Trent Lott

[Kramer]

Trent Lott had to quit Senate Leader for these words
‘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.”



John Kerry said about Lott
”I simply do not believe the country can today afford to have someone who has made these statements again and again be the leader of the United States Senate”


Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee (D-TX) said about Lott:
 “It was shocking…a piercing voice through the fabric of black America”

Kweisi Mfume said about Lott
“the kind of callous, calculated, hateful bigotry that has no place in the halls of Congress”

Still waiting for Harry Ass to quit as Lott had to for his remarks -nobody hold your breath waiting for Harry to leave because he won't
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) apologized for referring to President Barack Obama as “light skinned” and “with no Negro dialect” in private conversations during the 2008 presidential campaign.

[Michael Tee]

While I can't support the remarks of either Harry Reid or Trent Lott, there's a gap between them as wide as an ocean.

Reid's remarks indicate a belief that most blacks repel white voters because of the darkness of their skin and their broadly accented speech.  Basically he stereotyped blacks and the stereotype he put them in was one which he believed would repel white voters.  This set of beliefs did not affect in any way his belief in what was right or wrong - - it was wrong to deny blacks their civil rights no matter how broad their accent, no matter how black their skin.  There is nothing in any of Reid's remarks to indicate that he ever wavered from those core beliefs.  At most, his opinion related to the personal attractiveness of blacks, and attitude which CU4 and I have discussed regarding the sexual attractiveness or lack thereof on racial lines.

Lott, OTOH, explicitly endorsed a view favourable to de jure racial segregation, which the Supreme Court had already ruled was detrimental to the civil rights of black Americans   THAT is what is beyond the pale.

[Rich]

The gap is wide, certainly. It's as wide as the gap between your ears.

Trent Lott made a joke at a mans 100th birthday party. There was obviously no racist intent behind it. He was trying to be kind to a man who was on deaths door. He was attempting to show affection ad respect for a man who served his country most of his life.

Harry Reid on the other hand insulted every Black person in this country. He said it behind closed doors where true racism does the most damage. He showed what he thinks of Blacks in this country. He finds them inferior because of their dark skin and their Negro dialect.

The gap is wide. The Black "community" are played for fools by democrats. They must like it. They make excuses for scum like Reid and return democrats to office so they can keep them right were the White liberals like them. In poor schools and dangerous neighborhoods. They blame Republicans of course. But it's clear who really are the racists in this country.

[Kramer]

Lott, OTOH, explicitly endorsed a view favourable to de jure racial segregation, which the Supreme Court had already ruled was detrimental to the civil rights of black Americans   THAT is what is beyond the pale.



I don't see anything EXPLICIT in there but you do?

Trent Lott
"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,"

Later Trent said this:
"A poor choice of words conveyed to some the impression that I embraced the discarded policies of the past," Lott said. "Nothing could be further from the truth, and I apologize to anyone who was offended by my statement."

[Michael Tee]

<<Trent Lott
<<"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,"

<<I don't see anything EXPLICIT in there but you do?>>

You have to know a little U.S. history to understand the significance of Lott's remarks.  When Thurmond ran for President, he ran as the candidate of the States' Rights Democratic Party (the "Dixiecrats") whose motto was "Segregation Forever!" and whose platform explicitly provided for continuation of the Jim Crow laws of the South.  Anyone who is proud of voting Dixiecrat is proud of supporting a party which explicitly stood for racial segregation and Jim Crow laws (including the poll tax) which effectively disenfranchised every black American living under that system.   The explicit endorsement of racial segregation and Jim Crow is found in the proposition that America could have avoided a great many problems over a great many years had they all "followed the lead" (i.e. backwards into the 19th century) of Strom Thurmond and the Dixiecrats.

<<Later Trent said this: . . . >>

What's the difference WHAT he said "later?"  The dumb schmuck realized he had just fed his dick to the meat grinder and was trying to stop the inevitable consequences by turning off the machine.  He woulda French-kissed Al Sharpton live on prime-time TV if he thought that could save his scurvy ass.

[Michael Tee]

<<Trent Lott made a joke at a mans 100th birthday party.>>


Was Trent Lott doubled up in laughter when he said it?  Did the entire audience break out in guffaws and knee-slaps when he said it?  Do you know ANYBODY who thinks that's funny?  That doesn't even LOOK like a joke.   There's absolutely nothing remotely funny about it.  It is so obviously NOT a joke, there was no laughter at the time or since.  

<<There was obviously no racist intent behind it. >>

That's funny, because there is obviously no humour behind it either.  So what then do you think the intent could have been?

<<He was attempting to show affection ad respect . . . >>

Now you're getting closer to the truth.  Who but a racist piece of shit would even TRY to show "affection and respect" to another racist piece of shit?

<< . . . for a man who served his country most of his life.>>

Served his country by opposing Federal legislation to punish lynch mobs?  Served his country by doing everything he could to ensure that black Americans would be deprived of the right to vote and the right to equal educational and employment opportunities?  

How the hell is THAT serving his country?  You must be a racist too or you would never say that Strom Thurmond "served his country."  Depends on what kind of country you want, I guess.

[Kramer]

<<Trent Lott
<<"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,"

<<I don't see anything EXPLICIT in there but you do?>>

You have to know a little U.S. history to understand the significance of Lott's remarks.  When Thurmond ran for President, he ran as the candidate of the States' Rights Democratic Party (the "Dixiecrats") whose motto was "Segregation Forever!" and whose platform explicitly provided for continuation of the Jim Crow laws of the South.  Anyone who is proud of voting Dixiecrat is proud of supporting a party which explicitly stood for racial segregation and Jim Crow laws (including the poll tax) which effectively disenfranchised every black American living under that system.   The explicit endorsement of racial segregation and Jim Crow is found in the proposition that America could have avoided a great many problems over a great many years had they all "followed the lead" (i.e. backwards into the 19th century) of Strom Thurmond and the Dixiecrats.

<<Later Trent said this: . . . >>

What's the difference WHAT he said "later?"  The dumb schmuck realized he had just fed his dick to the meat grinder and was trying to stop the inevitable consequences by turning off the machine.  He woulda French-kissed Al Sharpton live on prime-time TV if he thought that could save his scurvy ass.

platforms encompass many goals and principals not just ONE. You can assume to know what he meant and so can I but in the end only Trent Lott knows what he meant and he apologized for a poor choice of words and his leadership role in the US Senate ended. Harry Reid had a poor choice of words too and he apologized but won't step down, I like using the same set of standards for both political parties. Democrats like to use two sets of standards, one for them and another for Republicans. I don't like that and will call them out every time. You like two sets of standards too. That is the cowards way.

[sirs]

<<There was obviously no racist intent behind it. >>

That's funny, because there is obviously no humour behind it either.  So what then do you think the intent could have been?

I can't count how many jokes I've heard that have bombed.  Even Johnny Carson could lay a few bombs.  I guess every joke Tee's heard, he's laughed hysterically

[Michael Tee]

<<platforms encompass many goals and principals not just ONE.>>

PLEASE.  If the States' Rights Democratic Party had any goals besides "Segregation Forever!" and the perpetuation of de jure racial segregation and Jim Crow, there probably isn't one person in a thousand who knows of them.  I bet if Lott had come out in favour of the Nazi Party, you'd probably try to claim that the Nazi Party had "many goals and principles, not just ONE."   Even Lott himself wasn't so fucking dumb as to claim that he was praising Strom and the Dixiecrats for the safe highways plank in their platform.

<<You can assume to know what he meant and so can I . . . >>

Well, usually you are safe in taking a man at his word and believing that he meant what he said.

<< . . . but in the end only Trent Lott knows what he meant and he apologized for a poor choice of words >>

Even a dumb racist asshole knows enough to figure out that words spoken at a banquet of Southern racist bigots won't fly in the rest of the country.

<< . . . and his leadership role in the US Senate ended. >>

What a fucking tragedy for white racists anywhere.

<<Harry Reid had a poor choice of words too and he apologized but won't step down . . . >>

Maybe you missed my post, the second in this thread, where I pointed out the huge difference between what Lott said (an explicit endorsement of de jure racial segregation and Jim Crow laws) and what Reid said (an offensive stereotype of black racial characteristics that in no way came even close to an endorsement of de jure segregation, Jim Crow and lynch law.)

<< I like using the same set of standards for both political parties. >>

That's good to know.  So I guess maybe now you can stop putting an endorsement of de jure racial segregation on the same level as mildly offensive stereotyping coming nowhere close to it, just because a Republican is guilty of the more heinous offence.

<<Democrats like to use two sets of standards, one for them and another for Republicans. >>

I haven't seen any evidence of that.  Not only did they sacrifice the South, as LBJ expressly said they would, by abandoning de jure segregation and denial of black civil rights, but they condemned Trent Lott as readily as they lost the Democrats in their midst - - Strom Thurmond included - - who jumped ship for their racist ideals.  Just as readily as the GOP defended Lott's racism, that's how readily they took in all racist Democrats who left the Party for their racist ideals.  Sure looks to me like the standard of the Democrats is anti-racism and the standard of the Republicans is pro-racism.

<<I don't like that and will call them out every time. You like two sets of standards too.>>    

The only double standard I see operating here is yours.  You condemn the most minimal form of racism (unconscious stereotyping) when it comes from a Democrat but you defend the most blatant form of racism (endorsement of de jure racial segregation, opposition to Federal anti-lynching legislation, support of Jim Crow and "Segregation Forever!")  when it comes from Republicans.  That's hilarious.

<<That is the cowards way.>>

Uh-oh, careful now.  You know the old adage, when you are pointing a finger at someone, there are three fingers pointing back at you.  If maintaining a double standard is "the coward's way," you have just accused, tried and convicted yourself.

[Kramer]

<<platforms encompass many goals and principals not just ONE.>>

PLEASE.  If the States' Rights Democratic Party had any goals besides "Segregation Forever!" and the perpetuation of de jure racial segregation and Jim Crow, there probably isn't one person in a thousand who knows of them.  I bet if Lott had come out in favour of the Nazi Party, you'd probably try to claim that the Nazi Party had "many goals and principles, not just ONE."   Even Lott himself wasn't so fucking dumb as to claim that he was praising Strom and the Dixiecrats for the safe highways plank in their platform.

<<You can assume to know what he meant and so can I . . . >>

Well, usually you are safe in taking a man at his word and believing that he meant what he said.

<< . . . but in the end only Trent Lott knows what he meant and he apologized for a poor choice of words >>

Even a dumb racist asshole knows enough to figure out that words spoken at a banquet of Southern racist bigots won't fly in the rest of the country.

<< . . . and his leadership role in the US Senate ended. >>

What a fucking tragedy for white racists anywhere.

<<Harry Reid had a poor choice of words too and he apologized but won't step down . . . >>

Maybe you missed my post, the second in this thread, where I pointed out the huge difference between what Lott said (an explicit endorsement of de jure racial segregation and Jim Crow laws) and what Reid said (an offensive stereotype of black racial characteristics that in no way came even close to an endorsement of de jure segregation, Jim Crow and lynch law.)

<< I like using the same set of standards for both political parties. >>

That's good to know.  So I guess maybe now you can stop putting an endorsement of de jure racial segregation on the same level as mildly offensive stereotyping coming nowhere close to it, just because a Republican is guilty of the more heinous offence.

<<Democrats like to use two sets of standards, one for them and another for Republicans. >>

I haven't seen any evidence of that.  Not only did they sacrifice the South, as LBJ expressly said they would, by abandoning de jure segregation and denial of black civil rights, but they condemned Trent Lott as readily as they lost the Democrats in their midst - - Strom Thurmond included - - who jumped ship for their racist ideals.  Just as readily as the GOP defended Lott's racism, that's how readily they took in all racist Democrats who left the Party for their racist ideals.  Sure looks to me like the standard of the Democrats is anti-racism and the standard of the Republicans is pro-racism.

<<I don't like that and will call them out every time. You like two sets of standards too.>>    

The only double standard I see operating here is yours.  You condemn the most minimal form of racism (unconscious stereotyping) when it comes from a Democrat but you defend the most blatant form of racism (endorsement of de jure racial segregation, opposition to Federal anti-lynching legislation, support of Jim Crow and "Segregation Forever!")  when it comes from Republicans.  That's hilarious.

<<That is the cowards way.>>

Uh-oh, careful now.  You know the old adage, when you are pointing a finger at someone, there are three fingers pointing back at you.  If maintaining a double standard is "the coward's way," you have just accused, tried and convicted yourself.

Did it bother you that Bill Clinton went to Kennedy looking for an endorsement for Hillary. Recounting the conversation later to a friend, Teddy fumed that Clinton had said, A few years ago, this guy would have been getting us coffee. Clinton was referring to OBama!!

[Michael Tee]

<<Did it bother you that Bill Clinton went to Kennedy looking for an endorsement for Hillary. Recounting the conversation later to a friend, Teddy fumed that Clinton had said, A few years ago, this guy would have been getting us coffee. Clinton was referring to OBama!!>>

Yes, that DID bother me and a lot more than Reid's remark.  That proves he has a working bias against blacks and is prepared to put it into practice by denying them equal opportunities with whites.  That is inexcusable.  He was trying to deny political support to a man based on the colour of his skin.  Reid was trying to SUPPORT a black man by what he was saying, even though it revealed that he was unconsciously stereotyping all or most other blacks.  All the more to Reid's credit that he was able to support a black man DESPITE his subconscious prejudices.  Bubba was trying to undermine a black man BECAUSE of the colour of his skin.

[sirs]

[Kramer]

<<Did it bother you that Bill Clinton went to Kennedy looking for an endorsement for Hillary. Recounting the conversation later to a friend, Teddy fumed that Clinton had said, A few years ago, this guy would have been getting us coffee. Clinton was referring to OBama!!>>

Yes, that DID bother me and a lot more than Reid's remark.  That proves he has a working bias against blacks and is prepared to put it into practice by denying them equal opportunities with whites.  That is inexcusable.  He was trying to deny political support to a man based on the colour of his skin.  Reid was trying to SUPPORT a black man by what he was saying, even though it revealed that he was unconsciously stereotyping all or most other blacks.  All the more to Reid's credit that he was able to support a black man DESPITE his subconscious prejudices.  Bubba was trying to undermine a black man BECAUSE of the colour of his skin.

Here's what I think: People say silly stupid things. Trent, Clinton, Reid, Jesse, Obama, Biden & Al all have said dumb things about blacks, whites, Jews, mexicans, Arabs, so on and so forth. SO WHAT! But let's treat everybody the same. Nappy headed Ho was funny. Jesse Jackson wanting to rip off Obama's nuts was funny to me.

I for one like a sun tan. I think tanned people look healthy compared to pasty white folk like you people up in Canada that have to stay indoors for months at a time. People are too uptight about all this shit.

[Rich]

>>Was Trent Lott doubled up in laughter when he said it?<<

Doubled up? He had a grin on his face. He was obviously trying to be funny.

>>Did the entire audience break out in guffaws and knee-slaps when he said it?<<

Are guffaws and knee slapping the criteria by which you judge a joke? People were laughing, yes.

>>Do you know ANYBODY who thinks that's funny?<<

Until the reprobate leftists read something into it lots of people attending the party thought it was funny. They knew it was a joke meant to pay respects, not to support some 60 year old agenda. The left doesn't seem to mind having a grang duke, or whatever, of the KKK in their party. He denounced it, so did Strom. But the left loves that race card, and they'll use itagainst all but their own. Even when one of their own is a proven racist.

It's only the hypersensitivity of the left that made it into something it wasn't. But we now know it's okay to be a racist as long as you support abortion and the statist disregard for the Constitution.

[Michael Tee]

<<Doubled up? He had a grin on his face. He was obviously trying to be funny.>>

I didn't watch him deliver the "joke" so I can't say what his demeanour was.

I suppose it's barely possible that the whole thing was meant as a joke, but I consider it highly unlikely since there's nothing remotely funny about it.  In fact, considering that this was a 100th birthday tribute, it would actually be insulting to the guest of honour to make a joke out of something he took seriously enough to stake his political career on.  It's like telling the guy, on his 100th birthday no less, "Strom, you would have made a great President.  Not."

I just don't believe, all things considered, that this was a joke.  That's a very unlikely explanation and knowing what I know about Strom Thurmond, I don't think anyone was joking with him about that.