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.