WHO WILL LEAD THE SENATE?-GOP Leaders Discussing How/Who Calls for Lott to Step Aside

The American Spectator ^ | Dec. 11, 2002 | The Washington Prowler

[ewing]

Republicans on Capitol Hill and conservatives in Washington and around the country are discussing how best to call for Trent Lott's stepping aside as Senate Majority Leader.

According to a knowledgeable Senate source, GOP members of both houses are extremely concerned that Lott's comments have so derailed the momentum gained from the 2002 elections that it would be impossible come January to make numerous confirmations for the executive branch, begin planning a legislative agenda that includes accelerating the Bush tax cuts and pushing through a prescription drug plan for seniors.

Even more upsetting to Republicans is that realization that Lott's comments may make it virtually impossible to bring a number of potentially controversial judicial nominations to the Senate floor successfully.

[Credo]

Yeah, heck with his stupidity and possible racism -- he should have been tossed out on his ear for that feather hat. Hee

Clueless in Crawford. Dec. 2000.

[ellery]

Wrong -- Lott's presence in the Senate is between him and the voters of Mississippi. The republican party is not in the business of disenfranchising MS voters or anyone else. However, his job as majority leader is to be the public face of the party. Only he knows whether or not he is truly racist -- but what we all know is that he has failed at his leadership job, and as such, should step down.

[Redbob]

"We still need Trent in the Senate, just not as Majority Leader."

No, we need a Republican representing Mississippi, but we surely do not need Trent Lott, and this has nothing whatsoever to do with his remarks at the Thurmond Party, truthful though they may have been.

We'll never get meaningful tort reform with Lott in there - his brother-in-law is the biggest tort lawyer in Mississippi.

[twyn1]

So you're willing to throw away our slim Senate majority in order to "win" in 2004 -- I don't see it happening -- if he resigns the "opposition' isn't going to say "oh good, now we can move on" -- Nope --they'll say "we told you so ! ALL Republicans are racists, Trent was just really stupid and he got caught, but the rest of them feel the SAME way -- we Democrats LOVE you -- keep on voting for us, we PROMISE things will get better !"

[thatdewd]

I hate Trent Lott and I always have. But to give in to the demonrats on this will damage the party in the next election far more than many people seem to realise. If we legitimize Gore and Jackson on this, there won't be vague accusations thrown at us in the next campaign, there will Republican admissions of guilt, not Lott admissions, but REPUBLICAN admissions thrown back at us. Just last week Bill Clinton advised the demonRATS:

"We don't have to be more liberal, but we do have to be more relevant in a progressive way...They have a destruction machine, we don't...When people feel uncertain, they'd rather have somebody who's strong and wrong than somebody who's weak and right."

Looking back I see his words for what they are, demonrat code to attack and destroy, EXACTLY what's going on now. They are indeed being strong and wrong. It's scary to see how many people on our side are fighting the enemy's battle for them. Most of us want someone else as leader, but if we use this exaggerated situation to achieve it, we'll be cutting our own throats, as far as the party's concerned. As much as I dislike Trent Lott, I don't believe he's a racist. I do believe that Bill Clinton is a racist, and I for one, WILL NOT surrender to his ploys. Lott needs to step down quietly, LATER, in response to more appropriate non-threatening needs such as family-time or some such, preferably during a break in the next congress. But right NOW the party and its members should FIGHT LIKE HELL. Better to be strong and right than strong and wrong. Lott may be an idiot, but he's not a racist. We won't be fighting for Lott, we'll be fighting for the PARTY. /rant

[twyn1]

I agree with your point -- Lott is a dork and should step down as ML -- but NOT now -- we must figure out a way he can do this later, after all the "racist" broo-ha-ha dies down

[Sabertooth]

When you have a 51-49 majority...you cannot afford to have a majority leader as foolish as Mr. Lott has demonstrated himself to be.

Even if he had a spine.

[San Jacinto]

I assume Mitch McConnell is not a contender for Leader, but if he were so chosen, I absolutely promise you McCaniac would become an 'Independent' immediately.

[leadpenny]

if he resigns the "opposition' isn't going to say "oh good, now we can move on"

You're right, the dems are going to keep the issue alive regardless of what Lott does, but here is what is likely to happen if he stays: The issue will be put on the back burner throughout '03 and the early part of '04. Then, about a month or two before the election, something else will be revealed about Lott's past and it will be a major issue during the first week of Nov '04. At least, if Lott leaves with some class, the dems cannot make it a BIG issue for '04. He is a liability now and could be a bigger liability later.

[Redbob]

Don't quite know how to break this to you, but Roger Clinton has not been elected to any federal office, and as far as I'm concerned he's free to use whatever racial slurs pop into that little pea brain of his.

Let's focus on what elected folks do and say.

[ForOurFuture]

pushing through a prescription drug plan for seniors..

ahhh, to elect Republicans...... What are Freepers' opinions on the impending prescription drug 'coverage' that will be passed by GOP majorities and signed by a GOP President? Is this socialist steal-and-distribute plan the intended object of all your efforts to elect a GOP congress? Is it constitutional? Is it conservative?

[cksharks]

I hope Lott resigns from the leadership and from the senate then tells FR and the rest of the assholes who have no idea how the senate works to go f--k yourselvs. A demmocommie appoints a dem then chafee switches and you assholes get what you want in the first place to be losers.This includes rush and the rest of them.

[MARTIAL MONK]

I'm one who would like to see Trent Lott go but not under these circumstances.

He eulogized ol' Strom who is still venerated as a conservative stalwart. Where were these people the past few years. I didn't see them clamoring to toss ol' Strom out on his ear and he was the real deal.

To construct a Rube Goldberg contraption to kick Lott in the butt because he stood next to Strom and said some nice things is the heigth of hypocracy and the definition of a weasel. Any stick may do in a fight but to beat Lott with this race stick now is to cave to the perception that all Republicans are racists, they just hide it well.

[Redbob]

"I assume Mitch McConnell is not a contender for Leader, but if he were so chosen, I absolutely promise you McCaniac would become an 'Independent' immediately."

No, he would not, simply because he would not be in the majority, and without Trent there'd be nobody foolish enough to do another "power-sharing" agreement with the Dims.

McLame loves his cushy office and his committee ranking too much to jump ship now.
If Saxby Chambliss hadn't won, now that would have been an entirely different story...

[twyn1]

So Lott can step down in a few months -- he can cite whatever he wants -- needs more time with his family -- tired of the backbiting -- illness -- feels that he has been ineffective -- whatever -- he needs to time it carefully so it will be a back burner issue (maybe wait until we start the Iraq campaign)

The other option is to use the Democratic 'techniques' against them -- this is a personal matter (maybe he can cry a little here) -- the Vast Left Wing Conspiracy is trying to "smear" a good man -- Rush is doing a great parody of this today ("Remember ...no criticism of Trent Lott ever fed a hungry child")

[twyn1]

So what ? He was instrumental in some of the pardons, he camped out in the White House day and night. You don't think the media and Democrats would be screaming to high heaven if they had a tape of Neil Bush using the "N-Bomb" ?

[ForOurFuture]

Is there anyone in the Senate to replace him?

Not if you want a conservative who respects the Constitution and actually advocates the implementation of conservative ideals. But if you want a 'conservative Republican', well, we all know there are plenty of those.

[San Jacinto]

You make excellent points. However, I think Lott has to go. We simply cannot have him be leader given the distraction he now creates. Under ideal circumstances, his leadership ability was marginal at best. Now it is kaput!

The issue now, is --can replacing Lott be engineered in a way to do as little damage as possible? No doubt the Dems will crow. They will say Lott's stepping down PROVES R's are racsists. I think the R's should stage a big press conference where Lott announces he will not run for the leadership position because of the hub-bub over his poor choice of words. The R's should point out the partisan double standards that are routinely applied. They should point out that ex-KKK Byrd is never criticized by the Left, give some other such examples, and forcefully require some Dems to defend against charges of racism.

Even though I think Lott has to give up the position of Majority Leader, I also think the R's should go on the offensive about the character asassination aspect of this.

[Dave S]

I can't believe this story is still going. The double standard here is absolutely breathtaking.

Double standard? Ex-congresswomen McKinney of GA. Enough said.

[MARTIAL MONK]

Wrong. McCain was the first to embrace power-shareing.

I know McCain, and McConnell as ML would be one of the very few things that would push him out, To him personal
matters override politics. McConnell would be a slap in the face that he would not abide.