Posted on 12/14/2002 11:15:13 PM PST by Kay Soze
It’s Already Starting- Lott’s collateral damage.
Yesterday a reporter called and read to me a statement made by Secretary of Education Rod Paige, saying, in effect, that he knew Trent Lott, Senator Lott was a friend of his, and Trent Lott was no racist. That's a very generous defense by Secretary Paige, I said, and he may well be right (I don't know Trent Lott personally). Such a spirit of forgiveness does Secretary Paige proud. But it's mostly beside the point.
The issue is whether someone who has said what Senator Lott has said has the credibility on civil-rights issues to be the Senate's Majority Leader. And the answer to that question is obviously no. It's not as if Lott made remarks that only the hypersensitive would twist out of context into something offensive; his remarks are quite reasonably read and interpreted as being racist, and will be so used against his party.
It's already starting, of course. Not only will Lott be tarred, but his whole party will be, and so, by extension, will the positions his party and conservatives and others have taken — even when they are demonstrably not racist.
The front page of the Washington Post Friday has an article headlined, "Lott Has Moved Little on Civil Rights Issues: Analysts Say Remarks, Record Consistent." Predictably, the Post has collected all of Lott's past comments and votes on anything related to race. Equally predictably, it includes, along with Lott's genuinely troubling statements, other positions he has taken that have nothing to do with discrimination — or are actually antidiscrimination — but are at odds with the agenda of the civil rights establishment.
Thus, Lott has opposed busing, said nice things about federalism and the Constitution, and opposed racial quotas (as encouraged in a 1990 civil-rights employment bill, which Lott voted against and President Bush vetoed). Well, we can now see that all that is consistent with a racist agenda, can't we? Because Lott took those positions, and Lott is a racist, then that proves that the positions are racist, right? Of course not, but this is what we will be up against for the next several years, now that Senator Lott has given the left a big stick to hit him and his party over the head with.
Consider just one concrete example. Between now and January 16, the Bush administration will have to decide whether to file an amicus brief with the Supreme Court opposing the use of racial and ethnic preferences in university admissions. There's no doubt that any decent conservative lawyer — and every lawyer in the chain of command in the administration is a decent conservative lawyer — would conclude that it ought to do so. The fear has always been that political gurus at the White House might get cold feet.
Will the Lott matter warm their toes any? Of course not, and to the contrary. Now they will worry that a decision by the White House to oppose admissions quotas will be bundled up with the Lott scandal and trumpeted as proof that the President has shown his true colors, joining those who, in their heart of hearts, would turn back the clock on civil rights and resegregate our universities.
Let me hasten to add that the gurus would be incorrect; the received wisdom among Republican political experts that no black or Latino can be convinced that quotas are wrong, is wrong. But my point is that having Senator Lott as Majority Leader is going to strengthen the hand of those who insist that, if the President or any Republican opposes the civil rights establishment, they are digging themselves into hopeless hole. It is, then, conservatives who should most want Senator Lott to step down, and liberals who are praying that he won't.
Step down, Senator Lott.
— Roger Clegg is general counsel of the Center for Equal Opportunity in Sterling, Virginia.
I am so old that I can remember a saying we once could use in the Republican Party:
“Character Matters.
I had to remove that bumper sticker from my SUV.
The good ole days.
He's gone.
His voting record is solidly conservative, so this is not his problem. His problem is that he's a career screw-up.
When it didn't depend on what the meaning of is is....or what 'character' represents...
*** [Lott] can only be a drag **** But it is possible for someone simultaneously to suffer unfair attacks, handle himself and his predicament poorly, and be an underwhelming political figure. Trent Lott has managed a trifecta ***
Wonder if that 'drag' comment was intended as I suspect it was? LOL LOL LOL ..... Oh, well, typical whispered D.C. rumors..... Lott is the ultimate embarassment. Trent Lott's Theme Song ought to be:
"I'm too stupid for my shirt ... Too stupid for my shirt .... I'm Stupid ..."
GWB must tell him to resign as Majority Leader.
First, I bet you half the country couldn't pick Trent Lott out of a lineup of muppett characters.
Second, they don't care.. ask around.
Third, the remarks are not "quite reasonably read and interpreted as being racist" He said something stupid and apologized twice for it.
Fourth, guess what? We will never be able to address Civil right's legislation without someone screaming "racist" at us. So f'em. Let them scream, there's nothing we can do about it anyway.
Fifth, if he quits and we go back to 50/50 I will blame drooling, reactionary nutcases like the author of this piece.
Sixth, If this taints our Supreme Court in any way I will blame drooling, reactionary nutcases like the author.
Seventh, don't you know you only validate these claims when you respond to them like this? As it is half of FR and most of the Conservative media is dancing to the democrats tune.
Last, if you validate this tactic and give it legitimacy then you may as well expect to see this same name and blame scenario played out over and over till the end-of-time.
We finally got what we want, we got the Senate. All of our whining and looking through the glass from the outside is over.
We could actually begin to turn our ramblings into reality except that a bunch of paranoid's, brimming with white guilt over something they didn't even say are putting it in jeapoardy!
Enough with the "Already Posted" posts. You are taking up bandwidth
I think that makes, ohh about.. TWO of us!
Actually there is a small handfull of people who think this is the way to go. You know, people need to let go of impeachment.
As it was Dubya barely squeaked past in the general. He just barely got in.
It's easy to forget that when he's got sky high approval ratings now, but that wasn't always the case. Imo, if algor would have had the added benefit of running as an incumbent and a few months head start for people to get used to the idea it's very likely we could be looking at President Algor.
We got cheated on impeachment, but it may have been for the best in the long run.
He is also just the appetizer for the entrée'
The problem then becomes that we must continue to right off 95% of the black vote. I realize getting any of it is and has been a challenge. Maybe we could address immigration in this country if the GOP didn't have to rely on the Hispanic vote so much.
I hate the racebaiters as much as anyone. However, black people in this country have a legitmate bitch about the way they were treated in Thurmond's world. Most just want to move forward and work hard to support their families. When people like Lott open their mouths in this fashion they remind an entire race of people of a horrendous past. Don't you think we should at least stand behind them in not promoting or sanctioning this behaviour. Lott has a past. It's time the GOP set the example in the Senate. Byrd, Hollings and the 'Rats can run around making excuses. I would prefer the GOP take the high road.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.