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?

[Rocko]

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.

Yes, at every opportunity.

[doug from upland]

Sorry, I almost always put articles in CAPS. Call it my trademark.

[over3Owithabrain]

Don't worry Lott supporters, you have nothing to fear. The good 'ol boy network in Washington has already closed ranks around Lott and he will stay, with or without blackmail. The GOP agenda will be stalled in the Senate as usual, despite the majority, because the majority leader has to prove he's a "fair" guy.

But hey, we didn't give those Dems a victory, right?

[mewzilla]

You can bet there's more in Chester's closet. The only question is who's holding the key? Frankly the best thing that could happen is that someone spills it all, then lets the chips fall where they may. Otherwise I'd say the blackmail possibilities are endless.

[Salvation]

** All it would take is for Lott to become a Democrat, and all would be forgiven.**

How true, how true. And the RNC can not hand the dims this victory.

[doug from upland]

Funny you are mentioning the Sinkmaster. I expect that we are going to see a charge of hypocrisy by the leftist b*st*rds. They are going to accuse us of supporting our guy no matter what. That is what we accused them of with Sinkmaster.

Under even the slightest scrutiny, however, the argument doesn't hold water. If we do stand behind Lott, we are not standing behind someone who has committed crimes --- he simply said stupid things. There truly is a difference but I await Maureen Dowd making the accusation.

[CounterCounterCulture]

I agree with doing the right thing. In this case, however, what is doing the right thing?

That's the crux of our discussions since this erupted.

Lott stays as leader and we reap whatever excrement hits the fan from having this albatross around our necks. Lott leaves the Senate, our agenda is screwed. Lott does the right thing and only gives up the leadership and our long-term and short-term futures still are plausible. Unfortunately he is unwilling to do the latter at this time.

He said something stupid.

Incredibly stupid. Stupid Stupid Stupid.

Does that justify removal on the RATS' terms? 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.

*F* the RATS. They do not have Lott's interests, the GOP's interests, nor the nation's interests in mind. They only care about power and their twisted agenda. This should be solely what WE think is the proper way to handle this. Nixon shouldn't resign because the RATs wanted him out. Nixon had to resign because he was wrong and we needed him to resign to keep the GOP viable, which it has.

Let's think about what having Lott as leader does for our recruitment of new party members from wavering moderates, still trying to understand the issues from our perspective, to the next generation of voters. Will some newbie look at the parties and say, "Hmmmm...is the leader of the GOP Senators a racist? Do I want to be of the same party as that?" Whether true or not, that's what we face. Let's also think about how this affects our fundraising efforts. Would somebody risk embarrassment of exposure by contributing to Lott's party? Does Lott hurt us in these two key factors of battling the Democrats and their spin machine?

I don't want Lott gone for saying something stupid. I have wanted him gone for being ineffective and a pushover for the RATS. But I don't want him gone because the RATS are making it happen. He did not commit an "impeachable" offense here.

Absolutely.

[artsie]

I agree with most points however regarding benching your most important player misses the point, imho. Lott has been and is completely ineffective. He presided over our 5 seat loss in the Senate. Right after this election when Bush was putting out the word "Don't Gloat", smart old Trent started ranting about PBA and had to be slapped down again by the WH. If I where a coach, I would definately bench my weakest link, regardless if he were the captain.

[aristeides]

The article in this morning's Washington Post specifically says Lott was not on the conference call where he is supposed to have made the threat, and it attributes the threat to "allies" of Lott's, without any indication Lott was behind them.

[alnick]

I don't care what he meant. His thoughts are no one's business but his own. It's what he said. What he said, probably after having a few drinks rid him of some common sense, was that if the man who was running on a segregationist platform had won the presidency, we wouldn't have had all these problems all these years.

It's pretty basic stuff. Had a democrat said that, many of the people here defending Lott would have been all over it, pointing how what a hypocrite the democrat must be to make such a racist statement and to be a member of the party that loves to boast how enlightened they are about racial relations.

Just because the left is piling on does not justify people on the right blindly defending such a stupid public statement. And yes, the statement smacked of racism.

[Chancellor Palpatine]

I could go along with that in theory, but there is one critical matter.

He needs to quit playing with the SCV and other neo Confederate groups. No appearances, no statements in support, not so much as a whisper of anything. He needs to forget the name of Jefferson Davis, and he should honor nothing Confederate.

As far as I'm concerned, further "historical honoring" is akin to segregationist attitudes and needs to stop.

[cynicom]

doug...Blame where blame belongs...Lott put his foot in his mouth and then Bush on national tv compounded the problem. Bush has to play the hand dealt to him, Lott is part of it. If Bush cannot manage the hand then he has to share the blame if we lose the senate. Directly and indirectly Bush branded Lott as a racist, whether was or is, is not the issue.

The democrats are trying to undo the election and Bush in his zeal has handed them a race card that they will play from now til 04. I hope he is man enough to admit to his insiders that he made a "political" blunder.

[Sabertooth]

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.

Doug, I understand the dilemma you're addressing, but I have a question:

How did the Democrats makte Trent Lott say the following?

"I want to say this about my state: When Strom Thurmond ran for president, we voted for him. We're proud of it. And if the rest of the country had followed our lead, we wouldn't have had all these problems over all these years, either."

~Trent Lott - December, 2002

When Strom Thurmond ran for President, he was a segregationist Dixiecrat spurred into revolt against the Dems by Hubert Humphry's Civil Rights plank in the '48 Democratic platform. Segregationist Mississippi voted for him.

The plainest sense of Lott's words are that he approves of the above.

Even though I don't believe that's what he meant, that fact is inescapable. It's disingenuous to suggest otherwise.

George Bush needs to sit Lott down and read him the riot act:

"Senator, you've brought his on yourself, the party, and the country. The only honorable path for you, Trentster, is to step aside as leader and play ball in the Senate. Our nation and our agenda are in peril. I need you, and I'm asking you as you President to do this for the good America."

[Bogolyubski]

Very good point about SD. This is the thing that keeps infuriating me about the entire Republican leadership - they won't fight. The evidence is overwhelming that the RATS stole the SD election. Do you see any legal moves on the part of Thune or Bush, Rove and Co. to fight the fraud? What about all of the illegal electioneering in LA black churches? The same thing happened back in 2000. In Wisconsin, Missouri, New Mexico, and California (now known as Soviet Kalifornistan), there was clear evidence of widespread vote fraud by the RATS (Felons and Illegal aliens voting, polls kept open to midnight in RAT districts, etc.) Remember Hitlery's pal handing out cigarettes to the homeless? Not a thing was done about it. Bending over to allow vote fraud and other illegal RAT activities seems to be a prerequisite for leadership amongst the Republicans!

[Verginius Rufus]

"Madison was a genius."

What???? He was a slave-owning segregationist!!!!!!! He opposed women's suffrage!!!!

Besides that, his wife's cupcakes are bad for you. Full of ingredients.

[dogbyte12]

Lott's old friends, the CCC are trying to defend him. I think they should shut up right now. They filed an amicus brief in the cross burning case in front of the Supreme Court. Here is there take on the Lott thing.

Sad, sicko raciopaths rule the day, dear friends, and they roil about like maggots in a garbage can eating the flesh of aracial whites who are too stupid to even know they're being repressed and exterminated by those who hate all whites and who seek high profile examples such as Trent Lott to condemn any expressions of white identity. And, the whites who have been weakened by years of trying not to be white, lest any non-white people be offended by their whiteness and white ways, go happily to their genocide rather than standing up and demanding the right to their own self-determination and identity.

Silence can be a virtue sometimes.

[Publius6961]

David Schippers called it a SELLOUT.

What's the statute od limitation on extortion?

I think there is a diference between a plain "sellout" and one under the threat of blackmail.

I am convinced that the Contract with America ultimately failed because of the single biggest wholesale act of blackmail and/or extortion in history.
Unfortunately, no Republican under threat had the b***s to call the bluff and bring the First Rapist down.
All more's the pity.

[aristeides]

Link to Washington Post story (that specifically denies Lott was on the conference call and attributes the "quiet suggestion" that he might resign to unnamed "some allies").

[Bounceback]

Cornpone. And Foghorn Leghorn. That's what you think about when you listen to Senator Lott. What were the Republican senators thinking about when they elected him the Majority Leader? Looney Tunes.