That's a good thing, though as I recall, it wasn't enough for Trent Lott.

More when I see an actual transcript of his lachrymose blatherings.

I will say, snarkily, that I assume that this apology is now (in the famous words of Ron Ziegler) inoperative?

[Update at 8 PM EDT]

OK, it's a non-apology apology.

Here are the key words:

“Some may believe that my remarks crossed a line. To them, I extend my heartfelt apologies.”

Note the dog that didn't bark in the night. Here's what an actual apology would look like.

"My remarks crossed a line. I retract them.”

As I noted above, Trent Lott resigned from his leadership position in the Senate (and he was Senate Majority Leader, not Minority Whip). Anything less for Durbin would be shameful. But while I wanted Lott to resign, because I thought he was a disaster for the Republicans (which, while I'm not one, I still favor over the Democrats), for the same reason, I hope that Durbin (like Howard Dean) remains in his position, continuing to show the true face of the Democrat Party to the American people.

Trent Lott was pushed out to make room for Bill Frist. It was an inside hit and Lott's racism remarks were merely a smokescreen for GOP inside baseball.

Right, Bill.

Lott made those comments so that he could be shoved aside for Frist. It's what any leader of the Senate would do.

You might want to adjust the chinstrap on your tinfoil hat, there.

One should keep in mind that Durbin was quoting from a report by an FBI agent. Should the agent be forced to retract his words too?

If not, do we consider his slandering of the troops acceptable?

There was no slander of the troops by the FBI agent. The agent was simply describing the condition of one prisoner. It was Durbin who slandered the troops by absurdly using this as an opportunity to compare them to the regimes of Hitler, Stalin and Pol Pot.

Lott lost his job to make room for Frist. Had Lott been supported by the GOP power brokers, his comments would have been subjected to massive Democratic whining and a wrist slapped limply.

Saw a report that Lott was secretly pleased that Frist botched the nuclear option business due to lingering animosity that the GOP power brokers were so eager to dump Lott for Frist.

Durbin won't get dumped from his position of leadership because he only voiced core Democratic Party values: enemy warcriminals should be provided the full protection of American civil laws, and American military forces are massmurderers.

How is what Durbin said any different from what John Kerry said in 1972? The Democrats rewarded Kerry with the 2004 Presidential nomination in appreciation for Kerry's accusations against the U.S. military and for Kerry's pollyana rationalizations about communists.

you got it right Rand.

He did not elocute what he did wrong, and refute his words.

"Lott lost his job to make room for Frist."

And look what a *great* decision that was. I have never in my life seen such ineffective "leadership".

I disagree with this notion that Durbin should remain in power.

US troops neither need unfounded criticism like Durbins or for politicians to use the issue to make hay for themselves. His remarks (right that the FBI agent made no comparisons) were inappropriate and a publicitiy stunt for him and a literal gold mine for the terrorist enemies. I don't need a public reminder of who Democrats are, no more than I need another 9-11 to remind me who terrorist are.

I was of the opinion Lott needed to go long before his Thurmond remarks -- but I don't remember hearing anyone say Frist's name as his replacement until well after the controversy had flared up. In fact, a great many names were floated.

Lott wasn't 86'd in favor of Frist, he was 86'd in favor of Anybody but Lott. To say otherwise is revisionism.