Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
BREAKING NEWS  LeftArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican   RightArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
  • Check the boxes and send us your email address to receveive your free newsletter
  • Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
  • Townhall.com’s weekly inside scoop on what’s happening behind the scenes in the world of politics. When news breaks, we report.
  • Signup to receive the latest daily Townhall cartoons
Thursday, August 31, 2006
Ann Coulter :: Townhall.com Columnist
They Shot the Wrong Lincoln
by Ann Coulter
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
 
Poll
Will the Dems' health care Christmas Present to America be an improvement or detriment to our health care system?


In addition to supporting Democrat Joe Lieberman over Republican Alan Schlesinger in Connecticut, President Bush is supporting the Democrat over the Republican in Rhode Island, too. In the Republican primary, Bush supports Lincoln Chafee -- who votes with Bush on the important issues less often than Sen. Lieberman does -- over the only actual Republican in the race, Stephen Laffey.

Apart from Bush, the only person who hasn't figured out that Lincoln Chafee is a Democrat is Lincoln Chafee. As the expression goes, if Chafee switched parties, the average IQ on both sides of the aisle would go up.

It's hard to figure why Bush would support a half-wit like Lincoln Chafee. Maybe he believes his own poll numbers and is trying to help the conservatives by endorsing their opponents.

After Chafee's family money got him into Andover and Brown, he made his living shoeing horses for seven years. In fact, I've often wondered if an errant kick to the head by one of his charges would account for Chafee's rudimentary cognitive abilities.

That remains Chafee's only professional accomplishment -- unless you include the "fun zone" for kids on his official Senate Web site. Perhaps we could install a "play zone" like they have at McDonald's in the Senate well to keep Chafee occupied while the real senators go about their business.

When the farrier business proved too taxing for Chafee's intellect, he went into the family business -- politics. His father died in office, and Lincoln was appointed by the governor to serve out the remainder of Pop's term in the U.S. Senate. (I know Rhode Island is small, but couldn't they find someone who reads books right side up to fill the seat?) In terms of qualifications for the job, Chafee makes Michael Brown look like Donald Rumsfeld.

Chafee is everything the Democrats like to claim Republicans are, which we are not and they are: silver-spoon morons who get ahead on the basis of family connections (for example, Ned the Red Lamont in Connecticut).

The only reason Chafee calls himself a Republican is that he believes that everyone above a certain income level is required by law to do so.

He learned this from reading "Doonesbury" and watching "The West Wing" while studiously ignoring blindingly obvious facts like: Sens. Teddy Kennedy (inherited millions), John Kerry (married millions -- twice, lucky guy), Sen. Herbert H. Kohl (inherited millions), John D. Rockefeller (inherited millions), Mark Dayton (inherited millions), Dianne Feinstein (married millions) and aspiring senator Ned the Red (inherited millions). All Democrats.

In addition to the Democratic trait of having absolutely no idea how wealth is generated, Chafee's other Democratic characteristics include:

supporting gay marriage;

supporting abortion;

opposing the war in Iraq;

opposing tax cuts.

Stop complaining about taxes -- just live off your trust fund like a normal person! Taxes, I note, have virtually no bearing on someone who is not currently earning an income but living off incomes earned generations ago by better men than he.

Chafee even voted against Samuel Alito's nomination to the Supreme Court.

Republicans are always told we're supposed to vote for Fidel Dumbo if he has an "R" after his name so Republican nominees will be confirmed to the Supreme Court. That is true: Save terrorism, there is no more important issue than a president's Supreme Court nominees. But Bush had two Supreme Court nominees and Chafee voted against 50 percent of them, so Chafee doesn't even have that argument going for him.

Chafee explained his vote against Alito -- but for John Roberts -- by invoking the Democrats' idiotic talking point about maintaining "balance" on the court.

"Balance," like "meaningful consultation with the Senate before choosing the nominee," means precisely one thing: a Republican is in the White House. Democrats subscribe to the Brezhnev doctrine: "What we have, we hold." Their interpretation of elections they win by a plurality is that they have a mandate for Ruth Bader Ginsburg; their interpretation of elections they lose is that this means they get to block all Republican nominees.

Steve Laffey is the molecular opposite of Chafee: He is smart, self-made -- and a Republican. He is one of five children and was the first member of his family to go to college -- Bowdoin College, and then on to Harvard Business School. He was president of a brokerage firm, a position he acquired by hard work and native talent, not by attending his father's funeral.

Laffey is the sort of decent, talented person that makes you wonder why he would bother entering an irritating profession like politics. But he did, becoming mayor of Cranston, R.I., when the city was near bankruptcy. Within two years, Laffey had raised Cranston's bond rating from the lowest in the country to investment grade, earning him the sobriquet "the anti-Dennis Kucinich."

True, Rhode Island is an overwhelmingly Democratic state, and the chances of any Republican winning the general election are slim. But that's no reason for the Republican Party to debase itself by running someone dysfunctional and illiterate enough to appeal to Democrats.

Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author
Ann Coulter is a columnist and author of Guilty: Liberal Victims and Their Assault On America.
 
TOWNHALL DAILY: Sign up today and receive Ann Coulter and Townhall.com's daily lineup delivered each morning to your inbox.
My thoughts as well
Go to my blog and read the essay titled "Conservative Comeback". It meshes very nicely with what Ann says and gives my ideas of where things need to start. (hint: it's the primary races)

Poll numbers..
.."[Bush] believes his own poll numbers and is trying to help the conservatives by endorsing their opponents."

We were told that President Bush didn't care about poll numbers.

Spot on!
What's it take to get a Republican nominated in the Republican primary?

Every time Bush does something like this, my estimation of him slides.

Definitely check on Flag's blog (click on his name) and join the discussion on how we can get conservatives to win their primaries.

Repulican infighting, manna from...
There's something I just have to say before commenting on this week's Ann Coulter column. Prior to making her hasty exit (Sean? Sean?) from last week's Hannity & Colmes she, and I'm not kidding here, actually used the word "swimmingly" to describe how events were unfolding in Afghanistan.

It wasn't the fact that she was making a positive assesment of the situation that surprised me. It was the fact that she uttered the word "swimmingly".

I don't know, maybe you need to spend your childhood summers eating things like grandma's potato salad on a perfectly manicured upper middle class Connecticut lawn before you can use words like swimmingly with a straight face.

I wonder, what's the likelihood that Ann Coulter ever uttered the phrase, "Please papa, I would ever so much like a pony for my birthday."

And on that note, let me offer up my comments. As a liberal all I can say is that it's heart warming to see Ann Coulter's sardonic wit aimed at a Replulican candidate as we roll into the elections. I'm sure she can fid some other Republican candidates who fail the Coulter conservative test. Maybe she could write some additional columns concerning the lack of intelligence among other Republican candidates. After all, there's no shoratge of subject matter.

The only other comment I'd make is that it's always amusing to see someone like Ann Coulter play the class card. She seems to delight in telling Horatio Alger stories. A young boy, born into poverty, overcomes the odds, goes to college, becomes an investment banker and leads the conservative Republicans to victory.

Ann Coulter, a bit of advice, before you mock someone for having a silver spoon in their mouth, you might want to take yours out. Leave the Horatio Alger stories to someone more qualified, someone who has some first hand experience in being poor. The stories sound more than a little disingenous coming from you.




Ann is spot on as usual
And one thing I really enjoy about her columns. They always cause the Liberals to jump at the chance to attack the only one they hate almost as much as Bush. Yet their feeble attempts only place their ignorance and stupidity on display.

Not the first time.
Bush supported Arlen Specter in 04. Specter repaid him by allowing the dems to stall numerous judicial nominees in commitee.

I'm not convinced that playing it safe in order to maintain a majority is smart. Better to have conservatives than RINOs any day.

Coulter's Background
If you noticed, she prizes native talent that contributes to success and devalues the lack of it.

Did Coulter ever write a best seller? Was she editor of her law review? Is she a lawyer?

Thank you.

To AZ Lib
Are those the only alleged hypocrisies that that you could fid(sic)after reviewing the entire column?
I was not aware that coming from somewhat upper middle class constituted the "silver spoon" status.

Ann Coulter
What is it about Ann C. that seems to drive the Dumbos, LimpLibs and fellow travelers crazy? Could it be she has the MOXEY to display the hard realities of politics, a dangerous upper cut and no one can pull her strings. She delights in intellectually spearing anyone who has bought into the Nanny State/Marxist stupidity!!!
IMO, she is Thomas Sowell with the gloves off.
Go Ann go, put a hurt on the Bums, KO punch incomimg!

Re: They shot the wrong Lincoln
Ann, you tell it like it is. You have the moxy, wit, and intelligence to take the libs on and they hate you for it. You go girl!

whoo-hooo!
Another example of "belles lettres" from the doyen of right wing anti-intellectualism. Fresh from her triumphant disinterment of moribund arguments against evolution, Anne Coulter displays yet again the unique blend of vulgarity and ignorance that has made her a favorite among the malodorous denizens of the far right.

THIS IS WHACKED
Top Republicans backing democrats?

I KNOW I AM IN A PARALLEL DIMENSION -

LET ME OUT!

Please dear God, let me go back to where the earth is round and the sun comes up from the EAST and sets in the west.

Ajhil opines....

... "Anne Coulter displays yet again the unique blend of vulgarity and ignorance....."

Maybe Ajhil needs to re-read Jerubaal's post...

Oh... and there is no "E" in "Ann", brainiac.

Coulter
Typical Coulter. somewhat vitriolic.
What is missing is an explanation on why the
support for Chaffee. Is there some quid pro quo
between Chaffee and the Republicans?

RIGHT
Yep, Ann the beautiful chick from the right is RIGHT AGAIN!
JGS

Wrongway does it again

Well, well! The great "dubya," Georgie "Wrongway" Bush has betrayed the base again. If you read the William Grigg article, "A Tale of Two Incumbents," in the current issue of The New American, you'll find he did the same thing in a Republican congressional primary in Michigan, where he backed the "moderate" pro-abort incumbent against a conservative "pro-life" challenger. Aw, but Bush is on our side. Cross his One-World, Globalist heart and hope to die he is.

And they call France an unreliable ally!

Rhode Island
So far, has produced......

Howard Phillips (H.P.) Lovecraft, possibly the greatest writer of tales of horror and the supernatural after Edgar Allan Poe;

David Hedison, Captain Lee Crane of the "Voyage To The Bottom Of The Sea" TV series, a fine actor and a very gracious man;

And Lincoln Chafee.

Oh well, two out of three ain't bad.

Thank you Annie!

If for nothing else, the way you make the left SIZZLE... and so SWIMMINGLY, at that. Will that be one lump or two, AZ?

For you Ann-Fans. If you want to get a sense of just how much the left hates Ann (as if you didn't already know - LOL) check out the "Huffy-Post" (huffingtonpost.com) and key Ann Coulter into the site search.

Is Bush a Conservative?
I love Bush's terrorism policy of pre-emption. And I'm grateful he gave us a meagre tax cut a half a decade ago. And it appears his judicial nominees won't make up new laws.

But this is a man who wants to give amnesty to illegal aliens and refuses to secure our borders in a time of war.

Our Federal budget is ballooning out of control. We have a massive new entitlement program called prescription drugs.

Rather than support a moderately conservative idea like vouchers, he creates more federal regulation with No Child Left Behind.

This is a man who campaigned as a "compassionate conservative" which is just a means of disguising a bunch of liberal policies for the Republican platform.

So is it really so surprising that he would support the wrong Lincoln?

Right again
Coulter STILL hasn't written a single thing I disagree with. The fact that she ticks off the left so bad is just cream. I feel bad for my fellow (normal) NE'ers...they will never get a candidate who ISN'T a jerk.

True colors
Ann's article isn't revealing. Bush tried (unsuccessfully) to paint himself as a non-partisan uniter when he first went to Washington. And, of course, most pols believe in election year centrism, however misguided.

In fact, the most valuable prose on this page are the words of the liberal commenters. There's no ammunition better than your own words, when used against you. These people object to Ann's rants against Democrats and apparently, don't want her tirading against Republicans either. What more proof do you need that they are dyed in the wool members of "the Party of Opposition"?

YOU CAN DO THAT
When you don't have to worry about being re-elected ever again. Cross party blending may be the only saving grace that will be able to save this country from two political parties that have just about run this country right into a ditch. AZ Lib in true liberal fashion is flapping his/her jaw and offering nothing that would be considered beneficial to anybody or anything. Which is exactly why liberals will never be in charge of anything more than restocking gum ball machines. With that said, conservative side have just about bankrupted this country selling out to Corporate America. And it's a fact that neither the right or the left have done squat to protect our borders or enforce the immigration laws that are already on the books. These immigration laws that are already in place if they were to be strictly enforced are more than sufficient to keep the illegal immigration problem that is strangling this country at bay. For the survival of this country, voters need to remain flexible and not allow their views to become distorted by the philosophy of a single party, it just doesn't work. Visit http://www.headsneedtoroll.org and post your views and opinions.
Heads Need To Roll

Y'all are, me thinks, of like mind.
Last week I sent this email to a conservative who lost the primary for U.S. House. Y'all are, me thinks, of like mind.

Now that the primary campaign dust has settled a bit:

Americans and America – and the peoples of the world for that matter – cannot afford, and should not abide, America’s sociopolitical trend line. The federal government is growing in size and in pervasiveness and in invasiveness. Personal and economic liberty are in decline. Already at least eighty percent of what the federal government does and spends our money on is unconstitutional.

Democrat lawmakers love and applaud these trends. No surprise. Lots of Republican lawmakers – and, I believe the president -- are progressives, i.e., though having some different goals than the Democrats, believe that government is the vehicle for change. These Republicans are growing government, growing its pervasiveness, growing its invasiveness, infringing on personal and economic liberty.

I don’t look to my representative, Congressman Jimmy Duncan, for help with this. I don’t look to my senators, Lamar Alexander and Bill Frist, or Bob Corker or Harold Ford, Jr. who will replace Frist for help with this. They don’t see the American landscape I see.

I do think that Peggy Noonan sees what I do. I do think that two-thirds-ish of the Republican Study Committee (The Caucus of House Conservatives) sees what I do. I do think that Senator Dr. Tom Coburn sees what I do. And there are a few other senators, I’m sure.

I want Republican congressman and senators who will aggressively denounce and violate the Reagan 11th commandment. Helping Arlen Specter get re-elected was an unconscionable mistake. Ditto McCain, Snow, Collins, Chafee, et al.

I want a “caucus” of Coburns (in the senate), Pences (in the house), Bryants (not in the senate), McGills (not in the house), activist citizens in Americans for the FairTax, activists in the American Conservative Union (ACU). Bring on dedicated dittoheads and devout members of the Church of the Painful Truth (Neal Boortz). I want the “caucus” to target, e.g., any Republican incumbent who will not publicly co-sponsor The FairTax along with border security and deportation of illegals. I want the “caucus” to actively seek and support constitutional originalist conservatives to run against these incumbents.

The mission of the “caucus” has to be obtaining and then maintaining a comfortable majority in the House and a super-majority in the Senate of constitutional originalist conservatives. I want the conservatism of Bill Buckley and, for the most part, of Ronald Reagan.

Democrats will destroy America . . . intentionally. Progressive Republicans along with compassionate conservatives will destroy America . . . unintentionally, more slowly, but just as certainly. Democrats will destroy American culture, our market economy, and our will and ability to defend our sovereignty. Progressive Republicans will grow government, erode personal and economic liberty, and disincentivise our market economy. In the hands of democrats, republicans or libertarians, the train will leave the tracks and crash. Only constitutional originalist conservatives can right the ship of state, and we must. We need to have a national agenda, an originalist agenda, a principled agenda, an unyielding agenda.

Ralph, can we get some of your supporters together? Can we get hold of Ed Bryant and get some of his core conservative supporters to join in? Can he get Tom Coburn and a handful of others to join us? Can we . . . ?




Rhode Island
What is it about Little Rhodie? The Republicans have Lincoln and the Democrats have Patches Kennedy. There is anecdotal evidence that Patches is the dumbest of the Kennedeys. It's never been proven but just to be nominated is incredible. And to top it off, he is apparently a degenerate addict. That is empirically proven. Is it in the water?

Honesty
It must seen very odd to AZ that Ann would prize reality and honesty above party. Conservatives value values more than power. Top democrat positions today are held by despicable, intolerant, whiners incapable of leading a successful barbeque. Before cutting the legs off of Joe liberman, who agreed with almost everything Pelosi and crew do, there were no significant examples of dems speaking out against treir own.

Conservatives are not necessarily alligned to a party. They are alligned with a philosophy. democrats are aligned with a party because they require power to hand out goodies for recruiting purposes.


To ajhil
Your post reads as thought you went through your "word-of-the-day" calender in one sitting. Take it easy buddy, there are 365 days in the year. Spread those 50 cent words out a little.

Let's back Laffey

Have I got this right? The GOP Senate primary race in Rhode Island is between Chafee and Laffey? Well, as long as Laffey's not Chafee, let's back him! I never heard of the guy until I read the above column, but if Coulter says he's an "actual Republican," he's got to be immeasurably better than Chafee (as would a vacant seat, but that's not on the ballot).

I'm going to find Laffey's web site and see if I can't scrape a few dollars together and send a contribution. Maybe some of you reading this can do the same--especially those of you living in RI.(There must be at least a few other "actual Republicans" in old Rhody).
Any of you have friends or relatives in Rhode Island? Call them and get them motivated and activated.

A hopeless cause? Maybe. But I'll bet some of the Nutmeg leftists in Connecticut thought Lamont was a hopeless cause, too. Let not the Children of Light be outdone by the Children of Darkness. Let us, as the Apostle Paul wrote, "Be not weary in well doing, for in due season, we shall reap if we faint not."

Let us come to aid of Laffey and maybe we can kick out Chafee!

Ann Coulter for President
Wonder if she would run?
Must find some bumper stickers.
Love ya, Ann

Party time
Since the Republican party has too few actual conservatives, I truly believe they are no different than the Democrat party of 40 years ago. It seems the conservatives have left the building and need a new home.

That is why I think the Libertarian party shows a lot of promise. The only place I don't dislike the word moderate is when I call myself a moderate libertarian. Which is the equivalent of a Reagan Republican.

To people of my ilk, Bush was the logical choice to vote for. Libertarians can't get elected and voting for a Democrat is out of the question.

It will be interesting to see a legitimate third party ascend to power. It's not a one-issue party and it would make a good home for the Fair-Tax movement as well.

Obviously, there will be an election where a Democratic candidate will win the presidency due to a split with conservative voters between Republican and Libertarian candidates. That may be forgivable since the Supreme Court is full and we will only be sacrificing a RINO candidate anyway.


It must be him!!
That must be the real Jimmy Carter. Misquote the material and spin it in the opposite direction. She said (tongue in cheek) "MAYBE he believes...." Another Liberal misquoting written material. Careful Ann! Some folks are not so bright and don't have a sense of humor. Go back to Cuba Jimmy and spend some quiet time with your buddy in recovery.

To Ajhil
If you want to admit that you evolved from a chimp, be my guest. Ann(no e) & I will claim to be created by God.

Our sovereignty ?

I agree with much of what drpete has said, but I wonder about his claim that the Democrats would destroy "our will and ability to defend our sovereingty. It seems to me our sovereignty is being undermined by things like that toll road from Texas to Canada that some company in Mexico is going to run and other international agreements backed by those NAFTA and GATT-loving, One World Republicans in Washington. (And that includes the "spotted" Newt.)

Are we "defending our sovereignty" in Iraq? Was Iraq attacking our sovereignty? Conservatives complain that Bush won't defend our borders. Well, he doesn't respect anyone else's borders (our sovereignty), either. On that poin at least, he's consistent.


Fuzzy
No, actually, there was at least one another example of a Democrat exposing the truth of The Party: Sen Zell Miller, from Georgia. He decided not to run for re-election because he was so disgusted (my word, attempting to sum up how he felt, based on what he wrote and said). He was such a loyal Dem that he couldn't imagine switching parties; at the same time, what the Party had become turned his stomach. He wrote a book about it ("A National Party No More").

His basic point was - as nearly as I can tell - that the Democratic Party has become a vast left-wing conspiracy with only one thing in common to all of them: they hate George W. Bush so much that it's driving them insane to have him in the White House for six years, and maybe eight. It doesn't help any when his poll numbers get above 40$, or when his numbers even show much of an upward trend.

The Main-Stream Media, of course, have no love for GWB, either, so they sweep any news items about Sen Miller under the rug - as much as they can - because he embarrasses them by telling the truth.

Chafee
Good for Ann! I finally told the RNC not to expect $$$ from me till they stopped sending it to RINO Chafee.....

MIchael
Three cheers for Zell. He was only "unintentionally" wrong most of the time. Still, he has values & some moral character. Traits that would get any Democrat shunned by his party.

I thought about him as I wrote my previous post. Although I consider his situation a little different, I agree you 99%.

At least there is another thing the Dems are tolerant of - hiding illegally gained cash in the freezer. I'm sure that is the only constitutional place it can be kept. We should have Kennedy & Ginsburg take a look to make it official. Don't we already know their answer, though.

They Shot the Wrong Lincoln
OUCH!!!!!

UNITED WE STAND
This is just the latest in the contra-contradictions that has been the hallmark of the Bush Administration since 9/11. While starting out strong and fast, this second year of the second Bush term has left me confused and exasperated.
Like all the sane contributors to Townhall, I am all for the War on Terror. The tactics though, I am at a loss.
Hamstrung by his efforts to please everyone from coast to coast, this president has lost a lot of his most diehard supporters in the wake of errant judgements, shortsightedness and appeasement to the opinions as expressed by some of the readers listed here before me.
I will not bore you fellow readers with thoughts I have expressed before, be it about the border, the tactics of the Department of Homeland Security,et al.
We have to find a way to take back this nation for the sake of our literal survival as well as the survival of logic. To that end we are united.
As far as some of the spin on display here today, they are also united.
To lunacy, and the out there left wing fringe that has taken over the Democratic Party.

Yo AZ lib
As usual you libs miss the point. Being born with a silver spoon in your mouth isn't the issue. It's what you do with your elevated financial station and how you view others from it. Rich libs (and some RINOS)want to tax and spend the hell out of the rest of us, while conservatives want to give us the opportunity through less government restriction to achieve for ourselves. Unlike rich libs, Ann makes no bones about who she is and what she believes. We don't need the arrogance of these trust funders to oversee our lives. Just get out of our way. Chafee and the dems cannot campaign on their beliefs (if they have any aside from just getting into office.)

Fuzzy
The Demo/Libs don't have a philosophy because that requires kowledge and an understanding of the world around them. But they do have a PLAN. It is, to Get Bush and his administration at any cost!

And of course the Islamic terrorists have convinced the Demo/Libs that they are no threat, so it's better to concentrate on attacking your own government for saying bad things about us.

In case you were wondering....
In case everyone was wondering, the one and only reason the lefty kooks who insist on posting on her stories hate Ann so much is SHE'S SMARTER THAN THEY ARE! And they all know it, too. Jealousy, plain and simple.

goblue
Talking about the Kennedy Klan and asking if there is "something in the water".

Good one.

As to Miss Coulter, this article, I believe, demonstrates her commitment to principles above party. If this virtue were more common these discussions would be shorter.

And why is it that all the heroes of the far left either come from Old Money or money generated by pretending, (Holly Weird), but if your father worked hard enough to have a two car garage when you were a child that is a Silver Spoon.

another option
I would fight modern liberalism with my last breath, because it is an evil and degenerate philosophy. Having said that, I also realize that the Republican leadership in this nation is weak and stupid---we need another option.


Not supporting the President
Ann, are you with the terrorists? Even Bush knows that the Republicans are not doing a good job in Congress. Support the Democrats so we can win the war on Terror.

The coming revolution
I have never been able to figure why the liberals hate Bush so much. He is really one of them. He is from Conn. (not Texas), has the rich background provided by family money that their leaders enjoy, is form of family with a legacy of liberal leaning, and has consistently demonstrated liberal leanings in his political life. He give lip service to religion and the values of the religious right to the extent he vetoed stem cell research (this means little in the world of research and I am in medicine so I know the true facts-in fact lack of government involvement might really mean something could come from the research). His tax cut was meaningless to most people. The war in Iraq is taken directly from the pages of the Democratic play book. His war on terror consist of manhandling old women and not profiling Muslims.

The Republicans in general are little better.

History shows that those countries that have degenerated into this situation wind up in Civil War. Our situation is little different than that before Lincoln's war.

Ajhil, it seems...
has bought a thesaurus and now knows some really big words. Strangely enough, after accusing Ann of anti-intellectualism, he/she fails to come up with a single cogent point refuting any of Ann's arguments, instead relying on the good 'ol lib standby--name calling. But I will grant that it's name calling dressed up in its Sunday best--a welcome departure from the tired littany of racist/homophobe/nazi/moron.

To Eon - While Poe may cary more literary weight, I much prefer Lovecraft - Cthulu rocks!

To Freedom Writer - I would urge you to study economics more carefully. Free trade is a natural and necessary offshoot of free market capitalism. Global trade is the engine that has driven the unprecedented economic boom of the last half century. By contrast, trade restrictions, along with bad monetary policy, were responsible for the Great Depression. The idea that free trade proponents are involved in some "one world government" conspiracy is absurd; let's leave the tinfoil helmets to the libs, please.

Re; They shot the wrong Lincoln
"[S]ilver-spoon morons who get ahead on the basis of family connections"... but enough about Bush. Oh, you mean Chafee was born rich, too?

RazorsEdge
I thought the same thing re: Ajhil's post. Your comment made me almost snort coffee out of my nose...too funny!

Goshawk, GoBlue, Flagwaver, JC,
and Cynewolf, Primus54,NRAlifer, Michael,Pilgrim, Beowulfe. Goshawk, Robyn, Rugged, drpete, Ann Coulter, and maybe wingo.

Dittos -
I love you guys.
There is always hope knowing you are out there.


Empty seats or empty suits
I agree with Ann on her assessment of most situations but

Freedom Writer

suggested that a vacant seat would be better than one filled by the likes of Chaffee and said "but that's not on the ballot".

I have often wondered why the "count" is limited to the votes FOR a particular person. Even if politics would not let it play a part in the actual election, I would like to see something like "None of them" or "None of the above" as a choice for all positions on all ballots.

After all, an election IS a public opinion poll, but leaving out a "None" choice seems a bit duplicitous say in a "two horse race" where the "winner" got 1000 votes, the "loser" got 750 votes while 2000 voters didn't vote for either of them.

conservatives
Will the real conservatives please stand up???Our
wonderful country is being devoured by neocon republicans and commie democrats...We need real conservatives to march on Washington...folks who love America and want to save it not strip it to the bone just for the sake of power! The present congress dosen't give a damn about the people who help make this country great....they want to bring us all down. Power is more important to them than morals! I,d vote for Ann Coulter or Newt Gingrich any day but either they won't run or they will be so tainted when the howling mob aka democrats get done digging up dirt on them and all their ancestors! The libs are never going to get it...wish we could deport them along with the illegals!

Come on Ann get to the real issue
The problem is at the top of the Repulican party. Get to it Ann, the president is not a conservative except on Saturday afternoon. We need a real conservative agenda and we do not have one. Bush only plays politics with the right. He is soft on immigration, spends like crazy, and talks tough about Iran but Condi negotiates an agreement in Lebanon that would Palosi proud. Hit where you need to hit to truly make a difference Ann.

The other "Vote Republican" argument...
"Republicans are always told we're supposed to vote for Fidel Dumbo if he has an "R" after his name so Republican nominees will be confirmed to the Supreme Court."

True enough. But there is another reason routinely hawked for voting "R" -- Nancy Pelosi. Or at least she's the excuse given by every every fund raising caller for any group remotely affiliated with the Republican party. I don't think Sean "Cutie-pie" Hannity can go 15 minutes in his radio show without mentioning how his fear of Speaker Nan-si drives his every move.

Now it's started to drive my moves as well. An RNC fund raiser called my home yesterday. He got about 15 seconds into his spiel when the spectre of Speaker Nancy Peolsi raised it's ugly head. I cut him off and said that, with those words, he just lost me...I refuse to vote for or provide any funds to any candidate or organization who thinks I should support them because the left wing whack job scares me into it.

That is my current policy, and I'm sticking to it. Fund raisers, consider yourselves on notice. If you try to scare me into supporting your cause by telling me how bad it would be to give the Democrat party a chance to self destruct by electing Nancy Pelosi as the next Speaker of the House, I will share with you my best impersonation of Howard Dean's campaign screech then hang up.

But this is just really a new trigger, not a particularly new policy. I quit supporting the National and state Republican parties when the RNC brought President Bush to Ohio during the primary campaign to support the Senior RINO Senator, Mike DeWine, against two conservative opponents. Individual candidates will get my support, but the RNC and its minions will need a radical makeover before any funding flows from my paltry balances.

Do I want Republican's to lose? Only to conservatives...

The crying shame of it all is how few conservatives there are running in any races. Maybe the MoveOn and DailyKos whackos feel the same way about socialists.

I can only hope.

I Love Ann Because
The Left hates her so much.

And they hate her because she lays bare their inanities with GREAT acerbic with. In this particular case, even though she rants at some length about Chaffee, the real target is BUSH. And it should be.

There is talk of Democrats actually taking control of the house this Novemember. If they do, I will enjoy the spectacle of our liberal Republican president hogtied by liberal Democrat impeachment proceedings.

Maybe they'll all be so preoccupied they'll neglect growing the government.

Liberals and RINOs are in power today largely because our fellow citizens have, for the most part, been permanently brain damaged by our public "educational" system. If you think I'm wrong, ask yourself why "name recognition" is such a potent factor in elections.


Ann
I steal all of your lines!
The problem:
they are so original that everyone knows they come from you!
Good work!!!!

The important issues
Our thanks go to Ann, once again, for extracting breathable air from the political moronosphere.

When Republicans stray from virtue, they should be disciplined.

Secretly, I think the liberals like a good spanking, even if it is vicarious.

Bush = Biggest Republican Disappointment
We have been sold a bill of goods with this President. If you don't think so, how about the egg he dropped with Harriet Miers? That's where I got off the Bush bandwagon. Elsewhere on this site, I'm reading about some interstate NAFTA highway from Mexico to Canada that Bush supports. Now this. Can anyone tell me in all seriousness that Bush is a conservative president?? We are in deep trouble, folks. And if McCain starts a run in '08 it will only get worse!

Don't insult Farriers
I care little for Chafee but respect the those that practice his first proffession. Shoeing horses takes knowlege of horse anatomy, an eye for balance and shoe fitting, and is hard honest work. Those that are exceptional limit their work to show and race horses and make a great income doing so. I would never try to shoe my own horses and I've saved a good bit on vet bills by calling my farrier first.

To ajhil
To quote ex pfc Wintergreen, " Too Prolix, too prolix."

Bush is a Moderate.
I have often wondered why the Left has hated Bush so much. He is not a Right-Winger by any real tally. He is to the right on tax cuts, abortion, stem cells and values, but not much else. America's security should be a centrist issue, but the Left just cannot overcome their feminism and irrational hatred.

The no child, the drug plan, 9/11 bailout, Katrina bailout are all bureaucratic boondoggles worthy of praise from the most Leftist Communist/Democrat.

As proven by the comments of every lefty that posts here, they are never motivated by issues, but purely by their feelings of inadequacy for not being in power and their hatred for the opposition.

I truly wish the Democrats hated Islamic Fascists as much as they hate America and the Americans who are Republicans. I might actually feel safe enough to be OK with their eventual return to power in the House. I will never trust another Democrat President.

The wrong Lincoln
"whoo-hooo!
Another example of "belles lettres" from the doyen of right wing anti-intellectualism."

Most unfortunate that unbiased critical thinking and independant analysis weren't taught along with such wonderful communication skills.

Such a waste of obvious potential!

I thought her column was cogent & swimmingly conveyed her astute observations.

Ouch...
r2_d2
I feel like a loser now-
I've dropped Ann as a fan and will pick up all star wars DVDs and chill!

ro d1
r0_d1 writes: Thursday, August, 31, 2006 1:21 PM
Why Ann Sucks
Because she is a loud bigot hatemonger who draws the lowest of the low.
"They Shot the Wrong Lincoln".......
[M]Ann strikes again... LOSER.


You just described EVERY Liberal I know. Including yourself. The Democrats ARE the party of Hate and Bigotry.

So much delusion and so little brains.

r2 d0
Wouldn't that be Republican House, Senate and Presidency for two terms and Democrats for no terms, recently ate least.

You losers just can't get over being losers.

Free Trade
To John Galt: I would urge you to consider the possibility that not everything touted as a "free trade agreement" promotes genuinely free trade. Do you really think the World Trade Organization with its many thousands of of pages of regulations is promoting free trade? It certainly doesn't protect, or even respect, any nation's sovereignty, which is the point I was making in reply to drpeter. Like him or not, I think Buchanan's warning years ago, when Congress was considering the last GATT agreement, was on target: "If you like big goverment in Washngton, D.C., you're going to love it in Geneva."
And the Republicans are promoting it more than the Democrats.

Court "Balance"
Re: Ann's statement about the invoking the "Democrats' idiotic talking point about maintaining 'balance' on the court:" what the Dees mean by court "balance" is someone who will uphold Roe v. Wade.

To Pilgrim
RE: Your statement "I also realize that the Republican leadership in this nation is weak and stupid---we need another option." There is another option -- the Constitution Party. Check it out, people!!


to r0_d1
While I may not be the sharpest knife in the drawer, you my friend make this butter knife feel like a samurai sword. Can you at least attempt to make an argument that has a point? Oh yeah, Libs can only call people names and stomp their feet like two year olds (is that redundant?) go back to Kos, where they’ll consider that post right up there with “War & Peace”

ad hominems and stem cells
I always have a hard time cutting through Ann Coulter's numerous ad hominem attacks. But a question: Exactly how much money did Laffey's dad earn, or did Laffey pay his own way through Harvard? What were his own earning? Scholarships, Pell grants, loans along the way? Harvard isn't exactly $50 a credit hour. You either have be damned good, damned rich, or damned lucky to there. Which was he? I find it implausible to accept that Mr. Laffey was some $8-per-hour convenience store clerk who got lucky.


"Chafee explained his vote against Alito -- but for John Roberts -- by invoking the Democrats' idiotic talking point about maintaining "balance" on the court."

We should otherwise descend into one-wing-one-party interpretation (of either side)? That's not democracy. It's tyranny.

"Their interpretation of elections they win by a plurality is that they have a mandate"

Anymore any politician who wins claims a mandate. That doesn't make it so. _I_ call it a mandate only when it's more than 80% - a clear supermajority. After all, mandate does come from "mandare" - to order or to command.

As for SteveHerbert: "As proven by the comments of every lefty that posts here, they are never motivated by issues, but purely by their feelings of inadequacy for not being in power and their hatred for the opposition."

Let's talk issues, not ad hominem attacks. Ad hominems are easy. Any idiot can spew those.

Yes, we need more security, and border security, especially port security is still a joke.

Since when did embryonic stem cell become a solely right wing issue? I thought it was a religious ethical issue. Did the entire Right adopt it? And there are other stem cells such as somatic and umbilical cord. Don't just blanket the thing with an oversimplified term. As a centrist-lefty, do I like embryonic stem cell research? No, but it's temporary until we can unlock the secrets of turning time back in somatic cells, and most of the embryos that are used were NEVER going to become children anyway. Should they kept in freezer until the end of time? Most are destroyed after a time anyway, so the whole "they could grow up to be children" is a straw man at best.

Fact: of the 27 or so cell lines that are allowed to be used, over half of them are contaminated and useless for research. This new technique that came out last week may resolve the ethical dilemma to all but the very, extremely hard-core.

SteveHerbert responding to rd_01
r0_d1 writes: Thursday, August, 31, 2006 1:21 PM
Why Ann Sucks
Because she is a loud bigot hatemonger who draws the lowest of the low.
"They Shot the Wrong Lincoln".......
[M]Ann strikes again... LOSER.


You just described EVERY Liberal I know. Including yourself. The Democrats ARE the party of Hate and Bigotry.
---------------------------------------

I'm with Steve this time, rd.

So Ann Coulter advocates assassination? I've seen similar remarks from other people decried as such. She's stating her opinion, not calling for him to be shot. If she'd said "he SHOULD be shot", that would be different.

But...

Based on the number of ad hominem attacks I see here against the candidate Bush supported (for whatever hairball reason) is that the only basis for them is that he is a Democrat. This strikes me as prejudicial and bigoted. What evidence does she offer to prove his inadequacy, beyond his not-Right credentials and his being Democrat (which results in circular reasoning)?

I see either an attempt at satire or bigotry.

She's questioning Bush's judgment. Ann Coulter must be with the terrorists! (satire for those who don't know it when they see it)

Chafee
Ann knows a liberal/left wing Republican when she hears/sees one!

To Bobby Lee
"Re: Ann's statement about the invoking the "Democrats' idiotic talking point about maintaining 'balance' on the court:" what the Dees mean by court "balance" is someone who will uphold Roe v. Wade."

Sadly, I think you're right. It's one of those hidden code words, like "poor" meaning "black".

I do believe in true balance on the Court, but not just for Roe v Wade. We need some balance to get Kelo v New London overturned. Our real estate is in danger.

What if the Court decided blacks really were inferior to white, and reversed the reversal of Dred Scott, reversed Brown v. Board, et al, and struck down the 13th Amendment? Would we stand behind them, or would we be protesting in the streets?

One I'd like to see overturned is Santa Clara County v Southern Pacific. 1892 if memory serves. Look it up.

Existentialy yours,
I know Rhode Island is small, but ‘couldn't they find someone who reads books right side up to fill the seat?’

I know America is big so, ‘couldn’t we have found someone who doesn't employ dyslectic ek-a-lec-tic rhetoric?’

Now where did I put my cliff notes for 'Three Shakepeares'?

R Zero
I heard Randi Rhodes' comment about Ann worrying about the size of her p*nis. Then you put an 'M' in parentheses in front of her name. Others resent her because she makes cogent, biting arguments against the left's favorite stalking horses - like evolution as theocratic dogma. Some leftist brainiac even threw a pie at her.

I would LOVE to be there the next time some moron throws a pie at her. They would be in the hospital and I would be (proudly) in jail.

The point is that the left cannot debate coherently, and MUST resort to cheap tricks like ad hominem attacks, interupting, shouting, changing the subject frequently, ignoring contradictory data. And did I mention ad hominem attack?

In the last analysis
Despite some of the mistakes that the Republican has made with their base, and close to selling out, as is demonstrated by the 17 Senators sellout in supporting the amnesty bill,when I vote in November,it will be for a Republican. The reason is that America cannot trust the Democrats with the security of this Nation. Their cut and run policy, as displayed in Korea, Vietnam, Jimmah Carters Iran,and now Iraq, clearly indicates their lack of trustworthiness, and their inability to understand that these Islam terrorist want to kill us and will do anything to accomplish their objective. We must stop them and the only way that can be done is by force. While there is a lot of justifiable critism going by Repubs and their base, they realize as General Patton said "We can still lose this War". That is especially true if Americans lose it and vote Democrats into the majority.

In the last analysis
Despite some of the mistakes that the Republican has made with their base, and close to selling out, as is demonstrated by the 17 Senators sellout in supporting the amnesty bill,when I vote in November,it will be for a Republican. The reason is that America cannot trust the Democrats with the security of this Nation. Their cut and run policy, as displayed in Korea, Vietnam, Jimmah Carters Iran,and now Iraq, clearly indicates their lack of trustworthiness, and their inability to understand that these Islam terrorist want to kill us and will do anything to accomplish their objective. We must stop them and the only way that can be done is by force. While there is a lot of justifiable critism going by Repubs and their base, they realize as General Patton said "We can still lose this War". That is especially true if Americans lose it and vote Democrats into the majority.

in addition blue...
how *randi* rhodes jokes about any other woman-let alone Coulter-
being a man
is rich!

I find it amusing...
that half of the libs commenting are confused about Chafee's party affiliation. He is technically an (R), not a (D). And THAT is the problem...

As for the guy upset about scare tactics - while I agree at the base, I reeeeeeeeeeeeeeeally can't stand Nancy P. She was bad enough just on the political side, but when a hand-picked intern-hiree from her office stalked and stole my husband (who in honesty was willing to be stolen), I decided that NP actually lived up to her billing - evil, horror, hide the family, etc... [but I am mostly over it now;-)]

and I want to echo the kudos from Fuzzy, even when i do not totally agree with ya'll, I come back just looking for more conversation!!!

Ann Coulter A BORING RepubCon Troll
Her act has gotten as old and lame as her rhetoric. Anyone with any common sense can see
that she is a consummate political hustler seeking to line her pockets$$$ by getting repub/cons suckers to buy her books by throwing flamebombs against the supposed "enemy" Democrats
& Liberals. It has made her a multi-millionare and proves a "sucker is born every minute. lol

The best thing any Democrat or Liberal can do is to ignore her.

To Cutter Bench - 2 Lumps Please
I loved how you incorporated swimmingly into your answer. Well done.

As unlikely as it may sound to you, I don't hate Ann Coulter. I may disagree with her on 90% of the issues, but I consider myself a fan. I own all her books and I love her writing style, wickidly funny.

I hope you don't think my posts regarding her columns are motivated by the same sense of personalized anger and outrage you see on sites like Kos. They're not.

Regardless, I still, and always will, consider her to be an east coast elitist. But then I'm a economically challanged liberal. In my cash strapped world, anybody making more than 80k a year seems like an elitist;)







Ann does not represent this conservative
More and more genuine conservatives are beginning to protest against the Anns/Michelles/Lauras, et al of Right Wingdom. Here is a link to one such group of disgusted conservatives -- be sure to read the comments:

http://www.blogger.com/publish-comment.do?blogID=9762062&postID=115702814682413523&r=ok

If the link doesn't show up, go to: CalledAsSeen*dot*blogspot*dot*com -- post is titled "STFU Ann"

r0_d1
Boy, you really are bitter. I think you may actually qualify as the perfect liberal, have you ever thought about running for office. I can see the adds now, "REPUBLICANS HATE BLACK PEOPLE, REPUBLICANS HATE POOR PEOPLE, REPUBLICANS WANT TO SHOOT YOU WITH THEIR GUNS, REPUBLICANS ARE STUPID, REPUBLICANS ARE STUPID....ANYBODY THAT VOTES FOR THEM IS OBIOUSLY AN IDIOT AND SHOULD BE LOCKED UP!!! OH, AND VOTE FOR ME, I'M TOLERANT."

Ann Coulter's "Lincoln" Column et al
Ann Coulter is simply the most entertaining political commentator of the present age.

I have trouble hitting a nail square on its head but I know where to go for tutoring.


r0_d1
"...you bloated mooks", boy that certainly fosters devoir. Your posts on this column don't appear to have any point, other than to call people names. Why don't you come back when you actually have an argument. Until then, maybe you can spend your time attending those anger management classes it appears you need. Just keep reminding yourself-- Bush can't run again, Bush can't run again.

Re: Hate-Mongers Unite2
r0_d1, look up the words: polemics, sarcasm, satire, hyperbole, and humor. Get back with us after you've done that.

Not much to
discuss here. Coulter advocates replacing RINOs with conservatives. Every conservative here is going to agree; every lefty is going to whine about it, being as there isn't a hair's breadth of distance between a RINO and a lefty. It's like she attacked them, so they respond. Really, the only thing to discuss is how do we effect the replacing of RINOs with conservatives. Come on over to Flagwaver's blog and see what's already been discussed:

http://flagwaver.townhall.com/

r0_d1, sounds like
projection to me. Without the humor.

r0_d1
Sooo.. why do you hate your mother??

Confused Left
Reading the responses from some of the far left, r0d1, tana, left angel, etc., I am more convinced than ever that they do not even bother to read the columns. They simply find their most hated and start accusing them of being racist, or bigots, or homophobes, or whatever the favorite of the day is.

Did none of you people even notice that Miss Coulter was beating up on the Republican party, that she was taking to task the president? I would have thought for once one of you more enlightened types would have brought that up.

Ann Coulter cares about the future of her party, the Republican party, (which many of us feel is now tied directly to the future of this country), in a way that the far left cannot grasp. Ask Joe Lieberman. The left is perfectly happy to watch the Democratic party be drug deeper down into the political and moral cesspool by embracing every fringe group and idea that rolls down the aisle. Her point on this was the president made a bad decission, (really thought you all would have lapped that up), he backed an incumbent who is weak on every issue the president needs strength in and neglected the man who could have helped him. She feels this hurts the Republican party and by extension the country. I have to agree with Ann on this one, maybe I won't get as worked up as she did, but bad call (again) by GW he backed the man simply because he was an incumbent.

And by the way, who was that up there, Jay in Milwauke saying the court needs "balance". What? The court is not, or should not be, where we go for a political solution to the question. Yeah, I know, I have seen pitures of the statue, she is holding the scales of justice in her hand, but she is blindfolded, she cannot see which direction the scales tilt, hence Justice Is Blind. What you want, or at least I want, are justices who read a law and read the Constitution and see if they fit together, if not the law gets trashed, my goodness we could trim the federal government ten fold. Dred Scott cannot come back because a strict reading of the Constitution cannot allow slavery nor segregation or the trampling of any mans rights.

Jeez, I need a beer.

If Ann were GW's speechwriter
I had a dream: if only one time, Ann Coulter could write President Bush's nationally televised speech or be wirelessly patched into his ear while he took questions from the press....can you imagine? A whole new President would emerge!

Sounds like a great SNL skit, if nothing else!!

First female president
Czarette Clinton said in a speach this week that we are close to having our first female president.

While the arrogant one was undoubtedly talking about herself, I think we all know who the most qualified female is..


Madam President Coulter 2008?????

Who is the V-P?

Coulter with more shrill crap
She is almost as bad as Paul Krugman. Maybe worse.

Seventh Degree's Dream
Ann Coulter as President Bush's speechwriter or prompter, now that's a dream I can support.

It would provide me with some really first rate political entertainment and drive the Conservative movement into electoral oblivion.

I think it's a testament to the strength of the Democratic Party. We can survive and thrive despite the likes of Howard Dean.

Ann Coulter though, she'd seal your political fate in no less than 27 syllables. But, I'd pay good money to hear those 27 syllables.

Jimmy Carter writes...
"We were told that President Bush didn't care about poll numbers."

(..Psst...Hey Jimmy....She's kidding. Little joke. Chill.)

Manx wrote...
"She is almost as bad as Paul Krugman. Maybe worse."

Lighten up, Francis. It's still a free country. She can write what she wants (which is typically highly intelligent analysis, punctuated with grueling satire), and you're free not to read it.

Geez Euytychus
I never said she didn't have the right to speak her mind. Why is it every time someone criticizes another's comments there is always a person who interprets the criticism as wanting to repress free speech? I defend her right to say shrill and stupid things but they are still shrill and stupid. Some of her stuff is thoughtful, but mostly it is filled with extreme partisanship and ideological blindness. And I am pretty sure that I am free to criticize her. So, I think it is you who needs to lighten up, Francis.

Wrong Lincoln
Ann shoots from the hip and sometimes hits her foot. So what! She dosn't have 100,000,000 deaths by government on her conscience. Liberals loved Stalin, Che, Mao, Fidel, Pol, and other killers. The media helped them cover up the murders, and now they want to rule the US. No wonder they are against the death penalty.

AZ lib -- re: 2 LUMPS PLEASE

Thanks for your extended kindness and a measure of civility in the midst of the oftentimes maddening spectacle.

Speaking of which, this r0_d1 appears to be a dizzy, staggering, piñata stick wielding blind man; flailing about in a room full of sighted people – he’s no where near the target and his ad hominem attacks have become little more than sport for the spectators. If r0_d1 ever removes the blindfold (hatred) he may very well realize he’s been pantsed and the piñata’s out of reach. He, in so very many ways, well… reminds me of Howard Dean. Glad they’re both on your side! (LOL)

On another note, Ann can easily differentiate between what makes for good copy and what’s required for Presidential speech writing. I think she would give Dubya just enough sting to make him a more effective communicator. Besides, it’s not as though the Press is going to cut him any slack either way. I say take the gloves off. “It would [likewise] provide me with some really first rate political entertainment.”

And no, I do not think your posts regarding her columns are motivated by the same sense of personalized anger and outrage I've seen on sites like Kos. I would no more LUMP you with them than I would LUMP you with r0_d1.

Ann spews forth again
"But that's no reason for the Republican Party to debase itself by running someone dysfunctional and illiterate enough to appeal to Democrats/"

All I can say is that having Ann Coulter as a Republican is debasing enough - Republicans don't need to worry about who they run.

Does this woman have any redeeming qualities at all? Foul mouthed and petulant, she displays the class of a, --, uhh, I can't think of anything that I'm willing to debase by equating them with Coulter. And furhter, she spouts 'truths' that the facts contradict:

Such gems as:

"Chafee makes Michael Brown look like Donald Rumsfeld."

Has anyone looked at Iraq or Afganistan lately? Does anyone realistically think Rumsfield is competent at ANYTHING? Don't bother with facts, he talks a good show. And does he have any strength of character? Did Rummie accept responsiblity for Abu Ghraib - not on your life.

Good grief, somewhere in Ann's perverted view of the world, Rummie is competent.

"Chafee is everything the Democrats like to claim Republicans are, which we are not and they are: silver-spoon morons who get ahead on the basis of family connections (for example, Ned the Red Lamont in Connecticut)"

Hey Ann, ever hear of George W. Bush? Or Julie Myers? To name just a couple of republican "silver-spoon morons." But I suppose these folks aren't Republicans worthy of Ann's attention.


Maybe she ought to look at her boy Laffey's positions - he criticized Bush on Iraq, says Rumsfield should resign, and can't quite figure out why he was mayor of Cranston, variously saying that

1. ‘It just became very clear to me – “God you sent me home to run for mayor””’ (M. Charles Bakst, “Laffey’s Mission of Faith in Cranston,” The Providence Journal, December 8, 2002). Steve Laffey later avoided acknowledging that he initially stated that God told him to run (Ian Donnis, “Laffey Attacks from the Center,” The Providence Pheonix, July 5, 2006).

2. At a speech before the Johnson and Wales College Republicans, Laffey offered this version: “Picked up a newspaper at my mothers house. It said that the $10 million rainy day fund of the city of Cranston was missing. Went over to City Hall and inquired about the last audit. I’m a Harvard MBA, I do audits. I mean I look at audited financial numbers. And they didn’t have any. They didn’t have any for several years. So I called my wife on a cell phone, who was still in Memphis Tennessee, and said, ‘I guess I’m not gonna start that hedge fund. I guess I’m not starting an investment banking firm. I guess I’m not gonna go out and keep making money. I’d like to run for mayor of the city of Cranston, to save the city that I love because its going broke. That’s how I got involved” (Laffey’s speech to Johnson and Wales College Republicans, April 12, 2006).

And there are others, but why bother. Sound's like Laffey is one of reaganite's famed moon bats (as is Ann, for the silliness of the things she says.)

And further to show how shallow Coulter's research (and thinking in general is) she fails to note that Laffey lasted lest than one year as President at Morgan Kinder, kind of unusual for a President of a company. Apparently he wasn't the greatest people person, as the firm's employees demanded he leave. http://www.answers.com/topic/stephen-laffey

But my comments are not about Laffey, but about Coulter and her shallow research and inappropriate conclusions. At least that's what I started to write about.

All the folks who read her and say 'right on' and other such nonsense - check-out Coulter's record. You might learn something.


And John Galt - my, my my:

"instead relying on the good 'ol lib standby--name calling. "

Lets see, Ann in this week's nonsense column used

· 'moron'
· 'half-wit'
· Said if Chaffee switched to being a democrat that "the average IQ on both sides of the aisle would go up'

How many other 'jewels' has she used? Examples:

· Coulter describes people who practice the religion of Islam as "camel jockey", "jihad monkey" and "tent merchant" .

· "In the history of the nation, there has never been a political party so ridicxxous as today's Democrats. It's as if all the brain-damaged people in America got together and formed a voting bloc". — Jan 12, 2006

· On February 10, 2006, the audience at the Conservative Political Action Conference applauded her when she referred to Muslim terrorists as "ragheads" and said, "I think our motto should be post-9-11, raghead talks tough, raghead faces consequences" .

· Coulter herself once stated, "Liberals love to pretend they don't understand hyperbole" . However, she has also stated, "I believe everything I say"

See http://www.answers.com/topic/ann-coulter

for more of her 'wit.'

Must make Republicans proud.

So I guess your comment about name-calling doesn't apply to her, eh? Or its OK when Ann does it?

mman spews forth again

Well no sooner did I write about the "Maddening spectacle" and blogpgargantuan, mman enters the fray -- sucking up all the oxygen in the thread.

You are however improving mman. You kept your word count just slightly under (15 words) Ann's column. I like to make note of progress whenever I can. You get a 3 for effort, on a scale of 1 to 5, 1 being the high.

No time to dialogue at the moment, just wanted to say "Good morning!" I'll try catching up with you later in the day. Until then, bonne chance.

Left Angle - great advice!
Interesting posts. Left Angle purportedly seeks out Ann's column at Townhall, reads the column and 70+ posts following it. Next (s)he decides to make some "very eloquent rebuttals to the content"... oops, make that "rabid ad hominem attacks", ending with the extremely ironic "The best any Democrat or Liberal can do is to ignore her."!
Or, perhaps more accurate, like all the other liberal "thinkers", doesn't actually READ anything Ann has written, but eagerly awaits opportunities to "review" her books at Amazon or "comment" as they have here.
The article (for those who missed it) makes a very good point; we voters are not limited to a choice between the tax-and-spend Democrats and the current crop of borrow-and-spend Republicans.

Veremont Heretic..
....politicians don't "borrow."

Jimmy Carter
In my opinion, running up a huge federal deficit is precisely "borrowing" - from future taxpayers. However, I suppose they could be called "steal-and-spend" politicians if they remain in power indefinitely... or at least until our entire economic system goes bankrupt.

mman - man the barricades!!
Good post mman!!

I thought I'd throw in a more thoughts for good measure, give Cutter Bench a little more material to work with on this fine Friday afternoon. I wouldn't want her to be bored;)

But mman, "does this woman have any redeeming qualities at all?" That's a bit harsh. Come on, you don't find her the leat bit funny? The errant kick in the head, the McDonald's play zone bit, that doesn't make you grin at all? No? O.K.' I guess comes the revolution we'll all have a sense of humor.

For me, Ann Coulter's biggest redeeming factor is that she makes me a better Liberal. Her rants force me to re-evaluate the reasons and facts that serve as the basis for my beliefs. Most of the time my research invalidates Ann Coulter's arguments and leaves me a more informed, more commited Liberal. However, there have been times when an honest review of the facts have forced my to agree with her. Case in point, Sen Joseph McCarthy. I don't know how anyone can look at the Verona documents and not acknowledge, at some level, he was somewhat justified in his suspicions.

But, having said something positive about Ann Coulter I have to follow it up with more criticism. The universe must be kept in balance. In evaluating his intellect, Ann Coulter fails to mention that Se. Chafee earned a masters degree in classical studies from Brown, a signifigant intellectual accomplishment.

And then there are Ann Coulter's comments on his career as a farrier. While she doesn't say it outright, there is a certain haughtiness in her comments, the faint echo of her inner east coast elitist, when she touches on the subject. Personally, I have more respect for someone who decides to become a farrier over someone who, let's say, graduates from Cornell and decides to go to law school.

Then she downplays Sen. Chafee's political accomplishments. If you relied soley on Ann Coulter's column you'd conclude that Lincoln Chafee went straight from being a farrier to being a United States Senator. Not so, Linclon Chafee served as a city councilman for and Mayor of Warick, R.I. before being appointed a Senator. In fact, Linclon Cahfee had announced his intention to run for the seat prior to his father's death.

Of course had Ann Coulter mentioned these facts Lincoln Chafee wouldn't have the desired apperance of being a silver-spooned moron, and the column wouldn't have the same impact. Ignoring and surpressing non-supporting evidence is Ann Coulter's bread and butter. It's a tactic she probably picked up in law school.

Sheldon Whitehouse, get familiar with the name. Whether you run Lincoln Chafee or Steve Laffey, it really doesn't matter. The Repulicans are going to loose the seat.

Speaking of Spewing
It's been a rough summer for Moon Bats and the "I hate Bush more than the terrorists" crowd. That means a good summer for the real American Patriots and truth seekers.

In June it was revealed that WMD has been found in Iraq, Bush didn't lie about WMD in Iraq.

This week it was revealed that Bush (or Cheney, or Rove or Libby etc.) didn't reveal Valerie Plame's identity as a CIA operative. The liberal rag Washington Post states it best; it's great when a liberal stalwart like the WP vindicates Bush. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/08/31/AR2006083101460_pf.html

The last paragraph of the WP article:
“Nevertheless, it now appears that the person most responsible for the end of Ms. Plame's CIA career is Mr. Wilson. Mr. Wilson chose to go public with an explosive charge, claiming -- falsely, as it turned out -- that he had debunked reports of Iraqi uranium-shopping in Niger and that his report had circulated to senior administration officials. He ought to have expected that both those officials and journalists such as Mr. Novak would ask why a retired ambassador would have been sent on such a mission and that the answer would point to his wife. He diverted responsibility from himself and his false charges by claiming that President Bush's closest aides had engaged in an illegal conspiracy. It's unfortunate that so many people took him seriously.”

Now it is FACT that:
Bush didn’t lie about WMD (the Left did)
Bush didn’t out the CIA agent (a Leftist did)
Iraq was indeed trying to buy uranium in Niger (again the Left lied)

Bush does indeed have the moral authority to wage the current and just War against Terror and lead America, the Left doesn’t.

right on
Keep going, Ann. There is nothing liberals love so much as letting the rest of the population see into how the right really thinks, talks, and writes. Maybe next time you'll provide the scenario for this assassination - every time you step to the plate and bring your drooling, oversexed worshippers on line to voice their hail Annes the left scores another little victory.


DON'T STOP!!!!!!

Cate's comment
Cate said:
"And, of course, most pols believe in election year centrism, however misguided."

Naturally. Most people cluster in the center. It gets votes. Unfortunately sometimes we get snookered.

I like honesty so I can what I'm really voting for. Like that'll ever happen. (snort!)

Go, Stan!
"Typical Coulter. somewhat vitriolic.
What is missing is an explanation on why the
support for Chaffee. Is there some quid pro quo
between Chaffee and the Republicans?"

Thanks, Stan. Nice to see reason and not just bandwagoning a collection of ad hominem attacks. I know, I know, that's Ann. But what information was really there after you get past the attacks? Darn little.

Play fair, dammit!
"And to top it off, he is apparently a degenerate addict."

Is Teddy currently using? If not, then be fair and let's count other recovering alcoholics in that boat, like...the President (gasp!).

The form of argument
"Others resent her because she makes cogent, biting arguments against the left's favorite stalking horses"

This is what passes for cogent? Methinks people need to attend Logic 101 if you think a cut-down-laden, fallacy-riddled piece of written rhetoric such as this passes for cogent.

Even though I agree with the premise (just what _is_ Bush doing supporting a Democrat?), it's one of the most uncogent, unsound, and invalid arguments I've seen yet.

Argument go like this:
if A then B
if B then C
therefore if A, then C.

A, B, and C are facts, not opinions, not straw men, not cut-downs.

We have two facts: Bush supports a Dem. Ann says "WTF?!" So what's the conclusion, part C? Bush is not a Conservative? Compared to Ann, that's almost everyone. Sorry, but if the shoe fits...

Who _is_ trustworthy?
"The reason is that America cannot trust the Democrats with the security of this Nation. Their cut and run policy, as displayed in Korea, Vietnam, Jimmah Carters Iran,and now Iraq, clearly indicates their lack of trustworthiness..."

Wait! Your forgot WW II and Vietnam! Oh, wait, Nixon was GOP and we won WW II.

I don't trust the lot of them. Horse-traders every one.

And the basis is...?
"Liberals loved Stalin, Che, Mao, Fidel, Pol, and other killers."

And the basis for this statement is...? Who faced down Krushchev over Cuba? And Fidel (even Bay of Pigs was a clusterf**k)? And Ho? It all started in the early 60s. If it weren't for Kennedy we wouldn't have gotten in 'Nam.

What exactly is the basis of this supposition? Exact references please, and not Hanoi Jane. She was just a stupid rich kid who got used.

To Leroy:
Leroy said: "Dred Scott cannot come back because a strict reading of the Constitution cannot allow slavery nor segregation or the trampling of any mans rights."

An equally strict reading 170 years ago said it could. Simply put, Negroes weren't "human", therefore had no legal standing. Much like the same argument used for fetuses these days.

I'll concede the point, but was using it as an illustration of the reversability of the Court.

Yes, I am a strict Constructionist in a lot of cases. I find the so-called Separation thing laughable. Kelo is a disgrace.

About Bush and WMD
"In June it was revealed that WMD has been found in Iraq, Bush didn't lie about WMD in Iraq."


Yep. I was happy to hear it, then disappointed when it turned they were so old their usability was extremely questionable.

"This week it was revealed that Bush (or Cheney, or Rove or Libby etc.) didn't reveal Valerie Plame's identity as a CIA operative. The liberal rag Washington Post states it best; it's great when a liberal stalwart like the WP vindicates Bush"

I'll admit my surprise. It was classic Washington.

AZ Lib:

Busier than usual but nonetheless was looking forward to see your response to my ealier post. You can't imagine how dissapointing it was for me to find you to be boorish. When you're ready to crawl out of the sand box perhaps we'll dialogue again.

idee fixe
Why is Coulter so obsessed with liberals? Do you suppose it's a form of sublimation? Does she ever think about anything else?

Interesting, liberals are not as fixated on Coulter as she is on the left. In fact, the ones I talk to have actual ideas and find cross-party sliming pretty much of a bore, best left to children and village idiots. I don't know if most of them even know who she is.

What a life to look back on. Sorry, Ann.



Jay Jay:

You wrote, "Interesting, liberals are not as fixated on Coulter as she is on the left."

Actually, I believe Ann is intent on battling the left and that may very well explain why she writes about them occasionally.

Insofar as your supposition is concerned, you may want to do a little research? For starters try: Salon, HuffingtonPost & DailyKos. If those don't help, try Yahoo and Google's search engines. Key in Ann Coulter; you will find they generate 10,700,000 and 19,900,000 hits respectively. Click randomly on some of the urls and see if your postulation stands up to empirical evidence.

Here's a hint for you. DailyKos generated 18,993 hits for comments on Ann in a three year time period. That averages out to approximately 128 comments per week on just one site! "[N]ot as fixated??? There are left-leaning blogs dedicated to her downfall.

Oh, and BTW - What brings you a-trolling Jay Jay?

Az Lib : good post
Humor - I guess I find Coulter's humor contrived, but then Goethe said

"Nothing shows a man's character so much as what he laughs at"

Her humor suggests to me a petulance and demeaning of others which reveals something about her. I'm no Freud, but I'd guess there is something seriously wrong there - a certain hatred and contempt of everyone, and an elitism that suggests she is perfect. A deep-seated narcissim or superiority complex, I'd guess.

At least five of the following are necessary for a diagnosis:

1. has a grandiose sense of self-importance
2. is preoccupied with fantasies of unlimited success, power, brilliance, beauty, or ideal love
3. believes that he or she is "special" and unique and can only be understood by other special people
4. requires excessive admiration
5. strong sense of entitlement
6. takes advantage of others to achieve his or her own ends
7. lacks empathy
8. is often envious or believes others are envious of him
9. arrogant affect

But maybe I'm wrong, and its all a show for the money.

Whatever. I don't really care but it is worthwhile to show her shallowness and false premises, if only to try and set the record straight. (Note to readers prior to tirades - liberals also often get it wrong.)

But I digress and border on the flippant. Enough psycho babble!

Cutter Bench - I hope this post meets your the Word Police length limit. What was it Churchill said - something like "I want all memos to me to be short, unless you haven't got the time?" I guess that applies here - good writing takes time (and more intelligence that I have) -so my verbosity shall continue. Apologies in advance.

Oops: 'more intelligence THAN I have'
was what I meant to say.


Cutter Bench
"Battling the left"? "OCCASIONALLY writes about them?" Are you kidding?

I find it amusing but also interesting, that the right has some extreme need to see the left as evil, traitorous, religion-hating, consumers of babies' blood and small puppies. I'll bet you're all just frustrated that you can't attack jews, catholics, and people of color any more (or, remember Polish jokes?) and have fortunately, for the more needy among you and for Coulter's bank account, have found a whole new target.

Here's a little game for you: Count the number of references to Liberals, Democrats, left, etc. on Townhall and then compare to the number of times conservative, right wing, Republican, appears on Daily Kos. Sorry to tell you, but the left just doesn't find the right all that interesting. Lately, even the right doesn't seem to find the right all that interesting. (Maybe THAT'S what drives Coulter, Talk Radio, and Townhall pouty-threads.)

If I had a party with liberal guests and started a topic on the Right wing, they would all look at their watches and make excuses to leave.

Milwaukee Jay in Norway
It would easy to create annectdotal connections between the Democratic Parties Neo-Coms, and Fidel, Che, and Mao. Also it is not to hard to find lovers of Ho in their attic. John Kerry, not Hanoi Jane would be a choice example, along with Jimmy Carter.

You have to be fairly old to remember the left's love for Stalin.

But Jay if you have any age at all you have to know that the Liberal Media just did'nt cover the 77,000,000 murders by their darling Mao, or the 34,000,000 murders by their slight embarrassment, Joe Stalin.

They protected Fidel, and eulogized Che as a hero.
I understand that Che loved killing so much he personally provided capital punishment for Fidel's political prisoners. You can bet impressionable american youth would not question Che's values by reading the Liberal American Media.

They were to busy congratulating themselves for bravely exposing Joe MaCarthy as a jerk to cover the dirty little liberal secret that they have intellectualized killing for the common good.


Death is the baggage carried by European Liberals, and Europeanized American liberals, and you can follow the baggage beginning with the French Revolution.

Mman:

Please accept my apologies, that is, for not getting back to you sooner. Much improved on your word count 1/3 the words of your last post! I’m going to have to raise your effort grade point to a 1! “Word Police?” Interesting isn’t it? Those words have such a negative connotation. I would rather think of myself as someone who has taken an active role in pomposity intervention. Think of it as a service, not unlike well, taking the initiative to pocket a drunken friend’s keys and drive him or her home. I have found that, by and large, the length of a post is directly proportional to its degree of: bombast, obfuscation, and lack of originality – mind you, there are always exceptions; you however, thus far (in my estimation) are not one of them.

I can’t say that I’m familiar with the quote you attributed to Winston Churchill, "I want all memos to me to be short, unless you haven't got the time?" You however, might consider affixing the following Churchill quote above your monitor, “The length of this document defends it well against the risk of its being read.” In my opinion, if you actually have something of value to post, which happens to be overly wordy (more words than the original column – my personal rule) that you feel the need to contribute, create you own blog and pontificate to your hearts content. There are any number of bloggers who have already done so and have garnered quite a following – at least those who have something worth writing about. And towards that end, it appears as though you have at least one fan, AZ Lib. Insofar as “more intelligence than I (you) have.” Self-deprecation is an admirable quality. Truth is, when you’re not parroting talking points or cutting and pasting leftist propaganda you’re very articulate, not mind you, that I’m agreeing with your articulations. (LOL)

Insofar as your post is concerned, if not for the fact that you have shown yourself to be little more than an Ann-hater and (pardon the expression) leftist shill, one might otherwise be able to glean more insight from your writing. And trust me, if you imagine that Republicans are lock-step concerning the mid-terms you are surely mistaken. This particular thread is proof, albeit limited, of that. Apart from her call to arms, one of the other redeeming qualities of Ann’s current column is it’s affect on the left. Apart from your selective hatred of polemics, I should think that you would want the conservatives to be true to themselves; by voting for other conservatives and not the lowest common denominator.

The polemic writing, as you are well aware, is typical Ann Coulter, which I don’t suppose you will ever appreciate. I personally, don’t take it very seriously and most times, do find her humorous. You however, could save yourself a lot of time and energy by cutting to the chase and just write, “I hate polemicist, Ann Coulter, and her writing sucks because she is a polemicist.” You could cut and paste on a weekly basis and we would all be duly apprised (as we now are) of your sentiments.

Little long this time; before I break my own rule, I’ll sign off.

Enjoy you weekend!

Jay Jay:

Lighten up; you're liable to have an aneurism.

If anyone ever accuses you of having a sense of humor, just show them my post and your response; you will surely convince them otherwise. (LOL)

"Kidding?" Yes, otherwise known as, being facetious. Great response though; nothing like taking a reasoned advisement and countering with the “Linda Blair” 360 defense. Oy vey!

Lydia:
Thank You!

Jay Jay needs to find a clue...

Happy Saturday & LD weekend!

Cutter
There is no such thing as a funny conservative, or even a conservative with a sense of humor, unless it's Pat Robertson doing his pious routine or Ann Coulter trying to look profound 'n pouty at the same time.




Jay Jay:

Good to see you've got your feet back down on the ground.

You would be amazed at how much fun we conservatives have; quoting my niece from a Christmas Eve celebration in my home, "My face hurts, from laughing so much!" She wasn't the only one laughing, she merely gave voice to what all of us were experiencing.

There's a reason the expression "blind hatred" is part of our language. The choice is yours...

Cutter Bench - Assail the Messenger
and ignore the message.

I was paraphrasing Churchill from memory, and I have yet to find the quote - I'm not even sure where I heard it. I note Pascal said essentially the same thing.

"I have made this letter a rather long one, only because I didn't have the leisure to make it shorter."

On the Word Police, I appreciate the '1' rating, but I find it interesting that you choose to attack the messenger rather than the message. Ignore the facts, and assail the messenger. Typical right wing tactic.

And I might also note that you criticized a post which, by my count, had 829 words, 393 of which were Ann Coulter or other quotes in support of my comments.

So I try to support my comments with FACTS. If that leads to wordiness, so be it. Feel free to ignore me.

And as for being an Ann-hater, I couldn't care less about her, but the lies and half-truths she spouts in her column are galling and should be challenged and corrected. In the process I've noted a few other things about Ann and the reader can do with those whatever they wish. I've noted no factual defense of her or push-back to my comments, so I suppose either:

(1) readers choose to ignore inconvenient facts

(2) most don't bother to read my posts cause I'm a liberal and wordy

No. 2 is probably correct (though I think no. 1 is typical of the right.)

261 words above (I've taken the liberty of not counting this last paragraph).

Cheers

Cutter Bench: Polemic Hatred?
I had to look it up,

1. A controversial argument, especially one refuting or attacking a specific opinion or doctrine. 2. A person engaged in or inclined to controversy, argument, or refutation.

I certainly don't hate controversial arguments, I just want them to be based on facts, and not half-truths, misquotes, and outright lies. If Ann would be honest, OK.

I also note that origin of the word is from the French. Wonder if Ann would be happy about that, since she so often derides them.

86 words

Shocked and Amazed !!!
Ann, I am shocked and amazed with you saying Lincoln Chafee should be shot (your headline emplies). There are a lot of unstable (crazy) people in the USA and I fear a few are probably fans of yours. I hope none take your words as a OK to do it. I think possably you have broken the law. I am surprised the FBI or Secrete Service have not contacted you, or at least your editor should have changed it.
Ann, you went over the line on this one.

mman - Assailing the Assailing Messenger

Good to see that you have a sense of humor! Looks like you found “Word count” in your tools too. (LOL)

Two points that you made which are inextricably intertwined; one, “But I find it interesting that you choose to attack the messenger rather than the message. Ignore the facts, and assail the messenger.” Your conclusion, “Typical right wing tactic.” And further down in your post, subsequent to your listing two (other) points; starting with, “readers choose to ignore inconvenient facts” you muse, “though I think… [This] is typical of the right.”

Question is, where’s the balance? You want to be taking seriously, but as I previously pointed out, you have (by your own words) proven yourself to be little more than a leftist shill. For reasons that should be obvious (nonetheless, specifically because I don’t want to be the target of their mindless invectives) I will not name names but all one need do, is to look at the posts in this thread to see examples of left-wingers employing the methods you ascribe as the sole province of the right. Your "right wing" accusations don’t stand up under the mildest of scrutiny, are obviously biased and only serve to detract from your argument. And do you see the irony; accusing me of attacking you and finishing with your own attack – by association?

If you’re truly intent on raising the bar and improving the level of discourse, which I’m assuming you are; lead by example. The reality is; similar tactics are employed by bloggers on both the left and right. If you take people to task on the content of their discourse and don’t assail their predilections (left or right) you may have greater success obtaining a response. And I am by no means saying that I’ve always gotten it right. I have however, made a decision that I’m going to make a concerted effort towards improving my future postings.

Au revoir

BTW – Do you email Al Franken and Michael Moore concerning their hate-filled diatribes?

Lincoln Chafee - Skull and Bones connect
Lincoln Chafee's father, John Chafee was a member of Skull and Bones, the Yale secret fraternity that W, W's father and grandfather were members of. The connection transcends religion, politics and just about everything else.

My theory is that Lincoln Chaffee owes his whole political career to this mysterious society. When Lincoln's father died in office he was appointed to his father's position (this is unusual in itself).

If you don't believe me just Google "Skull and Bones" to learn about the New World Order and the necessity of going to war every generation or so in order to purge our infrastructure of lackluster Spartans.

The Skull and Bones influence explains a lot of things about our situation in the middle east and the succession of leaders in this country since the November 1963 coup d etat.

For MMAN
What's your take on the Skull and Bones connection as it may apply to Chafee?

Not again
This sckank is funny. She rants and raves about the most mundane sh_t. Maybe someone ought to cap her as well

Saharanprince

Who is the "She" you are referring to? And are you hoping someone kills ("cap[s]") her?

: [
Why all the hate? Every other argument Coulter makes is riddled with rash insults toward whomever she is talking about. Whatever happened to decency in politics and discussing things in a civilized matter? I consider myself a Democrat but in issues like abortion and gay marriage I agree wholeheartedly with Republicans. I understand that others have different opinions and that they have a right to express them.
In my experience, only those who cannot trust their own intelligence degrade themselves to attacking their opponents on a personal level instead of showing self-discipline and respect.
Sticks and stones may break my bones, but Ann's comments serve no purpose other than show her own incompetence and bitterness.
Sign Up to Post Your CommentsSign Up to Post Your Comments
If you are already registered, click here to login. Otherwise, please take a few seconds to register with Townhall.com. Once you sign up, you’ll be able to post your comments immediately, use the action center, get podcasts, and more!
Note: Fields marked with a red asterisk (*) are required.
Salutation:
First Name:
*
Last Name:
*
Email:
*
Nickname:
*
Note: Nick name will be shown when you post comments.
Address 1:
*
Address 2:
City:
*
State:
*
Zip:
*
Phone:
      
Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
(Bi-Weekly) We highlight the best opportunities from our partners for surveys, action items and more.