Democratic National Convention

[Xanadu]

Some awesome Coulter quotes.

"Even Islamic terrorists don't hate America like liberals do."

"I am a polemicist. I am perfectly frank about that. I like to stir up the pot. I don't pretend to be impartial or balanced, as broadcasters do."

She admits to being biased.

If you are bias in any way you are admitting that you are willing to distort/ignore a particular reality in order to protect your particular group/tribe.

Coulter's solution to the middle east:

"We should invade their countries, kill their leaders and convert them to Christianity"

"I think, on the basis of the recent Supreme Court ruling that we can't execute the retarded, American journalists commit mass murder without facing the ultimate penalty," Ms. Coulter told me. "I think they are retarded. I'm trying to communicate to the American people and I have to work through a retarded person!"

"My only regret with Timothy McVeigh is he did not go to the New York Times Building."

From her article "Supreme Court Opinions Not Private Enough"

"Having literally gotten away with murder for a quarter century, the court is getting wilder and wilder, deferring to "international law" and issuing nutty pronouncements more appropriate to a NAMBLA newsletter."

"In the past few years, federal courts have proclaimed a right to sodomy (not in the Constitution), a right to partial-birth abortion (not in the Constitution), a right not to have a Democratic governor recalled (not in the Constitution), a right not to gaze upon the Ten Commandments in an Alabama courthouse (not in the Constitution), a ban on the words "under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance (not in the Constitution), and a ban on voluntary student prayers at high-school football games (not in the Constitution). "

Yes, Miss Coulter, My right to take a piss, or walk down the street, is also not in the constitution.

Anyone who still thinks she is not a crazy bitch, try reading the whole article at: http://anncoulter.com/columns/2003/120303p.htm

[Colonel Rebel]

that just makes you look more guilty xanadu. if you knew the response to the comments you made, certainly you intentionally made those comments to piss people off. nice one, jerkstore.

[Scott_Connery]

I haven't read that much of Coulter's stuff. From what I did read it seemed like she was mostly just an angry republican talking head in the same vein as O'Reilly.

[argive99]

I haven't read that much of Coulter's stuff. From what I did read it seemed like she was mostly just an angry republican talking head in the same vein as O'Reilly.

She's far more intelligent and substantive that Bill O'reily. Read 'Treason' and you'll see why I say that. Harry Binswanger's review of that book is why I read it. He said that her explicit philosophy is terrible (religious) but that she is great as a Cold War historian, especially of the last 50 years. I agree.

I wish she would use less ad hominems but I forgive her for her anger because I know what she's angry at; ie the disgusting Left.

Also, if you ever watch O'reily interview her (and she is on his show often), you will see how different they are. She is far more principled then he is.

Its interesting (and humorous) to see the various Objectivist reactions to Ann Coulter. Some love her (like me), while others despise her as a 'loudmouth bitch given to nothing but ad hominem attacks.' I think an O'ist's response to Coulter will mirror their view of the modern Right; if they are more forgiving of the Right as at least a movement with some values then they will like Coulter, if they are closer to a Libertarian orientation that is maniacally obsessed with the religious aspects of Conservatism (ie Arthur Silber) then they will hate her.

But don't put her in the same sentence as Bill O'reily.

[DPW]

Its interesting (and humorous) to see the various Objectivist reactions to Ann Coulter. Some love her (like me), while others despise her as a 'loudmouth bitch given to nothing but ad hominem attacks.' I think an O'ist's response to Coulter will mirror their view of the modern Right; if they are more forgiving of the Right as at least a movement with some values then they will like Coulter, if they are closer to a Libertarian orientation that is maniacally obsessed with the religious aspects of Conservatism (ie Arthur Silber) then they will hate her.

I love Coulter for all the reasons you cite, and I love her even more since she pisses off anti-war libertarians.

But don't put her in the same sentence as Bill O'reily.

Yeah. That SOB (B.O.) couldn't even answer Michael Moore's absurd question, "Would you sacrifice your son for Fallujah?" But what do you expect from a guy who thinks not having principles is an admirable quality and the means of objectivity?

[jedymastyr]

Also, if you ever watch O'reily interview her (and she is on his show often), you will see how different they are. She is far more principled then he is.

That is practically the only place I have heard what she has to say...and I have been very impressed so far (noting the religiosity as a negative, of course). What's amazing is, I haven't yet heard O'Reilly dismiss her as an "ideologue." He uses that adjective to describe almost everyone who is principled as a way of dismissing their arguments (???)... It's definitely nice, when she's on, to be able to listen to her without getting interrupted by such nonsense.

[jedymastyr]

Yeah.  That SOB (B.O.) couldn't even answer Michael Moore's absurd question, "Would you sacrifice your son for Fallujah?"

Did you think he lost that argument? I sure did... I don't think I've ever seen O'Reilly so backed into a corner. He usually maintains control, but it didn't seem like it with Moore. He just kept conceding points and letting Moore dictate the particular subjects he wished to talk about.

[DPW]

Did you think he lost that argument?  I sure did...  I don't think I've ever seen O'Reilly so backed into a corner.  He usually maintains control, but it didn't seem like it with Moore.  He just kept conceding points and letting Moore dictate the particular subjects he wished to talk about.

I didn't see the interview, but heard about it from my mother. Disgusting.

The proper answer of course is: "Do you so hate America that you consider dying in defense of its existence a sacrifice?" Or, "Right, Michael - so you agree we should have bombed Iran instead?" But, then, I would never have given him a platform in the first place. He is the human equivalent of an inherently dishonest idea.

But that's the problem with O'Rielly, or anyone else who eschews principles. They cannot answer scum like Moore because they can only argue about concretes, and it doesn't matter if you have the right concretes so long as you cede the high moral ground to your enemy.

[Xanadu]

Coulter wants a Full Christian Theocracy! But you say you love her? Amazing!

[Spearmint]

She's far more intelligent and substantive that Bill O'reily. Read 'Treason' and you'll see why I say that. Harry Binswanger's review of that book is why I read it. He said that her explicit philosophy is terrible (religious) but that she is great as a Cold War historian, especially of the last 50 Its interesting (and humorous) to see the various Objectivist reactions to Ann Coulter. Some love her (like me), while others despise her as a 'loudmouth bitch given to nothing but ad hominem attacks.' I think an O'ist's response to Coulter will mirror their view of the modern Right; if they are more forgiving of the Right as at least a movement with some values then they will like Coulter, if they are closer to a Libertarian orientation that is maniacally obsessed with the religious aspects of Conservatism (ie Arthur Silber) then they will hate her.

Coulter is an idiot and her writings occupy an even lower intellectual plane than those of Michael Moore. I don't think you can judge the reactions to her based on how sympathetic people are towards the modern right however - there are other populist religious/pro-war conservative pundits such as Limbaugh and Hannity who arent despised in the way Coulter is, mainly because they occassionally offer something of substance rather than poorly written emotionalist diatribes.

In her defence, I doubt she believes even 10% of what she writes. Most of her stuff reads as a quite blatent appeal to a certain audience, rather than an authentic portrayal of beliefs. I imagine she takes her own writings a lot less seriously than her average reader.

edit: I haven't read either of her books to be fair (nor do I care to), and I am judging her solely on a number of articles which she has written.

[argive99]

Coulter is an idiot and her writings occupy an even lower intellectual plane than those of Michael Moore. I don't think you can judge the reactions to her based on how sympathetic people are towards the modern right however - there are other populist religious/pro-war conservative pundits such as Limbaugh and Hannity who arent despised in the way Coulter is, mainly because they occassionally offer something of substance rather than poorly written emotionalist diatribes.

In her defence, I doubt she believes even 10% of what she writes. Most of her stuff reads as a quite blatent appeal to a certain audience, rather than an authentic portrayal of beliefs. I imagine she takes her own writings a lot less seriously than her average reader.

edit: I haven't read either of her books to be fair (nor do I care to), and I am judging her solely on a number of articles which she has written.

Spearmint, you prove my point. But what's the sense? I wonder why you respond to anything I write. Actually I know why, to piss me off.

You and I will never agree about anything, not even the time of day. IMO you are a Libertarian leaning mental midget w/o a clue. I could care what you think of me. I don't know if you know who Arthur Silber is, but check out his blog at lightofreason.com. The two of you can be twins judging by your ideas and your interpretation of Objectivism. I know this because I get the same feeling in my stomach when I read his nonsense as I do when I read yours; nausea.

Hate Coulter all you want. Even with her philosophical flaws, she has more intelligence in one brain cell than you do in your whole brain.

I can understand Coulter's use of ad hominems. Sometimes a person is so dense, rational argument is useless. So why not tell them to go to hell and then be done with it.

[BlackSabbath]

Ann Coulter is nothing but a crazy raving lying bitch!  I put her up there with Mr. Moore.

Any remotely intelligent/educated person will agree.

She is such a nutcase and a moron and evil peson I am sickened by an "Objectivist" that can stand her!

Psuedo-Objectivism is not the majority of this forum's focus, but many members are extreme psuedo-Objectivists?  Or is it?

Ann Coulter is better than michael Moore for a few reasons:

1) She's not a fat b****** nor did she play the Scotsman in Austin Powers.

2) She is quite good at hitting targets like politically correct liberals.

3) She does come out in favour of something and defends things. When does fatty Moore ever do that?

4) AFAIK Ann Coulter doesn't blatantly lie.

We have a guy here in Britain called Richard Littlejohn - he writes for the Sun tabloid newspaper - who is quite like her in a lot of respects. His favourite target is politically correct liberals and he at least does defend things which his opponents, the Guardianistas - after the Guradian newspaper - almost never do.

[BlackSabbath]

BTW does Xanadu have anything to do with Rush or Olivia Newton-John and the ELO?

[Capitalism Forever]

I am sickened by an "Objectivist" that can stand her!

IMO you are a Libertarian leaning mental midget w/o a clue.

Let us maintain a civil tone on this board, please.

[Kitty Hawk]

Ann Coulter is nothing but a crazy raving lying bitch! 

Perhaps you could reference some of Ann Coulter's lies? I'm not a big fan of hers either, but your description of her says more about you than it does about her.

There is a growing trend among Democrats to hurl the childish accusation "Liar!" at Republicans and Conservatives. Al Franken and Michael Moore are the loudest of these childish liberals, but they are by no means the only ones shouting it.

[BlackSabbath]

Al Franken and Michael Moore are the loudest of these childish liberals, but they are by no means the only ones shouting it.

Michael Moore is fat.

[AshRyan]

This thread has degenerated to the intellectual level of an elementary school playground brawl. I don't care if you like Anne Coulter or not (I don't particularly care for her myself, from what little I've read), but if you're going to disagree about it, provide arguments, and don't just hurl insults at the other board members! The behavior of certain people on both sides of the debate (if you can call it that) is just ridiculous, and inappropriate for this board. It will not continue to be tolerated.

[BlackSabbath]

I'm not too familiar with Ann Coulter, other than what I've seen at Frontpagemag.com.

I'm still waiting for the AC-haters to say exactly why they hate her.

BTW Michael Moore is still fat.

[BlackSabbath]

AC notes that :

http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadA...le.asp?ID=14427

"Moore says Bush must be defeated because Bush lied about the war in Iraq. Ninety-three percent of the delegates agree with him, saying they oppose the war in Iraq, according to a New York Times-CBS News poll.

But the Democrats' candidates for president and vice president both voted for war with Iraq. Their party platform supports the war with Iraq. (Let's just hope wherever the delegates teach, they're not teaching logic.) "

Interestingly Dick Morris, former advisor to Bill Clinton, notes:

http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadA...le.asp?ID=14393

"Sen. John Kerry was crazy to let his wife speak on Tuesday night as the featured orator during the second night of his convention. (Or maybe he had no choice).

While Teresa Heinz Kerry delivered an excellent speech, demonstrating a determined feminism and an attractive personality, her prominent role at the covention puts her in play in our national politics. Where criticism of a candidate’s wife might have been seen as a foul, Mrs. Kerry is now a legitimate target for partisan barbs and arrows.

Even Hillary did not address the 1992 Democratic Convention. By the time she spoke in 1996, she had served as a high profile first lady and authored the health care initiative. Barbara Bush spoke in 1992 after her tenure as first lady when she was more popular than her husband was. Teresa Heinz Kerry is the first wife of an insurgent candidate to address a convention in such a high-profile way. She now attracts all kinds of attention to herself and makes herself an issue in the campaign."

[Yes]

The Republicans are also as bad as far as that goes. My mute button is bipartison;)

Yeah.

It was more fun to watch the Yankees and Red Sox brawl than it is to watch these clowns on both parties convention it out.

It's no surprise that the DNC is drawing bad viewer ratings.