Trent Lott at Strom Thurman's Birthday Party-Any comments?
 

http://www.time.com/time/nation/arti...0.html?cnn=yes


Also, should Lott step down as Senate Majority Leader for his remarks?

He is only apologizing for his comments because someone called him on it. The entire controversy raises questions of a historical nature. Mainly, can you judge past events by the social mores of the present time? Back then, his thoughts and behavior were in step with many of his contermporaries. While, we as African-Americans consider his stance horrible despite the time period, his experience was different. However, the fact that he looks back fondly at those times removes him from the aforementioned historical comparison model.

I think Trent Lott can suck it. I cannot stand policians. Any of them.

One day I will run for office and be all conservative....then when I get elected I am changing everything up. And when I am done I will say, "Don't cry! You voted for me!"

Sorry you all. Look at the time stamp. Delerious, lol.

Hello GC!! I am new to the board. As for Trent Lott...

Many people were saying that he should apologize, but I say why apologize?? He was letting the world know how he truly feels. Knowing that without a doubt Trent Lott is a racist @$$ does not bother me. The ones who smile in your face, yet are thinking how much of a "nigger" you are, are the ones who trouble me. I have found that most southern whites are straight up with you like that. They don't try to hide that they are racists and that they believe that you are inferior to them because you are Black. Now those Northern ones...those are the ones to watch.

I believe that there are many people in the Senate as well as Congress who support Strom Thurmond and his segragationist views. He could not have lasted this long if this was not so.

Just my humble opinion...

I don't think that Trent should apologize. He made similiar comments back in the 80's. At least we know where he stands and I rather know if someone has racist views than someone who smiles in my face and has racist views.

Also, there are alot of people who have the same beliefs as Trent but do not express them in public. Racism is still very much alive. It's just not in vogue to state that you are a racist like it was back in the 50's and 60's.

Historical perspective
 

Simply put, you lie down with dogs, you get up with fleas. The GOP knew what it was getting into when it welcomed anti-civil-rights Democrats back in the 1960s and such. Remember, people like Jesse Helms and ol' Strom Thurmond used to be Demos.

And it is better to know where one stands rather than be stealthy.

Here's a column by Armstrong Williams on the issue that appeared on www.blackelectorate.com. Some of his thoughts, and I said some, are on point:

[B]Trent Lott And The Republicans Drop The Ball On Race, Again by Armstrong Williams



Southerners are the only Americans to have lost a major war and to have had their cultural configurations torn apart.

In 1948, Senator Strom Thurmond tapped into the south's identity crisis with his third party bid for the presidency. Running as a "Dixiecrat" segregationist, Thurmond vowed to maintain the uniquely southern heritage by "stand[ing] for the segregation of the races and the racial integrity of each race." During a stump speech in Jackson, Mississippi, Thurmond declared that "All the laws of Washington and all the bayonets of the Army cannot force the Negro into our homes, our schools, our churches." Ultimately, Thurmond captured 39 electoral votes and carried Mississippi, Alabama, Louisiana and South Carolina. It was one of the most successful third party bid in this nation's history.

A lot has changed in this country since days when Ol' Strom could make viable a run at the presidency by promising to keep "Negro's" from our schools. The shape of racism has now been twisted inward. It's subtler, less acceptable. Instead of donning white sheets and stomping down our streets, racists perpetuate their beliefs with snide remarks and insensitivity.

Case in point: Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott recently said that the Unites States would have been better off if Thurmond had actually been elected President in 1948. Lott made the comments during a birthday party celebration for Thurmond, who turned 100 last week. Lott went on to express pride in the fact that his home state of Mississippi supported Thurmond's 1948 presidential bid. "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. "

You mean those pesky problems associated with letting Negroes into our schools and churches? That is what Thurmond campaigned against in 1948.

For obvious reasons, Lott's office played down the significance of the senator's remarks, opting merely to issue a curt two sentence press release: "Senator Lott's remarks were intended to pay tribute to a remarkable man who led a remarkable life. To read anything more into these comments is wrong." Lott's office issued similar remarks in 1998 when it was reported that Lott appeared before-and praised-- the Council of Conservative Citizens, a group dedicated to the separation of the races.

Then, as now, there was scarcely little condemnation amongst Mr. Lott's colleagues. This needs to change. Our Republican leaders cannot keep squinching their eyes to Lott's racial insensitivity. As Congressmen, they bear a dual responsibility to represent the nation's conscience and to act as respectable faceplates for the party. By giving Lott a pass on his racist-seeming remarks, they've suggested the worst kind of stereotype: that lurking beneath the Republican party is a private identity that harkens back to a time when blacks were valued only as a cheap source of labor.

Some commentators have suggested that the Republicans use Lott's remarks, as an occasion to go on the offensive by pointing out that Democratic senator Robert Byrd was formerly a "Grand Kleagle" with the Ku Klux Klan, who recently used the N-word during an interview on "Fox News Sunday." This will not work. The Republican Party spent much of the 60's opposing the Democrats on civil rights legislation, affirmative action legislation and race-based quotas. This gives the democrats the benefit of the doubt on race related issues. Whereas Senator Byrd's history will be discarded as the indiscretion of one, Lott's remarks are seen as endemic of a party that has consistently displayed an insensitivity to the issues that blacks care about most. The Republicans simply do not have the credibility to go red of tooth and claw with the Democrats on the race issue. They will lose that battle every time.

So far, President Bush has made a considerable attempt to build bridges in the black community. His grass roots efforts support for school vouchers and the diversity of his own cabinet should proclaim to black Americans that they are part of the Republican Party.(This I disagree with)

But black America's distrust of the Republican Party runs deep. The psychological scars will not merely fade away. And whatever gains the president has made (and was poised to make with a GOP controlled Senate) can be ripped to shreds when just one leading member of the GOP makes remarks as racially insensitive as those offered by Senator Lott.

That is why the only acceptable response from the GOP should be harsh criticism. Sadly, no such criticism seems forthcoming.

That sound you hear is the GOP once again dropping the ball on the race issue.

He speaks....
 

Per www.cnn.com

Lott is scheduled to speak today @ 5pm (EST) to talk about the controversy surrounding his statements.

There is a Republican female Senator or Congresswoman who feels Lott should step down.

I apologize, but I forgot her name.

Anne Northrup (sp?) from Kentucky.

LOL, you sound like my Nana...she says the SAME thing!!!
At least in the south you know who your enemies are!

Trent Lott's statement at Strom Thurmond's celebration reflect the ideas of many southern whites, especially the good ol' boys. His apology should be taken with a grain of salt because he only apologized after being reprimanded by African Americans.

Good ol' boy himself, George Dubya, surprised the heck out of me with his harsh criticism of Lott. If Trent Lott does make it past the holiday season as Senate Majority Leader, I think he'll be able to save his behind.

I just think the uproar will be over in the coming months and politics will go.





soulfulremix

ole Lotty baby is going to be on BET tonight.

Sources: GOP Sens. to Meet on Lott's Fate
 

Sources: GOP Sens. to Meet on Lott's Fate
5 minutes ago Add Politics - U. S. Congress to My Yahoo!


By DAVID ESPO, AP Special Correspondent

WASHINGTON - Senate Republicans will meet early next month to settle the fate of Sen. Trent Lott (news, bio, voting record) as party leader in the wake of a racially charged controversy, GOP sources said Monday.


The sources, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said the meeting would be called for Jan. 6, the day before the Senate convenes for a new session under Republican control.


WASHINGTON (AP) — Senate Republicans will meet early next month to settle the fate of Sen. Trent Lott as party leader in the wake of a racially charged controversy, GOP sources said Monday.


The sources, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said the meeting would be called for Jan. 6, the day before the Senate convenes for a new session under Republican control.


The decision came as White House spokesman Ari Fleischer (news - web sites) criticized Lott's comments anew, and a key GOP senator issued a statement that pointedly refrained from saying Lott should remain as leader.


"My Republican colleagues and I are actively engaged in deciding what is in the best interests of the Senate as an institution and the country," said Sen. Bill Frist (news, bio, voting record) of Tennessee, who chaired the GOP campaign effort over the past two years.


"I am confident a consensus will emerge, but no decisions have been made yet," Frist said, "and I have endorsed no specific proposal at this time."


For his part, Lott spent the day preparing for an appearance on Black Entertainment Television, part of an effort to overcome controversy stemming from racially comments he made at Sen. Strom Thurmond (news, bio, voting record)'s 100th birthday party earlier this month.


Lott said Mississippians were proud to have supported Thurmond for president when he ran as a segregationist in 1948. "And if the rest of the country had followed our lead, we wouldn't have had all these problems over all these years, either," he said.


The Mississippi Republican has since apologized repeatedly for his remarks, but the original utterances set off a furor that poses a strong threat to his grip on power.

I would not have expected ANYTHING LESS than the comments made by Trent Lott. Anyone who was shocked and surprised is completely naive. He just said what all those other Republican bastards were thinking but never had the balls to say!!!

Does that make it right....Hell Naaawww.

Do I think he should step down?
Come on now, the same naive people who were surprised by his comments are the same naive people who actually think that their complaints are really going to change something. This fool is NOT going to step down..nor is he going to be voted out of office.

Of course G-Dub & all the other Capitol Hill big dawgs have to make this look good for the public and show some criticism, but behind closed doors, while they're chillin' in the sauna, tokin' on cuban cigars, and hookin' up with the interns....they're laughing that sh!t off.

Don't be fooled.

Interesting POV
 

Greetings Sisters and Brothers,

As you are all aware, racist republican leader Trent Lott has found a forum on BET. Mr. Robert Johnson, although he is canceling the few programs of value left on his network, was able to find a time slot for Trent Lott. Interesting.

This morning, radio jock and activist Tom Joyner appeared on the Today Show and clearly stated that he was not interested in seeing Trent Lott showcased on BET. To paraphrase, "How many times can he say he's sorry?" The deal is, you can't apologize for being a racist. He apologized for saying what he did, but his actions over the years clearly paint the picture of a man who supports segregation and everything that goes along with it.

But more important, at this junction, it is imperative that we, the ones who are affected by the likes of the Trent Lotts of the world do not provide him with the platform to espouse his lies. By tuning into BET tonight, you inadvertently support the agenda of both Mr. Johnson (seeking ratings) and Mr. Lott (seeking your sympathy and forgiveness). We must not provide either.

As responsible Black Americans we cannot let that happen. We cannot be "gotten over on" again. No other REPUTATABLE network has rolled out the carpet for this man. Therefore, you MUST ask yourself: then WHY Bob Johnson? The answer is clear-ratings equal dollars. And no matter what Lott says on BET, or how outraged we are sitting in our living rooms watching it, the bottom line result will be the numbers of viewers tuning in.

I must reiterate what Mr. Joyner said this morning: what is this man going to say that he hasn't said already? "I'm not a racist. Bob Johnson is one of my dearest friends."

Skip BET Tonight and catch the highlights on your evening news!!!

Let us tell Mr. Lott and Mr. Johnson exactly how we feel by BY-PASSING BET this evening. This issue cannot be supported by us for even an instant. Let Mr. Lott know we have heard enough from him.

Visit the BET website at www.bet.com and cast your opinion about Lott's visit on BET.

Call their switchboard and voice your outrage (202)608-2000

Write a letter and explain your disgust:
1900 W. Place, NE, 1 BET Plaza, Wash. DC 20018.

Who wrote that letter?

:confused:

Re: Interesting POV
 

I must say that I am VERY surprised at AA's who hold this viewpoint. If one of the back bones of the AA community is the church, what happened to forgiveness? I really wish AA's would come out this strong against the racists in our community i.e. Farrakhan .... and the party that 90% of us vote for time and time again (Sen Byrd)

I really think the situation has been blown wayyyyyyyy out of proportion. I think Senator Lott has done all that he needs to do, which is apologize. He knows he is under a microscope, so regardless of what's in the man's heart, he has to, from this point forward "do right by us" on civil rights issues.

But to call for him to step down is reee-diku-lus! Everybody has skeletons in their closets. And I hope they don't start digging into every black elected officials background, and looking at what he might have said after a few drinks at a birthday party..... You might run across the term "white devil" being thrown around a few times. But I forgot, in the minds of some people, it's ok for AA's to say things like this.

Don't get me wrong, what he said was wrong....but he has apologized, now let's move forward. I mean is this really the most important thing going on right now??

......there i go with that conservative crap again! :p :D :D

I didn't see all of it but Ed Gordon asked the question I wanted ask which was "would you be on this show if this had not occurred"? and he couldn't even answer it, he fumbled around for words.


I agree, if he's racist then so be it. But I do not think he should make important decisions that will effect us and our children.


QTE

I don't give a damn what this man "says" on BET. Whatever. :rolleyes: It's not for me to forgive him. He's yet to wrong me. I wasn't pressed to tune in because I didn't want to hear the BULLSHIT. Because that's exactly what it was. "I'm sorry, I'm racist, don't be mad. Forgive me and let's move forward." BULLSHIT. I have no serious problem with what was said. I'm not oblivious to the fact that there are some racist people running our country. So I'm glad he put himself out there. I wish EVERYONE would. Let me know. All of a sudden he's cool because he apologized? And ALL OF A SUDDEN, he's going to do right by us on civil rights issues? WHATEVER. Whether he's put out of the position is not the issue, but it still needs to be talked about. Shall we ignore it? If he had his way, you'd still be separate and barely equal. What, he changed his mind? You know, we wouldn't have all the problems we've had if people had just followed the program. And you think we should let this go??? Strange fruit, indeed.

What, exactly, is the most important thing going on right now? I get SO sick of people using that cliche. So overlook the BULLSHIT because there is something else more important going on? And when, exactly, do you focus on the BULLSHIT that you let slide? Before you know it, your metaphorical septic tank will be backed up and YOUR HOUSE will smell like the SAME SHIT that you ignored, because at the time, there was more important stuff to tend to.

CALLING ALL POLI SCI MAJORS: What power does the Senate Majority Leader hold?

Re: Re: Interesting POV
 

Correct me if I am wrong, but outside of Tom Joyner and of course Jesse Jackson ( :rolleyes: ), most of the public outcry is coming from Lott's own political party! THEY are the ones who are making the BIGGEST stink over this because they feel that he is hurting the "new" Republican image. We shouldn't automatically assume that it is african americans asking for all of these apologies, asking him to be on BET, or anything of the sort, because in this instance, it is not us. Most of us are not surprise, or shocked at what he said........or even that he said it in public.

Re: Re: Re: Interesting POV
 

I will have to correct you. The Congressional Black Caucus is calling for his censure and the Black Leadership forum is calling for him to step down. Also, numrous African American Congress people have called for Lott to step down.

This is not an assumption. This is a fact. Yes some members of his party have expressed concern about what was said, but by far, the outcry is coming from the Democrats and African Americans.

Re: Re: Re: Re: Interesting POV
 

I disagree. Granted we had those centures, but they followed the President's words and the outcry amongst republicans. Watching the news and reading the NYTimes this morning it appeared that Democrats (not blacks, but the Dem party) were trying VERY hard not to pounce on it first because they didn't want to make it a party issue. There was a good article about the outrage amongst black republicans in particular (JC Watts excluded of course). THey face so much censure from their communities that his words were like a slap in the face. With the elections in 2004 this is not the image that the republican party will feel it needs. He might go. I'd be SURPRISED if he went, but not SHOCKED.

Re: Re: Re: Re: Interesting POV
 

Again, the most outcry ARE NOT coming from the Demorcratic party and African Americans, but from his own party. This is fact as well. Again, they began the first campaign for his so-called apology because again, they (as in the "new" Republican party) are wanting to maintain this new image of "we are all inclusive" and so forth.

Honestly, I think Lott will step down, but it will only be because of pressure to preserve the "new" Republican party.

If yall say so....
 

Again, it is incorrect to downplay the Democratic Party and AA's taking the lead on the strong opposition to Trent Lott as Majority Leader. Many Republicans are only responding to this because of the negative publicity this is bringing to their party. They responded in record numbers AFTER TOm Daschle and the CBC spoke out. Of course they're all coming out of the woodworks now saying he should step down....but in the beginning it was AA's and Democrats.

http://www.democrats.org/news/200212130002.html

But hey, if the Republicans have people thinking that they led the fight on censuring Trent Lott and asking him to resign..... their political strategy has worked beautifully.

http://www.democrats.org/news/200212130001.html

HEADLINES

Dec 11, 2002

DNC Chairman McAuliffe Statement on Senator Lott's Remarks
Washington, D.C. -- Democratic National Committee (DNC) Chairman Terry McAuliffe issued the following statement:

"Today's disclosure that Senator Trent Lott made virtually identical comments twenty years ago in praise of Senator Strom Thurmond's presidential campaign, demonstrates an unfortunate pattern of racist remarks by Senator Lott.

"Given this pattern, it is simply not credible for Senator Lott to continue to assert that the comments he made last week in support of Senator Thurmond's segregationist campaign were anything more than a 'poor choice of words.' Sadly, it would rather appear that these comments reflect Senator Lott's true prejudices on race.


"The time has come for leaders of the Republican Party to speak out against Senator Lott's remarks. I call on President George Bush and Marc Racicot, Chairman of the Republican Party, to denounce Senator Lott's comments and to assure African Americans, and all Americans, that these types of racist remarks do not reflect the beliefs of the Republican Party.

Likewise, I join incoming Congressional Black Caucus Chair Representative Elijah Cummings in expressing concern with Senator Lott's fitness to serve as leader of the United States Senate. I would urge members of the Republican Senate Caucus to consider carefully whether or not they believe a man with Senator Trent Lott's beliefs is the person they want leading the Republican Party in the United States Senate."

Well the New York Times is not what anyone would call pro-republican, so I wouldn't say they were spinning anything. This discussiom started in the press, not on the hill and it was started by *gasp* republicans.

ON THE RIGHT

Conservatives Led the Way in Criticizing Lott's Remarks
By JIM RUTENBERG and FELICITY BARRINGER

Early, widespread and harsh criticism by conservative commentators and publications has provided much of the tinder for the political fires surrounding Senator Trent Lott since his favorable comments about the segregationist presidential campaign of 1948.

Conservative columnists, including Andrew Sullivan, William Kristol and Charles Krauthammer, and publications like National Review and The Wall Street Journal have castigated Mr. Lott for his remarks at Senator Strom Thurmond's 100th-birthday party, arguing that the conservative movement's credibility on racially tinged issues like affirmative action and school vouchers has been squandered.

Mr. Sullivan, on his Web site, and Mr. Krauthammer, writing in The Washington Post, are among those who have called on Mr. Lott to resign. Others, like Sean Hannity of Fox News Channel and the radio talk-show host Rush Limbaugh, have said the remarks were indefensible but were not necessarily reason enough for Mr. Lott to step down. An editorial in The Wall Street Journal stopped short of a direct call for Mr. Lott's ouster, but named three Republicans it preferred in the post.

The responses by conservatives have provided a marked contrast to the contention — put forth most recently by former President Bill Clinton and former Vice President Al Gore — that the nation's conservative news media acts as a monolithic Republican support system.

Robert Bartley, the editor of The Wall Street Journal, said, "I don't know that there's anything close," when asked if he could remember such a revolt against a conservative leader by those who are usually like-minded on the issues.

Richard Lowry, the editor of National Review, said that young conservatives particularly feel undermined by Mr. Lott's comment.

"The reaction to this on the right has been tinged with outrage," Mr. Lowry said. "I think that's a product of decades of hard work that conservatives have done on racially charged issues out of idealism and principle. To have those positions tarred, even inadvertently, with this backwardness on race is extremely distressing."

The intensity of the criticism has even surprised Democrats, who say they are unused to seeing the conservative press take on one of its own so ferociously.

"It's a level of cannibalism that we generally don't see," said Chris Lehane, the Democratic strategist who was the spokesman for Al Gore's presidential campaign.

Some Democrats, in fact, are crediting conservative commentators with providing the momentum for the story, which was first reported only in dribs and drabs in the mainstream press.

Even before prominent Democrats joined the criticism, conservatives with active Web sites were posting highly critical columns.

Mr. Sullivan, one of the first conservatives to highlight the issue, wrote: "After his disgusting remarks at Strom Thurmond's 100th-birthday party, it seems to me that the Republican Party has a simple choice. Either they get rid of Lott as majority leader; or they should come out formally as a party that regrets desegregation and civil rights for African-Americans.

"Why are the Republican commentators so silent about this? And the liberals?"

Mr. Sullivan and the few who weighed in on the issue early on were not alone for long. In his call last Thursday for Mr. Lott to resign from the leadership, Mr. Krauthammer wrote, "What is so appalling about Lott's remarks is not the bigotry but the blindess," and he noted that "the civil rights movement forever set the standard for social transformation in America."

"Lott sees the civil rights movement and `all these problems over all these years.' He missed the whole story," Mr. Krauthamer wrote.

The next day, the lead editorial in The Wall Street Journal all but called for Mr. Lott's resignation, saying: "The Senate Republicans will now have to defend against the race card that Mr. Lott gave their enemies to play. In light of this, it's remarkable that Senate Republicans have shown the restraint they have."

The editorial named three Republican senators — Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, Bill Frist of Tennessee and Rick Santorum of Pennsylvania — who, the editors thought "would all do better as G.O.P. leaders than Mr. Lott."

The televised debate, meanwhile, has at times resembled a bizarre world with various guests taking wholly unexpected positions.

Last Wednesday, "The O'Reilly Factor," the Fox News Channel talk show with Bill O'Reilly as host, featured a white guest from the conservative Family Research Council, Kenneth L. Connor, who skewered Mr. Lott for his remarks. Squaring off against him on the program, was Kevin Martin, of the African American Republican Leadership Council.

"I'm defending it," Mr. Martin said, because "both sides, conservative and liberal, are playing this for their own political agenda."

uh-ohhhh!
 

It's been some time since, but...

Is it that he is 3rd or so in line if anything happens to the Prezodent, VP?

Is that it? Okay, it's been 9 years and a lot has happened since that time. :p

Great discussion!

The only thing I want to add...where is Jesse???

It's amazing how he can be at the forefront of a movie boycott :rolleyes: but less vocal when it comes to issues of political substance.

You can say that again. :p

I don't think Jesse will ever bounce back from that baby daddy scandal. he lost a looooooot of moral authority there, and without that his political influence is spotty at best. People feel (with good reason) that when you put the word "Reverend" before your name that it actually means something, and that you should behave accordingly. I don't know if Jesse does.

R U Serious? The NY Times??? No Spin??? :rolleyes:

The link I posted was from THE DEMOCRATIC NATIONAL COMM. not an article that is from a liberal or conservative viewpoint. ITS FROM THE DEMOCRATS THEMSELVES!!!!


It is good to see different viewpoints in this discussion though. Is anyone else on this board a Poli Sci major?

I should have been clearer. The NYTimes has not, in my experience, been a pro-republican paper. I am not saying they don't spin, but they don't spin PRO-REPUBLICAN. They would not be ones to give them any "credit" for denouncing Lott.

Anyway we all know the man is racist. Not because of this dumb comment from a party that was clearly only meant to flatter Strom Thurmond (saying he'd have been a better president) but because of his record. He has been expressing racist views or supporting those who do for YEARS. I mean at least Strom has a black daughter, right? lol.

Re: uh-ohhhh!
 

This is an old listing. So Lott is #2 in line.


"Prior to the ratification of the 25th Amendment in 1967, there was no provision for filling a vacancy in the vice presidency. When a president died in office, the vice president succeeded him, and the vice presidency then remained vacant. The first vice president to take office under the new procedure was Gerald Ford, who was nominated by Nixon on Oct. 12, 1973, and confirmed by Congress the following Dec. 6.

The Vice President Richard Cheney
Speaker of the House John Dennis Hastert
President pro tempore of the Senate1 Robert Byrd
Secretary of State Colin Powell
Secretary of the Treasury Paul O'Neill
Secretary of Defense Donald H. Rumsfeld
Attorney General John Ashcroft
Secretary of the Interior Gale A. Norton
Secretary of Agriculture Ann M. Veneman
Secretary of Commerce Donald Evans
Secretary of Labor Elaine Chao
Secretary of Health and Human Services Tommy G. Thompson
Secretary of Housing and Urban Development Melquiades Rafael Martinez
Secretary of Transportation Norman Yoshiro Mineta
Secretary of Energy Spencer Abraham
Secretary of Education Roderick Paige
Secretary of Veterans Affairs Anthony J. Principi
NOTE: An official cannot succeed to the Presidency unless that person meets the Constitutional requirements.
1. The president pro tempore presides over the Senate when the vice president is absent. By tradition the position is held by the senior member of the majority party."

http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0101032.html

Bush Won't Intervene to Save Lott's Job
 

Bush Won't Intervene to Save Lott's Job
Tue Dec 17, 4:44 PM ET Add Politics - U. S. Congress to My Yahoo!


By JESSE J. HOLLAND, Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON - Sen. Trent Lott (news, bio, voting record) says he "made a terrible mistake" in praising Strom Thurmond's 1948 segregationist presidential candidacy, but the controversy continues amid indications from White House advisers that President Bush (news - web sites) won't try to save Lott's job.

The White House position could seal Lott's fate because a number of GOP senators are expressing concerns that the Mississippi senator is a liability to their agenda in Congress and to Bush's re-election. Tuesday afternoon, Bush maintained the silence he has kept on the matter since Thursday, waving off a reporter's question about whether Lott could still lead effectively.


The Senate GOP set a Jan. 6 meeting on Monday to decide whether Lott should remain majority leader.


Meanwhile, Bush met at the White House Tuesday with House Speaker Dennis Hastert, proceeding without Lott to plan for the 2003 congressional agenda. White House spokesman Ari Fleischer (news - web sites) said Lott, at home in Mississippi, was not excluded for any political reason. "For us to talk with anybody from the Senate, they need to be in Washington," Fleischer said.


As for the date set to decide Lott's fate, Fleischer made clear that Bush will not intervene either for or against Lott. "The White House will not comment on that meeting or anything leading up to that meeting vis-a-vis anything these senators may or may not do or call for at a potential meeting," Fleischer said.


Trying to salvage his political career, Lott reached out Monday to the community he now admits he wounded, and promised black Americans that minorities could benefit from his continued leadership.


"I accept the fact that I made a terrible mistake, used horrible words, caused hurt," Lott, R-Miss., said during a 30-minute interview with Black Entertainment Television. "But it is about actions more than words. As majority leader I can move an agenda that would hopefully be helpful to African Americans and minorities of all kinds and all Americans."


Lott has been trying to atone for his Dec. 5 toast to centenarian Sen. Strom Thurmond (news, bio, voting record), when he publicly wished that Thurmond had been elected president in 1948. Mississippi voted for Thurmond, Lott recalled, "and if the rest of the country had followed our lead, we wouldn't have had all these problems over all these years either."


Thurmond's third-party platform in 1948 was almost wholly segregationist, upholding bans on multiracial marriages and the defense of the South from "anti-lynching" reforms.


White House officials, speaking on condition of anonymity, said Monday that Bush would not try to save Lott's job.


Bush's political advisers say they are highly disappointed with Lott's explanations, but say they had been ordered by the president not to take any overt or covert action against the Mississippi Republican.


Sen. Don Nickles (news, bio, voting record), R-Okla., Lott's longtime rival within the GOP leadership, was the first Republican to break ranks over the weekend and call for new leadership elections, and there were fresh signs of Lott's political weakness Monday. The Republican National Committee (news - web sites) maintained its silence about the controversy, and the White House issued its sharpest rebuke yet.


Fleischer said Lott's remarks about Thurmond's presidential bid were "offensive and repugnant." At the same time, Fleischer repeated on Tuesday, ""Again, the president thinks there's no need for him (Lott) to resign."


Some colleagues rallied behind Lott. Incoming GOP whip Sen. Mitch McConnell (news, bio, voting record), R-Ky., repeated his support for Lott on Monday, saying he hoped "this issue is resolved quickly so we can move forward together to advance the president's agenda."


Sen. Judd Gregg (news, bio, voting record), R-N.H., called the remarks "exceptionally inappropriate" but said they should be placed in context with what he called Lott's otherwise sterling record.


In addition to Nickles, Sen. Bill Frist (news, bio, voting record), R-Tenn., has also gained prominence in recent months, following a successful stint as chairman of the senatorial campaign committee.


"My Republican colleagues and I are actively engaged in deciding what is in the best interest of the Senate as an institution and the country," Frist said in a statement. "I am confident a consensus will emerge, but no decisions have been made yet."


Lott's reputation suffered as much from his toast — which he said was offhand — as it did from the subsequent analysis of his political record, which showed resolved opposition to causes dear to the civil rights community.

In his fourth apology to date, Lott scrambled to show he was a changed man. He announced that he now supports making Martin Luther King Jr.'s birthday a federal holiday — having voted against it on the Senate floor — and said he supports affirmative action.

"I'm for affirmative action and I've practiced it," he said. "I've had African Americans on my staff and other minorities, but particularly African Americans, since the mid-1970s."

Lott also said had spoken with Rep. John Lewis (news, bio, voting record), D-Ga., about setting up a task force on reconciliation and with Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison (news, bio, voting record), R-Texas, about setting up an African-American summit.

Lewis, a veteran civil rights leader, said Lott appeared "sincere." "I'd like to come down on his side, giving him a chance," Lewis said.



~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Has Condoleeza or Colin commented?

So, the order is Bush, Cheney, then Lott?

Semantically I was wrong, but right. :D :p

Thanks! I tell ya, it's been dayum near a decade! :D

HC they (the media) now call Condoleeza "Condi"? :rolleyes:
HC that's almost as worse as calling Lawrence Fishbourne "Larry"?

:rolleyes:

Condi and Colin have not publically commented on the Lott matter.

AKA2D,

No, Lott is not in line for the Presidency at all. He would be majority leader in the Senate. After Cheney is Speaker of the House of Representatives, John Dennis Hastert, followed by
President pro tempore of the Senate1 Robert Byrd and Secretary of State Colin Powell, so on and so forth (see Suggles12's post.) Hope that clears it up.

For anyone who wants to read the law for themselves, it is the RPesidential Succession Act of 1947, codified at UNITED STATES CODE , TITLE 3 - THE PRESIDENT , CHAPTER 1 - PRESIDENTIAL ELECTIONS AND VACANCIES (see http://www.luminet.net/~tgort/success.htm)


Sisiterly,
Kimmie1913

I'm not surprised that they haven't made public comment on the matter.

Thank ya much ma'am. :D

Incoming Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott appeared on BET on Monday to apologize for controversial remarks that many have deemed racist, but some in the hip-hop world are saying the gesture just isn't enough.

"I don't want to get this into a position of making excuses," Lott told BET's Ed Gordon. "I accept the fact that I made a terrible mistake, used horrible words, caused hurt. I'm sorry about that. I've apologized for it. I've asked for forgiveness. And I'm going to continue to do that."

Lott — who had suggested that the nation would've been better off had Sen. Strom Thurmond won the presidency in 1948 while running on a segregationist platform — called his earlier comments "repugnant" and "inexcusable." As for his 1983 vote against making Martin Luther King's birthday a federal holiday, Lott called that "a mistake."

Rap impresario Russell Simmons, chair of the Hip-Hop Action Network, was among those who found little solace in Lott's apology. "President Bush should take immediate action to stop Trent Lott from being the Senate majority leader," he said in a statement. "Lott's comments expose deep-seated racial prejudice, and our nation deserves better quality leadership."

"It's a real big kick in the face to minorities," rapper Fat Joe said. "You would think he would be fired :eek: ((this is not McDs!)) or would have to step down. What's real surprising to me is Bush actually endorsed him and said that he doesn't need to resign. ... Apologizing means nothing when that's what you truly feel in your heart. If you truly feel that you're down with the Confederate flag, down with segregation."

The White House has said the president believes Lott's apology was sufficient. "He has apologized, and rightly so," an administration spokesperson said.

Talib Kweli, meanwhile, said the flap over Lott's remarks is just a distraction from the bigger issue. "If you thought that Trent Lott wasn't a racist or wasn't a prejudiced person, you're just a fool. Everything in his political record points to that. The issue is not whether or not he's racist — that's obvious. The issue is that he got caught saying it. No one's asking him to recant his beliefs, no one is shocked about what he said. I think people are shocked that he allowed himself to get caught. I think his apology is not for what he said, I think he's apologizing because he realized he's a fool for getting caught.

"That's the illusion of politics," Kweli continued, "that somehow [once] you put laws on the books, that people change. No, as you see, in private quarters, people are going to say what they want to say. I don't know why people are shocked by it. I don't know what it means for him to apologize, or for him to resign. Who are they going to put in there when he resigns? It's going to be somebody with the same attitude, somebody who's just smart enough to play the politics of it better."

Calling for Lott to resign, Kweli said, doesn't do much to destroy institutionalized racism, which can only be eliminated if people work on a grass-roots level.

"I would like to see more people get involved in community organizations and get involved in work that directly affects people's lives," he said, "instead of trying to put laws on the lawbooks. I would like to see more activism on that level. That's where a Dr. King comes from. That's where a Malcolm X comes from. That's where the real power comes from."

Republican senators will meet January 6 to decide on Lott's future as majority leader.

This report is from MTV News.