Lott Resigns as Majority Leader

[jdd2007]

what?

[Imran Siddiqui]

Dude, Thurmond is often used as the proof that South Carolina is still a bastion of white supremacy.

Never heard that one before.

--

And Lott is refering to atheists, not Jews, jdd.

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui

Imran, you're looking at Lott's comments outside a context of his contonued support of racism and racists throughout his career.

No I'm not. If Thurmond can be forgiven and Byrd can be forgiven, sure as HELL Lott can be forgiven.

Thurmond and Byrd have both asked to be forgiven for their past and have repudiated them. Lott has been playing the "I'm not a racist, wink, wink" game for years with his KKK constituents and now that he got caught, he was contrite because he knew he was in trouble.

Long overdue is the best way to describe it.

[MrFun]

Imran, I don't think it's as simple as looking at only one issue that a person has taken a stand on, in every situation.

However, this issue over Lott's statement worshipping a racist or former racist like Thurmond, revolved around -- guess what -- Thurmond's past advocacy for segregation, which is the focus in this thread.

It's nice to see that Thurmond may have cried crocodile tears later, and presented himself as no longer a white supramacist. But on the other hand, maybe Thurmond has truly renounced his past racism. Who knows, either way.

But when Lott implied through his statement that during the 1940's, when Thurmond was still a racist, that our nation would have been better off under Thurmond, Lott's statement was uncalled for.

[Imran Siddiqui]

However, this issue over Lott's statement worshipping a racist or former racist like Thurmond, revolved around -- guess what -- Thurmond's past advocacy for segregation, which is the focus in this thread.

Bull****. That's the focus for you because you've already condemned him to be one. Lott knew Thurmond as a states' rights guy from working in the Senate and said the nation would be better off FROM THAT PERSPECTIVE. He didn't say that bastard Truman messed things up, because he was thinking of the years he spent with Thurmond in the senate.

Thurmond and Byrd have both asked to be forgiven for their past and have repudiated them. Lott has been playing the "I'm not a racist, wink, wink" game for years with his KKK constituents and now that he got caught, he was contrite because he knew he was in trouble.

I can say the same thing with Byrd. You want to believe him was the 'wink, wink' because it benefits your political side to think so.

I still don't think there was anything wrong in what he said.

[Sikander]

Count me as one of those who has always hated Lott for his complete lack of political intuition on any subject beyond the floor of the Senate. I only heard about his ties to racists much later, but they did not surprise me. I am very glad to see him go, and I think a sizable chunk of the Republican party feels the same way. Certainly the White House is very pleased at what they have wrought this week.

[Dr Strangelove]

Originally posted by Shi Huangdi
Lott is a Southern Baptist, so most people who consider themselves Christian, Lott would not consider a Christian.

Huh? In that part of the country many Baptists and fundamentalists would be very likely to say that about Catholics and liberal protestants.

[Imran Siddiqui]

In that part of the country many Baptists and fundamentalists would be very likely to say that about Catholics and liberal protestants.

Um... that's what he said. Most people that consider themselves Christian would NOT be under Lott's definition of the word.

[jdd2007]

ah, i see...

[MrFun]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui

Bull****. That's the focus for you because you've already condemned him to be one. Lott knew Thurmond as a states' rights guy from working in the Senate and said the nation would be better off FROM THAT PERSPECTIVE. He didn't say that bastard Truman messed things up, because he was thinking of the years he spent with Thurmond in the senate.

In my opinion, states' rights has mostly been a facade, so that racist politicians can deny the federal government the power to protect the rights of citizenship that all people are entitled to in United States.

Does this mean that the federal government is innocent of discrimination? No, but in regards to individual states using the states' rights argument, it has been nothing but a facade, in my opinion, in order to deny people equal citizenship rights within their state government.

During the Civil Rights movement of the 1960's for instance, many white supremacists were screaming about states' rights, and that the federal government has no business in their states. Gee, I wonder why they used this argument . . . . . ?

[Boris Godunov]

[SIZE=1] Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
I can say the same thing with Byrd. You want to believe him was the 'wink, wink' because it benefits your political side to think so.

I still don't think there was anything wrong in what he said.

The dance continues. I can see not thinking what Lott said was that bad, but even the people in the room gasped when Lott said it, and they were all Republicans.

And again, Byrd has renounced his past, forcibly, and has a legislative record repudiating it. And he's not the majority leader for the Dems.

I think what Lott said in and of itself wouldn't have been so bad--if it hadn't been Lott saying it. It was putting it in the context of his persistent racism that did him in.

[Sava]

bah, let this thread die, he's gone...