I don't understand why Rush and Hannity want to keep Lott in power. Lott has stabbed conservatives in the back too many times... From the "power sharing" deals with the 'Rats to this enormously stupid gaffe, it's time for Lott to go. It's really the perfect time too, considering we just gained the Senate majority back, but the new session hasn't started yet.
They're tired of Republicans CONSTANTLY bending over and taking it up the wazzoo from the likes of Castro-lover Maxine Waters.
The Democrats see a way to get the Senate back, and they have found a way to do it.
And, there are lots of Republicans (on this board, and elsewhere) who are keeping the fire going.
But to appear to be purging Lott from power because of a perfectly harmless statement of his historic views--his preferences with respect to an election 54 years ago--is to give encouragement to the worst brand of Leftist demagoguery, while appearing to be sending a message to many Conservatives who, like Lott, sincerely admire and respect Strom Thurmond's lifetime of dedication to the American tradition, that they have no place in the Republican party. This is both immoral and potentially suicidal.
Note, that almost all of the hue and cry over this comes from people who either are committed verbal warriors on the Left, or from self-styled "Conservatives" and moderates, who are so self-conscious that they appear willing to appease any militant Leftwing group, that employs name calling techniques, lest those would be appeasers get tarred under the same umbrella. It is just plain silly to suppose that the broad mainstream of the American public will really see it an important issue, what someone believes about a 54 year old historic event (over 13 Presidential elections ago)!
The strategists of the Left have been more and more picking out historic issues, to try to create dissension in Conservative ranks. Just as there are issues on which the Left is very vulnerable--some of the ethnic and class jealousies within their ranks, for example, as well as the clash of petty ambitions and prima donna mindsets;--so Conservatives, who being Conservative are very prone to strong historic opinions, are vulnerable to ascerbations of old arguments.
We see this from time to time, on threads dealing with issues of the 1860s. The attacks on the Confederate flag by the American Left over the past three or four years, are a deliberate attempt to divide the Conservative base. The answer, of course, is not to abandon those old nostalgic issues which attract us. It is to keep them in perspective. Those old differences are never a reason not to work with people who are likeminded on the issues of the present. That is the crux of the matter. That is where we need to keep our primary focus.
So those who want to express their disagreement with Lott over Thurmond should be free to do so. But if they care about a united Conservative approach to the present, they should speak softly, proportionately. And those of us who agree with Lott's statement should respond softly, proportionately.
One other thing, that should be kept in mind. Thurmond was justly honored--think what you will about his 3rd party run in 1948. It was Strom Thurmond, more than any other Senator, who kept Richard Nixon to his promise--the price of Southern Conservative support--to start appointing Conservatives who believed in strict consrtuction to the Federal Bench. He has kept up that pressure on Republican office holders, ever since. George Bush would not be President, if five Justices sitting on the Supreme Court because of that Thurmond pressure, had not been in place in Deccember, 2000.
We can debate each other. But we ought not to devour our own. Not over some silly, contrived issue like this.
William Flax Return Of The Gods Web Site.
If nobody stands up now, all of the steps taken in the past 2 years to rid our government of "poltical correctness" will have been erased and "PC" will be firmly entrenched in our lives.
Amen, bro!
Even if he doesn't harbor racist views... which his record doesn't appear to show (although making two comments like he did it's hard to believe he doesn't just a little), he at a minimum showed incredibly bad judgement. And at this point in time not only do we need someone with excellent judgement... we need someone with alot more backbone.
I guarantee that there's plenty of real conservatives who haven't forgotten the sellout a few years ago when the mock senate trial was held. Talk about him using really poor judgement... man this guy's got enough of a track record (especially when you take the 'power-sharing' deal he cut).
He needs to do everyone a favor and step down from his leadership position (sic). I think it's fair to say that we're not mad... we're just very very disappointed... again!
Amen. I don't know why Lott has always got a solid backing on FR, but no matter what stupid thing he does he can always find a ton of support here... go figure.
If the reason is that, as the Pres. said, Trent has identified himself with a position that is both immoral and anachronistic, then Trent should go.
If the reason is that the Dems are whining about it, Trent should stay.
If the reason is that Trent is an idiot and should go, then let him stay a WHILE to prove a point, then remove him.
He's our guy and just because we hate his guts most of the time, we can't let the other team tell us whom to put on the field, or whom to pull from the line-up. This won't cost the Republicans any popular votes. Those few blacks who vote Republican aren't going to jump ship. The only weak sister on our team is Lott.
I hope the SOB ios tough enough to stick with a game plan. And I wish somebody on the Republican team had the brains and balls to proclaim to our brothers and sisters of darker hue:
The Republican Party is the party that was founded to end slavery and preserve the Union. The Democrat Party was the party of segregation for over 100 years. Jack Kennedy, FDR, Harry Truman all were segregationists and voted with the segregationist block for years.
The only difference between segregationists and today's Democrats is that today's Democrats keep Negroes "in their place" not by force of unconstitutional law, but by subsidizing a dependent lifestyle that dooms those who follow it to personal failure.
You can say this after what you saw the press do to Newt and George Bush? If we let them "out" anyone they want, they win!
What is important here is the principle of not allowing anyone to get away with referring to someone as a "racist."
Rush has explained many times in the past that one must instantly respond to that label because once that it is attached to you it is an attempt to destroy your character and cannot and must not be allowed to stand.