Replies

His actions, not outside charges, changed the burden of persuasion.

And, of course, you would sum up a man's entire career in one statement made to an old colleague. Fortunately, I believe the rest of the country might be a little more fair with Senator Lott than you are predisposed to be.

No one is charging they think he said what he said. He said what he said.

And what he said is not what you are attacking. You have not attacked a hypothetical Strom Thurmond presidency. You have attacked a Dixiecrat platform -- which could not have been passed because the Dixiecrats had no real voting power in the US House or Senate.

Your interpretation of Lott's remarks leaves much to be desired. Lott has not stated he endorsed that platform. You keep saying that he has done so.

To state a Strom Thurmond administration would have been better than a Harry Truman administration is not the same as an endorsement of the Dixiecrat platform. You can twist it, stretch it and torture it, but you cannot make it the same.

With your false assumptions, you have set up a straw man. Pardon me if I am unimpressed to see you topple him.

Listen. This whole matter is not your fault, my fault, the media's fault, the Dems fault.

Trent Lott opened this can or worms. He did so in a purely politcal environment. An envrionment he is not some innocent virgin as to how things work.

This was not your or my senile old grandpa up there who made such statement and is now being pilliared for.

This is a seasoned politician who knows how hardball politics is played. He has played them himself.

Please, don't look to me for any sympathy for his dumbass.

Your interpretation of Lott's remarks leaves much to be desired. Lott has not stated he endorsed that platform. You keep saying that he has done so.

That is exactly what he did. That was the platform of Strom Thurmond, candidate for president, Dixiecrat party.

If you support the candidacy of Elenor Smeal, NARAL party, are you saying you don't support abortion?