Thread: Harry Reid Situation vs. Trent Lott Situation: Trent stepped down. Why doesn't Harry?

This needs to be discussed. It has been non stop all over the radio talk shows tonight and I believe that Reid should step down for the remarks he made. Lott apologized repeatedly and he was forced out by Dems, Repubs and even help from the White House. Why is it that Harry Reid is being coddled by Democrats over this? Tonight on 60 Minutes they ignored talking about this and instead devoted a segment to discuss the new book out 'Game Changer' in which exposed Reids comments Negro about Obama and Clintons comments on Obama fetching him coffee. Rather than discuss those topics they chose to trash non politician and regular citizen Sarah Palin who's mentioned in the book and not even mention Reids controversy. Why is it that its ok for Reid to get a pass and not for Lott? Even Obama called for Lott to step down in 2002.



http://www.washingto...t-81072627.html

http://www.floppinga...-negro-comment/



Obama forgives Reid; In 2002, he demanded Lott's ouster



Today, President Obama announced that he has forgiven Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., for saying that Obama was an acceptable presidential candidate due to his light skin and lack of "Negro dialect."



The racially charged remark hearkens back to the Christmas break of 2002, when Sen. Trent Lott, R-Miss., was hounded out of his majority leader position after he remarked favorably on former Sen. Strom Thurmond's 1948 run for president on a segregationist third-party line.



So one obvious question: what did Obama have to say about that incident after Lott apologized?



The National Republican Senatorial Committee did not waste a moment this weekend sending members of the press a clip of what then-State Senator Obama said at that time. It comes from the Chicago Defender, a left-leaning newspaper that has long chronicled that town's racial politics. Obama's statement on Lott, as recorded by The Defender:



"It seems to be that we can forgive a 100-year-old senator (Thurmond) for some of the indiscretion of his youth, but, what is more difficult to forgive is the current president of the U.S. Senate (Lott) suggesting we had been better off if we had followed a segregationist path in this country after all of the battles and fights for civil rights and all the work that we still have to do," said Obama. He said: "The Republican Party itself has to drive out Trent Lott. If they have to stand for something, they have to stand up and say this is not the person we want representing our party."



Lott, in praising Thurmond on his 100th birthday, appeared to identify himself with the institutional racist movement that Thurmond had represented long ago. Reid, on the other hand, implied that a dark-skinned person with a "Negro dialect" is unworthy of the presidency. The two comments are not identical, and both can be taken in more than one way. But Obama's reaction to the two is so starkly different that one cannot but see partisanship at work even here.

[quote name='Djinn' date='10 January 2010 - 09:47 PM' timestamp='1263181662' post='96834']

Trent Lott strongly insinuated an endorsement of Thurmond's segregationist views. That's considerably more serious than Reid calling Obama "an acceptable presidential candidate" whatever words he may have used.



Segregation was a hateful, shameful part of America's history.

[/quote]There was some Dem apologist on fox news saying that it's true a Republican would be tarred and feathered for making the same comment, but it was OK for Reid because he has a good voting record on minority issues. I guess it's the Senator Byrd defense

[quote name='U.S. Army Retired' date='10 January 2010 - 07:39 PM' timestamp='1263181158' post='96829']

Why is it that Harry Reid is being coddled by Democrats over this?[/quote]



The very act of espousing Liberal ideology makes you better than other people, even

overt racism can be mitigated.

Reid was insulting the American Voter, especially moderate swing voters when talking about how they would vote for Obama because he is not as dark as "real" Negroes and doesn't speak negro unless he wants to. He smeared them an insinuated they are racist.

[quote name='U.S. Army Retired' date='10 January 2010 - 10:39 PM' timestamp='1263181158' post='96829']

This needs to be discussed. [/quote]



Then why don't you go to the rightwing blog for ignorants that you posted and discuss it there?

[quote name='U.S. Army Retired' date='10 January 2010 - 10:39 PM' timestamp='1263181158' post='96829']

This needs to be discussed. It has been non stop all over the radio talk shows tonight and I believe that Reid should step down for the remarks he made. Lott apologized repeatedly and he was forced out by Dems, Repubs and even help from the White House. Why is it that Harry Reid is being coddled by Democrats over this? Tonight on 60 Minutes they ignored talking about this and instead devoted a segment to discuss the new book out 'Game Changer' in which exposed Reids comments Negro about Obama and Clintons comments on Obama fetching him coffee. Rather than discuss those topics they chose to trash non politician and regular citizen Sarah Palin who's mentioned in the book and not even mention Reids controversy. Why is it that its ok for Reid to get a pass and not for Lott? Even Obama called for Lott to step down in 2002.



http://www.washingto...t-81072627.html

http://www.floppinga...-negro-comment/



Obama forgives Reid; In 2002, he demanded Lott's ouster



Today, President Obama announced that he has forgiven Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., for saying that Obama was an acceptable presidential candidate due to his light skin and lack of "Negro dialect."



The racially charged remark hearkens back to the Christmas break of 2002, when Sen. Trent Lott, R-Miss., was hounded out of his majority leader position after he remarked favorably on former Sen. Strom Thurmond's 1948 run for president on a segregationist third-party line.



So one obvious question: what did Obama have to say about that incident after Lott apologized?



The National Republican Senatorial Committee did not waste a moment this weekend sending members of the press a clip of what then-State Senator Obama said at that time. It comes from the Chicago Defender, a left-leaning newspaper that has long chronicled that town's racial politics. Obama's statement on Lott, as recorded by The Defender:



"It seems to be that we can forgive a 100-year-old senator (Thurmond) for some of the indiscretion of his youth, but, what is more difficult to forgive is the current president of the U.S. Senate (Lott) suggesting we had been better off if we had followed a segregationist path in this country after all of the battles and fights for civil rights and all the work that we still have to do," said Obama. He said: "The Republican Party itself has to drive out Trent Lott. If they have to stand for something, they have to stand up and say this is not the person we want representing our party."



Lott, in praising Thurmond on his 100th birthday, appeared to identify himself with the institutional racist movement that Thurmond had represented long ago. Reid, on the other hand, implied that a dark-skinned person with a "Negro dialect" is unworthy of the presidency. The two comments are not identical, and both can be taken in more than one way. But Obama's reaction to the two is so starkly different that one cannot but see partisanship at work even here.

[/quote]



I don't know who wrote such drivel but Reid never said any such thing. He may have rightfully stated that it was an advantage for Obama to be light skinned and without the dialect but he never implied any race or person as "unworthy". You have to be fucked in the head to draw that conclusion. Not surprised many conservatives read it that way though, alot of em are.

[quote name='kmiller1610' date='11 January 2010 - 07:10 AM' timestamp='1263211852' post='96911']

Racism and Race based political analysis are part of the game. We can pretend that isn't true, but we're only kidding ourselves.



-Obama had an advantage because he was "light-skinned" and had "no Negro dialect" -- until he wanted to use it.-



This sounds like political analysis to me. The word choices aren't very modern, but I don't get why this is so offensive. People judge on race and Obama comes across as more white than other black politicians. This makes him appealing to a wider audience, because people are remarkably superficial. But it's still reality.



The idea that a politician might use a dialect to connect with an audience also should not be a surprise or offensive..[/quote]

Anotherwords Reid was speaking the truth and he should not have to step down for that? I agree.

The whole inane PC thing has to go. People should not have to step down for telling the wrong joke or using the wrong "black magic" words. It's juvenile.

I agree again. It's really only when one actually endorses or praises the concept of racism that it becomes disgusting, you know, like the things Tret Lott expressed. Reid simply told it like it was, he did not endorse racism in any way nor did he imply anyone as unworthy. On top of that he apologized to those who may have taken it that way.



As far as Lott is concerned I don't think he should have been forced to step down if that's what happened to him either. If it were the democrats who did so I think it was kinda juvenile and stupid on their part. Lott could have been held up as the poster boy for the republican party thus causing that many more common sense independants to abandon them.