Senator Landrieu apologizes for Lynching

I see this post over at YRHT, and wonder what motivated the Senate resolution. It seems that Senator Mary Landrieu (D-LA) has cosponsored a resolution that apologizes for lynching.

What? Senator Landrieu was involved in a lynching? When the hell did that happen?

Then I go over to the Senator's site and look at the webpage about the resolution. You can read the whole thing on your own, but the lead paragraph gives us the main point.

From 1890 to 1960, 4,742 Americans were documented as having been lynched, with actual numbers believed to be much higher. During that time, nearly 200 anti-lynching bills were introduced to the United States Congress. The United States House of Representatives even passed three anti-lynching bills, but all failed on the floor of the Senate despite the lobbying of seven U.S. Presidents. Because of the Senate’s refusal to pass the legislation, the federal government was left powerless to intervene and protect Americans from these heinous acts of mob violence.

Wait a minute. The Senate's refusal to act left the federal government powerless to proceed? Were there no murder statutes on the books? Was it not illegal to kill someone without due process of law? Is not murder a state responsibility? Could not the federal government intervene if the state refused to prosecute? Something don't sound right, here.

It seems that Senator Landrieu wants to apologize for not taking action, long before she was born.... no, wait, that isn't right. Senator Landrieu wants to apologize for the Senate not taking action before she was born... No, that's not right either.

Well, okay. She couldn't have done anything about it anyway, but feels a need to apologize. Seems pointless to me.

What is the point, anyway? I'm still trying to figure a point on this resolution.

Before anyone takes exception and accuses me of something I'm not guilty of, let me state for the record that I think lynching is the ultimate degradation, should not be tolerated among civilized persons, and people who participate in lynching should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. Lynching is wrong. Lynching is bad. People who participate are criminals.

I am a child of the '60's. I watched the great Civil Rights movement and the changes that were wrought in our society. I participated in the segregation of our schools. I studied and worked beside people of all races. I held the thin blue line with brothers and sisters of all colors. I have supervised, and been supervised by African-Americans. I judge a person by their character, and I judge co-workers by their technical ability and tactical proficiency. Yet that means nothing. I am still a white man, and should feel guilty for something that happened a long time before I was born. Well, I don't. I wasn't there. I didn't participate. It was wrong, but I had no part of it.

Evidently this means something to the victim class, although for the life of me I can't figure it out. It changes nothing. Those lynched are still lynched. Those who participated are still criminals.

I pray for a United States where we are over it. Where people can look forward to living the rest of their lives in the pursuit of happiness.

I do wish Senator Landrieu would spend her time doing something productive, rather than doing things with mainly symbolic value.

UPDATE: Captain Ed is all over this one, with some interesting tie-ins to the filibuster question. Go read it at the link.