Trent Lott Has More Important Things to Apologize For
The Editorial Board
In the wake of Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott's ill-spoken, implicit support of the bad old days when segregation was an issue that centenarian Senator Strom Thurmond could run on and not be ashamed, we are not at all suprised over the Congressional Black Caucus' vehement reaction.
Lott said Mississippi was one of four southern states that voted for Thurmond. "We're proud of it. And if the rest of the country had followed our lead, we wouldn't have had all these problems over the years," he said. This is certainly not a personal comment on Mr. Thurmond's years of dedicated service as Mr. Lott has suggested, but it seems rather obvious that it is a statement on policy. And what a statement.
What problems is Mr. Lott referring to? Crime? Gangs? The moral decay of our nation? And how exactly would segregation have solved these problems? This speaks to the tendency of many in the Republican Party to blame minorities for their own ghettoization and their desire to just have them leave us alone so that our nation can be a better place to raise (white) children. This makes the fact that over ninety percent of African-Americans voted for Gore in 2000 a little more understandable.
We certainly support the Congressional Black Caucus and the NAACP in their rejection of Mr. Lott's tepid apology, but, we can't help but wonder: why is the caucus's full ire reserved solely for symbolic politics? Over one million welfare recipients, many of them African American, will lose their benefits a few days after Christmas in an economy where unemployment is sharply rising thanks to lame-duck Congressional Republican efforts to block a holiday extention ahead of the 108th Congress' presumed debate on welfare reform. Why shouldn't Mr. Lott apologize for that?
|
