Replies

The reason he wasn't challenged after Nov. 5 was because he *was* put on probation. Remember "we've circled the wagons around him"? That was the GOP Leadership talking about Lott then. This is where they show him the door, NOW!

I can agree with that. We just have to recast it as Lott being cast aside for our reasons, and make sure the public "gets it." They are already receptive, I think, based on some poll numbers.

Ineffectiveness or bad, liberal crap coming out of the Senate the first 6 months is death.

I agree here, too. Throwing Lott out as a racist is more liberal crap.

I think Lott should be removed from leadership, too. He just can't be run out of town by Democrats. How do you think this would play out?

1. Lott doesn't step down immediately because that would be agreeing with the racism charges, and Lott would be shamed for the rest of his life.
2. Republicans express their outrage at Lott in no uncertain terms (behind closed doors if necessary).
3. Bush has a rousing State Of The Union Address, where he makes announcements of major initiatives.
4. Republicans have another leadership vote, in the name of retooling themselves to fit Bush's agenda (or some such nonsense that is focus group tested), Lott is replaced and is given some kind of "special project" to keep him occupied.

I understand that there is some significance to the Jan. 6 date, after which (I think) committee assignments are made and there would be no place for Lott to go. Otherwise, as long as it happens soon, what's the urgency? How can Lott be ousted that is a win for everyone?

-PJ

"The reason he wasn't challenged after Nov. 5 was because he *was* put on probation. Remember "we've circled the wagons around him"? That was the GOP Leadership talking about Lott then. This is where they show him the door, NOW!

I can agree with that. We just have to recast it as Lott being cast aside for our reasons, and make sure the public "gets it." They are already receptive, I think, based on some poll numbers.

*My friend, Lott will have to start immediately paying the checks his mouth wrote Monday night. IMMEDIATELY or the RATS obstruct and attack because he was *lying* otherwise. No matter *when* he steps down, it will be unequivocably tied to race, for which Trent has only himself to blame; he admitted his own racism and did so much more on Monday night. That sticks to him now, period.

Ineffectiveness or bad, liberal crap coming out of the Senate the first 6 months is death.

I agree here, too. Throwing Lott out as a racist is more liberal crap.

*Lott leaves because his ineptitude in leading was not conducive to the Majority party, the party held responsible, could do not the work that America needs in this critical time of war and a slumping economy.

I think Lott should be removed from leadership, too. He just can't be run out of town by Democrats. How do you think this would play out?

*It's not about *them*, this is about Lott losing the confidence of ALL conservatives, particularly his Senate compadres, and the GOP entrusted with America's condition; the middle class want action, not excuses. Excuses and ineffectiveness get accredited to the Majority party.

1. Lott doesn't step down immediately because that would be agreeing with the racism charges, and Lott would be shamed for the rest of his life.

*Lott has already ensured that and the RATS can accept his apologies all they want, they are perceived as trashing a man that was chastened by his own for utter stupidity. Lott's problems are cast in stone. They can not be our problems. He will have to rehabilitate by doing whatever he sees as his and Mississippians best course of action.

2. Republicans express their outrage at Lott in no uncertain terms (behind closed doors if necessary).

*I agree. Closed doors and secret ballot for the leadership of the Majority party that has been overwhelmingly (I feel 11/5 was a near mandate for an off year against RATS with a GOP POTUS) entrusted to get things done, and make it work. Liberal ideals are old, tired and proven not to work. The people want effective leadership.

3. Bush has a rousing State Of The Union Address, where he makes announcements of major initiatives.

*Definitely mandatory, but with a *FRESH START*...clear the darn decks first.

4. Republicans have another leadership vote, in the name of retooling themselves to fit Bush's agenda (or some such nonsense that is focus group tested), Lott is replaced and is given some kind of "special project" to keep him occupied.

*Too late. He chose his special project Monday night on BET. Liberal Civil Rights.

I understand that there is some significance to the Jan. 6 date, after which (I think) committee assignments are made and there would be no place for Lott to go. Otherwise, as long as it happens soon, what's the urgency?

*Every reason I've already noted.

How can Lott be ousted that is a win for everyone?

*I'm sorry, Lott did this to himself and his winning is not incumbent upon the GOP or conservatives now. He can have a chair and whatever aligns with his new quest for liberal civil rights. It can't be all about Trent anymore. He doesn't get to choose anymore.

*Harsh? What Trent has done in blundering, not recovering then looking like a liar, capitulating to the RAT civil right's wet dream and swiping all whites, southerners, Pickering, etc. was harsh. Whether you and blacks realize it or not, he endorsed a liberal civil rights agenda that sets blacks back bigtime and will cripple our country over race, yet again.

***I must retire for the night shortly, but I wish you God's speed and wisdom. You are astute and thinking very well in a critical, lucid and dynamic - historical period in history with higher stakes than at *any* other time.