Opposition Research Starts on Nickles (See I told You)NAACP & DNC ALERT

Early this week, I told those of you who want Trent Lott gone that dumping him will not end the smearing. I said, "Even now, Democratic Party operation research is giving a Clymer exam to the records of all potential Lott replacements." Sure enough, Jim Abrams of the Associated Press has run the first hit piece on Senator Don Nickles (R-OK), who came out against Lott on one of the Sunday shows.

Headline: "Nickles' Voting Record on Civil Rights Mirrors Lott's." The subtext here is that Don Nickles embraces segregation, "too" because that's what they say about Lott. This is going to keep happening to Republicans until we stop being worried about whether or not we're all thought of as racists. It's going to keep happening until we start tackling this with the mountain of historical facts about the Republican Party's history on civil rights.

I guarantee you they're working on similar stories about Senators McConnell, Frist, Domenici and anyone else who might replace Lott. Without mentioning the Democrats who also opposed it, Abrams dutifully transcribes the DNC talking point that Nickles opposed making Martin Luther King, Jr.'s birthday a federal holiday. He does write that "Nickles unsuccessfully pushed alternatives to a paid holiday," but follows it up quickly with the fact that he backed a Jesse Helms amendment to preserved tax exempt status for private schools, such as Bob Jones University.

You must mention Bob Jones; it's obligatory if AP wants to keep getting the DNC faxes and not have to actually do their own research instead. There's a whole bunch of tax exempt colleges out there, but you have to name this one. Everywhere in this article it's "Lott and Nickles." It's like reading an article about Sonny & Cher. AP also reports that "the senators" again, they are one-and-the-same, "differed with the NAACP" on Head Start, education programs, the confirmation of John Ashcroft and global AIDS funding.

So they're all bigots, because they dared disagree with the NAACP and supported Ashcroft. They're already moving on from Lott to Nickles, as proved by the quote AP printed from Hillary Shelton, director of the NAACP's Washington office: "We're concerned..." Oh, she's quoting Daschle! "We're concerned that Nickles has voted just as poorly or even more poorly than Trent Lott." [Italics added] Do you see this? Nickles is even worse, now! I hate to say See, I Told You So, but this is all happening. We have to take this garbage on. There's no other way to stop it.

You're new at this 'politics' thing, aren't you?"

Condescending cr*ppola...like 99% of your whole response to me this morning on this thread.

Lott's supporters are spending all of their time and energy trying to find someone to blame...well, you need look no further than Mr. Lott. This circus has had only one ring from the beginning, and he has made sure he was the clown act right out there in the middle of the ring.

You accuse me of shortsightedness? I would contend that it is you yourself who is being incredibly shortsighted. Defending Lott, by the President, or the Republican rank and file, would have simply taken the whole GOP down into the hole Lott dug for himself, and made us all look as craven as he himself actually is.

The White House and most Republicans have kept their focus on the core principles they represent throughout this Lott-induced bad dream, and have kept their powder dry for the battles to come in '03 and '04. They have kept their sights on the big picture and the long-term goals, while Lott has used up all of his political bullets on an inanity.

We don't need a 'useful idiot' as Majority Leader. We need someone who is smarter than to go on national TV and declare that we must 'build on the failures of the past' like Lott did.

We need a Leader who has not compromised himself so badly that he thinks he must go on national TV and declare his allegiance to the racism of affirmative action.

Lott is a liablity in the Majority Leader position. Most here knew it long ago. Even his supporters here preface their remarks with that admisission over and over and over.

He's not being crucified. He's not being sent to a gulag. He is being given a graceful exit with his position as Mississippi's Senator intact. He just needs to show he cares more for the country and his party than he does about Trent Lott, by taking that graceful exit and shutting up, and stopping his embarrassment of us all.

Ah, so it may not turn out how you like, so rationality is "defined downward"? Interesting.It is either rational or not rational for Lott to bolt and has nothing to do with your preferred choice.

"Rationality" has little to do with whether or not a man runs away in the face of danger. "Rationality" has little to do with whether or not a man puts what is good for America above what is good for his ego or his ambitions or his personal safety.

Is is pefectly rational for a brave man to volunteer for military service when his country needs him and it is perfectly rational for a coward to run away to avoid such service.

Such issues have nothing to do with rationality but they have everything to do with the "character" of the man.

The question is, "What kind of character does Trent Lott have?"

If we know the answer to that, we can predict what is "rational" to him.

The question is, "What kind of character does Trent Lott have?" If we know the answer to that, we can predict what is "rational" to him.

I'm holding onto the belief that in the final pass, he will come to the understanding that he must do the right thing for his country and remain as Senator, while stepping down from the Leadership.

No matter how far he has fallen, that is the final test of character for him in this whole thing.

all who are slamming Trent are doing a hate crime

are you all proud of your sinless selves?

Just a question........

You've demonstrated yourself throughout this debacle to be nothing but an unthinking spam artist who doesn't even know how to use basic punctuation.

You have added nothing of any substance to the debate.

You lack the slightest bit of nuance or creativity in any of your posts.

Your attempts to clumsily bludgeon conservatives into supporting the insupportable and feckless Trent Lott are a running joke around here.

It is obvious to all thinking people here that you have failed abjectly.

So take your insults and stuff em where the sun don't shine...with them there, you should be able to gaze on them lovingly all the day long.

I am convinced that the Republicans can find several in their caucus who can withstand a detailed investigation of their civil rights records.

Senator Frist especially since he was never active in politics until right before his election in 1994 and his reputation is sterling. Plus, he is a doctor, and just about everyone trusts a doctor. I know, I know, I am biased being from TN, but I still think he would be great.

I just wish there was some way I could imagine Lott surviving this. While I agree he is not the tough bargainer I would like in there, I will hate that he loses his post over a stupid offhand comment. It just doesn't seem fair.

You keep calling me a "Lott defender." I'm not, because I'm not asking anyone to excuse his behavior.

What I am is a defender of the Republican majority in the Senate.

This nihilistic drive by so many conservatives to upset the system and rack things around as much as possible so that when the dust clears we have guys WE like sitting on top is just naive, and that's why I say you and others like you are political naifs.

You build a solid, unshakeable structure in order to achieve your goals. If you overreach in a foolish manner, the walls often come tumbling down (as Bill Clinton and the Dems found to their dismay in 1994, in the wake of Hillarycare).

It was not necessary to eject Lott. Lott is NOT John McCain, threatening everything if he doesn't have it all his way. He's just a good ol' boy that likes his cushy sinecure, and who will work with the right people--like Pres. Bush--leading him around by the leash.

Instead, you've gained NOTHING and threatened the structure that's been carefully built, just to punish Lott.

"Cut off your nose to spite your face." Fits the scenario perfectly.

We don't need a 'useful idiot' as Majority Leader. We need someone who is smarter than to go on national TV and declare that we must 'build on the failures of the past' like Lott did.

A perfect example of what I'm talking about when I say "politically naive."

Since you DON'T understand politics and politicians, and that many of them think of their position, FIRST, before they think of anything else (and don't start this silly, adolescent whining about how we shouldn't elect people like that; that's the kind of people who WANT to be elected. This description fits 90% of the people who are in elected office, and it fits 99.9% of 'em who ever run for reelection) then it comes as a SHOCK to you that Lott did what he did. Whereas it didn't surprise me at all. In fact, you watch: If Nickles gets in, he's going to do much the same thing (though he may not sound so desparate about it).

When you hung Lott out to dry, told him in effect that his position was now threatened, NOT because he committed a major crime, not even because violated any sort of rule of ethics, but simply because he said something ill-advised and downright stupid.

So then, when he looks around and sees that NO ONE has his back, he says to himself "I guess I'm going to have to save myself."

Then he goes on BET and says something that you REALLY DON'T like! (because let's face it: What he said to Strom Thurmond didn't hurt one single human being on this planet, no matter what skin color or political persuasion).

When he starts threatening in that roundabout way to, in essence, defect to the other side, it's pretty much over for all of us.

We've got to get rid of him, and when we do we run the risk EITHER that he's going to step down (in which case the Dems win his seat) or he's going to curry favor with the other side (since we've already shown that we hate him).

It was stupid, stupid, stupid, stupid, STUPID on the part of conservatives to do this. Just idiotic beyond my capacity to relate.

You won't get 10% of politicians in D.C. to "put what is good for American ahead of what is good for his ego, or ambitions." That's just plain, silly, naive thinking.

Politicians are useful idiots, pretty much across the board. You don't RUN for elective office unless you have a mighty ego. This noble sentiment about "public service" is quaint, but bears no resemblance to reality.

Instead, you USE politicians, maneuvering them to do your bidding. Why do you think lobbyists are such an essential part of the political infrastructure?

And furthermore, you DON'T hang a powerful politician out to dry just because of political correctness. Not even because you think he's not "pure enough."

You USE his ego, and manipulate it to your own ends.

Conservatives who don't understand that, will ALWAYS be disappointed losers.

What people like you don't undestand is that you just handed the "race hustlers" a semiautomatic rifle, and took our guys' weapons away, replacing them with a pitchfork.

This is NOT over, no matter what happens to Lott. Had we supported him after his apology, let him know that no matter what he was our guy for better or worse, and let this thing die down, we would have done far more against the race hustlers than we'll ever do now.

Those "race hustlers" got the upper hand of the Republicans, and they're going to be riding us for all its worth for AT LEAST the next two years.

I am convinced that the Republicans can find several in their caucus who can withstand a detailed investigation of their civil rights records.

No, not when we've shown that we'll run from something as silly and inconsequential as what Lott said. Not when we've shown that just as soon as one of our guys goes "radioactive" with the mud slung from the Left, we'll all shun him and toss him out.

We've shown the Left that they only have to INSINUATE racism, and we're quivering in our boots.

That's what YOU PEOPLE have done.

Congratulations, hope you enjoy your hollow victory.

And if the media had made a big deal about it, AND if Clinton had apologized, but looked around and found that there was NO ONE there to defend him, no one to get his back, he'd have been gone, too.

I thought when L'Affaire Lewinsky broke, that Clinton would be a goner because no one could POSSIBLY defend his behavior.

I was flat wrong, and we see the result.

What Lott did was miniscule in comparison, of course, but he gets no support because "conservatives don't like him."

Actually I think "conservatives don't like to win." And this whole sorry episode proves it.

Had we supported him after his apology, let him know that no matter what he was our guy for better or worse, and let this thing die down, we would have done far more against the race hustlers than we'll ever do now.

Lott blew it Bigtime, instead of standing up for himself and the party he painted himself into a corner as a racist and now he must atone for his past. The guy is an idiot and needs to go. If he resigns he proves the point that he never was for the GOP, only for himself.

You keep calling me a "Lott defender." I'm not, because I'm not asking anyone to excuse his behavior.

Yeah, right.

What I am is a defender of the Republican majority in the Senate.

Then tell your boy not to take his marbles and go home like a spoiled baby...then we won't have a problem...our majority will remain intact.

If he does do it, there will be no one to blame but Trent Lott.

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.