I've corrected an egregious error and added Lean Left to the blogroll.
Lean Left wonders "Where is George?" in regards to the Lott flap:
Where is George W. Bush in the firestorm around Trent Lott? Nowhere, as near as I can tell. He had Fleischer offer some weasly words of support, but has remained silent. He has yet to call for Lott's resignation. He has yet to do anything but hide. The Democrats should not let him. By not calling for Lott's resignation, Bush seems to be trying to have it both ways. He doesn't want to appear to court the racists, but he certainly seems to want their votes.
...During his visit to Bob Jones University, he spoke not one word of criticism to his hosts. He did not speak out against their segregationist policies, or their characterization of the Pope as an anti-Christ. It was not until he left the campus that he criticized the university. Wink, wink, nudge, nudge.
Is George W. Bush a racist? I don't know, but I doubt it. His personality seems to be the classic mean spirited bully, and those tend to hate anyone who doesn't agree with them equally - and to like anyone who does. I seriously doubt race enters into the equation. I do know that it doesn't matter, though. More than once, George W. Bush has had the opportunity firmly place the racists outsides the bounds of acceptable political discourse. Each time, he chose instead to not offend them. The Trent Lott furor offers him yet another opportunity, and he is failing yet again.
I've alluded to my opinion that Bush's stance on this issue has been far from forceful, but Kevin Raybould has it exactly right: As the man with the bully pulpit, Bush should leap on this opportunity to repudiate segregation in no uncertain terms. So far, he has indeed failed to do so.