LOTT SAID IT BEFORE (Drudge Siren)

Drudge ^ | 12/10/02 | Drudge

[walrus954]

After a fiery speech by Thurmond at a Mississippi campaign rally for Ronald Reagan in November 1980, Lott, then a congressman, told a crowd in Jackson: "You know, if we had elected this man 30 years ago, we wouldn't be in the mess we are today."

More to follow...

[deadskunk]

I didn't say I wouldn't debate you, just that I wouldn't stoop to defend my beliefs to you. Your aggressive rhetoric and attempts to emasculate me by comparison to a "sissy boy" don't warrant a defense, because they are merely tactics meant to put me on the defensive, so excuse me if I refuse to comply.

Check my last post and see if it makes you angry. I'm a moderate, and its amusing how much that pisses some of you off. Hence the deadskunk, which John Ashcroft said was the only thing you'd find in the middle of the road.

[sinkspur]

Not having Lott as Senate majority leader doesn't change the makeup of the Senate -- Republicans would still hold a majority, no "power sharing" necessary.

If you think Lott will remain in the Senate after being forced to step down in humiliation as a "racist," then you're naive. Lott's gonna hang around and be labeled by the press as "Racist Trent Lott" for the rest of his term? Come...ON!

Trent Lott could make a million dollars a year as a lobbyist, and kiss all this hassle good-bye.

That's what I'd do. Wouldn't you?

[Dan Day]

gee, endorsing RR in 1980 by saying he would be better than the liberalism and soft anti-Communism practiced by so many administrations was somewhow...a gaffe?

Read it again. It was at a Reagan rally, but Lott was talking about Thurmond, who had just finished speaking. The "30 years ago" comment makes that clear -- Thurmond had run 30 years ago (from 1980), whereas 30 years before 1980 Reagan was just an actor who was still a few years away from filming "Bedtime for Bonzo".

[Mo1]

Expand on that please. I have my own ideas about what you mean, but what do *you* mean? Thanks

What is the number one concern with the Dems?? .. what is the number one concern when appointing Judges or passing laws??

As long as the Republicans hold power .. the Dems can't stop this from happening

[ApesForEvolution]

"If he goes now, that empowers PC, and speech codes, and race baiters."

It absolutely wouldn't have to.

[MJY1288]

If Lott is forced to resign, We can expect the RATS to controll the agenda for the next 2 years and Trent Lott won't be to blame, It will be the fools who side with the RATS and demand that he should step down as the leader.

I couldn't agree with you more sinkspur, If we allow the Left to demonize Lott over a off-hand remark that could be taken in many ways would be political suicide. Lott apologized and it should be left at that. We have to stand up for Lott at this point, Otherwise we once gain have allowed the RATS to kick us in the groin

[sinkspur]

If Lott were to resign from the Senate merely because he's no longer fit or qualified to be the Leader of the Senate then he is not only Stupid but he is EVIL.

If he's not qualifed to be Majority Leader because he's racist, why the hell would you tolerate him as a Senator at all? He's a friggin' RACIST, according to you.

You want a RACIST in the Senate?

Marlowe, as my momma used to say, sometimes I don't think you've got your right mind.

[Poohbah]

How very liberal of you to put words in Senator Lott's mouth! Your analogy is a complete and total misfire, and I think you know it.

Did Senator Lott say that "resumption of segregation would have prevented so many of the problems we've experienced since then"?

No, he did not.

Did I say he did, or did you strategically move the quotation marks around to distort what I said? (Hint: the correct answer is the latter one.)

Case closed.

Yup. Case closed. You have to misrepresent what I said to make your point, therefore, I claim the win.

His expressed opinion about Senator Thurmond was no more racist than my expression of admiration about the genius of one of our founders.

The only significant difference between the Democrat and Dixiecrat platforms was the issue of segregation. That is the platform Thurmond was running on in 1948. Either Lott is actually in agreement with that platform, or he's too much of a blithering idiot to be trusted with anything important (the latter is my opinion).

[BenR2]

and the thought occurs that these leaks are not coming from the Democratic left but Republican Senators looking to force Lott out.</>\I>

Perhaps even from His Royal Satanic Majesty himself?(Msr. Rove).

[Mo1]

What on earth are you talking about? Not having Lott as Senate majority leader doesn't change the makeup of the Senate -- Republicans would still hold a majority, no "power sharing" necessary.

No they won't because Lott won't just step down .. he will step out of the Senate

Newit did it and so did Bob Livingston and my guess is .. Lott would do it also

[BenR2]

and the thought occurs that these leaks are not coming from the Democratic left but Republican Senators looking to force Lott out.

Perhaps even from His Royal Satanic Majesty himself?(Msr. Rove.)

[jwalsh07]

Then lay off the bong.

LOL, I swear you've been mind snatched by the left. No MRI's or CatScans lately, eh?

[Mo1]

There, did that sound like an apology?

Are you saying that you are a lier??

[ApesForEvolution]

"Your "morality" and those of your mindless cohorts here are putting at risk conservative judges and economic growth"

Good grief sink, that's non sense.

First off, Lott as the GOP leader has proven in the past to be more of a RAT friend than RAT opponent.

Second, if Lott leaves the Senate, then SCREW HIM and the horse he rode in on.

His statements are NOT defensible, as even he, by his lack of/weak apology, attest to. He made the bed, now, if he wants to be remembered by ANYONE as a *man*, he steps aside, gracefully, insists his comments were mis-characterized and yet he wasn't going to let the misunderstanding weigh on progress for America and sucks it up until he decides to quit or run again. He made the bed, he lies in it like a man. Time for him to take some Sine-agra.

[Timesink]

The paragraph, as it appears on top of Drudge's page NOW:

After a fiery speech by Strom Thurmond at a Mississippi campaign rally in November 1980, Lott, then a congressman, told a crowd: 'You know, if we had elected this man 30 years ago, we wouldn't be in the mess we are today'... MORE... Quotation appeared in an account of the rally on Nov. 3, 1980, in Clarion-Ledger in Jackson, Miss...

And as it appears at the top of this thread:

After a fiery speech by Thurmond at a Mississippi campaign rally for Ronald Reagan in November 1980, Lott, then a congressman, told a crowd in Jackson: "You know, if we had elected this man 30 years ago, we wouldn't be in the mess we are today." More to follow...

The latter paragraph, the older one, is far more ambiguous. I don't think you two are working off the same one.

[Poohbah]

No--go back and reread the Lott-style apology, complete with the subtext.

I have screwed up LOTS of times in my life, so I'm kind of an expert on what is and isn't a real apology. Lott's statement didn't qualify.

[habs4ever]

Except, we don't know what Strom said on behalf of RR, do we? I think it most likely it was a general appreciation for Strom's support of RR and being a conservative Republican when they weren't too thick on the ground in the South of 1964.Thurmond has never been censured by rhe Senate, has he? So, why should comments about him be ripe for such outrage?

[Texasforever]

Why do you have a dog in this fight? I have spent the last 30 minutes looking at your posting history and you are without exception rabidly anti-GOP. You have no credibility on this and you are really enjoying yourself. At least Poohbah is a long time GOP supporter and we should all listen to him but you are no better than Jesse Jackson on this particular issue.

[Poohbah]

Like I said, the only way it's ambiguous is if you need to take the class that prepares you for Bonehead English...