I can't speak for Granite State, to whom the above comment is apparently addressed -- but I think most of us do understand that. That's why we can't figure out why Trent Lott thought fit, in 2002, to endorse the principles of 1948 -- or even to appear to endorse those principles. I don't think it's a slip of the tongue. I think it's what Lott reallly believes. It's not like Lott has not said similar things already. Back in 1980 he was claiming we'd be better off if the Dixiecrats had won in '48.
The excuse I've most often heard this time around is that he was simply honoring an old man who's nearing the end of a distinguished career. But he could easily have expressed appreciation for Thurmond (who's done many things since his Dixiecrat candidacy) without invoking the ghosts of segregationism past. So I must conclude he meant what he said. To say otherwise is to imply that he's a fool, which he is not.
And if anybody's "obsessing" about this issue, it's Lott and these Southern Partisan types, who simply can't get over their noble and beloved "Lost Cause." Really, it is past time for OUR party, the true Republican Party, the Grand Old Party of Abraham Lincoln, to give up its latter day Confederate wing.
What I don't understand is why Lott said what he did. On some level he must have thought it politically beneficial to give a sop to a pro-segregation lobby. Does he actually think such a lobby exists and that it is a sizable group? How lost in the past do you have to be to think that?
I am not here to say if he is or isn't a racist in his heart. But anyone who says what he says and thinks as he does shouldn't be the public face of the 2002 GOP. We're going to pay dearly for his ignorance and get zero in return.
Sir, that may be the last conservative stronghold for the GOP.
Oh I see, then you want to renounce and invalidate all those Bush electoral votes that came from southern and border states in 2000, right? After all, they were tainted by having been cast by the vile "Confederate wing" of your otherwise pure and virtuous GOP. Moreover, I'm SURE that any loss incurred by cutting us out of your party will be more than compensated for by the flood of minority voters who will undoubtedly flock to the new and improved GOP once we're outta here. Yessir, you can take those minority votes to the bank for sure.
Sometime when you have nothing better to do, take a look at the 2000 red/blue election map. The despised "Confederate wing" of the party holds forth in that big RED area from just south of the Ohio river down to the Mexican border and the FL straits. Paint just one of those states blue and you would have Algore as your president right now. Paint a couple more blue and you would have a Democratic Senate and House.
But, if you virtuous and colorblind northerners don't want us po white trash to sully your precious party of Lincoln and Harding with our tainted votes, well, OK, I guess. But you do realize don't you, that your purified GOP will then become a minority party for the forseeable future? And that Daschele will be Senate majority leader in perpetuity? But I suppose it will be worth all that for you just to feel oh so rightous and high-minded, will it not?
Maybe you're too young to remember those good old days of the Democratic "solid south". You know, those days when the Democrats held the White House, and all but one congress, for 20 years straight? And when, but for a very popular wartime general named Ike, they would have held the White House for another 16 years. Well, believe it or not, if you do decide to throw us out of your party you can relive those glorious years of defeat and despair over and over again just as if you had a magic time machine. How great would that be?