Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: TigersEye
I suspect you're wrong and that Lott will summon up the courage to face life in the Senate after leaving his leadership posistion. He's still got enough seniority for some choice chairmanship posistions and, if he needs to simply kill time as a back-bencher for a year or two, I suspect he'll be amply rewarded with a nice little sinecure (if that's what he wants). He's also young enough that a few years out of the spotlight could allow him to refurbish his image.

Let's carry the idea behind post #73 to it's logical conclusion however:

If Lincoln Chaffee demands a 50% increase in income taxes in order to remain a Republican, should we accede to his demands?

What if John McCain demands a repeal of the 2nd Ammendment as the price of his continued allegiance?

Capitulation to blackmail is not a way to build a successful political party, and it's certainly not the way that a party should choose it's leadership, especially a party that purports to stand for certain principles.

I do not know Lott's heart, but I do know his record of (non)accomplishment and lack of political accumen. Even those who defend him seem to do so only because they don't want the Dems to "Win". Wake up People, Lott's stepping down will not be "loss". A change in leadership is what we need. Lott is NOT the general we need for the campaign ahead. He wasn't before and definitely isn't after all of those multiple, self-inflicted gun-shot wounds to his feet.

Think of this as a political Battle of the Bulge. When Lott steps down, the Dems will over-reach and try to ratchet up the pressure for censure or some such. At this point McConnell or Nickles (or whoever our new "General" is) can "channel" Patton and slash north to Bastogne (figuratively speaking), cutting the Dems supply lines as they go (ie -- pulling Byrd and Hollings into the mix).

OK, my metaphors are overstated. My point to the "Yes, Lott is an idiot, but..." crowd is simply that one should never become so involved in the BATTLE that they lose sight of the WAR. Pyrrhic victories are not really victories at all.

91 posted on 12/15/2002 4:55:38 PM PST by Reverend Bob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 73 | View Replies ]


To: Reverend Bob
I agree with your post #92 in its entirety. Very well stated!
93 posted on 12/15/2002 5:33:22 PM PST by EternalVigilance
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 91 | View Replies ]

To: Reverend Bob
Whoops...#91.
94 posted on 12/15/2002 5:34:11 PM PST by EternalVigilance
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 91 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson