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

Skip to comments.

Democrats have a Lott of trouble: Ann Coulter says media knowingly hiding fact [Morning re-post]
WorldNetDaily.com ^ | Thursday, December 19, 2002 | Ann Coulter

Posted on 12/19/2002 1:03:20 AM PST by JohnHuang2

Edited on 12/19/2002 1:04:15 AM PST by Admin Moderator. [history]

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.


TOPICS: Editorial; Front Page News; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-63 next last
To: MeeknMing
BTTT on this fine "gutting" of the typically offbase liberal attacks on Republicans.
41 posted on 12/19/2002 7:49:07 AM PST by BOBTHENAILER
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: ravingnutter
Only one problem with that...Lott was born in 1941...he was only 7 years old in 1948!

And how old was Lott when he endorsed the segregationist platform of the Dixiecrats?

42 posted on 12/19/2002 7:56:11 AM PST by SteveTuck
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: cyncooper
Dont bother. Talking to him is like talking to a brick with bad hair (See his profile about his hair)
43 posted on 12/19/2002 8:00:42 AM PST by smith288
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: cyncooper
BUT she also points out that Lott has a penchant for catering to the dems,





So does Bush! Whats your point?
44 posted on 12/19/2002 8:17:31 AM PST by TLBSHOW
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: EternalVigilance
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."

Ann Coulter


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"?



Ann Coulter




45 posted on 12/19/2002 8:22:38 AM PST by TLBSHOW
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: knighthawk; Alamo-Girl; Askel5; JMJ333; patent; livius; NYer; ThomasMore; nickcarraway; sneakers; ..
Ann Coulter ping -- and PING again.
46 posted on 12/19/2002 9:15:04 AM PST by Siobhan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Siobhan
Ann Coulter is RIGHT on the mark with this.
47 posted on 12/19/2002 10:42:09 AM PST by ThomasMore
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: TLBSHOW
As usual, you totally ignore my earlier post that points out your seeming inability to understand plain English...and try to shift the conversation to the President. Look up non sequiter in the dictionary, if you own one.

Ann Coulter wants Lott out. Deal with it.

Good to see the TLBSHOW that uses punctuation today, though. The other TLBSHOW gets on my nerves more.
48 posted on 12/19/2002 10:54:33 AM PST by EternalVigilance
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: EternalVigilance
Sorry ev you need to learn to read! Stand with the rats if you want to. But Trent isn't going anywhere!

Oh Ann didn't say Lott needs to go but for one reason being a demorat liker! Thats it and the reason you can't deal with it is President Bush is as guilty as Trent for that offense.
49 posted on 12/19/2002 11:08:01 AM PST by TLBSHOW
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

Comment #50 Removed by Moderator

To: JohnHuang2
bttt
51 posted on 12/19/2002 11:20:05 AM PST by lodwick
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: solzhenitsyn
Actually, Lott was only interested in job 3; keeping his own pork projects in place and himself as majority leader.
52 posted on 12/19/2002 5:56:41 PM PST by Jimmy Valentine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2

On NOW at RadioFR!

Join John Bender and …WISH MERRY CHRISTMAS TO OUR MEN IN UNIFORM! Call 866-RadioFR!

Click HERE to listen LIVE while you FReep!

Click HERE to chat in the RadioFR chat room!

Miss a show?

Click HERE for RadioFR Archives!

53 posted on 12/19/2002 5:56:53 PM PST by Bob J
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jimmy Valentine
Pleased to hear from you, Jimmy Valentine! If you'll forgive the stupid question, are you actually the brother of the distinguished Freeper known as "Jimmy Valentine's brother"?
54 posted on 12/19/2002 6:43:15 PM PST by solzhenitsyn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: lodwick
bttt
55 posted on 12/19/2002 7:01:38 PM PST by Siobhan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2
She is awesome, isn't she ...??

I can hardly wait to see her in person at CPAC!!
56 posted on 12/19/2002 11:41:54 PM PST by CyberAnt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: CyberAnt
She is awesome, isn't she ...??

Awesome and then some! Nobody quite like her -- her wit is biting, her insight always unique.

If Coulter didn't exist, we'd have to invent her =^)

57 posted on 12/19/2002 11:43:55 PM PST by JohnHuang2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2
I loved her book "Slander". I'm planning to bring it with me and have her autograph it. Well ... I'm hoping anyway.
58 posted on 12/19/2002 11:48:31 PM PST by CyberAnt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]

To: CyberAnt
I'm planning to bring it with me and have her autograph it.

Lucky you! =^)

59 posted on 12/19/2002 11:55:01 PM PST by JohnHuang2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

To: solzhenitsyn
Yes, he is distinguished, and yes, I am his brother, and no he ain't heavy.

Regards,

60 posted on 12/21/2002 4:31:15 AM PST by Jimmy Valentine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-63 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