Lincoln vs Cadillac Forums

(This is the forums archive - If you want to get back to the main site simply click the banner above and you will be taken to our homepage.)

Lincoln vs Cadillac Forums is the Ultimate Online Resource for Owners and Enthusiasts of American Luxury Cars. Feel free to browse through our archive - but make sure you make it back to our main site - Lincoln vs Cadillac Forums

Cadillac XLR : Cadillac CTS : Cadillac : 2005 Cadillac STS : Cadillac Forums : 2000 Lincoln LS : Lincoln Mark VIII : Lincoln Mark VII : Car Wax
Lincoln Town Car : Lincoln Air Suspension : Lincoln Continental : Lemon Law : Do It Yourself Car Repair : Lincoln vs Cadillac Forums : Mesothelioma

Back to the Archive Main Page

Pages: 1

Parrot-in-a-Suit vs. Smart Diva - Ann Coulter cleans Lauer's clock

(Click here to view the original thread with full colors/images)

Posted by: fossten

Coulter Won't Buy Into Lauer's Liberal Logic
Posted by Mark Finkelstein on June 6, 2006 - 07:57.

While considerable attention focuses on Ann Coulter's more superficial charms, from a conservative perspective Ann's real beauty is her absolute refusal to buy into liberal logic, no matter how pervasive. That independence of mind was on display this morning during her interview with Matt Lauer. Ann was on to tout her new book, Godless: The Church of Liberalism, released today on . . . 6/6/6 - sign of the devil and all that.

The first example came in the the context of President Bush's current push for a constitutional amendment that would prohibit gay marriage. The liberal mantra on his initiative, as exemplified by Ann Curry's performance on yesterday's Today, is that this is a cynical political ploy and a waste of time when there are myriad 'real' issues out there to be addressed.

Right out of the box, Lauer invited Ann to buy into that logic:

"David Gregory said if you ask people what they care about they say Iraq and gas prices. Gay marriages are way down on the list, but that's what the president is talking about and what the Senate is taking up. Why?"

Coulter would have none of it:

"I don't know what people are talking about or how David Gregory knows that. But I do know that gay marriage amendments have been put on the ballots in about 20 states now and passed by far larger numbers than Bush won the election by."

Matt then hit Ann with a classic exemplar of perceived liberal truth - the musings of a WaPo columnist. Lauer:

"Here's how E.J. Dionne puts it in the Washington Post: 'The Republican party thinks its base of social conservatives is a nest of dummies who have no memories and respond like bulls whenever red flags are waved in their faces.' Do you agree with that?

Coulter: "That the base are dummies or that Bush thinks that?"

Lauer: "That he can wave a red flag and they will run to the polls to respond to him?"

Coulter: "They don't need to respond to him. He's not running again."

Lauer: "They want the voters to turnout in the mid-term elections. They don't want to lose control of the congress."

Coulter: "Maybe they want to do what the voters want. Whatever you can say about whether or not Bush has a mandate, the mandate against gay marriage is pretty strong. It passed by like 85 percent in Mississippi. Even in Oregon, and that was the state that the groups supporting gay marriage fixated on and outspent their opponents by like 40:1, it passed even there. There is a mandate against gay marriage."

Lauer: "Do you think George Bush in his heart really cares strongly about that issue?"

Coulter: "I don't know what anybody cares in his heart."

Lauer: "Would you take a guess?"

Coulter: "I know what Americans think because they keep voting, over and over and over again overwhelmingly they reject gay marriage. So why is that a bad thing for politicians to respond to what is overwhelmingly a mandate?"

Ann's rejection of Lauer's liberal logic was again on stunning display a bit later in the interview. Lauer suggested that Pres. Bush's low approval ratings are attributable to Iraq. That in turn engendered the following exchange.

Coulter: "I don't think so. That's the one thing he is doing right and that the Democrats are incapable of doing. That is fighting the war on terror."

Lauer: "But I am talking about the war with Iraq, not the war on terror."

Coulter: "I consider them the same thing. We didn't invade Guatemala."

Cue the rim shot!

Posted by: Calabrio

I think she's great.

Many of the elitist Republicans in D.C. don't like her, but they're spineless aye-holes.

Posted by: fossten

Lauer Offended By Ann Coulter; Delighted by Al Franken
Posted by Geoffrey Dickens on June 6, 2006 - 11:53.

Matt Lauer has two different sets of standards for politically provocative authors. If you are on the left he laughs with you, if you are on the right he slams you. On this morning’s Today show Ann Coulter’s statements drew outrage from Matt but last October when Al Franken suggested Karl Rove and Lewis Libby be executed for treason Matt and the Today show crew laughed. Lauer’s interview with Coulter got particularly testy when he read excerpts from Coulter’s new book and demanded she defend them. The following is the most explosive portion of this morning’s Coulter V. Lauer showdown:

Matt Lauer: "Let me give you some quotes from your book, alright? These are random. 'Environmentalists..."

Coulter: "Yes! Now we're on a subject I want."

Lauer: "'Environmentalists' energy plan is a repudiation of American Christian destiny which is jet skis, steak on the electric grill, hot showers and night-skiing. Liberalism is a religion. A comprehensive belief system denying that the Christian belief in man's immortal soul.' And you go on to say, 'liberalism is the opposition party to God.' How do you think Democrats who believe in God are gonna feel about that statement?"

Coulter: "They probably won't like it. They don't like a lot of things I say."

Lauer: "Is it a fair statement you think?"

Coulter: "Yes, yes."

Lauer: "How about this one?"

Coulter: "That's why I wrote a book about it."

Lauer: "Referring to liberals again. 'To a liberal 2200 military deaths in the entire course of the war in Iraq is unconscionable but 1.3 million aborted babies in America every year is something to celebrate.'"

Coulter: "Yes."

Lauer: "You think people celebrate..."

Coulter: "They manifestly do. They are huge rallies for it. That is the one issue that's more important to the Democratic Party than any other. I mean Bill Clinton, the last..."

Lauer: "Do you think they celebrate the right to choose or, or the actual abortion?"

Coulter: "The last candidate the Democrats got into the White House was Bill Clinton. I, I take that as a fair assessment of whom the Democrats will choose as their representative. Bill Clinton sold out every single special interest group. The criminal rights group, the welfare bureaucrats. The one group he would not stand up to were the abortion ladies. Vetoing bans on partial birth, a gruesome procedure passed by overwhelming majorities in the House and Senate. Twice, Clinton vetoed that. That tells you what the Democratic Party thinks about abortion."

Lauer: "Do you, do you believe everything in this book, do you believe everything in the book or do you put some things in there just that cater to your base?"

Coulter: "No of course I believe everything."

Lauer: "Alright on the 9/11 widows and in particular a group that had been outspoken and critical of the administration. 'These self-obsessed women seem genuinely unaware that 9/11 was an attack on our nation and acted as if the terrorist attack only happened to them. They believe the entire country was required to marinate in their exquisite personal agony. Apparently denouncing Bush was an important part of their closure process.' And this part is, is the part I really need to talk to you about. 'These broads are millionaires lionized on TV and in articles about them reveling in their status as celebrities and stalked by grief-arazzis. I've never seen people enjoying their husbands' death so much.'"

Coulter: "Yes."

Lauer: "Because they dare to speak out?"

Coulter: "To speak out using the fact that they're widows. This is the left's doctrine of infallibility. If they have a point to make about the 9/11 commission, about how to fight the war on terrorism. How about sending somebody we're allowed to respond to? No, no we always have to respond to someone who just had a family member die..."

Lauer: "But aren't they the people in the middle of the story?"

Coulter: "...because then if we respond, 'Oh you're questioning their authenticity.' No the story is..."

Lauer: "So grieve but grieve quietly."

Coulter: "No the story is an attack on the nation..."

Lauer: "And by the way..."

Coulter: "That requires a foreign policy response. That does not entail the expertise..."

Lauer: "And by the way they also criticized the Clinton administration for their failures leading up to 9/11."

Coulter: "Oh not, not the ones I'm talking about."

Lauer: "No they have."

Coulter: "No, no, no. Oh no, no, no, no."

Lauer: "But is your message to them just grieve..."

Coulter: "No, no they were cutting commercials for Kerry. They were using their grief in order to make a political point while preventing anyone from responding."

Lauer: "So if you lose a husband you no longer have the right to have a political point of view?"

Coulter: "No but don't use the fact that you lost a husband as the basis for your being able to talk about it while preventing people from responding. Let Matt Lauer make the point, let Bill Clinton make the point. Don't put up someone I'm not allowed to respond to without questioning the authenticity of their grief."

Lauer: "Well but apparently you are allowed to respond to them."

Coulter: "Well yeah I did."

Lauer: "Right so in other words..."

Coulter: "But that is the point of liberal infallibility. Of putting up Cindy Sheehan, of putting out these widows of putting out Joe Wilson. No, no, no you can't respond it's their doctrine of infallibility."

Lauer: "But what I'm saying is they've..."

Coulter: "...somebody else make the argument..."

Lauer: "I'm saying I don't think they've ever told you, you can't respond. So why can't they make their point?"

Coulter: "Look you're getting testy with me."

Lauer: "No I'm not. I just..."

Coulter: "Ohhh."

Lauer: "I think it's, I think it's, I think it's your dramatic statement. 'These broads,' 'you know are, are 'millionaires stalked by grief-arazzi.'"

Coulter: "You think I shouldn't be able to respond to them."

Lauer: "'I've never seen people enjoying their husbands deaths so much.'"

Coulter: "They're, they're, yes. They're all over the news."

Lauer: "The book is called Godless: The Church Of Liberalism. Ann Coulter always fun to have you here."

Coulter: "Hey where's Katie? Did she leave or something?"

Lauer: "She did. 7:17am. And now here's Ann."

Posted by: JohnnyBz00LS

Oh yeah, she's a real gem.........

Quote:

FOXNEWS.COM HOME > POLITICS
Coulter Jokes About Poisoning Supreme Court Justice
Friday, January 27, 2006

LITTLE ROCK, Ark. — Conservative commentator Ann Coulter, speaking at a traditionally black college, joked that Justice John Paul Stevens should be poisoned.

Coulter had told the Philander Smith College audience Thursday that more conservative justices were needed on the Supreme Court to change the current law on abortion. Stevens is one of the court's most liberal members.

"We need somebody to put rat poisoning in Justice Stevens' creme brulee," Coulter said. "That's just a joke, for you in the media."

Coulter has made a career of writing and lecturing on her strongly conservative views.

At one point during her address, which was part of a lecture series, some audience members booed when she cut off two questioners. "I'm not going to be lectured to," Coulter told one man in a raised voice.

She drew more boos when she said the crack cocaine problem "has pretty much gone away."

Quote:

FOXNEWS.COM HOME > POLITICS
Coulter Blasts Sept. 11 Widows in Book
Wednesday, June 07, 2006

NEW YORK — The group of outspoken Sept. 11 widows who pushed for the commission to investigate the attacks are "self-obsessed" and act "as if the terrorist attacks happened only to them," conservative author Ann Coulter charges in her new book.

Coulter appeared on NBC's "Today" show on Tuesday, marking the release of "Godless: The Church of Liberalism" and reiterated her stance, saying the women used their grief "to make a political point."

In her book, Coulter said, "I've never seen people enjoying their husbands' deaths so much."

The women are Kristen Breitweiser, Lorie Van Auken, Mindy Kleinberg and Patty Casazza of New Jersey. Coulter refers to them as the "Witches of East Brunswick," the New Jersey town where two of them live.

"Having my husband burn alive in a building brought me no joy," Van Auken told the Daily News in Wednesday's editions in response to Coulter.

"She sounds like a very disturbed, unraveled person," Breitweiser said.

Glad to see what kind of looney ideology you align yourselves with.

Posted by: Calabrio

Interesting, you forgot to bold the end of the sentence:
"We need somebody to put rat poisoning in Justice Stevens' creme brulee," Coulter said. "That's just a joke, for you in the media."

See. Changes the emphasis a bit, doesn't it. Truth isn't your speciality, so I won't hold that against you Johnny.

But the media backlash against Coulter shows the one problem I associate with her. Just like many of the members here, I recognize her sarcasm and humor. Her colums, despite what many liberals think, are actually designed to have elements of sarcastic humor. Within that article is a very strong and well composed argument. Around that argument is scathing sarcasm and barbs.

When a conservative reads her words, they smile at the wise-ass stuff and see the argument.

When a liberal reads it, they focus entirely on the sarcasm and barbs in order to avoid the argument. So, her point is no longer how the Democrats are using victims to advance their agenda as a means of avoiding criticism. Now it's about how upset the 9-11 Widows are. "Oh my, she called those poor women the Witches of East Brunswich," something I think is funny.
_________________

Posted by: fossten

Johnny once again ignores every single time anybody from the left on this board has called anyone a Repug, or used the term Shrub, or BuSh, or any pejorative term.

We're supposed to take those types of insults as humor, but Ann Coulter's insults are mean-spirited?

Johnny doesn't realize that everything Ann said was right.

Johnny is still operating from a double standard.

Posted by: TheDude

You know what’s really odd??? I'll tell ya. In 2004 Bush used key 9/11 victims family members to strengthen his own election campaign and not a single Republican/Conservative blinked a questioning eye at these people. These peoples words were held VERY high, if anyone questioned anything they had to say, you were labeled an un-American, terrorist sympathizer who was basically urinating on all the 9/11 victims and their families.

Fast forward two years later and what do we have? Ann Coulter bashing and spewing hate for the sole purpose of selling a book, she's like Howard Stern, she'll say and do what her audience wants to hear but are to scared to do themselves because she knows it will make her rich.

Wake up Righties, she's bending you over the barrel and taking what she likes (MONEY).

Posted by: fossten

Quote:

Originally Posted by 95DevilleNS

You know what’s really odd??? I'll tell ya. In 2004 Bush used token 9/11 victims family members to strengthen his own election campaign and not a single Republican/Conservative blinked a questioning eye at these people. These peoples words were held VERY high, if anyone questioned anything they had to say, you were labeled an un-American, terrorist sympathizer who was basically urinating on all the 9/11 victims and their families.

Fast forward two YEARS later and what do we have? Ann Coulter bashing and spewing hate for the sole purpose of selling a book, she's like Howard Stern, she'll say and do what her audience want to hear but are to scared to do themselves because she knows it will make her rich.

Wake up Righties, she's bending you over the barrel and taking what she likes (MONEY).

You may think you have a point here, but you do not. You are forgetting the intervening 18 months where every libwack in Congress has USED any 9/11 or war victim they could find to fuel their BashBush agenda. From Breitweiser to Sheehan, they have worked unceasingly to fan the flames of hatred and anger against Bush by claiming he faked us out on a war for oil, which has been proven to be untrue.

This kind of rhetoric upsets people that lost friends/family members on 9/11 or in Iraq, and it's hard to imagine that a handful of them wouldn't believe the lies told to them by the Drive-by media and the libwacks (Kerry, Murtha, et al) in Congress. Then you throw in somebody who wants to interview them on camera, and they start spewing their hate about how it's Bush's fault. Where do you think they got that rhetoric?

What's a real shame is how the lefties in the media and Congress have sacrificed the dignity of these people (who Bush EMBRACED) by inciting them with lies to turn against Bush, and all for the sake of political gain. You know that none of these claims were true, and yet people believed them.

It's a bunch of baloney and Coulter's right on the mark by pointing it out. The only people benefiting from this crap are the lefties in Congress and the media. But they will all lose again come November.

Posted by: TheDude

I'm glad you think I don't have a point, if you did; you'd see Coulter for the pit viper she is. By the way, did you buy her book? Just curious.

And yes, Democrats used 9/11 victims for political gain, but the Republicans did too. So the shame of it is spread equally. One exception though, the Republicans are now dumping on those same people.

Posted by: KharmaDog

Ann Coulter is a stupid B*tch who whores out her illogical rhetoric and confused facts to any wayyyyy-right retard that is stupid enough to shell out money for her trash.

It has been proven, and shown, time and again that she does little research in the facts that she spews, and when challenged on her continual inaccuracies she uncomfortably laughs and tries to joke as she is aware that she knows nothing and fears that her semi-intelligent to downright stupid followers might just catch on.

Though her personality is an act, it is by no means a joke. She positions herself to make money off of the racist, the intollerant or the just plain stupid. Her positions and columns are not an attempt at humour, but an attempt to insight anger in order to justify her existence and paycheck.

Anyone who is entertained by her antics is slightly more intelligent than a half brain dead collubus monkey. Anyone who agrees with her positions, or thinks that anything she spews has any value whatsoever is at best...a Douche Bag.

Posted by: DixieRambler

Damn she has got some good looking legs too!

Posted by: TheDude

Quote:

Originally Posted by DixieRambler

Damn she has got some good looking legs too!

I'll give you that, but her neck scares me.

Posted by: TheDude

Quote:

Originally Posted by KharmaDog

Ann Coulter is a stupid B*tch who whores out her illogical rhetoric and confused facts to any wayyyyy-right retard that is stupid enough to shell out money for her trash.

It has been proven, and shown, time and again that she does little research in the facts that she spews, and when challenged on her continual inaccuracies she uncomfortably laughs and tries to joke as she is aware that she knows nothing and fears that her semi-intelligent to downright stupid followers might just catch on.

Though her personality is an act, it is by no means a joke. She positions herself to make money off of the racist, the intollerant or the just plain stupid. Her positions and columns are not an attempt at humour, but an attempt to insight anger in order to justify her existence and paycheck.

Anyone who is entertained by her antics is slightly more intelligent than a half brain dead collubus monkey. Anyone who agrees with her positions, or thinks that anything she spews has any value whatsoever is at best...a Douche Bag.

Don't hold back, tell us what you really think.

Posted by: MonsterMark

Quote:

Originally Posted by KharmaDog

I guess I need to wait for you to make a few more posts before taking that diatribe you posted on.

Btw, welcome. Nice belly flop. Time to refill the pool, I guess.

Posted by: DixieRambler

Quote:

Originally Posted by KharmaDog

Posted by: fossten

Actually, when you insert the name "Hillary Clinton" into his description, it starts to make sense.

Try it; it's fun.

Posted by: KharmaDog

Quote:

Originally Posted by DixieRambler

A stunning retort bereft of point or humor.

Posted by: fossten

No, actually, this is a stunning retort:

Reprinted from NewsMax.com

Wednesday, June 7, 2006 6:45 p.m. EDT
Ann Coulter Fires Back at Hillary Clinton

Conservative author Ann Coulter is firing back at Sen. Hillary Clinton, after the former first lady attacked her for being "vicious [and] mean-spirited" towards a group of politically active 9/11 widows.

"I think if she's worried about people being mean to women she should have a talk with her husband," Coulter told radio host Sean Hannity, who was hosting a book signing for the conservative firebrand on Long Island.

"This is, I remind you, Bill Clinton's wife," Coulter added. "[And I'm the one who's] mean to women?"

Earlier in the day, Mrs. Clinton complained about Coulter's attacks on the Jersey Girls, a group of 9/11 widows who blamed President Bush for the attacks that killed their husbands and who campaigned for John Kerry in 2004.

"Perhaps [Coulter's] book should have been called 'Heartless,"' the top Democrat said. "I know a lot of the widows and family members who lost loved ones on 9/11. They never wanted to be a member of a group that is defined by the tragedy of what happened."

An angry Clinton added that she found it "unimaginable that anyone in the public eye could launch a vicious, mean-spirited attack on people whom I've known over the last four and a half years to be concerned deeply about the safety and security of our country."

But Coulter told Hannity: "She may know the 9/11 widows, but you and I know Juanita Broaddrick" - a reference to one of Mr. Clinton's accusers.

Coulter delivered her broadsides against Mrs. Clinton as a phalanx of TV and print reporters looked on.

The heavy coverage was prompted by the New York Daily News, which frontpaged Coulter's comments on the Jersey Girls in Wednesday editions.

Hillary, you've been

Posted by: DixieRambler

Quote:

Originally Posted by KharmaDog

A stunning retort bereft of point or humor.

Damn. "bereft"....did you ask your mom for permission first before you use words like this?

Posted by: TheDude

Quote:

Originally Posted by fossten

No, actually, this is a stunning retort:

I wasn't stunned, as you say fossten, that was 'ad hominum' at it's finest, Hillary is talking about the 9/11 widows and Coulter attack's Hillary on her husband. I wouldn't expect less from her.

Posted by: fossten

Quote:

Originally Posted by 95DevilleNS

I wasn't stunned, as you say fossten, that was 'ad hominum' at it's finest, Hillary is talking about the 9/11 widows and Coulter attack's Hillary on her husband. I wouldn't expect less from her.

Actually, Hillary's attack was ad hominem. It's completely reasonable to expect that Hillary should have to answer for why she never stood up for women's rights while her husband was philandering.

If she runs for president, I suspect that she will have to answer some questions about that unless she dodges the camera.

The bottom line here, Deville, is that Hillary made a costly miscalculation by attacking Ann Coulter. A politician should never attack a pundit. It's a little like David and Goliath, except with God on Goliath's side and David's sling empty. Ann sliced and diced her, and she will now continue to do so, while Hillary has to hunker down and hide, because if she continues to engage Coulter, she will look more and more idiotic. It was a really stupid thing to do, politically. The Hillary-loving media will have to do somersaults now in order to prevent the American people from hearing about Juanita Broaddrick and Kathleen Willey all over again.

Posted by: KharmaDog

Quote:

Originally Posted by fossten

No, actually, this is a stunning retort:

You are easily impressed.

Quote:

Originally Posted by fossten

Reprinted from NewsMax.com

A steaming crap of a site.

Quote:

Originally Posted by fossten

Hillary, you've been

Actually, as much as I dislike hillary clinton, Coulter made herself look even more idiotic with that rebuttal.

Posted by: fossten

Let's see, I'll do it your way:

Quote:

Originally Posted by KharmaDog

You are easily impressed.

Wrong.

Quote:

Originally Posted by KharmaDog

A steaming crap of a site.

Wrong.

Quote:

Originally Posted by KharmaDog

Actually, as much as I dislike hillary clinton, Coulter made herself look even more idiotic with that rebuttal.

Wrong.

Boy, I feel smarter already!

Posted by: TheDude

Quote:

Originally Posted by fossten

Her husband cheats on her and she needs to stand up for women's rights? Sorry, I don't see the connection. Hillary should have ignored her, I'll agree with that, but sometimes you swat a gnat because it bugs you.

I don't see how she looks idiotic here though, Hillary calls Coulter out on attacking widows for grieving and Coulter's response is 'oh ya, your husband cheated on you!'. If anyone looks like an idiot there; it's 'drag you through the mud' Coulter.

Posted by: wayfarers43

Politics are politics and grandstanding is grandstanding. Ann Coulter sells books because she's controversial. But I'd hate to have that bi**tch in my bed at the end of the day.

Posted by: fossten

Quote:

Originally Posted by 95DevilleNS

He didn't just cheat on her. He was accused of groping(Kathleen Willey), exposing(Paula Jones), and raping(Juanita Broaddrick); and he lied about it on national television; and this all happened while he was in the Oval Orifice getting bjs from an intern while Hillary stood by and said nothing. And she hasn't said anything about it to this day.

She was an enabler, pure and simple.

See the connection now?

Posted by: fossten

Quote:

Originally Posted by wayfarers43

Politics are politics and grandstanding is grandstanding. Ann Coulter sells books because she's controversial. But I'd hate to have that bi**tch in my bed at the end of the day.

Who are you referring to, Hillary or Ann? I'd take Ann any day.

Posted by: pepperman

Quote:

Originally Posted by fossten

Who are you referring to, Hillary or Ann? I'd take Ann any day.

Yup Ann Coulter any day.

Posted by: fossten

Coulter Was Cruel? How About Kristen Was Cruel?
Posted by Tim Graham on June 8, 2006 - 05:52.

As the networks robotically followed the New York Daily News and its "Coulter Was Cruel" cover -- probably the best TV day for the Daily News since they put Newt Gingrich in diapers in the mid-90s -- they did not consider that some of the 9-11 widows she mocked were also champions of political trash talk.

It should go without saying that by writing in her new book that the widows were enjoying their husbands' deaths, Coulter didn't cross the line, she exploded it with a grenade. (On the other hand, these liberal widows drew hours of TV pundit time that many members of Congress will never see in their lifetimes.) Kristen Breitweiser, the most prominent Bush-trashing 9-11 widow, has sounded like a liberal version of Coulter at times on her huffing and puffing blog at the Huffington Post. For example, on April 5, after complaining that New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani shouldn’t be allowed to make a victim’s impact statement ("Which family member did Giuliani lose in the attacks?"), Breitweiser whacked the Bush administration with the snide stick:

By these standards, should I expect Condoleezza Rice (Ms. "Nobody knew planes could be used as missiles"), George Tenet (Mr. "I failed to tell the FBI for 18 months that two known al Qaeda killers were living in San Diego and planning the 9/11 attacks"), and perhaps, George Bush (Mr. "I was reading a story about a pet goat while thousands of people perished and burned alive in the World Trade Center because I didn't want to alarm the school children.") to provide victim's impact statements, as well?

On the Dubai ports, February 23:

As an aside Mr. President, perhaps you should have spent the past 5 years decreasing our dependency on foreign oil from nations like the UAE and Saudi Arabia so that maybe this deal might not have been so necessary for you to rubber stamp.

But, that is just a thought and a dream. A dream that won't come true until you and all your oil-rich friends have sucked this planet dry of every drop of oil and in the meantime cornered the market on alternative energy resources, right? Power-grab; Power-shift?

On the subject of Newsweek's collapsing Koran-flushing "scoop" on May 18, 2005, Breitweiser wasn't so much Coulter as Seymour Hersh, loosely asserting "homicides" and "major human rights abuses" by U.S. interrogators:

Anybody who has looked into some of the allegations floating around about the torture and homicides being carried out by our interrogators must realize that it is a possibility that something like flushing a Koran down a toilet could happen. What do you expect when you have interrogators basically given carte blanche to do whatever they want to detainees....

We have major human rights abuses being carried out by our military and intelligence officers. Such human rights abuses are on their face morally reprehensible and wrong. Moreover, in the long run they put this nation at huge risk. Why? Because every person that is wrongfully held, tortured, and then wantonly released by us, immediately returns to their homeland, tells their story and becomes the poster child for why everybody should hate the Americans....My take? Don't flush the Koran, Flush Bush.

Oh, she's a real sweetheart, that one.

Posted by: TheDude

Quote:

Originally Posted by fossten

No, I do not... The blame for any events you described above would fall on Bill Clinton.

Posted by: rmac694203

Ann Coulter's book came out on 6/6/06...hmm...now I know for sure. She, in fact, is the antichrist.

Posted by: fossten

The reason the left is so angry about Coulter's book (at least the ones who've actually read it) is because her points are dead on. I bought a copy and read it, and it's the most accurate, hard-hitting piece of work I've read in a long time. She even talks about government toilet regulations in this book! Unbelievable.

Reprinted from NewsMax.com

Monday, June 12, 2006 11:05 p.m. EDT

Media Proves Coulter Right

In their outrage over Ann Coulter’s new book, "Godless: The Church of Liberalism." the media have proved the very point they dispute -– the church of liberalism has a doctrine of infallibility and liberals hide behind a bevy of sacred cows to defend its tenets.

In her book, Coulter writes that ever since Rush Limbaugh and Fox News Channel broke the monopoly on the news and the floodgates opened, the leftist media and the Democrats have been trying "to re-create a world where they can hurl slander and treason without anyone arguing back –- they needed a doctrine of infallibility” that would prevent critics from answering back, leaving their fallacious doctrines unchallenged.

"They would choose only messengers whom we’re not allowed to reply to,” she writes. "That’s why all Democratic spokesmen these days are sobbing hysterical women. You can’t respond to them because that would be questioning the authenticity of their suffering.”

Among them, Coulter writes, are "people with "absolute moral authority” in the words of Maureen Dowd describing Cindy Sheehan -- Democrats with a dead husband, a dead child, a wife who works at the CIA, a war record, a terminal illness or as a last resort being on a first-name basis with Nelson Mandela.”

And so we get the likes of the "Jersey Girls" exploiting the deaths of their husbands on 9/11, Sheehan exploiting the death in Iraq of her son to attack President Bush, Joe Wilson, Rep. John Murtha and other untouchables. To challenge their assertions is blasphemy and "over the line.” And an assault on the "sacred.”

In her book Coulter writes of all of the above unchallengeable messengers, but the liberals in the media have focused on one group -– the Jersey Girls -– four New Jersey 9/11 windows who have blatantly exploited the deaths of their husbands exactly as Sheehan has exploited the heroic death of her son -– to castigate the president and his administration, and become lionized millionaires in the process.

And, just as Coulter has written, she has been lambasted by the media and such liberal Democrats as Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, for daring to attack their untouchable spokeswomen.

Posted by: fossten

Reprinted from NewsMax.com

Vile Left Gets a Pass

Steve Malzberg
Thursday, June 15, 2006

You have to admire the brazen hypocrisy being exhibited by the liberal media when it comes to the treatment that Ann Coulter has been receiving from them.

She has been so vilified that at least one liberal columnist has reportedly suggested she'd be better off dead. He actually asked her, "Would it kill you to do us all a favor and kill yourself?" But that columnist, Simon Dumenco of Ad Age, gets away unscathed – as do the rest of those who have directed vile, outrageous and shameful remarks in the direction of Coulter and others on the right.

Let's take the much-hyped Wednesday night matchup on Jay Leno's "Tonight Show" on NBC between Coulter and George Carlin.

You may remember Carlin as the man behind the "seven words you can't say on TV."

I also cannot write them on these pages.

In a CNN.com story about the Leno show, Coulter is described as "the acid-tongued conservative" while good old George is tabbed as "the quick-witted, anti-establishment comedian." I also see that he is in the voice cast of the new hit movie for kids called "Cars." (Disney might want to take a closer look at its movie voices in the future.)

I wonder when Ann will get her shot to voice a kids movie?

During a Sept. 9, 2005 appearance on HBO's "Real Time with Bill Maher" Carlin used his quick wit to take this gratuitous shot at our president:

"Governor Bush, and I call him that because it's really the last thing he was elected to, ... when he reaches his Christian heaven I think he will have a lot to answer for." As for the president's mother, Carlin told Maher, "The silver douche bag, I call her."

Far from evoking any Ann Coulter-type outrage, the slur elicited a hearty roar from the audience, a broad grin and chuckle from fellow guest Cynthia Tucker, a columnist from the Atlanta Journal Constitution, and a good laugh from the host himself.

I also don't recall any outrage from the left when comic Whoopi Goldberg took to the stage at Radio City Music Hall in New York City for a democratic fund-raiser for the Kerry-Edwards ticket back on July 8, 2004.

According to the New York Post, "Waving a bottle of wine, Goldberg fired off a stream of vulgar sexual wordplays on Bush's name in a riff about female genitalia." Goldberg reportedly said the country should "keep Bush where it belongs and not in the White House."

Not only did John Kerry not object to the vulgarities, but he actually took to the stage at the end of the night and thanked all the performers for "an extraordinary evening" and said that every performer "conveyed to you the heart and sole of America."

I don't recall a group of congressmen writing a letter to Goldberg or Carlin asking for an apology they way they did to Coulter.

I don't recall state legislators in New Jersey or anywhere urging a boycott of Goldberg, Carlin or, for that matter Alec Baldwin, who had urged the stoning of Congressman Henry Hyde during the impeachment of Bill Clinton, the way they have for Coulter.

Might I have said what Coulter has said about the "Jersey Girls" in a different way? Yes, and I have many times. But the reaction by the left to what Coulter did say is just another example, the latest example, of selective outrage, aka the old double standard.