From what I have read he ran as the States Rights Democratic candidate..."
Sure "T"...and it was all about sex, wasn't it?
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.
You are right about all the "conservatives" here on FreeRepublic these days, but most are really moderate when it comes to political expediency.
I will agree that most on FR believe they are and indeed are in the main "superpatriots". It is the one thing that brought me to the forum and has kept me here through all the changes that have occurred over the past 5 years here.
Happy New Year and God Bless America!
Strom Thurmond, presidential candidate, 1948
Robert Byrd, Democrat Senator, 2001.
Many of "us" called for it starting four years ago, but most of us way out here in the bleacher seats don't have much say in inter-party decisions. Some of us (self included) decided that since the inept leadership wasn't leaving, we would.
I for one am really glad to see Lott eviscerated over this issue. He really lent definition to the expression generated 4 years ago to "Trent Caves-a-Lott". One of the sorriest Republican "leaders" to come down the pike and has done nothing to enhance the party, more so to work towards its' demise.
Like I said when you first posted this thread. This would be fun. And it was, except for the forays into "thread policing" by some of the legends in their own minds.
You are out of your friggin' mind "T"! Look at the Party platform.
You can squeeze your eyes shut all you want, but the lights are still on out here.
Well said and worth repeating.
From what I have read he ran as the States Rights Democratic candidate..."
Sure "T"...and it was all about sex, wasn't it?
NICK DANGER ADDED: "I am tired of watching bipeds crawl out of the forest to tell me that dumping Lott was an act of cowardice. Never mind what the Democrats said, what is our policy on racism? What do we stand for? It sure as Hell isn't to return to segregation and Jim Crow, and if Lott has any doubts about that, then I don't care which Democrats are after him... I'm after him, too. I don't want him stinking up my house."
Your whole post was RIGHT ON, especially the above 2 paragraphs.
Total agreement.
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.