Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Democrats: A Lott of trouble (ANN COULTERS VIEWS ON TRENT LOTT ATTACK)
worldnetdaily ^ | 12/18/2002 | Ann Coulter

Posted on 12/18/2002 3:51:50 PM PST by TLBSHOW

Democrats: A Lott of trouble

I'm just glad Strom Thurmond isn't around to see this.

Statisticians believe Trent Lott is now on track to break Bill Clinton's single-season record for public apologies. During his recent B.E.T. appearance, Lott said he supported affirmative action, regretted voting against the Martin Luther King Jr. holiday, and that he'd give "The Bernie Mac Show" another try.

What the Lott incident shows is that Republicans have to be careful about letting Democrats into our party. Back when they supported segregation, Lott and Thurmond were Democrats. This is something the media are intentionally hiding to make it look like the Republican Party is the party of segregation and race discrimination, which it never has been.

In 1948, Thurmond did not run as a "Dixiecan," he ran as a "Dixiecrat" – his party was an offshoot of the Democratic Party. And when he lost, he went right back to being a Democrat. This whole brouhaha is about a former Democrat praising another former Democrat for what was once a Democrat policy.

Republicans made Southern Democrats drop the race nonsense when they entered the Republican Party. Democrats supported race discrimination, then for about three years they didn't, now they do again. They've just changed which race they think should be discriminated against. In the 1920s, the Democratic platforms didn't even call for anti-lynching legislation as the Republican platforms did.

Thurmond's Dixiecrat Party was not the only extremist spin-off from the Democratic Party in 1948. Henry Wallace, formerly FDR's vice president and agriculture secretary, left the Democratic Party that year to form the communist-dominated and Soviet-backed "Progressive Party." Much as Thurmond's Dixiecrat Party was expressly pro-segregation, Wallace's Progressive Party was expressly pro-Soviet.

Indeed, this was the apex of Moscow-directed subversion of U.S. politics. The Progressive Party platform excluded even the mildest criticism of Soviet aggression. It will come as no surprise that many American celebrities supported Wallace. The Progressives received 1 million votes nationwide, about the same as Thurmond's Dixiecrat Party.

Thurmond went on to reject segregation, become a Republican, and serve his country well as a U.S. senator. By contrast, running a communist-dominated presidential campaign was Wallace's last hurrah. Yet only an off-the-cuff remark at a birthday party praising Thurmond's presidential campaign is the career-destroyer. Not so fawning references to Wallace's Soviet-backed presidential campaign.

Just two years before Lott's remarks, a hagiographic book on Wallace's life was released, titled "American Dreamer." How about a book about a segregationist titled "American Dreamer"? Wallace's version of the American "dream" was communism every bit as much as Strom Thurmond's dream was segregation. Aren't dreams of murderous dictators, gulags and death camps at least comparable in evil to segregated lunch counters?

The dust jacket on "American Dreamer" featured a nauseating statement of praise by U.S. Sen. Edward Kennedy. Kennedy said that the book deserved "to be read by all who care about the American dream." The American dream: communist totalitarianism. Why wasn't the lecherous liberal asked to retire for his flattering remarks about a proven Soviet fifth columnist?

In 1999, the Clinton administration dedicated a room at the Agriculture Department to Wallace. At the dedication, former Democratic presidential candidate George McGovern gave a speech explicitly praising Wallace's pro-Soviet positions, such as the idea that the Cold War was "overdone" and that "problems" between the nations "could not be resolved by military means."

McGovern fondly recalled that he himself had voted for Wallace. He chipperly reminded the audience that he had run for president in 1972 "on a similar platform" – with the help of a young Yale law school graduate named Bill Clinton. Inasmuch as Trent Lott was in kindergarten in 1948, he did not vote for Thurmond. He did not run on a "similar" platform to the Dixiecrats. He did not write a jacket-flap endorsement calling a segregationist an "American Dreamer."

The idea that Lott took the occasion of an old timer's birthday to introduce a new policy initiative to bring back segregation – a Democrat policy – is ludicrous. Lott is a fine fellow; he just has some sort of liberal-Tourette's syndrome that makes him spout Democrat ideas at random. A few years ago, Lott practically wanted to give the adulterous Air Force pilot Kelly Flinn a silver star for her service. Remember that?

Up until two weeks ago, conservatives were clamoring for Lott's removal precisely because of his annoying habit of saying dumb things. (Showing their inferior intellect, liberals have only recently figured that out.) Republicans should ask Lott to step down as leader, but only for all the nice things he's said about Teddy Kennedy.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Special Offer!

Ann Coulter's newest blockbuster is here! "Slander" hammers liberals who use lies to vilify their opponents. Autographed copies now available through WorldNetDaily's online store!

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Ann Coulter, well-known for her television appearances as a political analyst, is an attorney and author. Dubbed "one of the 20 most fascinating women in politics" by George magazine, Coulter has appeared on ABC's "This Week," "Good Morning America," NBC's "Today," "Politically Incorrect with Bill Maher," CNN's "Larry King Live" and CNBC's "Rivera Live."


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; Editorial; Foreign Affairs; Government; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: anncoulter; trentlott
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 181-200201-220221-240 ... 541-546 next last
To: Right_in_Virginia
Again, for the 15,000,001st time...post #185
201 posted on 12/18/2002 6:14:08 PM PST by ApesForEvolution
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 194 | View Replies]

To: ApesForEvolution
I guess us 'girly boys' were right all along? (gloat)

I'm just glad Strom Thurmond wasn't around to hear you say that.

202 posted on 12/18/2002 6:14:33 PM PST by Tribune7
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: VaBthang4
....since you said that you have yet to come upon anybody that has meet those prerequisites, yeah.

Initially, you used the phrase "alot of people" had a racist agenda for supporting Lott.......subsequently, you have chosen to rephrase the use of a racist agenda as being a reason for backing Lott as "one of which".

It seems to me that you just admitted that their are other motivations for supporting Lott's continunace as ML other than racism.

203 posted on 12/18/2002 6:14:39 PM PST by hole_n_one
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 186 | View Replies]

To: Right_in_Virginia
I am agreeing with your analysis. It emboldens the left across the board.
204 posted on 12/18/2002 6:15:16 PM PST by jwalsh07
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 199 | View Replies]

To: ApesForEvolution
post #185 Bump
205 posted on 12/18/2002 6:15:53 PM PST by VaBthang4
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 201 | View Replies]

To: hole_n_one
meet s/b met

idiot!

206 posted on 12/18/2002 6:19:04 PM PST by hole_n_one
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 203 | View Replies]

To: TLBSHOW
Typical Ann Coulter.

A little of this and a little of that and a little tongue in cheek.

>>>Lott is a fine fellow; he just has some sort of liberal-Tourette's syndrome that makes him spout Democrat ideas at random.

FuNnY!!!

207 posted on 12/18/2002 6:19:19 PM PST by Reagan Man
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jwalsh07
You take yourself much too seriously, this is politics, not war. And generals never become sargents.

Senator Byrd did and he remains in the senate today.

208 posted on 12/18/2002 6:19:37 PM PST by McGavin999
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 92 | View Replies]

To: Right_in_Virginia
I just don't think Lott has the brainpower to be a majority leader, he was fine as the go along to get along minority leader but he proved that he is not a leader by basically turning over the GOP agenda to the black caucus. If thats not a sellout of your own party, what is ?
209 posted on 12/18/2002 6:20:06 PM PST by John Lenin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 194 | View Replies]

To: VaBthang4
I think you're doing a fine job playing the part of the fool. Why would I get in your way here?
210 posted on 12/18/2002 6:20:19 PM PST by jwalsh07
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 205 | View Replies]

To: jwalsh07
"I am agreeing with your analysis. It emboldens the left across the board."

John, WADR, Lott himself energized the left and couldn't defend it. He self-destructed. It was only a matter of time. He lobbed a grenade at the WH...then proceeded to nuke the rest of White America, conservatives, southerners, fair and reasonable 'civil rights' legislation (as opposed to affirmative action which is reverse dicrimination)...do I need to expand this list? This is the best time for the inevitable self destruction of Lott. Let's get him behind us as ML, support him once he's done so as a'nother' Senator and get the real important stuff done unabated by his foolishness. And chase the RATS back into the hole they come from.

Carville and Co. and now genuflecting to Lott to stay....do you not see what is happening???
211 posted on 12/18/2002 6:20:58 PM PST by ApesForEvolution
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 204 | View Replies]

To: jwalsh07; TLBSHOW; VaBthang4
Breaking news,FWIW, Alan Colmes(the liberal part of Hannity & Colmes), just said that Lott shouldn't step down.

Can anybody say Carville memo. Looks like the demos are the dictionary version of the addage, "Be careful with your wishes, for they may come true."

212 posted on 12/18/2002 6:21:17 PM PST by Dane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 200 | View Replies]

To: hole_n_one
I think people who cant defend Lott staying in the Leadership position with any sort of political or principled logic...have other illogical, unprincipled reasons...one of which I do not doubt is down low endurance and in some instances acceptance of...Racism.

Doesnt flow with...

ANYBODY that attempts to articulate ANY arguement which endorses the position that Lott remain in his position as leader of the republican senate as a racist motivation.

That is basic comprehension of English and is quite apparent. You are simply bothered by the subject matter involved. Dont be. It is what it is. Some of his defenders are subscribers to racist positions. It's reality.

It would be a stretch to pretend it isnt.

213 posted on 12/18/2002 6:22:01 PM PST by VaBthang4
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 177 | View Replies]

To: McGavin999
No Senator Byrd went from the Senate Majority Leader, 1979 - 1987, to Senator.

Generals in the Army that I was in did not become sargents. You kinda had to be there. It was a reference made a couple of days ago.

214 posted on 12/18/2002 6:22:09 PM PST by jwalsh07
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 208 | View Replies]

To: Dane
Yep...

They are all going to backtrack and show their oblique support for Lott not being crucified by the evil republicans who dont want to grow as a party with Lott.

You can see it coming from a mile away.
215 posted on 12/18/2002 6:23:53 PM PST by VaBthang4
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 212 | View Replies]

To: hole_n_one
their s/b there

you really are an idiot!

216 posted on 12/18/2002 6:24:07 PM PST by hole_n_one
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 203 | View Replies]

To: Dane
"Breaking news,FWIW, Alan Colmes(the liberal part of Hannity & Colmes), just said that Lott shouldn't step down.

Can anybody say Carville memo. Looks like the demos are the dictionary version of the addage, "Be careful with your wishes, for they may come true."


They overplayed their hand and we can chase them now. They can't spin this if Lott does the right thing for America, the GOP and conservatives (and everyone else he sold out) now.
217 posted on 12/18/2002 6:24:29 PM PST by ApesForEvolution
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 212 | View Replies]

To: ApesForEvolution
The no ball Republicans who wanted him to go are as bad as the rats were.
218 posted on 12/18/2002 6:26:23 PM PST by TLBSHOW
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 196 | View Replies]

To: VaBthang4
Bump back atcha!
219 posted on 12/18/2002 6:26:42 PM PST by ApesForEvolution
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 205 | View Replies]

To: ApesForEvolution
Carville and Co. and now genuflecting to Lott to stay....do you not see what is happening???

:-} I saw it from the gitgo. And I'm here to tell you that the republican senate will not vote him out.

They will put there fingers to the wind and keep him.

At this point I would prefer he go but I don't see that happening.

220 posted on 12/18/2002 6:26:54 PM PST by jwalsh07
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 211 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 181-200201-220221-240 ... 541-546 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson