Coulter: all presidential assasssins and thwarted ass'ns were left wing or apolitical

[Ladewig]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2JM4APi4XLQ

I am having some trouble with her accusation. I am not sure how to identify the political leanings of the Puerto Rican separatists who tried to assassinate Harry Truman in 1950. Can anyone explain where these folks fall on the political spectrum?

How does J.W. Booth fit in here? Surely he fired the shot because of his political beliefs, but I see no evidence that he was left wing.

Charles J. Guiteau shot Garfield in 1881. He did so because he believed that his efforts to help elect a Republican president deserved some formal recognition. He surely cannot be counted as left wing or apolitical.

As for the claim that B.H. Obama is safer than G.W. Bush, I would love to see the statistics from the U.S. Secret Service concerning written death threats.

 

[Lurker]

Coulter is happy to make declarations like this whether there is any truth or not in the allegation. I wouldn't take any such declaration by her as truthful at all.

 

[KingMerv00]

J. W. Booth was strongly in favor of state's rights and smaller federal government.

 

[Darat]

So a typical leftie!

 

[Puppycow]

I would call Booth on the right, although I'm not even sure if they used the terms left and right in those days. I would also call Lincoln a liberal or progressive for his time and Booth a conservative or reactionary.

 

[Puppycow]

We have to remember that in those days the democratic party and republican party were exactly the opposite of what they are today. The democratic party was the party of the South and conservatives and the republican party was the party of the North and liberals. After the war, African-Americans overwhelmingly supported the party of Lincoln (republicans) basically up until at least the FDR administration. The end of the Southern wing of the democratic party came when Strom Thurmond and the Dixiecrats broke off from the mainstream of the democratic party. Then the republican party sensed a political opportunity and the rest is history.

 

[Cleon]

Uh, Booth was a Confederate type, and assassinated Lincoln out of revenge. Needless to say, this is not a sentiment one frequently finds on the political Left.

Once again, Coulter = full of it.

 

[Cicero]

I would call Booth on the right, although I'm not even sure if they used the terms left and right in those days. I would also call Lincoln a liberal or progressive for his time and Booth a conservative or reactionary.

Libs have been trying to claim the Republican Lincoln as one of their own since FDR hired playwrite Robert Sherwood (author of the 1938 "Abe Lincoln in Illinois") as his speechwriter. His name was appropriated by American communists for the Abraham Lincoln Brigade that fought in the Spanish Civil War. It was not enough that Booth assassinated Lincoln, the revisionists in their quest to make Lincoln a communist/socialist have to assassinate his character as well.

 

[headscratcher4]

I'm not sure why Squeaky Fromm, for example and a Manson follower -- would be considered a "liberal".... my recollection that while wearing the patina of the hippies, Manson was facinated by Hitler and the idea of generating a race war that would bring the blacks to power but eventually bring Manson to power where he would enslave the blacks. Anyway, big dose of crazy there, not quite sure how that kind of crazy fits into this silly left/right divide.

Also, my reaction to the point is a big "so what"? It is a little like arguing that those in the Jim Crow days that approved of lynching would probably vote republican today...I mean, it is sort of meaningless out of context. It is provocative but tells you nothing....like Glenn Beck saying that liberals would be slave owners, when so many of our founding fathers were slave owners, what does that even mean?

 

[Praktik]

Also, my reaction to the point is a big "so what"? It is a little like arguing that those in the Jim Crow days that approved of lynching would probably vote republican today...I mean, it is sort of meaningless out of context. It is provocative but tells you nothing....like Glenn Beck saying that liberals would be slave owners, when so many of our founding fathers were slave owners, what does that even mean?

Hmmm... does that mean the founding fathers were liberal??

Skousen must be spinning in his grave

 

[geni]

As for the claim that B.H. Obama is safer than G.W. Bush, I would love to see the statistics from the U.S. Secret Service concerning written death threats.

Up aparently:

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/w...This=true&TB_iframe=true&height=550&width=980

 

[Ziggurat]

We have to remember that in those days the democratic party and republican party were exactly the opposite of what they are today.

There have been some changes, but certainly not everything. The Republican party was pro-business from the start, for example, and it was also much more hawkish than the Democrats. The 1864 Democrat election slogan was "compromise with the south".

 

[dudalb]

Uh, Booth was a Confederate type, and assassinated Lincoln out of revenge. Needless to say, this is not a sentiment one frequently finds on the political Left.

Once again, Coulter = full of it.

Type??? Hell, Booth was running a espionage ring for the South before the assination. He was very,very, inept at it and did not produce much in the way of useful information, but it shows he was foot stomping confederate a long time before the Assisantion.

And I think James Earl Ray would qualify as on the political right.

I don't get why Coulter makes such stupid statements that are so freaking easy to be called on.

 

[headscratcher4]

Type??? Hell, Booth was running a espionage ring for the South before the assination. He was very,very, inept at it and did not produce much in the way of useful information, but it shows he was foot stomping confederate a long time before the Assisantion.

And I think James Earl Ray would qualify as on the political right.

I don't get why Coulter makes such stupid statements that are so freaking easy to be called on.

We're talking about shooting Presidents...assasinating civil rights leaders, that's another matter.

 

[Cleon]

Type??? Hell, Booth was running a espionage ring for the South before the assination. He was very,very, inept at it and did not produce much in the way of useful information, but it shows he was foot stomping confederate a long time before the Assisantion.

Yeah, "type" as in "sort of person." "Sympathizer" didn't seem strong enough, and calling him a "soldier" would attribute more value to him than what he accomplished.

And I think James Earl Ray would qualify as on the political right.

Or Byron de la Beckwith.

I don't get why Coulter makes such stupid statements that are so freaking easy to be called on.

Because she knows she's right, even when she's wrong.

 

[Snide]

Type??? Hell, Booth was running a espionage ring for the South before the assination. He was very,very, inept at it and did not produce much in the way of useful information, but it shows he was foot stomping confederate a long time before the Assisantion.

And I think James Earl Ray would qualify as on the political right.

I don't get why Coulter makes such stupid statements that are so freaking easy to be called on.

She's smart enough to know where the money is.

 

[headscratcher4]

I don't get why Coulter makes such stupid statements that are so freaking easy to be called on.

Becasue, realistically, she doesn't get called on them. She throws the gernade and pays no price...indeed, throwing the grenage puts food on her table...else why would she be on any show?

What's hard for me to figure, though I suspect I know the answer, is whether these interviewers are a). just happy to let her throw the grenade 'cause it gets them publicity, b). not smart or informed enough to care about the stupidity or factual basis of some of the things she says.

I suspect it is a bit of both but mostly b.

 

[Cicero]

I don't get why Coulter makes such stupid statements that are so freaking easy to be called on.

Really? I mentioned the left-wing fruitcake assassins back in August. A.C. is definitely on to something.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=5027356#post5027356

 

[Cleon]

Really? I mentioned the left-wing fruitcake assassins back in August. A.C. is definitely on to something.

No, she isn't, unless you think John Wilkes Booth was a raving leftist. And if you do think that, then you get the laughing dog.

I swear, Coulter could say that the world is flat, and you'd still pop in to defend her.

 

[Cicero]

No, she isn't, unless you think John Wilkes Booth was a raving leftist. And if you do think that, then you get the laughing dog.

I swear, Coulter could say that the world is flat, and you'd still pop in to defend her.

I swear. A.C. could say the world is round, and you'd still pop in to ridicule her.