'A gaffe,¨ columnist Michael Kinsley famously noted, 'is when a politician tells the truth.¨ The ouster of Mississippi Senator Trent Lott as the Republican leader of the U.S. Senate was a result of mounting evidence that Lott's racist remarks on Dec. 5 revealed his true beliefs on civil rights. So why was our U.S. Senator, Rick Santorum, among Lott's leading defenders?

The whole hullabaloo started with Lott's now-all-too-familiar remarks regarding his home state's support for the 1948 presidential candidacy of Strom Thurmond and Thurmond's racist, segregationist platform: 'When Strom Thurmond ran for president, we voted for him. We're proud of it. And if the rest of the country had followed our lead, we wouldn't have had all these problems over all these years.¨ When Lott tried to discount these comments as a slip of the tongue, reporters found two other occasions during which Lott had expressed nearly identical sentiments. Moreover, it came out that these statements were in line with Lott's record on racial issues. Among other votes, Lott opposed creating the Martin Luther King holiday and opposed the 1990 Civil Rights Bill, but supported allowing Bob Jones University to maintain its tax-exempt status, even though the university banned interracial dating between students.

None of these revelations, however, gave Rick Santorum pause before speaking out in Lott's defense. Our senator went on national television and claimed that Lott was 'a man of tremendous integrity, a deep faith, [and] someone who believes all men are created equal.¨ He added that the furor would subside when his colleagues 'reflect and put things in better context,¨ a dubious statement given the context of Lott's terrible civil rights record.

As the chairman of the Senate Republican Conference, Santorum originally opposed even calling a meeting of Senate Republicans to discuss Lott's remarks and potential replacement, telling NBC's Tim Russert, 'It's not under our rules to allow me to do that.¨ A few days later, under pressure from his more moderate colleagues, Santorum reversed himself by calling a meeting for Jan. 6. But Santorum continued to defend Lott, even as more evidence of Lott's poor civil rights record came out, telling reporters on Dec. 18, 'I'm more and more convinced that Senator Lott should stay.¨

Santorum didn't stop at defending Lott. He told the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette that 'he personally never viewed Thurmond, who just retired as the Senate's longest serving member, as a segregationist.¨ This is the same Strom Thurmond who, while running for president on a segregationist platform, said, 'There's not enough troops in the Army to force the Southern people to break down segregation and admit the Nigra race into our theaters, into our swimming pools, into our homes, and into our churches.¨ Yes, that was in 1948, but when asked in 1998 if he wanted to apologize for his 1948 campaign, Thurmond said, 'I don't have anything to apologize for,¨ and 'I don't have any regrets.¨ When asked if he thought the 1940s segregationists were right, Thurmond replied, 'Yes, I do.¨ That was only four years ago, but that didn't stop Santorum from defending Thurmond.

Perhaps we shouldn't be surprised by Santorum's support for Lott, given that Santorum's record on civil rights is scarcely different from Lott's. The People for the American Way, a liberal lobbying group, reviewed eight key civil rights votes cast by Lott and Santorum since Santorum entered the U.S. Senate in 1995 and found that, with one exception, Santorum voted with Lott every time.

The National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) reviewed the votes of Lott and Santorum for the 2001-02 congressional session and concluded that they were nearly identical. Lott got the lowest score in the U.S. Senate, voting with the NAACP only 14 percent of the time. Santorum's score -- 19 percent -- was scarcely better.

Santorum has claimed that he has 'worked very, very hard on trying to build the Republican Party and outreach the African-American community,¨ but we now know that's just rhetoric. Now that the fight has been lost, Mr. Santorum is attempting to distance himself from Lott, dispatching aides to say that he was privately pleased with Lott's ouster. But we shouldn't forget that when it mattered, our senator, Rick Santorum, didn't hesitate to side with Trent Lott rather than side with civil rights.

In praising Strom Thurmond's racist presidential bid, Trent Lott unintentionally told the truth about his views on civil rights; by defending Lott, Santorum has told us that truth about his civil rights views as well.

J.J. Balaban is a Democratic political consultant based in Lower Merion. If you would like to respond to this Slant or have one of your own (850 words), contact Howard Altman, City Paper executive editor, 123 Chestnut St., third floor, Phila., PA 19106 or e-mail altman@citypaper.net.