Has she no shame? [Conason on Coulter--Some Men Just Can't Handle Blondes]

Salon ^ | July 4, 2003 | Joe Conason

[liberallarry]

At first glance, at least, fair enough on the Constitutional issues.

I'll have to search for examples of Right-wing violence which means - I guess - that if it occurs, it's a fringe activity.

Historically, resistance to desegration was such an example but I can't think of anything current.

[Bush2000]

Historically, resistance to desegration was such an example but I can't think of anything current.

You do realize that southern Democrats made up a sizeable contingent of desegration opponents, right?

[liberallarry]

Southern Democrats of yesterday are Southern Republicans of today. I'm sure you know that. In any case they were and are conservatives, regardless of their party label.

[liberallarry]

Oh, please. I saw the WTO riots in Seattle firsthand. These are people that were looking for a violent confrontation. They are most certainly leftwing nutcases...

I'm sure that's true about the Seattle demonstrators. But Left-wing opposition to the WTO is a legitimate populist issue...and it can be and is argued as such.

I don't think they'll win because history tells us that such struggles are very long and very hard...but they shouldn't be deprecated because of the bad behavior of anarchists and aging hippies.

[liberallarry]

This reminds me of union violence of the period 1880-1935. Now that is a real test for me. When I think of those violent labor struggles I don't think I can stick with my principles.

Sad but true. Too many of my ancestors were part of that struggle - as union members.

[Bush2000]

I'm sure that's true about the Seattle demonstrators. But Left-wing opposition to the WTO is a legitimate populist issue...and it can be and is argued as such.

A legitimate populist issue? Are you kidding? A minute fragment Americans even understand what the initials WTO stand for. Anybody who was protesting it was the furthermost left fringe of the Democrat party. And they came to promote violence and destruction. Legitimate? Hardly.

I don't think they'll win because history tells us that such struggles are very long and very hard...but they shouldn't be deprecated because of the bad behavior of anarchists and aging hippies.

They'll lose primarily because they're a bunch of morons.

[Bush2000]

Southern Democrats of yesterday are Southern Republicans of today. I'm sure you know that. In any case they were and are conservatives, regardless of their party label.

Nice spin, Larry. But the fact of the matter is your party is the party of segregation. Republicans under Lincoln were the ones who fought to free slaves and who eventually pushed for desegregation. Your DNC machine has been very successful in turning the racial tables on your own history -- but those who are old enough to remember the past know the truth.

[nopardons]

You can't equate the lunatics on the left, protesting the WTO ( which most of them don't know much about, don't understand, nor actually care about ) with Union strikes and/or mellees. Even the Marxists, who started the Hay Market Riots,were more atune, than the gaggle of protest anything and everything bunch in Seattle and in European countries. That horde doesn't even all stick to the same message.

[liberallarry]

You can't equate the lunatics on the left, protesting the WTO ( which most of them don't know much about, don't understand, nor actually care about ) with Union strikes and/or mellees.

I didn't mean to.

Thinking about that long-ago conflict made me realize that violence was an essential part of our political system - that the Civil War was not the only example of disputes which could not be resolved peacefully by compromise, voting, arbitration and Court rulings.

And, sadly, as in the War between the States, there were men of principal and honor on both sides.

[liberallarry]

A legitimate populist issue? Are you kidding? A minute fragment Americans even understand what the initials WTO stand for

Pretty arrogant of you considering how many threads here on Free Republic deal with just this issue.

They'll lose primarily because they're a bunch of morons

No, they'll lose, in the short term, because they're Luddittes trying to ride the whirlwind. In the long term, after the economy becomes truly global, the labor and environmental wars will begin again with their side in a more favorable position.

Nice spin, Larry. But the fact of the matter is your party is the party of segregation

It's not my party. Although I voted before 9/11 it was out of habit and inheritance. Now that I'm truly engaged I have informed opinions but no party.

It's you who are spinning. Democrats were the party of segregation from the Civil War until 1960 or so. God knows what kind of bargain FDR struck to keep them in the party but it fell apart in the '60s.The Southern conservative Democrats largely moved to the Republican side when Reagan took office.

[liberallarry]

Actually, the Republicans were Abolitionist only for a short time. Almost as soon as Reconstruction began they too supported segregation - or at least made no real efforts to oppose it.

I'm sure you're aware of that too. Talk about spinning.

[Carthago delenda est]

Conason is accusing somebody of "having no shame"???

I...am...speechless!!!