Trent Lott is a wealth of information

January 5, 2007

For Sen. Trent Lott (R-Miss.), the second highest ranking Republican in the Senate, to say this on national television seems a little surprising. From last night’s Hardball:

Matthews: I think [Vice President] Cheney had his thumb on the scale, do you agree? That they were pushing this war so hard, they were working to look at any evidence that backed the war and ignore any evidence that didn’t back the war.

Lott: They were pushing the evidence that justified going to the war, a lot of us, Republicans and Democrats, were concerned about what we were told, and we bought the packet.

Really? GOP senators realized in 2002 that the White House was “pushing the evidence” to start a war? That seems like a rather startling admission.

For that matter, Lott isn’t even sold on troop escalation in Iraq. During the same interview, Matthews asked, “Is there a chance you’ll say no to the surge?” Lott responded, “There is.”

As Judd explained, this matters quite a bit on the Hill: “[A]s the Minority Whip, he’s responsible for bringing his caucus in line with the Senate leadership’s position. If he’s not for escalation in Iraq, it’s unlikely there will be any serious effort in the Senate to get other members of his caucus to support it.”

Do you get the sense that maybe Bush and Lott are no longer reading from the same playbook?

I can’t help but wonder if there’s an element of revenge in all of this. As I noted in November, Bush, with varying degrees of subtlety, has made it clear that Lott is not his favorite member of the Senate.

For example, after Bush helped orchestrate his ouster, Lott said it was “payback time” and started becoming a thorn in the White House’s side, including stiffing the National Republican Senatorial Committee, balking at Bush’s first-term request for a dividend tax cut, and even calling for Karl Rove’s resignation after Scooter Libby was indicted.

This is not to say Lott somehow became more moderate — he clearly has not — but he certainly was (and is) less disposed to fall in line behind Bush. In March 2006, the president threatened to veto congressional efforts to derail the Dubai Ports World deal. Consider how Lott responded.

“I was offended,” Sen. Trent Lott, Mississippi Republican, said of Mr. Bush’s threat last week to veto legislation aimed at stopping the transfer of port operations to a company owned by the United Arab Emirates. He said Mr. Bush “threatened me before I even knew the details of what was involved or whether I was going to vote for the bill or not.”

Mr. Lott said his immediate reaction was: “OK, big boy, I’ll just vote to override your veto.”

Nearly a year later, Lott now seems completely off the reservation. Good for him.

Hell hath no fury like a former Senate Majority Leader scorned.

Sic ’em, Trent!! 🙂

  • If Trent Lott is not a bigot, he is pretty close to one. He is also brings way to much pork to his state- lies about issues, is detached from reality and follows the conservative mantra very closely; however, he was competent at his job and did run the trains. It really shows how bad Bush is that he cannot even run the trains.

  • Petty vindictiveness and a highly developed sense of self-preservation are not unknown qualities among long-established politicians. Lott’s been around long enough to know which way the wind blows (and that includes Katrina).

    The Bush Crime Family is headed for a panoply of televised (I hope) Congressional investigations. The petty criminals who make up the GOP are all looking for ways to distance themselves.

    I’d love to know what Richard Bruce “the Snarl” Cheney (aka “Shooter”) is up to these days (other than being evicted by Charlie Rangel, that is).

  • So what does Trent mean when he says “we bought the packet“? “the packet” sure sounds a lot more like “their propoganda” than “true statements”.

    I’d say we have a new name for Bush’s prewar bullshit: “The Packet”

    And boy howdy do I love the smell of big Republicrook assholes eating each other in the morning.

    Mmmmmmm good.

    Maybe Trent senses that Bush is roadkill already, and is just trying to jump clear of the second wave (in 2008)?

  • Do you get the sense that maybe Bush and Lott are no longer reading from the same playbook?

    I don’t agree, but I think you’re a better judge of this than I am.

    For one thing, I haven’t seen much of Lott. I was kind of half watching the Hardball show, though.

    However, since he already looked disposed to vary with the president, as you’ve described, if they can get him back within the ranks then he’s valuable as portraying opposition within the ranks. It all depends on whether they have something to bargain with him with or whether he thinks they have something to bargain with him with.

    For the admin in times like these, loyal opposition within the ranks is important because they’re trying to resusciate the party. If it’s opposition they can control it’s an asset.

    This may seem less likely when you think of how committed Bush is to the surge and how little ostensible support he’s holding, but consider that in times like these asking for ostensible support is basically asking too much. Just look at the Hardball show again, I don’t thunk he sounded as noncommittal as you’re making him sound.

  • Re: my comment at 6

    little ostensible support he’s holding,

    i.e., because it may seem like ostensible support would be infinitely more valuable to him, when you consider how little he’s got of it, then opposition from his own people (makes them seem rational as a group to onlookers- so this is political benefit) that he can at least control to some extent in its content.

  • When will these Republican Retards learn that “loyalty” only flows in one direction in this administration? The Dem letter to Shrub urging him not to escalate troop levels uses the phrase, “time to bring this war to a close.” and I get the impression it is like a parent having to tell a stubborn child to put his toys away and listen to the grownups for a change. Our Bubble Bound Boob in the White House will have to be dragged kicking and screaming out of the residence. If we bring his contrived war “to a close”, he will no longer be a war president claiming unprecedented powers and the loss will have the Bush name firmly attached to it in the history books. This catastrophe started on Presidunce Dolt’s watch when he and his staff ignored briefings. They used our tax dollars to pay for the highest tech PR and spin to divert our attention and propagandize Americans that this war was morally correct. It is fitting justice that this war end on Shrub’s watch with as little loss of life as possible from here on. I now understand the value of the French “national razor”. I wonder if we could borrow one from a museum.

  • Do you get the sense that maybe Bush and Lott are no longer reading from the same playbook?

    Trent has to run for re-election someday. Bush does not. QED.

    -GFO

  • Two to one Bush won’t be invited to sit on Lott’s new porch on the Gulf Coast and watch the waves. Even better odds Lott won’t be invited to chop wood in Texas.

  • Hearing about how public affairs are perverted by personal animosities kills my faith in this system. I would hope Trent is man enough to not take all matters of public concern and turn them into private pissing matches. That said, Bush has burned a lot of bridges and made a lot of enemies. That’s just his style. And comeupance is coming home to roost.

    I would hope Lott, as Minority Whip, realizes that Bush is leading his party further into the desert with his plans for escalation of the conflict in Iraq. It’s time for others, such as Lott, to take back the reins from an increasingly isolated president.

  • “Lott: They were pushing the evidence that justified going to the war, a lot of us, Republicans and Democrats, were concerned about what we were told, and we bought the packet.

    “Really? GOP senators realized in 2002 that the White House was “pushing the evidence” to start a war? That seems like a rather startling admission.”

    No, I think what Lott was saying was that “we” were concerned about WMD because that’s what Bush was pushing, and “we” fell for it–we “bought the packet.” And (by inference) “we” know better now.

    So he’s not saying he realized it then, just that he knows it now. Less startling, but still an admission.

    Re Lott being off the reservation, clearly Bush’s disrepecting him and bouncing him out of the leadership is a factor. But I also wonder what effect the insurance companies’ stiffing Lott and his neighbors over their Katrina losses has had, in making him less likely to go along with Bush’s mindless pro-corporate line.

    • Comments are closed.