Lott finally steps down.

[Anthony Ng]

Lott finally steps down.

[hellstrom]

I watched CNN yesterday where they had a "lott" of examples, but didn't quite get what this "lott" thing is. Could you please explain?

[Anthony Ng]

http://news.google.com/news?&q=lott

[DomeBase]

Originally posted by lotsofissues
Nooooooooooooooooo......
I took delight in reading Republican unity crumble further everyday.

Lott resigned his Ofissues?

[Banned: Larry]

If my memory serves me, didn't Senator Byrd from West Virginia use the "n" word a couple years ago? How could that possibly be any less offensive than what Lott said?


I think he still has his job and I don't remember the black caucus, jesse, al, or anybody else for that matter say anything about Byrd stepping down.


Seems odd to me that a Democrat can say something so foul and it is almost entirely ignored by everybody including the press.


republican unity crumbling...nah. this is just typical conservative response.

conservatives tend to clean their own house (lott...gingrich..et al) while liberals tend to defend to the end their right to be scumbags ( clinton...rivera..et al.)

Just remember..if the san andreas fault ever lived up to the hype, democrats would never again win a national election (j/k)


opinions vary.....

[Anthony Ng]

>lotsofissues: Clinton although not liked still recieved high approval ratings.

Actually, I would go even further to say that if Clinton was on the last presidential ballot, George W.M. Bush wouldn't be in power now.

[Banned: Larry]

Republicans clean house not because they have a morally superior position.

Wasn't suggesting they were taking a moral stand. Regardless of the reason, they still are quicker about taking action against those in their party who stray..either politically or in their personal lives.

Where were the aforementioned groups when Byrd spoke?

What did the Democrats do?

Lott's comments are damaging to the image of the party.

Very true. But Lotts biggest problem is that he has not been an effective leader. His recent reprehensible statements were only the final leverage needed by others in the party to tip the cow.

Clinton although not liked still recieved high approval ratings

I personally don't care about his approval ratings. He clearly did as much to harm this country as he did to help.

Both parties function the same way.

That's just silly. The majority of people see enough difference to split the country every time we go to the polls.

[GiantDomains]

Originally posted by lja
If my memory serves me, didn't Senator Byrd from West Virginia use the "n" word a couple years ago? How could that possibly be any less offensive than what Lott said?
I think he still has his job

LJA, Senator Bird was not House Majority Leader. Lott was House Majority Leader. He is still a senator, just doesn't have control of the floor.

[Banned: Larry]

lotsofissues -

By saying Demos are slower or less willing to respond to undesirable figures in the party your asserting they function differently in this regard but they don't.

But they do. I didn't bring up clinton as an example. I brought up Byrd as an example. And clearly he was held to an entirely different std (which in this case was - none) than Lott....by the press, Jesse, Al, the black caucus, and particularly his own party.

The Demos have shown themselves to abandon untenable figures such as Condit and Trafficant.

Perfect! Your two examples prove my point. These two were unsavory characters so let's take a look at how the dems dealt with them.

Trafficant - Indicted on various charges. Clearly there was overhwelming evidence that he had issues. The democrats did nothing for two years. When the guy was finally convicted, he was censured by the body..not by democrats specifically. The dems sat on their hands until time for a vote.

Condit - This guy lost an election...otherwise he'd still be walking the halls.


doberry - At the time, Byrd was a senior member of the party that controlled the chamber. He sat on numerous committees that the dems controlled and I believe was ranking member on at least one. (but i;d have to dig up a little to check which one).

And, imho, it doesnt matter if you are the lowest ranking member in your chamber, if you said what he said you should get the boot...yet NOTHING was done and all the people (outside of the republicans) that are currently screaming for Lotts head on a plate were quite on the Byrd issue.

The primary reason those outside of Lotts party are crying so loud is they just got their hats handed to them for the second election in a row when everything was in their favor.

The only thing the two parties really have in common right now is poor leadership. Unfortunately these poor leaders will likely be our choices for president for many years unless a strong governor steps up to the plate (but honestly nobody stands out to me as a strong governor either...'cept maybe ventura ).

[INFORG]

lja

sounds like you need my domain:

PresidentVentura.com

Even has some links to it!

[Banned: Larry]

You're trying to reframe the issues:

What about Trafficant?...His ouster was unanimous; only 1 dissenting vote from Condit

The point I made that you objected to was

conservatives tend to clean their own house

To which you replied:

Both parties function the same way....By saying Demos are slower or less willing to respond to undesirable figures in the party your asserting they function differently in this regard but they don't.

So, my original point...that conservatives deal with their issues by internally ousting the reprobate while the liberals tend to allow their members to justify to the end their right to be reprobates..is true by your own admission....

What about Trafficant?...His ouster was unanimous; only 1 dissenting vote from Condit

Unlike Lott and Gingrich, he was sent packing only after being convicted of numerous felonies. And only then by the chamber....NOT democrats.

Hardly a strong stand by democrats..wouldn;t you agree?


On the other hand..Both Lott and Gingrich were sent packing by nothing more than internal party pressure...gingrich for nothing more than EVERY liberal democrat was defending Clinton for at the time.


_________________________________________

Condit? Demos certainly weren't united in supporting him

Support? They did nothing. If he had not lost the election he would be back on the hill. Period.

Before Lott decided on his own to step out, how many Republican senators publicly called Lott to do so?

AAHHH! Your keyword is publicly. Conservatives traditionally do not do anything "publicly". Remember during the last presidential election when 50 white men in suits showed up to protest how a portion of the recount was being handled inFlorida? The press called them an "angry republican mob".......but.... the cameras showed a bunch of middle aged, middle class, white guys standing outside the courtroom talking to each other and holding banners. If you know anything about politics, you know that conservatives don't do things "publicly"...thats the democrats game. "Loud is right" is not a conservative republican game. All the talk and all the pressure goes on behind the scenes and the end result is they step down.


So, the issue with condit was that the only reason he is not in congress now is he lost an election..not because he wasnt supported by the dems..they simply do not discipline their own.



If you think they do you will have to come up with a far better example than the two you have put forward.

[Anthony Ng]

In the real world, whether a politician is dumped by his or her party/colleagues is more often a damage control decision than anything else. It doesn't matter he or she is right or wrong or if that particular party has a higher moral ground.

[Banned: Larry]

nameslave - I understand your opinion and agree with your basic position but your response does not address the specific issues we are discussing.


1) the dems consistent unwilliness to deal with rodents or repugnant issues (or people) within it's own ranks.


2) the repub's desire to expel (internally) their own when they fail ANY fraction of the party

This is not a moral issue. However, it may subconsciously be an issue of morality for those who consider such things.

[kingdon]

Here's my 2 cents. Most people vote to keep the other guy out. I doubt any one here truly believes their candidate is the best man for the job. I bet most of you vote to keep out the guy you don't like. I say go Libertarian and change the world, while we still have time to live.

[Banned: Larry]

lotsofissues - the "reason" is irrelevant as far as I am concerned. Be it moral, political, smart...it just doesn;t matter to me.. and you can say "I do believe you are trying to insinuate a moral issue" as many times and in as many ways as you like but that doesnt make it true.



So, I'll also offer a summary of my thoughts:

You simply need to look objectively at ALL the specific people we discussed above and how each was handled by their party to determine that the dem part does nothing to police it's own and the republicans handle things internally every time.

Regardless of how you feel, the specific facts that are available to us in each case bears this out.


Gingrich/Lott - forced (very quickly) to step down or aside.

Trafficant/Byrd/Condit - Convicted/Ignored/Defeated - in that order. No action was taken in any of their situations by Dems directly....period.


If you can come up with ANY case for either party that flies in the face of my earlier statements about the parties I would be most interested.


p.s. Although you have failed to discuss the Byrd issue and it's similarity to Lott's I will not assume that you agree with his use of the term he used nor will I attempt to interpret what you may be thinking about that issue....although you have made assumptions and interpretations of my words to fit your argument.


Thanks for the discussion!