Lott stepping down

Assuming they're correct, which committe chairman is going to give up his spot for Reichsmarshall Lott?*


* Note, this is only funny if you saw SNL this weekend

 

I saw it and still don't think it's funny.

If I was Lott I'd thumb my nose at the whole Republican establishment and resign my seat, effectively throwing the Senate into a tie. F*** the Republican senators, not one freaking guy had the backbone to say this witch hunt was a travesty. Washington is a cesspool of backstabbing and social climbing aholes. This guy was hung out to dry for making a joke at a birthday party and people inferring all sorts of crap out of it.

 

You know, Ian, if this was the only time he had said it, I might agree with you. But he said the same thing in 1980. He told the CCC, the modern off-shoot of the white citizen's councils, that they had the right idea. He said that racial intolerance is not necessarily a violation of public policy. He spearheaded a movement to keep blacks out of his college fraternity. He voted against Martin Luther King Day.

Sometimes, when you have a witch hunt, you catch a witch. Either you're choosing to ignore the obvious or you don't think what he meant was all that bad.

 

As far as I'm concerned, the vast majority of people who don't think Lott is a racist are racists.

 

If Lott resignes, and he likely will, it won't be because of the pressure from the liberal media, it will be because of the pressure within the GOP. I mean, these guys have spent the last few decades trying to change their image, present themselves as an inclusive party that has broken with its sometimes shady past and Lott goes on and causes all this furor. You'd think all these years in politics would've taught him the value of common sense.

 

Why does voting against Martin Luther King day make you a racist?

I personally think that Lott is a racist. I just don't see why voting against making this a federal holiday would make one a racist.

 

"He voted against Martin Luther King Day."

That was wrong the more holidays the better I say.

 

Because due to his personal history and comments and actions he made over the course of his life, it isn't too hard to guess why he voted against it.

 

No kidding.

How'd you like to be the last guy in the country to figure it out? You'd be up there, saying "Wait, he's all about heritage" or some crap, and then it dawns on you? How stupid would you feel then?

On the Richter Scale of the F**cking Obvious, with "O.J. did it" being a full 10.0, "Lott's a racist" has to clock in at least as an 8.5.

 

If Lott's a racist for saying good things about Strom Thurmond then everybody in the room at the birthday party is a racist. Why else would they be attending a roast for a racist?

If Lott's a racist then Senator Byrd's a racist for saying and writing infinitely worse things than Lott.

If Lott's a racist then Hillary Clinton's a racist for calling a guy a "Fecking J*w Bastard".

If Lott's a racist then Jesse Jackson's a racist for calling New York "Hymietown".

If Lott's a racist then Al Gore's a racist for going out to eat at a "white's only" restaurant while their black family maid waited outside in the car.

If Lott's a racist then Bill Clinton's a racist for having a segregationist as a mentor and saying great things about him.

If Lott's a racist then Bill Clinton's a racist for saying Mario Cuomo "acts like a mafioso".

I doubt a real racist is going to get in front of a mixed crowd and make a racist joke. We all know, THEY all know, in their heart that Lott didn't stand up there and make a racist comment. It's all politics. It's sick, it's disgusting, and it will happen again. Lott was an incompetent spokesman for the conservative movement. He deserved to be pushed aside for other reasons. But, he ain't no racist. They're all frickin hypocrites in Washington.

 

Usually I'd laugh at the logical fallacy, but there's a nice picture of Dubya smiling next to Trent and Strom, so I think I'll agree with this.

Because he's recanted most of it?

Byrd was a racist, he's apologized - something Lott didn't quite get the hang of, despite more than a few tries.

Urban legend.

Pretty sure he apologized for this.

Did it hurt your arms, reaching like that? Either this happened when Gore Jr. was, like, eight years old, or he went to some Denny's last year that missed the company memo.

Anyway, I'd be amused to see you back this one up.

I don't remember Clinton supporting Fulbright's segregationist platform. Which is what Lott said about Thurmond, explicitly.

*international "wanker" hand signal*

Joke?

Have you missed the news for the past ten days or so?

Who's we, you and your talking dog?

*sniff*

Poor Trent - "Lotted" by those darn liberals.

 

> If Lott's a racist for saying good things about
> Strom Thurmond then everybody in the room at
> the birthday party is a racist.

It is not the fact that he said something nice, but that he said that a segregational policy would have helped the United States.

> If Lott's a racist then Senator Byrd's a racist for
> saying and writing infinitely worse things than Lott.

If Byrd is no longer saying those things then he is no longer a racist.

> If Lott's a racist then Hillary Clinton's a racist for
> calling a guy a "Fecking J*w Bastard".

That is racist if she ment Jew as part of the derogatory aspect of the statement and not just an identifying feature.

> If Lott's a racist then Jesse Jackson's a racist for
> calling New York "Hymietown".

That's pretty racist.

> If Lott's a racist then Al Gore's a racist for going
> out to eat at a "white's only" restaurant while
> their black family maid waited outside in the car.

I don't think that's racist at all. My mother works as a maid and has never been taken to a restaurant by her employers. I do think eating at such a place (if it was done in the last few decades) is questionable in the same way as playing golf at Augusta is questionable.

> If Lott's a racist then Bill Clinton's a racist for
> having a segregationist as a mentor and saying
> great things about him.

I don't think this is racist at all either. Any person can have good qualities as well as bad ones. Saying I like Hitler's paintings does not make me a Nazi. Clinton, to my knowledge, has never said that segregation is a valid policy - saying that would make him a racist.

> I doubt a real racist is going to get in front of a
> mixed crowd and make a racist joke.

They certainly would if they felt comfortable, such as by being around fellow racists or by injesting a little too much alcohol.

Please think about the words Lott said. If Lott did not mean what everyone thinks he ment, what else could it possibly mean?

 

Ok, to sum up your comments: Racism is okay if you're a Democrat and apologize. Got it.

 

You lied and I caught you at it. Quit your whining.

EDIT - well, let me be a little less harsh. The only outright lie was the Hillary thing. The rest was various degrees of spinning, ranging from the crap no one believes (Bill Clinton, a racist?) to stuff that's totally irrelevant (so don't vote for Jesse Jackson, then, you big crybaby).

All this ignores the laughable spin you've tried to put on this - ANYTHING but face up to what Lott said and what Lott is. It's pathetic, hilarious, and says a lot about the person posting as "Ian McCracken."

 

Lott Vows to Fight to Hold Onto Power in Senate

 

http://www.cnn.com/2000/ALLPOLITICS/stories/07/16/hillary.book.response.02/

Isn't an urban myth at all. It's he(they?) said/she said. At least, from what I've been able to find anyway. Looked on all the normal Urban myth sites, couldnt find any reference to it.

PS-Took an interest in replying to this part of your post because I had an anti-Hillary friend email me (and ALL his friends) the fairy tale about Hillary supporting the Black Panther murderers. I sent everyone on his email list (and all those from the source email on) this: http://www.snopes2.com/inboxer/outrage/panthers.htm. I'm not a big fan of Hillary either, just hate seeing mis(dis?)information being propagated like that.

 

It's only an urban myth in Loney's delusional world. Three witnesses heard the comment, including the guy it was directed towards. Only Loney would accept the word of Bill and Hillary Clinton, who deny it. We know they have such a sparkling reputation for telling the truth.

 

This whole thing is just so damn hilarious, as it shows how hypocritcal and back stabbing Rep-Dems really are.

For the dems to come out and roast Lott is absolutley rediculous.. when they have some down right nasty bigots on their side of the aisle.Of course its alright to hate Serbs and arabs (Liebermann), Its alright to hate Whites (take your pick in the black caucas)
, heck its even allright to be a Klansman as long as the robe is in the closet.
But what would expect from the Party of Segragation.I am sure good ole flip floppin LBJ (who supported segragation while on the hill) would be extremley proud that hypocracy is alive and well with his party.

As far as the White house and the rest of the Republocrats... it serves them right if Lott resigns and the dems gain a foothoold.Loyalty is a two way street.And ole George has proved how loyal he is.

 

http://www.prospect.org/webfeatures/2000/07/mooney-c-07-19.html

When you consider that the person allegedly slandered -- then-Bill Clinton campaign manager Paul Fray -- is actually a Baptist, the story starts to seem rather Area 51-ish. And that's before you read these lines from Fray's three year old apology letter to Hillary, released by her campaign: "At one point in my life, I would say things without thinking, without factual foundation, and without rhyme or remedy until it furthered my own agenda. I was wrong, and I have wronged you."

This site doesn't immediately come up on Google, what with all the many many many many many MANY ultraconservative sites who all but cream themselves over spreading the rumor. But crap it was, crap it is, and crap it shall remain.

Now. The question is...why can't people just toss Lott over the side? The uncle-f**cking REPUBLICANS want to by now. Why stick up for him? Why can't people just accept the obvious?

The only answer that makes sense, is out of a misguided feeling that sliming the Democrats somehow makes the Republicans look better. The moral equivalence trotted out is just embarrassing - Ian isn't the only one to do it, and most Republicans have rightly focused on Lott rather than uselessly tried to equivocate.

Seriously, did I miss something? Where were the denunciations of Strom Thurmond before now, if having a racist past was so horrifying? They had years and years and years. Now all of a sudden, Robert Byrd is held to standard that would have had Jesse Helms swinging from a Washington lightpole?

If you REALLY want someone's scalp by the Lott standard...and I'm not the first one to suggest this by any means...but Attorney General Ashcroft better not answer the phone for a while, if you know what I mean.

 

And to prove it, you quote from a liberal site...hmmm.

And I wasnt looking at news web sites for the story, rather at "Urban Myth" websites. ALL the news web sites state the allegations of each individual. Except YOUR site. Doesn't mention the other witnesses at all...

CNN is ultraconservative?

 

That's what it took. Surprisingly, Newsmax didn't report these little details.

And ALL the news sites forget to mention the guy was Baptist, or the letter he wrote three years prior to the Senate campaign.

ALL of the news sites forget to mention Hillary-haters' history of...oh, what's the best way to put this...making sh**t up.

I can't help it if news sites didn't do their job on this one.

Jesus, it's like dealing with pre-schoolers. Learn to read, already.

Still not convinced? Yeah, after all, Rush said it, Drudge wrote it, that settles it, right?

http://www.adl.org/presrele/Mise_00/3642_00.asp - They're apparently dumb enough to take Hillary at her word. You'd think they'd be sensitive to this kind of thing.

http://archive.nandotimes.com/elect...9793-500332454-501896019-0-nandotimes,00.html

Hey, here's another little tidbit CNN didn't see fit to mention, let alone Newsmax.

Fray has suffered a brain disorder that led to memory loss, addiction to painkillers and erratic behavior. He also lost his law license after accepting a bribe to alter a court document.

And, apparently the Frays had been spouting off stuff like this before:

http://www.s-t.com/daily/07-00/07-25-00/a12op076.htm

The people who accused her of the ethnic slur are the former campaign worker, Paul Fray, and his wife, Mary Lee. Mr. and Mrs. Fray have spent much of their time in recent years mining the Bill-and Hillary rumor mill. Over the years they've been available for rumors involving Bill's womanizing, drug use among Clinton staffers and the ever-popular Hillary-is-a-lesbian stories. Not until visited by Mr. Oppenheimer, however, had they ever mentioned the Jew-bastard remark. Perhaps it's a sign the mine is playing out. One can hope.

Fray's past had been touched on by some other real journalists - you know, NOT Drudge and the National Enquirer:

http://www.bartcop.com/cona718.htm

Of course, in believing this story whole cloth, there was a cue from the very top - a certain senator from Mississippi piled on - oh, delicious irony is so ironically delicious:

http://archive.salon.com/politics/feature/2000/07/19/lott/

Noting that "Clinton is now accused of having uttered anti-Semitic imprecations along the line," "Fox News Sunday" host Tony Snow asked the Senate majority leader, "What's going to happen in that New York Senate race?"

Lott replied that he hoped Clinton's opponent, Rep. Rick Lazio, R-N.Y., wins the race. "I think he's making a great candidate," Lott said, praising Lazio's enthusiasm and New York roots.

"He's got them all confused," Lott went on. "I mean, he's even getting, what is it, a substantial support of the Jewish vote in New York. And I think that's one of the reasons why Hillary is uttering these anti-Semitic comments, if in fact, she is. So I'm pulling for Rick. Rick's getting support from all over the country." (Emphasis added.)

Lott's answer made it sound as if Clinton's alleged comment was made last week and as a direct result of her inability to break 60 percent among likely Jewish voters in New York. It was only then, the New York Times reported on Tuesday, that Hillary's aides advised their boss to hold a press conference to refute the charge.

When asked about Lott's role in this latest scandal, his spokesman John Czwartacki downplayed Lott's answer. "Lott didn't say if the remarks were true or not," Czwartacki notes. "He was obviously not aware of this very specific allegation."

That Lott was unaware of the particulars of the charge didn't mean that he wouldn't take Snow at his word, however. "He wasn't going to say, 'Tony, you're a liar,' just because he hadn't heard the allegation independently," Czwartacki says. "The statement was a tease to the question 'What's up with New York?' All his information was embedded in the question at the time."

Moreover, Czwartacki said that Lott's office was amused that anything the boss said or did would affect Clinton's campaign strategy. "We're pleased that Mrs. Clinton's campaign is apparently so skittish that it's making knee-jerk decisions based on a single question Lott answered during the most crowded Sunday news hole in ages," he said.

Karma, motherflucker.

Oh, hey, any time. I'll do anything for you wonderful people. I'll even move your lips for you as you read the paragraphs. Just lay off the Newsmax occasionally?

And, uh, maybe you could all now finally consider whether Trent Lott's remarks are still excusable...now that the little excuse you've had that "Hillary did it too!" has been exposed.

 

Trent Lott is a racist.

 

Well, yeah. The Serbs are genocidal maniacs.

OK, OK, it's not all the Serbs. It was just the overwhelmingly popular government of the Serbs. And the people didn't ditch the gvt. out of any sense of moral...well, moral anything. They just didn't like it when we bombed all of the power plants.

 

Mike Lastort has become a nasty, irrelevent poster, and that hurts!