[aristeides]

If you've done no real wrong, and the choice is between keeping the Senate or not, then, of course, keep the Senate.

Doesn't that mean, if Lott's removal means Lott's resignation from the Senate, that you keep him the leader?

[xzins]

Absolutely. Control is more important than appearance.

However, if we can have both control and appearance, then I'd take that, too. Plus, I don't think Lott's been that effective a leader.

[Dave S]

if Lott's removal means Lott's resignation from the Senate, that you keep him the leader?

Why are you saying that voting in Frist or Nickles as Majority Leader means that Lott has to leave the Senate? One doesnt follow from the other? Nickles ran against Lott in 96. He didnt win and he didnt leave. Is Lott that much of an egotist that he would grab his marbles and leave. If so what a cry baby. Not the kind of person that's going to do much for the Republicans anyway.

BTW, his comments have already screwed up Bush being able to nominate conservative judges. Imagine some on the SCOTUS are really pissed. They cant retire w/o fear of being replaced by someone more liberal.