Posted on 01/02/2003 6:12:39 AM PST by sheltonmac
Most Americans seem to believe that Trent Lott deserved to suffer for his "insensitive" comments at Strom Thurmond's birthday celebration. Now that Lott has been forced to step down as Senate Majority Leader, neo-conservative Republicans are the ones cheering the loudest.
"We've wanted him gone for a long time," some have said. "We needed to get rid of him and move on with our agenda." The trouble is, no one in the party seems to know exactly what that agenda is.
Of course, that hasn't stopped neo-cons before. Pragmatism has always trumped principle, and as long as the polls reflect public approval for their actions, they really don't care about anything else. They must increase their majority in 2004 at any cost, and to do that they must first shake their xenophobic image.
As everyone knows, the GOP has long been branded as the party of racists. Such labels have been successfully utilized by the liberal left for years, and Republicans have tried everything to keep those labels from sticking. The end result is that in order to present the voting public with a kinder, gentler GOP, Republicans typically begin adopting Democratic positions.
It's the same three-step process every time: 1) liberals make the accusation of racism against a Republican, 2) the Republican denies the charge and 3) the Republican agrees to sign on to the liberal agenda, hoping that in doing so he might prove beyond the shadow of a doubt that he is not a racist. The entire fiasco surrounding Trent Lott is only the latest example of this kind of Republican cowardice.
Lott's comments sparked all the predictable reactions from all the usual suspects. Men like Al Sharpton and NAACP president Kweisi Mfume —both veteran champions of racial divisiveness —wasted no time in attacking the senator.
Sharpton, who had remained strangely silent in 2001 when Senate Democrat Robert Byrd let fly with his "white niggers" remark, said, "[Lott] should step aside. No one is saying that if the people of Mississippi want to elect him to the Senate that they don't have the right to do that. But to be the head of the party in the Senate, given the sensitivity of that position for the interest of the country and the party, Mr. Lott should step aside."
Mfume's response was a bit more harsh. He called Lott's little speech "hateful bigotry that has no place in the halls of the Congress," and dismissed Lott's subsequent apology as "too little, too late."
Reacting to the verbal barrage from the left, the neo-cons scattered. No one even bothered to mention the possibility that Lott was simply acknowledging the distinguished political career of his 100-year-old colleague. Nobody proposed that when the senator from Mississippi implied that we would be better off had Strom Thurmond been elected president in 1948, he was referring to some of the more noble causes Thurmond stood for, like states' rights and a less-intrusive federal government.
No, the neo-cons were so desperate to prove that they could be just as racially sensitive as their slightly more liberal counterparts that Lott's political fate had already been sealed. He was the perfect fall guy, and his sacrifice was worth it if it meant keeping the GOP in power.
Republicans, listen up. Whether you agree that Trent Lott should have resigned as Majority Leader or not, his ousting is yet another sign that you just don't get it. No matter what you say or do, you will always be viewed by the left as a bunch of bigots and racists. Bending to political peer pressure doesn't help —in fact, it makes you look weak. The sooner you learn that, the sooner we can begin repairing the damage your party has done to the conservative cause.
But it's probably too late. The mob has spoken, and Trent Lott has been forced out of his leadership role. Sen. Orrin Hatch of Utah summed up what Republicans expect of Bill Frist, Lott's successor: "I think Bill has a kind of a more moderate record and a more moderate approach toward things, and I think that it's going to be very difficult to criticize him."
In other words, "if you can't beat 'em, join 'em." And that, my friends, has become the battle cry of the neo-conservatives in the GOP, Party of Cowards.
Winning the vote of the people of the State of Mississippi, for one...
All personal attacks are equal. However some persoanl attacks are more equal then others.
Next time, in this thread, use the insult word, "coward". It would make cynicom feel better.
Uh, TLBSHOW, it was a GOP representative who inserted the language into the Homeland Security Act that killed TIPS. That was more of a matter of what Ashcroft and Justice were doing, not the entire GOP.
Bob Barr is a member of the ACLU.
Does that mean Lott should have stayed in the position before this happened? Of course not. His stance changed so often one would think he was a liberal. However to throw him to the multicultural wolves as a way to get him out of that seat was a mistake that conservatives will be paying for for years
I just make them up as I go along, and hope no one notices the really stupid ones...
Lott was ousted after he began sucking-up to the NAALCP.
Another flippin' idiot who doesn't get it.
For everyone who agrees with this imbecile, read this carefully: IF LOTT WAS SIMPLY "ACKNOWLEDGING THE DISTINGUISHED POLITICAL CAREER OF HIS 100-YEAR-OLD COLLEAGUE, HE SHOULD HAVE SAID SOMETHING TO THAT EFFECT. IF LOTT WAS REFERRING TO STATES' RIGHTS AND A LESS INTRUSIVE GOVERNMENT, HE SHOULD HAVE SAID THAT.
WHAT HE SAID WAS THAT IF THURMOND WAS ELECTED PRESIDENT "WE WOULDN'T HAVE ALL THE PROBLEMS WE DO TODAY." NOW, GENIUS, WHAT "PROBLEM" IS THURMOND MOST FAMOUS FOR TRYING TO PREVENT? THAT'S RIGHT, BRAINIAC: THE "PROBLEM" OF INTEGRATION!
LOTT DIDN'T HAVE A SATISFACTORY ANSWER FOR WHAT THE "PROBLEMS" WERE, AND EVEN IF HE DID, HE WOULD HAVE STILL HAD TO ADDRESS THE FACT THAT HE SAID HIS STATE WAS PROUD TO HAVE VOTED FOR A PRE-CIVIL RIGHTS ACT SEGREGATIONIST!
No, the neo-cons were so desperate to prove that they could be just as racially sensitive as their slightly more liberal counterparts that Lott's political fate had already been sealed. He was the perfect fall guy, and his sacrifice was worth it if it meant keeping the GOP in power.
Oh, shut your stuff up! If Lott had remained Majority Leader, he would have been the equivalent of a firing range target for the left for the two years he's still got left -- which, if you haven't forgotten, is a Presidential election year!
You idiots who are in the business of ragging on "neo-cons" for being realistic and pragmatic don't seem to realize that the left is relying on gaffes like Lott's to EXPAND THEIR BASE -- something that is already forecast to happen just by means of illegal immigration and the percentage increase in non-whites. Even if you think that the future lies in rallying more white voters to the GOP by being intentionally provocative on racial issues, THAT will be a additional war cry for the Democrats! And on top of that, if your approach is taken, and the Dems accuse the GOP of shutting out minorities, THEY'LL BE RIGHT THIS TIME!
TLBSHOW nails the triple Lutz as he effortlessly spins his way to his new position. Even the French judge is impressed...
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.