Smith/Lott Media Roundup

Gordon Smith's defense of retiring Senator Trent Lott is attracting attention from media outlets around the country. The statement, made yesterday on the Senate floor, defended Lott's praise in 2002 of former Senator Strom Thurmond's segregationist presidential campaign.

D.C. tabloid the Hill reported, in an article entitled "Fire pours down on Sen. Smith":

Sen. Gordon Smith (R-Ore.), a top target of Democrats next year, came under fire Tuesday after he took to the Senate floor and defended Sen. Trent Lott’s (R-Miss.) 2002 comments that were interpreted by some as a defense of segregation.

Oregon and national Democrats and liberal bloggers pounced on Smith Tuesday after he said that Lott’s comments were “misconstrued.” They pointed out that immediately after the incident in 2002, Smith called Lott’s remarks “offensive.”

However, as the Associated Press notes, Smith's defense of Lott contradicts his comments when the controversy first erupted in 2002:

"However they were intended, Senator Lott's words were offensive and I was deeply dismayed to hear of them," Smith told The Associated Press on Dec. 17, 2002. "His statement goes against everything I and the people of Oregon believe in. "

Smith later called Lott's remarks "very unfortunate and hurtful," adding that Lott did the right thing in stepping down.

Facing criticism, Smith attempted to defend his statement yesterday. From the Oregonian:

In an interview, Smith said there was not a contradiction between his 2002 statement and Tuesday's speech.

"I said then what I said today and what I say now," Smith said. "What Trent Lott said was wrong. What I'm proud of is that he apologized and that he has worked every day since to regain the trust and respect of his colleagues. He has been a model for crafting honorable compromise and achieving bipartisan progress for the American people. One mistake should not define an honorable career of service and sacrifice. I believe in redemption."

Democratic Senate candidates Steve Novick and Jeff Merkley immediately criticized the comments:

Smith also drew fire from Steve Novick, who is seeking the Democratic nomination to run against Smith next year.

"Smith was instrumental to returning him to power in the Senate last year. Now he claims Lott was misconstrued and that 'we knew what Lott meant' when he showered praise on Thurmond's racist run for the presidency," Novick said in a statement soon after Smith's speech. "I think we do know what he meant and I don't see how it was misconstrued."

Oregon House Speaker Jeff Merkley, who also is seeking the Democratic nomination, criticized Smith as well.

"How can Oregonians trust what Gordon Smith says on any issue of consequence when he can't even form a consistent position on whether Trent Lott's pro-segregationist statements were wrong?" Merkley said in a statement.

Discuss.

  • Unrepentant Liberal (unverified)
    (Show?)

    After all these years you think Smith would know how to give a speech without sticking his foot in his mouth, Trent Lott style. On the other hand maybe he just secretly yearns for that permanent golfing vacation that being a Senator deprives him of.

  • Bill Bodden (unverified)
    (Show?)

    After all these years you think Smith would know how to give a speech without sticking his foot in his mouth, Trent Lott style.

    Theoretically, politicians should know how to give a speech, but in reality they hire speech writers to tell them what to say. It is the ad libs that get them in trouble. Ad libs that come without much thought are usually a better indicator of what they really think; whereas, a formal speech indicates what they want the intended audience to believe which may or may not be what they really believe.

  • Senate 2008 Guru (unverified)
    (Show?)

    Gordon Smith can't think Lott's comments are BOTH "wrong" AND "miscontrued." If Lott's comments were "wrong," then they were not "miscontrued" and the media response was quite warranted. If Lott's comments were "misconstrued," then Lott meant well and his comments were not "wrong." But Smith can't have it both ways, as much as he may try.

    It is really something how blatantly devoid of integrity and conviction Gordon Smith is.

  • bama_barrron (unverified)
    (Show?)

    well ol gordo is beating the rush as it were ... this is a very calculated flip flop on his part ... he desperately would like to be one of the first gop types that benefits from trent's new job as a bag man (excuse me lobbyist) for nut jobs on the right. say what you want ... but ol gordo can smell the decaying green in a lobbyists back pocket! this man is a truly disgusting example of what it means to be a republican.

  • Gil Johnson (unverified)
    (Show?)

    Democrats, and especially Novick and Merkley, shouldn't push this one too far. It's not going to get traction in Oregon.

    The clip in the post below makes Smith look eminently reasonable and kind--the bit about Lott trying to make 100-year-old Strom feel good. It's usually bad karma to be mean to old people.

    Candidates, please go back to making mincemeat of Smith's stands on issues important to Oregonians. This isn't one of them.

  • Gil Johnson (unverified)
    (Show?)

    Democrats, and especially Novick and Merkley, shouldn't push this one too far. It's not going to get traction in Oregon.

    The clip in the post below makes Smith look eminently reasonable and kind--the bit about Lott trying to make 100-year-old Strom feel good. It's usually bad karma to be mean to old people.

    Candidates, please go back to making mincemeat of Smith's stands on issues important to Oregonians. This isn't one of them.

  • (Show?)

    "Democrats, and especially Novick and Merkley, shouldn't push this one too far. It's not going to get traction in Oregon.

    The clip in the post below makes Smith look eminently reasonable and kind--the bit about Lott trying to make 100-year-old Strom feel good. It's usually bad karma to be mean to old people."

    Except that he said the very same thing 20 years prior. One doesn't have to extol segregation in order to be nice.

    Kind of odd to say it won't gain traction--it pretty much has, no?

  • (Show?)

    If he wanted to be nice to Strom, why couldn't he have congratulated him on ceasing to oppose segregation and helping to move the country forward?

    It would have been a white lie, so to speak, but the kind that you really do make to be nice to an old person on their 100th.

    The fact that he chose to praise Strom for the worst part of his career rather than the better parts speaks volumes about Lott, and the fact that Smith is spreading octopus ink about what Lott plainly meant speaks volumes about Smith.

    <h2>This need not be an exclusive focus but should be part of the portfolio of Smith's changing his positions for political convenience and lack of real values.</h2>
in the news 2007

connect with blueoregon