What is all of this "code phrase" crap.

Post #68,500 by bepatient 12/12/02 9:39:13 PM Reply	What is all of this "code phrase" crap. The man said nothing about the segregation ticket. He said nothing about "keeping anyone in their place" He said "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," Where in that can anybody determine that it was a racist statement? Please explain this to me? Equivalent. "I like Ford cars." Response. Well, since a Ford ran into a schoolbus and killed 10 kids in 1907...that means you are a babykiller. I think Lott is an idiot. I'm not willing to call the man a racist for saying nice things to Strom Thurmond at his 100th birthday party. And in no way can the comments be construed as racist. He should have just told everyone to get stuffed. ---- The degree of this crusade one week after the Dems were criticised by one of their own for not running the "destruction campaigns" as well as the Republicans is a little suspect. ----- Say something nice to a 100 year old man and get screwed for it. Only in America. You were born...and so you're free...so Happy Birthday! _{Laurie Anderson} [link\|mailto:bepatient@aol.com\|BePatient]
Post #68,504 by boxley 12/12/02 9:44:14 PM Reply	code phrase was the apology not the original statement If Thurmond had won on that ticket the civil rights movement would have happened anyway, a lot bloodier but the times had moved from blind obedience to gummint. The rest of the country would have pushed the South to comply. It might have not involved the US overseas as much as the yankees and westerners did so Nam and the domino theory might have ended much differently. thanx, bill will work for cash and other incentives [link\|http://home.tampabay.rr.com/boxley/resume/Resume.html\|skill set] I was so poor growing up ... if I wasn't a boy ...I'd have nothing to play with. --Rodney Dangerfield
Post #68,584 by Silverlock 12/13/02 8:58:28 AM Reply	Uhmm... Bill? You do know one of the planks of the Dixiecrats was the defeat of anti-lynching laws, right? Keep segregration alive and all that. This is the Party Thurmond was running for pres as a member of. Get it now? Why should we ask our military to die for cheap oil when the rest of us aren't even being asked to get better mileage? -[link\|http://www.workingforchange.com/article.cfm?itemid=14107\|Molly Ivins]
Post #68,625 by Simon_Jester 12/13/02 10:42:04 AM Reply	Nice background piece - from the Washington Times no less (Goldberg's piece) The problem is that Strom Thurmond's "Dixiecrat" 1948 presidential candidacy was based pretty much entirely on opposing any push for civil rights for black Americans. We're not even talking about opposing, say, the 1964 Civil Rights Act, which would be hard enough to defend. We're talking 1948. Strom Thurmond didn't just oppose voting rights for blacks -- he opposed anti-lynching laws. Here's what the 1948 sample ballot put out by the Mississippi Democratic Party had to say about the race between Thurmond and Truman: "A vote for Truman electors is a direct order to our Congressmen and Senators from Mississippi to vote for passage of Truman's so-called civil rights program in the next Congress. This means the vicious, anti-poll tax, anti-lynching and anti-segregation proposals will become the law of the land and our way of life in the South will be gone forever." Trent Lott boasted about his state supporting this junk. After all, it's not like Thurmond's platform was full of planks about tax cuts or environmental protection. [link\|http://www.washtimes.com/commentary/commentary-20021211125238.htm\| A whole Lott of Nothing ]
Post #68,651 by bepatient 12/13/02 12:02:48 PM Reply	He says it right in the piece.... Now, people too young to remember or too uninterested to know might think this is just a nice thing to say to a guy who ran for president over 50 years ago, when Lott was 7 years old by the way. And, to be fair to Lott, that is almost certainly what he intended -- to be nice to an old warhorse of the Senate. When >this< should be the reason he's not even there as leader in the first place... Regardless, Trent Lott only does two things well, freeze-dry his hair and say stupid things. He mishandled impeachment, mishandled the 1998 elections, mishandled power-sharing with the Democrats after the 2000 election and mishandled Jim Jeffords straight into the Democratic Party. So...if you want him out of the leadership...great...there are plenty of reasons without "inventing" his racism out of a friendly statement made at a birthday party for a 100 year old man. You were born...and so you're free...so Happy Birthday! _{Laurie Anderson} [link\|mailto:bepatient@aol.com\|BePatient]
Post #68,690 by Simon_Jester 12/13/02 2:00:11 PM Reply	I don't believe I said he was a racist. in fact, most people aren't saying he's racist. They're claiming that "saying America would be better off now had Thurmond won back then (under a racist platform)" is STUPID. It's EVEN worse that he didn't backpedal hard enough when (he should have) realized what he had said. Now, they're looking at his past deeds and actions (because he didn't backpedal). Now, they're looking at his involvement with the CCC (which some consider racist) and briefs to the court. But even granted this stuff, I still don't think he's a racist. I do think he's stupid though. Sidenote: note that the left IGNORED this issue until hardliners on the right (Sullivan, et al.) brought it up. (Exception - Marshall nailed it from early on, but he's the only one.) Furthermore, the left has mentioned, more than once, that they DON'T want Lott out. (Hell, why would they? He's a great source of amusement.)
Post #68,704 by mmoffitt 12/13/02 3:31:16 PM Reply	Okay, if you don't like racist, how about bigot? ;-)
Post #68,723 by Simon_Jester 12/13/02 3:56:17 PM Reply	Chuckle. Again, I think he's more stupid than anything else. The "left-wing" papers picked up on the John Kerry haircut and ignored Lott's statement. And if Lott had stopped at mere praise for Thurmond, there wouldn't be anything to this at all. But, I suspect (still) that Lott went off the cuff and made the statement. But even then he was given a pass. No one wanted to be accused of playing the race card. The left (with the exception of Marshall) ignored the event. The right, on the other hand (Sullivan et al.) began calling for the apology. (I suspect they knew what was in the cards.) Go Lott apologizes with a wimpish, "I'm sorry if you took offense" comment. (Stupid II). Now the issue is getting attention. (Hell, look at how BP when someone accused him of ol' "Separate but equal" .. immediate and total denial. - Why couldn't Lott decry segregation?) So people start reviewing his past. Some of the people he's hung out with aren't totally convinced that segregation was a bad idea (CCC and others). Now the talking begins in earnest. Frankly, I still don't think he's a racist - even given his court brief or talks in front of the CCC. I think he has associates that are racist and that he's made some dumb political moves so far. But then again, I could be wrong by giving him the benefit of the doubt.
Post #68,748 by mmoffitt 12/13/02 4:22:54 PM Reply	He couldn't decry segregation. Because he believes "we'd be better of if we'd continued it." That's what he said. More than once. If you want to give him the benefit of the doubt, go ahead. But understand that at his best, he was at least appealing to racists in his own constituency.
Post #68,758 by Simon_Jester 12/13/02 4:36:26 PM Reply	Actually, I haven't seen that. Don't get me wrong, he's praising some people who DO (and DID) say that, but I haven't seen him anywhere say that we'd be better off with segregation. (Which is why I was surprised by his wimpish apology.) He's written briefs to the Courts supporting school discriminatory policies. (While I disagree with his conclusion, he had valid arguments.) He's also written one (iirc) on the burning of crosses. (Which, strickly speaking, I also agree with him, it should be covered as a free speech - provided it's done on my own property and it's my own cross. :-) There is even an argument that he's a member of the cofcc...but that he didn't pay the dues (and may not have known about the membership) - as it was done through an uncle of his. Frankly, I have no ax to grind with Lott. I think he's statement of Thurmond were over the top and I think he should've apologized better. (Bush's statement should've been the one he made). But I do have doubts that he's really a racist. (But I could be wrong.)
Post #68,650 by bepatient 12/13/02 11:56:57 AM Reply	Yes I do. Did Lott say that? Or did he say to a 100 year old man that the state was proud of his service...and even supported his bid to run the big show? I know how the opposition latched on to the platform. I know how they've then turned that into "Lott is a racist"...though he was all of 7 years old at the time. But did he say anything racist? Did he say..."if you had been elected all them niggers would still be in their place?" No he didn't. Yet he's being criticised by Jesse Jackson (among others)...a man who actually DID make antisemetic statements in a NY dining establishment. Again...this has nothing to do with racism...but we have people here saying "of course he's racist...he's a southerner"...or "failed policies of the past" is a "code word" for racist policies. To which I again say, "I like that house on Elm Street" ...to which the current press response would be "he supports the terrorism and murder of innocent teenagers" Call me Freddie. You were born...and so you're free...so Happy Birthday! _{Laurie Anderson} [link\|mailto:bepatient@aol.com\|BePatient]
Post #68,638 by mmoffitt 12/13/02 11:19:00 AM Reply	"... we voted for him. We're proud of it." That is among, if not THE, strongest condemnations of a people I can think of. If I lived in Mississippi, I'd leave the state immediately for fear that he might be right about my neighbors.
Post #68,654 by bepatient 12/13/02 12:16:14 PM Reply	So... ...where's the racist remark? No epithets. No code words. "We supported you! We're happy that we supported you! Things would have been great >if< you had won!" (whcih he didn't...so where do the above statements diverge from being a nice thing to say to an old man on his birthday. Tell you where...when Jesse, Al and the Democrats all see the chance to turn this into a divisive racist issue...for the sole purpose of destroying Lott and continuing to profit from the racial divide. You were born...and so you're free...so Happy Birthday! _{Laurie Anderson} [link\|mailto:bepatient@aol.com\|BePatient]
Post #68,657 by mmoffitt 12/13/02 12:20:21 PM Reply	So, segregation, no civil rights and lynchings aren't racist? You know, in a wierd way this makes sense. Back when Ronnie Rayguns was in office he enjoyed wide support despite the fact that, when asked, his supporters supported almost NONE of his policies. Now, it's getting more clear. The Republican credo is "image over substance." Adopting this attitude, one could "support the man, but oppose his policies". That's the ONLY light I can think of where your position "makes sense."
Post #68,661 by bepatient 12/13/02 12:27:19 PM Reply	did he mention any of these things? No. He made a platitude to an old man. But...apparently you are good at inventing racism where it doesn't exist...obviously. Gamesmanship was one thing, >friend<...that line was crossed about 20 minutes ago. You were born...and so you're free...so Happy Birthday! _{Laurie Anderson} [link\|mailto:bepatient@aol.com\|BePatient]
Post #68,664 by mmoffitt 12/13/02 12:37:14 PM 12/13/02 1:24:04 PM Reply	So, he's proud that his state supported Strom, but ashamed of Strom's policies? Edited by mmoffitt Dec. 13, 2002, 01:24:04 PM EST Expand All History
Post #68,670 by bepatient 12/13/02 12:51:33 PM Reply	Dude... He wasn't old enough to vote. You were born...and so you're free...so Happy Birthday! _{Laurie Anderson} [link\|mailto:bepatient@aol.com\|BePatient]
Post #68,688 by mmoffitt 12/13/02 1:24:46 PM Reply	Nit corrected, Geesh.
Post #68,665 by boxley 12/13/02 12:39:07 PM Reply	ROFL! Image over substance indeed hmmmbjhm will work for cash and other incentives [link\|http://home.tampabay.rr.com/boxley/resume/Resume.html\|skill set] I was so poor growing up ... if I wasn't a boy ...I'd have nothing to play with. --Rodney Dangerfield

Welcome to IWETHEY!