Ok, I'm going to take the contrarian view from most of the posts on this thread. It's human nature, IMO, to exact revenge. Regardless of what you think of Trent Lott, he got the shaft bigtime with the phony baloney Dem instigated charge of bigotry for the comments he made at an old man's birthday party, in Trent's attempt to flatter him and make him feel good in his old age. Trent had the best of intentions w/Strom, and the Dems took Trent's praise of Strom's service to his country, plucked out one sentence, and blew it up into a big phony incident.
There was a large chunk of Pubs who wanted Trent out as Majority Leader, and used this excuse to push Lott out of his leadership position. They succeeded, and Bush, via Rove, did nothing to stop it; in fact Bush came out and condemned Trent for making improper remarks. They stabbed him in the back, and gave him no support. It cost Lott his leadership post. How happy would you be? And do you think that Frist is doing any better in that position? I don't. I think Frist is as big a wimp as Lott was accused of being.
Lott's lack of support for Rove, whom he considers to have been the WH engineer in getting rid of him from his Majority Leader position, is, to me, totally understandable. If it were me, I'd be out for revenge too, any opportunity I would get. It really has little to do with his Pub credentials, he almost always votes the right way; it has to do with his exacting his pound of flesh from someone he considers has done him dirty.
I'll bet a whole bunch of Freepers would think about doing the same if their situation was similar to his, and considering the results that came from it (Lott's loss of a prestigious position over a bullsh*t charge of bigotry made against him). Put yourself in his shoes, if possible, although highly unlikely. It's a lot easier to march lockstep in condemning Lott than consider the reasons for his action and words.
P.S., I just heard Lorr again on little Chrissy Matthews' show, and Chrissy was really trying to back Trent into a corner about Rove staying on in the WH, and Lott in general, was being very evasive and general in his answers, and not once did he come outright and say Rove should go. He said that perhaps the WH should consider whether they wanted a political advisor to also serve in the role of policy advisor, considering what has occurred w/the Special Prosecutor going after, although not charging, Rove. Get the transcript of Lott's conversation w/Chrissy and read it carefully. It's not quite as it is being made out to be on this thread.
No, Lott cost Lott his leadership post.
Well, I don't necessarily blame him for being bitter about being booted as Senate Majority Leader but, until I read some of the posts on this thread, I had forgotten about him agreeing to share power with the Dems. That was a major boo-boo, IMO, and he deserved to be booted.
But, being the cause of your own loss of position is no reason to give aid and comfort to the leftists. Trent may be mad, but he needs to dance with the ones what brung him and that's the 'Pubbies.
That does happen when you sell people out time and time again as Lott has a tendancy to do.
Lott caused most if not all of Lott's problems. If he hadn't been so willing to "share power" then likely they would have stood behind him. But since he was so eager to give up their power they figured that he should have no problem giving up his own.