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/washington/articles/2009/10/18/secret_service_under_strain_as_leaders_face_more_t hreats/?page=1&placeValuesBeforeTB_=savedValues&KeepThis=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".
http://www.sonofthesouth.net/compromise-with-south.jpg

[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://forums.randi.org/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.

[Cleon]

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

Hah! That's clever!

So...Booth. Leftist or not?

[headscratcher4]

Successful Assasins

Booth...Confederate sympathiser
Guiteau...Batsh*t crazy GOP office seeker
Czolgosz ...anarchist influenced
Oswald...Communist wannabe

So, she's really not even half right...Booth and Guiteau (sp?) don't really fall into the modern leftist/rightest divide, and Guiteau really was completely "god is one of the voices in my head" nuts. I suppose it is arguable that an Anarchist is a "leftist" -- though there is a bit of the libertarian about it all. Oswald speaks for himself...he was a wanna-be commie, but certainly he doesn't fit neatly into an organized political actor...like the rest, a loner.

Now, I know we can argue about the attempted assasinations as well, but of the successful ones, Coulter's statement that they were "all" lefties is demonstrably false -- and it is problematic even in situations like Oswald where you can put it into a marginally modern political context.

[Cicero]

Hah! That's clever!

So...Booth. Leftist or not?

He was an actor. But beyond that, he shouted "Sic semper tyrannis" after he shot Lincoln. This is the state motto of Virginia as designed by Alexander Hamilton. Hamilton formed the Federalist Party that advocated a strong nationalistic government. Is that a left or right pursuit?

[headscratcher4]

He was an actor. But beyond that, he shouted "Sic semper tyrannis" after he shot Lincoln. This is the state motto of Virginia as designed by Alexander Hamilton. Hamilton formed the Federalist Party that advocated a strong nationalistic government. Is that a left or right pursuit?

Pretty facile don't you think?

[Cleon]

He was an actor.

So is Alec Baldwin. How is that relevant?

But beyond that, he shouted "Sic semper tyrannis" after he shot Lincoln. This is the state motto of Virginia as designed by Alexander Hamilton. Hamilton formed the Federalist Party that advocated a strong nationalistic government. Is that a left or right pursuit?

That's an interesting bit of free association, but not relevant. The question is about Booth, not about Hamilton or the Federalist Party. Was Booth a leftist or not?

[Ladewig]

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

http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=5027356#post5027356


Left wing fruitcake assassins:

Oswald
Sirhan Sirhan
Charles Guiteau
Leon Czolgosz
Arthur Bremer
John Hinckley

Can you explain why Charles Guiteau and John Hinckley are left wing?

[headscratcher4]

He was an actor. But beyond that, he shouted "Sic semper tyrannis" after he shot Lincoln. This is the state motto of Virginia as designed by Alexander Hamilton. Hamilton formed the Federalist Party that advocated a strong nationalistic government. Is that a left or right pursuit?

BTW...you realize, of course, that presumeably, Hamilton would have been one of the non-slaveholding non-lefty founding fathers so admired by Beck in contrast to the slave-holder/lefties like Washington and Jefferson and Madision? But you argue that he would be a lefty non-slaveholder, so as predictable, Beck's pretty confused by it all.

[Ladewig]

Oswald speaks for himself...he was a wanna-be commie, but certainly he doesn't fit neatly into an organized political actor...like the rest, a loner.

Now, I know we can argue about the attempted assasinations as well, but of the successful ones, Coulter's statement that they were "all" lefties is demonstrably false -- and it is problematic even in situations like Oswald where you can put it into a marginally modern political context.


Perhaps I am misunderstanding her position, but she seems to me to be saying that because L.H. Oswald had strong communist ties, he was a left winger.

[headscratcher4]

Perhaps I am misunderstanding her position, but she seems to me to be saying that because L.H. Oswald had strong communist ties, he was a left winger.

I think that is exactly right, and of the four successful killers, he's the only one that even begins to fit into the modern "left/right" political divide...though, again arguably, anarchist Leon Czolgosz also fits in that divide and would be "left" of today's center and certainly left of center in his own time.

But, as pointed out, that makes Anne about 50% at best.

[Cicero]

Pretty facile don't you think?

Is the "evidence" that Booth was a conservative any more compelling?

[Cleon]

Is the "evidence" that Booth was a conservative any more compelling?

Was Booth a Leftist or not?

[Cicero]

Perhaps I am misunderstanding her position, but she seems to me to be saying that because L.H. Oswald had strong communist ties, he was a left winger.

Does LHO being a communist make him a conservative?

[headscratcher4]

Is the "evidence" that Booth was a conservative any more compelling?


No, the evidence is that this type of political pigeon-holing doesn't have much historical basis or utility and is ultimately silly, ergo Coulter's raison d'etre (sorry about hte spelling).

[headscratcher4]

Is the "evidence" that Booth was a conservative any more compelling?

BTW...while I wouldn't apply modern lables to Booth, I would call him a "conservative" in that he was trying to "conserve/preserve" institutions that he believed were necessary for his enjoyment of the benefits of liberty, inlcuding and specifically property rights (though they were the right to own another human being) and he was angry at what he perceived as Lincoln's use of the ham-hand of government to take away both his liberties and his rights and he thought of Lincoln as not only a tyrant but also as a dangerous radical....

[Madalch]

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.

It's the sex and drugs. Obviously a liberal.

[Cicero]

In 1933, Giuseppe Zangara shot at President-elect FDR, but killed Chicago Mayor Anton Cermak instead.

"Too many people are starving to death! "I don't hate Mr. Roosevelt personally... I hate all officials and everybody who is rich."

"You give me electric chair. I no afraid of that chair! You one of capitalists. You is crook man too. Put me in electric chair. I no care!"

Are Zangara's words the ideology of a conservative?

[Cleon]

Are Zangara's words the ideology of a conservative?

What about John Wilkes Booth? Was he a leftist?

[Ladewig]

Does LHO being a communist make him a conservative?

Of course not. Does LHO being a communist make him a liberal?

. . . . . . . . . . .

ETA: I'd still like to know why you consider Charles Guiteau and John Hinckley leftists.

[willhaven]

Is the "evidence" that Booth was a conservative any more compelling?

Fairly compelling... (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Wilkes_Booth)
He was also a Confederate sympathizer vehement in his denunciation of the Lincoln Administration and outraged by the South's defeat in the American Civil War. He strongly opposed the abolition of slavery in the United States and Lincoln's proposal to extend voting rights to recently emancipated slaves.

By the age of 16, Booth was interested in the theatre and in politics, becoming a delegate from Bel Air to a rally by the Know Nothing Party for Henry Winter Davis, the anti-immigrant party's candidate for Congress in the 1854 elections.

And the Know Nothing Party? (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Know_Nothing)
The Know Nothing movement was a nativist American political movement of the 1840s and 1850s. It was empowered by popular fears that the country was being overwhelmed by Irish Catholic immigrants, who were often regarded as hostile to U.S. values and controlled by the Pope in Rome. Mainly active from 1854 to 1856, it strove to curb immigration and naturalization, though its efforts met with little success. There were few prominent leaders, and the largely middle-class and entirely Protestant membership fragmented over the issue of slavery. Most ended up joining the Republican Party by the time of the 1860 presidential election.


Oh, and...
http://img237.imageshack.us/img237/1200/tmdsh060607k.gif

[RecoveringYuppy]

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.

It was in the news recently:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ynews/20091021/ts_ynews/ynews_ts950_1

ETA: Oops, just noticed this was addressed.

[dudalb]

Fairly compelling... (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Wilkes_Booth)




And the Know Nothing Party? (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Know_Nothing)



Oh, and...
http://img237.imageshack.us/img237/1200/tmdsh060607k.gif

That cartoon is so accurate.
As someone who has opinions that most would classify as conservative on several issues, I have no problem in saying that Coulter is a crappy spokesperson for the Conservative viewpoint. Several much more intelligent conservatives writers have made clear their contempt for her.
Her whole "all evil is on the left side of the political spectrum" argument is silly beyond belief.
Of course, to be fair, we see similiar shennigans on the left when a few hard line ideologues. try hard to prove that Stalin, Mao ,Pol Pot and company were really "Fascists", not Leftist at all.
I think she is called for her dumb mistakes, but her hardcore fans just don't care.
And I think Cicero has shown he is a Coulter fanboy.

[Cicero]

That cartoon is so accurate.
As someone who has opinions that most would classify as conservative on several issues, I have no problem in saying that Coulter is a crappy spokesperson for the Conservative viewpoint. Several much more intelligent conservatives writers have made clear their contempt for her.
Her whole "all evil is on the left side of the political spectrum" argument is silly beyond belief.
Of course, to be fair, we see similiar shennigans on the left when a few hard line ideologues. try hard to prove that Stalin, Mao ,Pol Pot and company were really "Fascists", not Leftist at all.
I think she is called for her dumb mistakes, but her hardcore fans just don't care.
And I think Cicero has shown he is a Coulter fanboy.

What opinions on what issues are those, exactly?

[Cicero]

Of course not. Does LHO being a communist make him a liberal?


Historically? Yes.

[Ladewig]

Historically? Yes.

Do explain.

[dudalb]

What opinions on what issues are those, exactly?

I am very much tough on crime;
I support the war in Afghanistan and military action against Al Qaida
I just plain do not trust Iran and would be very skeptical of any deal made with it.
I have often been critical of the blind worship and support that some Liberals here give Obama.

But that is irrevelent. There are a lot of conservatives out there who share my opinion that Ann Coulter is a lousy spokesman for Conservatism.

[Brainster]

I was so hoping that Hillary would get the nomination so we could see the spectacle of Ann Coulter campaigning for her. Might have been just what McCain needed to get him over the top.

[Cicero]

What about John Wilkes Booth? Was he a leftist?

What we know for sure is that Booth assasinated a Republican POTUS. Booth was not a Republican. Booth was a Southern Democrat. He was probably more an Anarchist than a far lefty.

[Stellafane]

What we know for sure is that Booth assasinated a Republican POTUS. Booth was not a Republican. Booth was a Southern Democrat. He was probably more an Anarchist than a far lefty.

You do understand, don't you, that just making up stuff as you go along doesn't make it true...right?

Booth an anarchist? By whose definition? If you think Booth was anything resembling an anarchist, then with all due respect you have no clue what that word means.

[Cicero]

Do explain.

These New Dealer liberal Democrats were communists:

Harry Hopkins
Henry Wallace
Lauchlin Currie
Harry Dexter White
Nathan Silvermaster
Robert P. Patterson
Alger Hiss
Laurence Duggan

[Skeptic]

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

I am having some trouble with her accusation.

It isn't hard to explain. Just define "apolitical" to mean "anybody who is not left wing", as she seems to do, and her statement becomes a tautology.

[Cicero]

am very much tough on crime;

Is that a position monopolized by conservatives?


I support the war in Afghanistan and military action against Al Qaida

So does POTUS Obama

I just plain do not trust Iran and would be very skeptical of any deal made with it.

Isn't that "Snipery" Hillary's position as well?


I have often been critical of the blind worship and support that some Liberals here give Obama.

That is just common sense.

But that is irrevelent. There are a lot of conservatives out there who share my opinion that Ann Coulter is a lousy spokesman for Conservatism.

She is not a spokesman for conservatives anymore than Hannity/Beck/Limberger are.

[Cicero]

You do understand, don't you, that just making up stuff as you go along doesn't make it true...right?

Booth an anarchist? By whose definition? If you think Booth was anything resembling an anarchist, then with all due respect you have no clue what that word means.

The definiton does not exclude Booth. Unless of course you buy into this absurd definiton:

"Anarchism is the ideal of a society without force and compulsion, where all men shall be equals, and live in freedom, peace, and harmony."

[Ladewig]

These New Dealer liberal Democrats were communists:

Harry Hopkins
Henry Wallace
Lauchlin Currie
Harry Dexter White
Nathan Silvermaster
Robert P. Patterson
Alger Hiss
Laurence Duggan

Some liberals were communist ≠ all communists are liberals


, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

ETA: I'd still like to know why you consider Charles Guiteau and John Hinckley leftists.

[Ladewig]

It isn't hard to explain. Just define "apolitical" to mean "anybody who is not left wing", as she seems to do, and her statement becomes a tautology.

I really should consider her more of an entertainer and less of a political analyst.

[UnrepentantSinner]

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. {snip crazy non-sequitor rant}

You're avoiding whether Booth was a liberal or conservative, let's try going back to whether Lincoln was a liberal/progressive or not.

And please, none of your Rohrsach test responses. A simple on topic answer is requested.

[Cleon]

What we know for sure is that Booth assasinated a Republican POTUS. Booth was not a Republican. Booth was a Southern Democrat. He was probably more an Anarchist than a far lefty.

"Probably?" Booth's politics are a matter of record, not much mystery there. He was a Confederate. Is/was support for the Confederacy common among anarchists*?

I'm glad you finally concede he wasn't a leftist.


(* Hint: The answer is "no.")

[Meadmaker]

Francisco Duran was convicted of attempting to assassinate President Bill Clinton, after firing 29 rounds from an assault rifle at a group of people at the White House, when he believed Clinton was among them.

It is a bit difficult to pin down the political leanings of many assassins, because, as it turns out, they are nutty as fruitcakes, and often have difficulty stating anything coherent about politics. However, he claimed to be incited by an ultraconservative talk show host's ramblings about armed revolution.

[a_unique_person]

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

Because her audience don't care.

[Kevin_Lowe]

Because her audience don't care.

Or check.

[Stellafane]

The definiton does not exclude Booth...

Shucks, looks like I'm going to have to repeat myself here: You do understand, don't you, that just making up stuff as you go along doesn't make it true...right?

[Cicero]

Shucks, looks like I'm going to have to repeat myself here: You do understand, don't you, that just making up stuff as you go along doesn't make it true...right?

Repitition is all you have going. When do you suppose you will be ready to actually include content in a post about Anarchists?

[Cicero]

Because her audience don't care.

Which audience is that? The peole who watch the "Joy Behar Show" (the place where A.C. made her comments) are predominately libs. Who even knew this show existed before A.C. appeared on it?

[leftysergeant]

Which audience is that? The peole who watch the "Joy Behar Show" (the place where A.C. made her comments) are predominately libs. Who even knew this show existed before A.C. appeared on it?

Prior to that, a lot of people did not have a clue who the Coulter critter was, and many of them wish still that they had never had to lay eyes on it.

Very few people, outside of the political talk fans, have a clue who or what that thing in the mini skirt is.

Problem is, the few who take her seriously tend to be armed and sociopathic.

[headscratcher4]

The definiton does not exclude Booth. Unless of course you buy into this absurd definiton:

"Anarchism is the ideal of a society without force and compulsion, where all men shall be equals, and live in freedom, peace, and harmony."

And yet, Booth hated the "******-loving" Lincoln, felt that slavery was not only a Constitutionally protected institution but intrinsic to the life of the repbulic and believed in white superiority....so much for men shall live as equals.

Believed the civil war was necessary to secure his "rights" and the rights of the Southern states he supported...so much for "peace."

And all I would add is that "freedom" is a value (in one form or another) espoused by nearly every organized political movement...from Communists to Facists to Nazis to Republicans and Democrats. Though, clearly their definitions of what constitutes freedom might differ.

Anyway, this assertion that Booth was an "anarchist" is not only a-historical (as what became the anarchist movement was only begining to emerge among European and Russian intellectuals at the time) and completely out of the American political context (especially the context of the North/South confrontation).

So, in essence, in a desperate effort to have to avoid the conclusion that Booth was a "conservative" as opposed to the more radical Lincoln (for example -- and I use those terms in the context of the time, not the modern left/right dichotomy), you are essentially making it up as you go along.

Funny but silly.

[Cicero]

Prior to that, a lot of people did not have a clue who the Coulter critter was, and many of them wish still that they had never had to lay eyes on it.

Very few people, outside of the political talk fans, have a clue who or what that thing in the mini skirt is.

Problem is, the few who take her seriously tend to be armed and sociopathic.

Prior to A.C.'s appearance on the Joy Behar Show "a lot of people did not have a clue" who she was? Only Behar's publicist, mother, or you could have crafted that bit of bilge. When Behar manges to write six New York Times Best Sellers, she may be known for some accomplishment other than riding the coattails of Barbara Walters.

[leftysergeant]

When Behar manges to write six New York Times Best Sellers, she may be known for some accomplishment other than riding the coattails of Barbara Walters.

When the Coulter critter can write a book that makes the best-seller list without her sociopathic fans buying it in bulk to give to their liberal friends and co-workers, you will have a point.

[Cicero]

And yet, Booth hated the "******-loving" Lincoln, felt that slavery was not only a Constitutionally protected institution but intrinsic to the life of the repbulic and believed in white superiority....so much for men shall live as equals.

Believed the civil war was necessary to secure his "rights" and the rights of the Southern states he supported...so much for "peace."

And all I would add is that "freedom" is a value (in one form or another) espoused by nearly every organized political movement...from Communists to Facists to Nazis to Republicans and Democrats. Though, clearly their definitions of what constitutes freedom might differ.

Anyway, this assertion that Booth was an "anarchist" is not only a-historical (as what became the anarchist movement was only begining to emerge among European and Russian intellectuals at the time) and completely out of the American political context (especially the context of the North/South confrontation).

So, in essence, in a desperate effort to have to avoid the conclusion that Booth was a "conservative" as opposed to the more radical Lincoln (for example -- and I use those terms in the context of the time, not the modern left/right dichotomy), you are essentially making it up as you go along.

Funny but silly.

"Plainly the central idea of secession is the essence of anarchy."A.L. March 4, 1861

It is silly to characterize anarchists as standard-bearers of a belief that "all men shall be equals, and live in freedom, peace, and harmony." Perhaps the term insurrectionary anarchism is foreign to you?

Since Anne Hutchinson was an American anarchist well over 200 years before the civil war, I guess you are the one making things up.

[Stellafane]

Repitition is all you have going. When do you suppose you will be ready to actually include content in a post about Anarchists?

Oh good God almighty, do you actually think what you've been posting qualifies as "content"? I'm quite literally laughing at that right now. Sorry, but it's nothing more than ridiculous, easily disproven drivel (in other words, the usual crap that comes out of that incredibly stupid attention whore Coulter), and I'm giving it all the seriousness it merits -- which is none.

[Cicero]

Oh good God almighty, do you actually think what you've been posting qualifies as "content"? I'm quite literally laughing at that right now. Sorry, but it's nothing more than ridiculous, easily disproven drivel (in other words, the usual crap that comes out of that incredibly stupid attention whore Coulter), and I'm giving it all the seriousness it merits -- which is none.

Before you choke on your chortle, explain how Lincoln was wrong in regards to what constitutes anarchy? If it is so easy to disprove Booth was not an anarchist, why haven't you done so?

[headscratcher4]

You are being purposefully obtuse. The underlying point I am making remains valid. Your attempt to put modern "left/right" political interpretation onto Booth is meaningless. For example, while Lincoln may call succession "anarchy" , successionists would hardly have defined themselves that way, they would have argued that they were upholders of the natural and Consitutional order.

"Tell mother I died for my country..." JWBooth. Sounds like a "nationalist" sentiment to me. What country do the anarchist have?

[Cicero]

You are being purposefully obtuse. The underlying point I am making remains valid. Your attempt to put modern "left/right" political interpretation onto Booth is meaningless. For example, while Lincoln may call succession "anarchy" , successionists would hardly have defined themselves that way, they would have argued that they were upholders of the natural and Consitutional order.

"Tell mother I died for my country..." JWBooth. Sounds like a "nationalist" sentiment to me. What country do the anarchist have?

I said Booth was not a far lefty. Since when is self-definiton the standard for authenticity? Richard Heene describes himself as a meteorologist. I guess he must be one.

Lincoln correctly identified the secessionists as anarchists. During Booth's performance in "The Marble Heart" at Ford's Theatre on November 9, 1863, he stuck his finger in front of Lincoln's face three times. "He does look pretty sharp at me, doesn't he?' remarked Lincoln at the time. I wonder if Lincoln thought to himself this actor just might be on of those anarchists he spoke of two years earlier.

[elbe]

"Plainly the central idea of secession is the essence of anarchy."A.L. March 4, 1861

It is silly to characterize anarchists as standard-bearers of a belief that "all men shall be equals, and live in freedom, peace, and harmony." Perhaps the term insurrectionary anarchism is foreign to you?

Since Anne Hutchinson was an American anarchist well over 200 years before the civil war, I guess you are the one making things up.

I really fail to see how the confederates were anarchists. Anarchists want no government while the confederates just wanted a different government. While anarchy can be a product of revolution or succession, it is usually not the goal of the people instigating it.

[fullflavormenthol]

Okay..Ann Coulter is full of (rule 10). She is an idiot. And the New York Times Bestseller list is as easily gamed as the Billboard Top 100.

(A large portion of the initial purchase of her books is by third party organizations and resellers that don't take part in the traditional buyback procedures, which automatically games the system. Incidently it is why World Net Daily is always shilling her crap at such a huge discount 2 months later (they can't return the unsolds for a refund like Barnes and Noble can.)

[Cicero]

Okay..Ann Coulter is full of (rule 10). She is an idiot. And the New York Times Bestseller list is as easily gamed as the Billboard Top 100.



For an "idiot," she is incredibly accomplished. I wonder what she could have achieved if she had your smarts?

A.C. graduated cum laude from Cornell.
A.C. graduate of University of Michigan Law School, editor of the Michigan Law Review
A.C. law clerked for Pasco Bowman II of the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit.


How many books have you written, got published, and cracked the NYT Bestseller list? If the answer is 0, maybe you could tell us about your songs that cracked the Billboard Top 100?

[Cicero]

I really fail to see how the confederates were anarchists. Anarchists want no government while the confederates just wanted a different government. While anarchy can be a product of revolution or succession, it is usually not the goal of the people instigating it.

Its' OK that you failed. Lincoln did recognize the Confederates as anarchists.

[Tsukasa Buddha]

Its' OK that you failed. Lincoln did recognize the Confederates as anarchists.

That has to your biggest stretch this thread.

[fullflavormenthol]

For an "idiot," she is incredibly accomplished. I wonder what she could have achieved if she had your smarts?

A.C. graduated cum laude from Cornell.
A.C. graduate of University of Michigan Law School, editor of the Michigan Law Review
A.C. law clerked for Pasco Bowman II of the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit.


How many books have you written, got published, and cracked the NYT Bestseller list? If the answer is 0, maybe you could tell us about your songs that cracked the Billboard Top 100?
Yep...she is an accomplished idiot.

Well, I will keep that in mind for when you decide to criticize anyone on the left that has similar accomplishments. Nevertheless Ann Coulter is an idiot, her statements in print and in speech attest to this fact.

Oh and I imagine I could write a book that is composed largely of hate speech, advertise it on a "news" network, and then have World Net Daily buy a large amount of copies that they will turn around and sell a few months later for 75% or more off just to get rid of them.

But...you bring up a good point. Why is it when a right-winger graduates from a tier 1 institution, goes to a tier 1 law school and works as a law clerk they are a genius. BUT...when someone on the left does it they get no respect from you?

Um...

Oh, and Ann Coulter is still an idiot. Just an idiot with an impressive resume. Proof?

"Not all Muslims are terrorists, but all terrorists are Muslim." -Ann Coulter-

That is the most idiotic statement I have ever seen anyone write.

[elbe]

Its' OK that you failed. Lincoln did recognize the Confederates as anarchists.

Meh, as far as I'm concerned he was wrong, or, depending on context, was using it as hyperbole to motivate the north. Just because he's Lincoln doesn't mean he's infallible.

[Cicero]

Meh, as far as I'm concerned he was wrong, or, depending on context, was using it as hyperbole to motivate the north. Just because he's Lincoln doesn't mean he's infallible.

Booth was an anarchist. At the time he and his conspirators attempted to knock off the top members of the federal government, Jefferson Davis was in jail. There was no Confederacy to install as the replacement government.

Since the greatest POTUS in U.S. history (arguably ) believed the Confederates were anarachists, including his own assassin, that trumps your "meh" any day of the week.

[elbe]

Booth was an anarchist. At the time he and his conspirators attempted to knock off the top members of the federal government, Jefferson Davis was in jail. There was no Confederacy to install as the replacement government.

It's like you still don't know what an anarchist is.

Since the greatest POTUS in U.S. history (arguably ) believed the Confederates were anarachists, including his own assassin, that trumps your "meh" any day of the week.

I'm sorry, but if the definitions don't match then he was wrong. It's how reality works. He, or anyone else, can claim anyone is an anarchist, but if they aren't an anarchist then they are wrong.

Seriously, is your argument that Lincoln is infallible? Or just the old you're right because you said so.

[Cicero]

It's like you still don't know what an anarchist is.

Since you do not beleive that Lincoln knew what one was either, I am in good company.

I'm sorry, but if the definitions don't match then he was wrong. It's how reality works. He, or anyone else, can claim anyone is an anarchist, but if they aren't an anarchist then they are wrong.

Whose definition? Yours?


Insurrectional Anarchism: "The smallest amount of organisation necessary to achieve one’s aims is always the best to maximize our efforts."


Seriously, is your argument that Lincoln is infallible? Or just the old you're right because you said so.

Neither. I prefer the usage of the word anarchism/anarchy/anarchist as it was used at the time of the period being discussed. You can superimpose your favorite post period definitions over the event all you wish. How this makes you right and Lincoln wrong is a matter for your imagination.

[Cain]

I love Cicero because even in the off-chance his statements are consistent with reality, they're not at all consistent with the relevant argument. And then there's the obsession with Hollywood, and he seems to know which directors, producers and writers have given to the Democratic Party.

But this is the best:

Cleon: So...Booth. Leftist or not?
Cicero: He was an actor.

No, sock it to'em, what else:

Cicero: But beyond that, he shouted "Sic semper tyrannis" after he shot Lincoln. This is the state motto of Virginia as designed by Alexander Hamilton. Hamilton formed the Federalist Party that advocated a strong nationalistic government. Is that a left or right pursuit?

Wow. This is similar to a sketch Colbert does on his show, proving things like how the Girl Scouts secretly control the world's financial system.

It's funny how Democrats are now strong in all of them there Northern states that supported Lincoln, and how Republicans are strong in them Southern states supportin' secession. McCain always made a joke out of himself when he said he was honored with the nomination from the party of Lincoln. Lincoln was in office almost 150 years ago (which is what Republicans say about slavery to all those lazy black people who complain about "racism").

Anyway, a lot of people don't know the real Lincoln, or how those events really went down. Finally a faithful re-enactment has been getting some traction (or until Obama shuts it down): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B4Uf9rsBbhc&feature=PlayList&p=7363EC3300936CBF&index=0&playnext=1

As for Coulter's comments: Whose to say a left-winger won't tag Obama? What, nobody can fully believe that socialist/communist crap. Well, except for maybe Ann Coulter, but surely she knows better than the Secret Service.

[KoihimeNakamura]

er..
Lincoln called them anarchists in the only sense that he refused to recognize the Confederacy as an independent nation.

Generally, he just called them traitors.

[eeyore1954]

It isn't her statement that all assassins were left wing , communists ,no politics etc that was ridiculous. Apparently most would fit into her definition but doesn't she imply in the end that if President Obama is assassinated it would most likely be because of Moveon.Org instead of a racist.

[Kotatsu]

The definiton does not exclude Booth. Unless of course you buy into this absurd definiton:

"Anarchism is the ideal of a society without force and compulsion, where all men shall be equals, and live in freedom, peace, and harmony."

That seems to be an ideal that corresponds well to how most of the great anarchist thinkers have defined anarchy, and how many of the great anarchist groups throughout history have intended to structure their societies, albeit with varying success.

Its' OK that you failed. Lincoln did recognize the Confederates as anarchists.

I know virtually nothing about American history, and cannot really place your one-liner in any kind of relevant context on my own, but it would seem to me that Lincoln uses "anarchy" in a different sense than, say, Kropotkin, Reclus, Malatesta and so on, i.e., in the older sense of meaning, more or less, "chaos", and to some extent being a cover-all description of political enemies, similar to how the word "fascist" is used today. This was very common in older days -- and sadly and curiously still today -- until the mid-1800s (or so), when the term was more precisely defined -- or, some might say, appropriated -- by a series of thinkers, mainly in Europe (1).

The important point is, when Lincoln said those words, did he mean that the secession of the South was undertaken to produce what we today understand as anarchism -- that is, simply put, a society without coercion and hierarchy of any kind -- or did he mean it in the -- I would say the now somewhat dated -- sense of "chaos"? Or, as a third alternative, did he mean it is the same sense that some people called G. W. Bush a fascist, i.e., as a synonym of "evil" or "political enemy"?

Only if he definitely meant it in the first sense could this statement be said to support Booth being left. However, if he did use it in this sense, he was before his time by a long-shot, as most of the anarchist thinkers who sought to elaborate anarchism towards the left were primarily active after his death.

Neither. I prefer the usage of the word anarchism/anarchy/anarchist as it was used at the time of the period being discussed. You can superimpose your favorite post period definitions over the event all you wish. How this makes you right and Lincoln wrong is a matter for your imagination.

Then I assume you believe that Lincoln used it in either the second or third sense above, neither of which give us any indication of where on the political scale we might fit Booth.

---
ETA:
(1) I know there were people using the term in this way before the mid-1800's as well, but the majority were not, and most of the theory and thought has been done after that period. Thus, I expressed myself somewhat clumsily, but will let it stand.

[Darth Rotor]

If Coulter had stated "all assassins were anarchists" she'd still be off base, since one (Garfield's assassin) was mostly a pissed off office/patronage seeker (or so the story goes).

What I find curious is the denial of the left leanings of Oswald. In the parlance of the past century, left <-> communist is an affiliation communists were happy to make. You will note that lefty sergeant and conspiraider, among others, and Dr Adequate, all make it a point to point the right is wrong ideology at those they disagree with politically, each in his own different way. That doesn't make any of the three communists. What it does is put them squarely in a self identified sympathy with the left, whatever that is. Being anti right is often a position taken when you are on the left, and dealing in polemics.

The attempts on President Ford might be best attributed to anarchists, and IMO Booth probably fits there, if at all. ("Pissed off Confederate loser actor" is a category all its own). If any political motive was present of Ford, anti establishmentism, a common bit of leftover trash from the sixties) may have been present.

The attempt on Reagan fits squarely in the Fruitbat category. See also the idiot who crashed his plane into/near the White House when Clinton was president. Fruitbat.

Would it be rational to assume only racism as motivation to assassinate President Obama? I don't think so. There would be likely other motives, such as his being part of the Crusader Zionist cabal, for one ... (yesterdayk, the usual news article where people in Afghanistan are protesting "down with America" and "down with Israel" juxtaposed). Obama is now the great satan, skin tone irrelevant, simply by being our President.

Just because some people obsess over President Obama's race does not mean that any and everyone who has it in for him is solely movitated, or primarily motivated by race.

However, if it's a domestic originated attempt or plot, that's the way I'd bet.

DR

[headscratcher4]

Garfield's assassin wasn't just a dissapointed office seeker, he was certifiably nuts.

[Darth Rotor]

Garfield's assassin wasn't just a dissapointed office seeker, he was certifiably nuts.
How so?

Psychology and Psychiatry were hardly developed sciences at that point, so I wonder how you "certify" someone as insane in the 1880's. :cool:

Who writes history? ;)

That said, if you want to stand on 'fruitcake' for him, I'll not get my bowels in an uproar. ;)

DR

[headscratcher4]

http://www.trutv.com/library/crime/terrorists_spies/assassins/charles_guiteau/index.html#

Ok, sure, its a cheesy website...but it suggests, if nothing else, a very strange individual.

[Cicero]

Samuel Byck- left wing

February 22, 1974, Baltimore/Washington International Airport: Byck attempted to assasinate Nixon by hijacking Delta Air Lines DC-9 Flight 523 and flying into the White House.

[Cicero]

(which is what Republicans say about slavery to all those lazy black people who complain about "racism").


Only a lib could make such an asinine comment and believe they themselves were immune from being characterized as racist.

[Cain]

Only a lib could make such an asinine comment and believe they themselves were immune from being characterized as racist.

Well this is an interesting piece of poop. Are you claiming Republicans do NOT say "slavery was 150 years ago, so stop complaining black people," or what? And I'm not a "lib," or even a liberal for that matter (at least in the conventional sense, much less whatever demento misunderstanding you hold).

[Cicero]

Well this is an interesting piece of poop. Are you claiming Republicans do NOT say "slavery was 150 years ago, so stop complaining black people," or what? And I'm not a "lib," or even a liberal for that matter (at least in the conventional sense, much less whatever demento misunderstanding you hold).

1) Slavery did end in 1865. That was 144 years ago.
2) You are the one who is quoted as saying "lazy black people." That speaks for itself.
3) I find your unconventional liberalism liberal enough for me.

[Beerina]

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.


You have to also remember the Republicans were started by Lincoln and a few others only 11 years earlier for the purpose of capitalizing on the rising anti-slavery views of the North. It pushed out everyone's favorite party, the Whigs, as one of the two dominant parties.

As neither party espouses slave ownership, or the right of states to allow it, I cannot see putting Booth in any political alignment, even if said sentiment was softened over the years to some kind of generic, racial segregationist laws, and the parties morphed in which prefers which.

Preserving racial segregation laws is technically conservative, as the laws and attitudes existed for a long time already. However, they are not a "classically liberal" position, which was liberal, i.e. not conservative w.r.t. overthrowing King George's Big Government back in 1776.

So the sum of it is Booth wouldn't fit into either party, but his attitude softened and morphed over the years into the Southern Democrat thing, which then got adopted by the Republicans.

[Ladewig]

Samuel Byck- left wing

February 22, 1974, Baltimore/Washington International Airport: Byck attempted to assasinate Nixon by hijacking Delta Air Lines DC-9 Flight 523 and flying into the White House.

Another irrelevant post. The OP did not claim that there were no left wing assassins. The claim was that it is incorrect to say that all assassinations and assassination attempts were left wing or apolitical.

So to get this thread back to the original topic: Cicero, please explain why you consider Charles Guiteau and John Hinckley leftists.

[Cicero]

Another irrelevant post. The OP did not claim that there were no left wing assassins. The claim was that it is incorrect to say that all assassinations and assassination attempts were left wing or apolitical.

So to get this thread back to the original topic: Cicero, please explain why you consider Charles Guiteau and John Hinckley leftists.

What is wrong with adding to the list of lefty assassins? Hinckley wanted to impress the liberal Jodie Foster by killing the conservative Reagan. Does that make Hinckley apolitical?

I'll gladly substitute Byck for Guiteau since Guiteau was not acting from a liberal ideology.

[Lurker]

Franciso Duran - Attempt to assasinate Clinton

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Francisco_Martin_Duran

[Duran] also claimed to be incited by ultraconservative talk show host Chuck Baker, who spoke on air about "armed revolution" and "cleansing" of the government.

[Bill Thompson]

Wait a second.
Booth was driven by Catholic ideology, wasn't he?

[Cleon]

What is wrong with adding to the list of lefty assassins? Hinckley wanted to impress the liberal Jodie Foster by killing the conservative Reagan. Does that make Hinckley apolitical?

I sincerely doubt Hinckley's obsession with Jodie Foster had anything to do with politics; I'm not convinced he even knew what her politics were. The guy is seriously ill.

[Cicero]

Wait a second.
Booth was driven by Catholic ideology, wasn't he?

No, he wasn't.

"John Wilkes Booth was an active member of the American Party, an organization better known as the "Know-Nothing Party". This was a strongly anti-Catholic and anti-immigrant political party"

"Right or Wrong, God Judge Me: The Writings of John Wilkes Booth," (pp. 38-39)

[Cicero]

Franciso Duran - Attempt to assasinate Clinton

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Francisco_Martin_Duran

"claiming that he was trying to save the world by destroying an alien "mist", connected by an umbilical cord to an alien in the Colorado mountains

That puts Duran into the woo wing, not the right wing.

[Lurker]

"claiming that he was trying to save the world by destroying an alien "mist", connected by an umbilical cord to an alien in the Colorado mountains

That puts Duran into the woo wing, not the right wing.

Agreed, but he was spurred on by the right wing as shown by the cite you excised. Here, allow me to reinstate it and bold it for you in case you missed it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Francisco_Martin_Duran


[Duran] also claimed to be incited by ultraconservative talk show host Chuck Baker, who spoke on air about "armed revolution" and "cleansing" of the government.

[Cicero]

Agreed, but he was spurred on by the right wing as shown by the cite you excised. Here, allow me to reinstate it and bold it for you in case you missed it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Francisco_Martin_Duran

I didn't miss it. But you defintiely missed the first part of the cite when you decided not to hilite the guy's woo side. If the radio show was supposedly the instigator of Duran's actions, nobody in the jury beleived it.

[Lurker]

I didn't miss it. But you defintiely missed the first part of the cite when you decided not to hilite the guy's woo side. If the radio show was supposedly the instigator of Duran's actions, nobody in the jury beleived it.

Can not someone be woo and politically motivated? They are not mutually exclusive, are they?

And your claim that nobody in the jury beleived it, why would you come to that conclusion? Was the ultraconservative radio host also on trial and so it was within the purview of the jury to determine the veracity of the claim of incitation? Would the jury have found him not guilty had he shown that he was incited? I doubt it.

[Cicero]

Can not someone be woo and politically motivated? They are not mutually exclusive, are they?


You are correct. Most of the vociferous 911 Bush/Israel/media moonbats are libs.

[Lurker]

You are correct. Most of the vociferous 911 Bush/Israel/media moonbats are libs.

Thank you. We agree that Duran was a moonbat conservative assassin. Cool.

I agree that many of the 911 CT idiots are liberals. A friend of mine is one, to my dismay, and he is a pretty far to the left liberal. His favorite source is commondreams. Yikes!

[GreyICE]

As usual, the best defense of the right wing comes from left wingers and centerists who believe that total insanity cannot be the default position of the entire right wing.

It's honestly not, but cowardly right wingers who are afraid to be labeled 'not part of the herd' refuse to speak out, or speak vaguely and whingeingly of people who are 'just as bad' on the left.

The right wing of America - it's own worst enemy.

[Darth Rotor]

The right wing of America - it's own worst enemy.
That's a nice, pithy summary of the current state of play.

Exhibit A: Hey, here we go, back to Ann Coulter, under the presumption that she is a member of that club. (And not just an attention whore. She may also be both).

[Praktik]

ya I guess what amazes me is that she has an audience at all.

I guess that's the most frightening thing about her, aside from the fact that she looks like the bride of Skeletor.

EDIT: 3rd most frightening, that her track record of untruths hasn't resulted in an automatic banning from the TV-universe.

[Darth Rotor]

ya I guess what amazes me is that she has an audience at all.

I guess that's the most frightening thing about her, aside from the fact that she looks like the bride of Skeletor.

EDIT: 3rd most frightening, that her track record of untruths hasn't resulted in an automatic banning from the TV-universe.
You don't seem to understand TV. TV made a lot of money from advertising. Adverts are the cash cow of TV.

Advertising is the art of presenting half truths or bald faced lies in such a way as to be just under the "false advertising" and "fraud laws" radar.

Thus, political pundits are naturals for TV. They are Ad Men and Ad Women pushing a different product.

DR

[Praktik]

Ya I get all that. Still. Maybe its cause we dont have as many blowhards up here in Canada, at least as many controversy for the sake of controversy blind partisans, that I have trouble contemplating how someone like Coulter can make so much selling books and making appearances on tv.

But then again, I watch her when she's on sometimes.

So maybe I've been suckered.

[Darth Rotor]

So maybe I've been suckered.

Not suckered, trolled. :D

[Cicero]

Thank you. We agree that Duran was a moonbat conservative assassin. Cool.

I agree that many of the 911 CT idiots are liberals. A friend of mine is one, to my dismay, and he is a pretty far to the left liberal. His favorite source is commondreams. Yikes!

We do know Duran was into woo. We do not know he was a conservative. Being a listener of the Colorodo Springs AM radio show hosted by Chuck Baker is not conclusive of anything. However, we do know the women's ideology who attempted to kill POTUS Ford.


Sara Jane Moore, liberal .

"She regretted her actions, saying she was blinded by her radical political views and convinced that the government had declared war on advocates of left-wing politics.

[Ladewig]

What is wrong with adding to the list of lefty assassins? Hinckley wanted to impress the liberal Jodie Foster by killing the conservative Reagan. Does that make Hinckley apolitical?

Yes, it does. He was motivated by a movie. He thought that killing a president would help him impress Jody Foster. That has nothing to do with politics in any way. The last nail in the coffin is that he stalked Jimmy Carter while he was in office. He was ready to kill both a left-wing president and a right-wing president. That makes him one of the apolitical crazies.

I'll gladly substitute Byck for Guiteau since Guiteau was not acting from a liberal ideology.

Fine by me, because I am ready to call Guiteau a republican assassin because his politics were republican.

[Neally]

Okay..Ann Coulter is full of (rule 10). She is an idiot. And the New York Times Bestseller list is as easily gamed as the Billboard Top 100. So easy, yet libs seem somehow to be able to do it.
http://97.74.65.51/readArticle.aspx?ARTID=36171

[willhaven]

So we have concluded that Coulter is wrong. Correct?

[willhaven]

Here's the quotes again for fun. Some of them anyway.

COULTER: No, I do not. Because every presidential assassin -- or attempted presidential assassin in the history of the nation has either been a liberal, a communist, an anarchist, someone on the left, or there were two who had no politics whatsoever unless you count John Hinckley, who is certifiably insane. So, you know, we have-

SMITH: Which goes back -- which goes back to -- to your basic point that everything that's wrong with America is the left's fault.

COULTER: No, I have -- I wouldn't have mentioned that all these presidential assassins were anarchists, communists, liberals, they were some form of, you know, basically Obama's base, other than the fact that everyone keeps talking about Obama being at some unique risk. Well, I'm sorry, Sean Hannity's at greater risk. Rush Limbaugh's at greater risk. I promise you George Bush is at greater risk. He has been physically attacked two weeks ago. There's a book fantasizing about George Bush's assassination. There's a movie -- a documentary fantasizing about George Bush's assassination. And there are more hits on going Google for Obama and assassination than Bush and assassination. So maybe we can stop talking about the threat of right-wing violence in a country that is teeming with left-wing violence. At the Democratic National Convention-

[dudalb]

Garfield's assassin wasn't just a dissapointed office seeker, he was certifiably nuts.


The only assasssin..in this case, failed assassin..that comes close to Guiteau in the total wackjob department is Squeaky Fromme, ex Manson follower, who tried to shoot Gerald Ford in Sacramento back in 1976 .

[Cicero]

So we have concluded that Coulter is wrong. Correct?

Not quite. Excluding blatant mental illness, of the successful and attempted assassinations of U.S. presidents where there was a political motivation, that political motivation was left-leaning 100% of the time.

[Cleon]

Not quite. Excluding blatant mental illness, of the successful and attempted assassinations of U.S. presidents where there was a political motivation, that political motivation was left-leaning 100% of the time.

John Wilkes Booth was neither apolitical nor left-leaning. You fail.

[GreyICE]

John Wilkes Booth was neither apolitical nor left-leaning. You fail.

He's one of the wackjobs. 'Wackjob' is defined as anyone who might try to assassinate a US president and can't be interpeted to be left or left-leaning.

Yeesh, you need a refresher in basic right logic.

[Cicero]

John Wilkes Booth was neither apolitical nor left-leaning. You fail.

He was an anarchist. He was a Southern Democrat. Even back in 1865, the GOP was on the politcal right, and the Democratic Party was on the political left.

[Cleon]

He was an anarchist. He was a Southern Democrat. Even back in 1865, the GOP was on the politcal right, and the Democratic Party was on the political left.

Completely and totally wrong. Rewriting history does not make your point stronger. Booth was not on the left in any way, shape, or form.

[Cicero]

Completely and totally wrong. Rewriting history does not make your point stronger. Booth was not on the left in any way, shape, or form.

He may not have been a lib, but he was definitely a Southern Democrat and even Lincoln would have charatcerized his assasin as a anarchist. I am sorry to have to inform you that the GOP was on the right of the political spectrum and the Democratic Party was on the left of the political spectrum even back in 1865.

[Cain]

1) Slavery did end in 1865. That was 144 years ago.
2) You are the one who is quoted as saying "lazy black people." That speaks for itself.
3) I find your unconventional liberalism liberal enough for me.

I'm glad you numbered your points because in three attempts you never came close to rebutting my claim.

1) Hilarious. I was (fairly) characterizing what I hear conservatives claim. Check it out: http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=%22slavery%20was%20150%20years%20ago%22&aq=f&oq=undefined (first hit is Stormfront).

I am a little more upset by the content of their claim than saying 144 or 143. There's nothing wrong with rounding up; the only reason someone would criticize it is to inflate their weak, hot-air non-argument.

2) Yes, I am quoted -- you are quoting me -- as saying "lazy black people," though I doubt you bothered to understand the context, which would be explained by your almost all-consuming incompetence. If it was almost anyone else I would assume dishonesty. I'd just as well suppose you have been raised on Rush Limbaugh's "sarcasm" that you do not know the real thing when you see it. If only we lived in a world where people italicized their sarcastic comments.

3) Well, considering how you've tackled this issue, genius, I have nothing to add.

[GreyICE]

History is written by the victors, I guess.

Sadly, the right wing doesn't read any books that aren't 2000 years old fantasy novels.

[Cleon]

He may not have been a lib, but he was definitely a Southern Democrat and even Lincoln would have charatcerized his assasin as a anarchist. I am sorry to have to inform you that the GOP was on the right of the political spectrum and the Democratic Party was on the left of the political spectrum even back in 1865.

Repeating your assertions do not make them any less incorrect. Sorry.

[Cicero]

Repeating your assertions do not make them any less incorrect. Sorry.

Assertions? The historical support is on my side. You have the all poweful, "It isn't so because I say so" refrain.

[Cleon]

Assertions? The historical support is on my side. You have the all poweful, "It isn't so because I say so" refrain.

again, completely wrong. You are simply advertising your ignorance of history.

Booth was not an anarchist in any real sense of the word. Even if he was, his "anarchism" was closer to the Alex Libman style of right-wing anarchism.

The only way to assert Booth was "on the left" is to redefine "left" so as the term is completely meaningless.

You are simply completely and totally wrong, and there is no way to weasel your way out of it.

[Cicero]

again, completely wrong. You are simply advertising your ignorance of history.

Booth was not an anarchist in any real sense of the word. Even if he was, his "anarchism" was closer to the Alex Libman style of right-wing anarchism.

The only way to assert Booth was "on the left" is to redefine "left" so as the term is completely meaningless.

You are simply completely and totally wrong, and there is no way to weasel your way out of it.

Are you saying that Booth was a Republican, not a Democrat?

[willhaven]

"John Wilkes Booth was an active member of the American Party, an organization better known as the "Know-Nothing Party". This was a strongly anti-Catholic and anti-immigrant political party"The Know-Nothing party were Southern Democrats? :confused:

They started out as the American Republican Party and most (who disagreed with slavery) ended up switching to the Republican Party by 1860.

Or so the all-knowing wikipedia says.

[Cleon]

Are you saying that Booth was a Republican, not a Democrat?

No. Try to keep up.

[willhaven]

Booth also rallied for Henry Davis (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_Winter_Davis) who was one of the Radical Republicans (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radical_Republicans).

There are some interesting contradictions. The parties had a lot of strange overlap back then it seems.

[Cicero]

The Know-Nothing party were Southern Democrats? :confused:

They started out as the American Republican Party and most (who disagreed with slavery) ended up switching to the Republican Party by 1860.

Or so the all-knowing wikipedia says.


No need for confusion. They are two separate entities. Why couldn't Booth be a Southen Democrat and a delegate of the Know-Nothing Party?

[willhaven]

It's interesting because Booth supported Henry Davis who was once a Whig (considered a 2nd coming of the Federalists), a Know Nothing and finally a Republican. All of whom were opposed to the Democrats. Davis was against slavery as was the Republican party but apparently Booth was a racist. It looks as though he supported Davis because Davis was anti-immigrant. The Catholic thing I guess, since Booth was a Protestant.

He was upset about the Emancipation Proclamation, he was a racist, he was seemingly xenophobic, and he had apparently allied himself in support of politicians who were opposed to the Democratic party.

You'd have to make a pretty convincing case for Booth to be a Southern Democrat.

I'm not pretending to be an expert on the subject, but the face value fact of Booth killing a republican doesn't mean he wasn't conservative. He appears to be anything but a leftist or progressive in his beliefs.

[Lurker]

We do know Duran was into woo. We do not know he was a conservative. Being a listener of the Colorodo Springs AM radio show hosted by Chuck Baker is not conclusive of anything.
We don't? Duran claimed that he was spurred on to violence by Chuck Baker. He wasn't spurred to attack Chuck Baker or some other conservative, he was spurred to attack Clinton. I would say that is fairly conclusive evidence that he was a conservative nutbar.


However, we do know the women's ideology who attempted to kill POTUS Ford.


Sara Jane Moore, liberal .

"She regretted her actions, saying she was blinded by her radical political views and convinced that the government had declared war on advocates of left-wing politics.

Agreed. I wasn't questioning that but it is great deflection on your part. I find it humorous that you just can't admit that Duran was a conservative. Incapable of doing so, aren't you? :)

[Random]

He's one of the wackjobs. 'Wackjob' is defined as anyone who might try to assassinate a US president and can't be interpeted to be left or left-leaning.

Yeesh, you need a refresher in basic right logic.

I've always believed all conservatives are wackjobs :D

[Darth Rotor]

Sadly, the right wing doesn't read any books that aren't 2000 years old fantasy novels.
A coffee cup full of fail.

Some fine examples:
William F Buckley
Chesterton
Burke

Care for cream, sugar, or do you want your coffe black? :cool:

DR

[GreyICE]

A coffee cup full of fail.

Some fine examples:
William F Buckley
Chesterton
Burke

Care for cream, sugar, or do you want your coffe black? :cool:

DR
I clearly was not being hyperbolic in the least and referring to the strong grasp of historical fact that some people in this thread have shown.

But I will grant you've convinced me. Some of them read the more current fantasy authors.

[Cicero]

I clearly was not being hyperbolic in the least and referring to the strong grasp of historical fact that some people in this thread have shown.


Just a random selection of your posts shows an utter cluelessness about historical facts regarding the Vietnam War, military operations, different POTUS administration policies, and conservative ideology.

[GreyICE]

Just a random selection of your posts shows an utter cluelessness about historical facts regarding the Vietnam War, military operations, different POTUS administration policies, and conservative ideology.I suppose one could interpret it that way. I'll leave determining whether Cicero's version of reality is factual as an exercise to the reader.

[Darth Rotor]

I clearly was not being hyperbolic in the least and referring to the strong grasp of historical fact that some people in this thread have shown.

But I will grant you've convinced me. Some of them read the more current fantasy authors.
Nice seque into this protip: when you want to hate, despise, and/or demonize someone, make sure you "them" them with as broad a bracket as possible so that nobody is left out of the frag pattern. ;)

[GreyICE]

Nice seque into this protip: when you want to hate, despise, and/or demonize someone, make sure you "them" them with as broad a bracket as possible so that nobody is left out of the frag pattern. ;)
Since you are a member of 'them,' I can't officially listen to you.

On an unrelated note, why does 'us' keep shrinking? I blame them!

[Praktik]

As a helpful tip, you can spot "them" with special glasses:

http://geeksofdoom.com/GoD/img/2008/12/2008-12-04-they_live.jpg

[Darth Rotor]

Since you are a member of 'them,' I can't officially listen to you.
I am? Uh, I get a vote, and no, I'm not, unless you mean a different them. I don't have much truck with them, ya know. :p
On an unrelated note, why does 'us' keep shrinking? I blame them!
Well, yeah, that's a universal problem. :cool:

DR

[UnrepentantSinner]

He was an anarchist. He was a Southern Democrat. Even back in 1865, the GOP was on the politcal right, and the Democratic Party was on the political left.

Wow! The amount of revisionism in such a short post is nothing short of amazing... or at least would be if one didn't know Cicero wrote it.