Lott to Resign

Sometimes Southerners make it too easy for the other side to label us all racists. Earlier today I found the following comments in this article re: Frist...

Also in that campaign, Representative Harold E. Ford Jr., Democrat from Memphis, demanded that Mr. Frist apologize to African-Americans for remarks that he and a supporter made. Mr. Frist, going to a largely black march against crime, had asked a worker to obtain imprinted pencils to distribute, requesting unsharpened pencils.

"I don't want to get stuck," he told the aide.

LOL. What a dork. He also dropped out of an all white golf club to run for Senator back in 1994. This must be part of that "personal growth" that others were talking about earlier. Apparently one only undergoes "personal growth" when one's job or soul is one the line. There's no particular reason to do the morally correct thing throughout one's life when all you have to do is yell "allgood" on your death bed or in your next job interview.

God, people are pathetic. You should at least pretend like you don't use Christianity as some vehicle in your social affairs. At least pretend to honor the values you talk about. ****ing dorks.

 

giddyup,

Re: the funeral. I'm sorry for your loss.

Re: the rest. I didn't suggest the Lott controversy was a case of political maneuvering. If you want to accuse your party of cynicism here, go ahead. Until proven otherwise, I'm willing to give them the benefit of the doubt and allow for the possibility that their recent statements on race are sincere. I'm not willing to do the same for Lott, as he has a long history of making these kinds of statements along with a long record of voting against civil rights legislation. It's funny to me how you regard a Republican shift towards inclusion as cynical while you consider Lott's apologies to be sincere. No one, even in your own party, apart from Jesse Helms, is on record as agreeing with you there. Because it just isn't true.

The deflections on the Confederate flag are over. Mark my words. This is a watershed moment in American politics with regard to race. The flag thing is over. Pandering to Bob Jones and the CCC is over. States rights is trickier and, as in the article I posted above, there will be conflict over this. But in the place of the arguments you guys have posted here about states rights will be a fresh sensitivity to the spectres states rights rhetoric conjures.

I maintain, things have changed and you guys are parroting old, and very recently discarded, rhetoric. It won't fly anymore.

And rimrocker has absolutely kicked your collective asses on Horton, which even Lee Atwater didn't agree with you on. Good on you, rimrocker.

Please, guys. Join us in 2002. We're joining hands with certain ones in your party's leadership, whatever their motivation, in trying to correct the mistakes of the past. It's a much better place to be than the one you guys are stuck in: excusing those mistakes in order to wring out the last, few, proud racist votes remaining in what's left of the old South.

 

Wrong. Horton was the poster boy for the furlough program, and Gore brought the issue up. Susan Estrich, who makes me cringe every time she opens her mouth, and who was also a big Gore supporter last election cycle, told the truth about what happened. Atwater's apology is irrelevant to the issue.

Secondly, nobody in this thread has excused any racist act of the past. The argument centered around whether or not being an advocate of state's rights or maintaining Confederate symbolism automatically makes you a racist. Obviously, it does not.

Of course Batman, you are very good at arriving late with you condescending insults, without understanding the real subject at hand. Get a clue.

You say "it's a much better place to be than the one you guys are stuck in." Well, I can only counter that your head will be more comfortable than the place it is stuck in.

 

t: Did you even read rimrocker's post? Or did you employ your usual method when confronted with evidence you're wrong? You know the one: sticking your fingers in your ears, singing la la la, waiting for it to be over so you can have your turn to say No, No, No! You're wrong! You're lying! I heard all about it on Fox News! Guess what. Even Fox News will no longer back your backwards thinking here. Take a lesson from your party leaders. Things are changing. Trent Lott, of all freaking people, just went on BET and said he supported affirmative action! Things are changing. Try and keep up.

And you want me to get a clue. Talk about projecting.

I'm tryiting it all sink inng really hard not to be condescending here, t4, but you make it so hard. Your willfull denial of the racebaiting employed in the past by your party, for which even they now express regret, is difficult to ignore. I tried, believe me. That, I guess, is why I arrived "late" as you said, you know, maybe five or six hours after you trotted out the same, tired arguments, ignoring evidence to the contrary, even when presented by your own people.

Where are Refman and MadMax? I'm thinking they're happy with the recent turn of events. I know Max is. He's on record. Further, I'm guessing they're glad for some real evidence of their party reaching across the racial divide, rather than the old deflective rhetoric about how past instances of race baiting weren't really race baiting. I enjoy debating with those guys because they actually think and listen and respond, thoughtfully, rather than repeating old lines. They can't be counted on toe the party line (even, as in your case, after the party line has evolved and left you behind), because they actually think for themselves.

giddyup said earlier that he was offended that his party, rather than just individuals, was accused of arguably racist tactics. The thing that the party's now getting and you're not is that even if it is only perception, it is understandable. And, even if it is only perception, that perception must change. And, further, that the old lines will not change it. Wake the hell up.

 

Of course giddyup, that was the argument.

Don't bother Batman with this reality though, he is too busy demonizing his debate opponents with nonsensical broadstroke generalizations, lol.

 

Here's the quote that offended giddyup. It in no way accuses him of racism. It accuses his party (and by extension him, if you like) of not giving a rat's ass about civil rights. Pretty heavy stuff. Never mind the fact that his party has a terrible voting record on civil rights, never mind the fact that someone like Lott rose to leadership in that party, never mind the fact that the incoming majority leader has a civil rights voting record equitable to Lott's or that he quit his all white club to run for Senate. But I'm not calling Frist a racist any more than EC was calling giddyup one. I'm saying that Republicans have opposed meaningful civil rights legislation. Them's the facts. If you'd like your party to continue to oppose them, don't be offended when people remind you that your party does, in fact, oppose them.

I see a brighter future though. I see Repubicans turning the corner on issues of race, which I think is great. I think it's a terrible problem when 90% of the members of any race vote straight ticket. It's resulted in Dems taking the black vote for granted, which has resulted in blacks staying home in record numbers on election day. I'd love for both parties to reach out and make their cases. And I'd love it more if both parties made a regular habit of openly disdaining racism, even while keeping different views on how to address it. And I think, I hope, that's what happens next. There's a great opportunity here. I'm hoping both parties will take advantage of it.

 

I'd edit this in if I could:

More importantly, with regard to EC's quote, his main point wasn't even to dog Republicans on civil rights. His main point was that Republicans didn't bounce Lott due to his position on civil rights but because it was expedient to do so. The fact that his replacement has basically his exact record on civil rights votes is clear evidence that his main point was correct. If this offends you, write Bill Frist a letter. Tell him you're a Republican, you vote, you DO give a rat's ass about civil rights and that you hope his future votes will reflect HIM giving a rat's ass about civil rights.

 

Bull****!!!! You have to keep in mind that 90% or so of the letgislators are lawyers or have some form of legal background. In the Constitution, there are ennumerated powers of the Federal government. All other powers not mentioned are reserved to the states. That is what came to be called "states rights." The Federal government in the latter 20th century started to encroach upon those areas (ie education).

In regard to states with the Confederate flag, particularly Georgia...look up the state flag. It has the Confederate flag in the upper left hand corner. The state government didn't want to abandon the flag, but they were under tremendous pressure to do so...it is little wonder why it became an election issue.

It isn't always about racism, people.

 

I'm right here. Thanks for the invite. Sorry I showed up fashionably late.

Now...on with the show...

Trent Lott is not going to be majority leader. It came about a week later than I wanted. The guy is a cancer in the Republican Party. He stands for everything that is holding conservatism back.

Conservatives such as myself want ALL people to have the same shake. We want people to be able to achieve their goals through hard work and novel ideas. We do not want people to be financially paralyzed due to obligations to the government. This has accelerated the demise of the family unit. Too many Americans are having to seek two incomes not out of choice...but out of necessity. Something is desparately wrong with that. We want moral standards for conduct to be upheld. We can differ on what those standards are...that's America. We simply do not believe in moral relavitism...on some level certain things are absolutely right and absolutely wrong. We believe that the strength of this nation are the people...not the government which has sought the people to become dependent upon it generationally just to perpetuate our own political power. This is what conservatism means to me.

Not all Republicans are right...Trent Lott most notably. But there are millions of good, decent and caring people who classify themselves as Republicans. To me that is the saddest part of this thread...that some people equate Republicanism or conservatism with racism. I think you have been listening to Jesse "Line my pockets and give my son a beer distributorship or I'll brand you a racist" Jackson and Al Sharpton. It's destructive. It's hurtful...and most importantly...it's inaccurate.

Most of you know that I know MadMax. We are personal friends from law school. He's another one of the good guys. We were compassionate conservatives before compassionate conservatism was cool. Batman has even mistaken me for a liberal upon occasion.

All I ask is that you don't lump the good in with the bad. It's easy to do. It ultimately serves none of us well. I am appalled by some of the comments of t######. Do you honestly think it's going to help anything by getting into a smug pissing contest with Achebe and rimrocker about Willie Horton? It's in the past. Let it die there. We need to move on from the negative politics of the past and march into this new millenium with a renewed sense of hope.

We may disagree wildly between the dogmas...but what should be learned from our past is that the only way to make America better is to work together. George W. Bush's strongest ally when he was governor was Democrat Bob Bullock. Mr. Bullock was a good man, and Texas is worse off without him here. The John Sharps of the world would be well advised to think about Bob Bullock when formulating their policies to run on. Bush and bullock disagreed on many things...but they worked together and got things accomplished. We would all benefit from this approach. It was my hope when Bush was elected that he would continue in this tradition. Sadly, it seems that Washington is too polarized and too used to gridlock to change in a meaningful way.

I have rambled on long enough. I close by saying...goodbye Mr. Lott. When the next election cycle comes around, don't let the door hit you on the butt on your way out, and be sure to turn off the light.

 

More ramblings from rimrocker on race:

Race is a difficult issue. It can get folks fired up (as it has for me on occasion). There is the overt racism that, in it's purest form sanctions lynchings or draggings and rule by intimidation. Then there's the more subtle form that surfaces only in certain circumstances, even among liberals and those who define themselves as non-racists. (The most annoying one to me is "I like black people." Well some black people are cool and some are jerks and there are all kinds of people in between.) Some people recognize their failings and feel guilt or remorse. Some don't and don't care, others do and don't care. I sometimes think we need to have as many words to define racism or racist thoughts as the Inuits have for snow... it's that much a part of our culture, history, and politics and the undefined shadings make for confusing and irrational discussions. Because we can't really define it but we feel it so intensely, smart politicians of both parties can play to our emotions at both ends of the spectrum and many places in between. The term "States Rights" may conjure up a legal and philosophical idea for somebody like Refman, but it can also convey a meaning that appeals to folks on the bottom end of the spectrum. Conversely, someone can decry states rights and part of my emotional response is that whatever plan is being advanced under states rights is detrimental to my idea of racial justice and I immediately look with some approval upon the speaker... I think very little about the legal groundings (on the first pass anyway).

The only hope is that it does seem to be getting more subtle (in general) with each generation. I fully admit I'm a racist at times... I don't know how I could spend a childhood in East Texas in the 1960's without inculcating some of the dominant thought among those who took responsibility for raising me. But I am much less of a racist than my dad or grandfathers, (and I think I recognize it, though it may only be a partial understanding) and I hope my daughters will be several orders of magnitude better than I am and their children better than they will be. As the held beliefs become more fuzzy and hazy with each generation, so will the political appeals until it is not an issue. I hope.

When I was young, I thought a lot about race... read a bunch of Faulkner, Cash, Woodward, MLK, etc. I once spent two weeks riding around the South while I read "Simple Justice." (Full disclosure: I was also dating a girl from a Southern University) Went to Montgomery and Selma and Philadelphia and Ole Miss. On the bridge at Selma I finally understood what Faulkner was trying to say about the past... it's not and neither are the ideas or the emotions or the pain or the suffering or the triumphs. We're all connected. Brown wasn't even 50 years ago.

Socrates said "The unexamined life is not worth living." (Or something like that... it's late and I'm sleepy.) I would hope that we all take this opportunity during the holidays to sit down and think about where we are at and what we can do to leave the next generation in a better place than we are today.

 

I'm just that kind of guy.

Like anything else...there will always be people who take a valid argument and pervert it.