OK, Lott has "apologized," but he still hasn't explained.

And note, as I pointed out in my previous post, that the Dems (at least the semi-intelligent ones, which doesn't include Jesse Jackson) are not calling for his ouster.

One Democrat, Senate Democratic leader Tom Daschle, defended Lott on Monday, saying he had spoken with Lott and had accepted Lott's explanation that he hadn't meant for the remarks to be interpreted as they were.

"There are a lot of times when he and I go to the microphone and would like to say things we meant to say differently, and I'm sure this was one of those cases for him, as well," Daschle said.

They live in fear of the day that the Senate Republicans elect a leader who isn't a pushover, and an idiot.

[Update at 9 PM PST]

OK, I've been reading what the folks at Free Republic have been saying on this issue. Frankly, much of it is foolish.

There seems to be a visceral reaction among many Republicans and conservatives (many of whom populate that particular forum) of "my Senator, right or wrong." Or "we can't give the Dems the satisfaction of taking down a political leader."

This is exactly the kind of emotional, brain-dead thinking (during impeachment) that destroyed the Democrats in 2000 and 2002. "He might be a corrupt bastard, but he's our bastard, and we're not going to let those uptight bible thumpers remove our President, no matter what he did."

Had the Democrats stood up for principle in 1999, as the Republicans did in 1974, and asked their President to step down, it's very likely that Albert Gore (shudder, and perish the thought) would be President today, having run as an incumbent in a campaign representing a morally-purged Democratic Party.

Instead, they stuck by their guy, in the face of overwhelming evidence of his corruption and guilt, because the stock market was up, and his polls were (temporarily) good. They did so not for tactical, or strategic reasons, but only because they followed the ancient principle of "the enemy of my enemy is my friend." They defended him reflexively, idiotically, in a knee-jerk fashion, simply because he was being attacked by "right wingers," and "bible thumpers," and "Republicans." Not because his behavior was defensible.

Now, because of their insouciance toward his venality, they're out in the political wilderness.

The Republicans face the same danger, if they don't take care of business. To defend Lott simply because he is being attacked by Democrats is foolish, and counterproductive.

Lott has been a liability for years. This is a golden opportunity for Republicans to both get rid of someone who has been undermining them by playing a hapless stooge to his Democrat counterparts in the Senate, but also to demonstrate that they aren't the racist monsters (and apologists for same) that they've been painted by Democratic attack dogs and their allies in the press.

Where is the supposedly politically-astute Karl Rove?