Ann Coulter is an idiot

[CharlieMac]

Ann has her funny moments. This isn't one of them.

[Nbadan]

When you look at the numbers, I don't see how some of you can equally blame Demos for being as corrupt as Republicans. Me thinks most of you are falling for the M$M spin. In the time Demos have had control of the Presidency and Congress the rise in the national deficit has been miniscule. When the Republicans controlled both, the rise has been almost 5 trillion dollars and counting.

One of the biggest scandals when the Demos were in office was politicians using mailing priveliges to steal what amounted to 100,000's of dollars worth of graft, meanwhile the Republicans, led by Tom Delay, have turned the political system in the U.S. into a complete joke with wide-spread cronyism, milllions, maybe even billions of dollars in graft, and millions of dollars of corporate money funneled to Republican candidates for favorable legislation.

Yeah, all that seems fair to me.

[Nbadan]

Meanwhile, Ann Coulter is unrepentant:

BY JENNIFER MALONEY AND JOSEPH MALLIA
Newsday Staff Writer

An unrepentant Ann Coulter Wednesday blasted into Huntington, hometown to 34 people killed on Sept. 11, to promote her new book in which she attacks victims' widows as "witches" and "harpies."

But in a town where a dozen roadways are named in honor of those who died that day, few took to New York Avenue to protest the bookstore signing of the conservative author.

Instead, a defiant Coulter was met with more than 300 spirited fans at an event broadcast live to hundreds of radio stations by conservative commentator -- and Huntington Town resident -- Sean Hannity.

And she made a show of tearing up a letter of protest handed to her by a town official.

Newsday

Insannity aligns himself with Coulter.

[xrayzebra]

Yes, you're right manny, Lbj and Carter were herculian in foreign policies.

[xrayzebra]

When you look at the numbers, I don't see how some of you can equally blame Demos for being as corrupt as Republicans. Me thinks most of you are falling for the M$M spin. In the time Demos have had control of the Presidency and Congress the rise in the national deficit has been miniscule. When the Republicans controlled both, the rise has been almost 5 trillion dollars and counting.

One of the biggest scandals when the Demos were in office was politicians using mailing priveliges to steal what amounted to 100,000's of dollars worth of graft, meanwhile the Republicans, led by Tom Delay, have turned the political system in the U.S. into a complete joke with wide-spread cronyism, milllions, maybe even billions of dollars in graft, and millions of dollars of corporate money funneled to Republican candidates for favorable legislation.

Yeah, all that seems fair to me.

Guess you have forgotten all about the House Banking scandal?
or What's his face "book deal" with one word on some pages.
Wright from Fort Worth.

[FromWayDowntown]

Coulter is bombastic and she/he sells books and pockets big money for being bombastic. If she/he were repentant for making such over-the-top statements, she/he wouldn't sell as many books. In the market economy that has developed for political commentary -- an odd market, in my estimation, but nevertheless, a flourishing one -- only polarizing statements sell; nobody wants to read or hear "let's be nice and find consensus" types of rhetoric. Coulter excels at polarization, whether she/he believes genuinely in everything that she/he says or writes. And she/he is laughing all the way to the bank as the publicity just keeps rolling in. If you want to defeat Coulter, the solution is to stop listening to her/him and to stop buying her/his books.

With all of that said, I absolutely agree that Coulter has no socially evident conscience and makes idiotic and inflammatory things in an neverending effort to herself/himself out for a buck.

[xrayzebra]

Ant it the truth FWD. I should be such a idiot. What do they say, call me whatever
you want to, so long as you call me for dinner, while I am on the way to the bank
to make another deposit.

Wonder how you get on those programs and do you all know any good ghost writers
that want to share in the profits?

[JoeChalupa]

You are correct. That is why the Dixie Chicks are laughing all the way to the bank on the backs of people like Hannity and Coulter.

[MaNuMaNiAc]

Coulter is known for a combative column after September 11 saying, "We should invade their countries, kill their leaders and convert them to Christianity." In one book, she wrote, "Even Islamic terrorists don't hate America like liberals do."

sounds like something xrayzebra, gtown, or Vashner would say huh?

[xrayzebra]

sounds like something xrayzebra, gtown, or Vashner would say huh?

Yeah, and here is a little article about Coulter and the Jersey
girls. Might prove a little bit interesting to those that
dislike Ms. Coulter so much.

Reprinted from NewsMax.com

Thursday, June 8, 2006 9:39 a.m. EDT

NBC News Slanders Ann Coulter

In a vicious attack on Ann Coulter and her new book "Godless,” NBC News zeroed-in on her sharp criticism of the liberal "Jersey Girls” - the four highly politicized widows of 9/11 victims - leaving the impression that Coulter had attacked all 9/11 widows instead of the four women.

In introducing the segment, NBC anchor Brian Williams said "just when you think that it seems that there are no limits on anything, someone comes along and makes a comment that goes over the line – the line that is shared by just about everybody because some things are, it turns out, still sacred.”

Sacred?

Sacred, as it turns out, are the Jersey Girls. According to NBC’s Mike Taibbi, Coulter had written about some 9/11 widows charging that they have been reveling in their status as celebrities.

He reiterated the charge that Coulter’s attacks were on "9/11 widows” instead of the four Jersey Girls. [Editor's Note: Get Ann Coulter's new book for just $4.99 – Save $23! Go Here Now]

NBC then dragged out the shopworn David Gergen, the all-purpose "former White House adviser” who has never seemed to be able to determine what side he’s on, effortlessly sliding from a GOP White House to the Clinton menagerie. On cue, Gergen spoke of the "ugliness” of the charge against Williams' sacred icons.

Last night during a televised book signing in Long Island, broadcast on Fox News Channel's "Hannity & Colmes," Coulter fired back.

"[The left] sends out spokespeople, who - because of some personal tragedy - we're not allowed to respond to. Because their husbands died in 9/11, because they had a son die in Iraq. If they're making a point worth making, if they're entering the public dialogue, how about letting Howard Dean make the point.

"I feel sorry for all the widows of 9/11," Coulter continued. "[But] I do not believe that sanctifies their political message. They're the ones who claim to be responsible for the 9/11 Commission - a total Clinton whitewash commission."

More Coulter: "They have attacked Bush, they have attacked Condoleezza Rice, they're cutting campaign commercials for Kerry. But we can't respond because their husbands died . . . I think it's one of the ugliest things the left has done to political dialogue in this country - this idea that you need some sort of personal authenticity in order to make a political point . . ."

Asked if she would accept an invitation to personally debate the Jersey Girls, Coulter responde: "Sure . . . But I'm not going to treat them like victims, as with Cindy Sheehan and - oh, you can't respond to Joe Wilson."

Just who are the Jersey Girls?

Writing in The Wall Street Journal’s "Opinion Journal" in April 2004, Dorothy Rabinowitz noted that "all their fury and accusation is aimed not at the killers who snuffed out their husbands' and so many other lives, but at the American president, his administration, and an ever wider assortment of targets including the Air Force, the Port Authority, the City of New York.

"In the public pronouncements of the Jersey Girls we find, indeed, hardly a jot of accusatory rage at the perpetrators of the 9/11 attacks. We have, on the other hand, more than a few declarations like that of Ms. Breitweiser [of the Jersey Girls], announcing that 'President Bush and his workers . . . were the individuals that failed my husband and the 3,000 people that day.'"

The four women - Kristen Breitweiser, Mindy Kleinberg, Lorie Van Auken and Patty Casazza - are scarcely representative of the hundreds of 9/11 widows.

Wrote Rabinowitz: "Others who had lost family to the terrorists' assault commanded little to no interest from TV interviewers. Debra Burlingame - lifelong Democrat and sister of Charles F. 'Chic' Burlingame III, captain of American Airlines flight 77, which crashed into the Pentagon on Sept. 11 - did manage to land an interview after Ms. Rice's appearance.

"When she had finished airing her views critical of the accusatory tone and tactics of the Jersey Girls, her interviewer, ABC congressional reporter Linda Douglass marveled, 'This is the first time I've heard this point of view.'

"That shouldn't have been surprising. The hearing room that day had seen a substantial group of 9/11 families, similarly irate over the Jersey Girls and their accusations - families that made their feelings evident in their burst of loud applause when [Condoleeza] Rice scored a telling zinger under questioning. But these were not the 9/11 voices TV and newspaper editors were interested in.

"They had chosen to tell a different story - that of four intrepid New Jersey housewives who had, as one news report had it, brought an administration 'to its knees' - and that was, as far as they were concerned, the only story . . ."

Two years ago Rabinowitz made the point that Coulter is being chastised for making now - that the Jersey Girls status as 9/11 widows allegedly gives them immunity from being criticized.

Rabinowitz wrote: "The venerable status accorded this group of widows comes as no surprise given our times, an age quick to confer both celebrity and authority on those who have suffered. As the experience of the Jersey Girls shows, that authority isn't necessarily limited to matters moral or spiritual.

"All that the widows have had to say - including wisdom mind-numbingly obvious, or obviously false and irrelevant - on the failures of this or that government agency, on derelictions of duty they charged to the president, the vice president, the national security adviser, Norad and the rest, has been received by most of the media and members of Congress with utmost wonder and admiration.”

The Jersey Girls actively supported John Kerry in 2004. As for the "civility" issue, NBC News, it should be noted, turned a blind eye to Al Franken's statement to Matt Lauer last October.

Then, Franken told the "Today" host that Karl Rove and Lewis Libby should be "executed." The comment drew a laugh from Lauer. Franken's comments drew no criticism from the major media, including NBC News.

[xrayzebra]

Ann Coulter's Book Hits Amazon's #1 Spot

Posted without comment.

[Mrs.Tlong]

This thread is not worthless without pictures.

WWTLD - What would TLong do?

I think we all know what that cheap tramp would do. Why even ask?

[mikejones99]

she is just a dumb ugly

[Darrin]

Is it just me, or does Ann Coulter have an adam's apple?

[xrayzebra]

I think this gentleman hit the nail on the head. The dimms think they can hide behind
those who they say should not be critized. Maybe they shouldn't get themselves
involved in politics. When they do, they make themselves fair game.


Liberal infallibility: What Ann Coulter is right

By Kevin McCullough

Jun 11, 2006

Liberals in America have been staging a new strategy on winning public policy debates. Simply provide spokespeople that no one is allowed to respond to. Ann Coulter had the gall to challenge that and let loose with some direct observations in her newest best-seller "GODLESS" and true to form liberals have been fomenting in response.

The reason they do is not because it breaks some sacred respect that one should have for a grieving mother, wife, or relative. Rather the reason they are so outraged by this is because it simply stabs through the heart the strategy of hiding behind spokespeople who 'can't be criticized'.

Matt Lauer, Hillary Clinton, and Alan Colmes have been laughable in the trumped up outrage that they share for the statements Coulter makes in GODLESS in reference to the 'Jersey Girls'. The Jersey Girls are four wives who lost their husbands on 9/11, they jumped into the 2004 election debate early on, they cut commercials for John Kerry, and they are on record for saying some rather hideous remarks about Condoleezza Rice and Karl Rove, not to mention President Bush.

In recent years liberal spokespersons have grown infamous for self destruction when they are put into arenas where free debate, give and take response, and actual dialogue take place. As Ann argues rather convincingly in her new book, this sets up the structure of "liberal infallibility." In other words liberals use of victims of tragedies would never be criticized. So the plan is to find as many victims to become the mouthpieces for the left as possible.

An interesting point, when the GOP invited widows of 9/11 to participate in their national convention, the memes went up from the left of "pure political posturing." Yet any observer of those who participated would be hard pressed to know of a single critical thing they said about the President's opponents. The presentation they made dealt with the need for America to remain strong in its stand against terrorism. Kerry's name was never even invoked. And their involvement in the public debate ended that night.

The Jersey Girls on the other hand have consistently spoken out and advocated on behalf of leftist interests through the 9/11 Commission’s findings, to the operation of the global War On Terror, the elections of 2004, etc. In other words - they chose, or the liberal Democratic Party chose for them - to enter the fray, to don the gloves, and to mix it up.

But what if they're wrong? What if, even in as much pain as they have endured at the hands of terrorists, the substance of what they argue for is as loony as the day is long? Even if Cindy Sheehan lost her heroic son in the War on Terror - does that now mean that everything Cindy Sheehan says is correct?

Which is Ann's point.

Ann's criticism is legitimate - if liberals in America wish to truly have a debate on the issues that we all have strong emotions about - then stand and make the point, but don't hide behind those who are ineffective, unskilled, and often wrong in their views, simply because they're a victim.

For the last few weeks Congressman Murtha has been criss-crossing the television pundit circuit criticizing the brave marines who fell under attack via an improvised explosive device and as a result tragically some women and children ended up dead. The marines claimed that they were then fired upon and that those firing upon them did so from behind women and children being used as human shields. The jury is still out - but thus far Murtha has yet to present evidence that contradicts the marines' account.

Liberals are using the exact same tactics today. Firing upon people of faith, who believe in God, who believe God's model for marriage is what society should promote - but they do so from behind victims that they believe no one would fire back to. People like the Jersey Girls, Joe Wilson, Cindy Sheehan, and Jack Murtha. They do so knowing that they would lose on substantive, equitable, fair debates.

Coulter's critics have tried to turn her book into a verbal Haditha. Hillary Clinton was excessively unwise in doing so. Coulter decided to do the brave thing and do something that nobody else would. In doing so she is again undergoing every ounce of scorn and vehemence that the left can pour out, but she is doing so for the well being of political discourse in general.

By paying the price for us she also challenges us to not be so timid, to fight for the integrity of substance, and to not fall for the idea that a victim can never be disagreed with.

What a twisted world it would become otherwise...



Copyright © 2006 Townhall.com

Find this story at: http://www.townhall.com/opinion/colu...11/200732.html

[shelshor]

Guess you have forgotten all about the House Banking scandal?
or What's his face "book deal" with one word on some pages.
Wright from Fort Worth.

Not to mention the entire history of Chicago democrat politics

[xrayzebra]

Another example of our fine Dimm-o-craps demonstrations of "freedom of expression".
If you don't agree with someones opinion, just bann it.

Reprinted from NewsMax.com

Saturday, June 10, 2006 11:50 p.m. EDT

Ann Coulter Banned in New Jersey?

Two New Jersey Democrats are pushing to have Ann Coulter's new book "Godless: The Church of Liberalism," banned from all bookstores in their state because she criticized four 9/11 widows known as "the Jersey Girls."

In a joint press release issued Friday, New Jersey Assemblywomen Joan Quigley and Linda Stender say they want New Jersey retailers to "ban the sale of [Coulter's] book throughout the state."

"Ann Coulter's criticism of 9-11 widows, whose only desire since the attacks have been to repair their shattered lives and protect other families from the horrors they have experienced, is motivated purely by petty greed and hate," the two Democrats complained.

"Coulter's vicious characterizations and remarks are motivated by greed and her desire to sell books . . . She is a leech trying to turn a profit off perverting the suffering of others."

Quigley and Stender conclude:

"No one in New Jersey should buy this book and allow Ann Coulter to profit from her hate-mongering. We are asking New Jersey retailers statewide to stand with us and express their outrage by refusing to carry or sell copies of Coulter's book. Her hate-filled attacks on our 9-11 widows has no place on New Jersey bookshelves."

================================================== =============

Isn't this the same crowd that wants to preach about having your freedoms
compromised?

[turambar85]

Newsmax must be legit...they don't seem to know the difference in something being banned and boycotted.

[turambar85]

I believe the freedom to boycott is a good one. Banned implies the book is, through government intervention, not allowed to be sold or transferred within state borders. This call for a boycott is entirely different.

Down Xray, down.

[turambar85]

Just want to vent real quick, sorry.

I HATE ANN COULTER!!! SHE IS AN IGNORANT LITTLE WHO DOES NOT KNOW WHAT THE SHE IS TALKING ABOUT. THE ONLY PEOPLE WHO BUY HER BOOKS OR BULL ARE PEOPLE WHO ARE SO EASY TO MANIPULATE THAT THEY CANT FORM THEIR OWN OPINIONS AND BELIEVE ANYTHING WHICH IS SHOUTED AT THEM.

ok, sorry....I have seen her everywhere I go today, online...on the radio, on t.v, in the bookstore....it has driven me over the edge. If I have to listen to her gravely voice one more time today I will snap.

[xrayzebra]

Okay just to add to your unrest turambar85 here is a little article from NYT I am sure
will help make you day. LOL





--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

June 12, 2006
David Carr
Deadly Intent: Ann Coulter, Word Warrior
ONCE again, Ann Coulter has a book in need of flogging, and once again, people are stunned by what a "vicious," "mean-spirited," "de able" "hate-monger" they say she is.

Ms. Coulter, who seems afflicted by a kind of rhetorical compulsion, most recently labeled the widows of 9/11 "harpies." It is just one in a series from a spoken-word hit parade that seems to fly out of her mouth uninterrupted by conscience, rec ude or logic.

But Ann Coulter knows precisely what she is saying. Her current book, "Godless: The Church of Liberalism," is heading to the best-seller lists in part because she has a significant cons uency and in part because no other author in American publishing is better at weaponizing words. With five books and more than a million copies in hardcover sales, she plays to win and is happy to take hostages along the way, including the women she calls "The Witches of East Brunswick."

"These broads are millionaires, lionized on TV and in articles about them, reveling in their status as celebrities and stalked by grief-arazzis. I have never seen people enjoying their husband's death so much." That typical Coulter sortie was hardly a misstep on some overamped talk show. That doozy of a sentence was written, edited, lawyered and then published. By now, she, along with Crown Publishing, have come up with a dexterous formula for kicking up the kind of fuss that sells books. It looks something like this:



She did not come out of the gate with such ruthless aplomb. As published at the height of the Clinton-Lewinsky scandal in 1998, "High Crimes and Misdemeanors" reflected her background as a lawyer and was fairly scholarly, considering what came after it. But once her lethally blond franchise became part of public consciousness, or at least the lower stem of it that feeds off cable talk, she quickly learned that hyperbole is best sold by the ton.

She has since suggested wistfully that Timothy McVeigh should have parked his truck in front of The New York Times, joked that a Supreme Court justice should be poisoned, and said that America should invade Muslim countries and kill their leaders. And she recently admitted that she is "no big fan" of the First Amendment that allowed her to say all of that.

"She is so smart that none of it is by accident," said Adrian Zackheim, the publisher of Portfolio, a business imprint, and of Sentinel, a conservative political imprint. "She knows that a few things she says are bound to get attention. She just probably doesn't know which one."

But once attention, negative or otherwise, turns toward her, she is all knuckles and know-how. When Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton suggested that her attack on the widows was "vicious," Ms. Coulter went casually nuclear, saying that the senator "should talk to her husband, who was accused of rape by Juanita Broaddrick."

The second-stage rollout — picking a fight with Senator Clinton is a way, as they say in politics, to "activate the base." Only the returns will be financial, not political.



"Every single book she has done has become an instant best-seller," said Bob Wietrak, a vice president for merchandising at Barnes & Noble. "Her fan base is phenomenal and she is in the media constantly. When she is in the media, it creates more media coverage. And every single day, the book sells more."

You get the idea. Wagging tongue, wagging fingers and before you know it, soon enough you have hundreds of hits on Google News for days to come (this column among them).

And just when things threaten to slow down, Ms. Coulter will saw into Cindy Sheehan, who lost her son in Iraq, describing her as "a C-list celebrity trolling for a book deal or a reality show," or accuse a disabled Vietnam vet she was arguing with on a talk show of being part of the reason the United States lost the war there. Her attacks on the maimed or the bereft engage the thermodynamics of the media marketplace to send her to even loftier heights.

An explosive device is now baked into every book. For "Slander: Liberal Lies About the American Right (333,000 in hardcover sales, according to Nielsen Bookscan), she called Katie Couric "the affable Eva Braun of morning TV." We all tuned in for the ensuing cage match, in which Ms. Couric maintained both the higher ground and the upper hand. (That interview came to mind last week when Ms. Coulter, back on a Couric-less "Today" program, treated Matt Lauer like a cat toy.)

When she was pushing "Treason: Liberal Treachery From the Cold War to the War on Terrorism," (almost 400,000 in sales), it was all about the misunderstood genius and patriotism of Senator Joseph R. McCarthy. In "How to Talk to a Liberal (If You Must)", she let readers in on the playbook: "You must outrage the enemy. If you don't leave liberals in a sputtering impotent rage, you're not doing it right." And her sales of 301,000 for what was basically a collection of columns seem to indicate that she has mastered the form.

"Godless," which is already doing gangbuster business according to the folks at Barnes & Noble, suggests that liberalism "is the doctrine that prompts otherwise seemingly sane people to propose teaching children how to masturbate, allowing gays to marry, releasing murderers from prison, and teaching children that they share a common ancestor with the earthworm."

Does she believe any of this stuff? I doubt she even knows. When I profiled Ms. Coulter a few years ago, I never figured out the line between her art and her artifice. She picked at her plate of lobster ravioli before serving up Fred Flintstone-size slabs of red meat. For the duration of the media opportunity, she was playful and on point, other than fibbing about her age, because she cares deeply about the franchise.

Her sincerity is beside the point as long as people keep taking the bait. Mrs. Clinton, who is the perfect foil for Ms. Coulter — ambitious, allergic to irony, loathed by the people who will line up for "Godless" — simply added fuel to a fire that she was presumably trying to douse. All manner of televised talkfests, including "Today," welcome Ms. Coulter's pirate sensibilities back aboard whenever she has something to peddle, in part because seeing hate-speech pop out of a blonde who knows her way around a black tail dress makes for compelling viewing.

Without the total package, Ms. Coulter would be just one more nut living in Mom's basement. You can accuse her of cynicism all you want, but the fact that she is one of the leading political writers of our age says something about the rest of us.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Now have a nice day, you hear!

[JoeChalupa]

Another example of our fine Dimm-o-craps demonstrations of "freedom of expression".
If you don't agree with someones opinion, just bann it.

Reprinted from NewsMax.com

Saturday, June 10, 2006 11:50 p.m. EDT

Ann Coulter Banned in New Jersey?

Two New Jersey Democrats are pushing to have Ann Coulter's new book "Godless: The Church of Liberalism," banned from all bookstores in their state because she criticized four 9/11 widows known as "the Jersey Girls."

In a joint press release issued Friday, New Jersey Assemblywomen Joan Quigley and Linda Stender say they want New Jersey retailers to "ban the sale of [Coulter's] book throughout the state."

"Ann Coulter's criticism of 9-11 widows, whose only desire since the attacks have been to repair their shattered lives and protect other families from the horrors they have experienced, is motivated purely by petty greed and hate," the two Democrats complained.

"Coulter's vicious characterizations and remarks are motivated by greed and her desire to sell books . . . She is a leech trying to turn a profit off perverting the suffering of others."

Quigley and Stender conclude:

"No one in New Jersey should buy this book and allow Ann Coulter to profit from her hate-mongering. We are asking New Jersey retailers statewide to stand with us and express their outrage by refusing to carry or sell copies of Coulter's book. Her hate-filled attacks on our 9-11 widows has no place on New Jersey bookshelves."

================================================== =============

Isn't this the same crowd that wants to preach about having your freedoms
compromised?

I guess Ann toll a page out the Michael Moore way to success. Republicans went into the same type of horrah over Michael Moore's films and Al Franken's book. Both parties work in the same way but I've lost the little credibility I had for Sean insHannity when he aligned himself with Ann Coulter.

Now I know he's gone off the deep end. For all his chest pounding about how liberal are against the troops he has the little gonads to support Ann Coulter who is spitting in the face of 9/11 widows? Just doesn't make any sense to me.
I surely thought he was smarter than that.

[Darrin]

Miss Coulter is not stupid, nor is she without a sense of humor.

The theme of the President’s re-election campaign proceeded with the unsaid assumption that 'a vote for Kerry = a loss in the War on Terror, a war that started on September 11th, and you remember how you felt that day, right? Vote for Kerry = feel that way again.' In the reactive state of a very effective message, the Democrats found widows who disagreed with the President. This 'reactive politics' is another headache the Democratic Party must solve.

Do you want some proof this happened on both sides of the aisle? Before the joint session of Congress after September 11th, President Bush flashed a badge of a police officer that died responding to the initial plane crashing into tower 2. He said "I remember, this is why I fight" or something along those lines.

It was a magnanimous gesture on the part of that officer's widow, and it would've made for a great anecdote in a book reflecting on the effects of September 11, 2001 - that Bush kept this badge on his desk. However, with the entire world watching, with every network tuned in, it became a slick and effective political weapon - no matter the politics of the fallen soldier or the widow. It humanized the President more than it did anything to help the country.

That badge could've simply been a gift to the Presidency - but without a commercial, without a single word heard from this woman, they played politics with the gravestone of her husband. That's the nature of the beast, I realize. But don't start ing about it when the other side does the same tactics.

Now, about the reactive nature of the Democratic campaigns...

[JoeChalupa]

Like I said. Both sides do it all the time.

[xrayzebra]

I guess Ann toll a page out the Michael Moore way to success. Republicans went into the same type of horrah over Michael Moore's films and Al Franken's book. Both parties work in the same way but I've lost the little credibility I had for Sean insHannity when he aligned himself with Ann Coulter.

Now I know he's gone off the deep end. For all his chest pounding about how liberal are against the troops he has the little gonads to support Ann Coulter who is spitting in the face of 9/11 widows? Just doesn't make any sense to me.
I surely thought he was smarter than that.

Joe I disagree with you on this one. She is just pointing
out that if you are going to play politics you are going to
get blasted. No matter if their husbands were killed in
9/11. It didn't make them untouchable if they got into
the fray. Which they did big time.