Ann Coulter, protestant, and republican... - PeachParts Mercedes-Benz Forum

#1 05-05-2005, 08:47 PM

I'm so thrilled with Ann, I wish she was my sister...............

unkl300d · #2 05-05-2005, 09:02 PM

"I'm so thrilled with Ann, I wish she was my sister............... "

What position in the family pecking order do you wish, relative to yourself???

Kuan · #3 05-05-2005, 09:27 PM

Now now, sister lovin' is 'gainst the law in these here parts.

cmac2012 · #4 05-06-2005, 01:13 AM

Poor sweet lady's like a guitar that got tuned way too tight, and being played by a meth freak to boot.

aklim · #5 05-06-2005, 09:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kuan

Now now, sister lovin' is 'gainst the law in these here parts.

Nothin says love like faminly lovin.

phatryd · #6 05-06-2005, 02:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BusyBenz

I'm so thrilled with Ann, I wish she was my sister...............

Me too...So I could hit her with a plastic bat or shove a dirty sock down her throat!

John

wbain5280 · #7 05-07-2005, 12:31 AM

I find her really humerous and witty.

Jason Beal · #8 05-07-2005, 01:01 AM

She has no soul....

I would throw an egg on her if I saw her....

Honus · #9 05-07-2005, 09:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by w126

She'd lick that egg right off her face and smile. That chick lives off that kind of publicity and can verbally throw it right back at you. I don't always agree with her, but at least she shakes things up at these sleepy, left leaning universities!

Coulter is quick on her feet, but that's about as far as it goes with her. The problem with Coulter has nothing to do with left versus right. The problem with Coulter is her abysmal "research." She backs up her writing with voluminous footnotes and the media praise her thorough research. They rarely call her out to explain why her footnotes are either false or unrelated to the point she is trying to make. She is nothing more than a talented snake oil sales lady, yet the media feel duty bound to present her views as if they are legitimate. Right-wingers of the Hannity-Coulter variety have figured that out. They know that they can lie through their teeth and the media will be afraid to call them on it for fear of being accused of bias.

#10 05-07-2005, 10:22 AM

I love the open minded left, anyone that says something they agree with is an insightful genius anyone who disagrees is a moron or Nazi.

#11 05-07-2005, 10:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by w126

I take for what she is: a right wing assassin. Shoot (pun intended), even the "National Review" thinks she's a disingenuous, lying, sensationalist.

If she was invited to speak here by the UW student union, I'd def attend. Problem is that left wing groups would try to spoil all the fun by trying to ban her.

The last great speaking fireworks I witnessed was Louis Farrakhan, whitey got the ****ty seats and the black kids got front and center. Now that was good fun.

That's a hoot and wayyyyyy to true. I had a similar experience at a Jesse Jackson rally. I could only imagine the dirty looks you got after that speech

I accidently walked into a room that was used for a student NOI meeting and the looks were very similar to the looks a Panamanian gave me before he started shooting at me.

Botnst · #12 05-07-2005, 11:16 AM

Coulter is a good writer. She carefully selects words to provoke the greatest reaction and it works like a rubber hammer to the knee. Folks who hate her just cannot help themselves. Here's her latest opinion piece. Her parting shot (last paragraph) ought to get the knees thrashing.

Bot

THE DEVIL IS OUT OF DETAILS
May 5, 2005

Liberals have been unusually hysterical the past few weeks. But we're not getting much in the way of details — which is odd because the devil is usually found in the details. As we reviewed vis-a-vis the judiciary in last week's column, whenever liberals won't give you details, it's because the details don't help them.

We keep hearing Tom DeLay's name uttered in angry, accusatory tones, but I still don't know what law he's supposed to have broken. As far as I can tell, DeLay didn't even cheat at golf during that trip to Scotland. But you know what liberals always say: "Where there's nothing, there's fire."

As long as liberals can keep repeating "Tom DeLay" and "ethics violation" in the same sentence and get the media to throw a grade-A hissy fit –- and it's so hard to tease that out of the mainstream media when it comes to a Republican — and they've got themselves a scandal!

Close your eyes and even now you can hear Aaron Brown saying: "Embattled Rep. Tom DeLay came under fire again today when it was disclosed that his Permanent Record showed he refused to take a nap once while in kindergarten. We turn now live to Wolf Blitzer with former kindergarten teacher Louise Millicuddy in Livingston, Texas. Wolf, could this bombshell spell the end for the combative Tom DeLay?"

How about asking the Democrats — I would recommend asking Rep. Rosa DeLauro this -– to explain precisely which law they believe DeLay broke? People will have already left the building before we get the most basic outline of the allegation. These are the same legal geniuses who looked at dozens of Whitewater-related felony convictions and said, "Crime? What crime?"

DeLay's own constituents seem to like him, unless you include Democrats claiming to be Republicans. Liberals never tire of this trick or imagine that it could ever become any less believable. Turn on talk radio right now and you'll hear some liberal caller claiming to be a lifelong Republican scandalized by the Bush tax cuts — or some other policy that has been a mainstay of the Republican Party for at least a century. The callers are always teachers. (No wonder our kids aren't learning — their teachers are always on the phone with talk-radio shows pretending to be Republicans.)

A ringleader of the DeLay witch-hunt in Texas is Patricia Baig, who took out a full-page advertisement in a Texas newspaper calling for DeLay's resignation. Baig signed her letter, "A Texas Republican for Ethical Reform."

There is no record of Baig ever voting in a Republican primary, belonging to any Republican clubs or contributing to any Republican politicians in Texas or anywhere else.

To the contrary! Baig contributed to the Democrat who ran against DeLay in his last election. She used her maiden name for the ad, calling herself "P.A. Perine (Texas Republican)." She is a substitute teacher.

All of that was duly noted by a New York Times reporter. (If we are good and decent people, conservatives will put that reporter on a 24-hour watch to make sure he isn't killed in the middle of the night.) But liberals think they can fool normal people with their road-to-Damascus "I used to be a Republican" conversion stories. They can't even fool The New York Times!

Baig's entire retort to the absence of any evidence that she is a Republican was to say that lots of Republicans don't vote in Republican primaries or contribute to Republican candidates (which, in her defense, is at least a better excuse than Kevin Phillips'.)

So, like their theories on "global warming," a liberal's claim to be a Republican is a non-disprovable assertion involving a lot of hot air.

Another conservative getting the Emmanuel Goldstein treatment is John Bolton, Bush's nominee to be ambassador to the United Nations. The charge against Bolton consists of the allegation that he is an absolute beast to his co-workers.

Have the Democrats heard about Katie Couric? As The New York Times described it last week: "America's girl next door has morphed into the mercurial diva down the hall. At the first sound of her peremptory voice and clickety stiletto heels, people dart behind doors and douse the lights." (Funny, I do the same thing when I'm watching the "Today" show at home by myself.)

Things have gotten so bad at "Today," sometimes they show that videotape of Katie's lower bowel exam just to lighten things up.

Can't Barbara Boxer do something to protect the staff of NBC's "Today"? They're at least Americans. First they had to live through the horrors of the Bryant Gumbel years, and now this. Also, I can't be completely clear here, because somebody could get killed, but why isn't a certain lamp-throwing junior senator from New York helping them out? Oh wait — I think I know why ...

I repeat: Bolton has been nominated to be ambassador to the United Nations. It's not like it's an important job. Get a grip, people! He's not replacing Paula Abdul on "American Idol."

The U.N. is an organization with thousands of people from all over the world with one thing in common: They badly need to be yelled at, preferably by a guy who looks like Wilford Brimley. When did collegiality with representatives from North Korea and Syria become a pressing national issue?

Why just imagine if Bolton raised his voice in front of Sudan's ambassador, or (gasp!) Burma's! I mean, Myanmar's! (Sorry, military junta that runs Myanmar!)

Democrats are enflamed at the idea of Bolton mistreating representatives of slave-traders and dictators, but won't lift a finger to help the staff of "Today." We used to be a country that cared about ratings genocide.

The only silver lining to the Democrats' efforts to kill Bolton's nomination is that if they succeed, Bush could nominate Ronald Reagan's ambassador to the U.N.'s Economic and Social Council instead. (Alan Keyes!) Maybe then we could finally get on with the important work of quitting the U.N. and kicking them out of New York. Isn't it somebody else's turn to host those guys yet?

#13 05-07-2005, 12:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Botnst

Coulter is a good writer. She carefully selects words to provoke the greatest reaction and it works like a rubber hammer to the knee. Folks who hate her just cannot help themselves. Here's her latest opinion piece. Her parting shot (last paragraph) ought to get the knees thrashing.

Bot

THE DEVIL IS OUT OF DETAILS
May 5, 2005

Liberals have been unusually hysterical the past few weeks. But we're not getting much in the way of details — which is odd because the devil is usually found in the details. As we reviewed vis-a-vis the judiciary in last week's column, whenever liberals won't give you details, it's because the details don't help them.

We keep hearing Tom DeLay's name uttered in angry, accusatory tones, but I still don't know what law he's supposed to have broken. As far as I can tell, DeLay didn't even cheat at golf during that trip to Scotland. But you know what liberals always say: "Where there's nothing, there's fire."

As long as liberals can keep repeating "Tom DeLay" and "ethics violation" in the same sentence and get the media to throw a grade-A hissy fit –- and it's so hard to tease that out of the mainstream media when it comes to a Republican — and they've got themselves a scandal!

Close your eyes and even now you can hear Aaron Brown saying: "Embattled Rep. Tom DeLay came under fire again today when it was disclosed that his Permanent Record showed he refused to take a nap once while in kindergarten. We turn now live to Wolf Blitzer with former kindergarten teacher Louise Millicuddy in Livingston, Texas. Wolf, could this bombshell spell the end for the combative Tom DeLay?"

How about asking the Democrats — I would recommend asking Rep. Rosa DeLauro this -– to explain precisely which law they believe DeLay broke? People will have already left the building before we get the most basic outline of the allegation. These are the same legal geniuses who looked at dozens of Whitewater-related felony convictions and said, "Crime? What crime?"

DeLay's own constituents seem to like him, unless you include Democrats claiming to be Republicans. Liberals never tire of this trick or imagine that it could ever become any less believable. Turn on talk radio right now and you'll hear some liberal caller claiming to be a lifelong Republican scandalized by the Bush tax cuts — or some other policy that has been a mainstay of the Republican Party for at least a century. The callers are always teachers. (No wonder our kids aren't learning — their teachers are always on the phone with talk-radio shows pretending to be Republicans.)

A ringleader of the DeLay witch-hunt in Texas is Patricia Baig, who took out a full-page advertisement in a Texas newspaper calling for DeLay's resignation. Baig signed her letter, "A Texas Republican for Ethical Reform."

There is no record of Baig ever voting in a Republican primary, belonging to any Republican clubs or contributing to any Republican politicians in Texas or anywhere else.

To the contrary! Baig contributed to the Democrat who ran against DeLay in his last election. She used her maiden name for the ad, calling herself "P.A. Perine (Texas Republican)." She is a substitute teacher.

All of that was duly noted by a New York Times reporter. (If we are good and decent people, conservatives will put that reporter on a 24-hour watch to make sure he isn't killed in the middle of the night.) But liberals think they can fool normal people with their road-to-Damascus "I used to be a Republican" conversion stories. They can't even fool The New York Times!

Baig's entire retort to the absence of any evidence that she is a Republican was to say that lots of Republicans don't vote in Republican primaries or contribute to Republican candidates (which, in her defense, is at least a better excuse than Kevin Phillips'.)

So, like their theories on "global warming," a liberal's claim to be a Republican is a non-disprovable assertion involving a lot of hot air.

Another conservative getting the Emmanuel Goldstein treatment is John Bolton, Bush's nominee to be ambassador to the United Nations. The charge against Bolton consists of the allegation that he is an absolute beast to his co-workers.

Have the Democrats heard about Katie Couric? As The New York Times described it last week: "America's girl next door has morphed into the mercurial diva down the hall. At the first sound of her peremptory voice and clickety stiletto heels, people dart behind doors and douse the lights." (Funny, I do the same thing when I'm watching the "Today" show at home by myself.)

Things have gotten so bad at "Today," sometimes they show that videotape of Katie's lower bowel exam just to lighten things up.

Can't Barbara Boxer do something to protect the staff of NBC's "Today"? They're at least Americans. First they had to live through the horrors of the Bryant Gumbel years, and now this. Also, I can't be completely clear here, because somebody could get killed, but why isn't a certain lamp-throwing junior senator from New York helping them out? Oh wait — I think I know why ...

I repeat: Bolton has been nominated to be ambassador to the United Nations. It's not like it's an important job. Get a grip, people! He's not replacing Paula Abdul on "American Idol."

The U.N. is an organization with thousands of people from all over the world with one thing in common: They badly need to be yelled at, preferably by a guy who looks like Wilford Brimley. When did collegiality with representatives from North Korea and Syria become a pressing national issue?

Why just imagine if Bolton raised his voice in front of Sudan's ambassador, or (gasp!) Burma's! I mean, Myanmar's! (Sorry, military junta that runs Myanmar!)

Democrats are enflamed at the idea of Bolton mistreating representatives of slave-traders and dictators, but won't lift a finger to help the staff of "Today." We used to be a country that cared about ratings genocide.

The only silver lining to the Democrats' efforts to kill Bolton's nomination is that if they succeed, Bush could nominate Ronald Reagan's ambassador to the U.N.'s Economic and Social Council instead. (Alan Keyes!) Maybe then we could finally get on with the important work of quitting the U.N. and kicking them out of New York. Isn't it somebody else's turn to host those guys yet?

Now, what was it you were saying in the other thread, oh, wait a minute, let me paste your quote.........

"I hope that we're not going to descend back into the zone of political flaming.

Same comment goes for the other thread.

This is the kind of stuff that escalated twice before and led to slaughter of guilty and innocent alike. It rains on the just and unjust."

Best wishes.
__________________
Res ipse loquitur

#14 05-07-2005, 12:22 PM

Why is Ann, like Rush, always on the defensive with liberals?

Botnst · #15 05-07-2005, 12:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BusyBenz

Now, what was it you were saying in the other thread, oh, wait a minute, let me paste your quote.........

"I hope that we're not going to descend back into the zone of political flaming.

Same comment goes for the other thread.

This is the kind of stuff that escalated twice before and led to slaughter of guilty and innocent alike. It rains on the just and unjust."

Best wishes.
__________________
Res ipse loquitur

Well there ya go. I didn't think what I posted was provocative, I thought it was funny. Just like the initial posts that started this thread.

Bot