I understood your post to mean that this thread was 'flogging the dead horse' of the 'Lott saga' as you called it. It is my humble opinion that the 'flogging' of the 'dead horse' occurred while Sen. Lott was still in power as ML.
What the author of this article, and TLBSHOW by posting it, wish to discuss, is not the 'dead horse' (Lott) but those who 'flogged' him, and why they did so. I am of the opinion that it needs to be discussed, but you seem adamant in your attempts to sweep it under the rug - the old elephant in the livingroom trick.
MY OPINION is that this author, Barry Farber, is flogging a dead horse.
I know. You are incorrect. The author clearly stated, not only in his title, but in the body of his article, "In sticking to Trent Lott, let me quickly point out that I'm not talking about Trent Lott; rather, I'm talking about so much MORE than Trent Lott....The key question, rather, is, What does the Trent Lott affair now say about the Republican Party?"
If you don't want to discuss it, don't. What purpose do you serve by trying to stop others from doing so?