I grew up in Alabama during the civil rights turmoil of the 1960s and 1970s. In retrospect, Martin Luther King did almost as much to help whites advance as he did blacks. While not a perfect human being (and who is?), MLK is worthy of honor. When Lott said that he didn't understand MLK's impact, he was either blind to the facts or lying.

Thurman ran in 1948 on the Dixiecrat segregationist platform. Saying things would've been better had he won in 1948, it's hard to see it any other way than as an endorsement of segregation. If Lott had meant to say that he was supporting Thurman's support for defense, why didn't he come right out at the beginning and say so? Sorry, but it just doesn't wash.

I do believe that Lott said and incredibly stupid thing and should step down (or be pushed) from the leadership position. By the same token, I think others in politics who've done the same thing (such as Byrd and Clinton) should be subject to the same level of criticism.

As for the MLK holiday, it was created by combining the old Washington's Birthday and Lincoln's Birthday holidays into President's Day. There was no additional cost because the number of holidays remained the same. That argument doesn't wash, either.