[VinnyTex]

After the house voted to impeach on Dec 19, 1998, leading Democrat Senators told Lott they would never vote to convict. Not one Democrat Senator went to the evidence room to look at what the impeachment managers had. That's when Babs Boxer of California said, "We don't care if you have film of him raping a Nun, we're not going to vote to convict."

End of story. Republicans needed 12 Democrat Senators for removal. They didn't get one. I rest my case. You can blow smoke all want, but those are the facts.

[Twodees]

So, they just surrender, huh? How many democrat Senators would have been reelected after being forced into a public confrontation over this? Probably fewer than were reelected. By backing off, Lott and his gang allowed the democrats to keep all this out of public view.

How does it help to go ask the opposition for permission to do what you're required to do to fulfill your oath? That kind of thing might look like conservative principle to you, but it looks like surrender monkey tactics to me.

When the democrats say this kind of thing, they should be forced to back it up publicly, not allowed to go around acting as though they had the winning hand all along. Republicans in the Senate are the reason we have a democrat Senate. Before Jeffords jumped, Daschle ran Lott anyway, so what's the difference?