from same article:

Mississippians prefer Republicans in statewide races, and at the moment, the heavy favorite to succeed Lott is Rep. Charles W. "Chip" Pickering Jr., a five-term GOP House member.

Remember Judge Pickering, Chip's dad?  You know, the one who tried to get the cross-burner's sentence reduced?  The one that Dumbya gave a recess appointment?  Well, they don't call Chip "Chip" for nothing.

Hey, I don't like most of Gene Taylor's positions, either, but given the likely alternative -Chip Pickering -  Taylor is a flaming liberal.  Taylor is the most conservative Dem in the House, but he's still  more liberal than the most liberal Republican in the House.  And his strategy of being the most conservative Dem is, quite likely, the ONLY WINNING STRATEGY FOR A DEM in his House district OR in Lott's Senate seat.  

I would personally rather elect someone who is MUCH more liberal than Taylor, but Dennis Kucinich and Al Sharpton types don't poll very well down here.  So I guess we might have to settle for at least a slight move to the left by replacing Lott with Taylor.

So, somebody go ahead and tell me that because I am a realist and I know my own state very well, that I am selling out, but IT IS MISSISSIPPI AND IT AINT GONNA CHANGE ENOUGH BETWEEN NOW AND THEN TO ELECT A PRO-CHOICE CANDIDATE.  I'm tellin ya, it just won't happen down here.

Now, that will not prevent me from supporting one of the more liberal candidates in the primary (James Graves is good, if he runs, and so is Mike Espy), and I will do my best to get someone else to represent the Dems in this race if Lott retires.  However, I would gladly vote for Taylor over Pickering, it's not even close.

Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world. Indeed, it is the only thing that ever has. -Margaret Mead

For heavens sakes, I have listened in on conference calls... I am not stupid.

Let's beat the Republicans by by electing our own... Republicans.

It doesn't require some kind of conspiracy. It works in much the same way the RWNM works:

• a group of people share similar beliefs.

• a group of people share similar goals.

• a group of people have had several conversations, formed a general understanding of shared values, priorities.

• afterwords, events and actions and statements become more and more cohesive, as the successive actions of the given group reinforce each other.

It is plain from what's been written, from the house parties and conference calls, that there is a drive to marginalize women's concerns and issues in favor of the bullshit tactic to move right. It's not even necessary to send actual faxes: all you have to do is have the Vichy leaders like Schumer put someone forward as a spokesman, and the people w/ those shared values will get the idea.

This is how it works. The mere fact that Taylor was put forth so eagerly in so many places is a sign of the short shrift being given women's CIVIL RIGHTS on some important communties on the 'net.

Take a step back and take a look at how this all plays from our perspective. It has the appearance of collusion, and like a conflict of interest, the appearance is for all intents and purposes the same as actual overt collusion.

This move to put forward DfA trojan horses will further damage the party & the country, and will solidify the Religious Right's stranglehold on the political debate.

"Whenever a Voice of Moderation addresses liberals, its sole purpose is to stomp out any real sign of life." - James Wolcott

And you should see my filing system here in the office!  "downthread" might mean "in that other stack over there, about a foot down from the top"....  :)


Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world. Indeed, it is the only thing that ever has. -Margaret Mead