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.
I don't owe him squat. If he stops putting words in my mouth and quits spamming the forum, I'll back off. Until then, he deserves the scorn that is heaped upon him by me and many, many others. Capice?
Oh, and BTW, you never did explain how your comments regarding Frist had anything to do with what I posted...
Sorry, Fred, I've gotten absolutely sick of TLBSHOW spamming the forum on the Lott matter. He is not the least bit interested in debate, only spraying pointless points, and if you look at his progression here, he tried to make it seem that I had called Lott a racist when I have never done any such thing. I get irate at folks who try to put words into my mouth.
If I recall the timing correctly, I believe Lott was tossed overboard by the GOP after he began apologizing and appeasing the race-baiters and not before.
SO the question is -- why the hell should people in the GOP support Lott, when he himself goes around apologozing to the race-baiters??????
Nice sanctimonious whine. If your skin is that thin, don't go around putting words in other poster's mouths...
In other words, since the GOP hasn't done something before, they are wrong when they do do it?
'Xactly. It was an amazing spectacle watching the Lott apology train careen around the political landscape, throwing off supporters with every lurch to the left. But some folks still think that the GOP caved to PC interests. Strange.
Your refusal is indicitive of your character and we all see it very plain. I had hopes you were man enough to apologize. We are here to discuss, not demean and attack others on matters that are not on the subject.
So are you now calling me a hypocrite? Like I said, nice sanctimonious whine in your earlier response.
I debate people who are willing to debate on the points I raise. TLBSHOW deliberately tried to pull me into a debate on whether I considered Lott to be a racist, when I have NEVER called Lott such. So I find your wails here to be rather self-serving - why don't YOU get after TLBSHOW for trying to put words in my mouth (only after which I flamed him)? Oh, and BTW, for being so interested in dicussing the subject, you still haven't responded how your point about Frist had anything to do with what I said. So are you really here to discuss, or just egg a spat on further?
Posted by cynicom to xzins
On News/Activism 12/23/2002 3:01 PM EST #16 of 39
Did Frist send you here to post all of that????
Yeah, cynicom - only interested in debate, never attacking or disparaging the other poster. Cut me a break.
Lott was cappo of the Senate Republicans, and he blew it.
He was outsted for his incompetency as Senate Majority Leader.
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.