Lott’s most recent comments seem to be a marginal improvement over his first two apologies, but they are, as you say too little too late and still very, very, weak. I have yet to read anything in which Lott expressly says that segregation by law is and was wrong and condems segregation by law as a moral evil. He always refers to legal segregation as "policies of the past" -- a vague euphemism that does not even acknowledge what was so offensive about his remark. Lott knows full well why people rightly took offense at his remark. I believe Lott did imply that segregation was a "discarded" policy of the past -- but that is simply a historical fact not an actual condemnation of the policy. (In fact, Lott’s original remark at the birthday party implicitly acknowledged that fact, too, with words of regret and nostalgia for what might have been in 1948.) Shouldn’t Lott have the decency to speak specifically and candidly to the substance of what made his remark offensive in an apology?

Kudos to Jack Kemp for speaking out on the issue. I only wish some prominent Republican elected official would have the courage to say the same thing. It is well and good that conservative commentators have called Lott on the carpet, but what does it say about the Party of Lincoln when its elected officials refuse to do the same? Politicians should be held accountable not only for their words but also for their silences in the face of undeniablly offensive conduct.