main
side
curve
  1. In Memory of LAJ_FETT: Please share your remembrances and condolences HERE

Trent Lott: was his comment racist?

Discussion in 'Archive: The Senate Floor' started by DarthTunick , Dec 11, 2002.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. TreeCave

    TreeCave Jedi Padawan star 4

    Registered:
    Jul 28, 2001
    Your 95% figure is total nonsense and you know it. News flash!

    Gee, this was the part I took as an insult. Sorry, now that I re-read it, I see that you were proposing marriage. 8-}

    BTW, when did you ever specify you were referring to the '60s? I reread your post and found that it had not changed since I read it last.

    Here's what I said: "But how would YOU have had women and non-whites get a foothold in the workplace? How do you enforce the boss hiring the best candidate, especially when blacks had only recently begun to have decent public schools, and women still couldn't attend every college they might wish to? Of course, the ideal solution was for white men to grow up and realize "oh, hey, maybe we should share our 95% of the pie", but they weren't about to do that. "

    When I mentioned "blacks had only recently begun to have decent public schools", what decade did you THINK that referred to? The 50's and 60's, just after segregation ended. Further, the tense I used in "what would you HAVE HAD women and non-whites do" can only refer to past actions already taken, not actions that might yet be taken. Everything in my post was clearly referring to the decades in which AA began, the crisis point at which it was obvious white men were not going to give up their disproportionate share of worthwhile jobs. Everyone else seemed to understand I was talking about.

    Your post heavily involved the "society is stacked against minorities and favors white men" presumption, and I saw fit to dispute that.

    Once again, you didn't understand my post at all, and everyone else did. It WAS stacked in the 50's and 60's. It was legal to refuse to hire groups you didn't want. There was no recourse against what we now call "sexual harrassment", a term that didn't even exist then.

    Things HAVE changed some, and some of that may be due to AA. I am still challenging you to provide - having the benefit of hindsight - a solution better than AA to have been implemented in the 50's or 60's.
     
  2. Kuna_Tiori

    Kuna_Tiori Jedi Padawan star 4

    Registered:
    Mar 20, 2002
    Red-Seven:
    The man holds elective office. Moreso, he is the stated leader of the dominant party in the upper legislative house.

    His opinions on race relations are CERTAINLY of interest, and subject to skepticism. He's allowed to be a racist, of course...but as an elected official and an elected member of that small community, his speech and views on issues become important, regardless of whether they are 'harmful', or not.

    Better yet, if his views on race relations and segregation are as he has privately disclosed (and publically a few instances, looking at his voting record), then I could contend that his legitimate and free opinions DO constitute a danger and are harmful, necessitating action. Or, less aggressivly, his thoughts and opinions could be harmful to his party, which necessitates action.


    That's understandable.

    But personally, I don't care what he says - as long as he doesn't put words into actions. And as long as he doesn't hurt others with his words. C'mon, the actual remark in question was hardly racist, and it'd take a lot of implication, historical research, and second-guessing to get the "racist" part out of it.

    And so what if he's racist? Almost everyone's racist, to a degree - even the very hypocrites who are currently denouncing Senator Lott.

    "Sticks and stones may break my bones, but words will never hurt me."
     
  3. Master Ood

    Master Ood Jedi Grand Master star 4

    Registered:
    Dec 14, 1998
    i personally hopes he stays in power. only appropriate for Reichfuhrer Lott to lead the Stormtrooper Repulican Party.

    ya know, his record doesn't exactly glisten with equal rights voting history. didn't he vote against Martin Luther King Day being a national holiday? yeah, i thought he did too.

    interesting how a state where 30% of the voting population is black keeps voting for a candidate who has been making these kind of remarks for years. makes you wonder about those southern elections huh? i wonder how many crosses get burned the night before elections. things that make you go hhhmmm
     
  4. Red-Seven

    Red-Seven Manager Emeritus star 5 VIP - Former Mod/RSA

    Registered:
    Oct 21, 1999
    Please. At least look into the facts before making such a wild accusation, such as that.

    The facts are that Lott does disproportionately bad among the Black voters in his state...but he wins the vast, vast, vast majority of the white vote, and is able to carry the state comfortably. It's not about voter turnout or intimidation, it's about bizarre voting splits that are usually unheard of.
     
  5. Sant-A_Killers

    Sant-A_Killers Jedi Youngling star 1

    Registered:
    Dec 15, 2002
    Did anyone else see Lott's interview on the Black Entertainment Television channel the other night? He looked scared [face_laugh]
     
  6. FakeHandLuke

    FakeHandLuke Jedi Youngling star 1

    Registered:
    Nov 19, 2001
    Update: Lott is stepping down as Majority leader, but staying in the senate
     
  7. TheScarletBanner

    TheScarletBanner Jedi Padawan star 4

    Registered:
    Oct 19, 2002



    WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Mississippi Sen. Trent Lott said on Friday he will step down as Senate Republican leader, but will remain in the Senate, leaving Republicans with a controlling majority in the new year.

    Lott's decision came less than 24 hours after Tennessee Republican Sen. Bill Frist launched a bid to oust Lott for the top Republican post. Lott has been under fire for racially offensive comments made earlier this month at a birthday party for 100-year-old Republican Sen. Strom Thurmond of South Carolina.



    Sayonara.

    Now, to hope that he'll step down as a Senator, too. :D

    - Scarlet.
     
  8. darthmomm

    darthmomm Jedi Grand Master star 4

    Registered:
    Jul 16, 2001
    He really should step down as senator.....he has served his purpose..more than I could ever dream... :D it is time for him to go....but he will not, because he knows what it will mean to the senate...if he steps down now, the Dem. Governor of his state will apoint another Sen.......and we all know that it will not be a republican.

    Boy am I enjoying this.....as much as the Reps enjoyed the Clinton hunt......really bothers ya when the tables are turned huh...

    A liar and a bigot....great and appropriate way to represent your party.....that is something to look up to.


     
  9. KnightWriter

    KnightWriter Administrator Emeritus star 9 VIP - Former Mod/RSA

    Registered:
    Nov 6, 2001
    Better hope the Democrats don't overplay their hand, although I am, as always, amazed at how people can be so solidly Democrat or Republican. There are far too many good and points on both sides for me to ever hope to be so anti-one side and pro-another.
     
  10. Kimball_Kinnison

    Kimball_Kinnison Jedi Grand Master star 6

    Registered:
    Oct 28, 2001
    Now, to hope that he'll step down as a Senator, too.

    It is a bit extreme to think that he will step down as Senator because of this. Tell me, why should he step down? He is the duly elected representative for his state to serve in the Senate. The people chose him to represent them for this 6-year term. There is absolutely no basis (or reason) for him to resign (except for your wishful thinking).

    Even if he is racist (which I sincerely doubt), that in no way disqualifies him from serving in any public office. If he allows racist opinions to influence him into illegal activites (such as violating federal anti-discrimination laws), then there would be a basis to have him expelled from the Senate.

    Even authoring or voting for a racist law is not sufficient basis to kick him our before his term ends (or ask him to resign). Remember that in the Senate, a bill requires 51 votes to pass (unless people are absent). If he authors a racist bill, it still takes 50 other racist people (all duly elected by the people of their states) to pass it.

    Kimball Kinnison
     
  11. Anakin2001

    Anakin2001 Jedi Padawan star 4

    Registered:
    Aug 13, 2000
    CBS just announced that Lott officially stepped down. More news at noon.

    Lott will not step down as Senator and will make a public announcement at 12:45 est.


     
  12. TheScarletBanner

    TheScarletBanner Jedi Padawan star 4

    Registered:
    Oct 19, 2002
    Tell me, why should he step down?

    Because he's a shame to Congress. Everyone has the right to say that which they think and believe, but racism disgraces the office of a Senator, and demeans the district which he represents. A good man would step down and let another take his place - after all, how is it democratic, if, now that his constituents doubtless feel different about him, he is allowed to continue regardless?

    A resignation by a majority/minority leader should automatically mean a by-election in their constituency.

    - Scarlet.
     
  13. KnightWriter

    KnightWriter Administrator Emeritus star 9 VIP - Former Mod/RSA

    Registered:
    Nov 6, 2001
    The people in his home state elected him, and if they want to kick him out, they'll have their chance.
     
  14. Red-Seven

    Red-Seven Manager Emeritus star 5 VIP - Former Mod/RSA

    Registered:
    Oct 21, 1999
    Please. I've been on Lott's case vehemently from the beginning, but thinking/asking/telling him to resign his elected position over this flap is too much. *I* certainly wouldn't vote for him again, but the bar is much higher for deserving censure/resignation/impeachment.

    Excellent news, though.
     
  15. Master Ood

    Master Ood Jedi Grand Master star 4

    Registered:
    Dec 14, 1998
    **SARCASM WARNING: THIS POST MAY CONTAIN SARCASTIC REMARKS THAT SHOULD NOT BE TAKEN SERIOUSLY. IT IS UP TO YOU TO WEED OUT THE SARCASM FROM THE SERIOUS OPINIONS**


    i was hoping he would stay in power, best thing that could have happened for the 1 true American party. but, the best thing for AMERICA is for Der Fuhrer to step down.

    he he Knight i am very Democratic w/ a big D but i am not one to vote the party simply because it's my party (like the brainwashed Repooplicans). i vote Republican if their candidate suits me better. heck i voted for Shrub in 2000. i am one of those rare registered Democratic military men. but hey, Democrats have a history of being less party loyal than the Republicans.

    hey Red i was being sarcastic about those "insinuations" i made about the black voters. sorry, i forgot to give my sarcasm warning again.

     
  16. Grand Moff Joker

    Grand Moff Joker Jedi Master star 4

    Registered:
    Oct 13, 1999
    A resignation by a majority/minority leader should automatically mean a by-election in their constituency.

    LOL! What a distorted perspective of political priorities. An elected official's first duty should be to his constituents. Holding positions within the party or political body is secondary. By your reasoning, should any resigning committee or subcommittee chairmen also resign their offices? That's absurd. You're looking at the political scene from the top-down, when representation should really be from the bottom-up. If the voters of Mississippi chose not to re-elect Lott when his Senatorial term is up, that's their choice. That's how the system works and was intended to work. A resignation or reassignment (you realize that Lott will still very likely be a committee chairman) at the party level should not automatically mean resignation of the publicly-elected office.

    Because he's a shame to Congress. Everyone has the right to say that which they think and believe, but racism disgraces the office of a Senator, and demeans the district which he represents. A good man would step down and let another take his place - after all, how is it democratic, if, now that his constituents doubtless feel different about him, he is allowed to continue regardless?

    And did you say this about Bill Clinton and the Presidency? I doubt it.
     
  17. Kimball_Kinnison

    Kimball_Kinnison Jedi Grand Master star 6

    Registered:
    Oct 28, 2001
    Because he's a shame to Congress. Everyone has the right to say that which they think and believe, but racism disgraces the office of a Senator, and demeans the district which he represents. A good man would step down and let another take his place - after all, how is it democratic, if, now that his constituents doubtless feel different about him, he is allowed to continue regardless?

    1) His job is to represent the people that elected him. Every six years he has a "performance review" known as an election. His next review comes in 2 years. Until then the only reason to throw him out is to be expelled by his peers. That requires illegal actions. Even if he did resign, the governor would appoint his replacement (how democratic is that?).

    Tell me, should a president who suddenly has approval ratings below 50% step down? No! That would be simply following the "passions of the mob", something that the Founding Fathers specifically sought to avoid. There is absolutely no reason why he should step down, especially when other senators have made comments that are clearly more racist or offensive without any censure.

    2) There are a lot of things that disgrace the office of a Senator, but that alone is not enough to warrant resignation. There have been senators who have made bad remarks in public, been under investigation for murder and cover-up, public drunkenness, and many other disgraceful acts, yet they were not forced to resign. Racism is not sufficient basis to call him a "disgrace". If it were, someone would have started expulsion hearings already for him. Only 15 members of the Senate have ever been expelled. Take a look at this list of those who have been charged and what they were charged with.

    A resignation by a majority/minority leader should automatically mean a by-election in their constituency.

    No. It makes sense for him to resign as Majority Leader if a large protion of his party no longer has confidence in him, since that is a post that has no set term. It makes no sense for his set term of office to end prematurely because of a comment that was neither illegal nor unethical, simply offenseive. There are no Senate rules against giving offense.

    Kimball Kinnison
     
  18. Nikohlas

    Nikohlas Jedi Youngling star 1

    Registered:
    Mar 21, 2002
    Personally I think that Trent Lott has made a foolish mistake which will ultimately cost him his political career. Whether he is truly a racist, or simply carries a strong prejudice against people who are simply different than him...I cannot say. All I know is he has said things that have obviously been consdiered by many to be inappropriate. If the good PEOPLE OF MISSISSPPI decide he should go...then he will not be re-elected should he choose to seek another term. It is not up to the congress, press, or non-constituents to make him leave. If he has committed some crime, then that is a different matter. Up to this point I have heard/read no mention of bringing up criminal charges against Senator Lott. You may not like him, you may be EMOTIONALLY upset about his comments, but everyone should take a step back and understand the LEGAL and democratic processes of our Government. There have been MANY leaders of our government that have done or said things that would be unthinkable by today's standards. For instance Thomas Jefferson and other founding fathers owned slaves. We of course recognize slavery as a human indignity an completely wrong on any scale. So too are comments praising segregationist policies. So maybe this Trent Lott fiasco will be a futher lesson to our elected leaders to be more mindful when forming political, ethical and moral views. And ESPECIALLY expressing them. I would love to live in a world when only perfect people represented me in government...but I don't think that is going to happen any time soon. So it is up to us to pay careful attention to those WE elect and put into power and respect the laws and government which ultimately we are responsible for. Because if we aren't vigilant, more people of questionable moral character like Trent Lott or Bill clinton or ---->______<----- (insert hated politician here) will continue to gain power in the government. If you don't like them...VOTE THEM OUT. Show some courage and will and organize your efforts to remove them...cause they aren't going to remove themselves.

    Thanks and I will take your responses off the air.
     
  19. farraday

    farraday Jedi Knight star 7

    Registered:
    Jan 27, 2000
    It's odd, very few if anyone believes he's a racis but it did act as a nice cover for getting him removed as leader.

    were his comments stupid? undobtedly. But for most of the people involved it was a political pinata to beat until the candy feel out instead of an actual gripe.

    God bless America.
     
  20. Darth_OlsenTwins

    Darth_OlsenTwins Jedi Master star 5

    Registered:
    May 18, 2002
    Boy am I enjoying this.....as much as the Reps enjoyed the Clinton hunt......really bothers ya when the tables are turned huh...


    Well, considering that Lott is doing the right thing and stepping down, I don't think this is comparable to Clinton. Don't forget, a vast majority of Republicans really didn't want and still don't want this guy as their Senate party leader. This is a good thing for the Republican party(imo) and most of us aren't too upset by it.
     
  21. TripleB

    TripleB Jedi Padawan star 4

    Registered:
    Oct 28, 2000
    Well, if Trent Lott is a disgrace to congress, what does that make Bill Clinton to the Presidency?

    As it is, I am sorta glad that Lott is out, as I said on page 4 of this thread. For one, he too often compromised with the Democrats with nothing substantial to show for it. He compromised on budgets, appointee's, on the powersharing agreement, even the post 2002 Elections agreement, he gave way too much to the Democrats.

    This shows that there is no playing nice with the Democrat's. As far as I am concerned, the gloves should come off in exposing the left and the Democrats for the frauds that they are.

    ANd lets start...oh, I don't know. Since it was such a crime for Senator Lott's statement to be made....let's look at the favorite KKK member in the Senate, Senator RObert Byrd, Democrat of West Virginia.

    For example, I know a lot of you liberals will aplaud him for voting against the confirmation of Clarence THomas to the US Supreme Court. But did you know that Senator Byrd also voted against the liberal Thurgood Marshall as well when he was nominated to the Supreme COurt? Or even better, let's look into how many lynchings took place in West Virginia during the years Byrdd was a KKK Member down there- Heck, he may well have participated in many a lynching or cross burning.....


    Darth Momm said

    He really should step down as senator.....he has served his purpose..more than I could ever dream... it is time for him to go....but he will not, because he knows what it will mean to the senate...if he steps down now, the Dem. Governor of his state will apoint another Sen.......and we all know that it will not be a republican.

    Figures. The Democrats could not get control thru the will and vote of the American people on November 5th, so what else is left to them? I would point out one of the reasons that the Democrats even had 50 senators coming out of the 2000 election was that in 1999, Republican senator Paul Coverdall of Georgia died during surgery, and the Democrat governor of the state selected a Democrat, Zell Miller to the seat. As a Patriot first, Republican second, I was still very glad to see Senator Miller take the seat and I hope he runs again in 2004.

    Boy am I enjoying this.....as much as the Reps enjoyed the Clinton hunt......really bothers ya when the tables are turned huh...

    A small slip of the toungue is a minor thing compared to the lies and corruption that came out of the Clinton white house. Add to it the fact that Lott did the honorable thing and stepped down....of course the word HONORABLE meant nothing to CLinton....

    A liar and a bigot....great and appropriate way to represent your party.....that is something to look up to.

    Yeah, Bill CLinton perfectly described.... When you look at all the wonderfull segregationists in the Democrat Party who opposed integration, who blocked school house doors, etc, etc.....few Republicans did that, it was virtually all democrats....


     
  22. Darth-Schwartz

    Darth-Schwartz Jedi Master star 4

    Registered:
    Apr 16, 2002
    yes it was.
     
  23. Master Ood

    Master Ood Jedi Grand Master star 4

    Registered:
    Dec 14, 1998
    well look, this is coming from a Democrat (with a big D) and i honestly don't think that Lott is a racist. ya know, this whole thing just proves something i have been studying about how the press totally influences what we think. people have said worse but they didn't get the press attention that Lott has. so what is the result? most of America thinks he is a racist.

    my personal opinion is he was just trying to show some respect to Strom on his one hundred birthday and not say that a segregationist should have been president.

    i don't know i just think this thing was blown way out of proportion. as a Democrat i am estatic. as an American i am disgusted at the ignorance of our populace and how they let the media make such an impression on them. how they let the media judge for them and not make their own judgements.


    bah

    maybe i really do have the IQ of an apple.
     
  24. TripleB

    TripleB Jedi Padawan star 4

    Registered:
    Oct 28, 2000
    As a democrat, you should also be a little saddened. Trent Lott, when it came down to it, continuously conceeded and compromised with the Democrats in exchange for very little in return. He has done that since he became Majority Leader, and continued to give up way too much to Tom Dachle in exchange for nothing or next to nothing. Chances are, and I certainly hope, that Bill Frist will take a harder line against the Democrats and force them into playing ball by their rules; and it will make the Dems WISH Trent Lott were back as Majority Leader.

     
  25. ShadowDragon

    ShadowDragon Jedi Youngling star 1

    Registered:
    Jan 25, 2002
    As the most vocal critic of Lott in this thread (IMO), even I haven't called for him to resign his senate seat. If the people of Mississippi want to elect a racist to represent them, so be it. No one should deny them the right to elect whomever they'd like to elect to the senate just because he doesn't agree with their views, as reprehensible as those views may be.
    When you look at all the wonderfull segregationists in the Democrat Party who opposed integration, who blocked school house doors, etc, etc.....few Republicans did that, it was virtually all democrats....
    *sigh* Do you remember the Southern realignment? The Dixiecrats? Starting in 1948 and culminating w/the Civil Rights and Voting Rights Acts in the 1960's under Johnson, the nonsegregationist Dems managed to get rid of the segregationists. Nixon welcomed them with open arms, creating the Southern Strategy. Pushing this on the Democrats is just a Coulteresque diatribe.
    Trent Lott, when it came down to it, continuously conceeded and compromised with the Democrats in exchange for very little in return. He has done that since he became Majority Leader, and continued to give up way too much to Tom Dachle in exchange for nothing or next to nothing.
    He seems to have been pushing for 2-1 funding of committees with his latest OR, w/the Senate at 51-49. To his credit, he compromised when the senate was 50-50. And what did he get? When Jeffords defected, the senate democratic OR split funding 50-50, with 10% for admin, with a 51-49 senate, as it is now.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.