Lott's sin is giving Dems ammo--so he must go

C'mon over, baby, a whole shakin' o' Lott goin' on. On the face of it, it seems incredible that a mere month after Bush's election triumph, the Beltway should be immersed in a discussion of where the 2002 Republican Party leadership stands on segregation. For this, we have Trent Lott to thank. The incoming Senate majority leader couldn't even wait till he'd come in to start screwing up. Insofar as he has any conservative defenders, the defense is this: Hey, relax, Trent isn't racist, just stupid.

You're telling me. If he were still majority leader in 2004, the NAACP would be running ads with video of Lott's remarks--we're proud of voting for Strom, and, if everybody else had followed our lead in 1948, ''we wouldn't have had all these problems''--followed by footage of black bodies hanging from trees, gallant Southern gentlemen standing around having a whale of a time, Billie Holiday's ''Strange Fruit'' on the soundtrack, etc: ''Trent Lott says, if we'd kept segregation and lynching, we wouldn't have all the uppity Negroes we have today.''

Now maybe that's not what he meant. He was speaking, after all, at some old coot's 100th birthday party. Most 100th birthday parties take place in nursing homes and, if you drop in, you generally find a lot of people standing around the old boy with inane grins, talking very loudly and very slowly and agreeing with everything he says. Maybe that's all Lott was doing, given the unique circumstances of a guy entering his second century as a sitting senator.

But there were cameras present; there was a microphone. Successful politicians are supposed to have a built-in blocking mechanism in such circumstances: The borderline racist gag about the Filipino poolboy rises in your gullet, is within sight of your tongue, but at the last nanosecond your political radar detector spots the C-SPAN crew and sends it back down deep into your bowels. Wild'n'crazy gonzo pols--like John McCain, who regaled a Washington fund-raiser with a Chelsea Clinton/Janet Reno gag dependent for its effect on implied lesbianism and transsexuality--lack these antennae, and that's why they're not ambassador to China.

If the Republicans are going to make a 51-49 Senate work for them, they'll need discipline. When the man who's supposed to enforce that discipline is so undisciplined himself, he needs to go.

Lott made a bad situation worse in his attempt at damage control. His immediate reaction was that he regretted giving the impression that he supported the ''discarded'' policies of the past--''discarded,'' as if racial segregation is like the gold standard or the 55 mph speed limit, one of those things that comes and goes in and out of fashion. He then said he'd meant that back in 1948 ol' Strom had a lot of other good policies: ''Defense was a big issue. We were coming out of the war'' This is the Mississippi version of ''Mussolini made the trains run on time.'' Even if he did, it doesn't make up for the central defining plank of the platform. And, in any case, don't tell me the Dixiecrats bailed because Harry Truman, the nuker of Japan, wasn't tough enough on defense.

Strom led the walkout from the '48 Democratic Convention because a presidential panel had proposed a federal anti-lynching law and the abolition of poll taxes designed to keep blacks from voting. That's it.

Even if he had the best policies ever on defense or NEA funding or federally mandated bicycling helmets, they're just a little sprig of garnish on the segregationist beef. And, as it happens, in those days Strom was a fairly conventional big-government Democrat. That, after all, is what a ''Dixiecrat'' is: a Southern racist Democrat. The GOP candidate that year was Thomas Dewey, a man who lives on only as a headline. If Trent Lott was eager to refight the 1948 election, that's the fellow he should have been talking up. If small government's the issue that wowed Mississippi, those guys should have voted for Dewey, and the headline would have come true. Instead, floundering through another stage of his apology tour the other night, the senator couldn't even remember the name of the Republican.

That's his gift to the Dems. For the best part of two centuries, the Democrats have been the party of race: In the 19th century, they were for slavery; in the 20th, for segregation; in the 21st, for the neo-segregation of ''affirmative action,'' ''hate crimes'' and all the other paraphernalia of the modish trickle-down apartheid determined to make racial categorization a permanent feature of the American landscape. In fairness to the Dems, this evolution represents a significant century-on-century improvement: There's no reason to believe that one day, come the 24th or 25th century, they won't have reached the position that American citizens should be treated as freeborn individuals, rather than as chorus members of their respective identity-group kicklines. That's what the Republican Party stands for: Condi Rice is an effective, black, female National Security Adviser but she holds that position not because of her blackness or her femaleness but her effectiveness; she's better than the white males who were up for the job.

It's pathetic that Jesse (''Hymietown'') Jackson should be huffing and puffing about Lott's outrageous behavior. It's ridiculous that RNC Chairman Marc Racicot has been bullied into a meeting with Al Sharpton: If Lott is unacceptable as Senate majority leader, the race-baiting Rev should be unacceptable anywhere. But that's why principled conservatives have a right to be furious with the senator.

When the NAACP do their ugly dragging ads about Republicans opposing ''hate crimes'' legislation, they're right to this extent: Most Republicans do oppose ''hate crimes'' legislation, and for very good reasons. And when Al Gore taunts George W. Bush about ''affirmative action,'' it's legitimate to this extent: Most Republicans regard racial quotas as an obnoxious and un-American concept. But, when Democrats start bashing the GOP as the party of segregation, that baggage is theirs.

For a century and a half, race is one issue the Republicans have been right on--or, at the very minimum, less wrong. We've grown used to the Democrats' strange black-is-white world, where Al Gore apparently genuinely believes his father was a civil rights crusader rather than a civil rights obstacle. Segregation is the Democrats' history, and for Trent Lott to give them an excuse to dump it on the GOP doorstep is all the reason Republicans needed to be done with him once and for all.

Your choice is Lott or Daschle. I take it you want Daschle.

Bull. Don't blame Lott's stupidity and possible perfidy on me, or on any of those Republicans who want new leadership in the Senate.

If we get Dachle it will be 100% Trent Lott's fault...a) for the current stupidity...b) for compounding his error 10,000% by turning Judas on his party.

Lott's sin is giving Dems ammo--so he must go

Lott's "sin" was wholly manufactured by Democrats, promoted by racists Jesse and Al, and abetted by a load of moronic Republicans, including GW and lots of people on FreeRepublic.

I hope Lott stands pat. Republicans ought to fly him on the Senate flag pole, for all the world to see. He'll take lightening strikes, hurricanes, and scorching heat. He'll get mighty frayed.

Then, about a year later, exactly one year before the '04 election, he ought be hauled down, wrapped up and burned with great ceremony.

By that time all the energy will have been spent, and there will be nothing left to say. And the Dems will have only a short time to find the next monster. Feed him to them now, and they'll go hungry in two years. Give him in pieces, slowly, they'll be satiated and won't know what hunger is anymore.

Successful politicians are supposed to have a built-in blocking mechanism in such circumstances: The borderline racist gag about the Filipino poolboy rises in your gullet, is within sight of your tongue, but at the last nanosecond your political radar detector spots the C-SPAN crew and sends it back down deep into your bowels. Wild'n'crazy gonzo pols--like John McCain, who regaled a Washington fund-raiser with a Chelsea Clinton/Janet Reno gag dependent for its effect on implied lesbianism and transsexuality--lack these antennae, and that's why they're not ambassador to China.

I'm sitting here in tears, after gales and gales of laughter.

BTW, anyone here ever see The Best Years of Our Lives?

"Here's the best part of Mark's piece, imho:"For the best part of two centuries, the Democrats have been the party of race: In the 19th century, they were for slavery; in the 20th, for segregation; in the 21st, for the neo-segregation of ''affirmative action,'' ''hate crimes'' and all the other paraphernalia of the modish trickle-down apartheid determined to make racial categorization a permanent feature of the American landscape. " Yeah. Amazing how he can wrap up in two sentences wha it takes folks from the Heritage Foundation six years of position papers to say. Really.

If we get Dachle it will be 100% Trent Lott's fault...a) for the current stupidity...b) for compounding his error 10,000% by turning Judas on his party.

You sound like the type of person a boss could kick the crap out of, and you would still suck up and beg. You must be a real candy butt.

Lots of people change parties. Strom, Jesse Helms, and Phil Graham. Trent Lott was a Democrat for more years than he was a Repubilcan.

Even real stupid people can understand that if you fire a man he will get a new job. If he can find a job he can use to hurt the place that fired him , he will. It is just human nature.

trickle-down apartheid

That phrase is a keeper. If Steyn were ever to write books with as much vinegar and insight as his columns, he'd end up in the pantheon with the likes of Mencken.

Bush and Rove aren't dummies. No way did Nickles call for an election against Lott w/o their at least tacit approval. No way did they give that unless they are sure that: Lott will stay in in Senate if he loses leadership post; McCain won't jump.

It is NOT a "triviality" that Lott said what he said. GET THIS. Even if you believe everything his friends, including some of his black friends, say that he is not a racist (although if I were african-american and truly believed he was a good guy, I would still find very cold comfort in all of this), his republican colleagues have EVERY LEGITIMATE REASON to be pissed off at him. What he did raises serious questions about the caliber of his intellect, the quality of his judgement, the level of his competency and the efficacy of his leadership. Someone who was capable of such as spectacularly STUPID blunder doesn't have any business running the US Senate any more than my three year old nephew does. He's the Dennis the Menace of the Republican Party who has a weird compulsion to bring discredit on them all, and I don't think that serious minded Republicans or conservatives who care about the future of this country have to put up with his mindless Ole Miss, Oh Sh*t f*ck%ps anymore.

I agree with EV. Lott should do the right thing, step down as SML and remain in the Senate. If he fails to do that and resigns, and we end up with a 50/50 Senate or even a Dem Senate (Due to a defection) Lott only has himself to blame.

Go, Condi.

If Lott stays as Majority Leader, you may see Condi move into Cheney's place on the ticket as immunization for Lott's stupidity.

It looks like today the Democrats shed their village idiot. Now when do we shed ours?

Are you kidding Lott is going to single handed well along with the help of FReepers turn the racist card around and end this as an issue and in so doing will win the blacks to the party that voted for civil rights with truth. With the help of all FReepers of which there are black ones and white ones will tell the racist democrats that we know their lie and their game and its over.

Insults will get you nowhere.

This is not some run of the mill job...and any attempt to justify it along those lines is futile as well.

The only reason Lott could or would resign from the Senate is because he is a selfish fool. If he wants to go down in history as a traitor to the millions of GOP members who have worked so hard to retake our government from the liberals, that's his lookout.

It's time for the man to quit watching his own butt, and start playing for the team---by taking a nice chairmanship and shutting his mouth.

That's the only path of honor, and the only way he will ever restore any modicum of respect from his fellow Republicans across the U.S.A.

It's his choice.

It is just human nature.

Cowards succumb to petty bitterness...and it always ultimately consumes them.

Great men and women rise above petty self-interest and put the interests of their country before their own.

That's what makes them great.

Even real stupid people can understand that if you fire a man he will get a new job. If he can find a job he can use to hurt the place that fired him , he will. It is just human nature.
Your endless litanies and Jeremiahs on this subject suggests you're enjoying this situation far too much. If it weren't for all these "stupid people" you're 'splainin' to, who else would you obliquely talk down to?

You strike me as one of those cartoons who sits on the shoulder of a man at the crossroads between right and wrong. You're the one with the horns and pitchfork egging him on to take the "natural" course and spit in the eye of decency rather than accept the reasonable consequences of his own lamebrainedness. Very Common of you Tator.

Encouraging Lott to take a break need not be destructive. But your type of "character" keeps whispering in his ear "fired." The devil isn't needed for this to end badly; that dark fellow has self-made co-conspirators as your exceptionally repetitive demoralizing attests.

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.