Replies

This is a very craven move by Nickles, demonstrating how personally ambitious he is as a pol.He could have waited and done this quietly, worked on alliances with more moderate elements in the caucus,but he had to grab for it now when he lacked the fortitude to do it a few months back.Somehow his suuporters think this won't hurt the Bush agenda right off the bat?

Nickles is showing he isn't up to the job but doing it this way.He has no sense of tactics, or lotalty, and no one knows whether this guy has the ability at all to keep 51 divergent egos all in check.Freepers can rail all they want about getting a guy with "guts" and being conservative enough, but when a man with an ACU rating of 93 is deemed weak when his job is to manage the competing interests of so many Senators and advance the ball, just what the hell do they expect?

Freepers are ignoramusus about what the Majority Leader's job is all about.If they want high drama from their politics say so, but pragmatism is the most crucial element required by a leader of that body.Nickles fails on this score.

Nickles is showing he doesn't have the smarts to be an effective leader.There is a reason that he was never voted leader, and it's apparent for all to see now.

This is a very craven move by Nickles, demonstrating how personally ambitious he is as a pol.

I agree and disagree. This is Nickles whole career here. He has built himself up this high in politics and he has thrown the big dice over this issue. If Lott beats him, Nickles' career is over. If Nickles wins, he is a front runner for 2008. Nickles was a wonder boy. Elected to the Senate at age 31 in 1980. He is 52 now will be 58 in 2008... I am guessing that he feels that 2008 will be around the right time to find out if he has what it takes to grab the brass ring.

That has me wondering, what if at the end of the day Lott survives the challenge and wins reelection as ML? Couldn't we then say that the Senate weighed the charges, gave it serious consideration(by having the challenge and the vote), and in the end deemed the accusations to be overblown. Not every mistake is a felony. When the media howls then start handing out bio's of Byrd's, Hollings, Hillary's, etc. similar racial gaffes(which the RNC should have already compiled) and ask if they really want to keep this character guerilla war going?

You are 100% correct in your assessment of Nickles. This is a craven, opportunistic, move by a man who has always wanted to be Majority Leader. He would be a poor ML as shown by his lack of loyalty and tact.

After seeing Mitch McConnell this morning, I am greatly impressed by this man. He also wants to be ML, but unlike traitor Nickles has not taken advantage of this opportunity to advance himself. He also said that if a centure vote was put forth against Lott he would introduce one against all Senators who have made racially insensitive comments (Byrd). HOORAY!!!

We truly are the Stupid Party if we do not follow McConnell's lead. Lott has apologized several times and is not a segragationist. The double standard is appalling. The Rats response to questions regarding Byrd's comments are "well he is not the Majority Leader." No, he's only President Pro-Tem and in the line of succession!!! We need to throw this back at them and ask "well, if he was the Majority Leader would you then ask for Byrd to step down over his comments?"

"This is a very craven move by Nickles, demonstrating how personally ambitious he is as a pol.He could have waited and done this quietly, worked on alliances with more moderate elements in the caucus,but he had to grab for it now when he lacked the fortitude to do it a few months back.Somehow his suuporters think this won't hurt the Bush agenda right off the bat?

Nickles is showing he isn't up to the job but doing it this way.He has no sense of tactics, or lotalty, and no one knows whether this guy has the ability at all to keep 51 divergent egos all in check.Freepers can rail all they want about getting a guy with "guts" and being conservative enough, but when a man with an ACU rating of 93 is deemed weak when his job is to manage the competing interests of so many Senators and advance the ball, just what the hell do they expect?

Freepers are ignoramusus about what the Majority Leader's job is all about.If they want high drama from their politics say so, but pragmatism is the most crucial element required by a leader of that body.Nickles fails on this score.

Nickles is showing he doesn't have the smarts to be an effective leader.There is a reason that he was never voted leader, and it's apparent for all to see now."

I had to quote your whole post because it all bears repeating.

Lott WILL lose his job, OK? We just don't know if it will happen in January of 03 or 07 or even later. When it does happen we won't know anything about it until it's a done deal. Public grandstanding by the likes of Nickles isn't how this game is played. Committments from other Senators are obtained in private and when it's over the nation is presented with a fait accompli.

Nickles is showing he doesn't have the smarts to be an effective leader.

And this woud be Trent Lott's Edge? Maybe it has a lott to do with ethics and how far you are willing to go compromise to attract a coalition.

It would be nice in this age to see someone ascend to power without selling his soul, but sadly that may not be possible today.