Blackwell urges Lott to quit post

Columbus Dispatch ^ | Dec. 17th 2002 | Jon Craig and Joe Hallet

[Credo]

I've only lived in Ohio 3 years now so I really don't know a lot about Blackwell. I do know he is the highest ranking African American elected on his own in this state. The new Lt. Gov. was elected on a ticket with Taft. He is also a Republican. I can't imagine DeWine & Voinovich would merely dismiss this. Ultimately it is they, on or before Jan. 6th, who will have to decide how to apply Blackwell's comments.

The problem with Lott is that now it depends on whom he sees as owing favors. Will he now pander heavily to the Congressional Black Caucus types (CBC)? Whatever the issues are with Blackwell, I would take him in a heartbeat over the CBC. Will Lott see the Conservatives as his benefactors if he is retained? Based on his leadership style, I don't think so. Lott will be seriously weakened. Is this going to hinder the GOP agenda? It was going to be difficult anyway, does the Lott imbroglio make it more so?

For me personally, the best outcome is that Lott shuts his yap and soon. If Nickles is selected as Leader, Lott could move into the Budget Committee chair that Nickles was about to assume. Nickles has the most prestigious chair of any of the prospective new Leaders.

[Willie Green]

The facts would have detracted from the story.

If Jesse Jackson says they're racial comments, then they're racial comments.
Don't make waves. Whatever Jesse says, it's gotta be true.

[joesbucks]

I tend to agree with you.

Lott is probably seriously weakened.

Here's a problem. We are seeing into the heart and soul of the republican party and conservatives in general.

Republicans/Conservatives eschew a message of accountability. Lott has clearly not done that. Republicans claim the people need a clearly defined message. The President hasn't done that. The President should clearly state Lott should do whatever is necessary to stay in power or to vacate his SML status or even his elected office. The Presidnet has chosen not to make those conclusions known so he can appear to be disinterested. You and I both know he is. Some Republicans/Conservatives have turned on Lott because they have been unhappy with his go along/get along style. Not because he is good or bad on the job. Not whether his statements were a mistatement or so inappropriate that he should leave in shame....but in a self serving manner of he doesn't advance our agenda on our timetable. Others have engaged in the politics of destruction with "well what Lott said wasn't as bad as Senator Byrd or what Teddy Kennedy has done in the past" and on and on. Clinton used the everybody does it defense. Clearly, so do we. Still others have circled the wagons around Lott because he's a republican and democrats are attacking him, but not for if he's a good SML and Senator or a poor one. Frankly, many of those who have circled the wagons around Lott would be the first to lead an attack on a liberal for the same or similar comments.