Frist and Nickles -- is this the best the Repubs can do for Senate leadership? I say, keep trying Shrub...

I had my first experience with Google Answers over the weekend.

I've been thinking a lot lately about how Google Answers could be used for the public good: considering all of its answers are made public and searchable. This means, when one of us pays $10 or $20 to have a question answered, we can all benefit from the results.

So I thought I would try a little experiment, and signed up for the Google Answer service.

I haven't send Google Answers my feedback yet -- what do you think of its answer?

Saturday evening, at 10:25 PM (on 12/21/02) I submitted this question:

Of the top four contenders for Republican Senate Majority Leader, which have
the worst voting record on civil rights? (With specific examples.)

I had my first experience with Google Answers over the weekend.

I've been thinking a lot lately about how Google Answers could be used for the public good: considering all of its answers are made public and searchable. This means, when one of us pays $10 or $20 to have a question answered, we can all benefit from the results.

So I thought I would try a little experiment, and signed up for the Google Answer service.

I haven't send Google Answers my feedback yet -- what do you think of its answer?

Saturday evening, at 10:25 PM (on 12/21/02) I submitted this question:

Of the top four contenders for Republican Senate Majority Leader, which have
the worst voting record on civil rights? (With specific examples.)

When I subscribed to the service, I checked the box that said "E-mail me whenever there is new activity about my questions." (They also had an option that would never email me more than once a day with updates, but I'm curious and wanted to know about all of my updates as they happen.)

I looked at the pricing guidelines and decided that my question weighed in at about 20 bucks. (It would easily take someone a half hour and was sort of a compound question in the sense that you had to find one part of it out before you get going on the other. At the same time -- the question certainly wasn't too complicated, and it was arguably a fun question. So I left it at $20.)

At 11:37 pm, I received a "Google Answers Activity Report," asking me to please clarify my question.

So I clicked on the link, and saw that this question had been asked of me:

Request for Question Clarification by mvguy-ga on 21 Dec 2002 22:49 PST

At this point, it doesn't appear there are four top contenders;
according to news reports, Sen. Bill Frist has support from a majority
of the GOP senators for the position, a majority that includes at
least two others who had been considered contenders. Perhaps you
could name the four senators whose voting records you'd like to know
more about, or perhaps you would like to know more about Frist's
record. Thanks.

To which I replied at around 11:50 pm:

Clarification of Question by xmlrein-ga on 21 Dec 2002 23:51 PST

I understand that Frist is in the lead -- but I was not aware that he
is considered to have no competition at this point.

I was thinking of going down the ladder in popularity (From Frist, to
Nickles, to #3? and #4?) -- that's where I got my "top four
contenders."

If you're saying there's no contest, then, sure, let's concentrate on
Frist.

Thanks!

When I woke up in the AM, my question had been answered for me.

It came in at 3:37 AM. (Not bad!)

Here is the answer:

Subject: Re: Republican Leaders and Civil Rights
Answered By: easterangel-ga on 22 Dec 2002 02:47 PST

Hi! Thanks for the question.

It is true that at this point (Dec. 22) and as of the writing of this
answer, there are indeed two contenders for the Republican Senate
Majority Leader Sen. Frist as the front runner with Nickles coming in
second. Due to the withdrawal by Sen. Lott both are now considered
likely prospects. But like Lott both have been criticized and have
been said to be his mirror images when it comes to civil rights voting
records.

In this National Organization for Women article it provides examples
of the civil rights issues voted upon by Sen. Frist. He voted against
the following issues:

1. Sex education
2. International family planning
3. Emergency contraception
4. Affirmative action
5. Hate crimes legislation
6. Employment Non-Discrimination Act

“’Few senators have a worse voting record on civil rights than Trent
Lott—but Bill Frist is one of them,’ Gandy noted. ‘Frist has voted
against sex education, international family planning, emergency
contraception (the morning-after pill), affirmative action, hate
crimes legislation and the Employment Non-Discrimination Act. This is
the man who is supposed to save face for the GOP in the Senate? Think
again.’"

“NOW President Says Potential Lott Replacement No Improvement”
http://www.now.org/press/12-02/12-20.html The next article is a profile of Sen. Frist.

“Frist Has Quick Rise in Senate”
http://216.239.33.100/search?q=cache:D2piSfXoOJkJ:news.findlaw.com/politics/s/20021220/politicslottfristdc.html+Sen.+Bill+Frist+%22civil+rights%22+%22voting+record%22&hl=en&ie=UTF-8
Sen. Don Nickles is portrayed as well in the media as not so much a
champion in this arena.

1. Opposed a federal holiday for the commemoration Martin Luther
King’s birthday.

2. Voted for the preservation of the tax-exempt status of private
schools like Bob Jones University which is opposed to interracial
dating.

3. “…uphold the first President Bush's veto of legislation to amend
the 1964 Civil Rights Act to ban workplace discrimination.”

4. “In 1993, both voted to extend the Confederate flag design patent”

5. “In 1994, both sided with a Helms amendment to strip federal
funding from the Martin Luther King Jr. Federal Holiday Commission.”

6. Nickles also voted for the elimination of a disadvantaged business
enterprise program. This program insures that a certain percentage of
federal government contracts go to businesses led by minorities and
women.

“Nickles' voting record on civil rights mirrors Lott's”
http://www.gomemphis.com/mca/politics/article/0,1426,MCA_1496_1613863,00.html
In my own opinion, even though there were more samples for Nickles,
Frist’s voting records on the more basic and important civil rights
issues makes him less of a supporter when it comes to these types of
legislation.

Search terms used:
Sen. Bill Frist "civil rights" "voting record"

I hope these links would help you in your research. Before rating this
answer, please ask for a clarification if you have a question or if
you would need further information.

Thanks for visiting us.

Regards,
Easterangel-ga
Google Answers Researcher

Then later that day (3:37 PM) Another Google Answer Researcher added this to my entry:

Comments Log in to add a comment
Subject: Re: Republican Leaders and Civil Rights
From: snapanswer-ga on 22 Dec 2002 14:55 PST

You may also find this comparison of votes for Lott, Nickles,
McConnell, Frist, and Santorum interesting. Obviously, some of these
votes occurred prior to Frist and Santorum joining the Senate, though
that is the exception.

http://www.usnewswire.com/topnews/qtr1_2003/1217-127.html I would note that the National Organization of Women's agenda on:
1. Sex education
2. International family planning
3. Emergency contraception

is not universally considered civil rights legislation, so it is not
suprising to not find them listed in the vote comparison linked to
above.

Also, the following article from the USA Today points to some
differences between Frist and Lott beyond voting record. "Frist has
donated his services as a physician at medical missions in Africa and
has worked to address the problem of AIDS there."
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2002-12-18-lott-votes_x.htm

If Lott didn't see the storm coming, it was in part because it was so slow in building. The papers did not make note of his comments until days after he had made them. But the stillness was broken by the hum of Internet "bloggers" who were posting their outrage and compiling rap sheets of Lott's earlier comments.

Tripped Up By History
G.O.P. leader Trent Lott's remarks on race raise a storm and a hot question: Have Republicans really outgrown their past?
By Dan Goodgame and Karen Tumulty for Time.

Yippie! The first success of my "Bye-Bye 'insert corrupt politician here'" Series!

As of today, December 20, 2002, Trent Lott has stepped down as Leader of the Republican party.

Good work guys!

The bloggers and the popular press really worked together on this one!

Here's a Washington Post story by Helen Dewar and Mike Allen (with
Jim VandeHei) to flesh out some of the details of his resignation:

Lott to Step Down as GOP Leader

Southern Senator Will Serve Out Term

Today's announcement from Trent "Don't let the door hit your butt on the way out" Lott:

"In the interest of pursuing the best possible agenda for the future of our country, I will not seek to remain as majority leader of the United States Senate for the 108th Congress, effective Jan. 6, 2003. To all those who offered me their friendship, support and prayers, I will be eternally grateful. I will continue to serve the people of Mississippi in the United States Senate."

Here's the full text of the glorious article in case the link goes bad:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A17080-2002Dec20.html

Lott to Step Down as GOP Leader
Southern Senator Will Serve Out Term

advertisement
_____ Biography _____
Sen. Trent Lott
(R-Miss.)

Elected: 1988
Hometown: Pascagoula, Miss.
Age: 61
Born: October 9, 1941 in Grenada County, Miss.
Religion: Baptist
Family: Wife, Patricia Elizabeth Lott; two children
Education: U. of Mississippi, B.P.A. 1963; J.D. 1967
Career: Lawyer; congressional aide
Political Highlights: U.S. House, 1973-89; U.S. Senate, 1989-present (majority leader, 1994-present)

Source: Congressional Quarterly

_____ Lott Statement _____

"In the interest of pursuing the best possible agenda for the future of our country, I will not seek to remain as majority leader of the United States Senate for the 108th Congress, effective Jan. 6, 2003. To all those who offered me their friendship, support and prayers, I will be eternally grateful. I will continue to serve the people of Mississippi in the United States Senate."

Embattled Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott (R-Miss.) announced this morning that he is stepping down from his leadership post, just a day after Sen. Bill Frist (R-Tenn.) launched a campaign to oust him.

Lott said he would serve the four years left in his term, thus helping to insure that the Republican Party maintains its narrow control of the Senate.

"In the interest of pursuing the best possible agenda for the future of our country, I will not seek to remain as majority leader of the United States Senate for the 108th Congress, effective Jan. 6, 2003," Lott said in a written statement. "To all those who offered me their friendship, support and prayers, I will be eternally grateful. I will continue to serve the people of Mississippi in the United States Senate."

Lott, 61, had come under fire for comments he made Dec. 5 in support of Strom Thurmond's pro-segregation presidential campaign in 1948 during Thurmond's birthday celebration. Since then, the comments have erupted into one of the most remarkable and unusual political storms in recent memory. Lott had battled to keep his leadership job but in the past week a growing number of GOP senators had concluded that if he stayed, he would severely damage the party.

Lott had been the Republican Senate leader since 1996.

President Bush called the senator shortly after he issued his resignation, according to White House spokesman Ari Fleischer, and had a warm 10-minute conversation. In a statement released by Fleischer, Bush said that he considers Lott a "valued friend and a man I respect. I am pleased he will continue to serve our nation."

Earlier this week, Lott had complained that officials in the White House were undermining his efforts to remain leader. His allies said he was hurt that the president and other officials had refused to publicly support him and complained that there were behind-the-scenes efforts from the administration to oust him. White House officials had denied they were playing any role in Lott's future.

Frist, a 50-year-old heart surgeon and close ally of President Bush, yesterday called numerous GOP senators to ask for their support to become the next Senate majority leader if Lott were to leave.

He had no immediate comment today on Lott's decision, but senators from across the GOP spectrum announced their support for Frist. Among them were Sen. Mitch McConnell (Ky.), a close ally of Lott's, Sen. Don Nickles (Okla.), who holds the number two spot in the leadership and had been considering his own run for the post, Sen. Pete Domenici (N.M.), Sen. Kit Bond (Mo.) and both Virginia senators, John Warner and George Allen. The Republican senators will vote on a new leader Jan. 6.

"There's a fast-moving momentum building up for Bill Frist," Sen. John Warner (R-Va.) told reporters last night after meeting with Frist at the Republican Senate campaign headquarters near the Capitol. "I can assure you the [Frist] team is growing very quickly."

Known for a cool demeanor that masks his intense work habits, Frist can get by on four hours of sleep a night, a holdover from his days as a heart-lung transplant surgeon. The Senate's only doctor, he comforted tense officials at a meeting in the Capitol basement after an anthrax-laced letter panicked Capitol Hill. His Senate Web site became a clearinghouse for information about anthrax symptoms and treatment.

Several Republicans said Frist would be a huge help in selling an expected Bush admininstration health care initiative to Congress and the public. Some Senate aides said Frist would help the party portray a more moderate image if he succeeded Lott.

Aides said his goals include adding a prescription drug benefit for Medicare and making health care more affordable and available to low-income people. He promotes childhood vaccinations and wants to encourage the development of new vaccines. Much of Frist's agenda concerns prevention and treatment of AIDS, and he travels to Africa once or twice a year at his own expense to perform operations as a medical missionary.

Frist, who has three sons, earned an undergraduate degree from Princeton University in 1974, graduated with honors from Harvard Medical School in 1978 and joined the teaching faculty at Vanderbilt University Medical Center in his native Nashville. He was elected in 1994 by defeating Sen. Jim Sasser (D).

Jim VandeHei contributed to this report.

I'm just reading this myself, but I thought I'd bring your attention to it:
Lott, Reagan and Republican Racism
If the GOP wants to attract black voters, argues TIME's Jack White, it must confront the legacy not only of Trent Lott, but also of former President Reagan
By Jack White for Time magazine.

Then there was Reagan's attempt, once he reached the White House in 1981, to reverse a long-standing policy of denying tax-exempt status to private schools that practice racial discrimination and grant an exemption to Bob Jones University. Lott's conservative critics, quite rightly, made a big fuss about his filing of a brief arguing that BJU should get the exemption despite its racist ban on interracial dating. But true to their pattern of white-washing Reagan's record on race, not one of Lott's conservative critics said a mumblin' word about the Gipper's deep personal involvement. They don't care to recall that when Lott suggested that Reagan's regime take BJU's side in a lawsuit against the Internal Revenue Service, Reagan responded, "We ought to do it." Two years later the U.S. Supreme Court in a resounding 8-to-1 decision ruled that Reagan was dead wrong and reinstated the IRS's power to deny BJU's exemption.

Republican leaders and their apologists tend to go into a frenzy of denial when members of the liberal media cabal bring up these inconvenient facts. It's that lack of candor, of course, that presents the biggest obstacle to George W. Bush's commendable and long overdue campaign to persuade more African-Americans to defect from the Democrats to the Republicans. It's doomed to fail until the GOP fesses up its past addiction to race-baiting, and makes a sincere attempt to kick the habit.

Damn. Just what I was afraid of. The first guy that spoke up to oust Lott is only doing it because he wants the job. Fair enough, I guess.

It also looks like his civil rights voting record isn't much better than Lott's.

Well at least he doesn't come out and say he wishes we were still a segregated nation. (Damn. Talk about the lesser of two evils.)

Does it have to be one or the other? Is there a Repub with enough senority to be Leader that also has an admirable civil rights record?

If not. What does that say about the Repubs? (Yes, my new name for them. I've just coined it here.)

Here's the AP story on CNN:

Nickles, Lott share similar records
Both senators win high marks from conservative groups

Here's the full text of the article in case the link goes bad:

http://www.cnn.com/2002/ALLPOLITICS/12/16/lott.nickles.ap/

We might have to wait till the new year for Lott to be ousted, but perhaps he'll come to his senses and step down with whatever dignity he might have left and save us all a Lott of trouble.

Congress has a ton of other things to do, true, but I'd say this situation could serve to put a lot of other issues on hold until it is dealt with.

I, for one, am ready to keep the pressure on as long as it takes.

Here's an excellent progress report from Howard Fineman (With Eleanor Clift and Martha Brantfor) for Newsweek:
Ghosts of the Past.

He (Lott) had begun his career as a staffer to an ardently segregationist congressman. Blacks have a dim view of his record—against the Voting Rights Act, against a Martin Luther King Jr. holiday, in favor of racially restrictive policies at Bob Jones University...

...There were gasps when Lott uttered his remarks. There was enough of a sense of history in the room to know that Lott was praising one of the nastiest, openly racial campaigns of modern times. “People were shocked,” said conservative Armstrong Williams, who was on hand for the festivities...

The ensuing controversy gathered force slowly, helped along by some of the most inept damage control since the Maginot Line was built. Lott first said, dismissively, that he was “winging it”—until it was discovered that he had said the same thing 22 years earlier. Lott made this and other press “appearances” by phone while holed up with his wife on vacation in Key West, Fla. His aides assured White House officials that he would utter the key words “segregation is immoral” on “Larry King,” but he somehow forgot to do so. Bush went ballistic at this point. He also heard that GOP Sen. Chuck Hagel was about to denounce Lott. The president ordered up a harsh condemnation of Lott’s remarks. “Senator Lott has apologized, and rightly so,” a stern-visaged Bush said. Lott got the message, and scheduled his full-dress press conference—with the proper wording included—for the following day...

White House officials, afraid of offending “the base”—the Southern white conservatives who elected Lott and Bush—were careful not to openly work for Lott’s ouster. “They don’t want any fingerprints on this,” said one GOP strategist.

Here's the full text of the article in case the link goes bad:

http://www.msnbc.com/news/847739.asp

MSN Home | My MSN | Hotmail | Search | Shopping | Money | People & Chat
MSN.com
MSNBC.com
Home page
Navigation

IMG: Bush and Lott
During a speech Thursday, President George Bush rebukes Sen. Trent Lott (right) for remarks he made at Sen. Strom Thurmond's birthday party
Ghosts of the Past
It was a Washington classic: History suddenly rears up and threatens a safe pol’s security. Anatomy of the Lott firestorm

By Howard Fineman
NEWSWEEK

Dec. 23 issue — Mitch McConnell, who loves his role as Washington’s coldest-blooded tough guy, got right to the point in a cross-country conference call last Friday night with a score of his fellow Republican senators. The topic: what to do about The Leader?

Advertising on MSNBC
• eDiets Diet Center
• Shop at B&N.com
• Auctions at uBid
• Yellow Pages
• lavalife.com Where singles click
• MSN Broadband

IMG: Dec. 23, 2002 Issue TRENT LOTT had just finished his fourth, and most fulsome, apologia for having praised Strom Thurmond’s stridently segregationist presidential campaign of 1948. Many GOP bosses—in and out of the White House—still wanted Lott bounced from his role as majority leader when the Congress returns next month. Lott, in their view, had come across as too much of a “seg,” an embarrassment in a party eager to sell itself as a Big Tent of “compassionate conservatism.”
As the call began, McConnell—second in command and a Lott ally—delivered a history lesson. “Leaders who are ousted tend to leave altogether,” he said in his voice-of-doom baritone. “That is what Newt Gingrich did. That is what Jim Wright did. They don’t stick around.” If Lott left, he noted, the Democratic governor of Lott’s home state of Mississippi would name one of his own as a replacement. Republicans relishing the return of perks, power and committee chairmanships could forget it. Instead, they would face the kiss-your-sister chaos of a 50-50 Senate. “I was just explaining the history,” McConnell told NEWSWEEK. Other participants remember the moment differently. “He was raising the idea that Trent would blow himself up,” said one. Lott, for his part, distanced himself from the threat—even as aides still were making it on his behalf. “My term runs through 2006,” he told NEWSWEEK. “I intend to serve it, whatever happens.”


Submit your questions on race, the GOP and Trent Lott and join Jon Meacham for a live talk on Wednesday, December 18 at noon ET
Your Question

Your name

Your hometown

Your e-mail address

Click here for more details

This was Lott’s lot late last week: confident enough to discuss the possibility of losing his leader’s role—because, his aides contended, he felt he wouldn’t lose it. Still, behind the scenes, he was desperately trying to cajole support from colleagues warily assessing whether the perfect storm that had engulfed him would abate—or sweep him into oblivion. No one talked of a coup attempt. (“It would be pretty stupid to do that on a conference call,” said one participant.) But a suggestion for a second meeting-by-phone went unheeded, as did an idea, floated by a handful of senators in cross talk, for a signed letter of support.

MORE POWER THAN FRIENDS
The rise and folly of Trent Lott is a classical Washington saga. Here is the plotline: A politician with more power than friends fails to see that times have changed. Oblivious, even giddy, he mistakenly calls attention to an obvious fact about himself that the establishment, for a variety of reasons, has tolerated or ignored. Suddenly, he’s too outrageous for words, and he becomes the scapegoat for a city determined to show its moral rectitude. Think: Tony Coelho and money, Gary Hart and sex. And now Lott and the Southern, segregationist roots of the GOP.

Lott says he won’t quit
December 13, 2002 — Sen. Trent Lott held his first lengthy news conference Friday about his remarks on the 1948 presidential campaign of now-Sen. Strom Thurmond. NBC’s Norah O’Donnell reports.

All of Washington understood that Lott, proud of his background in the Mississippi of the ’50s, was among the last—and most visible—of the Hill barons to have grown up in the segregated Deep South. He had begun his career as a staffer to an ardently segregationist congressman. Blacks have a dim view of his record—against the Voting Rights Act, against a Martin Luther King Jr. holiday, in favor of racially restrictive policies at Bob Jones University. Yet these days George W. Bush is trying to portray the GOP as an inclusive party, one that reaches out to all minorities and conveys an aura of tolerance to affluent white suburbanites looking for an alternative to the Democrats. With the GOP back in power on the Hill, and Bush’s pushing centrist themes, Lott was —suddenly in a bigger—more dangerous—spotlight. “He was an accident waiting to happen,” said a GOP strategist.
Should Trent Lott resign his position as incoming senate majority leader?
Yes. His apologies are insufficient and insincere
No. Let's move on
I don't know

Vote to see results

The accident happened, the world now knows, at Thurmond’s 100th-birthday party on Capitol Hill. Thinking he was only among friends—or perhaps in Pascagoula, Miss., in the ’60s—Lott buttered up the honoree by proclaiming jovially that the country wouldn’t have “all these problems” had the Dixiecrats won power in 1948. There were gasps when Lott uttered his remarks. There was enough of a sense of history in the room to know that Lott was praising one of the nastiest, openly racial campaigns of modern times. “People were shocked,” said conservative Armstrong Williams, who was on hand for the festivities.

INEPT DAMAGE CONTROL
The ensuing controversy gathered force slowly, helped along by some of the most inept damage control since the Maginot Line was built. Lott first said, dismissively, that he was “winging it”—until it was discovered that he had said the same thing 22 years earlier. Lott made this and other press “appearances” by phone while holed up with his wife on vacation in Key West, Fla. His aides assured White House officials that he would utter the key words “segregation is immoral” on “Larry King,” but he somehow forgot to do so. Bush went ballistic at this point. He also heard that GOP Sen. Chuck Hagel was about to denounce Lott. The president ordered up a harsh condemnation of Lott’s remarks. “Senator Lott has apologized, and rightly so,” a stern-visaged Bush said. Lott got the message, and scheduled his full-dress press conference—with the proper wording included—for the following day.

The usually brotherly Bush failed to praise Lott personally in any way, leaving it to underlings to issue bland statements of support for Lott as leader. That, in turn, encouraged many conservatives, including the editors of The Wall Street Journal and The National Review, to demand Lott’s ouster. But White House officials, afraid of offending “the base”—the Southern white conservatives who elected Lott and Bush—were careful not to openly work for Lott’s ouster. “They don’t want any fingerprints on this,” said one GOP strategist. Democrats were glad to make trouble, but—on second thought—liked the idea of keeping him around as a convenient target.

Race, Politics, and Trent Lott
• Audio: David Bositis, Senior Political Analyst at Joint Center for Economic and Political Studies David Brooks, NEWSWEEK Contributing Editor; Senior Editor of The Weekly Standard
• Audio: Listen to the complete weekly On Air show
As for Lott, he sounded like a man trying to stay calm in a hurricane. He’d been reared in a different day and time, he said. He wasn’t the angry young man he was—no longer “the hot-blooded Scot.” “My daughter told me I’m much calmer than I used to be,” he said. “I’ve grown more mature and accepting as a result of deepening religious faith.” Now he knew that his early views were wrong, unacceptable and, yes, immoral. Whether he was telling the truth about his beliefs was a question to be decided in Another, Better, Place. For now, the more urgent issue was whether Lott had testified in time to help himself in Washington.

With Eleanor Clift and Martha Brant

Letter from Congressman John Conyers, Jr., Ranking Member of the House Judiciary Committee and Dean of the Congressional Black Caucus to Republican Leader, Trent Lott calling for his resignation

...your remarks are so un-American that they disqualify you from continuing as the Majority Leader of the United States Senate therefore, I must call on you to resign...

Even after you had seen how much you had upset the public, you did not disavow what the Dixiecrat Party stood for. Whatever your choice of words, the plain intent was clear. The Dixiecrat Party's agenda was to preserve segregated schools, segregated public facilities, and segregated armed forces, and to prevent African-Americans from voting.

Were you suggesting that America would have been better off if President Truman had not desegregated the armed forces? Were you suggesting that America would have been better off if the Nation's modern the civil rights legislation had been blocked - if we had no Voting Rights Act, no Civil Rights Act of 1964, no Fair Housing Act and no African-American elected officials in Mississippi?

Here is the full text of the article in case the link goes bad:

http://www.truthout.org/docs_02/12.13E.conyers.lott.htm

Print This Story E-mail This Story

t r u t h o u t | Letter

Conyers Calls on Lott to Resign: "He Has Lost His Credibility on Civil Rights"

Wednesday, 11 December, 2002

Congressman John Conyers, Jr., Ranking Member of the House Judiciary Committee and Dean of the Congressional Black Caucus sent the following letter today to Republican Leader, Trent Lott calling for his resignation.

December 11, 2002

The Honorable Trent Lott
Republican Leader
S-230 The Capitol
Washington, D.C. 20510

Dear Senator Lott:

I was astonished by your remarks at last week's birthday reception for Senator Thurmond. You claimed that the country would have been better off, and "wouldn't have had all of those problems," if other states had followed Mississippi and had supported the Dixiecrat Party ticket in the 1948 presidential election. Your callous comments were incredibly insulting, and outrageous for any American to make - let alone the prospective Senate Majority Leader. The recent revelation of your similar endorsement, during the 1980 elections, of Senator Thurmond's Dixiecrat campaign is a chilling confirmation that your remarks last week were not a spontaneous slip of the tongue.

President Bush and the Congress currently seek to promote patriotism and to explain America's basic values to the world. Especially at such a time, your remarks are so un-American that they disqualify you from continuing as the Majority Leader of the United States Senate therefore, I must call on you to resign.

I realize you have apologized to anyone whom you might have offended through "a poor choice of words." That only compounds your slap in the face of all African Americans. Even after you had seen how much you had upset the public, you did not disavow what the Dixiecrat Party stood for. Whatever your choice of words, the plain intent was clear. The Dixiecrat Party's agenda was to preserve segregated schools, segregated public facilities, and segregated armed forces, and to prevent African-Americans from voting.

Were you suggesting that America would have been better off if President Truman had not desegregated the armed forces? Were you suggesting that America would have been better off if the Nation's modern the civil rights legislation had been blocked - if we had no Voting Rights Act, no Civil Rights Act of 1964, no Fair Housing Act and no African-American elected officials in Mississippi?

Even worse, your limited acknowledgment that only some people might have been offended by your remarks portrayed gross insensitivity to millions of Americans.

In addition, a key question for the 108th Congress is whether civil rights laws will be enforced and strengthened, or whether the attempts will be made to undermine them. You no longer have credibility on this crucial issue.

Yours truly,

John Conyers, Jr.

Ranking Member

Fire Trent Lott

The birthday party controversy is only the latest evidence that Mr. Lott, the second most prominent elected official in the Republican Party, has never figured any of this out, or come to grips with the bad old days in his state. If he had, he could never have said that his state was "proud" of having given its electoral votes to Mr. Thurmond in 1948 -- at a time when most black Mississippians were barred from voting and sometimes killed for making the attempt...

...unless the president wants to spend his next campaign explaining the majority leader's behavior over and over, he should urge the Senate Republicans to get somebody else for the job.

Here is the full text of the article in case the link goes bad:

http://www.nytimes.com/2002/12/12/opinion/12THU1.html

here are 51 Republican members of the United States Senate. Surely they can find someone to be majority leader besides Trent Lott.

Mr. Lott was in full-bore apology mode yesterday, trying to explain why, at Strom Thurmond's 100th-birthday party last week, he publicly bemoaned the fact that Mr. Thurmond had not won the 1948 presidential election, when he ran as a segregationist protest candidate. We have since learned that Mr. Lott said much the same thing in 1980, at a campaign rally for Ronald Reagan in Mississippi. Mr. Lott, at that time a congressman, said that if America had elected Mr. Thurmond president "we wouldn't be in the mess we are today."

The incoming majority leader certainly was in a mess of his own by Monday, and his first attempt to dodge the controversy began with the classic words of the non-apologetic apologist, expressing sorrow if anyone had taken offense at his remarks, and making an oblique reference to "discarded policies." Discarded is a term best used for worn socks or outdated computers, not poll taxes and lynchings. After being yelled at by practically everybody, including conservative Republicans, Mr. Lott got the message, and yesterday called his remarks "terrible." He also asked an interviewer plaintively whether he was supposed to tell Mr. Thurmond he wished he had lost.

Southern white politicians who lived under segregation and the civil rights movement either repress the thought that anything terrible went on in their region or remember it all the time. They are especially sensitive to the fact that people whom they loved and honored did -- or at least endorsed -- awful things. Coming to terms with it makes them wiser politicians, and perhaps better people.

The birthday party controversy is only the latest evidence that Mr. Lott, the second most prominent elected official in the Republican Party, has never figured any of this out, or come to grips with the bad old days in his state. If he had, he could never have said that his state was "proud" of having given its electoral votes to Mr. Thurmond in 1948 -- at a time when most black Mississippians were barred from voting and sometimes killed for making the attempt.

No one has put more effort than George W. Bush into ending the image of the Republican Party as a whites-only haven. For all the disagreement that many African-Americans have with his policies, few can doubt Mr. Bush's commitment to a multiracial America. But unless the president wants to spend his next campaign explaining the majority leader's behavior over and over, he should urge the Senate Republicans to get somebody else for the job.

Pretty big accusation, huh? Here's my proof:

"What I want to tell you...Ladies and Gentlemen...That there's not enough troops in the Army...to force the southern people to break down segregation and admit the nigger race into our theatres, into our swimming pools, into our homes and into our churches."
-- Strom Thurman, 1948.

"When Strom Thurman 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 of these problems over all of these years either."
-- Trent Lott, December, 2002.

"If we had elected this man 30 years ago, we wouldn't be in the mess we are today."
-- Trent Lott, 1980.

Strom Thurman, Racist. Trent Lott, Thurman Supporter

(Right mouse click and "save" to download and play the file off of your hard drive.)

Another history lesson, courtesy of the most excellent Daily Show!

Strom Thurman in 1948:



Trent Lott in 1980: