December 12, 2002
WHITES NEED NOT APPLY:
Black lawmakers told Lott must go (Michael J. Rochon and Anna Kukec, December 12, 2002, Indianapolis Star)U.S. Rep. John Conyers Jr. this afternoon called for Sen. Trent Lott's resignation, citing Lott's comments last week as a "slap in the face to all African Americans."Conyers, the ranking member of the House Judiciary Committee, labeled Lott's remarks "so un-American that they disqualify you from continuing as the majority leader of the United States Senate."
Then 73-year-old Conyers issued his demand.
"Therefore, I must call on you to resign," he said, surrounded by more than a dozen members of the Congressional Black Caucus and Indiana politicians, including Democratic state Rep. William Crawford. The statement elicited rousing applause.
Conyers, D- Mich., was speaking at the National Black Caucus of State Legislators conference, which is being held this week at the Westin Hotel in Downtown Indianapolis.
This is something beyond absurd--a racially segregated organization decrying a statement that may or may not have expressed some level of fondness for segregation? Posted by Orrin Judd at December 12, 2002 11:57 PM
Thurmond did not stand only for segregation, or even White rights, but for White *privilege*. This went as far as the right of southern Whites to lynch Blacks.
The moral equivalence absolutely does not stand.
Agreed.
The analogy isn't valid.
The Gweilo Diaries (he's a Mississippian too) has the lowdown on Lott's sorry record:
">http://gweilodiaries.blogspot.com/2002_12_01_gweilodiaries_archive.html#90047056
Frankly, I was stunned. I didn't know a lot of this before. This isn't just one "statement that may or may not have expressed some level of fondness for segregration"; this is a history of actions and statements going back decades.
I hold Lott responsible for Terrell's losing in Louisiana this past Sunday, and I think he's a huge roadblock in the path of the GOP's attempt to connect to non-white voters. He must go.
The Treasury Secratary designee has to resign from Augusta, a private club, because it doesn't admit women, but black congressmen are allowed a pass for belonging to a segregated organization in their official capacity as government officials?
Posted by: oj at December 13, 2002 6:37 AMJoe:
Ms Terrell lost because she couldn't turn out the conservative white vote. It is more than likely that her failure to play the race card--which, as you note, Ms Landrieu did effectively--is one of the reasons she lost.
Two sides of the coin of political operation are
1) Cutting someone loose because it is cynically and politically expedient to do so.
2) Digging in your heels and standing by your man and principles because honor, morality, and principle demand that you do so, come what may.
Can anyone tell me what principle, what demands of honor, and what morality demands that I stand by Mr. Lott?
Anxiously Awaiting,
Two quick points:
1. My only regret in Lottgate is that, because I never liked the guy, I can't have the moral satisfaction of turning against him now. Even if Lott was simply dumb in what he said, he's got to go. His statement confirms what many blacks (and Jews) suspect Republicans say to each other in private. As a result, it will be devastating to the party's chances of expanding its minority vote. (Although he was right on Bob Jones.)
2. On the other hand, and somewhat contradictorally, I was sorry to see Snow resign from Augusta. One could have no better enemy that the feminists (and the NYT) who think this is the biggest issue facing women today.
But you were not originally talking about the comparison between the Black Caucus and Augusta, oj, you were talking about the comparison between the Black Caucus and the 1948 Dixiecrats. When was the last time Augusta advocated a lynching? When was the last time the Black Caucus advocated a lynching?
Posted by: David Ross at December 14, 2002 2:34 AMThe Black Caucus advocates racism, in the form of Affirmative Action, and most members, though perhaps not all, advocate murder, in the form of abortion. Trent Lott opposes both.
Posted by: oj at December 14, 2002 6:37 AMJohn Conyers is the most contemptible politician that my home state has produced, and this is the State of Reigle (of the Keating 5) Bonior (McDermott's travel buddy in Bagdad) and Levin (who voted for carter and against reagan more than any other Senator at the time)
Conyers slammed Reno at the Waco hearings for no reason other than to mug for the camera, then defended her from people who criticised her for not appointing a special prosecutor to look into Clinton's and Gore's Campaign finance misdeeds, and was the loudest voice against impeachment. State wide, the schools in his district were failing to bad they had to be taking over by the State Government. Conyers responded by getting out the Detroit politcal machine to cross over to vote for McCain in the '00 primary machine to embarass Engler, who had backed Bush. He's also come out early and often for reparations. This man is a hypocritical race-baiting scumbag of the worst sort.
I don't think I believe in the sincerity of all
this shock about Lott being a racist. Who
woulda guessed?
On the other hand, the spokesperson for
the Black Caucus, which plans to demand
censure for Lott, is the vilely racist Maxine
Waters.
Politics sure is funny. I wouldn't give you
last week's sardine for Lott, but if I were in
the Congress I'd be damned if I'd vote to
censure him at the behest of a Waters.