This is funny and stupid at the same time. Ann is saying that Lott and Thurmond are racist because they WERE democrats, and that they were acting on orders from Moscow!
See it all here…
It’s fun watching them eat their own, isn’t it?
I don’t know whether to be insulted or amused…
I tried to read it. Can’t. Tired of this woman’s shit.
What a peach…
It’s because (many) conservatives are people of principle. As Charles Krauthammer writes,
So if “neoconservatives” are the embodiment of all that is evil about Democrats, then WHY THE FUCK WAS LOTT THE SENATE REPUBLICAN LEADER???
You all were happy enough to put him in charge before he came down with foot-in-mouth-itis.
When the Republicans start playing partisan politics with each other, the entertainment just gets better…
:rolleyes:
He was Senate leader because he worked hard, and he effectively lobbied for the position. Neoconservatives were never happy with Trent Lott. However, until this scandal came up, there was no practical way to replace him. We see this as an opportunity.
Frankly, I buy more the idea Lott is out on his ass is because he actually put in a good word for affirmative action than I do that people seriously think his comment provides shocking new proof that he’s a racist. These are people who have worked with him for decades, who have freakin focus groups and bigwigs scrutinizing the party’s strengths and weaknesses constantly. If Lott really is still a racist, it wouldn’t be a surprise.
Somerby has pointed out an odd pattern here.
Lott: I didn’t know the CCC was a racist organization. Whoa.
McCain: I didn’t know what sort of magazine the Southern Partisan was when I hired it’s owner as my campaign manager. Damn. How about that!
Bush: I didn’t know that Bob Jones was so anti-Catholic and all that other stuff. Wow. (and they hate my dad?!!)
Ashcroft: CCC a racist organization? Southern Partisan a racist magazine. Geez, who knew? Not me. What a crazy world we live in!
None of these things are new, but now people are acting as if Lott’s connection to the CCC is some sort of shocking new revelation. All that’s changed is that Lott happened to get hit with a juicy media cycle, and in his attempt to apologize ended up publically renouncing conservatism instead of just racism. Affirmative action has nothing to do with racism: but it’s a huge liability to have the leader of the party in the Senate who has made a pledge that puts him, and the whole party, directly in the way of pressure group demands.
Ok I am all confused. In your first as post you quote Charles Krauthammer as saying,
[quote]
many neoconservatives are former liberals…neoconservatives were particularly appalled by Lott’s endorsement of its antithesis, Thurmond segregationism. Not to denounce it–on grounds not of politics but of principle–would be to lose all moral standing on matters of race… [\quote]
And you identify yourself AS a “neoconservative” in the last post at the end…
But isn’t the gist of Ann Coulter’s piece that the former liberal neoconservatives are the embodiment of evil, and Lott is the worst of the bunch?
What of that?
Shoulda previewed. Poop.
Lott is not a neoconservative. He supports government spending (especially in his home state) and plaintiffs’ attorneys (especially his brother-in-law and college roommate Dickie Scruggs, who was awarded a multimillion dollar fortune in the tobacco lawsuits.)
So then what the heck is he?
A pol.
Other than dead meat politically, that is…
He’s an asshole, of course.
But then you knew that already.
I knew that, but the Republicans are all acting like it’s all news to them. I’m just saying it’s fun watching them squirm away from him like slugs from salt.
Did you know Ann has her own message board?
—Lott is not a neoconservative. He supports government spending (especially in his home state)—
What “neoconservative” in the Senate has taken a stand against government spending in their home states?
—However, until this scandal came up, there was no practical way to replace him. We see this as an opportunity.—
Ah.
http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?s=&threadid=148642
Hmm… puts this thread in the different light.
Seems to me that these “principled conservatives” could have spent a few bucks on an investigation of Trent and his buddies at any time over the past decade. That sort of dirt digging is after all a popular pubbie pastime. Surely moral considerations don’t put a stop to it at the line between political partys?