Posted on 12/16/2002 9:55:09 AM PST by an amused spectator
When Trent Lott stuck his foot in his mouth at a birthday party for retiring Senator Strom Thurmond, the nation's mainstream press erupted in rage.
Dozens of newspaper and magazine articles and hours of television time have already been devoted to this non-story. The angst over Trent Lott's racist soul is palpable. "Dixiecrat" is becoming a household word.
Strangely, similar outbursts by prominent Democrats over the years have been for the most part ignored by the national media "information gatekeepers", and even the the sordid record of the Democrats during the battle over the Civil Rights Act of 19641 has been glossed over quite nicely by the liberal media.
Companies and people pay millions of dollars a year to advertise their products in print and television media. They do this for a reason: consumers remember when they see a product advertised.
We are going to remember that Trent Lott "said something bad" for long years after Senator Thurmond is dead and buried and I'm sure hundreds of thousands of other average Americans will too.
We on Free Republic remember that the Democrat Party is the party of Jim Crow who only moved their plantations from the South to the big cities, but I'm sure that just a handful of other average Americans are truly aware of the sordid race dealings of the Democrat plantation overseers. Why the disparity in coverage? Both American political parties have their share of skeletons from the race wars of the late 20th century. Many of the Democrat missteps on the racial front are even more sensational than the Lott tribute to Strom Thurmond.
Strangely, the former member of the Klan whose filibuster wrapped up the resistance to the Civil Rights Act of 1964 still sits in the Senate, and continues to spew racial epithets to this day. These facts don't rate a sentence on page 34 of The New York Times
I regretfully conclude that the reason most Americans are hearing about the "racial sins" of Trent Lott is because they are being used as a free political commercial by the Left, to advertise their views about this country and their political enemies under the guise of "breaking news".
As such, we should now examine all mainstream newscasts or news stories with this question in mind:
1At 9:51 on the morning of June 10, 1964, Senator Robert C. Byrd completed an address that he had begun fourteen hours and thirteen minutes earlier. The subject was the pending Civil Rights Act of 1964, a measure that occupied the Senate for fifty-seven working days, including six Saturdays. (June 10, 1964 - Civil Rights Filibuster Ended)
Great observation.
It is. However I don't see a single GOP spine stiffening to go on the offensive. So after they sweep Lott under the rug what's going to change?
The wet dream of democrat/RINO "Campaign Reform" come true! The media sets the agenda and censures the most rascist democrat history imaginable (KKK Byrd's "N" word commentary, Hillary's "Jew B*st*ard" and "n-word" ravings, and Jesse Jackson's "Hymietown" slurs come instantly to mind!)
That being said, Lott's butt-boy relationship with the democrats, his disgraceful performance during the impeachment, and his general disgusting Mississsippi trial lawyer smarminess are intolerable. Dude's got to be replaced!
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.