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

Skip to comments.

REFUTES BOOK 'TREASON'
TheTimesRecordOpinion ^ | 06/27/2003 Weekly | Eliot J. Chandler

Posted on 06/28/2003 6:44:38 PM PDT by fight_truth_decay

To the editor:

"Whenever the nation is under attack, from within or without, liberals side with the enemy," writes Ann Coulter in her new book, "Treason," subtitled "Liberal Treachery from the Cold War to the War on Terrorists."

Wrong. Our nation is presently "under attack from within" by the group known as PNAC, the "Project for the New American Century,"[1] which now inhabits the Bush White House. Liberals are certainly not siding with this enemy. The progressive movement desperately is attempting to defend the U.S. constitution from this menace. Desperate because the White House and both houses of Congress have sided with PNAC and its goal of empire.

Coulter accuses Democrats of "hobnobbing with foreign despots who hate America." How does she explain Ronald Reagan supporting Saddam Hussein, and George H.W. Bush supporting the Saudi royal family and friends from which the 9/11 terrorists and their leader, Osama bin Laden, emerged? And then there were the despots and dictators of Central and South America.

"Liberals want to be able to attack America," she writes. Ann Coulter cannot distinguish between attacking America and criticizing President Bush. The two certainly are not synonymous. Criticism of a president has never been considered treason, or else the entire Republican party, plus the press corps, would have been guilty of treason in criticizing Clinton. Certainly, criticism of this president can be considered synonymous with defending America.

"Fifty years of treason," she writes. What happened in 1953 to originate her distorted theory of "liberal hatred of America"? Eisenhower, as president, ended the Korean War in July of that year. He was providing France three-fourths of its cost for conducting the Indochina War. SEATO was formed. The Supreme Court ruled school segregation unconstitutional in 1954. Eisenhower's administration was charged with Communist subversion by Joseph McCarthy. And that same year the French lost the battle of Dienbienphu in Vietnam. In December, McCarthy was condemned by the U.S. Senate for contempt. So what was the event that, according to Ann, first poisoned the liberals' thought processes?

Or was it, as a friend said, like a "typical Fox News tactic — 'We distort, you decide.'"

Eliot J. Chandler, Bowdoinham

letters@TimesRecord.Com


TOPICS: Activism/Chapters; Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; Editorial; Foreign Affairs; Government; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections; US: Maine
KEYWORDS: anarchistsocialists; anncoulter; anncoulterbashing; antiamerican; antibush; anticapitalism; anticapitalist; antiwarha; barfalert; bigmedia; blameamericafirst; bushbashing; communism; communists; conservativebashing; conspiracy; coulter; coulterbashing; denydenydeny; dunce; fifthcolumn; fifthcolumnists; hateamericafirst; joemccarthy; lettertotheeditor; lovedclintonswars; mccmarthywasright; mediabias; notapeacemovement; pnacwindconspiracy; prodictator; projectilehurlalert; propalestinianwar; prosaddam; prostalin; ranttotheeditor; reddupes; redmenace; saddamites; socialism; socialists; stalinsusefulidiots; theredmenace; treason; unamerican; usefulidiots; vrwc
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 161-170 next last
{friend says}.."like a "typical Fox News tactic — 'We distort, you decide.'

..and finishes the round with a 'Low Blow' hitting the midsection.

1 posted on 06/28/2003 6:44:38 PM PDT by fight_truth_decay
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: fight_truth_decay
I have gotten about 100 pages into Treason, and I can feel my blood pressure rising. 95% of what "everyone knows" about Sen. Joe McCarthy is a lie. Liberals have been selling us out for decades because they are willfully blind and stupid-- and then they are too petty and venal to admit it when they are proven wrong.

Moderates and liberals may not like Coulter's tone, but they can't refute her research.

Maybe I need to pick up Mona Charen's book on liberal sell outs during the Cold War as well.

2 posted on 06/28/2003 6:49:55 PM PDT by Lysandru
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: fight_truth_decay
Eliot Chandler must be a DUmbass...
3 posted on 06/28/2003 6:53:00 PM PDT by clintonh8r (Diversity and bipartisanship....the mantra of pathetic losers.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: fight_truth_decay
"Liberals want to be able to attack America," she writes. Ann Coulter cannot distinguish between attacking America and criticizing President Bush. The two certainly are not synonymous. Criticism of a president has never been considered treason

Ever notice how they always like to frame the debate that way? Then attack the strawman arguement THEY created? Watch out for that, they think they really got a "zinger" in on you when they try that "they calling unpatriotic" canard.

4 posted on 06/28/2003 6:56:16 PM PDT by PeoplesRep_of_LA (Governor McClintock in '03!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: clintonh8r
I think he really hates America, too.
5 posted on 06/28/2003 6:57:02 PM PDT by Moonman62
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: fight_truth_decay
The creeps on the left certainly have their panties in a bunch lately.

Smell the fear and panic. They're being exposed for the rats they are.
6 posted on 06/28/2003 6:58:50 PM PDT by x1stcav ( HOOAHH!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: fight_truth_decay
Well, if you don't like what you see in the mirror you can do one of two things: change it, or stop looking in mirrors. This poor sap has chosen the latter course.

But, of course, I could be wrong - perhaps Chandler and the "progressive movement" are in favor of individual rights and the Consitution...let's hear 'em cheer for the Second Amendment! Ready? Hip hip -

[Sound of crickets chirping in the silent evening air...]

7 posted on 06/28/2003 7:00:31 PM PDT by Billthedrill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: fight_truth_decay
The progressive movement desperately is attempting to defend the U.S. constitution from this menace.

Ha! The progressive movement (aka liberal/socialist movement) cares nothing about the Constitution except to destroy it. They are more dangerous than any outside foe. Thank you for printing the truth Ann.

8 posted on 06/28/2003 7:01:42 PM PDT by Reagan is King
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: fight_truth_decay
As per http://www.liberalslant.com/ejc033003.htm , Eliot J. Chandler is a contributing writer for Liberal Slant.
9 posted on 06/28/2003 7:02:27 PM PDT by jigsaw (God Bless Our Troops!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PeoplesRep_of_LA
Criticism of a president has never been considered treason

Does that include doing it from enemy territory?

10 posted on 06/28/2003 7:05:34 PM PDT by tbpiper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: jigsaw
Thanks detective 'jigsaw'. I like that discovery.
11 posted on 06/28/2003 7:12:15 PM PDT by fight_truth_decay
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: fight_truth_decay
They "progressive" faction of the Democat party is a socialist platform.
Socialism is obviously anti-constitutional, hense anti-USA.
It is impossible to love freedom and espouse socialism.
It is impossible to love socialism/communism and love freedom.
What I have a hard time understanding, is why socialists and communists pretend to understand democracy and freedom, and/or claim they have any relationship with the concepts.
History and Logic are not difficult subjects to grasp, unless one espouses socialism and communism.
To prefer socialism or communism over freedom and democracy, only requires suspension of logic, and ignorance of history.
Stupid people should not breed.



12 posted on 06/28/2003 7:12:37 PM PDT by sarasmom (Punish France.Ignore Germany.Forgive Russia..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Moonman62
Typical that the "Masters of Deceipt" claim to support the Constitution, when in fact it has long been targeted for destruction by the so-called "Progressive Movement".
13 posted on 06/28/2003 7:12:43 PM PDT by BenLurkin (Socialism is slavery.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: tbpiper
"Does that include doing it from enemy territory? "

Not treason, but about as tactless and wrong as you can get.

14 posted on 06/28/2003 7:18:13 PM PDT by DannyTN (Note left on my door by a pack of neighborhood dogs.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: fight_truth_decay
Or was it, as a friend said, like a "typical Fox News tactic — 'We distort, you decide.'"

What an idiot. It's "we distory, you comply"

15 posted on 06/28/2003 7:19:44 PM PDT by xm177e2 (Stalinists, Maoists, Ba'athists, Pacifists: Why are they always on the same side?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: clintonh8r
Ya think ...??
16 posted on 06/28/2003 7:29:01 PM PDT by CyberAnt ( America - You Are The Greatest!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: fight_truth_decay
The progressive movement desperately is attempting to defend the U.S. constitution from this menace.

Sure...the progressive movement is "defending" the U.S. Constitution to make it safe for every unconstitutional socialist scheme they can defecate upon it and every distorted, tortured Supreme Court decision that can pervert our foundational principles. What a crock of sh**!!

17 posted on 06/28/2003 7:39:53 PM PDT by Spiff (Liberalism is a mental illness - a precursor disease to terminal Socialism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: fight_truth_decay
George H.W. Bush supporting the Saudi royal family and friends from which the 9/11 terrorists and their leader, Osama bin Laden, emerged?

He's got a point there.

18 posted on 06/28/2003 7:40:38 PM PDT by dagnabbit (Proud Hispanic African-American Gay Muslim since June 23, 2003)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tbpiper
Criticism of a president has never been considered treason.
Does that include doing it from enemy territory?

Probably.
It also would include obstructing ports to hamper the flow of military goods.
It would also include going to enemy territory to act as a "human shield".
It would also include supporting literally hundreds of programs that work to destroy the Constitution.
It might even include zealously promoting lifestyles and immigration that work to destroy American culture.

19 posted on 06/28/2003 7:43:44 PM PDT by Teacher317
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: tbpiper
Criticism of a president has never been considered treason.
Does that include doing it from enemy territory?

Probably.
It also would include obstructing ports to hamper the flow of military goods.
It would also include going to enemy territory to act as a "human shield".
It would also include supporting literally hundreds of programs that work to destroy the Constitution.
It might even include zealously promoting lifestyles and immigration that work to destroy American culture.

But they conveniently forget to include those parts when they weigh their "patriotism".

20 posted on 06/28/2003 7:44:21 PM PDT by Teacher317
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 161-170 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