Mark Levin in National Review

Mark Levin in National Review Online blasts liberal hypocrisy regarding Trent Lott by noting that there was no outcry when Bill Clinton praised Sen. William Fulbright who, like Strom Thurmond, was a segregationist. I believe that Levin misses the point. Lott’s error was not his praise of Thurmond. Thurmond is praiseworthy in some respects and, even if he were not, no one could reasonably take major offense at a general offer of praise to the 100-year-old Senator. The problem was Lott’s claim that the nation would have been better off if Thurmond had been elected in 1948, a statement that seems to state a preference for Thurmond’s segregationist views. Bill Clinton never said or implied that the country would have been better off if Fulbright’s segregationist views had prevailed. Clinton instead lionized Fulbright for his anti-interventionist views on foreign policy. Those views, though misguided, were not overtly racist.

Responses

Books to read from Power Line