Spinning Trent Lott 12.19.02 As everyone is probably aware by now, Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott spoke at Strom Thurmond?s retirement party.  In attempting to praise his longtime colleague, Lott made the statement that if Thurmond?s 1948 bid for president (that tells you how old Thurmond is) had been successful, we wouldn?t have some of the problems that we have today.  He went further to say that ?we? voted for him and are proud of it.  The we could be interpreted to be himself or the state he represents, which Thurmond won. Now, of course, there has been a storm or criticism surrounding Lott over these comments.  Why?  Because Thurmond ran for president in 1948 on a ?Dixiecrat? platform that pushed for segregation.  So of course all of the controversy-hungry media and Trent Lott opponents screamed racist and called for Lott?s head on a platter.  Now, many days later, even his Republican colleagues are trying to distance themselves from Lott.   Some are calling for his resignation as Senate Majority Leader. I find this situation to be vaguely amusing, outrageous, and pathetic all at the same time.  In some ways it is amusing because Lott, as a leading Republican over the last several years, was sure to have been on the bandwagon that attempted to destroy President Clinton over his sexual misconduct with his intern.  That amuses me because Lott should have known better.  He and his conservative brethren (along with the media, who will roast anyone, regardless of political partisanship, if it will get a headline) took President Clinton?s misconduct (and I don?t think anyone really denies that it is misconduct) and made it the focus of national attention for many months.  Looking back, would anyone say that the stain on Monica Lewinsky?s dress was the most important thing our government could have been focusing on in 1999?  Well, guess what, Trent, it?s your turn. The situation is outrageous because Senator Lott was trying to be nice to an old colleague at his retirement/birthday party and overstated his praise.  Hyperbole can be an effective tool, but Lott didn?t consider the full implications of what he was saying.  That was his mistake.  I doubt seriously that anyone really believes that Trent Lott wishes that the country was segregated.  The media and his opponents even understand the difference.  No one is saying that he should step down because he is a segregationist, they say he should step down because what he said was insensitive.  I seriously doubt that anyone?s feelings were hurt by Lott?s statements, so insensitive is probably the wrong word, but even if someone?s feelings were hurt, the thought that an insensitive remark should be punished by Lott being stripped of his Senate Majority seat is outrageous. Finally, the situation is pathetic because our government is still concerned with it.  As I said about the Clinton Intern Fiasco, isn?t there anything else the government could be focusing on at this particular moment?   Instead of wasting our leaders? time (and our tax dollars) by having Trent Lott go on BET to apologize or by holding multiple press conferences over this subject, couldn?t we have some meaningful discussions on how to fix public schools?  Or how to improve race relations? Or maybe we could use the time to re-run the numbers on the budget.  There must be something more useful on which they could be spending our tax dollars. One thing I haven?t been able to figure out is why Lott?s people haven?t tried to spin his statements another way.  Strom Thurmond abandoned the Dixiecrats and became a very respected member of the Senate for fifty years.  Isn?t there room to spin his statements to mean that Thurmond was very respected and a great leader in the Senate for fifty years, and that his ability to understand the flaws in the Dixiecrat way of thinking would have made him an ideal President to lead our country?  If Lott would have stuck to his guns and said, I was not supporting the Dixiecrats, I was supporting the character of Strom Thurmond, who was strong enough and wise enough to cast off the Dixiecrats and become successful in the Senate, perhaps he could have weathered this storm a little better.  We all know that would have been a pile of horseshit, but so is everything else people are saying.  President Clinton spoke out on the subject (with a somewhat vengeful gleam in his eye) and stated that Lott merely publicly stated what the GOP truly believes.  Now there's a jump of record proportions, but is a good example of the "kick 'em while they're down" mentality of American politics (never mind that it makes our whole country look incredibly terrible - and we wonder why the rest of the world hates us). Unfortunately, being called a racist is a difficult thing to refute.  The most popular way to refute that you are a racist is to point out that you have friends that are black, which doesn?t preclude you from being a racist anyway and actually probably makes you look even worse.  Otherwise, there is no way to prove that you are not a racist.  Trent Lott apologized for his ?insensitive? remarks and then went on BET and apologized again.   This, to me, was Senator Lott pointing out that he has friends that are black.  There is no easy way to recover from the accusation of being called a racist.  It is like the accusation that someone is being defensive about something.  Any denial is proof of being defensive. In the end, Trent Lott?s career has been permanently damaged by this fiasco.  He dug the hole with his statements, and the media hysteria has started to throw the dirt in to bury him there.  I wish this was not typical American politics, but it is.  Instead of debating substantive issues, our politicians are forced to debate the "controversy-of-the-day."  Instead of trying to work together to build a better country, the Democrats and Republicans each strive to become a stronger party at the expense of the other.  Disagreement, difference of opinion, and argument are good things when they are concerned with ways to improve our country, but are a waste of time and tax dollars when they are spent on media driven controversies over non-issues.