Posted on 12/18/2002 4:20:13 AM PST by Chairman_December_19th_Society
We will not tire, we will not falter, and we will not fail! [President Bush]
Good morning!! Do not let the victims of the attacks on New York and Washington, nor the brave members of our Nation's military who have given their lives to protect our freedom, die in vain!!
In response to the 12,000-page Iraqi declaration, one unnamed Administration official has termed the report "an incredible joke."
Senator Lott vowed to fight for his position as Majority Leader. New GOP elections are set for January 6 in the Senate to decide the matter.
Hitlery is likely to get the position of the Criminal Party's Senate Steering Committee - a group in charge of positioning Senators and the party as a whole for the 2004 election cycle by shaping the attack lines on the GOP.
The United States is concerned the situation in Venezuela could deteriorate rapidly. Already, crude oil prices are back over $30/bbl.
France claims it has arrested three men who plotting a WMD attack using either chemical or biological weapons.
MacDonalds is expected to post its first quarterly loss in its history.
And British meteorologists claim that 2002 will end up being the second warmest year worldwide since records started being kept more than 140 years ago. (Of course, this would require readers of the UK Independent to accept there are both records for everywhere in the world and they have been kept for 140 years.)
For AMERICA - The Right Way, I remain yours in the Cause, the Chairman.
Agreed.
I am very interested in seeing the Party rules that govern GOP operations in caucus.
I saw it being run this morning when I got my coffee and pastry from the cafeteria.
I think the pressure is going to grow some more over the next couple of weeks. I could be wrong, but I don't think he's going to survive.
I'll let UG answer the direct question on Jimmy the Mouth, but if I might offer on the Clintonistas generally, see #52.
"Lott will need 26 votes to prevail if a new leadership election is held next month. Most Senators are refusing to state their position.Key word there: IF
Oh, I just saw that if Lott resigns from the Senate before Jan. 1, a special election will be held within 90 days by MS law. If he resigns afterwards, the election will be held in November. If at all, the President must make his play by Dec. 31 at the latest.
Here's your link on the election of Lott to Majority Leader. You won't find it anywhere else...
Senator Lott's Homepage
See also this article on the scheduled January meeting:
Senator Lott announces Senate officer candidates for election in 108th Congress
Here's a Senate.gov link on the leadership role:
Responsibilities of Majority and Minority Leaders
My 'boy' is on his way home :)
I've been extra polishing, mopping, cooking, baking, cleaning, washing......sprucing :)
Now I need a big ole nap :)
All is right in the world....:-)
Hey Dog .. what is this about Lott going after Rove .. or something he said about Rove
I must have missed it
I haven't heard that..
But that would be the dumbest thing Lott could do.
It is on this I have a very good understanding. Lott gets 26 votes in caucus, boom, he's the Republican leader. No problem.
What I'm having a great deal of difficulty coming to terms with, because it just seems "way out there," is this idea that it would take something other than 26 votes to then entertain the notion that someone else should lead.
Even if it were true there was some kind of unanimous consent requirement within the Republican Conference to advance such a notion - would it indeed work?
No, of course not. It is fanciful. The "Leader" would be unable to lead without the support of those he intends to garner. He would be out on a platform by himself. His ability to move an agenda would be compromised in the extreme.
Yes, he might get by if the support numbers were close to 26 - say 22, 23, 24, or 25. Lower than 20, and the whole notion of backing begins to fall apart as more people clearly oppose the presence of the "leader" as spokesperson for the Conference than support the person.
But, again, this presupposes some rule that argues that it is the case that 100% of the Conference would have to agree before a vote could be taken on the future of the Conference and how the group is portrayed in the public forum that is the Senate.
That is not to say there isn't such a rule, I cannot say that I have read the Senate Republican Conference rules, but absent being presented such material for perusal, I'm simply going to have to go with my common sense. And my common sense says that 26 of 51 people would not agree to a situation that would foreclose debate on the Party's future.
I guess I've worked in this town for far too long.
I will need to see this rule before I buy it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.