Jackson Free Press

It's truly hard to be uglier than this women. It's amazing to think that The Clarion-Ledger runs this idiot every week. First her indifference to actual facts to support her hate. Her love of McCarthyism. Now this:

A member of the Sept. 11 commission on Friday lashed out at conservative pundit Ann Coulter for a "hate-filled attack" in saying the widows whose husbands died in the World Trade Center used the deaths for their own political gain.

In her latest book, Coulter criticizes the four New Jersey widows who pushed for an independent commission to investigate the Sept. 11, attacks. The women also backed Democrat John Kerry's presidential candidacy in 2004.

"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' deaths so much," Coulter wrote.

Former Rep. Tim Roehmer, D-Ind., a member of the commission that investigated the Sept. 11 attacks, called Coulter's "hate-filled attack on the patriotic heroes of 9/12 _ the widows of 9/11 _ reprehensible and undignified."

Roehmer urged people not to buy her book. "Americans shouldn't contribute to her profiting from these vicious remarks."

I just don't what the world has come to.

Previous Comments

ID

106220

Comment

Over the top but playing devil's advocate here, these women did appear in ads for Kerry and get politically active for the Democrats and their claim to fame was because of what happened to their husbands. Ann was out of line and there is a much more tasteful way to make her point but using your status as a widow to insert yourself into political campaigns, attack another politcal party and the leaders of the country, and appear in tv ads for one candidate deserves comment as well regardless of which side you are on or which campaign it is.

Author

Kingfish

Date

2006-06-10T09:08:04-06:00

ID

106221

Comment

OK. How could that possibly translate into what Coulter said? Every American can be inspired by whatever they want to take a certain political position? But somehow because these women voted for and supported Kerry, "they were enjoying their husbands' deaths?" Only a sick mind could think that, or defend that kind of statement (I understand you're playing devil's advocate here, Jimmy). This may be the one where she has finally gone too far. And ultimately it's good for other people to see who the real extremists are in their midst. That's happened here in Jackson to the wingnuts who have been willing to use the children of people they don't like to try to score cheap political points. Everytime they do that, they lose supporters and dig themselves into a credibility hole. Thus, it's disgusting to see this kind of thing happen, but ultimately it helps people know who to trust. People revealing themselves in such ways is a necessary component of our democracy, but it is a tragic one. I really can't imagine that daily newspapers would continue running her column after this. Whether they do will say a lot about how into sensationalism they really are. I mean, there are smart conservatives out there. Run them.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2006-06-10T09:16:19-06:00

ID

106222

Comment

I'm unsure why she places the burden upon the widows for the Kerry ads. Blame Kerry for that if she wants. But then she needs to look closely at how Bush used the same tactics in HIS campaign...using 9-11 and all. She is hateful, and I have strong distate for any who follow her columns, and the words both in print, on radio, and on tv, to form their political/social opinions. Yes, I'll base my opinion on someone else's opinion and that'll make me a smarter person. And I despise dinner conversation that is just a repeat of what they've read, heard, or seen from these editorials. If I wanted to discuss that crap, I'd follow the columnists myself.

Author

emilyb

Date

2006-06-10T09:23:03-06:00

ID

106223

Comment

And Ladd, I do think that the hate is going to kill that right-wing conservative crap. If we're going to base our political decisions on our faith, it's becoming impossible with the right-wingers. They are losing them daily. Take it from the chick in the suburbs :)

Author

emilyb

Date

2006-06-10T09:25:16-06:00

ID

106224

Comment

Hey, my tactic has always been to just get out of their way—after inspiring them to really let it hang out, of course. (You know my sticker in my office: "Doing my best to p!ss off the radical right.") I occasionally challenge them on a blatantly false statement (like that lunacy on the Paul Gallo show recently), or when they bash children for political purposes, but for the most part, I smile as I watch them dig their own grave—and isolate themselves into the wingnut house—with their venom and hatred. I truly believe the wingnuts around Jackson have done more to help the popularity of the JFP than about anything else—at least among our conservative readership. Reasonable people just don't want to hang out under that hateful umbrella. It reminds me of the voter rally we did a couple years ago when Jim Giles spoke early. Everyone there, regardless of party or beliefs, was united against his words. It was great, and an example of what true extremism can do. Nowadays, the N-JAM crowd has taken over Giles' space in people's minds. Whether or not they mean to project that impression, their herd-hatred makes many people think they have robes and sheets in their closets at home (as I saw someone say about them in a Ledge forum). That may not be accurate or fair, but they've made their own beds to to speak. And, ultimately, it's really good when such wingnuts come together and let it all hang out publicly. There are a couple people over there I used to think were reasonable, if not the brightest bulbs, but now wouldn't trust them alone with my cats, much less people I care about. I mean, they're turning off other right-wingers! They attack anyone who dares to disagree with them—even people in the NRA. It's breathtaking, really. And having such pockets of hate revealeed is progress, even if it's putrid to watch.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2006-06-10T09:49:25-06:00

ID

106225

Comment

Ann Coulter exposed four 9/11 widows who did exactly what Cindy Sheehan did. They used a personal loss to mount a political attack on President Bush. The press enabled them by maintaining their losses made them unimpeachabe in their views. When you enter the political arena you cannot claim immunity from counter criticism. The club of the 4 New Jersey widows maintained that Bush was responsible for allowing the 9/11 attack while never mentioning the the plot was developed and implemented under the nose of Clinton. I don't care if you are a widow or a gold star mother once you become a partisian advocate you have to take the heat. AC is one of the best at administering the heat to Democrats and leftists. She also administers it to Bush when she disagrees with him, to-wit: the Miers nomination, the Dubia Ports deal and Amnesty. Read her latest book and decide for yourself. She is trmendously funny even if you don't agree with her.

Author

pneville

Date

2006-06-10T09:50:32-06:00

ID

106226

Comment

neville, don't tell me you're buying that argument. Come on, man. In America, people can be inspired by their own experiences, and losses, to take political action. The ability to do that is part of what my cousin died to protect. I do not read Ann Coulter, and I hear Hitler had a sense of humor. She makes up "facts," and she calls people she does not agree with "traitors." She is the worst of "conservatism," and it's breathttaking that anyone with half a brain would even bother to read one sentence she writes. And you know what, neville, it is not up to you to judge Cindy Sheehan, the 9-11 wives, or anyone else who has lost a loved one, and how they react to it. That is disgusting.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2006-06-10T09:55:48-06:00

ID

106227

Comment

And speaks well to my post just above the one you just made. I hadn't seen your comments when I wrote it, but if the shoe fits, let it all hang out for the world to see. It's always good to know what we're dealing with.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2006-06-10T09:56:43-06:00

ID

106228

Comment

BTW, before you start whining that I'm being too mean to you, neville, I will remind you that now not only are you posting on my Web site, but on my personal blog. Like Ali says, "My blog. My rules." If you can't stand the friggin' heat, stop turning the burner all the way up on high in my friggin' kitchen. And with due respect, this is one the dumbest statements anyone has made on our site: They used a personal loss to mount a political attack on President Bush. Whether or not you like her -- and, really, who gives a damn whether you do? -- Cindy Sheehan Lost. A. Son. In. A. Bad. War. That. Was. Sold. Based. On. Lies. And. Poorly. Planned. And. Have. Lost. Public. Support. Because. The. Majority. Of. People. Know. This. Now. It is so not up to you, or anyone else to judge, whether or not someone who has lost a loved one in a bad war then wants to use their American right to speak up about it. By the same logic, I assume that you think it's awful and disgusting for a former soldier (not that there are many connected to this White House) to base their political beliefs on their own experiences and losses, right? That's just venom reserved for the left and people who disagree with you, right? The bottom line is that there are many families who believe they are losing their children in a bad war because the country is led by a bad president. Are you and your good friend Ann Coulter somehow trying to argue that, in America, they do not have the right to speak up about that? Are we all supposed to be loyal sheep, no matter what happens on our behalf and in our name? That's a different America than I live in, tell you what.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2006-06-10T10:03:19-06:00

ID

106229

Comment

Hate is not a family value is my favorite.

Author

emilyb

Date

2006-06-10T10:13:58-06:00

ID

106230

Comment

Yeah, I like that one, too. Meantime, Media Matters is all over Coulter-Gate, showing how wingers are rushing to try to explain what she, er, really meant. Talking points include comparing the widows to Cindy Sheehan and saying that what she said about the "harpies" is no worst than what damned-old-lefties say about people like Coulter. Gotta love that logic. I don't know a leftie who would give a damn about this twit if she didn't try to sound like Hitler, or at least McCarthy, every chance she gets in order to sell books. They have video of her apologists on Imus in the Morning whining about political incorrectness with Matalin saying that what Coulter wrote is not her "actual point." Imus: "I'm surprised you won't condemn her." So, imagine these paid hacks like Matalin trying to defend Hitler or McCarthy. Just at what point, would they stop trying to? Just what would they have had to say publicly to get these flacks to speak out against the hate? Imus' point is right on; at some point, you've got to cut off these hideous hatemongers and stop making them rich.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2006-06-10T10:21:46-06:00

ID

106231

Comment

This Media Matters piece details many ways in which Coulter has outright lied.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2006-06-10T10:23:31-06:00

ID

106232

Comment

Of course Ms. Sheehan and the Jersey widows have the right to speak their minds but when their minds lead them into partisian advocacy they become a part of the political process. That process includes the right to criticise and dispute with them. That is not "meanness" it is political discourse. Is it your contention that because they lost their son or husband to an Islamic fundamentalist attack that any attack they make on George Bush cannot be answered because it would be "mean"?

Author

pneville

Date

2006-06-10T11:33:49-06:00

ID

106233

Comment

Of course Ms. Sheehan and the Jersey widows have the right to speak their minds but when their minds lead them into partisian advocacy they become a part of the political process Obviously. No one is saying differently. But since when do people who are "a part of the political process" deserve to be treated in such a way? Don't bait and switch here—*no one* is arguing that Ms. Moron doesn't have "the right" under the First Amendment to express her views -- that is, no one is arguing for state censorship of her views. That's not the issue. Your "mean" recharacterize of my remarks is just plan silly and is a very weak attempt at pushing the save-Coulter talking points. The issue is judging people and media outlets on their own merits who would dare to try to make a person into a hero who would say, or try to convince others, that somehow these women did not love their husbands, or are not grieving the loss of them, because they have been inspired to join the political process. There is a special place in hell for people who would not only say that, but try to make money off saying it. I hear Hitler and McCarthy, to name two, have been keeping Ann's bed warm for her there. There is *nothing* more American and beautiful than being inspired to join politics because of something one experiences. That can be called a calling or an epiphany, and is the way it's supposed to work. Wingnuts seem really worried that Coulter is going to pull them over the edge with her on this one, and she may well. I would jump ship on this one, if I were you, neville. There is just no moral high ground to be found here. Look at Drudge's site right now: "Ann Coulter Needs Your Help." And he links to NewsMax, where they're selling her book for a bargain price of $4.99. Isn't it a new book? Why hawk it for nothing so soon? This ship is sinking. People are just getting tired of hate, of attacks on military heroes because they dare to disagree with Bush and Rove's frothing band of wingnuts. People are tired of losing our soldiers in an ill-conceived war. We are tired of the treatement of our soldiers by the government when they come home. We are tired of a government that can't tie its shoes right telling us it's in our best interest to take our personal information without us knowing it. Ann Coulter is a symbol of the worst we can become, and Americans just aren't going to go there again. Believe it.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2006-06-10T11:44:38-06:00

ID

106234

Comment

It dosen't surprise me that the CL would keep this story going. This is their style. No one in their right mind would ever think that these widows are enjoying anything about this. Lives were lost that cannot be replaced by ANY amount of money or fame. IMO Ms Coulter is doing exactly what she is accusing these widows of doing. She is playing the media for her own personal gain. Her accusations are saddistic and morbid. I wouldn't wish it on anyone, but I wonder how she would have felt if she had lost a loved one because of the 9/11 attacks?

Author

lance

Date

2006-06-10T11:54:09-06:00

ID

106235

Comment

A bit more context on Ms. Evil's characterization of the "Witches of New Brunswick." Four widows instrumental in the creation of the 9/11 commission are "self-obsessed" and "enjoying their husbands' deaths," said conservative author Ann Coulter. [...] "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," she writes. "They believe the entire country was required to marinate in their exquisite personal agony." Known as the Jersey Girls, Kristin Breitweiser, Lorie Van Auken, Mindy Kleinberg and Patty Casazza pressed for the creation of the 9/11 Commission. [...] "These broads are millionaires, lionized on TV and in articles about them revelling in their status as celebrities and stalked by grief-arazzis. I've never seen people enjoying their husbands' death so much." 'These broads are millionaires, lionized on TV and in articles about them revelling in their status as celebrities and stalked by grief-arazzis.'-Author Ann Coulter on four 9/11 widows In an appearance on MSNBC's The Situation on Tuesday, Coulter told host Tucker Carlson that the women, whom she calls the Witches of East Brunswick, should expect criticism if they are leaping into the political arena. "If people are going to use a personal tragedy in their lives to inject themselves into a national debate, I'm sorry, you can't just say, 'We're off limits. Now we're going to invoke the fact that our husbands died, you can't criticize us.'" Kristin Breitweiser, one of the widows, said Coulter sounded like a "very disturbed, unravelled person." "Having my husband burn alive in a building brought me no joy," Lorie Van Auken told the New York Daily News. It's remarkable that Coulter would accuse anyone of being "self-obsessed." ;-D Meantime, she is going to help complete the lionization of these women. Idiot.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2006-06-10T11:57:50-06:00

ID

106236

Comment

More about Ms. Putz: But probably the most incendiary statement is: "How do we know their husbands weren't planning to divorce these harpies?" Contacted by The Sun, Mindy Klienberg of East Brunswick, N.J., whose husband Alan perished inside the World Trade Center, was reluctant to speak. "I'm really not interested in helping her sell more books," said Klienberg, who is one of the five widows pushing for the investigation. She did, however, provide a prepared statement, which read: "Contrary to Ms. Coulter's statements, there was no joy in watching men that we loved burned alive," the statement reads. "There was no happiness in telling our children that their fathers were never coming home again. We adored these men and miss them every day." The statement was signed by Klienberg, Kristen Breitweiser, Patty Casazza, Monica Gabrielle and Lorie Van Auken. [...] "She's making outrageous statements to sell a book," Ogonowski said. "It's OK to criticize if that's how you feel and if that's what you want to say, but her attacks were personal and very low-class." Her husband, John Ogonowski, was the pilot aboard the ill-fated American Airlines Flight 11. Peggy Ogonowski feels that Coulter has probably been holding back on unleashing her remarks for some time now. "Some time has passed since the attacks and I think some people go back to what they really wanted to say all along," Ogonowski reasoned. "She can say anything she wants and it just gives her more publicity." Ogonowski would rather focus on the work done by Patricia Quigley of Wellesley and Susan Retik of Needham, who founded Beyond the 11th, a nonprofit organization to aid widows affected by war and terrorism, including women in Afghanistan. Quigley, whose husband Patrick was aboard United Airlines Flight 175, and Retik, whose husband David was aboard American Flight 11, could not be reached for comment. [...] Expressing shock and outrage, U.S. Rep. Marty Meehan has called on Coulter to apologize, not only to the families, but to the American people. "These women have suffered an immeasurable loss and should not be made to endure the slanderous, hate-filled rhetoric of Ann Coulter," said the Lowell Democrat. "I know the 28 families in my district that lost loved ones on Sept.11 and their pain is very real. (Coulter's) rhetoric of hate has no place in civilized discourse."

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2006-06-10T12:02:30-06:00

ID

106237

Comment

I'm writing a check to Beyond the 11th and dedicating it to the Witch of the Right.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2006-06-10T12:03:14-06:00

ID

106238

Comment

Ms Coulter seems to be a mental patient with the media's ear. She probably thinks that this little outburst will bring her into prominence with the big boys (figure of speech). I think that she will be remembered for her attacks of lunacy. I wonder how does she sleep at night, or mayby she sleeps in the daytime like the rest of the vampires.

Author

lance

Date

2006-06-10T12:04:02-06:00

ID

106239

Comment

I wonder how much money she will make from her attacks on these women?

Author

lance

Date

2006-06-10T12:07:12-06:00

ID

106240

Comment

It's truly remarkable that "conservatives" would support such attacks on these women. I guess these are the same people who support the administration's outing of CIA operative of Valerie Plame for political purposes? Nice. Good conservatives need to jump this sinking ship and fast. It's quite amazing that y'all would stand for someone like Ann Coulter to be your ship's figurehead. Think forward, folks. This. Won't. Work. It really is OK to speak out against people who pretend to be on the same side, folks. Try it. I do it all the time, and it's liberating. And good for Random House for setting up a special imprint for these kinds of books. Did Random House not have an editor read this tripe first?

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2006-06-10T12:13:12-06:00

ID

106241

Comment

Only a sick mind could think that, or defend that kind of statement (I understand you're playing devil's advocate here, Jimmy). This may be the one where she has finally gone too far. You must've missed it when she said that the hijackers should've hit the NY Times building. Now that's sick! I'm gonna have to research this for myself, but I think Ann's lying again... "In fact, students are actually required to wear "Creationism Is Shameful" T-shirts in Dover, Pa., where -- thanks to a lawsuit by the ACLU -- the liberal clergy have declared Darwinism the only true church, immunized from argument." She also lied about how the aforementioned NY Times waited three days to report Dale Earnhardt Sr.'s death, when Al Franken, in his Lies and the Lying Liars Who Tell Them book (which I've got to get) showed where the story was printed the next day, even showing the front page! Yet, it's the liberals who are the mean and nasty monsters.

Author

golden eagle

Date

2006-06-10T12:27:04-06:00

ID

106242

Comment

BTW, the creationism t-shirt deal was from yesterday's column.

Author

golden eagle

Date

2006-06-10T12:27:57-06:00

ID

106243

Comment

No, the idea is for the truly evil to make everythign that isn't evil into evil so they can hide their own evil. Follow that? It is laughing-out-loud funny that someone like Coulter would complain about people being "Godless." I bet there's a special suite reserved for her down yonder. And, boy, does she make blondes look bad.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2006-06-10T12:40:41-06:00

ID

106244

Comment

Yesterday's column in the Ledge? They can't find a real woman in the state of Mississippi, or on their staff, to write a hard-hitting column about politics and social issues (or be on their editorial board), but they run Ms. Liar every week? Well, then. I'm lovin' all over all that Real Mississippi b.s.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2006-06-10T12:42:08-06:00

ID

106245

Comment

Coulter spent her last book praising Joe McCarthy, and got in the media for that; now she's attacking widows and getting in the media for that. She's not doing this out of any particular passion or hate, IMHO; she's doing this out of a callous and soulless desire to sell more books. That anyone on the right wing would defend her, as if she were doing anything but marketing her book by doing the political equivalent of biting the heads off chickens, is amazing. As for the other blog, I'm not sure there is a difference between these guys and Jim Giles anymore. They're getting bold. Here are a few choice snippets from a recent thread: Person 1: "OK Johnny, what are you gonna do then? Bull doze all HUD housing and sterilize all unwed black females?" Person 2: "Not a bad idea, but HUD would just build it right back." (Nobody responds to disagree with this.) *** "Black women are in poverty because they put themselves there. They would rather have a Hoochie Mama House in the HOOD than an education and a better life." *** "If there is anything that Frank understands, it's where the problem in Jackson is coming from, young black thugs that are more often than not in these HUD Housing areas of Jackson ... You blame everyone and everything else for the crime problem and the condition Jackson's economic condition, but not the source of the problem." *** To their credit, a few of the later comments inspired mild disagreement--more about vocabulary than ideas. But very mild disagreement indeed, followed by a consensus that at least they're all working together against horrible liberals like "LaddCo" to deal with The Problem. Why Jim Giles isn't hanging out there is beyond me. He would fit in perfectly. Cheers, TH

Author

Tom Head

Date

2006-06-10T13:21:46-06:00

ID

106246

Comment

Breitweiser (the leader of the Jersey Four) has been a contributing blogger at the Huffington Post since May 2005. On June 23, 2005 she posted an open letter to White House Deputy Chief of Staff Karl Rove, wherein she complained that "we invaded Afghanistan, took down the Taliban, and left without capturing Usama Bin Laden -- the alleged perpetrator of the September 11th attacks." She stated that "Afghanistan … continues to suffer from extreme violence and unrest," and that "[p]oppy production [there] … is at an all time high, thus flooding the world market with heroin." She noted sardonically that "the Caspian Sea [oil] pipeline is better protected by U.S. troops who now have a 'legitimate' excuse to be in that part of Afghanistan." "Interesting isn't it, Karl, that the drug 'rat line' parallels the oil pipeline[?]" she queried. Now when you start questioning the motives for the invasion of Afganistan you open yourself up to someone questioning your motives. Its the old leftist canard "oil for blood". PS She LIED there is no Caspian Sea pipeline through Afganistan.

Author

pneville

Date

2006-06-10T13:24:29-06:00

ID

106247

Comment

I'm kinda torn here. 1. I think one mistake is lumping her in with the conservatives. She's simply out to see books and make herself a more valuable property. Money Uber Alles, I think is her motto. The only reason (in my mind) she's claiming conservative creds is that most of the media is percieved (rightly or not) and being shills for the liberals. 2. pneville: there's no Caspian Sea, anymore. The Russians have nearly drained it. 3. As for the whole "Witches" and Sheehan thing; it plays to the part of society that thinks, deep down someplace, that they are enjoying the popularity that their tragedies have brought them. I hadn't heard of the Four women from Jersey before this, and don't care what they do. They want to get involved in politics? Fine. Putting up with Ann/Rush/whomever else is part of the pain of being a public figure. 4. Ann's remarks are painful, but I doubt she cares. It's not about human emotion for her, it's about money and public ratings. Quit listening, boycott and encourage people to ignore her. Don't yell back, ignore. It'll hurt her more.

Author

Ironghost

Date

2006-06-10T14:02:56-06:00

ID

106248

Comment

In addendum: I despise Ann, too. She makes the whole debate harder to maintain with her hyperbolic claims and demagoguery.

Author

Ironghost

Date

2006-06-10T14:16:43-06:00

ID

106249

Comment

Iron ... . I think one mistake is lumping her in with the conservatives. She's simply out to see books and make herself a more valuable property. Money Uber Alles, I think is her motto. Agreed, but the problem is that so many of the "conservative" mouths doing the same thing are backing her. Then they telegraph the rhetoric to regular, reasonable people who don't have time to factcheck for themselves. It's really up to "conservatives" whether they are willing to be lumped with her ilk. Anybody who follows the talkilng points to defend her is showing that desire. The only reason (in my mind) she's claiming conservative creds is that most of the media is percieved (rightly or not) and being shills for the liberals. One, the irony is that Coulter was produced by the folks who have led that attack on so-called "liberal media" for years. Their problem, though, is that they include any media that doesn't agree with ultra-right-wing b.s. as "liberal media," even media that is truly willing to criticize "both" (all?) sides, such as ours, for instance. You simply can't, with a straight face, call any media that bothers to factcheck "liberal media." 3. As for the whole "Witches" and Sheehan thing; it plays to the part of society that thinks, deep down someplace, that they are enjoying the popularity that their tragedies have brought them. "Enjoying?" It sounds to me like they are speaking up for their beliefs regardless of awful personal attacks waged by the right to discredit them. I can't see how anyone would "enjoy" this, even though I admire them for doing it anyway. "Putting up with Ann/Rush/whomever else is part of the pain of being a public figure." "Putting up with" is an interesting phrase. I'll agree—as long as that definition does not include that no one can speak out and counter them and call them out for what they are: hideous people out to make a buck by spreading hate against fellow Americans. And "hate" is not synonymous with "disagreement." There is no reasonable person on the planet who would think that Ann Coulter has to resort to saying that these men might have divorced them women anyway in order to make a point. Nobody. And they can't sell this crock about what she meant, instead of what she said. That can fly on talk radio, or even a blog—people misspeak in the heat of the moment and need to apologize or clarify. However, this is in a blog where she planned every word and then supposed was edited. She had plenty of time to say what she, er, really meant, or edit her book. This is on purpose, and we don't exactly hear her clarifying or apologizing, no do we? 4. Ann's remarks are painful, but I doubt she cares. Of course she doesn't. She loves it. But at some point good people have to stand up for what is right, and against what isn't. It's not about human emotion for her, it's about money and public ratings. Quit listening, boycott and encourage people to ignore her. Don't yell back, ignore. It'll hurt her more. I haven't been listening all along. I don't read her books or columns anymore. However, simply ignoring this level of hatred won't make it go away (history has shown that; see Neshoba County entry) -- now when it has a pulpit and plays off people's worst instincts. We need to talk back—and help people see what they're following and swallowing. Somebody turned in a very bitter column to me months ago about Coulter, and I refused to run it because it was too angry (in a leftie way). I saw the writer Thursday night, and she said, "Will you let me write about Coulter now?" That's what made me go read up on it. It is time for the public to face this level of demon in our midst, and realize the kind of person is helping shape our public discourse. Only scum would write the words that she wrote. As a woman, I'm mortified to see a fellow woman be so evil.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2006-06-10T14:19:54-06:00

ID

106250

Comment

BTW, re the "putting up with" point: It always tickles me how thin the skin of the country's most outrageous hatemongers. David Horowitz is a prime example of that—he fanned the racist flames every way possible, then was mortified when he was called out for it by the Southern Poverty Law Center. (We have a Horowitz thread here here for discussion of that.) Or it was John Stossel complaining about his speech rights being violated on a private-school campus because a group of students showed up to shout down one of his speeches. "Free speech" doesn't just flow one direction. It also extends to the right of talking back. And even in that Imus interview linked above, Matalin falls prey to the same thing: She is so mortified that wingnuts are called fascists and such, but doesn't give a damn about the fascist behavior and commentary that draw those labels. That's the problem with the "pollitically correct" excuse: it is often used to attack very real and deserved criticism. It's too often (although not always) a way to try to pass the buck away from truly horrendous behavior or words, such as Coulter's as quoted above. That is, it is itself a way to discourage expression that the PC-hunters do not agree with. They use it as a catchphrase rather than actually discussing the speech itself, which is where any discussion should go. And notice that Matalin refused to condemn what Coulter actually wrote in the book. Should we assume that means she agrees? Or, is she just being "politically correct" to please all the conservatives who keep her rich? If you think it is simply politically correct to call out the social misfits who are making money off the backs of fellow Americans who are exercising their rights, then you don't understand American ideals very well.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2006-06-10T14:27:46-06:00

ID

106251

Comment

"Putting up with" is an interesting phrase. I'll agree—as long as that definition does not include that no one can speak out and counter them and call them out for what they are: hideous people out to make a buck by spreading hate against fellow Americans. In my mind, that's always been part of the "game" (if you want to call it that) is that if you join in the political discourse, you should expect people to disagree and give arguements counter. Hate has no place in todays society, and making a buck off of it is despicable. And "hate" is not synonymous with "disagreement." There is no reasonable person on the planet who would think that Ann Coulter has to resort to saying that these men might have divorced them women anyway in order to make a point. Nobody. And they can't sell this crock about what she meant, instead of what she said. That can fly on talk radio, or even a blog—people misspeak in the heat of the moment and need to apologize or clarify. However, this is in a blog where she planned every word and then supposed was edited. She had plenty of time to say what she, er, really meant, or edit her book. This is on purpose, and we don't exactly hear her clarifying or apologizing, now do we? Nope. I hate to think she actually believes this tripe she spews. We have little other evidence she does, so one must make the deduction that she does actually feel all this hate. Sad person.

Author

Ironghost

Date

2006-06-10T15:01:19-06:00

ID

106252

Comment

Donna-you didn't read Ms. Breitweiser's (the greving widow from New Jersey) letter to Carl Rove. She says Osama Ben Laden "allegedly" killed her husband. In 2005 she still wants to give him the benefit of the doubt although he has bragged about it. She says the reason the troops are in Afganistan are to protect an oil pipeline (that does not exist). She slanders the troops that went to Afganistan to keep it from being a training ground for the terrorists that killed her husband. No thank you just a slander. AC is correct these harpies have traded their widow's weeds for left wing blogger fame.

Author

pneville

Date

2006-06-10T15:05:30-06:00

ID

106253

Comment

Well, technically, neville, bin Laden did "allegedly" kill her husband. He hasn't been caught or tried yet for the crime—even if most of us believe strongly that he masterminded it. There is nothing about that statement to justify Coulter's idiocy. Otherwise, here's an apparent copy of her letter, found by Googling. I'm confused; which part "slanders" the soldiers: More to the point, Karl when you say, “Conservatives saw the savagery of the 9/11 attacks and prepared for war,” what exactly did you do to prepare for your war? Did your preparations include: sound intelligence to warrant your actions; a reasonable entry and exit strategy coupled with a coherent plan to carry out that strategy; the proper training and equipment for the troops you were sending in to fight your war? Did you follow the advice of experts such as General Shinseki who correctly advised you about the troop levels needed to actually succeed in Iraq? No, you didn't. It has always been America's policy that you only place soldiers' lives in harm's way when it is absolutely necessary and the absolute last resort. When you send troops into combat you support those troops by providing them with proper equipment and training. Why didn't you do that with the troops that you sent into Iraq? Why weren't their vehicles armored? Why didn't they have protective vests? Why weren't they properly trained about the rules of interrogation? And Karl, when our troops come home – be it tragically in body bags or with missing limbs – you should honor and acknowledge their service to their country. You shouldn't hide them by bringing them home in the dark of night. Most importantly, you should take care of them for the long haul by giving them substantial veteran's benefits and care. To me, that is being patriotic. To me, that is how you support our troops. To me, that is how you show that you know the value of a human life given for its country. Yeah, right, Neville, that's some slander there. Jump ship, dude. It's sinking fast, and Ms. Harpie is helping.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2006-06-10T16:08:22-06:00

ID

106254

Comment

Ah, the delights of blogging. This ain't talk radio, neville; twisting sh!t out of context just makes you look stupid in print. Take a deep breath while I cram a bit more of the letter from your hated "harpy" down your throat: Karl, I mention Bin Laden because recently Director of the CIA, Porter Goss, has mentioned that he knows exactly where Bin Laden is located but that he cannot capture him for fear of offending sovereign nations. Which frankly, I find ironic because of Iraq--and let's just leave it at that. But, when you say that “moderation and restraint” don't work in fighting terrorists, maybe you should share those comments with Mr. Goss because he doesn't seem to be on the same page as you. Unless of course, Porter is holding out to announce that Bin Laden is in Iran. (Karl, I want Bin Laden brought to justice, but not if it means starting a war with Iran - a country that possesses nuclear weaponry. The idea of nuclear fallout in any quadrant of the world is just not an acceptable means to any ends, be it capturing Bin Laden, oil or drugs. But, Afghanistan and Bin Laden are old news. Iraq is the story of today. And of course, it appears that Iran will be the story of next month. But, I digress.) More to the point, Karl when you say, “Conservatives saw the savagery of the 9/11 attacks and prepared for war,” what exactly did you do to prepare for your war? Did your preparations include: sound intelligence to warrant your actions; a reasonable entry and exit strategy coupled with a coherent plan to carry out that strategy; the proper training and equipment for the troops you were sending in to fight your war? Did you follow the advice of experts such as General Shinseki who correctly advised you about the troop levels needed to actually succeed in Iraq? No, you didn't. You can't expect anyone to buy your argument when you go around lying about what grieving widows have said. Y'all wingnuts have reached new levels here. And I only call you that due to your stated allegiance with Ms. Self-Obsessed and Mr. Don't Criticize Me. Fine, these are your people. Keep trying to defend them as the ship breaks apart. Just in case anyone isn't entirely clear what Mr. P. Neville and Ms. A. Coulter are calling these widows, here's your trusted Dictionary.com definintion: Har·py P Pronunciation Key (härp) n. pl. Har·pies Greek Mythology. One of several loathsome, voracious monsters with the head and trunk of a woman and the tail, wings, and talons of a bird. harpy A predatory person. harpy A shrewish woman.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2006-06-10T16:21:32-06:00

ID

106255

Comment

Rick Santorum starts backing away, a wingnut pundit should start, well, selling her book for $4.99 on NewsMax. ;-) [i">From the June 8th Broadcast Of The Michael Smerconish Program, 1210AM WPHT: MICHAEL SMERCONISH: With regard to a certain group of 9/11 widows Ann Coulter in her new book says, 'I've never seen people enjoying their husbands' deaths so much.' I'm appalled by that. Are you appalled by that? SEN. SANTORUM: Probably more then you are. I mean this is ridiculous. I mean Ann is what? Ann is someone who is out there trying to sell books and, you know appeal to a certain audience and I guess she's doing it. SMERCONISH: But you're not in that audience to which she's appealing? SANTORUM: No, no, I don't consider myself, I'm not a part of that audience at all that's really on the edge as far as I'm concerned, maybe over the edge. SMERCONISH: Yes, over the edge. I applaud you, I applaud you for saying that. Listen to it here.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2006-06-10T16:36:28-06:00

ID

106256

Comment

The slander comes in the part you did't copy as follows: "In the meantime, Afghanistan has carried out democratic elections, but continues to suffer from extreme violence and unrest. Poppy production (yes, Karl, the drug trade) is at an all time high, thus flooding the world market with heroin. And of course, the oil pipeline (a.k.a. the Caspian Sea pipeline) is better protected by U.S. troops who now have a “legitimate” excuse to be in that part of Afghanistan. Interesting isn't it Karl that the drug “rat line” parallels the oil pipeline. (Yet, with all those troops guarding that same sliver of land, can you please explain how those drugs keep getting through?)" Which is exactly like the post I made earlier. What part of her contending the troops are in Afganistan to guard a Caspian Sea Pipeline (which does not exist) do you not understand. She lied about the pipeline and the purpose of our troops. That is the slander. She is even inferring the troops are guarding the drug route.

Author

pneville

Date

2006-06-10T17:02:13-06:00

ID

106257

Comment

You're not making sense, neville. There is *nothing* in that statement to "slander" the troops themselves, who are individuals who do not control how they're used, although there is a criticism of the administration in there, as well as possibly military leadership. Under even the most extreme reading of this, she in no way is slandering the troops by saying they want to be there guarding drug pipelines. Lord. Without even debating the veracity of your statements or hers, lying about the "purpose of our troops" cannot by definition be the same thing as "slandering our troops." It's not up to the troops. Your logic is way off here, although I suppose these kinds of sound bites might get 'em all hyped on talk radio. This woman has the same right that you or any other American does to either praise or criticize this war or this president. And it is despicable that Coulter, and apparently you, believe that the answer is to smear them in the worst possible ways. I guess Santorum is a damned liberal now, too, now that y'all are too off the charts for even him to go along with the Swiftboating of these widows? This is sick.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2006-06-10T17:16:51-06:00

ID

106258

Comment

I've been referring to Shrub as "President MacHeath" for a long time. I'd have to say Coulter fits well into the first two lines of the song: Und der Haifisch, der hat Zähne, Und die trägt Er im Gesicht.... Except with her, I think it's the tongue that's sharp as well as the teeth. Coulter is a monster. Best, Tim

Author

Tim Kynerd

Date

2006-06-10T17:52:31-06:00

ID

106259

Comment

When Ms. Breitweiser says the troops are in Afganistan guarding a Caspian Sea Pipeline she is lying. There is no Caspian Sea Pipeline in Afganistan. She undermines the war effort by asserting that our purpose is to secure oil which Afganistan has none that I am aware of. She slanders the troops by demeaning their purpose. Troops include military leaders. Bush ordered the attack on Afganistan for the sole purpose of destroying the terrorist's base of operations. This is something Clinton failed to do before 9/11 although he had ample opportunities to take out Ben Laden. Can you find me one single quotation where the New Jersey Four has asserted criticism against Clinton or the Democrats for their failures in the war against terror? If not then they are political hacks for your party and AC is perfectly right.

Author

pneville

Date

2006-06-10T18:16:12-06:00

ID

106260

Comment

pneville, I don't care if Ms. Breitweiser said that the moon landing was a hoax and Elvis killed John F. Kennedy. The issue is not what Ms. Breitweiser's political beliefs happen to be. The issue is Ann Coulter's damnable comment about how she and other 9/11 widows "enjoyed their husbands' deaths." Coulter routinely makes comments of this nature to sell books. I find it ironic that you can defend Coulter and condemn Ward Churchill. As far as I'm concerned, they're cut from the same cloth. Cheers, TH

Author

Tom Head

Date

2006-06-10T18:34:15-06:00

ID

106261

Comment

Ward Churchill attacked the dead at 9/11 as having got what they deserved as little Eichmans. Ann Coulter attacked these four widows of 9/11 for what they became by trading on their victimhood to assert a political agenda. Think of how many other victims found this distastefull. Just as they found the left's attempt to take over the 9/11 memorial for its political agenda as outrageous. Again I will challange you find me one ocasion where any of these four showed they had not perverted their positions by criticising Clinton or the Democrats. At least Cindy Sheehan has started to criticise Hilliary.

Author

pneville

Date

2006-06-10T19:35:04-06:00

ID

106262

Comment

There you go again. pneville, the issue is the fact that Ann Coulter said that four 9/11 widows "enjoyed their husbands' deaths." The fact that Ms. Coulter happens to disagree with these four 9/11 widows on their political opinions is completely irrelevant. It was a disgusting comment and should be roundly condemned, and if that's where you stand, then you have no moral authority with which to condemn Ward Churchill. None at all. Cheers, TH

Author

Tom Head

Date

2006-06-10T19:59:23-06:00

ID

106263

Comment

OK lets compromise. Find me one statement where these four widows condemned Ward Churchill for calling their late husbands nazis. If they truly honored their memories this would be more important to them than attacking George Bush for attempting to keep their children safe from future attacks.

Author

pneville

Date

2006-06-10T20:44:30-06:00

ID

106264

Comment

When Ms. Breitweiser says the troops are in Afganistan guarding a Caspian Sea Pipeline she is lying ... or perhaps misinformed, neville. You've made many misinformed statements on the site since you started posting that are not fact-based. I don't see anyone here attacking your family, or saying horrible, awful things about people you've lost, etc. (And I know your identity; I could try to dig dirt on you. But I wouldn't.) What kind of skewed moral compass must one have to think that an appropriate response to disagreeing with someone's political views means saying the evil, disgusting, horrifying things that Ann Coulter said about that group of women? You're digging yourself in a hole here with your attempts to justify Coulter's statements in that book. They simply can't be, no matter how much you disagree with the women's political views. And they wouldn't be justifiable if said by someone on the left about someone on the right. Are you truly this blinded by wingnt ideology that you can't see the problem here? If so, I really, really feel sorry for you. And your statement about Ward Churchill is simply a non sequitur. He is not in a position of power over every citizen in the United States. Everyone picks their battles, yourself included, as Tom pointed out brilliantly. Now, like Coulter, you are going in and reading the widows' minds, too? It's not up to you or anybody else to decide what "would" or "should" be more important to those women. Start making sense here. Your attacks on these women is disgusting, and I can't believe you think it's going to help your cause somehow.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2006-06-10T21:17:19-06:00

ID

106265

Comment

Hmmmm, If ALWAYS "strongly Conservative";then "always good", "always wholesome", "can only speak God's own truth (whether literally or only metaphorically)" If EVER "one statement that is NOT "strongly Conservative"; then "bleedingest heart leftie"; If Bleedingest Heart Leftie, then "wimpy", "weirdo", "stupid", "political apostate", "traitor", "Communist", "not a true American", "slanderer", "Taliban supporter", "launders mucho dinero to al-Qaeda", "anti-Christian persecutory bigot", "Militant Jesus-hater who vandalizes churches the way Nazis vandalize synagogues", "promoter of teen fornication", "child abuser", "upporter of cannibalism", "animal torturer", "alcoholic", "contributes to delinquency of minors", "poisons halloween candy", "steals granny's newspapers from her front porch", "and generally is pure evil, does not possess even one quark* of goodness". That's the equation, right pneville? *quark - what protons, neutrons, and electrons are made of

Author

Philip

Date

2006-06-10T22:58:53-06:00

ID

106266

Comment

"... or perhaps misinformed, neville. You've made many misinformed statements on the site since you started posting that are not fact-based. I don't see anyone here attacking your family, or saying horrible, awful things about people you've lost, etc. (And I know your identity; I could try to dig dirt on you. But I wouldn't.)" I get it. "Bush lies" but the left is just "misinformed". Sherlock there is only one pneville in the phone book, but it is comforting that you will only threaten to dig dirt on me. However, that probably violates some federal law when done over the internet.

Author

pneville

Date

2006-06-11T05:03:30-06:00

ID

106267

Comment

Actually, neville, I just accused you of being misinformed as well. Are you a leftie? Can you read what's written? Or does your leftie-hatred shape even what you read, not just what you write. And if you can't understand the difference between the accountability of a George W. Bush and a citizen who becomes an activist after tragedy strikes her, or even a you, then I really am wasting my time trying to have as conversation with you (which I'm aware of already). Uh, you're not president, or sending troops to war, or, or. Neither is Ms. Breitweiser. Neither is Mr. Churchill. Learn the difference between a public servant (in this case, the grand poobah) and citizens who are speaking out. No, I'm not threatening to dig dirt on you. I'm saying the exact opposite to try to present an analogy to you -- that I would never do that, simply because I disagree with something you say. Now, Ms. Coulter will just make sh!t up that she can't know (like the men might have divorced these women had they lived, or that the women are enjoying their husband's deaths), and you will defend such a tactic. That's an interesting space to exist in, neville. I don't believe many people live in such a space with you. I truly feel sorry for you right now.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2006-06-11T10:06:46-06:00

ID

106268

Comment

"It reminds me of the voter rally we did a couple years ago when Jim Giles spoke early. Everyone there, regardless of party or beliefs, was united against his words. It was great, and an example of what true extremism can do. Nowadays, the N-JAM crowd has taken over Giles' space in people's minds." I am delighted to understand you like for others to hear me so as to unite against me. If that's the case, how about some more unification? When is your voter rally for this year's election? Or are you united enough already? BTW, you'll have to share with me how you knew every person's opinion on my speech in 2002? Are you a psychic as well as an anti-hate hater?

Author

Jim Giles

Date

2006-06-11T10:10:21-06:00

ID

106269

Comment

You're right, Mr. Giles, that was hyperbole. I can't know what was in everyone's mind. However, both Republicans and Democrats were gathered in a group, voicing displeasure with your remarks. Some were visibly angry at some of the things you said. However, we have no regrets at giving you a forum to say them, and you did present yourself in a courteous manner, despite the difficulty of hearing some of your statements. We haven't planned a voter rally for this year. It's a big undertaking, and there aren't as many races this time around. However, I'll keep you posted if we have one. It's also important to note that I don't "hate" you, even as I don't agree with what you say. In fact, you've been very respectful to my staff including the black ones. And I really agree with some of your other beliefs, such as an tort reform. But you do have a way of uniting people who do not think they agree on much. That's simply true.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2006-06-11T10:16:11-06:00

ID

106270

Comment

To stay on-topic, btw, what do you think of Ms. Coulter's comments?

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2006-06-11T10:16:45-06:00

ID

106271

Comment

As for Ms. Coulter, it's a money thing with her and all the rest; they believe first and foremost in personal greed; none risk deviating from a script that is pre-approved by their Zionist masters; anything to distract from the Iraqi quagmire, invasion of our Southern borders, no good jobs (re: 'free trade'), etc. Nice legs though.

Author

Jim Giles

Date

2006-06-11T11:15:33-06:00

ID

106272

Comment

Giggle. Read Andrew Sullivan's Cracking the Da Bitchy Code post. The best part is the end: I take Coulter as seriously as I take a fictional character. Except most fictional characters do not make millions by assassinating the characters and wounding the souls of other real human beings.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2006-06-11T11:47:21-06:00

ID

106273

Comment

Here's a pretty funny blog posting about the joke that is Coulter: Speaking of Ann Coulter, I guess my letter-writing campaign to defend the honor of Max Cleland a couple years ago got me on her mailing list, because I get a postcard every time she's about to barf a new book onto the shelves. The promo blurb for her latest effort, Godless: The Church of Liberalism, read, I shit thee not, as follows: Dear Friend: When President Hillary Clinton uses the subpoena powers of the 2009 Hate Crimes Law to find out what books you've purchased, make sure GODLESS: THE CHURCH OF LIBERALISM is on that list! Love, Ann Coulter All righty. Leaving aside for a moment the twin ironies of 1) a woman* who, by her own admission, does not attend church calling me, a weekly churchgoer and Eucharistic minister, "godless"; and 2) a woman* who vociferously supports the NSA's warrantless wiretapping/phone-call-monitoring efforts getting her jock strap in a knot over some fantasy of Hillary Clinton tracking what books people are reading, what we have is a tacit admission by Ann Coulter that the country is so fed up with eight years of Republican pooch-screwing that they're going to elect a Democrat in 2008. So fed up, in fact, that they're going to elect that commie lesbian Hillary! Dang, I knew Bush's approval ratings were way down in the septic tank, but I had no idea things had come to that. (By the way, is anyone else amused that Ann's book is coming out on 6/6/06? And she's calling me godless?)

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2006-06-11T11:52:27-06:00

ID

106274

Comment

And don't you love that the woman is the arbiter and critic of all our "Godlessness" wants the return of literacy tests and poll taxes? Wait: Aren't taxes a Godless, liberal thing? But not when they're used to keep people from voting against fascists? Intriguing.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2006-06-11T12:01:16-06:00

ID

106275

Comment

Ah, just cranked up some Miles Davis at the Blackhawk and reading this. Two points. I would hope no one thinks that these women are shielded from comments or criticisms when they take active roles in campaigns. Its one thing to form an advocacy group, testify before congress, take stands on issues etc. But to insert yourself into a politicians campaign REGARDLESS OF WHO IT IS means you are open to criticism, regardless of your motives.By the way, I am not saying they shouldn't do that. They have a right to free speech obviously, but they also don't have a right not to be criticized either. Now did Coulter go too far? yeah. she did. she crossed the line. THere was a way to make her point without saying it the way she did. Just because it is political theater does not mean you just throw stuff out there (I put it in the same camp as the Bush knew about 9/11 crap or CLinton killed 60 people stuff, at some point enough is enough).

Author

Kingfish

Date

2006-06-11T21:15:23-06:00

ID

106276

Comment

I don't think they're shielded from comments and criticism, Jimmy. That's never been the point. Coulter's evil is the point.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2006-06-11T22:19:42-06:00

ID

106277

Comment

I'll go on record as saying that I don't agree with Cindy Sheehan's politics. Not necessarily her objection to the war, but the way it fits into her broader political worldview as she's expressed it. I signed the Euston Manifesto. I'm not that kind of liberal. But I would never, ever say that she "enjoyed" the death of her son. And if I did, that would be completely independent of whether I like her politics. Just because I disagree with people's politics doesn't mean that they have to be evil, and hideously unattractive, and eat bad food, and drive bad cars, and have bad sex. It just makes no sense to feel that way about somebody because of a political disagreement. I'm sure even Saddam Hussein didn't "enjoy" his sons' deaths. I'm sure even Adolf Hitler grieved for friends he lost in World War I. I'm sure Osama bin Laden cried at his mother's funeral. It's irrational to think otherwise. And these are people who are responsible for deaths, remember--evil people. Not grieving widows who happen to be liberals. I mean, come on. This is sick. Don't even come close to defending it. If you disagree with the ideas, fine--I'll be the first to say that there are valid reasons to support the war, and that the antiwar movement doesn't always credibly address this. I'll be the first to say that the antiwar movement has sometimes become so entangled with Democratic Party politics (now that it's popular to oppose the war) as to hurt the integrity of both. But that has nothing to do with women "enjoying their husbands' deaths." This really should cost Coulter book sales, not give her more--but we know better, don't we? Let's condemn this evil garbage for what it is. I never once thought of seriously defending Ward Churchill over his "little Eichmanns" comment. Never once. Churchill, like Coulter, has some interesting political views to express at times--and like Coulter, he's so busy drowning in his own hate that he's unable to express them in an articulate way. Cheers, TH

Author

Tom Head

Date

2006-06-11T23:16:05-06:00

ID

106278

Comment

Ward also has a problem with stretching the truth out of shape to fit his theories. He's also never met and idea he wasn't scared to snitch. Not that they'll call him on it; they've refused so far.

Author

Ironghost

Date

2006-06-11T23:59:33-06:00

ID

106279

Comment

Good to know someone else hates Coulter as much as I do. Is she married or dating anyone? She needs a diversion real bad. Forgive me ladies for saying that, if you can. Otherwise, go ahead and beat me up as I shouldn't have said it. Smile.

Author

Ray Carter

Date

2006-06-12T09:58:07-06:00

ID

106280

Comment

It's Ann and George Carlin on Leno Wednesday. Who's betting on fireworks? :D

Author

Ironghost

Date

2006-06-12T19:00:32-06:00

ID

106281

Comment

Seems Anne's angry words aren't even her own. Second time she's been accused of plagarism.

Author

Lori G

Date

2006-06-13T11:00:14-06:00

ID

106282

Comment

Plagiarizing evil. Not, that's a reason to slink out of bed in the a.m.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2006-06-13T11:06:51-06:00

ID

106283

Comment

ladd wrote -"My blog. My rules." If you can't stand the friggin' heat, stop turning the burner all the way up on high in my friggin' kitchen." this is exactly why I put my egg-shell shoes on when I log on to this site :o) ..sarcasm and Ann Coulter's not evil....that's too harsh to say about her, even for me!...lol..she's very funny if not slightly disturbed...lol

Author

JSU

Date

2006-06-13T12:40:10-06:00

ID

106284

Comment

...tom Head wrote -"I'll be the first to say that the antiwar movement has sometimes become so entangled with Democratic Party politics (now that it's popular to oppose the war)" the war was opposed by people from all walks of life from the very beginning. being a democrat has absolutely nothing to do with it. shame on you.

Author

JSU

Date

2006-06-13T12:55:36-06:00

ID

106285

Comment

JSU writes: the war was opposed by people from all walks of life from the very beginning. I never said it wasn't. being a democrat has absolutely nothing to do with it. According to an October 2005 CBS News poll, 73% of Democratic respondents favor withdrawing U.S. troops from Iraq while 62% of Republicans oppose that option. If being a Democrat has absolutely nothing to do with it, someone should tell the Democrats. Cheers, TH

Author

Tom Head

Date

2006-06-13T13:11:12-06:00

ID

106286

Comment

...Tom Head wrote -"According to an October 2005 CBS News poll, 73% of Democratic respondents favor withdrawing U.S. troops from Iraq while 62% of Republicans oppose that option. If being a Democrat has absolutely nothing to do with it, someone should tell the Democrats." Taking any poll from the likes of pawns such as CBS and their comrades shows me that you have no clue whatsoever. but it's not your fault. you're only regurgitating what you were fed. Not that party lines matter to us "in-depth thinkers", but I have quite a few associates who are "republican" and they want to impeach Bush for his actions eversince he stole the first election.. I also have a supervisor(BIG Bush supporter) whose 2 nephews(twin brothers) were ambushed and slaughtered by insurgents. ask him if he still supports the war and he might haul off and punch you in the nose. I think he's a little pissed.

Author

JSU

Date

2006-06-13T13:25:41-06:00

ID

106287

Comment

the more I learn about ol' Ann Coulter, the more I realize she's a true American. and a brave one to boot. funny as a frog in ice water too...lol She has her own unique way of stifling her oppostion to urkness, which is brilliant but at the same time risky, especially if she was a white man. I mean, who is really bold enough to assasinate a woman for saying such powerful things with conviction?

Author

JSU

Date

2006-06-14T10:17:33-06:00

ID

106288

Comment

JSU since you apparently understand Coulter, tell us what's driving her? What's wrong with her? What is she trying to accomplish? What is she angry about? Where does all the bullsh1t comes from other than stealing much of it from others. How did she become cheif hater of the haternation?

Author

Ray Carter

Date

2006-06-14T11:32:46-06:00

ID

106289

Comment

What drives Coulter is attention. She craves the media attention, and she loves saying provocative things that make liberals (and even some conservatives) cringe. Some people get their jollys from ticking off the opposition. Unfortunately, she is another sign of how low political discourse is sinking in this society. She's like an internet troll with TV access.

Author

Jeff Lucas

Date

2006-06-14T12:28:54-06:00

ID

106290

Comment

**JSU since you apparently understand Coulter, tell us what's driving her? What's wrong with her? What is she trying to accomplish? What is she angry about? Where does all the bullsh1t comes from other than stealing much of it from others. How did she become cheif hater of the haternation?** <--Ray Carter Ray, she's just a mean, poisonous, bitter b!tch who prostitues her extremist views to make the almighty dollar!

Author

Kacy

Date

2006-06-14T12:45:51-06:00

ID

106291

Comment

Good comments, Ejeff. I was just reading about her and i came to the same conclusion judging from some of her comments. I wonder if it's all a game to her. Probably a lucrative gig, too. I know I'm sick in the head, but I have been trying to see a full body shot of her. All I've even seen are upper body photos of her. Catherine Harris in Florida registered real low on my scale too until I saw better pictures of her on NightLine. Had she passed me a ballot in one of those scenes I would have voted republican for the second time in my life. HA. HA. Just kidding. I mentioned this only because I'd like to get to evaluate the whole person before I decide whether I really like or don't like or should support or not support. No other reason.

Author

Ray Carter

Date

2006-06-14T12:49:49-06:00

ID

106292

Comment

Thanks Kacy. I hope my jokes and warped mind hasn't really offended anyone.

Author

Ray Carter

Date

2006-06-14T13:00:16-06:00

ID

106293

Comment

...Ray wrote -"JSU since you apparently understand Coulter, tell us what's driving her?" I can't honestly pinpoint what drives her and neither can you or anybody else. but what I can pinpoint about her is, she has her finger on the pulse of American politics. ... "What is she trying to accomplish?" a wild guess, I would say she probably wants to be president one day. she definitely has the moxie to hold office. ..."What is she angry about?" PMS? lack of a Man? poor sleeping habits? ...honestly I don't think she is as angry as she is disappointed in how the political process has deteriorated. and therefore, I think she is vying to up the ante on accountability in Washington. ..."Where does all the bullsh1t comes from other than stealing much of it from others. How did she become cheif hater of the haternation?" I assume the "bull" you're refferring to is her off-the-cufff(sometimes unfactual) statements to piss people off. Well, she's no different than O'Reilly, Brit Hume, Geraldo, etc or any other journalist who tries to get a rise out of their interviewee, she just flips it to get a rise out of the interviewer and their audience to if nothing else spark debate in a country that's really asleep at the wheel.

Author

JSU

Date

2006-06-14T13:36:21-06:00

ID

106294

Comment

JSU, you should have your own show too. You're missing out on your calling.

Author

Ray Carter

Date

2006-06-14T13:40:40-06:00

ID

106295

Comment

I know I'm sick in the head, but I have been trying to see a full body shot of her. All I've even seen are upper body photos of her. She's rather tall, somewhere around six feet. She'll be on The Tonight Show on NBC tonight, so I'm sure you'll get to see her in full view when she comes out on stage. I don't know what you see in her, but to each his own.

Author

golden eagle

Date

2006-06-14T13:41:36-06:00

ID

106296

Comment

Golden Eagle Boy, I'll make sure I catch it tonight. I don't really see anything in her yet. She's without a doubt a samrt woman (a Michigan law graduate who made law review). As I said earlier, you can't make a valid and complte evaluation without seeing or knowing the whole person. I'll post my finding after watching tonight. I'd love to see her and comedian George Carlin on Bill Mayer's show where it alright to show your tail a little bit.

Author

Ray Carter

Date

2006-06-14T14:15:09-06:00

ID

106297

Comment

"Well, she's no different than O'Reilly, Brit Hume, Geraldo, etc or any other journalist who tries to get a rise out of their interviewee" JSU So, only FOX reporters try to get a rise out of an interviewee? Come on! All the alphabet stations are all trying to get a rise out of their guests. I would say the chief "riser" is Chris Matthews regardless of topic or party. Heck, Maggie Wade would get a rise out of a guest if the topic was right. I liked it when Maxim magazine did a profile of eligible high profile women and this to say about Ann Coulter: “Anyone who thinks God and GW are two different people are not getting any from her.” ;-)

Author

pikersam

Date

2006-06-14T14:37:06-06:00

ID

106298

Comment

Bert Case and Kirk Fordice. I rest my case. :D Seriously now... I can't honestly pinpoint what drives her and neither can you or anybody else. but what I can pinpoint about her is, she has her finger on the pulse of American politics. JSU Oh come on. American Politics isn't that bad. The only reason she's everywhere is because she has a book to Pimp and is an expert on getting a rise out of people, much like Jerry Springer.

Author

Ironghost

Date

2006-06-14T14:44:25-06:00

ID

106299

Comment

JSU, you are really on a losing streak today. You think Coulter is "disappointed" at how the political process has "deteriorated"? She is the reason why the political process has deteriorated. Or at least, she is a perfect symbol of how deranged right wing "journalists" have become (and she is not really a journalist at all but just a demagogic commentator). Good grief.

Author

Brian C Johnson

Date

2006-06-14T14:47:56-06:00

ID

106300

Comment

....pikersham wrote-".. Come on! All the alphabet stations are all trying to get a rise out of their guests. " of course. I just name a few off the top of my head. ....."I liked it when Maxim magazine did a profile of eligible high profile women and this to say about Ann Coulter: “Anyone who thinks God and GW are two different people are not getting any from her.” " HAHAHAHA...See what I mean???...this chick is funny as hell!!! and I KNOW she had to get a rise out of Jerry Falwell and Billy Graham Jr. with those comments...lol

Author

JSU

Date

2006-06-14T15:23:59-06:00

ID

106301

Comment

...Ironghost wrote-"Oh come on. American Politics isn't that bad. The only reason she's everywhere is because she has a book to Pimp and is an expert on getting a rise out of people, much like Jerry Springer.' oh yes, Politics is that bad, worse even. Just look how our own Frank Melton, Amy Tuck and Chris Neely quickly jump ship on their party affiliations when it appeases them and what they want to accomplish. People in Mississippi don't even know who to vote for anymore. ----->And if pimping a book was as easy as you claim why then isn't "Live from Deathrow" by Mumia Abu-Jamal not flying off the shelves and him given all kinds of airtime on TV? Ann Coulter is striking at the core of what's bringing this country down and those who want to "adjust" and change the constitution appear to be her biggest enemies. She seems to be very patriotic and want nothing more than America to: 1. Mind it's own business 2. Abide by the Constitution 3. vote republican..lol there might be others but I need to read up on her some more, but that's what I got so far.

Author

JSU

Date

2006-06-14T15:34:12-06:00

ID

106302

Comment

....B.C. Johnson wrote-"You think Coulter is "disappointed" at how the political process has "deteriorated"? She is the reason why the political process has deteriorated. Or at least, she is a perfect symbol of how deranged right wing "journalists" have become (and she is not really a journalist at all but just a demagogic commentator). Good grief." Ann Coulter is what like 38 years old. the political deterioration climate in America was in effect way before she stepped on the scene. she just appears to be one person that's fed up with how this country is run and ain't scared to voice it. some of us should be so worthy.

Author

JSU

Date

2006-06-14T15:37:37-06:00

ID

106303

Comment

oh yes, Politics is that bad, worse even. Just look how our own Frank Melton, Amy Tuck and Chris Neely... Chris Neely? WHO? Melton didn't fool anyone, and admitted that a Republican wouldn't get seriously considered for Mayor of Jackson. In contrast to his reelection, in which no one will take him seriously. Tuck? Eh, her choice. And if pimping a book was as easy as you claim why then isn't "Live from Deathrow" by Mumia Abu-Jamal not flying off the shelves and him given all kinds of airtime on TV? Because the market for media savvy, convicted Cop Killers is smaller than Ann's Micro Opus?

Author

Ironghost

Date

2006-06-14T16:01:06-06:00

ID

106304

Comment

Actually, JSU, Ann trained to be who she is today from a young age. It wasn't about getting "fed up."

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2006-06-14T16:02:47-06:00

ID

106305

Comment

...Ironghost -"Chris Neely? WHO?" Chris Daryl Neely. ..."Melton didn't fool anyone, and admitted that a Republican wouldn't get seriously considered for Mayor of Jackson. In contrast to his reelection, in which no one will take him seriously." So that made it ok? I call that deterioration. ..."Tuck? Eh, her choice." more deterioration. ..."Because the market for media savvy, convicted Cop Killers is smaller than Ann's Micro Opus?" Mumia is as innocent as Peter Pan. the courts won't even allow his side to be told just to keep him rotting away in prison. hence, his book. to tell his side. ...ladd-"Actually, JSU, Ann trained to be who she is today from a young age. It wasn't about getting "fed up." she was raised as a patirotic American, she's only trying to defend what she was raised on.

Author

JSU

Date

2006-06-14T16:23:22-06:00

ID

106306

Comment

Chris Daryl Neely See, name recognition helps a lot. Now I'm vaugely familiar with who you're talking about, rather than totally clueless. Re: "Deterioration" Frank ran like he did, because he wanted to win. Jackson is still blind to the idea of a two party system. Tuck... why can't she change? She's not a democrat in the slightest. Mumia is as innocent as Peter Pan. the courts won't even allow his side to be told just to keep him rotting away in prison. hence, his book. to tell his side. Pan is a boy who won't grow up. Mumia is a man who won't admit the truth, which is constantly telling lies doesn't make it the truth. No one believes him who has seen the evidence. His side has had its day, and has been roundly dismissed as fictional.

Author

Ironghost

Date

2006-06-14T16:46:38-06:00

ID

106307

Comment

I saw the tonight show last night and finally got a good look at Coulter. I'm even more convinced now that she writes books for attention. Now I know why we see so many full shots of Beyonce and none of Coulter (and the ability to dance and sing has very little to do with it). But since I've learned that real and lasting beauty is within, I looked hard for inward beauty too. Came up empty there too. I may go to the library and peruse some of her books before totally dismissing her as a nut. At least Rust Limpbaugh is occasionally funny unlike Coulter. Rust used to crack me up about the failings and missteps of my hero William Jefferson Clinton. Of more concern than the above was the lack of piercing intellect, balance, and mental stimulation i got from her. I don't know what her fans see in her. She's either an empty wagon or wagon with many empty cans in a land where people long to see a wagon of any sort or kind. I might add for humor purposes that I've seen better looking legs on a crawdaddy. Forgive me ladies. I'm bad. I need therapy. I won't do it again.

Author

Ray Carter

Date

2006-06-15T09:30:38-06:00

ID

106308

Comment

I meant a granddaddy long legs not crawdaddy.

Author

Ray Carter

Date

2006-06-15T10:40:49-06:00

ID

106309

Comment

...Ray wrote -" I saw the tonight show last night and finally got a good look at Coulter." I saw it too but I can't say I agree with your assesment. don't want to go in-depth on it though. don't wanna get dropkicked for being a man. but I will ask.. is Leno's chin still growing..lol..my god.

Author

JSU

Date

2006-06-15T10:58:18-06:00

ID

106310

Comment

How come when a woman holds a strong opinoin, and deigns to write about it, the discussion always degenerates into a conversation about her appearance? Just asking. I'm sorry, but what in the hell do Anne Coulter's legs have to do with anything that she says or does? I dislike the woman...a lot. But, that has nothing to do with any of her body parts.

Author

Lori G

Date

2006-06-15T11:53:13-06:00

ID

106311

Comment

I agree totally Ali. Beat me up if you wish. I asked for it! I couldn't resist it. I deserve whatever I have coming.

Author

Ray Carter

Date

2006-06-15T12:07:35-06:00

ID

106312

Comment

Ali, by the way, however, Coulter made a comment to one of Jay's question that if she neeeded certain kinds of attention she would have worn a short dress or something of the sort. Jay wisely ignored it. I ain't got that much sense. Have I told you ladies lately how much I respect and adore y'all? I'm doing it again right now. My granddaughter, a wonderful almost 6 year old, always tell the wife when I have made her angry "be nice to granddaddy". What an angel.

Author

Ray Carter

Date

2006-06-15T12:14:49-06:00

ID

106313

Comment

Beat me up if you wish --You'd like that, wouldn't you Ray? ;)

Author

Lori G

Date

2006-06-15T12:17:13-06:00

ID

106314

Comment

Here's your answer to Anne's anger, guys.

Author

Lori G

Date

2006-06-15T12:38:36-06:00

ID

106315

Comment

Thanks Ali. If I could borrow from Michael Jackson, the x-king of pop, and 2 time escaper of child molestation charges, "I'm a lover, not a fighter," therefore I'll pass on the whipping, if possible. Don't you agree that the message or package is easier to accept when delivered by Brat Pitt (in your case) or a gorgeous female messenger in the case of the fellows? If you disagree, these day and nite-town new shows are way off base. Rosalyn Andreson started me to watching WLBT weekend news. Quite frankly, as I watched Coulter I did start to think a beautiful human being could be found somewhere deep that facade she displays. But I then said the digging required to get to it would drain most men and women. I wish her the best. JSU should be happy you ladies didn't let me get completely away with my comment.

Author

Ray Carter

Date

2006-06-15T12:55:49-06:00

ID

106316

Comment

Ann's plagaristic methods don't bother me because the people she's plagarizing are credible sources. I see Ann as just a vehicle for those person's ideals. And not everything she says is a plagaristic statment. Some of her barbs are thrown in the right direction, America is just too blind to see it right now. If she was plagarizing Charles Manson then I would not pay her any attention at all, especially to her body.

Author

JSU

Date

2006-06-15T13:00:24-06:00

ID

106317

Comment

So plagarism is a-okay, unless the person stealing words and ideas don't agree with what you think is right? Huh?

Author

emilyb

Date

2006-06-15T13:03:36-06:00

ID

106318

Comment

Ann's plagaristic methods don't bother me because the people she's plagarizing are credible sources. I'm sure your professor would love to hear that excuse if he or she accused you of plagiarizing.

Author

golden eagle

Date

2006-06-15T13:28:37-06:00

ID

106319

Comment

Ann went to Law school and has a sharp "bean" between her ears, Manson was a nutcase who probably never graced the halls of library let alone a college campus so I'd say she is little more "on to something" than Manson was, which was nothing but murder and mayhem.

Author

JSU

Date

2006-06-15T13:35:50-06:00

ID

106320

Comment

Ann may be smart, but she hasn't used her smartness very wisely. You would think that being a Michigan law school grad would mean something, but in her case, that's just as much a parallel as GWB being a Yale grad.

Author

golden eagle

Date

2006-06-15T13:46:47-06:00

ID

106321

Comment

Again, how does that make plagirism okay?

Author

emilyb

Date

2006-06-15T14:12:45-06:00

ID

106322

Comment

If that's okay....I'm totally going to start channelling Molly Ivins and just use her columns as my own.

Author

Lori G

Date

2006-06-15T14:26:37-06:00

ID

106323

Comment

....GLB -"I'm sure your professor would love to hear that excuse if he or she accused you of plagiarizing. " we all plagiarize in one way or another without even knowing it sometimes. example: "...by any means neccessary" -Malcolm X Nobody ever gives credit to Malcolm before they say it, they just say it. It can pertain to stuff like how my mama would say to people "I'm gonna win bingo tonight by any means neccessary"...lol..she never gives Malcolm credit..or when I haul off and say "I'm going to fix this plumbing by any means neccessary"..I've done it. am I a plagarist too? no. just quoting a great man who had a powerful statement that stuck with me and I adopted this statment as my own. and his ideals are still with me and I promote them. I'm not a plagarist though. malcolm is dead. how else can the next generatations know of this great man unless people like continue his legacy by quoting him. and if you want to go deeper, ALL true christians are plagarists if they accept Jesus' life and words as their own and walk his path. If imitation is the sincerest form of flattery then what then is plagiarism if not flattering? can anbody answer this? what about when a musical artist remakes songs of other older artists word for word? the only difference there is the fact artist#1 got permission to copy-cat the orignal artist's song. it's still plagiarism.

Author

JSU

Date

2006-06-15T14:39:08-06:00

ID

106324

Comment

...Goldenegaleboy wrote-"Ann may be smart, but she hasn't used her smartness very wisely. You would think that being a Michigan law school grad would mean something, but in her case, that's just as much a parallel as GWB being a Yale grad." >>>>that's arguable. she's made it to prime TV in front of millions and sellings books like Krystal's burgers on Saturday night..lol..she must be doing something right eventhough it "appears" wrong in some peoples' eyes. the one thing I do notice about Ann that bothers me is her ability to play with the smoke and mirrors aspect of politics. kinda like the unseen hand so to speak. Therefore, I don't doubt she is possibly ..dare I say it..nooooo!...a ..g.o.l.d.d.igr....no, I wil not say it!..I won't I won't!!!

Author

JSU

Date

2006-06-15T14:43:10-06:00

ID

106325

Comment

"Ann's plagaristic methods don't bother me because the people she's plagarizing are credible sources. that sounds like something Coulter would say.....anyway...Tall Statuesque Blonds.....what can one do? You know whenever she is on Fox, with that Hannity creep, they have to crank up his ergo chair so she won't tower over him. You can tell because his torso proportions are out of sync with her and Colmes (sorriest excuse for a liberal I have ever seen). He's only about 5'-2" tall to her 5'-10 +. He's such a phony that I have to watch just to be made mad..It's called attraction to guilt.....like picking at a sore.

Author

ATLExile

Date

2006-06-15T14:43:29-06:00

ID

106326

Comment

Well, its a crime that's what it is. A very unflattering crime.

Author

Lori G

Date

2006-06-15T14:45:30-06:00

ID

106327

Comment

Previous post was to JSU regarding plagiarism.

Author

Lori G

Date

2006-06-15T14:46:30-06:00

ID

106328

Comment

...Ali wrote-"Well, its a crime that's what it is. A very unflattering crime." maybe so, but so is Defamation of one's character. And her plagiarisms are so irrellevant to what(I think) her real purpose is, the rest of the world really doesn't care. People want answers, they don't care how they get it. and frankly I don't either. I've only learned about Ann since her and O'Reilly locked-hornns some time ago, and I will say, she shut him down. O'reilly of all people had to cut to break to let the blush of embarrasment wear off. then he came back and Ann was gone...what happen? did he boot her off? did she say something to stump him? We'll never know. I tried to get the transcipt of that show a number of times and they still won't send it to me. go figure.

Author

JSU

Date

2006-06-15T15:53:40-06:00

ID

106329

Comment

O'Reilly (or as I like to call him, O'Really?) has been known to turn off guests' mics if they say something he don't like and they challenge him. There was a guy who was on a few years ago and the man was the relative of a 9/11 victim and they got into it a little bit and O'Really told him to shut up and turned his mic off. Al Franken also lit him up a few years ago at a debate in Los Angeles.

Author

golden eagle

Date

2006-06-16T09:09:01-06:00

ID

106330

Comment

Ann or Hitler quiz.... http://www.people.virginia.edu/~jac3he/GiveUpQuiz/hitlercoulterquiz.html

Author

emilyb

Date

2006-06-21T17:21:30-06:00

ID

106331

Comment

Don't start reading this unless you're in for the long haul. *Matalin makes a great point here... MATALIN: You lefty crazy people run around, calling us "extra chromosome" and "Hitlers" and "Nazis" and everything, and nobody says anything. She calls somebody a "harpy" and you'd think that, you know, the whole world was on fire. MediaMatters comments pages show us a lot about liberals. (check comments under clinton's secretary piece.) Ironic Statement #1:She is a pure hatemonger Her level of hate has no end. *and then the real liberals come out to play... -Ann Coulter shut up. You sound like a screeching crack whore. -Props to MMFA for having a photo that shows Tranny Annie's Adam's apple in its full glory. -Would someone please feed this no-headed calf into the meat grinder of media history and be done with it. -nothing can compare to the insance rhetoric that spews from the mouth of that frightful succubus. Not too shabby from a party so militant against hate speech, hate crimes, and hate in general, and let's not forget such great liberal book titles as "Stupid Fat White Men" and "Lie and the Lying Liars who Tell Them." If you ask me, Ann's diction is just par for the course. What the heck is with Imus's studio, is he Native american or something? How about Imus VS. Nugent. PPV anyone!?!?!?

Author

Shrute2

Date

2006-07-15T04:06:50-06:00

ID

106332

Comment

Second Part: Jon Stewart/Stuart, really has the perfect job, he can comment on politics with an air of seriousness and relevance, yet if he says something idiotic and offensive, he pops out his umbrella.."I'm a Comedian." Well, if that's a fact, jack, then stop showing segments on your show that try to be so stupidly dramatic and serious. I, unlike lassie Lad, have read one of Ann's books, (Treason) and listened to one on CD (How to Talk to a Liberal-If You must). So I know full well the style and scope of her satire and humor.(BTW, she is funnier than Franken and Garafolo combined). Everything MediaMatters(which is a liberal outfit trying really hard to seem objective.) cites is very ambiguous save for the Clinton Secretary thing. No one can prove that Kerry's papers weren't withheld at the time of her writing, also, were ALL of his papers available, or just some? The others are opinions she has, with no claims to fact. I will concede... Clinton was only a mediocre rapist... Her points are that Kerry is shady, Clinton is a Scumbag, The NYTimes is biased against conservatives (BIG DUHHH) and that other stuff everyone but liberals already knows. All other citings where mere balks due to the nature of communication. No journalist is 100% accurate all the time. If liberals would approach the Times with such a rigid standard towards telling the truth as they have with A.C., the paper would be bankrupt, as well as Dan Rather. But they somehow find a way to argue against Clinton's impeachment after he outright lied to the nation (Ms. Ladd excluded). Funny how liberals develop a fondness for truth when a conservative is caught being less than perfect. Somehow liberals have found time between sending the message that "you can do a reproductive anytime you want and if you happen to reproduce, well by golly, just kill the damn thing," and "we'll tolerate anything, except people who don't agree with us," to go on a truth crusade.

Author

Shrute2

Date

2006-07-15T04:25:20-06:00

ID

106333

Comment

Part 3: *First of all, I must apologize for any and all errors in typing, I mean, look at the time! Previous post should read "you can do a reproductive act anytime you want..." Sorry, I know they are eyesores. To wrap up... Developing Truism #1: If you wanna know where a media outlet stands, just check their blogs and comments made on said blogs. They're golden, especially here. Truism #2: despite the discourse here, it is awfully kind for the JFP staff to let us in their kitchen and break their appliances, thank you for that, "I'm sorry, I didn't realize it was a Viking range!" Truism #3: I love the food at Kiefer's but, man...what's that smell????? Things I learned from Ann... 1. The Clintons took a ton of valuable furniture from the whitehouse as well as other things of great value that didn't belong to them. Cheap as Free. 2. The National Endowment for the Arts sanctioned a display of Christ inside a jar of urine, yet no one would run the picture of friggin Mohammed with a bombforahat. ;( 3. Liberals think Christians are archaic and backwards. 4. Liberals Hate it when a book like Godless makes it to the NYTimes bestseller's list. 5. Bill Clinton originated the term "Presidential Kneepads." and bombed an aspirin factory. 6. Soon after the Columbine atrocity, counselors forced students to remove any mention of Christ, Jesus, or God from their vigils on school grounds. Finally, I don't understand why the champions of free speech and of the Madonna arrayed with dung in an art show hear someone who is "calling it like I see it" all of a sudden become ambassadors of decency and propriety. I, being a White Protestant Male, am daily convicted of Imperialism, close-mindedness, slavery (reparations), indoctrination, bigotry, hate, Homophobia(we don't fear them, we just think the anatomy supports our theory) warfare in the middle east (actually, some say all Faiths are to blame for civilizations horrors) and the list goes on in universities around the nation and by idiots like Noam Chomsky and Richard Dawkins of Oxford(england). So please, stop whining, the world is not burning, and yes, Ann needs to earn a living some how, why not do it by sticking it to the libs.

Author

Shrute2

Date

2006-07-15T04:48:00-06:00

ID

106334

Comment

Shrute, your comments are uninteresting to me. You have an agenda, and are using my personal blog to push it. Otherwise, you wouldn't make asisine statements like I was the only "liberal" who supported Clinton's impeachment. That's bullsh!t. Shoo. Go find somewhere else to squat.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2006-07-17T12:47:37-06:00

ID

106335

Comment

pat him on the head, he knows how to cut and paste.

Author

Kingfish

Date

2006-07-17T13:10:17-06:00

ID

106336

Comment

Has someone already noted...the topic thread should read "BARES" her fangs. Sloppy, sloppy!

Author

cbiskit

Date

2006-08-12T12:57:51-06:00

ID

106337

Comment

Did you miss the reference, cbiskit?!?

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2006-08-12T21:11:05-06:00

ID

106338

Comment

"I am delighted to understand you like for others to hear me so as to unite against me. If that's the case, how about some more unification? When is your voter rally for this year's election? Or are you united enough already?" Jimsy, there is nothing to unite, since there is nothing to unite against.

Author

Boone

Date

2006-09-26T21:38:17-06:00