Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 26 to 50 of 90
  1. #26
    Veteran Wild Cobra's Avatar
    My Team
    Portland Trailblazers
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Post Count
    43,117
    Even with the source material, these quotes stand on their face as being obviously designed to be divisive.
    That's her style, and she makes news and money that way.
    Do you really think it's true that all liberals try to bring down America? If so, then don't expect any quarter when liberals paint conservatives as knuckledragging racist inbred hicks.
    Try to, no. Part of her points, if you ever took the time to read her works, is that people unwittingly do support the destruction of America, by being uninformed, and advocating what appears to be good things.
    The point of the 'old Arab' remark is not about press passes for Maureen Dowd. The fact is that she was using racism to make a point. Even an ARAB person can get a press pass (arab being code for terrorist/undesirable person.)
    Really? I though she was referring to Helen Thomas' defense of radical muslin's. What makes you think otherwise? To me it's like calling Senator Durbin, "Turban Durbin."
    My point about the 'war' quote is that MOST people will disagree that America should carpet-bomb enemies, as it goes against most of the rules of war (force only as much as needed, avoiding innocent casualties, etc etc). However, she is happy to kill millions of innocents, without even so much as a seeming second thought. This is even worse when we are not at war with a COUNTRY, but with a group of individuals within the country. Tell me, if a rogue terrorist cell in America attacked France, would you be ok with France carpetbombing us? I doubt it.
    I forget what her point was here. Not going to look it up either. We are at least being too nice in this war on terror. We need to do more than we have.
    I don't see how you can add any context to the idea that women=stupid voters.
    I'm not even going to explain that in it's entirety, I forget must of it. She has a long chapter in one of her books about that. I disagree with eliminating women from the voting process, but her points are astounding. I think it was more to make women aware that they need to put their emotions aside when voting.
    Saying you agree with an execution for a valid reason is not the same as saying you agree with an execution in order to intimidate a group of people that weren't tangibly involved.
    Really? Execution as a deterrent isn't acceptable for you?
    Oh, and the final bit you posted? That pretty much sums up my point. Matt Lauer owns her thoughout the whole thing. She plays hard and loose with the facts, and it burns her. What about the whole Canadian brouhaha? Yet another episode where she made a fool of herself, and self-righteously stuck to her guns, compounding the issue.
    How did he own her? She was factual. I think you don't understand her points. She makes perfect sense.

    What Canadian brouhaha?

    Lauer interview

  2. #27
    Cogito Ergo Sum LnGrrrR's Avatar
    My Team
    Boston Celtics
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Post Count
    22,399
    How did he own her? She was factual. I think you don't understand her points. She makes perfect sense.

    What Canadian brouhaha?

    Lauer interview
    In the interview you posted, Coulter said that they were putting on an air that conservatives weren't "allowed to respond", or were prevented from responding, and then admitted moments later that obviously she COULD and DID respond.

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

    Coulter tried to claim that Canadians sent troops to Vietnam, when they did not. Of course, she tried to cover it up later by saying that 10,000 troops came over to the states to enlist, but that's nowhere near the same as the government sending troops over.

    Finally, the idea that every liberal proposal is somehow tied to taking America down is as laughable as the idea that every conservative idea will do the same. The ability to see failure in everything one group does is a dangerous blind spot to have.

    People keep saying we need to "do more".... what is "more"? Is it carpet bombing? Dropping a nuke? I'm sure that will really stop terrorist recruitment, whose most effective tactic is to paint us as the bad guy.

    You calling someone 'turban Derbin' could also be considered racist. Not everyone with a turban is a terrorist, right? What if Helen Thomas supposed Israel, and Coulter called her "that old Jew"? Could you not see the negative connotations?

    You didn't understand my execution comment. Coulter's statement would be the same as if I said, "I hope they execute Timothy McVeigh in order to physically intimdate conservatives." It paints all conservatives as terrorists/terrorist sympathizers, which obviously is untrue.

  3. #28
    Veteran Wild Cobra's Avatar
    My Team
    Portland Trailblazers
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Post Count
    43,117
    In the interview you posted, Coulter said that they were putting on an air that conservatives weren't "allowed to respond", or were prevented from responding, and then admitted moments later that obviously she COULD and DID respond.
    She made the point in her book that in responding to these people, you become a target. In this case, she became the target. The left's tactics of slander and intimidation is what she was referring to. The left doesn't let you respond like she does without their wrath.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bob_McKeown

    Coulter tried to claim that Canadians sent troops to Vietnam, when they did not. Of course, she tried to cover it up later by saying that 10,000 troops came over to the states to enlist, but that's nowhere near the same as the government sending troops over.
    from your link:
    Although no uniformed Canadian troops were involved in war, Canada did participate through counterinsurgency efforts in South Vietnam and reconnaissance for US bombing runs in North Vietnam.
    Cover it up? Are you saying Canadians did not volunteer? I agree. She was wrong. It was more like 30,000 Canadians that served:
    Vietnam may have been America's war but Canada was heavily involved — for and against. Canada harboured American draft dodgers and helped supervise ceasefires. But at the same time, about 30,000 Canadians volunteered to fight in southeast Asia. And there was Canada's involvement in secret missions, weapons testing and arms production. CBC Archives looks at Canada's role in the Vietnam War.
    Finally, the idea that every liberal proposal is somehow tied to taking America down is as laughable as the idea that every conservative idea will do the same. The ability to see failure in everything one group does is a dangerous blind spot to have.
    Of course she doesn't mean every liberal idea, but yes, most of them.
    People keep saying we need to "do more".... what is "more"? Is it carpet bombing? Dropping a nuke? I'm sure that will really stop terrorist recruitment, whose most effective tactic is to paint us as the bad guy.
    Yes, someone will spin it that way. especially our own mainstream media.
    You calling someone 'turban Derbin' could also be considered racist. Not everyone with a turban is a terrorist, right? What if Helen Thomas supposed Israel, and Coulter called her "that old Jew"? Could you not see the negative connotations?
    Bull . It's tagging him to his protecting radical Islamics. Not painting him as racist.
    You didn't understand my execution comment. Coulter's statement would be the same as if I said, "I hope they execute Timothy McVeigh in order to physically intimidate conservatives." It paints all conservatives as terrorists/terrorist sympathizers, which obviously is untrue.
    Wasn't John Walker Lindh protected by liberal pundits? Did any c oncervative pundit try to protect Timothy McVeigh? Your spin can be amusing, or are you being ignorant? How about replacing the word conservative with "domestic terrorist." in your example.

    Conservative my ass. There you go repeating propaganda again. He voted for Harry Browne in 1996. We really don't know his political feelings. He was registered a republican, but that doesn't mean . How many liberal republicans are there?

    Thing is with Ann Coulter, on the spot, she sometimes mispeaks, and the pundits drool on that for years. Read her books sometime. She is very careful to get the facts strait, and very open with her opinion.

  4. #29
    🏆🏆🏆🏆🏆 ElNono's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Post Count
    152,607
    LOL Coulter... partisan hack if I've ever seen one...
    No wonder their local peers on the board are quick to jump on her(his?) defense.

  5. #30
    Veteran Wild Cobra's Avatar
    My Team
    Portland Trailblazers
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Post Count
    43,117
    I knew if I looked long enough, I would find Coulter was right:

    Operation Gallant:
    Canada contributed 240 Canadian Forces personnel and 50 officials from the Department of External Affairs. The ICCS operated until 30 April 1975, two years after the Canadians withdrew.

  6. #31
    Veteran Wild Cobra's Avatar
    My Team
    Portland Trailblazers
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Post Count
    43,117
    LOL Coulter... partisan hack if I've ever seen one...
    No wonder their local peers on the board are quick to jump on her(his?) defense.
    Hacks like you dismiss her.

    I dare you to disprove something in one of her books.

  7. #32
    🏆🏆🏆🏆🏆 ElNono's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Post Count
    152,607
    Hacks like you dismiss her.

    I dare you to disprove something in one of her books.
    I can't read right wing nuts. It's like you trying to watch an entire Michael Moore movie without ing in the process.

  8. #33
    Veteran Wild Cobra's Avatar
    My Team
    Portland Trailblazers
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Post Count
    43,117
    I can't read right wing nuts. It's like you trying to watch an entire Michael Moore movie without ing in the process.
    Then how can an intelligent person make a claim like you did? Since when does ignorance = intelligence?

  9. #34
    Alleged Michigander ChumpDumper's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Post Count
    144,590
    Hacks like you dismiss her.

    I dare you to disprove something in one of her books.
    Ok, she claims in one of her books there is absolutely nothing in the fossil record to support the theory of evolution.

    There is quite a bit in the fossil record that supports the theory of evolution.

    Prove it beyond any doubt? No.

    Support it? Certainly.

    That was easy.

  10. #35
    🏆🏆🏆🏆🏆 ElNono's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Post Count
    152,607
    Then how can an intelligent person make a claim like you did? Since when does ignorance = intelligence?
    I've seen and heard enough of her to know she's a partisan hack. I don't need to read an entire book to know that. I don't need to read your entire next book to know you're exactly the same.
    I don't like partisan hacks, left or right.
    When the entire argument on a problem gets reduced to wether you're from the left or you're from the right, and you end up analyzing the other's side way of thinking more than the problem itself, then we've already lost.
    Sure, it's controversial and probably what sold her some books and made her some money, but it really leaves nothing for anybody else (except the sheep like you, I guess).

  11. #36
    Veteran Wild Cobra's Avatar
    My Team
    Portland Trailblazers
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Post Count
    43,117
    Ok, she claims in one of her books there is absolutely nothing in the fossil record to support the theory of evolution.

    There is quite a bit in the fossil record that supports the theory of evolution.

    Prove it beyond any doubt? No.

    Support it? Certainly.

    That was easy.
    First, how can a fossil record support evolution? I think she probably made a safe statement. It is theory, nothing more.

    Godless page 215-216:





    I think I'll leave it at the two pages. Copyright reasons. But the book for more. She makes compelling articles and references several people and works.

    Just looking up evolution in the index, it covers several pages:


  12. #37
    Alleged Michigander ChumpDumper's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Post Count
    144,590
    First, how can a fossil record support evolution? I think she probably made a safe statement. It is theory, nothing more.
    Right. Theories can be supported by evidence.

    There is evidence in the fossil record that can be used to support the theory of evolution.

    Hence, the fossil record supports the theory of evolution.

    That was easy.

    If you still don't understand, that's not my problem.

  13. #38
    Cogito Ergo Sum LnGrrrR's Avatar
    My Team
    Boston Celtics
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Post Count
    22,399
    She made the point in her book that in responding to these people, you become a target. In this case, she became the target. The left's tactics of slander and intimidation is what she was referring to. The left doesn't let you respond like she does without their wrath.
    Wait wait... you're saying COULTER has a problem with the left's tactics of slander and intimidation? Really? COULTER has a problem with slander?


    from your link:Cover it up? Are you saying Canadians did not volunteer? I agree. She was wrong. It was more like 30,000 Canadians that served:
    Yes, but that doesn't mean that 'Canadian troops were sent over there'. It would be like if Canada went to war, a bunch of Americans joined up to help, and then it was said that the United States went to war. It's not the same thing.

    They did help out in counterops, and materials and whatnot, but it's not like they sent a large amount of troops, as Coulter is obviously implying.

    Yes, someone will spin it that way. especially our own mainstream media.Bull . It's tagging him to his protecting radical Islamics. Not painting him as racist.
    Ah, so it would be perfectly acceptable in today's society to put down someone who believed in affirmative action the same way? For instance, let's say a hypothetical African-American representative named Mr. Smith believes in affirmative action. Would it be alright to call him, "Watermelon eating" Rep. Smith or "Bling blinging" Rep Smith or any other racially minded term? How about if we put "big nose" in front of a hypothetical Rep Goldstein, or even "yamika"? How would that go over?

    Wasn't John Walker Lindh protected by liberal pundits? Did any c oncervative pundit try to protect Timothy McVeigh? Your spin can be amusing, or are you being ignorant? How about replacing the word conservative with "domestic terrorist." in your example.
    Because the statement implies that 1) American citizens forfeit their rights if captured as a terrorist without it first being proven and 2) that all liberals support terrorists. Obviously, both of those are not true.

    It'd be saying something like, "Conservatives like brutal dictators" because some of them wrote things like this:

    http://acuf.org/issues/issue75/070108news.asp

    http://www.creators.com/opinion/paul...a-s-power.html


    Conservative my ass. There you go repeating propaganda again. He voted for Harry Browne in 1996. We really don't know his political feelings. He was registered a republican, but that doesn't mean . How many liberal republicans are there?
    Of COURSE it's a bull statement. That's my whole point. Just because one or two crazy liberals defend or even DO something does not mean all liberals agree or are crazy; just because one or two crazy conservatives defend or even DO something that does not mean all conservatives agree or are crazy.

  14. #39
    Cogito Ergo Sum LnGrrrR's Avatar
    My Team
    Boston Celtics
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Post Count
    22,399
    I knew if I looked long enough, I would find Coulter was right:

    Operation Gallant:
    Actually, no.

    Her WHOLE POINT was that Canada helped in Vietnam, and did not help in Iraq, correct?

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

    The Canadian and American militaries operate closely together, and the Chrétien government permitted a number of Canadians Forces members to actively serve in Iraq. Despite Canada's official position to stay out of Iraq, Canada, in fact, was contributing forces[8]:
    On March 31, 2003, Maclean's reported that "in February [2003], Canada took command of the multinational naval group, known as Task Force 151, patrolling the Persian Gulf region. Canada is deploying three frigates in the area and the destroyer HMCS Iroquois is en route. In addition to 30 Canadian Forces personnel working at the U.S. Central Command in Qatar, there are 150 Canadian troops on exchange with U.S. and British forces in the area who could see action."[9]
    Canada allowed its NORAD stationed Air Force members to fly combat missions and deploy with the USAF E-3 AWACS during the war and allowed its exchange officers in the Army, Navy, and Air Force to deploy and fight with their US units. 40-50 Canadian Military Members participated in the conflict, the majority flying on the E-3 AWACS, based out of Tinker AFB, OK, where they are stationed as part of NORAD.
    On October 9, 2008, the CBC published this statement[10]:
    "Chrétien was attacked by opposition parties for hypocrisy, and asked to bring the exchange officers home. Chrétien's response was that those officers weren't involved in direct conflict, and that Canada had to honour its commitments. But in their book, The Unexpected War [11], University of Toronto professor Janice Gross Stein and public policy consultant Eugene Lang write that the Liberal government would actually boast of that contribution to Washington. "In an almost schizophrenic way, the government bragged publicly about its decision to stand aside from the war in Iraq because it violated core principles of multilateral-ism and support for the United Nations. At the same time, senior Canadian officials, military officers and politicians were currying favour in Washington, privately telling anyone in the State Department or the Pentagon who would listen that, by some measures, Canada's indirect contribution to the American war effort in Iraq — three ships and 100 exchange officers — exceeded that of all but three other countries that were formally part of the coalition.""[12][13]
    The only reason she brought up that Canada sent troops to Vietnam was to show contrast with her belief that they had done more for us in Vietnam than they had for us in Iraq. So she was wrong, after all.

  15. #40
    Alleged Michigander ChumpDumper's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Post Count
    144,590
    Why should Canada have ever done anything for us in Iraq?

  16. #41
    Just Right of Atilla the Hun Yonivore's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Post Count
    25,372
    LnGrrrR, you lost me when you equated affirmative action with radical Islamists.

    If affirmative action proponents were an existential threat to our country and they all belonged to one racial or cultural group; yeah, I'd say derogation would be fine with me.

  17. #42
    Cogito Ergo Sum LnGrrrR's Avatar
    My Team
    Boston Celtics
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Post Count
    22,399
    First, how can a fossil record support evolution? I think she probably made a safe statement. It is theory, nothing more.

    Godless page 215-216:





    I think I'll leave it at the two pages. Copyright reasons. But the book for more. She makes compelling articles and references several people and works.

    Just looking up evolution in the index, it covers several pages:

    Why do you believe THIS book WC? Where's your natural skepticism? Don't you think Ann Coulter might have reason to be less than truthful with the facts?

  18. #43
    Cogito Ergo Sum LnGrrrR's Avatar
    My Team
    Boston Celtics
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Post Count
    22,399
    LnGrrrR, you lost me when you equated affirmative action with radical Islamists.

    If affirmative action proponents were an existential threat to our country and they all belonged to one racial or cultural group; yeah, I'd say derogation would be fine with me.
    I'm not equating the two as a means to say one cause is as bad/equal to the other.

    What I'm saying is that using a visual image of an Arab (a turban) in a derogatory manner is offensive.

    Obviously, not all people who wear turbans are terrorists, and not all terrorists wear turbans. But it's a stereotype, and it puts across the fear that all Arabs are to be distrusted. It'd be like putting "taco-loving" in front of the name of someone who supported illegal immigration amnesty.

  19. #44
    Veteran Wild Cobra's Avatar
    My Team
    Portland Trailblazers
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Post Count
    43,117
    Why do you believe THIS book WC? Where's your natural skepticism? Don't you think Ann Coulter might have reason to be less than truthful with the facts?
    Nobody yet has been able to discredit her work with facts, except for real minor things.

    Please. Disprove something she has written.

  20. #45
    Just Right of Atilla the Hun Yonivore's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Post Count
    25,372
    I'm not equating the two as a means to say one cause is as bad/equal to the other.

    What I'm saying is that using a visual image of an Arab (a turban) in a derogatory manner is offensive.

    Obviously, not all people who wear turbans are terrorists, and not all terrorists wear turbans. But it's a stereotype, and it puts across the fear that all Arabs are to be distrusted. It'd be like putting "taco-loving" in front of the name of someone who supported illegal immigration amnesty.
    And, I'm saying I don't care if we offend Islamic extremists.

  21. #46
    Cogito Ergo Sum LnGrrrR's Avatar
    My Team
    Boston Celtics
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Post Count
    22,399
    Nobody yet has been able to discredit her work with facts, except for real minor things.

    Please. Disprove something she has written.
    Does it have to be just written?

    In an interview with Bob McKeown on the January 26, 2005, edition of the The Fifth Estate, Coulter came under criticism for her statement: "Canada used to be...one of our most...most loyal friends, and vice versa. I mean, Canada sent troops to Vietnam. Was Vietnam less containable and more of a threat than Saddam Hussein?" McKeown contradicted her with, "No, actually Canada did not send troops to Vietnam."[45] On the February 18, 2005, edition of Washington Journal, Coulter justified her statement by referring to the thousands of Canadians who served in the American armed forces during the Vietnam era, either because they volunteered or because they were living in the USA during the war years and got drafted. She said, "The Canadian Government didn't send troops [...] but [...] they came and fought with the Americans. So I was wrong. It turns out there were 10,000 Americans who happened to be born in Canada." (Between 5,000 and 20,000 Canadians fought in Vietnam itself, including approximately 80 who were killed.).[46] John Cloud of Time, writing about the incident a few months later, said "Canada [sent] noncombat troops to Indochina in the 1950s and again to Vietnam in 1972".[5]
    Hehe. Couldn't resist.

    Some other cases:

    http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-me...igned-opinion/

    http://www.leftinalabama.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=518

    http://gunnyg.wordpress.com/2009/03/...david-r-usher/

    Oh and here she's wrong about where to vote...

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2006/0...-_n_15738.html

  22. #47
    Cogito Ergo Sum LnGrrrR's Avatar
    My Team
    Boston Celtics
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Post Count
    22,399
    And, I'm saying I don't care if we offend Islamic extremists.
    As in the above example, you're probably offending EVERYONE who wears a turban. Which is, ya know, not a 'terrorist-related' item, but an Arabic one.

    In the same vein, there's a reason why the word "spearchucker" is offensive to people that might not throw spears.

  23. #48
    Veteran Wild Cobra's Avatar
    My Team
    Portland Trailblazers
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Post Count
    43,117
    You know, I'm starting to get rather upset at your laziness. How about comparing those other people's statements to source articles, or are you just a good little lemming?

  24. #49
    Cogito Ergo Sum LnGrrrR's Avatar
    My Team
    Boston Celtics
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Post Count
    22,399
    You know, I'm starting to get rather upset at your laziness. How about comparing those other people's statements to source articles, or are you just a good little lemming?
    Hey, you just asked for times where she was wrong.

    Tell me WC, do you HONESTLY fact check every book you read, and then fact check the other sources? What about those sources? Can you trust those sources as well?

    I can keep gain-saying each of your sources as much as I want as well. Who does Coulter rely on for sources? Do you trust the sources SHE'S using as well?

  25. #50
    🏆🏆🏆🏆🏆 ElNono's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Post Count
    152,607
    Hey, you just asked for times where she was wrong.

    Tell me WC, do you HONESTLY fact check every book you read, and then fact check the other sources? What about those sources? Can you trust those sources as well?

    I can keep gain-saying each of your sources as much as I want as well. Who does Coulter rely on for sources? Do you trust the sources SHE'S using as well?
    You're intellectually dishonest, like a good lefty...
    Watch it spin that way... Ann Coulter style...

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •