Georgia Democratic Representative John Lewis offers an olive branch to Trent Lott.

Lewis has accepted Lott's apology, and hopes to form a "reconciliation group" with Lott. Lott had proposed the group while reaching out to Lewis on Friday. Lott has offered to work with Lewis on an agenda to "improve the lot of all minorities in this country." Lewis should be reminded that Lott also offered to work with Senator Olympia Snowe on removing some provisions in the legislation creating the Homeland Security Department. Lott seemed to forget that promise less than a day later.

Why has Lewis decided to extend an olive branch to Lott when most other African-American government officials have refused to? He says it is "keeping with the philosophy and discipline of non-violence to forgive and move on." Which may be true. I cannot look into his heart, or "inner soul." I can't help but notice, however, that he is getting some pretty nice press out of this.

      your note []

More on Bush's effort to shift the tax burden from corporations and the wealthy to the poor and middle class.

A very good explanation of how the tax burden has shifted from the corporations and the wealthy to the lower earning brackets since 1944, when we also faced war. The tax code then was much simpler, and there were not many loopholes.

It is noted that during the war in 1944, everybody was more willing to pay their fair share.

Then, the country at war accepted the necessity to pay for the war effort and made sacrifices, at both personal and corporate levels. The tax code then was, indeed, simpler. Corporations paid their fair share of taxes. The wealthy paid more taxes because they were most likely to lose their wealth if the country were to lose a war. Everyone, grudgingly, was, if not happy, then satisfied with the arrangement.

Now, however, it is very different.

Now, the right-wing extremists are not happy with the situation. They want less taxes on the rich, though the rich pay much less now than they did in 1944. Corporations now pay about 80% less in taxes than they did during the last major war, even though they largely benefit by government spending for war.

Some very good statistics and number are included. Go ahead and read it.

      your note []

Jim Wooten, the Atlanta Journal-Constitution's conservative right wing hack.

I hate even linking to this buffoon, but he sometimes is just too funny.

Liberals amaze me.

With a clarity not gifted to other mortals, they are able to see into the inner soul of Senate Republican Leader Trent Lott and therefrom to report with absolute certainty truths known only to Lott and his Maker. If his meaning in praising Strom Thurmond's presidential campaign was as Lott's enemies aver, then his words are to be damned.

If Jim wouldn't go to take a nap every morning after having his Metamucil, and perhaps read the paper, or even perhaps this new internet thingy, he would see that it is not Lott's statements at Thurmond's party that let us see "into the inner soul" of Lott. What allows us to see into Lott's "inner soul" is the pattern of racist statements, the pattern of a racist voting record, and a pattern of participating in and associating with racist groups. People who are not racist, do not repeatedly keep doing all the things Lott has kept doing. Sure it is possible to have a quote from an article taken out of context by one of these organizations for their newsletter. But you would not write fourteen articles/columns for them, as Lott did for the Council of Conservative Citizens. That seems pretty clear to me.

In all of the Lott hoopla, the single most offensive reaction is that the Republican Party should renounce the sentiments inferred. The premise is that conservative whites in the South are incorrigibly racist and the Republican Party is, too. Therefore, since one of its leaders, Trent Lott, has been caught expressing the party's inherent bigotry, which of course is the bedrock value system of conservatives, the party should seek forgiveness and salvation.

No, that is not what liberals like me want. What we would like is for any racists in a powerful leadership position to be exposed. We would like their record examined. We would like to know if their views are tainting their action for our country. It is not illegal to be a racist, but it is illegal to let racism taint your job performance. If racism is affecting a government employee's hiring, firing, law enforcement, or policy making, then that needs to come out for all Americans to see. If it is found to be against our country's morals or laws, then rememdies should be sought. We are really unconcerned with whether or not the GOP should get forgiveness and salvation. Conservatives in the GOP should know that those come from somewhere else, as they seem to think they know more about religion than the common man.

It is quite remarkable how quickly and easily commentators fall into stereotyping conservatives. The reason is that liberals truly do believe that conservatives are homophobic racists who loathe the poor and gather in secret conclaves on the weekends to drink mint juleps and to pine for days gone by.

No we do not think that all conservatives "drink mint juleps," but there do seem to be many who do gather in enclaves and pine for days gone by. See link about Council of Conservative Citizens. There are others. Maybe Jim should check out this new thingy on the internet called google.

Whether Lott stays or goes is unimportant. Frankly, either U.S. Sens. Don Nickles of Oklahoma or Rick Santorum of Pennsylvania would be good fiscally conservative replacements as majority leader

Nickles? Jim likes Nickles? According to the blog TalkLeft Nickles' voting record is pretty much the same as Lott's. His votes can be seen here. Of course Nickles is also fiercely anti-gay. Santorum? On the issues he is no better than Lott or Nickles. In the past he has voted against affirmative action and against any policy favorable to gays and lesbians. Naturally he is staunchly anti-abortion. I guess it is unimportant if Lott stays, since there seems to be many just like him the Republican party ready to step into his shoes. Jim's two choices seem to have beliefs just like Lott. Maybe the premise he quoted, "The premise is that conservative whites in the South are incorrigibly racist and the Republican Party is, too." is not far from the truth.

I wonder if that "fiscally conservative" is just another code word?

If you don't like somebody or don't wish them success on the day before they act/speak/make news, you can't profess to know their hearts after they do.

But you can look at their actions. Remember actions speak louder than words. If it walks like a duck and sounds like a duck, there is a good chance it is a duck. If it does it for decades, there is a very good chance that it is a very old duck. Or as in Lott's case, just another old racist.

      your note []