Skip to comments.
Lott Decried For Part Of Salute to Thurmond(Senate Leader Hails Colleague's Run As Segregationist)
Washington Post ^
| 12/07/2002
| Thomas B. Edsall
Posted on 12/07/2002 4:32:52 AM PST by KQQL
Senate Republican leader Trent Lott of Mississippi has provoked criticism by saying the United States would have been better off if then-segregationist candidate Strom Thurmond had won the presidency in 1948.
Speaking Thursday at a 100th birthday party and retirement celebration for Sen. Thurmond (R-S.C.) in the Dirksen Senate Office Building, Lott said, "I want to say this about my state: When Strom Thurmond ran for president, we voted for him. We're proud of it. And if the rest of the country had followed our lead, we wouldn't have had all these problems over all these years, either."
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
TOPICS: Front Page News; Government; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections; US: Mississippi; US: South Carolina
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-60, 61-80, 81-100 ... 121-137 next last
To: KQQL
Let's remind our Democrat breatheren that The Ku Klux Klan was strated as the official auxillary of the Democratic Party in the 1880s. Bob Bird could give a lecture on his party's history.
To: AppyPappy; Huck; BillCompton
Lott is a big wussbag idiot who isn't up to the task of
leading a cakewalk. Everyone in America wants to see this slob put out to pasture, yet he's still there wasting space.
That said, this is funny to watch. He steps on his dick and dares to say something politically incorrect and even our side jumps on him. After all the crap he's pulled, some people are ready to chop his head off for this silly "thought crime".
Government mandated segregation is and always has been unconstitutional and wrong, whether it was officially declared so or not. Just as government mandated de-segregation is unconstitutional and wrong, it just is.
Doesn't matter though, we're not allowed to talk about that stuff anymore. Any discussion of whether a business in a free country should be declared a "public accomodation" is racist now.
Lott comes within three degrees of this topic and everyone has a cow. If these insignificant remarks are considered the worst thing he's done we've really lost control of the conversation. PC brainwashing has worked.
62
posted on
12/07/2002 6:49:36 AM PST
by
AAABEST
To: MWS
Does anyone know if Lott is up for election in '04 or '06?
If it's '04 the party needs to push Haley Barbour who is planning to run for governor of Mississippi to challenge him for the senate seat.
The real danger of this meatheaded statement, especially if Lott's left in a leadership position, is it gives a convenient excuse to New England republicans like Chaffey to contemplate switching parties ala Jeffords
To: KQQL
If Lott had been a football coach, he would have already been fired.
Does a senator deserve more patience than a football coach?
The "boosters" think NOT.
64
posted on
12/07/2002 6:55:37 AM PST
by
lonestar
To: AAABEST
Lott will have ample opportunity to talk about his views on segregation the next time he's on Meet the Press and Tim Russert is tearing chunks out of him, asking Lott about his views on interracial marriage, whether the armed forces should be integrated, if races should be separated in work and school, should blacks be allowed to ride at the front of the bus, nifty topics like that.
65
posted on
12/07/2002 6:59:59 AM PST
by
Catspaw
To: AAABEST
Government mandated segregation is and always has been unconstitutional and wrong, whether it was officially declared so or not. Just as government mandated de-segregation is unconstitutional and wrong, it just is. AAABEST, look at Thurmond's 1948 platform:
On July 17, 1948, delegates from 13 southern states gathered in Birmingham to nominate Thurmond and adopt a platform that said in part, "We stand for the segregation of the races and the racial integrity of each race."
Do you agree with Trent Lott that the party of "segregation of the races and the racial integrity of each race" should have been given the keys to the White House?
66
posted on
12/07/2002 7:05:11 AM PST
by
Huck
To: Catspaw
#65. That sounds about right.
67
posted on
12/07/2002 7:06:34 AM PST
by
Huck
To: BillCompton
I knew the second Lott said this that
it was a terrible blunder. Am I a key
GOP leader? No! So how come I knew it
but Lott didn't? What an indictment!!!
Never have I piled on in the attacks
on Lott. All I opined is that we need
someone better, like Gramm, Nickles or
Santorum. Now I am flat flabbergasted
by this and angry at handing a sword
to our enemies, who are IMO America's
enemies, too.
LOTT MUST EXPLAIN HIMSELF.
HE MUST HUMBLY APOLOGIZE.
Then he must cast his fate in the
hands of the Senate GOP, Cheney & W.
I think THEY will decide correctly.
To: pabianice
Let's remind our Democrat breatheren that The Ku Klux Klan was strated as the official auxillary of the Democratic Party in the 1880s. We need to remember that from Reconstruction to the 1970s the Democratic Party was conservative. The South was essentially a one-party region and definitely conservative.
To: SteveTuck
Lott is a moron for saying this. Get rid of this idiot. After all that Bush has done to dispell the standard "racist, bigots" this is a step in the wrong direction. The rats can now justifiably call us racist. This sucks. Lets hope it does not blow over. I mean, it could get really bad with Jesse JAckson leading a thousand man march on the Senate to demand Lott's resignation.
He should have stopped after he said "we were proud of him running in 1948". Thats it. No more was necessary. What a shameful statement.
70
posted on
12/07/2002 7:34:21 AM PST
by
nwrep
To: Huck; Catspaw
Do you agree with Trent Lott that the party of "segregation of the races and the racial integrity of each race" should have been given the keys to the White House? No I don't agree with that. But who cares who agrees with it? So what if I did "agree" with it, or Lott agrees with it or Thurmond agrees with it. Big effen deal. Let's just interrogate everyone under light bulb and ask them if they ever used the word "nigger" after 1948.
Lott's done much worse than come within three degrees of supporting someone who believed in segregation in 1948. You wouldn't know it reading this thread.
The PCers are fully in control of the conversation.
71
posted on
12/07/2002 7:39:42 AM PST
by
AAABEST
To: nwrep
Agreed
To: Catspaw
You know what Lott would say don't you? He would say that he has no problem with any of those things, but perhaps it all could have been accomplished in a more touchie feelie way, just like Strom did it. That is total BS too of course. Whatever. Maybe Lott had one too many, and he just let it all hang out.
73
posted on
12/07/2002 7:44:25 AM PST
by
Torie
To: Non-Sequitur
Thurmond switched to be a Republican after it was signed into law. He was a Democrat when he cast his vote against it. The bill passed on the strength of Republican votes.
To: buffyt
Frist sounds great to me as Pres. in 2008, and taking Chester Trent Lott's job now. Excellent suggestions. Nickles for VP maybe? Bad idea. Why not offer Lott the VP so that Nickles would become Senate Majority leader?
Nickles would be more effective as Majority leader than Lott would be destructive as VP.
To: Torie
He needed to go before this.
He needs to go even more now.
To: Torie
Yup, Chester was having one of his giddy moments. He should've just shut up.
77
posted on
12/07/2002 8:15:49 AM PST
by
Catspaw
To: John W
With you. There was nothing to this statement other than a joke. He didn't mean anything about segregation, I am sure. That is so passe. It was merely a nice thing to say about a man whose knowledge and experience you respect.
On the other hand, part of being of politician is that constant self-censorship that you are always thinking one step ahead, how will this statement be construed by your enemies? I could never do it. So often I listen to Bush give some idiot a smooth mouthed answer, when I know he really wanted to tell them that was the stupidest question he ever heard.
Years ago, my husband got in bad trouble in a job when he said to a black supervisor "You people are always making things hard" in the middle of an arguement. He meant it to refer to management in general, and she went and complained he had uttered a racial slur. Thank the Lord we got out of that one, because my husband was NO politician.
To: AAABEST
But Chester's going to be asked if he believes in these segregation now. But hey, let him be non-PC. Let him say he yearns for the days when darkies knew their place and didn't get uppity. That'll play well, don't you think?
79
posted on
12/07/2002 8:18:03 AM PST
by
Catspaw
To: Catspaw
Think you just made AAABest's point.If this throw-away comment regarding a 100 year old institution,made at his 100th birthday party-not during the 1948 campaign-can create much of a stir given the state of the nation and the world,we are in trouble.
80
posted on
12/07/2002 8:30:26 AM PST
by
John W
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-60, 61-80, 81-100 ... 121-137 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson