Edwards pulls an anti-Lott regarding Strom Thurmond

You know, slowly but surely I’m warming up to John Edwards’ presidential candidacy. I’m not prepared to actually commit to voting for him in the primaries, but he’s beginning to look more appealing to me.

The North Carolina Senator recently took a mild swipe at Strom Thurmond, a risky move in light of the looming Democratic debate in South Carolina this weekend.

As the incomparable Lee Bandy explained in today’s edition of Columbia’s State, Edwards sent a fund-raising letter to Democrats in the South recently, explaining the differences between his ideology and that of Thurmond and Trent Lott.

“I am certain you were just as angry as I was when Senator Lott implied the country would be better off if Strom Thurmond’s racist presidential race had prevailed,” Edwards wrote. “It is no wonder that the rest of America has such a stereotypical view of Southerners. You and I must show America that the Old South of Trent Lott and Strom Thurmond is in the past, and the New South can produce true leaders who can unite and not divide us.”

Sounds like pretty harmless rhetoric, right? What’s not to like? After all, it was Lott’s praise of Thurmond and his 1948 run for the presidency on a segregationist platform that forced Lott from his majority leader post in the Senate earlier this year. If Lott was condemned and punished for glorifying Thurmond, Edwards should be commended for doing the opposite.

Apparently, some lawmakers in South Carolina — from both parties — didn’t exactly see it that way.

As Bandy’s article notes, some believe Edwards’ comments were “insensitive.” House Speaker David Wilkins (R) called the remarks “disrespectful.” State Sen. Thomas Moore (D) called on Edwards to apologize to Thurmond.

If Edwards, who was born in South Carolina, had backed away from his remarks, I would have immediately lost all respect for him. Fortunately, he did the opposite and stood by his remarks. Good for him.

The South Carolina GOP issued a press release on the flap, criticizing Edwards for “insulting” Thurmond.

“For someone who claims to be from South Carolina, you would think that John Edwards would know better than to stoop this low,” House Speaker David Wilkins (R) said. “To call Strom Thurmond part of the past is just plain disrespectful.”

Huh? Edwards wasn’t taking a cheap shot at Thurmond, he was simply saying there were racist elements in the South in the recent past, which Thurmond was clearly a part of, that Southerners should learn from their mistakes and “produce true leaders who can unite and not divide us.” Wilkins thinks it’s disrespectful to call Thurmond “part of the past”? Does this make any sense? Thurmond ran for president in 1948; George W. Bush was a few months shy of his second birthday at the time. Would Wilkins prefer we call Thurmond part of the present?