THE ATTEMPT TO UNDO AN ELECTION: I MAY BE RELUCTANTLY CHANGING MY MIND ON LOTT

dfu | 12-2002 | dfu

[doug from upland]

I have wanted Trent Lott removed from leadership since Impeachment. The spineless weasel had the votes to bring live witnesses before the Senate on national television that would have revealed the extent of Bill Clinton's sexual predator history.

David Schippers called it a SELLOUT. Schippers was absolutely correct. Could the prosecutors have changed enough minds to get 67 votes? We will never know. They should have had the opportunity to try. Lott is the one who stood in the way.

The RATS have been in turmoil since the midterm elections. They were shocked to their core. And now, Lott puts his foot in his mouth to give them the opportunity for which they have waited.

The same people who were not concerned with rape, perjury, obstruction of justice, intimidation of witnesses, etc., are suddenly concerned that a weak-kneed GOP leader (who is their best friend) made a really stupid statement last week, made the same kind of statement 20 years ago, and didn't want his fraternity integrated 40 years ago. We know what the South was like 40 years ago. It appears that Lott has led his public life since those days as someone who believes in racial equality.

Now, he is being a whiner and threatening to quit the Senate if he is removed from leadership. What a weenie. We don't want him as leader, but we need him in the Senate. It is blackmail.

Perhaps the statements will blow over soon. He is certainly damaged goods, but the GOP may have no choice but to keep him. The RATS will benefit either way. If he stays in his position, he will continue to compromise and kiss their RAT posteriors. That is Trent.

The more ominous scenario is that the GOP does the right thing to force him out. Yes, I believe if he is forced out of leadership he will quit the Senate and a RAT governor will appoint a RAT to the Senate.

So here we have the reason for the assault. If Lott stays, the RATS have an issue to fire up their base and they have a weak Lott right where they want him. If Lott goes, the Senate is 50-49-1, with the 1 voting for their team.

But it won't stop there. I suspect that the RATS are confident that either Snow or Chaffee might then see an opportunity to jump. Either of them could become an Independent and vote with the RATS. All of the effort by the GOP to retake the Senate will be flushed down the toilet.

This really is an effort to undue an election. The RATS, not surprisingly, are even doing it in time of war while al-Qaeda plans another assault on our nation.

We may have little choice but to reluctantly support Lott. Let's see how it plays out through the Christmas season (not the "Holiday season"). If he survives for another week, he may ultimately keep his post.

The real conservatives of the party, and those who really know how to deal with RATS, better sit Lott down and tell him the facts of life. If he is to keep their support, he needs to throw down his pom-poms, get rid of his light loafers, and start acting like a man. We don't need a wimp when we are dealing with the RATS.

President Bush made some strong statements as he clearly needed to do. Now it is up to the rest of the party to start fighting back. It is time to be reciting the awful, hateful, racist comments said by the RATS. We really do have an opportunity to stick it in their faces if we have the gonads to do it. There is no White Caucus, but there is a racist Black Caucus. It is no time to sit on the sidelines and wave pom-poms. Or is it pom-pons?

[twyn1]

I haven't seen a transcript yet -- it was the part with Sharpton and Anne (Boy-oh-boy they REALLY got going) -- was towards the end -- I'll peek and see what I can find

[Bigun]

Now it is up to the rest of the party to start fighting back.

ABSOLUTELY!

Look! The ONLY arrow the left has remaining in its quiver is the complicit media. If this attack on Lott succeeds the arrow will be sharper and used more and more frequently but, if we can beat down this attack, even THAT arrow will have been blunted!

[doug from upland]

Just as we regretted no legal challenge because a corpse was elected in Missouri, I hope we do not regret just quietly backing off a stolen election in South Dakota.

[Rightwing Conspiratr1]

Kind of ironic. In a few years, a kind word about Madison will trigger the same feigned horror and demands for apologies and resignations that this Lott incident has produced.

I demand the Democrat party immediately disband as one of its founders Andrew Jackson not only owned hundreds of slaves but actively traded and speculated in slaves. No an apology just isn't good enough, I demand they all commit hari kari.

[GB]

Look, most all the folks who were Dems back in those days are Republicans now. It may not be what you want to hear, but it's reality. So it's silly and, more importantly, irrelevant to try to hang Jim Crow around the neck of the Democratic Party.

The only reason people in the South ... and I'm in the South ... were Democrats back then is that the Republicans put them through Reconstruction after the Civil War. Those memories, as well as the memories of Herbert Hoover ... I worked in the Ford campaign in '76, and more than once when I mentioned that I was a Republican people started screeching "Hoover, Hoover, Hoover" at me ... have finally dissipated and the parties changed.

As to Trent Lott, I'd like to see him out as leader because he's been a horrible leader both in the majority and the minority. Political considerations, however, dictate that we try to keep him in the Senate at all costs.

As far as what somebody else might have done or said 30 years ago that was worse, give it a rest. He's the one who said the stupid comment in 2002, not George Wallace in 1965 (Wallace's son is a Republican now, BTW).

Did it show that he's a Seg? No. It shows that he had terminal brain constipation and wasn't thinking. He tried to say something nice about ol' Strom BUT HE DID NOT ENGAGE HIS BRAIN BEFORE OPENING HIS FOOL MOUTH!

I have been a conservative for 34 of my 44 years on this planet, but the one thing I hate about being a conservative is how my brethren on the right have the tendency to, when something like this happens, start screeching "Well he said this back then" and start screeching about unfairness and double standards.

Excuse the capitals, but ... WHY DO WE PERSIST IN, KNOWING FULL WELL THAT WE ARE NOT IN A FAIR FIGHT, STICKING OUR JAWS OUT AND SAYING "HIT ME" AND THEN WHINING ABOUT HOW UNFAIR IT ALL IS WHEN OUR ENEMIES ADMINISTER A LEFT HOOK?

[TLBSHOW]

Can you tell me if Ann said either Lott should stay or step down?

[HoustonCurmudgeon]

I have, for the last several years, written half the Republican Senators, emailed their staff, and called staff members that I know, trying to get Lott out of the leadership. I have written Senator Hutchison so often she sometimes makes notes to me on the reply letter.

I do not however believe we should dump Lott because the Dims want us to. We didn’t vote for Bush and got 8 years of Clinton, we dumped Gingrich, and then Livingston so as not to upset the DIMS. I don’t care what the Black Caucus wants, we don’t get enough of the black vote to matter.

I’m all for dumping Lott, but not like this. To hell with what the democrats want. F%^& em.

[JulieRNR21]

I'm glad to see this thread, Doug.

While I'm no fan of whimpy Lott; I feet that the RATS have been looking for anything to reverse what happened on 11-5! If Lott is forced out.....they will only get more 'blood thirsty'.....we must stand together on this.....and turn it around to reach out even more to Blacks.

I'm angry at Lott that he's given the RATS & the Media an opportunity to make the (totally false) charge that 'conservatives are racists'.....We need to speak up & not accept that label.

I sent this to a number of media outlets last night:

Dear Media:

The double standard is unacceptible....if the media is going to crucify Sen. Lott for misspeaking in overpraising a 100 year old retiring Senator...then they also need to point out the 'white sheeted' skeleton in the Democrat closet:
Senator Robert 'KKK' Byrd.

---

Facts supplied by a popular Radio Talk Show Host:

"The ex-Klansman's admirers praise his historical knowledge, mastery of procedural rules, and outspokenness. They refer to the Senate's senior Democrat as the "conscience of the Senate." They downplay his white-sheet-wearing days as a "brief mistake" - as if joining the Klan were like knocking over a glass of water. Oopsy.

This ex-Klansman wasn't just a passive member of the nation's most notorious hate group. According to news accounts and biographical information, Sen. Byrd was a "Kleagle" - an official recruiter who signed up members for $10 a head. He said he joined because it "offered excitement" and because the Klan was an "effective force" in "promoting traditional American values."

The ex-Klansman allegedly ended his ties with the group in 1943. He may have stopped paying dues, but he continued to pay homage to the KKK. Republicans in West Virginia discovered a letter Sen. Byrd had written to the Imperial Wizard of the KKK three years after he says he abandoned the group. He wrote: "The Klan is needed today as never before and I am anxious to see its rebirth here in West Virginia" and "in every state in the Union."

The ex-Klansman later filibustered the landmark 1964 Civil Rights Act - supported by a majority of those "mean-spirited" Republicans - for more than 14 hours. He also opposed the nominations of the Supreme Court's two black justices, liberal Thurgood Marshall and conservative Clarence Thomas. In fact, the ex-Klansman had the gall to accuse Justice Thomas of "injecting racism" into the Senate hearings.

The ex-Klansman vowed never to fight "with a Negro by my side. Rather I should die a thousand times, and see Old Glory trampled in the dirt never to rise again, than to see this beloved land of ours become degraded by race mongrels, a throwback to the blackest specimen from the wilds."


Here's the formula. If a conservative is embarrassed, it makes the front page, full story. If a liberal is embarrassed, it plays deep inside the paper, just an item in a column. "

---

The media is obviously in a feeding frenzy to abet the DNC in attacking the Republican party which was actually founded in the 1850s by those opposed to slavery.

The hypocrisy has to stop......report on Byrd as well as Lott!

(name & town)

[MadIvan]

Here I part company from you - I remember impeachment as if it were yesterday, and my anger at Trent Lott is still raging: we had to put up with 2 more years of Clinton polluting the world. Had Lott done his duty, it is possible that could have been avoided.

Let us also not forget if Lott remains, his definition of bipartisanship - basically doing whatever the Democrats tell him.

Lott has never been there for conservative causes when it really mattered. Now he wants conservatives to expend political capital to save him. Forget it. Let him twist in the wind.

Regards, Ivan

[Fiddlstix]

Leave it to Lott to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory for the Republicans.

Amen

[Rightwing Conspiratr1]

It shows that he had terminal brain constipation and wasn't thinking. He tried to say something nice about ol' Strom BUT HE DID NOT ENGAGE HIS BRAIN BEFORE OPENING HIS FOOL MOUTH!

I'm sorry but intelligence is not a requirement for election to the Senate nor election to the majority. Should of.. would of.. ought to... so freaking what? Lott need not answer to anyone but the citizens of Mississippi.

[Verginius Rufus]

It seems from what has been posted on other threads that there would be a special election to replace Lott, if he were to resign from his Senate seat...if it is true that Judge Pickering's nomination won't get through because of the Lott uproar, then maybe he could be persuaded to run for the Senate seat. I don't think any of the New England RINOs will switch parties in the 90-day interval before the special election.

In 1948, when Thurmond carried Mississippi, the Republican candidate (whose name Lott didn't know--Thomas Dewey) received about 5,000 votes in Mississippi. Ironically, probably most of those were cast by the few African Americans who were able to vote.

[mwl1]

Doug, you mean "undo," not undue.

And, you are right. This has nothing to do with race, it has everything to do with the balance of power in the Senate.

1. Lott steps down as majority leader, just the beginning, not the end of the battle.

2. Escalate the drumbeat for Lott to resign his senate seat.

3. Democratic governor of Mississippi appoints a RAT... now we are back to a 50-50 power sharing arrangement.

4. It doesn't take much in this instance to get Chafee to flip.

And thank you, Louisiana, for tieing our hands on all of this. If we had a 52nd senator, we could throw Lott to the curb in a New York minute.

[RJCogburn]

He did not rape a nursing home owner. He did not sell missile technology to the ChiComs. He did not commit perjury or suborn perjury. He did not obstruct justice. He did not get disbarred. He did not introduce a false affidavit to the court. He did not intimidate witnesses.

Just can't let go, huh?

Neither can I.

[twyn1]

well -- from what I've read about SD election law -- a recount request would most likely not have found enough "illegal" votes. But if they find evidence of wrongdoing, they can bring a legal challenge -- if they'd asked for a recount, this second option would be unavailable. I don't know what's being done there (remarkable how little "fuss' there has been in the press over that election ?) but did read that some Indians are signing affidavits saying they were paid $10 to vote Dem. -- the real problem in SD was the GREEDY Reps. who voted Dem. because they figured having 2 majority Senators would keep the pork flowing -- Plenty of blame to go around, eh ?

[mwl1]

Pickering will get through. If we would grow some cajones and fight back, this will be forgotten by next Tuesday.

Everyone is missing the point that GWB is running the Senate, not Lott. Especially after this situation, Lott cannot even take a dump without White House approval.

The president does not want a succession battle in the Senate.

[Starboard]

Is there such a thing as a vote of "no-confidence" ? And if that happened would Lott thumb his nose at his party and resign from the Senate ?

I doubt that he would resign. IMO this would be an act of self immolation that would leave him hated by both parties. He's too weak and compromised to remain as a leader. He needs to go.

[texasbluebell]

Someone remarked that we should be pointing out the sins of the Democrats in the past re: segregation.

I always like to remember what Condi Rice said, that when her father was finally able to register to vote in the 60s, he actually tried to join the Dem party, and they refused to accept his registration!

He then joined up with the Republicans where he was welcomed, and Condi says if the Republican Party was good enough for her father, it's good enough for her!

[Williams]

MANY of you oppose Lott because you see him as ineffective or moderate. OK but lets return to the issue at hand. 1. Lott does not support segregation just about no one in 2002 does (except a few radical black separatist leaders). 2. Lott was praising a 100 YEAR OLD man for God's sake. 3. Lott said NOTHING in support of segregation and he has forcefully denounced it since.

I heard Maxine Waters denouncing Lott as a racist. Are some of us FINALLY going to confront that leftist scum for telling Fidel Castro NOT to extradite a black "freedom fighter" who murdered a NJ State Trooper? Our country would be in flames if her ilk ever takes over.

Further, in terms of racism, on all counts the Democrat party takes the prize over Republicans. For Gods' sake, the democrats WERE the Confederacy. They WERE the slave owners. THey WERE the lynchers and church bombers. They created and enforced and preserved Jim Crow and segregation. Snap out of it!

[woofie]

I think there is a good chance the Dems are overplaying their hand