Washington PostAn early exit casts a shadow on an extraordinary congressional career? I think being removed from the majority leader position over charges of racism managed that quite effectively. Robert here is just pissed because his beloved Republican party is in a position to lose another seat in the Senate. Otherwise, this rambling, unfocused column has no other purpose than to reiterate Lott's resume. He sure as hell didn't explain why Lott is resigning. Hell, he more or less discounts the conventional wisdom on Lott's departure.
Lott's early exit casts a shadow on an extraordinary congressional career. Elected to Congress in 1972 at age 31, as a defender of Richard M. Nixon, he voted for impeachment as a House Judiciary Committee member when confronted with the evidence. He was the House's second-ranking Republican at age 39; won the same job in the Senate 14 years later; as 1984 Republican platform chairman shaped a supply-side document in defiance of the White House staff's design; and served for six years as the most effective Republican Senate majority leader of his time.
Actually, federal legislators know how to build tidy nest eggs without spending one day in the private sector -- none of them much better than Trent Lott. Except for one year as a practicing attorney fresh out of law school, Lott has spent his career on the public payroll -- four years as a congressional staffer, 16 years in the House and 19 in the Senate.Though, he fails to deliver any proof of Lott's nest egg.
Indeed, this entire effort on Novak's part seems more about venting his displeasure over Lott's pending resignation and it's effect on the Republican party's standing in government then on strengthening the narrative of Lott leaving for financial reasons. The old boy just seems to lack the heart of defending a rat fleeing a sinking ship.