I have already written (here) that Lott should leave. His comment re Strom in ’48 was disgusting, and if he remains majority leader he will damage the party. But that doesn’t mean that every comment of his that is now being dredged up is appalling, the best example of which is his now often-quoted defense of Bob Jones University in its tax case. The New York Times treatment of this is typical:
“Racial discrimination does not always violate public policy,” Mr. Lott, then a congressman, said in the 1981 friend-of-the-court filing.
He cited university admission programs intended to promoted racial diversity. “If racial discrimination in the interest of diversity does not violate public policy,” the brief said, “then surely discrimination in the practice of religion is no violation.”
Although Lott’s phrasing here is typically clumsy, his point — or at least a similar point; it’s hard to know exactly what his point was — is not only legitimate, but I believe persuasive. I discussed here why the Bob Jones case should not be the bogeyman liberals have made it, and have specifically criticized the New York Times’ use of it to brand someone a racist here. I’ll not repeat those arguments now, but I encourage you to take a look at them before agreeing that support for Bob Jones against the IRS should be grounds for condemnation.
But don’t regard these comments as a defense of Lott. In fact, they reinforce why he should go: even sensible things causes and issues and nominees from now on will be branded as unacceptable simply because he supports them.
