Battered Republican Syndrome (Ann Coulter does not agree with Sean Hannity that liberals are good)

worldnetdaily ^ | 8/28/2002 | Ann Coulter

[TLBSHOW]

Battered Republican Syndrome

For my escapist summer reading at the beach this week, I've been flipping through Sean Hannity's fabulous new book, "Let Freedom Ring." It's a fine book, with many excellent illustrations of how consistently wrong liberals have been for half a century, give or take a few years. But I must take issue with Sean on one point.

Perplexingly, he writes: "The vast majority of liberals are good, sincere, well-meaning people." This cheery bonhomie is beginning to sound like the mantra about the "vast majority" of Muslims being peaceful and has produced the same good results. I think it's time to drop the infernal nonsense about liberals being well-intentioned but misguided. In the spirit of Hannityesque magnanimity, I will say that there is only one thing wrong with liberals: They're no good.

As Hannity notes, liberals never reciprocate the love conservatives keep sending their way. They don't like us. They don't even think we're human. Of this, I am eternally grateful.

Some of the other things liberals believe are:

to move beyond discrimination, we must discriminate;

girls would make excellent Marines;

running gay marriage announcements in the wedding pages will lead to greater acceptance of homosexuality.

They are wrong about everything. Why would anyone want to be liked by these people?

It's sort of cute when Sean's hail-fellow-well-met approach toward liberals is greeted with dismissive grunts. For one thing, I think well enough of Sean to believe he doesn't really mean it. But how many times must we endure a Republican politician droning on about what a fine human being some heinous Democrat is and what a pleasure it was to work with him, only to have the heinous Democrat grudgingly issue some backhanded compliment about the Republican finally seeing the light on this "one issue"?

In the 1996 vice presidential debates, for example, Al Gore said of his opponent Jack Kemp: "Now I want to congratulate Mr. Kemp for being a lonely voice in the Republican Party over the years on this question" of racism and affirmative action. Kemp responded to this demagogic and baseless slander of the Republican Party by saying: "Affirmative action should be predicated upon need, not equality of reward, blah, blah, blah." Gee, thanks, Jack.

President Bush, too, has repeatedly set himself up as the test case of what happens when you try to play nice with a Democrat. After the dignified staff of the dignified former president trashed the White House on their dignified exit, Bush downplayed the property damage, saying: "There might have been a prank or two. Maybe somebody put a cartoon on the wall, but that's OK."

Anyone who knew anyone moving into the Bush White House knew that it was more than a "prank or two." But instead of stopping while they were ahead, pocketing Bush's gracefulness and moving on, the Democrats aggressively attacked Republicans for having falsely accused the Clinton staff of trashing the White House. They cited Bush's magnanimity as evidence that this was a lie. Rep. Anthony Weiner, D-N.Y., demanded an apology from the White House. USA Today ran a snippy article titled "Ex-Clinton staffers on vandalism: Got proof?" Former Clinton press secretary Jake Siewert insinuatingly asked why there were no records of the alleged damage.

And then the full GAO report came back: The Party of the People had done $15,000 worth of property damage to the People's House. Extend an olive branch to Democrats and they bite your hand off.

Bush has invited Sen. Teddy Kennedy to the White House for movie night (to watch the Kennedy hagiography "Thirteen Days"), brought him over to discuss education several times, named a federal building after one brother and gushingly praised the other.

The adulterous drunk who cheated at Harvard and killed a girl at Chappaquiddick responded to these overtures by attacking Bush. "It takes more than good intentions to make a difference," Kennedy said. Asked about Bush's intelligence (a meaningless concept in college admissions but a scientifically provable quality in the cases of Republican presidents and death-row inmates), Kennedy pointedly said only that he found Bush, "engaging and personable."

Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., dismissed Bush's overtures toward Kennedy as calculated political gamesmanship.

(Pop quiz: Did a Republican or Democrat say this about a member of the opposing party – "Your thoughtfulness truly amazes me. ... Thank you, my friend, for your many courtesies. If the world only knew." Answer: That was Sen. Trent Lott on Teddy Kennedy.)

When Bush named the Department of Justice building after Robert Kennedy, Kerry Kennedy Cuomo displayed the renowned Kennedy graciousness by viciously attacking the Bush administration at a pre-dedication ceremony. Noting that her daughter was in the audience, Kennedy Cuomo said: "Kara, if anyone tries to tell you this is the type of justice system your grandpa embraced, you just don't believe it."

This is as we have come to expect from a family of heroin addicts, statutory rapists, convicted and unconvicted female-killers, cheaters, bootleggers and dissolute drunks known as "Camelot." Why would anyone want such people as their "good friends"?

[Chairman Fred]

I learned a long time ago to not let political views interfere with real human relationships,

Obviously, you're not a liberal. They ALWAYS do.

[meyer]

My brother is a strong liberal. We don't talk all that much, especially after the election. He still thinks Goron won. I just can't relate to that.

[onedoug]

Evil does emanate form within the individual. We're all capable of it. The key, I think, is in realizng that, which the liberal mindet, for the most part does not, rather ascribing it to elements outside the individual, such as poverty, racism, television, cultural and moral relativism...i.e, anything to blame, except the values of the individual.

Conservatism essentially holds the indivdual accountable. This goes a long way, I think, towards describing the differences.

[meyer]

"The adulterous drunk who cheated at Harvard and killed a girl at Chappaquiddick..."

I honestly thought that Teddy dunked two in lake Chappaquiddick (and this may be the first time I've spelled that right). I may be wrong.

Anyway, good article as always.

[meyer]

As someone said, the brainwashed masses are well-meaning -- this is why lie-berals use emotion-based rhetoric to corral them. But the leaders of the movement are smug fascists progressively creating an increasingly docile herd.

I don't know who said that, but it is the perfect description of the democratic party today.

[UbIwerks]

I believe that Ann is one of the few conservatives who fully understands liberals.

She is, perhaps, the best political writer on the scene today.

And while no one agrees with me, even her comments in anger about "converting them to Christianity" and "[executing]John Walker Lindh to terrify the liberals" are on the money too.

[Constitution Scholar]

"The vast majority of liberals are good, sincere, well-meaning people."
"The road to hell is paved with good intentions..."
#:P Blah

[goodieD]

I see a few that are well intentioned idiots, the rest are just regular idiots and evil idiots.. I don't think they are all evil..but they are all really really stupid. Even the "edumacated" ones.

[the_doc]

I agree with the wit contained in Ann's outlandish comment about "converting them to Christianity," but if she was seriously floating an idea of Constantinism, she can forget it.

(Only the RCC would ever think you can compell conversions at the point of a sword. I like Augustine, but his defense of Constantinism was one of the worst blunders he ever made.)

[goodieD]

Why would you associate with someone who wanted to allow your kids to be indoctrinated by homosexuals and pedophiles? The Bible says we will be known by the company we keep. If you like associating with people who would rather see you dead than armed, go right ahead.

[Corin Stormhands]

I don't think they are all evil..but they are all really really stupid.

They're evil because they are stupid. They can't see the truth, so they fall in line with the ones who really are evil.

How else could we have elected Bill and Hillary?

[hoosierham]

many people despise the truth; my ex called me "brutally truthful"?!

It is a real challenge to advise someone to "get their head out of their a**" and do it charmingly.

Like the old fellow picking up a 2x4 to train a mule : FIRST, get their attention.

[Hugin]

Ann's examples are all about Democrat politicians. I don't think Sean was really referring to them when he talks about "most liberals". He's talking about the rank and file types who believe what the elites say. Probably a more accurate way to put it would be most liberals think they are good, and believe what they want are good things. They are not liberal out of malice, but out of misplaced altruism. The liberal elites know better, but cynically manipulate them to get their way.

[TLBSHOW]

Your welcome my friend!

[LasVegasMac]

I am really glad she is on my side. I would love to see a true debate between Ann and Hillary. Slice, dice and chill before serving.

I would pay serious $$$ to be a witness to that. One can dream!

Serving? Yuk!!! Just have the garbage truck on standby - shovel that crap out like the rest of the leftovers!

LVM

[Diverdogz]

They are not liberal out of malice, but out of misplaced altruism. The liberal elites know better, but cynically manipulate them to get their way.

Very well put.

[dalereed]

"does that mean you wont associate with them? Even if your mom, dad, son, wife, etc. were a liberal"

You bet!

I won't associate with liberals, do business with them or do work for them.

I make sure they know where I stand and really hope that they hate me. If they don't hate me, they are not only evil but stupid!

[TLBSHOW]

Right on the money with that post. I bet you told Rich your thoughts on liberals after he said that.

[Gritty]

We've all seen it, its not that the "sheeple" are stupid they are just ambivilant, they just dont care about this stuff.

What you are describing here is really "evil". It's much akin to those "good Germans" in Nazi Germany who knew what was going on but preferred to look the other way.

Anyone who doesn't care about the evil around them condones it, ipso facto. That makes them accessories before, during, and after the fact! They are enablers and facilitators of active evil.

I don't thinks such people deserve the time of day, much less the praise Hannity or others heap on them. That only confirms them and makes them feel more righteous about their evil stance and weakens those who genuinely stand against evil.

[Jim Scott]

Brilliant column from the lovely Ann Coulter. She nails it, as usual.

Liberals constantly attack and figuratively de-humanize conservatives, spit on the constitution, despise Christianity, hate middle-class values and most of what makes America great (individuals working hard and contributing to society) while lying through their teeth about what they really stand for: a socialist state run by elists - them.

Ann recognizes this and calls it what it is. Sean Hannity is a good guy and is trying to be generous but Ann is closer to the truth with her characterization of liberals as 'evil'. The fact that they lie about their real goals and about conservatives is enough to put them in that category.

Any moment now we'll get the 'Ann Counter is too harsh' tripe from the 'conservatives' who worry that she'll actually make some people think about the real nature of liberals and the actual effects of liberalism. Thus the 'concerns' about her bluntness and slams at her 'style'. Bah. Take it somewhere else.

Liberals play hardball 100% of the time and it's far past time to give them some of it back and quit acting as if we're dealing with friendly, well-meaning people who 'just don't understand. Maybe Aunt Tilly who's voted Democrat since 1948 becuase her parents loved FDR is ignorant about the real nature of liberalism but not a James Carville. That's who Coulter refers to here, as I see it.

Ann is always willing to go on TV and defend what she writes but not that many liberals will take her up on it without two or more liberal buddies around to shout her down. We've all seen it.

She defends what she writes, she's catching on with average Americans and the liberals are worried. Expect a scathing counter-attack shortly from some liberal activist who will pretend Ann Coulter called every Democrat voter 'evil' and demand she apologize for it. We may even see it on this thread from one of those 'concerned conservatives'.

Fat chance. Truth is hard to take but the lovely Ann Coulter is just the lady to say it. Loud and clear.

As you stated; Go Ann!