Frist already being demonized by the DemocRATS

Fox News | 12-20-2002 | NewBomb Turk

[rintense]

I knew this would happen. It doesn't matter who is picked, the Dems will run them through the ringer. It's time for all Republicans to stand up and say enough is enough!

And hey, if the Dems think all Republicans are racist, then why and the hell do they care who we pick?

[MeekOneGOP]

And according to Hilliary's just released statement, as reported by FOX's Shep Smith, all Republicans are racists.

Not surprising.....

You may have seen this already, but it's applicable in this case nontheless. For those that haven't seen it:

To: MeeknMing

Democrats are a strange bunch especially their leaders. They complain about politics of personnel destruction when that is how they try to divide the country. They have little pride in America, it seems that the American people serve for their pleasure only. If you don't cotton to the democratic line, you aren't American. They used the surplus for other countries and other people when there was much to do here at home. They take our best technologies and sell them to nations that will use the knowledge against us. They lack an enormous amount of integrity and don't seem to care as they flaunt sleazy ethics and morality in our faces.

We didn't have a government for the people under the Clinton administration, what we had was a Democrats Only need apply type of government and now they are attempting to replace a People's Government with their tired old arguments about an education system they didn't fix in 8 years, a health care program they messed up and couldn't fix in 8 years, a social security system they say needs fixing and did nothing about it in 8 years when in reality that system is fine as long as lawmakers don't spend the money that social security is meant for; they spent 8 years hiring federal workers with no qualifications as long as it meant a democratic vote leaving behind a dumbed down, bloated army of sleazy federal laborers who have plundered their departments of millions in dollars and equipment.

Democrats seem to have no respect, no real base from which true justice can spring, only justice that bends for them. They have no enthusiasm for country/nation, no pride, just the spoils from a rich nation for the DNC. They continue to huddle with shady and corrupt people both here in America and abroad for reasons that only benefit them. They are elitists and exclude the real Americans as they race for the Marxist Utopia they have dreamed about...where individual successes are discouraged in favor of a commune like population. They have learned nothing from failed socialism or failed communism; they still want to live like kings all the while painting a glowing picture of togetherness for the masses who work for them. It is called Slavery, servitude to a few at the top, domination over the people through higher taxes and rules and regulations. Democrats want a Unionized nation/world of bondage and they can surely have it by dividing the country with the deceptive lies they and the press propagandize with daily.

Stand tall Americans and stand firmly for the principals of our Constitution and the Declaration of Independence, both of which are like the fabled Vampires silver cross or spike to the leading democrats, they don't want you to have either; it is these people who would return this country to the quagmire of corruption of the Clinton/Gore/Reno years.

12 posted on 7/30/02 8:42 AM Central by yoe

[hchutch]

Yep. Most folks will see through this one. Frist's the genuine article, and the Dems are gonna be sorry that Corporal Cueball EVER decided to make an issue of this.

April Fool, Demoncraps!

[mewzilla]

Well, I can understand Hilliary's libelous hissy fit in a way...Lott was the best butt boy the Dems ever had...Looks like the Dems shot themselves in the foot this time. Frist is going to be their worst nightmare.

[YaYa123]

Alan Colmes is on FOX listing voter intimidation that took place against democratic candidates in Louisiana and Arkansas, he says it's been reported on ever since the election. Shepard Smith asks Colmes where it's been reported...Colmes doesn't know.

Colmes doesn't know why John Conyers waited until December 17 to write Attorney General Ashcroft accusing Bill Frist of being involved with voter intimadation, he hopes it's not the democrats falsely accusing Frist of voter intimidation. DUH

Hold onto your hats folks. The democrats have been dealt a disasterous blow with Lott resigning. They've lost their designated whipping boy, now they've got to resort to the ridiculous. I hope someone points out to Democrats they brought this on themselves. Maxine Waters, The Black Caucus, the NAACP...they over-reached...got caught up with their powerplay. I bet Tom Daschle is pulling his hair out!

[Luis Gonzalez]

Time to take a stand.

[Carry_Okie]

The following should shed some real light on this mess:

THE REAL PROBLEM WITH LOTT

By Timothy Robert Wyatt
http://www.tarheells.com/

In the wake of Trent Lott’s recent statement of support for Strom Thurmond’s 1948 presidential bid, and Lott’s subsequent apologies, the one point on which everyone seems to agree is that Lott has done something shameful. Lott’s comments are routinely labeled as “racially insensitive” by supposedly objective news reporters, despite the fact that his comments did not touch on race at all.
Similarly, Thurmond’s presidential campaign is roundly acknowledged as having been racist, with no evidence for this claim except the fact that he supposedly ran on the “segregationist” platform of the “Dixiecrat” party.

It all makes one wish that reporters and politicians were held to the same standards of accuracy that the rest of us are. Simple research would have turned up the fact that Thurmond ran on the States Rights Democratic Party ticket. “Dixiecrat” was a derogatory nickname coined by the Charlotte News.

And whatever the party’s platform may have been, neither the party nor Thurmond called for the country to become more segregated than it already was. Instead, the position most commonly attributed to Thurmond was that integration should not be “forced by the federal bayonet.” His was a states-rights argument: Race relations were to be determined by the individual states themselves. The Constitution did not grant the federal government authority over these matters, and the 10th Amendment specifically reserved all powers not delegated to the federal government to the states themselves, “or to the people.”

In 1948, the Washington Evening Star wrote that “Thurmond’s record as a progressive advocate for a better deal for the Negro of the South entitles him to a respectful hearing.” It is a shame that Thurmond’s stance no longer warrants a respectful hearing in 2002, and that this “progressive advocate” for black America is now roundly criticized as having been a segregationist or racist.

It is true that Thurmond’s bid for the presidency was precipitated by President Harry Truman’s civil rights proposal, but Thurmond did not oppose civil rights. At the 1948 Democratic convention, Thurmond said, “We do not wish to take away from any American his constitutional rights, but we do not intend that our constitutional rights [those reserved by the 10th Amendment] shall be sacrificed for the selfish and sordid purpose of gaining minority votes in doubtful states.”

Thurmond correctly recognized Truman’s proposal as little more than an election-year gimmick. In fact, the three-plank proposal was first outlined to Truman by his advisor Clark Clifford in a strategic memo entitled, “The Politics of 1948.” Clifford and Truman believed that the presidential election would be determined by the urban black vote in California, Illinois, New York, and Ohio. Clifford encouraged Truman to win that vote by offering a “civil rights” package, and to ignore a possible Southern backlash: “As always, the South can be considered safely Democratic. And in forming national policy can be safely ignored.” Were it not for Thurmond giving Southerners another option in 1948, the South would probably still today be ignored when it comes to national policy.

The first plank of Truman’s proposal was to eliminate the poll tax in Southern states. Thurmond did not oppose this measure; he himself had recommended that South Carolina eliminate its poll tax during his gubernatorial inaugural address in 1947. However, he correctly argued that the issue should be decided at the state level. Article I, Section 4, Clause 1 of the Constitution specifically granted each state complete control over the manner in which elections were to be held. And as long as it was applied uniformly, regardless of race, the poll tax did not violate the 15th Amendment. As much as Thurmond may have disliked the poll tax, he realized that it was clearly unconstitutional for the federal government to dictate it out of existence.

The second plank of Truman’s proposal was to make lynching a federal offense. Thurmond understood this proposal to imply that the states either could not or would not adequately prosecute lynch mobs. However, in 1947, as Governor of South Carolina, Thurmond had directed his state to prosecute the largest lynching trial ever in the history of the nation. Based on an anonymous tip, Thurmond directed the state police to arrest 31 white men accused of lynching Willie Earle, a black man in jail for murder. At the time, Thurmond said, “We in South Carolina want the world to know we will tolerate no mob violence.” After his yeoman efforts in solving that crime at the state level, Thurmond rightfully felt insulted by Truman’s implication that federal intervention was necessary.

The third plank of Truman’s proposal was to institute minority-hiring quotas through the creation of a Fair Employment Practices Commission. Truman justified this using the federal government’s authority over interstate commerce granted by Article I, Section 8, Clause 3 of the Constitution. However, Thurmond correctly argued that the federal government had absolutely no authority to mandate hiring practices for the vast majority of companies that did not participate in interstate commerce. Today, polls consistently show that most people of all races agree that race should not be a factor in hiring. Thurmond’s color-blind position in 1948 seems to be more progressive, and certainly more constitutional, than Truman’s quota plan.

Thurmond’s acts as an elected official support the notion that his concern was states rights, not racism, but he recognized that his stance would attract bigots to his campaign. He took special pains to identify those individuals and distance himself from them. After rejecting the support of known bigot Gerald L.K. Smith in 1948, Thurmond told Time magazine, “We do not invite and we do not need the support of Gerald L.K. Smith or any other rabble-rousers who use race prejudice and class hatred to inflame the emotions of the people.”

In 1980, Thurmond said that those who viewed his campaign as racist “misconstrued the whole thing. It was a battle of federal power versus state power. That was my fight.” The evidence certainly backs him up. (It is a myth that Thurmond has acknowledged that he ran a racist campaign and has apologized for it. In 1998, he told the Columbia State newspaper, “I don’t have anything to apologize for.”)

So why did Lott feel the need to apologize? He said, “A poor choice of words conveyed to some that I embraced the discarded policies of the past.” Unfortunately, Thurmond’s stance in 1948 - a literal interpretation of the Constitution and an acknowledgement of the sovereignty of individual states - has become a discarded policy of the past. In that time, Lott has become a complicit part of a federal government that no longer sees any constitutional bounds to its authority. State legislators and governors have become willing yes-men who cede state sovereignty in exchange for payouts of highway funds and storm damage relief.

One has to wonder what Lott meant by saying that if the country had elected Thurmond in 1948, “we wouldn’t have had all these problems over all these years.” Could he have possibly meant that we wouldn’t be saddled with a gigantic national debt, produced by years of federal government overspending and overreaching its authority?

If that is indeed what he meant, he should have said so. Instead, he compounded his problem by going along with the deceptive claim that Thurmond ran a racist campaign. By refusing to defend his colleague (and his Mississippi constituency, which did indeed vote for Thurmond), Lott proved that he lacked the most important characteristic of a Southern gentleman: honor. And that is why he should resign.

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

BTTT!

[rintense]

I urge everyone on FR, Republican, Libertarian, Inde, or whatever to write to the RNC and their Republican reps to urge them to take a stand against this assault by the Dems. Trust me, it's going to get much uglier in the next few days.

And now is the time to grab the swords and stand up and fight for what's right.

[what's up]

I believe Lott didn't really do as terrible a job at it as is widely accepted among conservatives.

[cardinal4]

bump!!

[rs79bm]

Frist is a surgeon. He knows a hell of a lot more about abortion than the people complaining do.

[mississippi red-neck]

Don't be surprized if Bill Frist takes his name out of the hat.

[Stultis]

"Frist already being demonized by the DemocRATS"

Excellent! Someday soon we'll be saying, "remember way back when it was Republicans who were percieved as 'mean-spirited'?"

No need to get too upset about this. Just smile, maybe mention Frist's annual visits to Africa where he does volunteer medical work, and let the evil Dems expose their hatred.

[samantha]

We need to encourage these idiots to keep this crap up,especially in a time for peace and good will. Dr Frist will be lauded for his many wonderful accomplishments especially doing open heart surgery on tiny babies.

[P-Marlowe]

This is a good sign that maybe Frist is our guy. The more they demonize him, the more I will support him.

Unfortunately there is a smear campaign going on against Frist here on FR. From my research the smear campaign is baseless. Lets give this guy a chance to prove his conservative credentials. So far, by the reaction of the democrats, this is not their guy. Praise the Lord.

[rwfromkansas]

Interesting.

Well, he didn't do much to fight for conservatism.

At least Frist will be a bit tougher.

[okie01]

"Similarly, Thurmond’s presidential campaign is roundly acknowledged as having been racist, with no evidence for this claim except the fact that he supposedly ran on the “segregationist” platform of the “Dixiecrat” party."

I can't imagine how Wyatt could come to this conclusion.

I was eight years old at the time. And even I had a clear understanding that the Dixiecrat movement was all about rigid segregation.

[concerned about politics]

I don't understand why FOX isn't reporting the fact that Strom was a Democrat segragationist presidential contender, and Lotts family, also Democrats, voted for him. Lott was a 7 year old boy at the time.
If Lott spoke like a segragationist from his heart as the Democrats claim, it was a Democrat up bringing they were hearing!

[Search4Truth]

Outstanding!