So, why is Trent Lott fighting the White House on FCC deregulation?
Revenge for getting a punk'd after the Strom Thurmond thing? Oh, that might be enough to axe a bit of presidential pork, but to align yourself with the crispy-green anti-corporate left on a major deregulation issue? I didn't think grapes came that sour.
Of course, there are those who say that deregulation is a conservative soup bone because it tends to favor local control. In this case, relaxing FCC regulations will actually hurt local control. So, Trent may just think that deregulation is the wrong hammer for this particular screw.
From the Salon article:
"None of us are able to fathom that anybody would do something based on the merits...But in Lott's case, you cannot discount that angle."
Heh. "Angle." The old "sticking by your principles" gag, eh? We're on to you, "Trent", if that is your real name.
And what kind of name is "Trent" for a southern conservative anyway? What's the matter, "Tyler" and "Justin" were already taken? What are you, 30? "Trent." Your name should be, like, "Orrin". Wait that's taken. How about "Earlis?" "Harlan?" "Enos?" "Cooter?"
Anyway, another possibility is that Trent Lott just doesn't like Michael (son of Colin) Powell, the pro-deregulation chairman of the FCC.
I mean, we all know that Michael Powell would never have become FCC chairman if STROM THURMOND had been president.
Posted by Jason at September 22, 2003 05:25 PM