Democrats: A Lott of trouble (ANN COULTERS VIEWS ON TRENT LOTT ATTACK)

worldnetdaily ^ | 12/18/2002 | Ann Coulter

[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."

[TLBSHOW]

I don't like polls they can tell stories some times.

[Jhoffa_]

Well..

While I personally think we blew a good chance to take the race battle to them, that was yesterday..

Today I am worried about the rubber spined and their rubber stamps for affirmative action.

If he's going to lay down on race issues then that's clearly not acceptable.

I mean, hell he may as well turn the Senate over to Daschle on race matters if that's the way it's going to be.

I think he crossed the Rubicon on this one.. There's no way back from where he is now.

He's finally alienated everyone.

[Texasforever]

I am puzzled by the poll on Lott ( question: Regarding Lott) that took place this morning and is displayed on forum page screen bottom right corner.

Because it is fairly obvious that Lott cannot remain ML. He is now in the final stages of the Stockholm syndrome. The only support Lott has received is in the cowardly reaction of the GOP to a phony racism charge. That damage is going to be long lasting because the next ML, whomever it is, will not challenge anything that has the slightest hint of racial bias IOW every domestic program that comes before the senate.

[Jhoffa_]

That damage is going to be long lasting because the next ML, whomever it is, will not challenge anything that has the slightest hint of racial bias IOW every domestic program that comes before the senate.

Sure, just ask Pavlov..

Worked for him.

[Sabertooth]

While I personally think we blew a good chance to take the race battle to them, that was yesterday..

I think the knives are being sharpened, but we can hardly follow Captain Dixiecrat into that battle.

[Texasforever]

Worked for him.

What amazes me is that I have seen many posts saying that Frist is too liberal but if it meant getting rid of Lott that was ok. I thought Lott was too liberal and he has a 93% ACU rating. Something does not compute.

[Jhoffa_]

I don't know much about Frist, but I was under the impression (mistaken I hope, anyone?) that he is a gun grabber.

Now that's something we don't need. My gosh, the last thing we need is an assault from the right here.

[Political Junkie Too]

I meant to post this earlier (around 7:30pm PST), but got knocked off the computer.

FYI..........just because someone has a differing opinion regarding a particular issue from what you might hold, it does not make them a RAT, a DU'er or a disruptor. In other words....... Knock it off!

I'm sure you've been paying attention since this began. I won't speak for TLB, but I too have seen a tendency lately for one to knock off a bunch of one-liners to every post in a thread that one sees. It's as if one logs on, reads down a thread, and posts whatever word-association pops into one's head at the moment. That doesn't lead to reasoned debate, only derision.

Not being one to dwell on problems, but rather, to offer solutions, let me say that it appears that most posters here fall into these camps:

1) Those who feel that Lott didn't say what people are hearing. Lott was repeating a running gag between himself and a senile old man to make him smile, and political opportunists (who know the truth) are running with it for partisan gain. That Lott must stand up against this PC insanity, but that he's an ineffective Majority Leader and should be replaced, but on our terms, not Democrat agitators' terms. Count me in this group.

2) Those who feel that Lott is a closet racist with a past history of supporting segregationist positions and that this "gaffe" is just another example of a growing pattern of behavior. Keeping Lott in power proves that all Republicans are racists at heart, and Lott will be used as our "albatross," disqualifying us from taking any moral high-ground position on issues of race, taxes, education, or whatever might prove vulnerable.

3) Those who feel that Lott is an idiot and an ineffective leader with no backbone, and will sell out everyone just to be liked. No matter how specious the charge, it should be used as justification to toss him overboard for the betterment of the party, even if it leads to more flimsy attacks and escalates the "politics of personal destruction."

4) Those who feel that Lott made a "mistake," but that we are Republicans who are held to a higher standard and will not stoop to the gutter-level of Democrats. That we will call for Lott's resignation on principle even if it costs us the majority that was stolen from us two years ago. That even though we are at a pivotal cusp in American history with Republicans controlling the Executive branch, both chambers of Congress, and with many vacancies in the Judiciary and at least two retiring Supreme Court Justices, we will gladly give it up in order to preserve our dignity amongst proven liars, cheats, perjurers and racketeers from the other side of the Aisle.

I've been squarely in the first camp since this story broke. I think the debate here has been healthy, the opinions diverse, and the passion evident, but I think the "hit and run" posting tactics have been detracting from the discourse.

-PJ

[Jhoffa_]

PS:

I thought Lott was too liberal and he has a 93% ACU rating. Something does not compute.

I know.

My concern is we are going to come out of this allot worse than we went into it.

We could:

1) Wind up with Trenty rubber stamping all things racial. Which will be everything by the time the rats and the press is through.

2) Wind up with a gigantic RINO as SML, thus thwarting our agenda yet again.. Maybe even setting it back.

3) Wind up with a rat appointee as Senator in Lott's place.

4) Some combination of all the bad aspects above.

I wish we would have addressed this much differently, but I think it's too late now.

I think all that's left to do is see how it plays out and just bite the bullet if it goes poorly for us.

[FreeReign]

The only support Lott has received is in the cowardly reaction of the GOP to a phony racism charge. That damage is going to be long lasting because the next ML, whomever it is, will not challenge anything that has the slightest hint of racial bias IOW every domestic program that comes before the senate.

The racism charge was phony and it came from both the left and right even here at FR. That's something the next ML will loooooooooong not forget. Our domestic agenda is screwed.

It's not too hard to see why Trent gave it up in January of 99.

[Mo1]

Lott was simply telling a self-effacing joke about his and Strom's segregationist past. Lott should not leave his leadership role for such remarks.

Affirmative action, a King holiday, numerous apologies -- Lott should be removed from leadership for supporting such.

That I agree with

[Political Junkie Too]

Wind up with Trenty rubber stamping all things racial... thwarting our agenda...

I get the feeling that you think our 51 Senator majority has been reduced down to 1. Will Lott be THAT powerful, that the other 50 Republican Senators would be reduced to the status of "potted plants?" Don't you think others would stop him before things got to that point? Aren't there any failsafes in the Republican caucus that would kick in? Aren't there any "recall" provisions to replace the Majority Leader if something like that were to happen?

-PJ

[Salvation]

** 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.**

Worth repeating for all the lurking dims to read!

[ApesForEvolution]

Thank you. I've prayed about this, truly, since the Sunday morning that Russert started this and knew Lott wouldn't come out and make the case. Then, I honestly saw as it dragged out that the BET Classic was going to be a sell out. I've studied Lott ferociously since xxxlinton's Impeachment trial and knew that, sooner or later, that former RAT was going to thoroughly pull a fast one on us. I didn't think all his past affiliations would create a land mine that he walked into like this, but the moment he did, I knew it was all over. In this day and age, a man with no core beliefs on the poster of a party that is trying to steer a nation of which half have no core beliefs would create a horrific scenario for future generations. And I see this moment in time, with the last few years events and blessings, really starting with Bush's overcoming the communist cheat machine in the '00 election, as an opportunity where we can't make mistakes and must clear the decks to get the type of generational-majority foothold that will allow us to repair this damaged, damaged great nation. I'm more passionate about moving decisively, forcefully, now, than ever before. Can you tell? (:o

[ApesForEvolution]

"Don't you think others would stop him before things got to that point?"

Start with Lott, throw in some RINOs and add the RAT party and it's all a disaster. As I've said before, Lott is a train wreck waiting for an audience. The audience was BET.

[ApesForEvolution]

LOL! hmmmmhmmmmmhmmmmmmm.

[ApesForEvolution]

What? Oh, it's you....

Annnnnddddd.... set bump

[Jhoffa_]

Look, I used to believe in all that till I saw them run a pack of deer over a simple up or down vote on impeachment..

Imo, Specter won the "Golden Spine" award for invoking "Scottish Law" to avoid actually saying the words "Yea" or "Nay" outright.

They are an old boys club and are known for their lack of principles and back room deals.

So, No... I don't expect any checks or balances to ride in and save the day.

[ApesForEvolution]

"I want trent as leader and I want Bush to say so"

But you said you wanted Bush to say out of ML affairs? Which is it Todd?

[Avoiding_Sulla]

bump!

Congrats.

What the Lott incident shows is that Republicans have to be careful about letting Democrats into our party....Republicans made Southern Democrats drop the race nonsense when they entered the Republican Party.

When I read this a few hours ago I was thinking like you that those lines needed reiterating.

When I came back to the thread it was already nearly 400 posts, and so hadda search for the phrase "Southern Democrats" to see if anyone else noticed that important observation. So far it appears to be only you and me. Here's hoping we can remedy that.

Both Ann today and Mark Steyn on Monday pointed out why it is not the rest of the GOP that is disloyal and outa step. It is not the rest of the GOP that is falling for the race baiting. It is Lott, and only Lott, who chummed for the race sharks to attack his party.

Coulter:

What the Lott incident shows is that Republicans have to be careful about letting Democrats into our party....

Republicans made Southern Democrats drop the race nonsense when they entered the Republican Party.

Steyn:

For a century and a half, race is one issue the Republicans have been right on--or, at the very minimum, less wrong. We've grown used to the Democrats' strange black-is-white world, where Al Gore apparently genuinely believes his father was a civil rights crusader rather than a civil rights obstacle. Segregation is the Democrats' history, and for Trent Lott to give them an excuse to dump it on the GOP doorstep is all the reason Republicans needed to be done with him once and for all.

Both of these excellent commentators make it quite clear that it is not the grassroot conservative GOP who has let down Lott. It is Lott who keeps giving a resoundingly traitorous gift to our adversaries. What is it? A longing to be reaccepted by the Democrats he abandoned in the '70s?

Because the Rats allow Byrd to remain not only without censure, but with honor (forgodsakes, he was President Protem for how long?), some of our fellow pubbies are letting the Rats set the standards for what constitutes loyalty. They think we should rally around a man who, at the very least, should cause any of us to not just question his intelligence but also his past promise to leave "the race nonsense" behind.

For what it's worth, I think these two conservative writers make it quite clear why some of our fellow FReepers have been misplacing their sense of loyalty. For the sake of simple honest decency, it's not the number of bodies our party needs to stand behind. That's for the Rats. What is at the very core of Republican principle that deserves our loyalty is that the GOP stands for freedom for all men, regardless of what group they're apt to be categorized by the true racists, to achieve what God has imbued in them the skill to achieve. Race is the history of Democrats, long earned by Democrats, and still being earned by Democrats.