At a time when politics increasingly bleeds into every public space, Congressman Troy A. Carter, Sr. chose not to ignore a moment that raised legitimate questions about boundaries, leadership, and responsibility. His response to a now-altered social media post by LSU football coach Lane Kiffin did not rely on outrage or partisan escalation. Instead, it acknowledged the basic reality that college athletics, particularly at a flagship public university, should not become a vehicle for divisive political messaging.
The controversy itself was brief but telling. Kiffin’s post invoked the phrase “Make Baton Rouge Great Again” while tagging Donald Trump. While the post was later changed, the meaning was already clear. That slogan is not politically neutral. It is directly associated with a movement that has challenged the rule of law, normalized political violence, undermined democratic institutions, and advanced policies that have disproportionately harmed immigrants, marginalized communities, and working families. Pretending otherwise ignores the political and cultural context in which those words now exist.
What might otherwise have been brushed aside as “just a post” instead raised a broader question about where partisan politics belong, and where they do not. LSU is not a private enterprise. It is a public, taxpayer-funded institution that represents Louisiana well beyond the football field. Its athletic programs, particularly football, occupy a rare cultural space that reaches across geography, ideology, and identity. That reach is precisely why restraint matters.
Injecting partisan political slogans into that space carries consequences. It risks alienating recruits and families who may question whether they will be welcomed or respected. It introduces unnecessary division into locker rooms that depend on trust and shared purpose. And it pulls attention away from the student-athletes themselves, whose work, discipline, and sacrifice sustain the program.
Carter’s statement was notable not because it elevated him, but because it avoided turning the moment into a spectacle. He did not demand punishment or personalize the issue. He redirected the focus to the student-athletes and to the idea that leadership, especially in public institutions, requires an awareness of impact beyond intent.
He also made an important distinction that is often lost in these moments. Carter emphasized that LSU’s broader leadership—its administrators, staff, players, and families—should not be conflated with a single post or individual action. In a media environment that often reduces institutions to controversies, that clarification matters. It reinforces that LSU’s stated mission remains centered on mentorship, development, and preparing students for life beyond athletics.
The larger takeaway is less about praise and more about precedent. Leadership is not neutral, and silence is rarely apolitical. Choosing when and how to speak signals what is considered acceptable, especially when public institutions are involved. In a political climate where many officials avoid discomfort to sidestep backlash, Carter’s response demonstrated that it is possible to acknowledge harm without inflaming it, and to address division without amplifying it.
That matters in the current national moment. The erosion of respect for courts, the dismissal of judicial authority, and the framing of entire groups as enemies rather than neighbors have consequences that extend well beyond Washington. Against that backdrop, insisting that college athletics remain a space focused on opportunity and shared pride rather than ideological signaling is not naïve. It is a reasonable expectation of publicly funded institutions.
Ultimately, this was never just about a slogan or a coach’s post. It was about where lines are drawn, who bears responsibility for maintaining them, and whether institutions meant to serve the public can remain spaces of broad inclusion. Carter’s statement did not resolve those tensions, but it acknowledged them—and in doing so, reinforced that these questions are worth asking.
That, at minimum, is worth taking seriously.
(Except for the headline, this story has not been edited by PostX News and is published from a syndicated feed.)
