My apologies, I meant to say it was his first speech as the official nominee of the Republican Party for the office of the Presidency which is even worse. That he was a guest of Lott's is worse still. Knowing exactly what "states' rights" means to people like Trent Lott and southern whites, it's not like he had to say it over and over again to make himself clear. We all know what specific right they're referring to. If you want to feign ignorance of that or argue something different then we know exactly who is "distorting the facts to fit (their) narrative".
Lest you've conveniently forgotten, like his mentor Strom Thurmond, Trent Lott left the Democratic Party over their support of civil rights, i.e. they weren't racist enough. Thurmond was one of the leaders of the split and the resulting creation of the Dixiecrats (mentioned extensively earlier in this thread). When President Truman, one of Thurmond's fellow Democrats, supported ending discrimination in the military in 1948 following the honorable service of millions of black Americans during WWII, it was simply too much to bear and Thurmond started his own party,
The States' Rights Democratic Party, to
challenge Truman for the Presidency.
With Thurmond as their official candidate, The States' Rights' Democratic Party adopted a platform which read:
We stand for the segregation of the races and the racial integrity of each race; the constitutional right to choose one's associates; to accept private employment without governmental interference, and to earn one's living in any lawful way. We oppose the elimination of segregation, the repeal of miscegenation statutes (laws against bi-racial marriage), the control of private employment by Federal bureaucrats called for by the misnamed civil rights program. We favor home-rule, local self-government and a minimum interference with individual rights.
At Thurmond's 100th birthday party in 2002, Lott said "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 the years, either."
And of course, when the Senate brought up a non-binding resolution to honor the civil rights activists murdered in the same small town where Reagan spoke, Lott, and the rest of the Mississippi delegation, refused to vote. If you're still unclear on what kind of people Thurmond and Lott were and the votes Reagan was courting with his "States' Rights" speech, you can always watch
Mississippi Burning for a refresher.
You need to print out this post, glue it to your forehead, and every time you want to call this place a "cesspool" or accuse someone of personal attacks, go look in the mirror.
I agree wholeheartedly that "all people need to be treated equally", but unfortunately the people you've chosen to align yourself with do not. I don't know that you necessarily agree with their views, but otherwise the reason you continue to identify with them is a mystery.
Reagan calls black people monkeys, but I'm sure it was just a slip of the tongue and he was a great guy. Not that different from making fun of Bush's ears anyway.
Trent Lott was the Republican Senate Majority Leader until 2007. Besides what is posted above which barely scratches the surface of his racist history, he was also (and probably still is) a frequent guest of the openly white supremacist organization the
Council of Conservative Citizens, along with many other prominent Republicans. Other than that I'm sure they're all just swell.
Two months ago, the Supreme Court ruled that the Virginian Republican Party's attempted gerrymander was so racist as to be unconstitutional. Not two weeks later the same body ruled that the stated justification for adding a citizenship question to the census was clearly contrived and didn't hide their racist intentions well enough. Chief Justice Roberts stated "we cannot ignore the disconnect between the decision made and the explanation given", but added that they simply had to come up with a better one. I guess they couldn't find one so they simply gave up. If you just ignore those I'm sure these Republicans have the highest moral character.
I guess we know now who is and isn't treating people equally.
You see my dear Jon, when you post stuff like this that is so over-the-top ridiculous it's no wonder you get ridiculed. I'd have more sympathy if you weren't constantly calling out for more abuse. Be the change you want to see my friend.
![[scooter]](/data/avatars/m/22/22287.jpg?1659477690){kind=avatar}
So you say stuff like, uh, forced busing, states’ rights, and all that stuff, and you’re getting so abstract. Now, you’re talking about cutting taxes, and all these things you’re talking about are totally economic things and a byproduct of them is, blacks get hurt worse than whites.… “We want to cut this,” is much more abstract than even the busing thing, uh, and a hell of a lot more abstract than 
