Replies

NY Post is not exactly Pravda. The NY Post, National Review, Opinion Review, Bennett, Charen, Noonan, Krauthammer, and the list keeps growing.

</center> Any predictions? I say... Thursday next week.

The Post has it wrong. The moral hypocrisy of the Left is moving this forward. They said nothing when Clinton awarded Fulbright the Presidential Medal of Honor for crying out loud. To bestow that honor on an avowed racist was okay for a Democrat, I guess. You've probably seen my editorial printed in the Washington Times today, but I've reposted it below. (BTW, I sent it to other major media outlets, but they won't dare use it because it exposes their own hypocrisy).

While not a fan of Trent Lott, I feel compelled to respond to the selective outrage regarding his comments at Strom Thurmond’s 100th birthday. On May 5, 1993, the Washington Post quoted former President Clinton’s comments at an 88th birthday ceremony for former Arkansas Senator William Fulbright where Clinton bestowed the Presidential Medal of Freedom on the man he described as a “visionary humanitarian, a steadfast supporter of the values of education, and my mentor."

Of course, the man Clinton was praising was a rabid segregationist. In 1956, Fulbright was one of 19 senators who issued a statement entitled the "Southern Manifesto." This document condemned the 1954 U.S. Supreme Court decision in Brown v. Board of Education. Its signers stated, among other things, that "We commend the motives of those States which have declared the intention to resist forced integration by any lawful means."

Fulbright later voted against the 1964 Civil Rights Act. He voted against the 1965 Voting Rights Act. And he did so because he was a segregationist and believed in separating the races — in schools and other public places.

More recently, in October 2002, Clinton traveled to Arkansas to dedicate a 7 foot bronze statute to Fulbright, and still nothing from the press admonishing Clinton for honoring a racist.

I'm not making excuses for Trent Lott. He should have apologized for his insensitive comments, and he did. Nor am I making excuses for Strom Thurmond's past. I'm questioning the hypocrisy of selective moral outrage by the Left.

There is a contingent here at FR that wants to defend Lott come hell or high water, simply to deny the Dems a win. This is exactly what the Democrats did with Clinton. It's not just dishonest, it's childishly dishonest.

The New York Post Championed the likes of Bill Clinton for TEN long years from the time he was the sex driven governor of Arkansas! They held up the leader of this nation as a misunderstood “boyish” fellow. That rag has no creditability left and they know it!

Trent Lott should not resign over this blown out of portion remark that was NEVER meant the way it is being reported and tossed about by the pundits and others.

I love the NYPost and everything, but they also dumped Bush for McCain in the 2000 primaries.

Lott will have to go because too many people are against him AND because he was incredibly stupid to say what he said. I just think it is unfair to ruin the guy over a mistake.

Lott must go ! < /shouting!!)

I do not think it benefits GWB or the Republican Party to allow Lott to issue blackmail declarations and threats to resign from the Senate rather than give up Leadership. If GWB caves in, it sends the wrong message to the American people. The message it sends is that an over-the-hill twerp of questionable morals and proven bad judgment can dictate to the President of the United States. It also shows that a practicing moron from the deep, deep Old South can dictate terms to GWB.

There is also the issue of Lott still being subject to the old Clinton and Barney Frank blackmail plot they used to pressure Lott during the Impeachment Trial of the Traitor in Chief. What's a little blackmail among brothers sitting in the Senate? Blackmail is just how we do business in the United States Senate. ("Time to move on now, nothing to see here, this is all old news")

The corrution must stop! It is time the remove, expunge, and stamp out the mere possibilty of blackmail from the Senate forever.

GWB should tell Lott to blow it out his @ss, and let him resign. It is time to make a moral choice and to stand up with courage. To cave in to Lott now, is a choice to accept blackmail as legitimate. If GWB allows Lott to threaten him, and simply walk away, I will never support GWB again. Having worked very hard to get him elected two years ago, I will not only refuse to vote for him, I will work to have him defeated by supporting a minority party.

Now is the time for true leadership! Not a time for testing the wind to see which way it is blowing.

Sorry. That is just how I feel. Feel free to flame away.

Could it be that it took Lott so long because he's never been forced to truly confront the horror of the Jim Crow laws of his youth?

A curious challenge to a lifelong resident of Mississippi from someone almost assuredly not a Southerner at all.

I hope this is becoming abundantly clear to fellow Freepers; specifically the Southern Freepers:

This is no longer about Trent Lott. This is about the South!

This columnist just with a stroke of his keyboard declared that anyone who has the remotest hint of affection for the South as it historically existed is not fit to be in elected leadership in the United States.

Friends, the South is my home. Your home is like your family: you don't love it because it's objectively better, you love it simply because it's yours; warts and all!

All but the most fringe loonies among the chattering class know goddamned well Trent Lott is not in favor of lynching and reviving Jim Crow. The immorality of that aspect of our history is clear today to any decent person. We lived, we learned, and we moved on. But the legacy of that system is an intense and ongoing political rivalry between blacks and whites in the South.

Racial/cultural frictions between coexisting populations are an inexplicable and worldwide phenomenon. It's in our bones, it's what we do, have done, and will continue to do. Lott's careless comments are merely a reflection of that.

If Lott is unfit for the U.S. Senate, so is about two thirds of the white South. We are basically being told that any Southern white who doesn't spend the rest of his life agonizing over the sins of ages ago and hating himself over perfectly normal instincts, does not deserve representation in government.

That is what is at stake here. And I couldn't care less if every fairweather conservative in print or on cable TV calls for Lott's head, they're getting nothing but my middle finger!

This is unconvincing to me. Lott stays, pimples and all.

FBI files.

"Whether he's a racist or not is immaterial: So stunning a lack of judgment, so obtuse an understanding of the historical importance of the civil rights movement would disqualify any politician from as high an office as Senate majority leader."

Lott admits it's his head not his heart that's the problem. He doesn't have the judgement or the character to be the ML. The pubbies must take the high ground, knowing that the dems don't and won't. Goodness and truth will prevail...