Posted on 12/14/2002 8:02:48 AM PST by FairOpinion
Political correctness reared its ugly head again with the media firestorm over remarks that Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott (R.-Miss.) made at the 100th birthday party for Strom Thurmond (R.-S.C.). In an attempt to be gracious, Lott said the nation would have been better off if Thurmond, retiring after his long years of service in the Senate, had been elected President in 1948 when he was the nominee of the State’s Rights Democratic Party.
Quick to take offense was Rep. Elijah Cummings (D.-Md.), the new chairman of the Congressional Black Caucus, who is quoted in [the December 10] Washington Post as being "very concerned" and "very upset" about what Lott had said. Cummings said the CBC was "trying to resolve exactly what action we will take." Perhaps the CBC is debating whether to call for Lott’s censure or his departure from the leadership post.
Whatever else one thinks of Thurmond, his record in Washington belies the stereotype of a crude Southern racist in the mold of a Senator Bilbo, particularly in the later years when he paid very close attention to the concerns of black voters of his state. Human Events political reporter John Gizzi reviewed Thurmond’s record in an online story. Gizzi noted that in the years following World War II when Thurmond was governor of South Carolina and made his presidential bid, there is no question that he was a supporter of segregation. Almost any successful Southern politician was back then, including those thought to be relatively progressive such as Senators John Sparkman (D.-Ala.) and J. William Fulbright (D.-Ark.). However, as governor, Thurmond sought to abolish the poll taxes that limited black voter participation and to improve the state’s segregated school system.
I’ve known Trent Lott for almost 35 years. We have spent a great deal of time together both socially and professionally, including many instances where he was out of earshot of reporters. We were on trips overseas and were in situations where, if Trent is a racist, it would have been clear. Yet, I’ve never heard one word come from his mouth that could be construed as racist. Not a joke. Not a flip remark. Nothing.
But political reporters seized upon his remark, causing even Senate Minority Leader Tom Daschle (D.-S.D.), as partisan a Democrat as you will find, to come to the defense of Trent Lott. Now, Daschle has backtracked, facing criticism from within his own ranks for having come to the defense of his adversary across the aisle.
Those in the conservative movement know that I have had serious differences with Trent over the years regarding his leadership of the Republicans in the U.S. Senate. Believe me, I am hoping and praying that he will be a tougher leader of the 108th Congress than he was in the last session or in other past ones.
However, he absolutely should not resign over the unfortunate remarks that he made at a birthday party in attempting to pay homage to an aging senator.
Knowing Trent as I do and how strongly he is opposed to communism, I believe what he meant to say is that Thurmond was a patriot and had he been elected we would have taken a much tougher stance vis a vis the Soviet Union than what the foreign policy establishment would have favored. Resigning over this issue would greatly strengthen the opposition. So, Trent would be doing the right thing by his country by not giving the left the victory they want just because he had made an unthinking comment.
________________ Mr. Weyrich is chairman and CEO of the Free Congress Foundation.
Dick Morris said the very same thing last night on John Gibson's show, chuckling about how ridiculous this whole thing is. Morris worked for Lott as a consultant, for years.
So, Trent would be doing the right thing by his country by not giving the left the victory they want just because he had made an unthinking comment.
Good for Weyrich. People who KNOW Trent Lott know the truth. Everybody else is just flapping their gums.
Paul knows that Lott said this (at least) once before-- long before Thurmond's 100th birthday party. That's the context of this (in addition to other things). I'm sick of hearing these misleading comments that this was Lott getting caught up in the moment of an old man's party. I could more easily forgive him if that were the case.
Lott's crime here is that he spoke aloud what he felt inside, but don't diminish the fact that he felt this inside. Lott has a right to feel how he wants about segregation and Jim Crow and the South of his youth. He doesn't have a right to lead my party in the Senate while espousing those views.
A M E N!
The fact is that the only arrow the left has in it's quiver is a complicit media and I say "Let them eat cake!"
You don't know what he felt inside!
You're putting your Northern establishment, politically correct spin on this thing when people like Weyrich and Morris, who know Lott a hell of a lot better and longer than you, are saying this is much ado about NOTHING!
You've convicted Lott of racism, however, and it would hurt your pride to admit you were WRONG, so you'll ride your horse until it drops.
Actually, I was disappointed in it.
I don't believe in publicly humiliating people, so Bush shouldn't have mentioned Lott by name.
But, I know why Bush made it, and it accomplished its purpose.
And beyond that, if Lott is the kind of person who would sabotage everything because he can't be "the leader", then we need to be rid of him as soon as possible.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.