Posted on 12/14/2002 6:16:46 AM PST by Credo
I dunno.. Newtie and Bob Livingston decided to quit rather than be shamed.
Their resignations weren't about being shamed. In both cases, they resigned because they realized that they were a PR liability for the party. They bowed out as the honorable thing, not out of shame.
And not out of spite and "if I go down, so does everyone else" as seems to be the motivation behind Lott's threat.
Additionally, Livingston resigned in order the shame the Democrats, showing them that there *are* still people who will do the right thing and step down if they have done something to cause people to lose trust in them. He resigned in response to Democrats disingenuously saying, "if you think Clinton should resign for his improprieties, then why don't *you* resign for having your affair exposed?" They never thought he'd actually *do* it, they were just engaging in cynical rhetoric. So when he actually called their bluff, there were audible gasps from them -- they realized he had demonstrated that he actually *did* have pricinples he believed in enough to act on them. He was also trying to shame Clinton into doing likewise, but he didn't count on the fact that Clinton is absolutely shameless.
'Nuff said.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.