Readers Ponder Trent Lott Fiasco
The political bonfire that has been ignited over the statements made by Trent Lott at Strom Thurmond’s 100th year birthday ["Character Assassins Must Not Succeed," HUMAN EVENTS, December 16] has turned into a frenzy unlike anything I have seen in recent politics. Regardless of the implications of what the meaning may or may not have been, the polarization and convergence on this issue is over the top.
From conservative to liberal, it’s off with his head. There is inference only, as to whether or not Sen. Lott was referring to Strom Thurmond’s then segregationist past. On inference alone however, a man’s otherwise admirable political career has been trashed. Bill Clinton cheated on his wife, is accused of rape, convicted of perjury and been named as defendant in several sexual lawsuits. His name however is still defended. By contrast the lynch mob descending on Sen. Lott is out for blood not justice.
Both Weyrich and Buchanan were right in their December 16 articles defending Lott’s position in the U.S. Senate. I have never thought Trent Lott was much of a conservative, but if the Republicans allow their party to be intimidated now by Democrats who are trying to recoup their own recent losses with their attack against Lott, we don’t deserve to win in 2004.
Enough, already! The recent upheaval about Sen. Trent Lott’s remarks at Sen. Strom Thurmond’s 100th birthday/retirement celebration is much to do about nothing.
Sen. Lott, in attempting to compliment his senior colleague, opined that had the rest of the country voted for Thurmond for President in 1948, as Lott’s home state of Mississippi did, we would not have had all the problems that we have had since.
Some have inferred a racial slur out of that homage, as Thurmond at that time was running on the segregationist "Dixiecrat" line. Lott made no reference to race in his remarks, and was complimenting Sen. Thurmond overall, and not commenting on any single issue.
Far less innocuous were past remarks made by President Clinton about "drunken Irishman," Jesse Jackson about "Hymie Town," Sen. Ernest Hollings about "cannibals" and "wetbacks," and Sen. Robert Byrd about "white niggers." I recall no one calling for the crucifixion of any of these people, whom are all Democrats, by the way!
I find it ironic that those "big tent" folks of the left are the majority of the people making these hideous racial remarks. Furthermore, let us not forget, it was the Republican Party that advocated, and procured, emancipation for slaves in the 1860s and effective civil rights legislation, 100 years later. It is the Democrat party that has in fact supported racial oppression.
I don’t like Trent Lott, and I think he is a poor leader for the Republican Party. When he has been majority leader, Sen. Lott has been weak, inept, and an impediment to justice and the advancement of Republican ideals. But I do not believe that he is a racist, and Lott has already apologized and said that his remark was made more from "the head" than from "the heart."
To infer he is a racist from a kind remark that he made to an elderly man who has dedicated most of his 100 years of life to serving his country in various capacities, military, as well as political, in spite of his previous and long since abandoned ideology of segregation, is absolutely ludicrous.
All of us, from both right, and left alike have far greater concerns to focus on now rather than stretching and twisting someone’s meaning in an otherwise innocent, kind remark. Get over it, and move on!
Appreciates Pipes Article On PBS’ Islamic Propaganda
I don’t agree with a lot of the conservative views expressed on this website [humaneventsonline] but the article you have posted concerning the PBS broadcast was dead on ["PBS Acts as Missionary for Muhammad" by Daniel Pipes, HUMAN EVENTS, December 23, page 10]. The article is clear, concise and to the point. I’m upset my taxpayer money is going into glorifying the religion of Islam. If only your website could write equally good articles about environmentalism, marijuana reform, etc. All liberals aren’t so bad. I’m somewhat of a liberal and I think this was a well-written article. Good job.
Rabbi Spero Nails Anti-Christian ACLU
Hooray for Rabbi Spero ["This American Rabbi Values Christmas," HUMAN EVENTS, December 23, page 5]. A long time ago I said our greatest enemy from within is the ACLU.
George Washington sent missionaries out to convert the Indians to Christianity. The U.S. Supreme Court in its first meeting held a four-hour prayer meeting imploring God to guide their hand. It is a fact that God did guide their hand until the last several decades.
It is time for those who believe in God to rear up and tear up the ACLU for what it is-anti-Christian. The ACLU culture now dominates our schools where teachers have no control over their pupils and a dear friend, a male teacher, had to get a license so he could carry a concealed gun to the classroom.
Congratulations to the ACLU and their counterparts in Hollywood for tearing down our school system! It is time we expose the ACLU for what it is, renegade people who are well on their way to imposing their own culture on the rest of the country.
It is time to expose them and the liberal media who wittingly support this type of nonsensical godless culture.
It’s time for the silent majority to stop being silent! If we continue to let a small minority of (self ordained experts) tell us what is right, then we deserve to loose those rights our forefathers fought and died for. The ACLU can twist a lie until it looks like the truth.
Its time to wrap these ACLU people in the same bag with money-grabbing lawyers who collect from clients who are too damn stupid to know that coffee is served hot.
Anyone selected for jury duty should be given some kind of common sense test to insure that they are able to find the rest rooms in the courthouse.
On Augusta National’s Restrictive Membership
All the media stories that Ann Coulter highlights ["CBS Could Show Augusta How to Really Discriminate," HUMAN EVENTS, December 16, page 6] about "no women allowed" still do not include one very important part. The club was established as a private club, by its members-by and for their benefit only. They wanted it to be a men-only club, period.
It was their money, resolve and right to do this. Establishing the club in this manner was entirely legal. Just what all the women’s organizations say means not one whit. Sure, they can boycott it, denounce it, or say just about anything they want, but that in and of itself does not mean anything.
It is just the Boy Scouts all over again, and that went all the way to the Supreme Court. The scouts won, dare I say.
