Trent Lott should take a lesson from Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld on how to make an apology. Too bad for Lott that Rumsfeld’s goof did not come earlier. At a Pentagon press conference on Jan. 7, Rumsfeld made unfortunate remarks regarding the military draft:
“If you think back to when we had the draft, people were brought in, they were paid some fraction of what they could make in the civilian manpower market because they were without choices.
“Big categories were exempted-people that were in college, people that were teaching, people that were married. It varied from time to time, but there were all kinds of exemptions. And what was left was sucked into the intake, trained for a period of months, and then went out, adding no value, no advantage, really, to the United States armed services over any sustained period of time, because the churning that took place, it took enormous amount of effort in terms of training, and then they were gone.”
Like Lott, Rumsfeld’s apology could have come sooner, yet when it did come, Rumsfeld’s apology clearly explained the intent of his remarks and the explanation is believable and acceptable.
Rumsfeld’s error was that his words were “not eloquently stated,” and he claims that he in no way meant to belittle the service of veteran draftees. He went on to say: “They added great value. I was commenting on the loss of that value when they left the service. I always have had the highest respect for their service, and I offer my full apology to any veteran who misinterpreted my remarks.”
Unlike Lott, Rumsfeld saw no need to pander to any group that might have been offended. He will not be appearing at any anti-war rallies in the next few weeks. Lott’s strange BET appearance and flip-flop on affirmative action only raised further questions about his character.
Both men were in leadership positions at the time of their questionable actions. Only one responded like a leader should. Understanding his great position and the people that he represented, Rumsfeld noted that it was “particularly troubling” that there are some in the service “who may believe that the secretary of defense would say or mean what some have written. I did not. I would not.”
Chalk up the score for the secretary on another point: “It is painful for anyone, and certainly a public servant whose words are carried far and wide, to have a comment so unfortunately misinterpreted.” Right you are, Mr. Secretary.
Rumsfeld is a leader our country needs-one who does not cower away when the pressure is on, one who is accountable for his words, one who understands that his office represents others. It is unfortunate that his words were misinterpreted.
Lott’s actions were that of a poor leader, and his attempt at an apology was poor. It’s unfortunate that a senator would do such and unfortunate that he represents our state. I am afraid his true character was revealed.
Michael Stewart is a junior philosophy and religion major.