For them, Bill Clinton is that far from an anomoly: "It's all about me". Some rise above it -- there are always some that use honor and the overall good as their guide. It would be nice to find out that Lott really was amongst them, but it is hard these days to think of many who operate on such principle in the U.S. Senate.
I don't think such people have the ability to see that the people of America still honor personal sacrifice above most other things -- the willingness to lay down your personal station, your personal stature, for a greater good. Lott doing what you propose would raise his stature, amongst Republicans and the great unpolitical mass at least. He's pretty much on bottom -- but think of the multitude of bottom-feeders that we have out there these days.
We've reached a point where most, at least in Lott's position, feel that honor is for suckers. They get in the midst of the fight, and don't realize that their enemies have leaped upon their mistake and have them cornered, requiring a sacrifice and a retreat.
I guess that's just all to say, I don't think he'll take this route, even if offered by the President, anytime soon.
Exactly.
Al Gore had such an opportunity after the first lawfully-mandated Florida recount. Had he been capable a gracious concession then, his stature as a statesman would be acclaimed, and the '04 nomination would be his.
Instead, he clutched for power, and is diminished. Lott still has a chance to avoid such a fate.
