The Difference Between Lott and Reid

Liberals are good at closing ranks behind their wounded and ignoring any character flaw as long as you are a believer in the cause.

So it should be no surprise that they are quickly and aggressively closing ranks behind Harry Reid (D-NV) in the wake of his antiquated views about President Obama’s blackness as revealed in the new book on the 2008 campaign, “Game Change.”

Republicans have, of course, drawn parallels to another famous majority leader’s race gaffe, Senator Trent Lott (R-MS). There are major differences however that no number of Al Sharptons can – or should be allowed – to paper over.

Lott’s comment about America being better off if centenarian Senator Strom Thurmond would have been elected as a Dixiecrat in 1948 was a light-hearted salute to an old man at his birthday party. Rather than being considered an article of faith, it rightly should have been considered a gratuitous tribute at someone’s birthday celebration. It is like giving your grandpa a t-shirt that reads “World’s Best Grandpa.”

However, Reid’s comments show a belief. And further, that belief is a stereotype and it is only made worse that Reid now says that he thought he was off the record – as if that makes it better.

There’s an old saying about a person’s character; it’s not what you do when someone is looking that defines you, it’s what you do when someone isn’t. What else does Harry Reid think when no one’s looking?