And so it is with Mr. Thurmond and the Dixiecrats. No amount of arm-waving hoo-hah is going to get past the kind of quotation that Luis Gonzalez has posted here. It makes me squirm to see people trying to sell the idea that Lott was referring to Thurmond's position on states' rights or a strong defense. It's like watching a bad comedian go down in flames on amateur night. It's so horribly embarrassing that one doesn't even want to be in the room with it. It seems to be a common argument among Lott's defenders that those who wished to dump him as Majority Leader for stepping in a bucket and falling on his face on national television are now ready to embrace the Democrats' race-baiting agenda to atone for Lott's sins. Absolutely not. It was Lott who did that; and for many who were on the fence, that was the final straw. It is not reasonable to think that we can advocate truly color-blind policies in this area while keeping in leadership positions guys who make jocular comments about a Strom Thurmond presidency. If we are ever going to sell color-blind policies as a better alternative than these race-based preferences, we just cannot have that around. 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. |
Did you know that Saint Nicholas (the real one, not the jolly fellow in the red suit) was a noted scholar of classical Greek who translated many of Homer's works? Nobody knows that about him, and that's only partly because I just made it up. Mostly it's because Saint Nicholas and gift-giving at Christmastime have become synonymous, and it wouldn't matter if the guy had invented atomic energy in the 11th century.