[Havoc]

No, he went, according to his own words, to the radio as it was the closest thing to him and responded in shock the way any of us might have responded. If it had been Byrd, this would be over with. It was Lott, a conservative, so he must crawl a mile through broken glass to be worthy of being attacked a little less agressively by the press and you are arguing we should provide the glass because the Democrats are being divisive and trying to wreck our party.
Gee whiz. When is that not the case? But your approach is well it's a mob, let's placate the mob and nail an innocent man to a tree. Plays into their hands just as much as not doing it but it soils your hands too. Sorry, that doesn't cut it for me.

And it is the story of the libs. Lott didn't march up there and say "you should have won because you were a segregationist" and you know it. It's common sense. If you have two people running that both believe in tax and spend policies, their stance on that hardly differentiates one from the other. How then can you say, "Dang, a segregationist won. If a segregationist had won, things might be different." Good grief. I must be nuts to think so clearly. Can you tell me where it makes sense. I sure as heck can't. I don't see anyone thinking it out and taking it to the media either.

[Sabertooth]

Lott didn't march up there and say "you should have won because you were a segregationist" and you know it. It's common sense.

If Trent Lott had common sense, he wouldn't have said anything close to what he did.

He could have followed something like what I scripted at the top of this thread and pleased everyone.

Instead, he played dumb and doner.