Jump to content






Photo
- - - - -

Trent Lott


  • Please log in to reply
7 replies to this topic

#1 jake

jake

    Veteran

  • No Politics!
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 165 posts

Posted 15 December 2002 - 05:59 PM

Does anyone else besides me think this whole Trent Lott thing is one of the most overblown "scandals" we have seen in some time.

My take on this is this: Strom Thurmond, who is older than time, was celebrating his 100th birthday. Knowing he unsuccessfully ran for president in 1948, Trent Lott said the country would have benefitted from him being president.

I seriously doubt Lott knew Thurmond was running on a segregationist platform - does anyone else agree? It seems he's getting burned alive for that one comment, when all he was trying to do was respect an old man who's a century old...
"You've got to be very careful if you don't know where you're going, because you might not get there."
-Yogi Berra

#2 Folsomite

Folsomite

    Veteran

  • New Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 117 posts

Posted 15 December 2002 - 09:12 PM

I think he should step down from House leader, but not resign completely. I'm tired of hearing about this, how many times does the guy have to apologize...
The first step to getting the things you want out of life is this: Decide what you want.

Ben Stein

#3 cybertrano

cybertrano

    Hopeless Addict

  • Premium Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,495 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 15 December 2002 - 09:48 PM

You mean Senate leader. I think for the benefit of the Republican party, he should resign.

And Wow, what a dumb mistake a leader can make. All the gains that President Bush and the Republican worked sooo hard for in the last election and this Lott guy ruined it....... Talking about....


(Ref. to: I seriously doubt Lott knew Thurmond was running on a segregationist platform ) -- Common now, as much as I want the Republican to do well, Lott knew what he's talking about. You are a Senate Republican leader and you don't know!!!! Wow.....

The Liberals are mighty mad with the election losses so of course they will try to take advantage of this thing..... joker.gif

#4 Terry

Terry

    Living Legend

  • Premium Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,425 posts

Posted 16 December 2002 - 01:47 PM

I agree - I was thinking I missed something when I heard about this, but no, people just assumed Lott was supporting segregation. That's NOT what he said. People need to get over it and move on. Lott's mistake was apologizing in the first place, since he didn't really say what people are accusing him of saying.

#5 john

john

    Founder

  • Admin
  • 9,841 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Prairie Oaks

Posted 16 December 2002 - 02:17 PM

I think the liberal media's having a field day with it - they're desperate for some 'dem news' so they're burning him at the stake for it.

I agree that he was not saying he supported segregation - that was not even his intention. He was just trying to pay some respect to an old man, and that's about it. usa.gif


#6 tony

tony

    Hall Of Famer

  • Premium Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,396 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Historic District

Posted 16 December 2002 - 07:52 PM

Actually, it's been the conservative press (the Wall Street Journal) and the far right Republican Senators who've come out the loudest in calling for his resignation as majority leader for two reasons: 1) they recognize that his handling of this episode has left him as damaged goods (a reasonable retractiona and explanation right away would have made the whole thing gfo away). and 2) the far right sees this as an excuse to get rid of a leader who has been, in their view, too willing to compromise conservative principles in the interest of governance.

As for what he 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." Given that Thurmond ran on a segregationist platform (which Lott has a history of supporting), it is reasonable to presume that that is to what he was referring. And if he wasn't, then why the follow-up sentence about "all these problems", and why were his attempts to explain it away so feeble? Why did he wait until his fourth apology to say that he was just supporting an old man on his Birthday? Because off-the-cuff remarks like that are the ones most likely to express true feelings (especially fro politicians who are generally very careul about what they say); they let down their guard and their true beliefs come out. Why? Because he still deep down believes that if the Dixiecrats had won and segragation was perpetuated, we'd be better off. If that's true, then he doesn't belong in a leadership role in the Senate, because those beliefs were repudiated 50 years ago.

#7 cybertrano

cybertrano

    Hopeless Addict

  • Premium Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,495 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 16 December 2002 - 08:44 PM

QUOTE (tony @ Dec 16 2002, 07:52 PM)
Actually, it's been the conservative press (the Wall Street Journal) and the far right Republican Senators who've come out the loudest in calling for his resignation as majority leader for two reasons: 1) they recognize that his handling of this episode has left him as damaged goods (a reasonable retractiona and explanation right away would have made the whole thing gfo away). and 2) the far right sees this as an excuse to get rid of a leader who has been, in their view, too willing to compromise conservative principles in the interest of governance.

As for what he 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." Given that Thurmond ran on a segregationist platform (which Lott has a history of supporting), it is reasonable to presume that that is to what he was referring. And if he wasn't, then why the follow-up sentence about "all these problems", and why were his attempts to explain it away so feeble? Why did he wait until his fourth apology to say that he was just supporting an old man on his Birthday? Because off-the-cuff remarks like that are the ones most likely to express true feelings (especially fro politicians who are generally very careul about what they say); they let down their guard and their true beliefs come out. Why? Because he still deep down believes that if the Dixiecrats had won and segragation was perpetuated, we'd be better off. If that's true, then he doesn't belong in a leadership role in the Senate, because those beliefs were repudiated 50 years ago.

u r right dude..... laughcry.gif

#8 cybertrano

cybertrano

    Hopeless Addict

  • Premium Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,495 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 19 December 2002 - 06:34 PM

Frist Looks to Replace Lott As GOP Leader
Thu Dec 19, 6:26 PM ET Add Politics - U. S. Congress to My Yahoo!


By ALAN FRAM, Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON - Sen. Bill Frist (news, bio, voting record) of Tennessee, a close ally of President Bush (news - web sites), said Thursday that he will probably seek to supplant Trent Lott as Senate Republican leader if he determines that most of his colleagues will support him.


In a statement, Frist said several senators had approached him Thursday and asked him to seek the job. He said he agreed to let them gauge support from all 51 GOP senators who will serve in the new Congress that convenes next month.


"I indicated to them that if it is clear that a majority of the Republican caucus believes a change in leadership would benefit the institution of the United States Senate, I will likely step forward for that role," Frist said.


Lott, 61, has said he believes he has enough support from his colleagues to retain his job and has vowed to fight for it. The Mississippian has been under fire since Dec. 5, when he expressed regret that segregationist presidential candidate Strom Thurmond was defeated in 1948. Lott has delivered a series of apologies for his comments.


Frist, 50 and in his second Senate term, had spent the last several days making noncommittal statements about Lott. ....................






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users