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

[puroresu]

"I hope you realize that's exactly how the Democrats rationalized their monolithic defense of Clinton..."



Clinton committed numerous immoral and criminal acts. Lott made an innocuous statement that's being twisted into something sinister by people who hate the Republican Party and are using this to undermine our victory in regaining the Senate. There is no comparison.

[aristeides]

And Byrd has been president pro tempore of the Senate, fourth in line of succession for the presidency, since Jeffords jumped last year. If Bush, Cheney, and Hastert had all died on 9/11, he would have become president. If the RATs succeed in scrabbling out a new majority in the Senate, Byrd will stay president pro tem, in the line of succession.

[Dave S]

Appearantly Dashole is changing his mind .. I heard on the news this morning Dashole sent out another more stronger statement

He reportedly got a lot of flack from the Black Caucus in the House for not joining in on the attacks.

[Mo1]

I forgot about listening to Rush today .. thanks

[Dave S]

Even if it results in losing the majority in the Senate?

If Lott is so thin skinned that he leaves the SEnate instead of just the leadership role then HE is a traitor, not those of us that want a new leader.

[aristeides]

Lott will be on Hannity's radio show....

Yes, at 3:30 Eastern time, I heard on WMAL.

[aristeides]

A lot of comfort that will be.

[Bubba_Leroy]

OOOOPS, Lott is not Speaker. Before anyone corrects me, he's senate majority leader

Nope. He is the Senate Minority Leader. It is expected that he will be elected Senate Majority Leader when the Republicans take over the Senate next term. There is no reason that has to occur. The Republicans can just agree to elect someone else as Majority Leader.

[aristeides]

Black lawmakers upset with Daschle.

[ApesForEvolution]

Specter? That's a new one. Why not just call me a dirty RAT? Lott wouldn't be cargo to be pitched if Lott wasn't such a spineless moron that insists on leading the new Senate Majority. Lott did this to himself and left himself no defense, based on the past, the present and what the GOP needs for the future. He gave traction to his demise as Leader, not me.

[aristeides]

Look at Lott's statement of apology. It does not contain the word "if".

[aristeides]

Why not just call me a dirty RAT?

I think you outed yourself as no Republican last night.

[twigs]

Democrats are using this as their first shot in the '04 election

Actually, Daschle is NOT using this. He is siding with Lott, saying that he misspoke. There's a reason for that--he wants to retain Lott in the leadership because he can get Lott to "negotiate" on Democrats terms.

All of us are entitled to our opinions; I don't consider myself a Lott basher. He's just not the kind of Republican I think needs to be in the leadership seat at such a critical moment. I happen to appreciate having a president who, though loyal to his associates, isn't afraid to make changes when necessary. Lott needs to be changed.

[Tallguy]

First off: I've read many of the comments on this thread, and most seem to think that Lott should, or will, step aside as majority leader. I think not.

First, if Lott steps down, he's done in the Senate. We can't afford that because the senate is so narrowly divided, and Mississippi has a Dem Governor.

Second, Bush can benefit from a weakened Lott to take the arrows for him. I was alarmed to hear some comments made by Lott in the wake of the mid-term elections. He basically said that he was going to put HIS agenda ahead of GWB's. How's that for party unity and gratitude?! Bush should woodshed Lott over this and tell him that in exchange for Bush's assistance with his political survival, he (Lott) must take his orders from the White House -- no exceptions

[Poohbah]

First, if Lott steps down, he's done in the Senate.

If he doesn't step down, he gives the Democrats a license to filibuster anything and everything, and allows them to NOT look petty and partisan while doing so. Essentially, he's just killed the entire GOP agenda for two years if he stays on.

I don't think his resignation is needed--just a swift, peremptory, SILENT removal from the leadership post.

Second, Bush can benefit from a weakened Lott to take the arrows for him.

Sorry, Bush would end up being in the position of taking arrows that are rightfully Lott's.

[altura]

Actually, Deb, I agree with you. You don't say much anymore, (at least not here) but what you say always makes sense.

We should mount an agressive campaign illustrating the hypocrisy of the dems on this issue, and then when they crawl back in their holes, somewhere down the line, Lott could decide to resign as majority leader in the same low-key way that Gephardt did in the house.

[fightinJAG]

Agreed, Lott is no big loss as Majority Leader. It's time for new blood anyway. Bush has to step in here quick.

[ApesForEvolution]

Quite the contrary. I've done more for the GOP than 99 out of 100 people that regularly post to FR. The fact that I have voted straight Republican tickets for decades, yet don't take all Republicans as conservatives or good for America, hardly makes me any less part of the Republican base for all intents and purposes. Yes, I'm to the right, right, right side of the modern day GOP and those that have supported Lott and his lack of principle, his power sharing with RATS and now his latest gaffe that provided a bat for RATS to club the GOP with appears to be your problem, not mine. As an Independent Conservative Constitutionist Christian, I am not surprised that the likes of Vacant Lott supporters such as yourself and others try to smear me.

Strident, statist Republicans are not what America needs more of. Independent minded conservatives that put America over any particular party affiliation are. How many Republicans have you campaigned or raised boat loads of money for? I suppose if Snowe or Collins would win a primary, they would autmatically, without hesitation, get your vote? Now, that's pathetic. Try and smear me all you like, my record and posts stand on their own.

[ApesForEvolution]

That would be the 2nd best option I personally could hope for.

[fightinJAG]

Hey, Frist is indeed a good suggestion. I heard him on interviews before the election and he was very impressive. And he has a calm, yet firm demeanor.

Why is it taking so long to get rid of Lott? Doesn't the RNC know how little capital he had with the rank and file in the first place, never mind lamebrain remarks?