White House Says Senator Trent Lott 'Should Not' Resign

CNN ^ | December, 12, 2002 | Wolf Blitzer

[ewing]

Wolf Blitzer said word has come down from the White House that Trent Lott should not resign as Senate Majority Leader and that his apologies are good enough.

Nothing on what the Republican National Committee might say tomorrow..

[mrsmith]

"There's a whole bunch of COWARDICE goin on here at FR "

Yes, and it's much worse than any that Sen. Lott has been accused of here.

It's really funny to read the cowardly knee-jerk responses from those who accuse Sen. Lott for his cowardice LOL!
They can't see the logs in their own eyes.

[rwfromkansas]

What is the RNC doing?

[section9]

I just realized this could give a little push to Condi's political future, too, Chris. You think?

Possibly; but only if the Pubbies think that they have to prove something to the black community.

She'll get promoted on Bush's schedule, not that of the Democrats.

Be Seeing You,

Chris

[rwfromkansas]

Why do you think Lott was supporting segregation in his comments? His comments are so vague you can't prove it.

[DoughtyOne]

Thanks EV. Just remember folks, "CRIME DOESN'T PAY!" Don't reward these race-baiters.

[dfwgator]

"Words mean things." The bottom line is that Trent Lott didn't choose his words carefully. Can't have that in a Majority Leader. The man is not qualified for ML.

[puroresu]

"Some of you folks don't know when to stand and fight. If every Republican said with one voice "SO WHAT" those Demo vanguards would stop dead in their tracks. When you flee they grow bold. When you turn and face them they sh*t themselves. Let's try it."

That's happened a few times. Remember when Clarence Thomas courageously stood up to the bullies? I saw it all on C-SPAN. Senator Paul Simon looked like he was about to wet his pants when Thomas spoke forcefully to him, and repudiated his allegations outright. When Orrin Hatch (believe it or not) stood up to NARAL, and Ralph Naes, and some of the others, they looked like they couldn't believe it. They just stood there with this dumbfounded expression on their faces, as if to say, "but...but...you're not supposed to fight back". When Alan Simpson really let the liberal smear artists have it, they threw a tantrum. Remember Nina Totenberg screaming obscenities at him for daring to challenge darling Anita Hill's version of the "facts"?

It was a glorious thing to see! Unfortunately, it was the exception to the rule, and most of the time the Republicans bow & scrape to the 'Rats, like cowards.

[ClancyJ]

I agree with your comments. We cannot allow pc nonsense to take away our civil liberties and be used as a hammer to make us tow the "pc" agenda.

Free speech? Free thought? Not if the pc police have any say about it. Yet all we ever hear are complaints against Ashcroft for taking away our civil rights. Yet, on pc items we willfully give our rights away.

[Mfkmmof4]

If Lott has to go then we also make sure Byrd goes at the same time :) Have a nice day.

[Redleg Duke]

I agree that we would be better served with someone other than Lott, but it should be our call, not a bunch of race-baithing RATS.

[Wingsofgold]

Where you from Dude? Sure ain't Mississippi. Lott ain't no bigot. Black colleges in Ms., ain't never had a better friend than Trent Lott. Lott may be alot of things, but Bigot ain't one of em.

[Chuckster]

Republicans, drawing a bead on their collective big toe with a .44.................

[Political Junkie Too]

This is what Republicans must do:

1. Hammer the Democrats on "selective moral outrage." Don't let them get away with the excuse that they never portrayed themselves as moral leaders.
2. Point out the "shrill voices" that keep picking on Lott while ignoring all the other more aggregious incidents, like Byrd in the KKK and Hollings raising the Confederate flag over the South Carolina state capitol. These incidents were just as long ago as Lott's.
3. Point out the media that feed the frenzy against Lott while trying to claim that no Liberal Bias exists in the newsrooms.
4. Point out who it is that is playing "politics of personal destruction" with a "destruction machine."
5. Keep pointing out the hypocrisy of Democrats accusing Republicans of what they themselves are doing. Point out how they claim to have no "destruction machine" while it is in full force destroying Lott.
6. Point out the hypocrisy of Democrats defending ethically-challenged members with "We have to let the people of ________ decide his fate" while instantly calling for Republicans to resign.
7. Go to 1.

The public has been watching how the Democrats operate. If they can be shown that the accusations are really a selective attempt at more Democrat power-grabbing by any means necessary, they will buy it. They have already seen the Democrats dance on Paul Wellstone's grave, overturn New Jersey election law, and blame the media and voters for their November loss. They can be made to see this as more desperation attacks on the incoming majority.

All the Democrats have to offer is fear. The people turned away from that in November. They want leadership. It is time for Republicans to lead and forget about the shrill cries from the Democrats.

-PJ

[Orion]

Thanks, Sink...

Glad we finally agreed on something.

FReep on, bro,
-Orion

[bdeaner]

You say: "I haven't heard about any Democrats rushing to the microphones to condemn Senator Byrd for his past membership in the KKK."

I say:
Two wrongs don't make a right.

[GraniteStateConservative]

When he said to Time that he supported segregation at Ole Miss. When he worked to keep his frat white-only. When he said that a Dixiecrat should have been elected president in 1948 in 1980 and 2002 (and who knows how many other times in private). When he associates himself with the CCC and Southern Partisan magazine. When he spent his pre-elected office as a protege of a white supremacist congressman. All of these things add up.

[Orion]

Actually, I think this is much ado about nothing. I don't think what he said was racist, even if it was how the 'Rats and WH are spinning the issue.

Look around the 'burbs. Most whites pay extra money not to live around blacks and pay even more to send their kids to schools that blacks do not attend. Blacks also try to segregate themselves into private dorms, universities, and clubs every chance they get.

I am pointing out that all the sanctamonious hand-wringing is wearing a little thin. If Lott is the new Evil Incarnate, then he should resign the Senate and throw it back to the 'Rats. That way, "we" Pubbies can keep the moral high ground. Of course, we don't want that, so Lott's comments are really OK, as long as we keep the Senate.

[TLBSHOW]

The democrats are using the right wing writers and Bush.

The democrats don't need to do any more because the right will turn out to be like an ouroboros and eat themselves.

[bdeaner]

"I would approve of him stepping down from the leadership in time. I would not approve of it now. It would further the idea that a political operation can take any Republican down. It would be open season on them after that. I recommend the Republicans deal a little dirt right back at the Democrats and tell them that it cuts both ways, if they want to play that game."

I totally disagree. This isn't about the game being played by the RATS. Its about Lott's stupidity and insensitivity in his remarks, which played right into the hands of the Rats. Do we really want a dumb**s like this as our majority leader?

Lott's comments were not provoked by democraps. And, sadly, his comments did not even have to be distorted by the media, because they are intrinsically shocking and dispicable. Even on Larry King, Lott could not even bring himself to say, after all, that he would not support Thurmond in the '48 election -- and played dumb, as if he couldn't even remember Truman was also running against Dewey just to change the topic! He has a history of supporting segregation and seems to be a Dixiecrat at heart.

Thank God we have a man of principle in the White House. Dubya knows right from wrong, and Lott's comments were just plain wrong. If Lott meant to say what he said, then he's repulsive. If he was too dim to realize the repercussions of his comments, he's not fit to be majority leader. There are far better men and women to fill his shoes. Santorum would be my pick.

The way I see it, the only way this could play into the hands of the Dems is to ignore the issue. Dubya took a stand for what is right, and "the truth shall set you free," brother -- political posturing and game-playing be damned.

Lott must go, and the Replican party will be the better for it.

[bdeaner]

"[Dubya] is not wrong, he's giving the rest of you an education on how to stand by your convictions and how not to play the POLITICALLY CORRECT game. Which by the way, is a disease of the worst kind."

Amen, brother!