Replies

Over the edge or not, Lott needs to stay out of the Senate leadership. He's a tarred man.

If Gary Condit had been say, House Whip, during the Levy stuff last year do you think he would have been able to be effective in his role in the House leadership? No way. Every day a new story would come out tarring him and the leadership would be asked why they weren't calling on him to step down. They didn't do much of that in Condit's case because he was essentially a nobody in the House already.

Lott, OTOH, is the expected Majority Leader and he's now tainted with the R-word big time. Fair or not, deserved or not, he infects the image of the entire party as long as he's viewed as a leader of the party - someone who is influential in what bills and what nominations come up for a vote.

For the good of the party, he's got to go. Not resign his Senate seat (he won't need to - he can use the same "let the voters decide" mantra that sustained Condit) but certiainly step down from any leadership role in the Senate.

Name one reason why we should continue with this ineffective dolt when there are several other qualified Senators who could easily take his place? Let's get some new blood in there. Somebody that isn't tainted with the R-word and symbolic ties to Strom Thurmond and outdated segregationist ideas.

And, for Mr. Ruddy, the reason Lott isn't getting a pass from conservatives is because he's not worth trying to save. He's kowtowed to the Democrats too often, even when the Democrats would not show him the same courtesies in return. He's Bob Michels and Gerald Ford all over again. Surely there's a dozen better options.

Time for Trent to move to the back of the bus.

..Lott, OTOH, is the expected Majority Leader and he's now tainted with the R-word big time. Fair or not, deserved or not, he infects the image of the entire party as long as he's viewed as a leader of the party -
someone who is influential in what bills and what nominations come up for a vote.

For the good of the party, he's got to go. Not resign his Senate seat (he won't need to - he can use the same "let the voters decide" mantra that sustained Condit) but certiainly step down from any leadership
role in the Senate.

Name one reason why we should continue with this ineffective dolt when there are several other qualified Senators who could easily take his place? Let's get some new blood in there. Somebody that isn't
tainted with the R-word and symbolic ties to Strom Thurmond and outdated segregationist ideas. <<

Shhh...now see what you've done. In the mind of Texasforever, your ideas are not only in contrast with his, but you are now a Democrat. He said I'm not a Republican, and in fact I'm in the NAACP.

Brilliant mind, that.

"They didn't do much of that in Condit's case because he was essentially a nobody in the House already."

Condit was a member of the House Intelligence Committee, a little known fact because the liberal media didn't report it at all. Human events did......

That became particularly important after 9/11, but you're right. No democrats called on HIM to step down.....