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
Wednesday, September 27, 2006
Ann Coulter :: Townhall.com Columnist
I did not have s.e.x. with that nomad, Osama bin Laden
by Ann Coulter
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
Poll
Was the Copenhagen Global Warming Summit Walk-Out a Win for the U.S.?


It's just like old times. Bill Clinton delivers an impassioned speech, and within 24 hours the Web is bristling with documentation, establishing that nearly every sentence was a lie.

The glassy-eyed Clinton cultists are insisting their idol's on-air breakdown during a "Fox News Sunday" interview with Chris Wallace was a calculated performance, which is a bit like describing Hurricane Katrina as a "planned demolition." Like an Osama tape, they claim he was sending a signal to Democrats to show them how to treat Republicans. Listen up, Democrats: Let's energize the undecideds by throwing a hissy fit on national television!

The Clintonian plan for action apparently entails inventing lunatic conspiracy theories, telling lots of lies, shouting, sneering, interrupting, and telling your interlocutor, "(Y)ou've got that little smirk on your face and you think you're so clever" -- all for asking a simple question. To wit: "Why didn't you do more to put bin Laden and al-Qaida out of business when you were president?" The only thing Clinton forgot to say to Wallace was, "You'd better put some ice on that."

Let me be the first to welcome Chris Wallace to the Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy! If the son of Mike Wallace is a member, can Chelsea be far behind?

According to Wallace, Clinton's aide, Jay Carson, demanded that the interview be stopped a few minutes into Clinton's tantrum -- just before the part where he threw the lamp at Wallace. The last time Clinton got that red in the face, the encounter ended with a stained dress. Even Muslims thought Clinton overreacted. But the Clinton Kool-Aid drinkers tell us this was a masterfully planned set-piece by their leader.

I also think Jessica Savitch's slurred, incoherent broadcast on "NBC Nightly News" in October 1983 was intentional. Others say it was drug-addled breakdown that ended her career, but obviously Savitch intended to speak in garbled gibberish on air as a brilliantly executed prelude to her death in a ditch weeks later.

And when Stephen Colbert did a routine at the White House Correspondents Dinner that bombed, I think he planned it that way.

Then there was Capt. Joseph Hazelwood's meticulously planned off-loading of 11 million gallons of crude oil off the Exxon Valdez.

Clinton shouted so many lies during his televised meltdown, only the World Wide Web can capture them all. These are just a few.

Clinton yelled at Wallace: "What did I do? What did I do? I worked hard to try to kill him. I authorized a finding for the CIA to kill him. We contracted with people to kill him. I got closer to killing him than anybody has gotten since."

This is so crazy it's worthy of an Air America caller. Clinton has consistently misrepresented the presidential directive about political assassinations. Clinton did not order bin Laden assassinated. He did not even lift the ban on intelligence agencies attempting to assassinate bin Laden.

What he did was lift the ban on political assassinations -- provided that assassinating bin Laden was not the purpose of the mission. So if U.S. forces were engaged in an operation to capture bin Laden, but accidentally killed him, they would not be court-martialed.

Clinton said, "All the right-wingers who now say I didn't do enough said I did too much -- same people." As proof, he cites his humiliating withdrawal from Somalia, claiming, "They were all trying to get me to withdraw from Somalia in 1993 the next day after we were involved in 'Black Hawk down,' and I refused to do it."

He added, as if it mattered, "There is not a living soul in the world who thought that Osama bin Laden had anything to do with 'Black Hawk down.'"

In fact, what Republicans objected to was Clinton's transforming a U.N. mission in Somalia to prevent mass starvation into a much grander "nation-building" exercise -- something the Democrats now hysterically support in Darfur and oppose in Iraq.

Democrats long to see American mothers weeping for their sons lost in a foreign war, but only if the mission serves absolutely no national security objectives of the United States. If we are building a democracy in a country while also making America safer -- such as in Iraq -- Democrats oppose it with every fiber of their being.

When Clinton's "nation-building" in Somalia led to the brutal killing of 18 Americans, some of whose corpses were then dragged through the streets, Clinton did what the Democrats are currently demanding we do in Iraq: He cut and ran.

Republicans didn't like that either, and it had nothing to do with whether it was al-Qaida we were running from. It could have been Islamic Jihad, Hezbollah, al-Dawa or the Viet Cong. We ran, and the terrorists noticed.

Osama bin Laden told "ABC News" in 1998 that America's humiliating retreat from Somalia emboldened his jihadists: "The youth were surprised at the low morale of the American soldiers and realized more than before that the American soldier was a paper tiger and after a few blows ran in defeat."

If this is the message that Clinton is hoping to telegraph to the American people, I hope the voters are listening.

COPYRIGHT 2006 ANN COULTER

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.
Love the title!
ROTFLMAF!No wonder Willy Wag finger was so Tee'd off for not capturing Bin Laden!

Great column Ann! Of course it will upset all Liberals across the country! I love it!

I thought Clinton fatigue..
...ended with the election of President Bush...please go away already klinton and let the adults handle it....

JimmyC
Clinton-fatigue will never end. Because unfortunately those darned Clintons will just never go away. They're like AIDS, or herpes. Except more unpleasant.

BrianR....
...you're absolutely right..the've left an itch we just can not scratch successfully....it's spreading.....

About the leaks
It is disgusting that the government would try Arthur Anderson on criminal charges and not the NYT.

How can you tell Clinton is lying?
His finger is wagging.

Clinton
Why discuss Clinton? Clinton is the worse President this country will ever have. He was impeached. He committed perjury to a Grand Jury. He directly lied in the face of the entire Nation. He sexually harassed a subordinate employee. He is an adulterer. He was responsible for an attempted cover-up of a sexual escapade that occurred in the Oval Office during official office hours. He was disbarred. He caused millions of tax dollars to be spent on a investigation that could have been avoided if he had just told the truth. The only saving grace for Bill Clinton is the realization his Presidency can be used as a bad example of leadership for all future Presidents for all time. Bill Clinton and his wife are SCUM.

Not Only That
But Clinton had no real interest in "fighting terrorism". Because in his mental universe, the Islamists were, and are, true-believing fellow socialists who just have appalling fashion sense. Like his short-lived SecDef, Les Aspin, "Bill" was and is dead-set against sending U.S. troops in anywhere that they can win- because that would not have a negative effect on their morale, and his goal was and is to make serving in the U.S. military something so pointless that no one will do it voluntarily.
His definition of a "terrorist threat"? The NRA, the Heritage Foundation, and the Cato Institute. If Hillary wins in '08, look for all of the above to be the primary targets of the new, improved "Patriot Act II"- written by Janet Reno and Ted Kennedy.

Warrior
Quit pussyfooting Warrior.

Putting Bill in context
John 8:44
You are of your father, the devil, and it is your will to practice the lusts and gratify the desires [which are characteristic] of your father. He was a murderer from the beginning and does not stand in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaks a falsehood, he speaks what is natural to him, for he is a liar [himself] and the father of lies and of all that is false.

Thank you
Ann Coulter!! You rock!!

BrianR
Not only are the Clintons less pleasant than AIDS or herpes, it iss also much less fun in getting them.

MacZed
You say " . . . the dyke is set to explode and someone is about to come out . . . "

Are we to infer that this is in response to her husbands explosion last week in front of Chris Wallace?

The truth about Mogadishu
In December of 1992 Bush 41 sent troops there as part of a UN peacekeeping mission.

After Clinton took office, DEMOCRATS in Congress, including JOHN MURTHA, old Abscam cut-and-run himself, pressured him to withdraw. Good ol' finger-in-the-wind Willie coudn't make up his mind who to please, his party or the UN, so he split the baby and reduced our forces to a little over 3,000, only 1,120 of which were combat troops. He also removed our armor, including Bradley fighting vehicles and armored personnel carriers.

He also SECRETLY ordered a Delta Force company to Mogadishu for the specific purpose of capturing Aidid.

In the days after the Black Hawk Down episode, which was a military success, Clinton turned it into a strategic debacle by releasing all but two of the 22 prisoners the raid captured.

On October 7, just four days after the raid, Clinton announced that all US troops would be withdrawn from Somalia by March 31 of the following year.

Troops were all gone by March 28, 1994, making this the only promise Clinton ever kept.

On Nov. 8 1993 a memorial ceremony was conducted at Ft. Benning, GA, for the 6 members of the 75th Ranger Division who died in Mogadishu on Oct. 3. The feelings of the troops and their families were best summed up by Larry Joyce, a Vietnam Veteran and father of Specialist James Joyce, one of the fallen. His comments, which follow, are taken from an article that appeared in "Newsday" dated December 5, 1993.

The ceremony intensified the grief and anger of Larry Joyce over the loss of his son. Joyce, a retired Army officer who spent two tours in Vietnam, voted for Clinton and said he had rationalized away the president's efforts to avoid the draft and his role as Vietnam War protester.

"My son opposed my support for Bill Clinton," Joyce said in a letter to Congress. "His death in Somalia - brought about by weak and indecisive amateurs in the Clinton administration - confirms my son's wisdom and my naivete."

Even the question of whether Clinton should write letters of condolence to the families of the dead was decided by what the administration thought would be the best move politically, not according to conscience or morality. (Clinton eventually did write these letters.)

Today, the Clinton Legacy and Historical Revision Society (aka "Democrats and other liberals") are now trying to claim that it was Republicans that made Clinton cut and run.

Don't believe anything they say and don't let them get away with it.

Best line of the week!
"The last time Clinton got that red in the face, the encounter ended with a stained dress."

Thank you Ann. What I don't get is why anyone listens to a word Willy says. All he ever does is lie. Even if you're a lib, you have to admit he's a liar.

Clinton is a frightened little boy!
He has always seen himself as President and imagined his legacy for the future and now he realizes that history will not be kind to him. As an aside for that we can thank Al Gore and the Internet he gave us so people can investigate Bill's lies and spread the truth. Anyway back to Clinton. He is a failed man. His inabilty to control his urges--a very childish trait which we have witnessed before--came out again in the Wallace interview.He wants control--again like a child--and he'll use the bully pulpit to be a bully and get his way. If all the documents could be declassified and we can keep Sandy Berger from stealing and destroying them, his failure is well documented.
Another possibility is that he is trying to help Hillary by getting this on the record and then the mantra would be for her--I'd have 140,000 troops in Afghanistan not Iraq. That's even more pathetic.
How many people must be apologizing to their families for voting for this pathetic soul. I apologized to mine for voting for Carter in 1976. I still feel bad about that so to all tou TH posters--I'm sorry!

Clinton's Fly, People Die
When did Clinton lie and what did he lie about?

It is truly sad to see the meltdown of anyone, especially the greatest Democrat president since Jimmy Carter.

But Ann, you knock it out of the park as you expose the spin these liars would have us believe. (To democrats: Accusing someone of being a liar in print is libel. I just accused Clinton and his handlers of lying. I make the same offer to you as I did to Kerry when I accused him of being a liar. PLEASE sue me! PLEASE defend yourself! Don’t let me get away with this any longer. Unless, of course, I did not libel.)

I can certainly see the ex-Prevaricator-in-Chief’s point. After all, the Bush administration had almost 8-whole-months (not 9, BJ) to sort out that pesky terrorist thingy while you only had a mere 8 years to do the same. (And again, perhaps Orwell was on to something.)

Despite trying (which is third runner-up to actually “doing”) you were kind enough to, what was that, allow a wall to be built between the FBI and CIA by, who was that, Jamie Gorelick who later, what did she do, sit on the 9-11 Commission…. Hmmm…

Not to be outdone, now we have, in addition to the “BJ Clinton Finger Waving Extravaganza” a leak of the NIE that appears to make the case that Bush blew it. I can not for the life of me understand how this happened. For some odd reason the fine newspapers and outstanding democrats were saddled with the rare malady of not being able to read past a comma where most all points were condoned, equivocated or contradicted. Imagine that in this day and age!

That said, I can’t wait to see how “Her Thighness” spins this to her own good as she runs for a 2-year term as Senator.

God Bless, God Speed, God Help Us All
J

Nation building
I would like to see Miss Coulter's or anyone else's explanation of how this nation-building nonsense in Iraq is making America safer. And she might have at least mentioned that Bush as a candidate in 2000 said he was against nation building. Of course, that was before 9-11 when "everything changed."

Still..How can we tell Bush is lying? Easy. Cheney's lips are moving.

Freedom Writer
Easy. Repeat after me, only nine words so it shouldn't be too difficult.

You ready?

"We kill them there, they don't kill us here."

Do you see how easy that was? Now go try repeating that to yourself ten times, and see if the meaning of the words doesn't start to float up to your consciousness.

And for evidence, count the number of terrorist attacks on American soil since 9-11.

New Liberal Politics, Language
I would like to anounce The President and the frist gentlemen. Good reason to think logically when voting!!!!

We just don't get it
All sorts of "reasons" have been given about why the alleged and/or "staged" meltdown occurred.. Frankly, I believe it was not Chris Wallace, Fox News, the right wingers or the inaccuracies (and accuracies) of 'The Path to 9/11'. I believe it is Amendment XXII. After all, didn't he several times imply how much better things would have worked out if HE had remained President?

After all, how many Democrats have been forced to leave the Presidency because of that Amendment? Only one -- Bill Clinton. AND there was an attempt to get that Amendment repealed while he was still in office. Even so, the amendment only says a person can not be ELECTED to serve more than 10 years minus one day.

There are paths to the White House other than by direct election. Many Vice-Presidents have become President. however, if all of the planned assassination attempts -- one of which took the life of President Lincoln -- had been successful, someone else would have become President instead of Vice-President Andrew Johnson. Gerald Ford became President following appointment as Vice-President. And I also remember that Governor Earl Long had a plan to out maneuver Louisiana law that prevented his running again for Governor. The movie "Dave" revealed an even more sinister, although fictional, plot by the Chief of Staff.

The point is that there are STILL many apologists and supporters for Bill Clinton, his lies, failures and obfuscations and I would put nothing beyond these people if they gain more control of government. With Hillary losing popularity, it has not surprised me at all that Bill is back in the news with the Clintonistas popping up all over the place.

I'll grant that my theory may sound crazy, but we are talking about some very determined and clever politicians.

That's Toat (Think of a thumb) Clinton
To the Left, we say: "That's SO Nancy!"

What a job
Can you imagine having to have the job that Carville, Begaula and a couple of others have? I mean, to have to go on national television, after the fact, and explain, spin, twist, distort and fabricate most of what Billy and the dems say.

I wonder some things about their jobs? How much do they get paid everytime they go on national television and conjure up or cover up something? Do they get paid by the appearance or are they on a retainer or salary? Is it a shock to their systems if they actually get to tell the truth? Do they actually believe what they are spewing? Do they ever have a problem with their conscience?

It will be a few days until the loyal clintonistas find their secret decoder rings and decode the secret message. Then the rest of us will know. Until then let's just sit back and laugh.

Clinton
This is the guy who pushed aside his companions when visiting President Kennedy so that he could shake the president's hand. Clinton is this country's first national dirty joke. Is there anyone who did not think of the Lewinsky thing when he wagged his finger at Chris? Clinton is a congenital liar, an adulterer, and a sex addict -- and an accused rapist. How glorious to have this man in the White House. The only person who is conceivably worse is his wife.

Hey Warrior!
I have only one correction for ya....Bill Clinton is not the worst President we've ever had. Close, but not the worst. That honor belongs to James Earl Carter.
Ain't it a hoot to watch Pervert-In-Chief Clintoon and the rest of the libs blow a gasket every single time you confront them with the truth?

Clinton
Wag the finger
Wag the dog
Same old Clinton CLAP TRAP

Ann Coulter, loved
the column. You arrived to bomb the drooling pervert back to Chippaqua even as Carville & Bagala, the two mice, Mickey & Minnie, appeared on O'Reilly to laud the Zipper's attack on Chris Wallace.

Fox News chief Roger Ailes says the Bubbster's reaction to Wallace's in-offensive question was a "wild overreaction" and an "assault on all journalists."

Bob Novak has written that the entire episode was scripted by the mice to put a charge under the dems, and that Clinton performed beautifully.

I believe that whether or not the interview was contrived by Mickey & Minnie, Slick Willie gave a realistic depiction of the way this nation was governed for 8 years. That is, it was run by a man with a high intellect, with little or no respect for the truth, who was self-absorbed, had no moral values, was calculating and manipulative, made important policy decisions based on polls and the country be-damned, and was pre-occupied with satisfying juvenile sexual impulses.

Had it no been for the essence of Willie deposited on a blue dress, to this day the cretin would still be denying that "I didn't have sexual relations with than woman, Ms. Lewinsky..." and a brain dead press would still be cooing, "Isn't he wonderful."

Carville
I liked Dennis Miller's line that Carville "looks like a sock puppet somebody washed on 'HOT'".

To Crawfish....and to Freedom Writer
Crawfish, My thoughts exactly. Thinking the same thing when I read the posts...As poor as Clinton may have been, Jimmy 'Caw-ta' was soooo much more inept. ... Now, to "Freedom Writer" There is no nation building in Irag...Why don't you READ what is being written here and the allusions to WWII on other blogs...We are fighting an enemy so horrible in the world, that you have to be unconscious not to see it. Why not go with Jimmy Carter ,Castro, and Chavez and live in Cuba or Venezuela? Wouldn't it be so nice to be in countries where people of like-thinking could ALL be together???

To Crawfish
You obviouly DON'T want "to see Ms. Coulter's explanation of this 'natin-building nonsense' in Iraq"...It would hurt you too much.....you know, the TRUTH.

All thrust, no direction
Hey libs and Clintonistas - what's all this adoration for Finger Waggin Willie's supposed intellectual acumen? What good are smarts if you have no moral compass or belief system to frame your efforts? You end up with a "rocket-butt" - all thrust but no direction. Since when does intelligence excuse bad behavior or poor decision making? Intelligence is just another human tool. Unfortunately, the ex-pres seemed more concerned about using another of his tools.

PS.: Where are all you liberal lurkers? Ann scares the crap out of me - I can just imagine the terror she strikes in your hearts!

Thanks to Ann!
Ah, the joy of Thursday mornings. My #1 thought watching the Wag on Sunday was, "How will I make it until Thursday and Ann's brilliant summation of this episode?"

Clearly, the fact that the Clinton Machine could not get The Path to 9/11 miniseries dropped from the primetime rotation is a sign that things just ain't what they used to be. And Bill's Bluster was the perfect epilogue.

The critics reviews are all in...
...and Clinton's performance on FOX news was a smash hit!!! Two thumbs up says Ebert!!!!The NY TImes calls it:"True Clintonesque!!!" The Rolling Stone magazine says:"Worthy of another Blue-Stained Dress award!!!"

I always love watching Clinton do his carefully staged and choreographed act in front of the cameras. Like the famous "Ron Brown video", when he was leaving the funeral of Ron Brown, the camera shows him laughing and joking with an aide, until Clinton sees the camera. Realizing hes being taped he then becomes very somber and wipes a tear from his eye. Or the equally explosive performance at the podium wagging his finger and uttering the famous lines: "I did not have sex with that woman"(I wonder if he got confused over the question. Maybe he was thinking of Hilliary and not Monica).

Brad Pitt, George Clooney, Tom Hanks, eat your hearts out!!!

I was reminded of these incidents as I watched him turn in another classic Clinton. Reminds me of why he recieved an honorary Oscar from Hollywood when he left office. The carefully staged response, the perfect timing of the righteous indignation, and, of course, the excellant use of a prop. Im sure acting schools everywhere are going to be showing his performance to their students.

Someone once said that the art of acting was the ability to get the audience to believe the impossible. If that is the truth, then Clinton must rank among the greatest actors of all time.

As a side note, I noted with great interest what Her Royal Thighness Hilliary Clinton said after her husband's performance. She noted that her husband showed:"that the Democrats weren't gonna take it anymore". Take what? The truth?

Great column Annie!

I was hubbing in Minn./St. Paul when I first saw the Clinton meltdown. My initial reaction (which I shared with my wife) was, “The lady doth protest too much.” Followed by, “I haven’t seen Clinton that worked up, not since the time when he said, ‘I did not have sexual relations with that woman, Ms. Lewinsky.’” The spinsters can say what they will, the fact remains; the man was definitely unhinged.

I believe we are witnessing an individual who is intent on leaving an honorable heritage; trouble for him, is he cannot escape his past. Even if the revisionists somehow alter the historical record, there will nonetheless be testimony written indelibly in the annals of life, which will ultimately bear witness to the truth.

I believe Clinton’s enduring legacy will be that he quaffed from the goblet of excess. A fitting epitaph would be, “He did what he did, because he could.” Although fine for a hedonist, it’s not the sort of ending Clinton (who imagines himself to be a statesman) wants to be the defining statement for his life.

Clinton was not the worst prez
Carter was by far the worst president we have ever had; Clinton was the second worst.

Redemption for ex-Clinton Voters
In 1992 my aging parents decided to believe all the fixes to Medicare and health care promised by candidate Bubba and voted for him. In early 1993, I drove them on a 12-hour drive to another part of the country to visit my son. I had tape recorded twelve hours of the Rush Limbaugh program on cassette (this was before mp3 downloads, of course). After twelve straight hours of Rush, this beautiful elderly couple were again right-thinking. And, of course, the next eight years convinced them completely of the error of their 1992 ballots. I call it tough love.

Psychopaths
It would almost be comforting if Bill Clinton were just incompetent. But his blow-up on screen with Chris Wallace shows that he KNOWS how badly he screwed up, but he doesn't want to take responsibility

I remember back in 1992 listening to talk radio and people saying that this "character" thing is way overblown.

Well, I can't speak with authority on FDR's performance, although there is evidence he could have prevented the Pearl Harbor disaster.

But I know for fact that Kennedy screwed the freedom loving Cubans in the Bay of Pigs fiasco.
Wonder if he was getting a Lewinsky by Marilyn while the Anti Castro troops were getting slaughtered. The particulars of the Bay of Pigs invasion isn't debatable, and I give JFK credit for admitting it and not trying to spin it or deny it.

I feel sorry for Jimmy Carter, because Jimmy was always just a "useful idiot". I don't think Jimmy has ever had a useful thought above the I.Q. of 90. And I can say that based on all of his statements in the past few years. The only reason he got elected is because Nixon was a paranoid megalomaniac and there were posters that warned people: "Would you buy a used Ford from this man?" I hate to say it, but the majority of voters in this country really are gullible.

And how proud would you be to share the distinction of receiving a Nobel peace prize with Yasser Arafat? Please, Jimmy, just build the houses and shut up.

But back to Bill. Bill is a sociopath, and his wife is even worse. Remember the "Healthcare" bill that they wanted to pass? The Rose Law Firm records? The rape of Juanita Broderick?

The worst things that the left can scream about George W. Bush is that he's stupid and inarticulate. How do you earn a Harvard MBA by being that way is a mystery to me, unless Harvard has been a fraud since 1960 or so.

And yeah, I freaking hate most of the social and spending policies that GBW has made possible. In that sense he's just as bad as Bill Clinton, but he's not evil. I just think George is listening to the wrong advisors on domestic issues while being overly (and justifiably so) preoccupied with the war against the islamofascists who want to kill us. As opposed to being preoccupied with trying to score a BJ in the oval office.


What great posts!
I found myself laughing out loud; really funny stuff.

I've gotta agree, for outdoing Drop-Trou for the Terrible Prez Prize: Jimmy Carter (the ex-pres, not our friend the poster).

Nation-building: We're not nation-building in Iraq (though I think it's fair to say that's our "public reason"). We're keeping the wolf away from our own door. If Iraq ends up with a democracy as a result (one BIG "if", IMO), so much the better.

Finger wagging: I have to laugh every time I read that. He wags more than his finger. ("Have a cigar, Bill")

The Worst Pres
As HH quoted George Will as saying, "Bill Clinton is not the worst president in American history, but he is the worst person to be president in American history."

(Or something very close; this is from memory)

WARRIOR
WARRIOR ,
WHAT A FANTASSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSTIC
SYNOPSIS (sp?) OF THE EIGHT YEARS
REIGN OF THE "LOWER THAN SEA WEED "
SLICKUM . KEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEP ON
KEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEPING ON
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

FREEDOM WRITER
IN THE HISTORY OF THE WORLD ,
YOU HOLD THE PRIZE FOR BEING
MIS-NAMED.

Fergus
Look out for BS Detector. If you have to use your memory its automatically BS.

A Song for Bill
Billy drop trou and I don't care;
Billy drop trou and I don't care;
Billy drop trou and I don't care;
It's just a scandal about sex.

Ken in Tenn
Dude, you miss the point entirely. Unfortunately for Drop-Trou and you, that's the legacy he earned for himself. Stained Blue Dress, cigars (can anyone ever smoke a cigar without that image at least passing through their mind anymore?).

That's just the way it is. And the interesting thing is that it didn't have to be that way. If he'd simply copped when the fit first hit the shan, instead of his "I never had sex with that woman" BS speech, it would have been a tempest in a teapot that would have disappeared into the breeze. Instead, he created a situation that for months dragged this country through the mud and slime in which he lives. He's an amoral sociopath, plain and simple. He's brought this all onto himself.

You reap what you sow
In Drop-Trou's case, the phrase has literal meaning.

:-)

TO: Ken in Tennessee
Very astute observations all! It would be so much better if Ann and other good Amercian’s just shut our collective mouths. Perhaps we could all take a lesson from the fine folks over at Skare Americka! Molloy, Franken, Rhodes and if you want a real, honest-to-goodness lesbian, well, they have Rachael Maddow.

One hardly ever hears an unsavory word from this bunch! It is obvious the etiquette and conversational courses they all took from Alec Baldwin are paying dividends!

As far as propaganda, well, perhaps the right might be guilty of a little of that. The fact remains there is generally a modicum in truth in propaganda, it is just exaggerated. On the other hand, the Birkenstockistas of the left simply make up their lies. I’ll take propaganda for $200 Alex.

But if nothing else and you prove it beautifully, Ann does get people to think. She is honest, brutal, acerbic and most distressing to the left, almost always correct. When she is calling names and stringing invectives I see it as simply acknowledging the elephant in the room.

When the leaders of the Democrat Party (and, I am so glad I did not get an invite to THAT party) can call the President of the United States far worse than Ann calls those who truly deserve our bile and get away with it I really do not see where Ann should be taken to task for her words.

If I can make one further observation, I think we would all rest easier if one did not mention “facing” and “Clinton’s genitalia” in the same sentence.

Or, century.

I kinda like the smirk
Well all comments covered here. I have seen leftie posters say this was a FOX news set-up and then all of a sudden when the crisis managers got into it it was supposed to be this brilliant act of planned defiance. Yeh Right. Get over it. Ol zipper head or what ever that was got caught with his pants down again, that's all. I kinda like Chris Wallaces permanent smirk. Lol. Like his fathers. They don't have to try hard for the smirk, it's natural almost.

This is a great wake up for America Nov. '08. If one gets in we get both idiots.

NRAlifer
Good to hear it.

GO ANN !!!!!!!

To BrianR
You REALLY want a good laugh?? Read some of the political cartoons on the Townhall comic section. Hysterical. Oh, but we mustn't laugh at him ...right?? The poor thing. How insensitive of me, and the Right.

If I weren't married
I'd hit the gym, get in shape and initiate a long distance courtship with Ann.

Since I am married, I guess I'll just have to get in shape for the woman whom I have loved for 22 years. Oh, I'll still read Ann, and she will still be on my top 10 cocktail list. No, that is not an entendre, rather it is a list of 10 people you would like to have cocktails with while discussing current events. She is in fine company. David Limbaugh, Mike Adams, Jeff Jacoby, Ann Coulter, Laura Ingraham, Leonard Pitts, Jonah Goldberg, Florence King, Michelle Malkin and Debbie Schlussel. Talk about the new Algonquin Roundtable.

Ken in Tenn
Have you ever read any Democratic or Left-wing columns in the newspapers ...????any similarity??You don't like it when others act the same way. I don't either..However, I have to agree w/ Ms. Coulter's view most of the time...no matter how smug or supercilious she may sound.

Loved the title.
Love the title again. The imagery is hysterical.

"Why didn't you do more to put bin Laden and al-Qaida out of business when you were president?"

Because at that point he was just a nuisance?

"It is truly sad to see the meltdown of anyone, especially the greatest Democrat president since Jimmy Carter."

A true statement at this time, because he's the ONLY Dem president since Jimmy.

So Clinton got PO'd over tought questions. And you wonder why the White House press corps lobs softballs.

Ann very good
I see all the replies to the subject that Ann wrote about are doing a good job of analyzing BubaBuba. The one thing that I would like to see is that the people start telling both the incompetents that we as a country had the misfortune to have a Presidents of this great country to SHUT THEIR STUPID MOUTHS.I am so fed up with Carter knocking our country when ever he goes overseas to unfriendly countries. Clinton talks so much nothing but Bulls*** always comes flowing out. You take a cowered like him, he would not know how to use a military force properly, his Demo gouges of his party are all the same way, they don't know how to protect this country, and really don't give a darn. I would like some test given to all the Members of Congress to find out who are loyal and who are traitors. THE DEMOCRATS WOULD TOP THE LIST OF THE TRAITORS.

Good satire
A dear old friend, now a retired professor emeritus of 18th centure and Restoration Lit. commented to me years ago: "True satire must be rooted in a moral stance." So, if you have a basis of truth that you stand on, then lies can be ridiculed without becoming a liar yourself. If, on the other hand, you have no moral compass and stand for nothing, you are just a name-caller. Trying to imply that Ann is immoral is a tactic that may demote her to Franken's level, but with only circumstantial surmisings offered, her satire remains on the high road, regardless of how much it may hurt.

Cheers to Swift and Ann

Ken in Tennessee
The other point you miss is the fact that Mr. Clinton refuses to acknowledge much in the way of wrong doing. His refutations and denials in the interviews are outright lies and half-truths. Whatever he admits to is only half the story and he blames the other guy for doing it worse than he did.

Ann has the knack of using satire to get a point across. Anyone who has read "The Church of Liberalism" can attest to that.

It's people who aren't looking for the truth that don't like her style.

We all must admit....
Bubba in the news is so much fun!
One of those guilty pleasures...
I must repeat the best joke out there so far...

Hillary states that she hasn't seen Bill this mad since she made him remove his page on MySpace!

We Still have Billary to kick around!
Keep it coming!!!

Follow the bouncing finger
Clinton's index finger is like the needle on a polygraph: excessive movement equals "Whopper Alert!"



Our Freind from Tennessee
It amazes me that libs are so obvious and superficial. In the 6 paragraph tirade, our freind from Tennessee failed to address a single point from Ann's article. He resorts to attempting to discuss how Ann is the lovechild of bill and bella, ranting about Ann discussing bills genitals, what a terrible person Ann is and how she talks like every Air America commentator, and then resorts to namecalling by trying to prove she's a lesbian...
I guess the bottom line is that the when the left cant refute the facts, they attack the messenger.
Need proof? Look at the attacks on George Allen and macaca. Personally, I didnt know macaca was a word in the english dictionary. Now all of a sudden, the Dems have decided that its a "bad" word... Its racial and stereotyping.
Gotta love campaign season.

Ann
I wait for Ann's comments, because until she makes it all a little more bearable with some humor and clever innuendo. Then I can laugh at what the left is running around and screaming about. Of course, the screaming of those offended by her caustic delivery of the obvious truth can help me identify who I must never trust or believe. I have enough common sense to know who is lying and having a conniption fit when they've been caught with their pants down. Oh, did I really say that? Ann's best line: "The only thing Clinton forgot to say to Wallace was, 'You'd better put some ice on that.'" Thanks, Ann! I wonder how many people even know about Juanita. When his pants went down that time, he became a rapist! If she had told the truth then, maybe the babies wouldn't have had to die in Waco.

to Crawfish
Earlier, I mistakenly addressed you instead of Ken in Tenn...Sorry....e.b.

Please Miss Ann. . .
Eat something baby. Cake, ice cream, donuts anything! You'll still be gorgeous!

Even the title
of the column had me rolling. Great analysis, as usual, Ann!
To Kimberly, it annoys me to no end that I feel compelled to fire back at any of your silly posts, but here goes-
As far as President Bush running in 2000 on a "no nation building" platform, don't you think that a little event that occurred on Sept. 11, 2001, changed things just a little bit? Maybe?

Oh, and to you and Donaldd, never forget to shriek "Halliburton" "Bush lied, kids died"..you know, the usual stuff...

Ken in Tennessee
Tsk, tsk, tsk. You mentioned that Ann Coulter is gay. Good Job! But,you forgot to claim that she is racist! Have you lost your playbook, little feller? You know, you can get a new copy over at dkos.

The plank in your eye
Why are you more worried about Bill Clinton than you are with actions from the side you can effect? What was that Jesus said about wanting to remove a plank from the eye of your neighbor? First you must remove your own.

Let's recap:
-You support a chosen war
-You support, accept, and rationalize that innocent Iraqi's who have done no harm to Americans should be put in harm's way if it protects your skin. The toll is in the 20,000s.
-You support torture if it makes you feel safer.
-Other people's lives are less important than yours which warrants a chosen war, especially if those those lives are other than Christian.


Ann, if you are not going to adhere to anything in the Bible, then throw it away or give it to someone who actually cares. Going to Church and calling yourself Christian, does not a Christian make. If that is all it took, anyone could do it.

Worry less about others and more about yourself.


Tree Hugger thinks
that this is a bad thing:

TH: "You support, accept, and rationalize that innocent Iraqi's who have done no harm to Americans should be put in harm's way if it protects your skin."

Yes, Tree Hugger. I think it IS a good thing to protect American life and American lives.

You probably also wonder why 'liberals' have such a wimpy reputation on national defense, too, don't you?

Your obsession with "The plank in your eye" doesn't apply to all of us Tree Hugger. Just because you and that tree of yours are so wrapped up in each other doesn't mean the rest of us have that problem.

Tree Hugger
you wrote:

"Let's recap:
-You support a chosen war"

1. Chosen? Where have you been for the last 13 years? How about the last 20 or so? 27? How about we go back to the publication of Qutb's "Milestones"?

We have been in a war, whether anyone in this country has been aware of it or not. The difference now is, most of the Right knows it. Most of the Left denies it, ignores it, or pretends that we can sidestep our way out of it, without losing it.

"-You support, accept, and rationalize that innocent Iraqi's who have done no harm to Americans should be put in harm's way if it protects your skin. The toll is in the 20,000s."

Yes. First, we are in a war. In war, innocents die. And yes, I would much rather it be THEIR innocents than ours. If you maintain that you would rather our innocents die than theirs, well, that's your prerogative, but it makes you darned stupid in my eyes.

"-You support torture if it makes you feel safer."

No, I support torture if it makes me safer, period.

What's your point?

"-Other people's lives are less important than yours which warrants a chosen war, especially if those those lives are other than Christian."

1. Other people have themselves and their government to look after their lives. I only have myself to look after mine. So yes, functionally, other people's lives are less important to me than mine.

The one exception to this would be my children, who have only me to look after their lives. This is the difference between adults and children. To take an attitude where the lives of others are more important to me than mine, is to take a parental attitude toward them. This is, in my opinion, one of the major faults of the Left: it demands that we act parentally toward other, adult human beings. As a consequence, many of those so parented tend to begin to act like children, and look for and depend on that parental regard.

This is not a way to run a ship.

2. No one else, in this conversation, has brought Christianity into this; why have you?


To Fergus, Sloopy, Handy
Kudos! Makes me wonder why 'they' even bother to post on TH. So wacky..."Plank" in OUR eye!! ??Please! Get Real, Get an education. Get a Life..

Mr. Tree-Hugger
perhaps actually knowing Scripture does a Christian make.
You and that tree...it's a speck, a speck in your neighbor's eye.

Re: Thoughtful Democratic Responses
Giving a thoughtful response to an Ann Coulter column is tantamount to trying to teach monkeys to work math problems. The perhaps too-subtle point of my Coulteresque satire earlier is that if you want to have a reasonable, civil debate, go to people who are reasonable and civil.

In my book, Coulter doesn't qualify for the same reason many of her counterparts on the left don't qualify. They are just engaged in juvenile tantrums, trying to outshout the opposition and gain more attention for themselves. Hence the comparison with my fifth grader, who sometimes seemes positively mature by comparison.

The rantings of Coulter and her ilk on both political extremes are a big part of the reason we have lost the ability to have real policy debates and are rapidly losing the ability to unite the country even for the best causes. I suspect those who remain obsessed with Clinton's sex life have settled on the only policy debate in their lifetimes they can truly understand, just like those in the "Bush lied, people died" crowd.

The funny thing is that when I go to sites like this one, then look at the ones from the progressive side, I see two completely different worlds. Unfortunately, neither one of them looks much like the real one, or at least the one I live in. My world isn't always black and white, usually it's colored in shades of gray. Every problem can't be solved by blind adherence to ideology, conservative or liberal, whatever those labels mean anymore. To solve real problems you often have to think, which is exactly the opposite of ideology where all the answers are conveniently provided for you. No party, no religion and no ideology has a monopoly on truth or wisdom.

And while we're at it, can we leave behind some of the pointless debates? Listening to the back-and-forth between Clinton and Rice over the weekend over which side did a better job in averting 9/11 was a great example. Here's a little hint -- neither administration did! Hey, I watched the towers collapsing on CNN just like the rest of the world and you both blew it. Now can we get on with deciding the best way to make sure it doesn't happen again, please?

As for me, I'm voting Democratic across the board in November for one simple reason: gridlock. I've had enough from both sides and now I just want everything to lock up for a while.

Mike Bouchard in Michigan needs money!!
This whole Clinton wig-out is worthless! It's nothing new, it doesn't promote the Repubican agenda nor does it change any minds. The Republicans who keep blathering on about it risk overplaying their hand--so forget about it and please donate money to the Mike Bouchard campaign for US Senate in Michigan.
Debbie Stabenow has got to be the easiest pick off in this election. The state is a totally messed up unmitigated disaster! Bouchard is way behind in the polls--which is just a disgrace for the Republican party if they can't even win such an easy seat to win.

Huh?
Donaldd writes: Facts
Recently when a reporter asked if what Clinton said was a lie Dr. Rice replied, "No,..."

Condosleezza's answer is good enough for me.
.
.
.
.
.
.
And this was in regards to? Was she asked if Bill Clinton lied when he claimed he was president?

Mike Bouchard
Hey, if Bouchard needs money, let him get a job like the rest of us. This is a conservative site, buddy. No free lunch. He wants us to give him our hard-earned money so he can get some cushy government job and never work again? Ridiculous.

You liberals are always looking for a hand-out, aren't you? Next thing, you'll be telling us Bouchard is a minority and ought to get extra votes through some kind of affirmative action program. Besides, if it's such an easy seat to win, why is Bouchard behind?

Clinton and Carter
Carter got us into this mess. Clinton perpetuated it. Bush is trying to clean it all up and the Dems are in the way at every turn. The party as a whole seems to be wagging their collective finger a la Clinton, as the too know they F*&^ed it all up and have nothing but guilt for their role. Clinton's performance was a microcosm of what the Democrat Party has become.

Ken in Tenn
I assure you that I am no liberal. The problems with Clinton are all well known are they not? Hasn't he always lied and been deceptive? Nothing new. So anything he says and does is just more of Clinton. It's all about Clinton--Clinton this and Clinton that--who give a flying finger of fate about him?
He is inconsequential and your typical lefty loon appeasing arrogant elitist. Most all dems have been that way since 1968 in case no one has noticed this.
His tyrade is a distraction and makes it all about him once again. If you also hadn't noticed, the Republicans way overplayed their hand against him before and there was a backlash-people started feeling sorry for Clinton because of all of the Republican attacks against him.
So forget about what he does and says--he should not be elevated back to a status he doesn't deserve.
Bouchard is behind because Stabenow has tons of cash so she has been running massive amounts of deceptive ads--you don't see any Bouchard ads because he doesn't have any cash coming in from national interests like Stabenow is getting. Her seat is only safe if Republicans don't toss some money up this way.

All right
Because this topic seems to be the biggie of the day, I rolled out my new essay on my blog (click my name, above) a couple of days ahead of my planned release. It's entitled "My name is Hassan", and directly addresses all of this stuff about the NIE conclusions and WOT indirectly, but (I believe) meaningfully.

That was a shameless plug, but check it out.

A simpler life
I guess I should just become a conservative then...or a liberal...even though I think both extremes are too extreme? It would be so much simpler. No need for thinking, analysis, coming to my own conclusions. Just ideology to answer all my questions, how liberating. I'd feel much better I'm sure.

And think of all the time I could save with no more need to read history, science, biographies...I could just put one of Ann Coulter's books by my bedside -- or Michael Moore's -- and color them all night long!

But my problem is that I usually find the truth is somewhere in the middle.

Sure, I can pick random facts out of history like both Clinton and Rice to tell me just about anything.

** Ronald Reagan was a wimp. He let Hezbollah blow up the barracks in Lebanon, kill 287 Marines and he did NOTHING. No, not really...he cut and ran. Pulled out. Talk about empowering terrorists. What a coward. Then he actually sold weapons to the terrorists who kidnapped those 44 Americans in Iran. A traitor as well!

** George H.W. Bush determined it was Libya that blew up Pan Am 103 and killed 259 people. And what did he do? Sanctions. That's right, wimpy sanctions. The fact that they worked and Libya got out of the terrorism business is beside the point. He was a wimp.

** Of course, the only real man of the bunch was Clinton. When he learned that Iraqi intelligence tried to kill Bush 41 in 1993 while he was visiting Kuwait, he immediately ordered a cruise missile strike on the Iraqi intel HQ and there was not a single instance of them attacking Americans for the next decade. A true conservative hero.

Hey, this is fun. Not only is the world black and white, I can actually prove that black IS white.

No, there really are gray areas, ideology doesn't have all the answers, nuance is important and my dinner is getting cold. Ken, out.


Ken in TN
Seems like his argument was slanted a bit to the left, huh, which countered his own post.

DZ
Only if you look at things objectively. From a liberal point of view, Ken's positions are extremely moderate/middle of the road. From a truly moderate position, he sounds mildly leftist. From a conservative viewpoint, he sounds like a f***ing leftist nutjob, whose gravel-munching includes his self-regard as a moderate.

Ken in Tenn has a good point about RR
Except he just does the typical oversimplification of things. Reagan was a wimp in Lebanon because he had bigger fish to fry--namely defeating lefty communism on a large scale. Defeating that was 100 times more important at that time than it would have been getting distracted by such a small scale operation like in Lebanon against a mostly civilian mob. The same can be said about Iraq--GWB knows that Iraq is much more important than Afghanistan. There was never a huge knowledge base in Afghanistan that knew all about making WMD's like there was--WAS--in Iraq. All of those types of people in Iraq were more than willing to sell their services to anyone who had the cash--and UBL sure had a wad.
Clinton lobbing a few cruise missiles at night on empty government buildings was typical Clinton--all show and no go.
GHWB--I seem to remeber something that happened in Kuwait. He wimped out though--he should have gone all the way into Iraq like all of those lefty appeasers want back then--right Ken in Tenn?


Question:
Is Ken and Phylo the same person? They're both out.

What about the ultimate appeaser Nixon?
He was the biggest appeaser of the bunch. His whole presidency was nothing but trying to appease the left--who really controlled everything back then--the press, the military and all things political. Nixon created so many liberal socialist programs I could write all night and still not be able to list all of that crud down. And where did that get him? A one-way ticket out of town on a rail. He was the greatest non-liberal liberal POTUS ever.
GWB has done some things just exactly like Nixon-unfortunately for him. Bush should be the lefts bestest buddy because he did what they all wanted him to do. He took the country to war in Iraq just like they were all screeching for for around 10 years straight.
I guess Bush should have dropped his idea of reaching across that aisle!

Ken
A pleasant civil post. By the way, BrianR and i are going for gridlock too. You make 3, we're on a roll. I grok Jerseygirl will go along eventually.

Brummy
"All of those types of people in Iraq were more than willing to sell their services to anyone who had the cash--and UBL sure had a wad."

Not exactly correct. UBL's share of the BL fortune came to about 7 mill, with a $500k per annum. Not chump change by any stretch, but vastly less than it has been estimated by some. And he left Sudan around 98 with at most about $50k, and at worst with nothing whatsoever.

Pistol
LOL.

Finger Wagging Bill
Any Time Clinton Wags His Finger, I Get Real Nervous, You Don't Know Where It's Been

The worst president
I admit to only having made it through about half the comments (my Auburn Tigers just won a couple of hours ago and I'm exhausted), but all of this talk about Clinton being the worst president has gotten me thinking. Now, I'm conservative, and I don't particularly like Clinton, but I can't bring myself to call him the worst president ever, and I have a problem accepting the conservative notion that he is almost as much as accepting the liberal notion that "Dubya" is the worst ever. In truth, I don't think either one of them is; it's just that the nation has become so polarized that everyone is completely one way or the other. I agree with Coulter that Clinton's interview was nothing more than a sham, but his presidency is a bit different. Yeah, he cheated on his wife and lied about it under oath. No, I don't think that's befitting of the commander in chief of the United States of America. No, I don't agree with the way he went about things. Yes, I think he was the beneficiary of the dotcom boom of the nineties. But calling him the worst president ever? Give me a break. He's a weasel, but he didn't do quite as badly as everyone here seems to believe. He didn't do well fighting the war on terror that Bush has fought, but then, Bush has been a bit overzealous in his pursuit of that war (he could have slowed down a bit and finished off afghanistan before invading iraq, for one...I don't think he did badly, but in retrospect he could have done better). But he did do well to maintain the economic level that the dotcom boom gave him. He did do well to appease other nations in the world through diplomacy, even if it was at the expense of America's dignity (back to the "will you please remove your di*k from my a*s" mentality that i've mentioned before). I don't think he was a great president, but the worst ever? What about Herbert Hoover, president in '29 (black Tuesday, the crash of the stock market and beginning of the depression)? He allowed the interest rate to rise to the point where it was no longer profitable for businesses to invest in ANYTHING, which caused them to pull their money out of their investments, which made stocks fall, which made the vast majority of America go broke. What about Abraham Lincoln, who brought the idea of a democracy to America? Remember, we were not founded as a democracy: we were founded as a republic, modeling ourselves after the Roman Empire. He is the one who drove the final wedge between federal and state governments, which inspired the south to succeed in hopes of creating a nation built on the principles of states' rights. For those of you who don't know this (I don't mean that condescedingly, because most people don't know it simply because it's not taught in schools anymore), the word "state" was, before the U.S., synonymous with "country" or "nation" (read: the State of Isreal). America was founded based on the idea that each of the colonies was its own country, and could govern itself as it wanted to; the federal government was meant only to organize defense against outsiders and to regulate interstate commerce. The Civil War in this country was not fought over slavery; it was fought over the right to choose whether to have slavery or not. And the Emancipation Proclamation did not end slavery; it only ended slavery in the south, as a punishment for trying to succeed. Franklin D. Roosevelt was a drunkard who has been documented as having 10 martinis a day, two mistresses (despite being married), and chain smoked. Yet we revere these last two as great presidents and the first is virtually forgotten, so much so that the only way people seem to remember him is because he shares the same name as a vacuum cleaner.

Look, I'm not a Clinton fan. And I do happen to support Bush, regardless of the problems I have with some of his policies. But don't just start arbitrarily calling Clinton the worst president ever simply because he's the only liberal to take office in the past two and a half decades. In doing so, you become little more than a common idiot shouting obscenities because things haven't gone your way (notice that I say "little more"...there is some truth to it, but understand the history of the U.S. before you make such claims).

Old timer...
Nice conspiracy theory, but one cannot be Vice President unless one is eligible to be President:

"...no person constitutionally ineligible to the office of President shall be eligible to that of Vice-President of the United States."

That's from the 12th Amendment.

Sorry, but Billy can't be President again. He's constitutionally ineligible to be President, so he can't be Vice President either.

Why
is it that most of the liberals are still pushing the idea Clinton was impeached because of his sex life? Why can't they wrap their tiny little minds around "perjury"? I am still hearing that tired old line on blogs, comedy routines and liberal talk radio. They never give up trying to minimize his actions into nothing more than having sex with "MISS NASTY A**", as Wanda Seikes calls Monica. And how can they be so defending of a 50 something married man who has that kind of relationship with a girl not yet 20 and when caught, throws her to the wolves? Oh yes, he is so honorable!!! Really worth defending.....

Interpretation
You say " . . . the dyke is set to explode and someone is about to come out . . . "
Are we to infer that this is in response to her husbands explosion last week in front of Chris Wallace?



....... No, I don't think so. I think he meant Hillary was going to give birth to a demon.

Old friend
I wish to exercise my right to make a statement about a former close friend of mine, Ann Coulter. This is about one of the slimiest women on the face of the planet. Everything she stands for, I hate. She emanates hate, she promotes hate and anger. How do I know? I am related to her. She's alienated her family, her original friends and lies every time she opens her skinny mouth.




You see, Ann Coulter was originally a democrat but when she saw an opportunity, she changed to a Republican, just for the notice, just for the press, just to make a few bucks. The net result is that Christians should hate her for her lies, her slime, her ugly methods, and the lies to her family. In high school Ann was a tramp, a real ****. She would have sex with most any guy who could get beyond the smell of her unwashed body. To this day, she quite often refuses to take a shower more than a couple times a week unless it's incredibly hot. The guests on her radio program have made comments. She seems to think it's her natural body smell. It is. But it's not pleasant. I know some people will doubt this report but it's all true. Not too many people have been closer to Ann Coulter than I, for most of her life. Ann Coulter is the kind of person who wouldn't be missed by many if she died today. Not really. No one really likes her, except those who attempt to become famous getting next to her. I've been told that Laura Bush hates Ann Coulter, and her husband doesn't think much of her either. Chris Matthews can't stand her, even though Ann Coulter has contracted to be on Hardball. Chris once said of Ann Coulter, far off camera, that, "she reminds me of a foul-mouthed bi**h in heat, always in heat!". In renewing his contract is asked that Ann Coulter not be allowed on his program again. But during the election he was forced to put up with her.

Bill Maher was Ann Coulter's friend when she was a hard nosed Democrat and still insists they are friends and she's appeared on his new show. But off camera, he can't stand her. Maher has been copping out lately. It called ratings. During one taping session, Bill Maher discovered that Ann Coulter had been dating a 17 year old boy whom she called her younger brother, was in fact her date for that night. I was told that they spent a night in a hotel room together. I don't know if they had sex, but then again, Ann has sex with lots of people, including women.

It is truly hypocritical that Ann Coulter can get away with this, even with the Fundamentalist Christians. They just don't seem to care or believe. How can they possibly trust this foul mouthed, nasty, slimy woman? Nothing comes out of her mouth but hate. Of course, it makes for dramma and for ratings.

Ann Coulter also practices different lines written for her, at least she did in the last six months. There are two men, David Emmerson and Arnie Kamenski (sp), paid by the RNC to teach Ann Coulter what to say and how to say it. The last time I saw her she was spending half the day practicing her lines, over and over again in front of a large mirror. She was laughing at it all, in fact said how much horse sh*t it was, but it was a game, only a game to play, a role.

I told her this was too important to lie but Ann thinks all this is just a game, that's it's the way it's played. Ann Coulter doesn't care about anyone but herself. And she's not even religeous. Not really. What she has done, and what she has said, is maybe some of the worse hate I've ever heard. Ann Coulter has turned into a hate machine, all too often, now believing what she says, and has even said that if John Kerry won the presidency, the best way to deal with those kinds of Liberals was to eliminate them, any way possible, legal or not.

That's when we parted company. And that's the end of our life long relationship. She's called me a liar but all her close "buddies" know the truth. Ann Coulter is a Nazi, a cold hearted, Nazi. Sue me. It wouldn't be difficult to find out who I am. Do something Anne. But you won't of course because you know it's true, and much more. We know the truth. And you thought I'd never say it. To show you who I really am, for sure, here it is Anne, something only you and I know for sure, so you know it is I:

Remember Ellen and what we did to her on New Year's Eve? Now you know for sure. And I'll never let you have a "bounty". You know what I mean!

For the professed 'Relative" of Ann
I find it far beyond credibility that you are in fact who you claim to be.
If you were, you would be SEEN on every news site on the planet- liberals would be just dying to put you in the spotlight to slander Ann-
I sincerely doubt that she would pal around with someone who is still adolescent enough to use the term "Nazi" when referring to people that they don't like-
But someone pretending to be a "close" friend/relative who just happens to be a flaming liberal, definitely would use that term continuously, it is THE coolest insult in liberalspeak.
I suppose I could be wrong, but frankly I think you are full of s***.

ellie
Ann is spelled A-n-n.

You were obviously spinning out of control and the dizziness left you a little confused towards the end of your screed.

BTW - Are you "a former close friend" or are you "related to her?"

Webster
A couple of things...
The word is "secede", not "succed".

You're half-right: the Civil War was fought because of states' rights AND slavery. Yes, from the perspective of the Southern states who seceded, it was all about states' rights. But consider why Lincoln issued the Emancipation Proclamation: the war was dragging on, the casualty numbers were climbing, it was getting expensive to buy all that gunpowder, etc, and there was a growing sentiment in the Union to just forget about it, let the Southern states go.
Read the Gettysburg Address, and read between the lines - Lincoln felt that it was of utmost importance to preserve the Union. He issued the E. P. to motivate the Abolitionists to support the War, and it worked. Remember that, it was mostly Lincoln's more or less alliance - if I can use that word - with the Abolitionists before his election, that had the South so concerned that many Southerners were swearing up and down that they should secede if Lincoln were elected.

If Lincoln had been radically in favor of slavery, to the point of making Northern states allow slavery, would the Southern states have seceded? Not likely.

Consider Lincoln's position as if you were a lawyer. After the Southern states secede, and the remaining states of the Union just settle, led by President Lincoln, make arrangements, exchange ambassadors, set up consulates, etc., sometime later, states in one part of the remaining Union have a disagreement about whether to allow exploration and the settlement of the West, or gold mining in California (which was already a state of the Union at the time - no slaves in California) or silver mining and lead mining in Colorado, etc, etc, and another group would split off. Challenge them? You've already set a precedent when you allowed the Southern states to secede over the right to decide for themselves to allow (or not to allow) slavery; now California and Nevada (I'm starting to make this up as I go) want to allow gambling, and the rest of the country says "Gambling!?!?! You can't do that." California and Nevada decide to secede and form their own little country. Are you just going to let them go? How do you stop them?

Personally, I'm more in favor of the states' rights side, especially if it could have been done without secession. I expect that slavery would have eventually become unprofitable anyway, and then it could have been outlawed, state-by-state, and without any bloodshed.

Good 'shrooms', eh ellie?
You are no more related to - or even a friend of - Ann Coulter than Bill and Hill are. What you seem to be is an imaginative but demented closet case.

Ann wasn't raised as trailer trash, as you seem to have been. Ann was arguing politics, from the conservative side, with her Father when she was in grade school. She was so well versed that by the time she got to Cornell, she practically immediately founded the Cornell Review based on Darthmouth's conservative paper also called Review. Some conversion...

Who do you think you are deceiving with your vicious and hateful lies. Some people just have no decency...

No, Goddie, it's ellie who is full of it...

Did we give you enough attention, ellie? Your 15 minutes of Fame? Now kindly go away.

Funny satire
Did somebody take ellie's rant too seriously?

I thought it was an incredibly clever satire of an Ann Coulter column. My problem with her satire was her glaring omission of at least one gratuitous reference to Bill Clinton's genitalia, Monica Lewinsky or a stained Gap dress. Of course, those references have tremendously tapered off recently to just 1.3 mention per column in recent months. After all, it has been nearly a decade A.E. (after emission). I guess it's that Cornell education that has made her so high-minded.




Mrs. Clinton Goes to Washington
This entire interview on Fox news was to show the viewer what kind of man Hillary has sleeping with her. Just think about the pillow talk!

I hope this goes big enough to be made into a hollywood sitcom. I just can't wait to see what kind of dialogue the writers will come up with to beat this presidential discourse.

You go Ann you got it almost right...but this is all about Hillary. Afterall everyone now knows how tough she HAS to be.

I think Chris Wallace will treasure the tape footage.

Kenssee,
how many of those shrooms did you bum off of ellie?

ellie's truth
How DARE you people question ellie's veracity! She has BRAVELY and SELFLESSLY come in to a hostile situation and put her anonymous reputation on the line. Ok, so maybe she isn't sure if she is a relative or a friend. So what! Perhaps she doesn't know how to spell the name of the relative/friend she was so EXCEEDINGLY close to! Who cares?

What matters is this: out of the goodness of her heart (which is obviously as pure as the driven snow), ellie has taken it upon herself to share her 'truth'. As we all know, we each have our own 'truth' and that 'truth' is as valid as anyone else's personal 'truth' except when you believe that the truth is somewhere in the middle which is never really true except to the higher thinkers amongst us who know the truth about the fact that one side can never be just plain ole telling the truth about the truth.

Truthfully, I don't care about the truth. It's true! It all comes down to this. I was willing to overlook the fact that Ann(e) is " one of the slimiest women on the face of the planet", that she is out "just to make a few bucks", that she "was a tramp, a real ****" as well as the fact that "To this day, she quite often refuses to take a shower".

I didn't care that she "had been dating a 17 year old boy" or that Ann(E) was a "foul mouthed, nasty, slimy woman". None of this bothered me, even though it came from such a clearly unbiased, respectable anonymous source.

Would you like to know what did me in?? Would you care to know why I'll never trust Ann(e) Coulter again??? Well, apparently.....

"Chris Matthews can't stand her"!!!

I now know all I need to know. NEVER AGAIN ANN(E), NEVER AGAIN!

THANK you, ellie, where ever you are, whoever you may be, for your brave sacrifice, bring the 'truth' to all of us neanderthals here on Town Hall!


Clinton is a petty little tyrant
There is no doubt in my mind this clown would be a REAL dictator if given a chance. Look how mad and angry he gets at the least little bit of tough questioning.

Sloopy,
you speak for us all. I was just too angry with Ann(e) that I couldn't think straight.

Ken - Minor point
Difference is, Ann's columns are based on (amongst other things)documented stained cloth, as opposed to Ellie's fabrication, made of crackbrained whole cloth. Minor point...

Handy I love Nixon
Nixon, gave us the EPA, Equal Opportunity, Affirmative Action, among other totally liberal garbage. He open relations with China, and ended the Vietnam war among the good he did.

Nixon is an honorable man unlike the Clinton. Nixon did not put the country though an impeachment like Bubba did.

You will say it was all about sex. Well, well, history will show his legacy is more than lewd sex with the hired help.

Lets see Nuclear N. Korea, India, and Pakistan. OBL the world trade center. China missile technology for campaign cash. The Waco slaughter, Elian Gonzales, Kosavo, oh my it's still going. Rwanda, Somalia, the Sudan aspirin factory. Draft dodging, 900 FBI files, cattle gate, whitewater gate, jim Mcdougal, Paula Jones, don't forget rape (Juanita Broderick), Vince Foster, Gays in the military, Carnivore spy program, finger wagging liar, the Cole, Kenya and Tanzania, Kovar towers, Bomb the Chinese embassy and Kosovar tractorcade, perjury, loss of law license, thrashing the whitehouse when he left, his wife, and this will prove to be only minor compared to our eventual destruction by our countries greatest enemy the democrat party.

Opps
I forgot the Blue stained dress. Good thing Monica had that dress she could have ended up by a cannon at Fort Marcy park.

G.I. Joe - Nixon

Whatever his other failings may or may not have been, Nixon believed the Office of the Presidency was far more important than his own political ambitions. Although it had been alleged that JFK stole the election in '60' and given that there were only 118,574 votes separating them, Nixon would have been well within his rights to contest the results. He however, chose not to because he believed it would not be good for our nation and would have branded him a "sore loser" forever.

Cutter
Roger that, Nixon is more or a man than any current crop of the flower childern, hippies, and pinkos I've seen in politics these days.

You know it must make the appeasers crazy anyone might have the nerve to praise Nixon, but I will always respect him more than the Clinton, Gore or Kerry.

Separation
Civilized dialogue with the left(Democrats) is no longer possible. I think Buchanan is right, within 10-20 years there will be separation in the US, two socialistic states on the coasts, (the Union of Soviet American Republics), and free America in the middle.

Hey GI Joe! You forgot...
The computers laden with missile technology and Boeing machining equipment Clinton sold to the Chinese. You also failed to mention selling the Lincoln bedroom for campaign contributions.
It really all boils down to, "character" really does matter. We must all give Clinton his due for intellignence and political shrewdness. What cannot be denied are his personal shortcomings. That some do not feel integrity is important for their elected officials makes me wonder what standards they hold the children's educators to.
History will likely judge the Clinton admninistration for the perceived goodness he sought and attained through few self-initiated political successes such as Family Leave. Beyond that, he was very fortunate to have been the successor of sound financial (Greenspan) advice and a booming but vacous dotcom economy. That he was able to kick the can of terrorism down the road to Bush is an amazingly shrewd achievement as well.
As for Ellie. Whether or not you have any relation to Ann Coulter - you are a very deranged individual. Please seek help.

Humorous article but; here are the facts
Hello Ann,

Honestly, I could pen a sarcastically charming article to retort your comments however; I figured I’d just keep in simple; here, from a centrist point of view, are the facts:

As per the September 11 Commission report, President Clinton did authorize killing Osama Bin Laden. Clinton authorized 75 cruse missiles to be launched against targets Afghanistan and the Sudan, on August 20, 1998, where Osama Bin Laden was thought to be hiding. This was in response to the embassy bombings in Kenya & Tanzania on August 7.

At the time many chanted “no war for Monica, no war for Monica!”

Bill Clinton did leave Condoleezza Rice a comprehensive plan to combat terrorism and without further debate… you can read the top secret memos of January 25, 2001 yourself (they were declassified in 2004)

http://news.lp.findlaw.com/hdocs/docs/clarke/clrk2rice12501mem.html
http://news.lp.findlaw.com/hdocs/docs/clarke/clrk2rice12501mem2.html
http://news.lp.findlaw.com/hdocs/docs/clarke/clrk2rice12501mem3.html

The September 11th Commission concluded that the Lewinski affair did not hamper efforts to capture or kill Osama Bin Laden.

Clinton created the department of counter terrorism and elevated it to a cabinet level post.

Under Clinton all the attackers who bombed the World Trade Center on February 26, 1993 where hunted down, captured, tried, and convicted (Ramzi Yousef, Sheik Omar Abdel-Rahman, El Sayyid Nosair, Mahmud Abouhalima, Mohammad Salameh, Nidal Ayyad, Ahmad Ajaj, and Abdul Rahman Yasin.).

The planned Al Qaeda attacks against the Holland & Lincoln tunnels where thwarted under Clinton and the mastermind, the Blind Sheik, was also tried and convicted.

The planned Al Qaeda attacks to simultaneously blow up twelve airliners over the Pacific were also uncovered and prevented under Clinton.

When the USS Cole was bombed overseas, on October 12, 2000, Bill Clinton sent Paul O’Neil along with 400 FBI agents to determine if Al Qaeda was behind the attack. It was not until late January of 2001 that the FBI certified that Al Qaeda did perpetrate the attack on the Cole, by then, George W Bush was in the White House.

In closing, I forewent wit and jest to counter your spin but, as Clinton said “I like that about the Republicans; the evidence does not faze them, they are not bothered at all by the facts.”

Have a good day now,
Anthony Congiano
Senior Editor & Founder
http://www.manualfordemocracy.com

NRALifer:

Ellie’s not alone.

If Mr. Anthony Congiano's a centrist what do you suppose that makes Cindy Sheehan? A moderate by my accounting. I checked out his site and these are some of the low-lights.

The Manual for Democracy’s Mission Statement: “The Centrist's guide to restoring democratic rights and overcoming the upper rich 2% neo-con aristocracy of today.”

Two of the “Centrists Standpoints” include these gems, “Congressional oversight of the Bush Administration needs to be enacted by both the House & Senate as mandated by the Impeachment Clauses of the Constitution & statute” and “Support for inquiries and investigations concerning the Bush Administration's NSA Domestic-International Spying Program, warrantless wire-tapping, phone record database complying, Internet Search Engine spying, the outing of CIA officer Valerie Plame, the discrediting of Ambassador Joe Wilson, the handling of intelligence in the lead up to war with Iraq, the Dowing (sic) Street Memos, the secret energy company meetings, the intimidation of the news media, the torturing of detainees, the voting irregularities of 2004, & war profiteering.”

Links include Air Aljazeera, Kos, Huffy, Rhandi & Wackette.

Anthony also supports ratification of FDR’s 2nd Bill of Rights – otherwise known as Socialism.

Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain...

Colbert did not bomb
Ann Coulter, I don't know if you knew this, but Colbert was making jokes for the "viewers at home" not the press. The press didn't laugh, because they are soulless, humorless bastards. The people watching at home ate it up.

The fact you HEARD of the speech proves it was a success. Who the heck cares about white house press? Nobody, until Colbert came along.

I assure you, if you had been invited to speech at thw WHPC dinner (which you never would be) you would bomb even worse.

Think about it: here's what he said to the press:

"But the rest of you, what are you thinking, reporting on NSA wiretapping or secret prisons in eastern Europe? Those things are secret for a very important reason: they're super-depressing. And if that's your goal, well, misery accomplished.

Over the last five years you people were so good -- over tax cuts, WMD intelligence, the effect of global warming. We Americans didn't want to know, and you had the courtesy not to try to find out. Those were good times, as far as we knew."

Wouldn't you hate a man who said you've been incompetent five years straight?

To answer you questions chronologically
Hello Cutter Bench,

To answer you questions in chronological order…

I think Cindy Sheehan is the mother of a fallen Iraq combat veteran and an anti-war activist. Agree with here position or not… I support the 1st Amendment, just as Republican Justice Anthony Kennedy who said "The First Amendment is often inconvenient. But that is besides the point. Inconvenience does not absolve the government of its obligation to tolerate speech."

As for our mission statement, it is absolutely not an anti-Republican Party creed, the mere fact that one has an R next to their name does not label them as evil. It is the new neo-con leadership of the Republican Party that overwhelmingly supports the super rich that we seek to expose.

As far as Congressional oversight… are you saying that the Congress should never hold investigations?

Where on my site is there a link to Al Jazeera? I went thru my Netroots links page and thru the quotes, I don’t see it there. BTW Foxnews quotes Al Jazerra all the time and has links at foxnews.com.

FDR’s 2nd Bill of Rights supports ‘We the People’, the common man, the American working man and also follows Jesus’ support of the poor, the least of us, those who cannot help themselves; not a redistribution of the wealth, that would be Socialism.

Lastly, I honestly don’t think I’m hiding behind any Curtin… I seem to be right out there.

But again, I welcome any debate about the facts I posted originally, all I seem to get is name calling, I’m “full of Sh*t” and look at his website…. Come on now, you’re arguments can’t be so weak that you can’t even counter mine with honest debate.

What a moron
Anthony Congiano, I have only one question. Why do you think marxism is going to work THIS time??? It never has before...not even close..

Hey Lydia
John Mark Karr-
that was funny!!

Colbert Retort!
Let's unpack this:

"But the rest of you, what are you thinking, reporting on NSA wiretapping or secret prisons in eastern Europe? Those things are secret for a very important reason: they're super-depressing. And if that's your goal, well, misery accomplished."

Here the premise is those things are all true (they're not) so therefore Leftedia did a good job, (they don't) by reporting them.

"Over the last five years you people were so good -- over tax cuts,"

Here the assumption is Leftedia didn't report them, which they did, but erroneously as "for the rich" and have never pointed out those cuts have INCREASED revenue, just as Reagan's did.

"WMD intelligence,"

All the world, left and right agreed Saddem Haddem.

And he did, but we gave him 3 months to ditch the stuff in Syria.

"the effect of global warming."

They've reported the effect AND the cause. But they don't KNOW the cause. Nobody does. There have been 7 or 8 "ice-ages" (warming and coolings) What caused them?

"We Americans didn't want to know, and you had the courtesy not to try to find out. Those were good times, as far as we knew."

But that's just it. They DID "find out" (not really, as I've shown) and reported too. Colbert's premise is Leftedia has been colluding with and covering for Bush and Republicans.

That's laughable... but it an "at" not "with" sorta way.

"Wouldn't you hate a man who said you've been incompetent five years straight?"

He didn't say that.


Can my dog certify that one's his?
Humorous article but; here are the facts
Hello Ann,

Honestly, I could pen a sarcastically charming article to retort your comments however; I figured I’d just keep in simple; here, from a centrist point of view, are the facts:

Awe... I bet ya couldn't either be sarcastic... at least not well.

But item by item then:

::Clinton authorized 75 cruse missiles to be launched against targets Afghanistan and the Sudan, on August 20, 1998, where Osama Bin Laden was thought to be hiding.::

Wow.

And ALL of 'em missed, and only 5 years after OBL was known to be the mastermind of WTC 1?

Now, if only (dern the luck!) he'd arrested him when he said (recorded on audiotape) he'd had the chance, then he wouldn't have need to authorize anything OR spend all that money on missile-shots.

Speaking of shots and money, I suppose it was just PURE coincidence he only had a good whack at Bin right on the very day of his impeachmet.

Dern the LUCK again!

::"At the time many chanted "no war for Monica, no war for Monica!"::

Anyone elected chant that?

::"Bill Clinton did leave Condoleezza Rice a comprehensive plan to combat terrorism and without further debate… you can read the top secret memos of January 25, 2001 yourself (they were declassified in 2004)"::

Would YOU take anything left to you from a sworn liar and a political juvenile seriously?

Of course you wouldn't.

Neither would I.

It's why character counts.

::"The September 11th Commission concluded that the Lewinski affair did not hamper efforts to capture or kill Osama Bin Laden."::

I agree!!

It actually REALLY stepped up the missile-count. Right thing for the wrong reason... (maybe that's why the aim was so bad?) but I took it.

::"Clinton created the department of counter terrorism and elevated it to a cabinet level post."::

Oooh. Wow. Impressive. With the likes of Reno, Albright and Robert Rieche I bet Bin was terror-fied.

But if he "created it", why not make it a cabinet post from the jump? He elevated it from where?

::"Under Clinton all the attackers who bombed the World Trade Center on February 26, 1993 where hunted down, captured, tried, and convicted (Ramzi Yousef, Sheik Omar Abdel-Rahman, El Sayyid Nosair, Mahmud Abouhalima, Mohammad Salameh, Nidal Ayyad, Ahmad Ajaj, and Abdul Rahman Yasin.)."::

All 'cept Bin.

That's a biggie.

::"The planned Al Qaeda attacks against the Holland & Lincoln tunnels where thwarted under Clinton and the mastermind, the Blind Sheik, was also tried and convicted."::

They were thwarted by a customs gal, who at the time wasn't under Clinton.

::"The planned Al Qaeda attacks to simultaneously blow up twelve airliners over the Pacific were also uncovered and prevented under Clinton."::


I don't recall that. Did he step-up airport screening or anything in response? No? Then how seriously was he taking it?

::"When the USS Cole was bombed overseas, on October 12, 2000, Bill Clinton sent Paul O’Neil along with 400 FBI agents to determine if Al Qaeda was behind the attack."::

Al Qaeda shouted to the WORLD they were behind it right after they DID it!

In fact, the reason they got to the Cole is under Clinton's Rules of Engagement the 50 sailors with rifles on deck COULDN'T FIRE on them!

::"It was not until late January of 2001 that the FBI certified that Al Qaeda did perpetrate the attack on the Cole, by then, George W Bush was in the White House."::

What is this "certified" stuff lately? Why does the POTUS need to wait on a subordinate agency to certify the obvious?

And Bush may have been in the WH, but thanks to Gore's coup-attempt he had no cabinet, and had not had time to get up to speed on anything.

::"In closing, I forewent wit and jest to counter your spin but, as Clinton said "I like that about the Republicans; the evidence does not faze them, they are not bothered at all by the facts."::

Add this to the list of things Clinton has said which are not true.

In fact, I can't think of a single thing he's ever said which WAS true.

Can you?

(toughy, aint it!)

::Have a good day now,
Anthony Congiano::

U2!


Clinton lied through the whole interview
Ann is right. He told so many fibs that even tv could not keep up.

http://www.cafenetamerica.com

Ann
Once again Mann Coulter gets it all wrong, wrong, wrong. But what do you expect from a conservative, these are, after all, people to stupid to believe in Evolution. To ignorant to understand that the United States was founded on the seperation of church and state. And too emotionally fragile to actually research the lies that mAnn Coulter writes because they would see that she is always wrong. By they way folks did you see Rush Limbaugh's new plan for Iraq is the same plan that John Murtha and many Democrats proposed. Given enough time, even the most ignorant of the masses have to see the logic in what us progressives have been saying for years. OPen your eyes folks, you are being duped by a gigantic Media Machine that is run byu huge corporations that want you to remain in the dark, asleep, and votnig Republican. Ann Coulter is nothing but a propogandist who keeps you dumb and voting Republican by assembling tissue thin arguments that can't stand up to the slightest research.

The Republicans aren't a values party. For god's sake they control all three branches of government yet they can't pass laws on gay marriage, flag burning, prayer in school, etc.. he reason? They don't want to pass them because then they wouldn't be able to offer anything to the American Taliban during election season. You are all being played as fools. WAKE UP!

Why do Republicans hate America?

Reading through the posts here...
is like reading essays by a pack of retarded third graders. But then again, what do you expect from a group of people too stupid to believe in evolution?

If Republicans are such good Christians, why do the y advocate preventive wars? I don't remember Jesus ever saying slap the other guys cheek before he slaps yours.

That's right, it's because they aren't really Chrisitan at all. They just know the American Taliban is the only group of people stupid enough to vote for them.

Hello Qratwhisperer
Hello Qratwhisperer,

I’ll ignore your multiple, childish “darn the luck”... big “wow” and “Clinton is a liar” comments and try to focus on the meat of the argument.

1. Ann’s article said that Clinton did nothing, but that was not true.
Ann’s article said that Clinton did not try to kill Bin Laden but that was not true.

(note: Her exact word was “assassinate”, and of course why ‘technically correct’, because assassinations are illegal under both US & International law, she chose that word to mislead. Clinton did not order Bin Laden “assassinated” but he did order him killed, as the senor leadership of any enemy is a legitimate target in wartime.)

2. Concerning the US Navy missle attack on Afghanistan and the Sudan you said “And ALL of 'em missed…” well, firstly that’s not true either, multiple targets were hit, hundreds of Al Queda were killed, a known bio lab was destroyed, but Bin Laden was not killed.

Ann said Clinton did nothing and did not try to kill Bin Laden, I proved she was wrong, you have not provide anything to the contrary.

3. Concerning the bombing of the Cole, you said “Al Qaeda shouted to the WORLD they were behind it right after they DID it!” Well, that is completely not true, I’ve researched articles at the AP, CBS, NBC, ABC, & Reuters from October 12, 2000 (the day of the attacks) thru the end of October, no article said that Al Qaeda did it.

You also said “In fact, the reason they got to the Cole is under Clinton's Rules of Engagement the 50 sailors with rifles on deck COULDN'T FIRE on them!” however, the truth is Clinton did not change the rules of engagement, the rules of engagement were the same as in many years past, they were not “Clintons” rules. Reports from the JAG Corp state that the sailors could have fired if they perceived an imitate threat. The sailors stated on the record that they did not fire because of concerns of killing unarmed civilians, they did not perceive the small boat as an imitate threat. The JAG ruled that the sailors acted correctly.

4. You also said “Why does the POTUS need to wait on a subordinate agency to certify the obvious [attack on the Cole]?” why, for the same reason that we didn’t attack Iran after Oklahoma City bombing. We have to determine who attacked before we respond… many said it was “obvious” that international terrorists were behind the Oklahoma City bombing; turns out it was home grown.

5. You then said “no war for Monica!":: Anyone elected chant that?" Firstly, many in conservative talk radio did. Secondly, as for elected GOP officials, they used the term “Wag the dog” and yes, many said that…
http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/03/23/wag.dog/

7. Concerning the comprehensive strategy to go after Al Qaeda provided to Ms. Rice you said “Would YOU take anything left to you from a sworn liar and a political juvenile seriously? Of course you wouldn't. Neither would I.” Well, actually yes, I would expect any of our elected officials, (Dem, GOP, Green, Indy, whatever) to take matters of national security seriously no matter who presented them; and especially if they were presented by the person in charge of counter terrorism Richard A Clark, again here are the declassified documents, are you saying you would have ignored this?:

http://news.lp.findlaw.com/hdocs/docs/clarke/clrk2rice12501mem.html
http://news.lp.findlaw.com/hdocs/docs/clarke/clrk2rice12501mem2.html
http://news.lp.findlaw.com/hdocs/docs/clarke/clrk2rice12501mem3.html


6. Lastly, I’m honestly surprised that you would continue to mention 'the Clinton had a chance to arrest Bin Laden rumor'. That issue, along with the rumor that the Sudan offered us Bin Laden was reviewed by the September 11 Commission, and found to be not true. Clinton said the words however; they were in relationship to wanting to get Bin Laden, not declining to get him.

The September 11 Commission also looked at all 16 often repeated rumors that Iraq was linked to Al Qaeda, every one of the 16 were determined to be “antidotal”

Anthony
http://www.manualfordemocracy.com

Anthony - Clinton's Comprehensive Plan

OK, I'll bite but help me out here. You wrote, "Bill Clinton did leave Condoleezza Rice a comprehensive plan to combat terrorism..." and then you posted links.

Please, explain to me the comprehensive stragedy "Clinton [left] Condolezza Rice." Are you implying the "comprehensive plan" (as defined by you) would have prevented 911? If you would, be so kind and break it down for me, using your referenced supporting documentation?

BTW - You seemed to have figured out my other deliberate malapropisms but somehow couldn't figure out Air Aljazeera. Hmmm... Strange? Feigned ignorance perhaps?

Hello Anthony!
Good call on the ignoring the childish stuff... play to your strengths!

1. Clinton treated a war which was declared at the first WTC bombing in '93 occurred like a police affair... until he needed cover, then he faked tough. He tried to "kill" Bin in the same way a crazed gunman firing shots at the white-house tried to "kill" Bush--- only Crazed had better odds than Bill.

That's worse than nothing, that's laughable and didn't fool anyone, least of all Bin.

2. I was talking about the US missile "attack" which killed the janitor at the aspirin factory. That's a "miss" where I come from. An EXPENSIVE one.

3. Concerning the bombing of the Cole, here's the two groups which claimed they did it, then at the end where OBL intimates he did it. All 3 have ties to OBL.

I found this link immediately.

http://www.ict.org.il/spotlight/det.cfm?id=505

So "al qaeda" didn't shout it to the world but 2 groups under (funded by) OBL did, as well as OBL himself which should be good enough for anyone serious about terrorism (considering his record) because there's precious little difference other than spelling.

5. Rules of Engagement: Here's a quote from USS Cole officers:

Petty Officer John Washak said that right after the blast, a senior chief petty officer ordered him to turn an M-60 machine gun on the Cole's fantail away from a second small boat approaching. "With blood still on my face," he said, he was told: "That's the rules of engagement: no shooting unless we're shot at." He added, "In the military, it's like we're trained to hesitate NOW (emphasis added). If somebody had seen something wrong and shot, he probably would have been court-martialed." Petty Officer Jennifer Kudrick said that if the sentries had fired on the suicide craft "we would have gotten in more trouble for shooting two foreigners than losing 17 American sailors."

http://www.answers.com/topic/uss-cole-bombing

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

The point is that a liberal CIC and admin creates a chilling effect in the military than can be fatal as shown.

BTW in this regard I see Bush as no better.

4. The even MORE obvious. Tim McViegh or some other Nazi group didn't clammer for credit after OKC the way OBLs peeps did after the Cole. And we found out who did it with in WEEKS and didn't need any "certification" to arrest and try them.

Clinton could have at least done that but kicked the can down the trail for Bush... or Gore... whoever. I doubt he cared.

5. Monica Missiles... many in talk radio laughed and still laugh at the timing. Let me illustrate the point by asking you a question: Do you think it was pure coincidence that on the ONE DAY he was impeached (out of the 2,920 days of his Accidency) he tried to bomb OBL?

Oh, and your link? There's not a single quote of any republican saying "Wag the dog". Just CNN commentary implying that thusly :"...at that time, some GOP lawmakers used the phrase "wag the dog" to describe Clinton's military actions..."

But that's deliberately misleading.

Newt Gingrich for example used the phrase to state he DIDN'T think this was "wag the dog". SO did several other republicans.

I happen to disagree with them, but the point is no one elected accused him of it.


6. Richard Clarke dumped a bunch of vague computer-spaghetti written in bureauspeak which offered NO PLAN (that I could see) and only vaguely (and with many misspellings) identified any targets!

THIS after Bush had spent 2 months thwarting Gore's coup-attempt.

And would I have ignored it? I would have observed how "seriously" they'd taken this and would have assumed I was being sent on a snipe-hunt for yuks.

7. I heard the audio tape. It's Clinton's voice. He was trying to act bad in front of the Cool Kids and stepped in it. But I haden't heard that the 9-11 Commission had dismissed it as "wanting to get him" vs "declining to get him".

Could you paste the text where it says that?

Or at least a link to it?

No offense, but I seriously doubt it says that.

As far as Iraq, Al Qaeda and the 9-11 Commish, doesn't it ALSO state that Ouday and Qusay had several eetingsmay with Al Zawrkarwi on or about Sept. 11 2001?

Now that may not be a "direct connection to Iraq" but it's close enough for me.

Pearl Harbor wasn't a direct connection to Italy either.


Hello Cutter Bench
Hello Cutter Bench,

You asked: “Are you implying the "comprehensive plan" (as defined by you) would have prevented 911?”

Firstly, thanks for your question.

Actually President Clinton defined it as a “comprehensive plan”, and Richard Clark the head of counter terrorism called it an “incorporated diplomatic, economic, military, public diplomacy and intelligence tools.”

Either way the plan’s details are still classified and were attached to the memos that were declassified; they are referenced on page three of the memo provided by Richard Clarke to Ms. Rice “attached is the year end 2000 strategy on al Qida developed by the last Administration to give to you.”

To answer your question specifically, I honestly do not have any way of knowing whether or not if the plans were implemented could the September 11th attacks have been prevented.

I see two scenarios, one… if the Bush Administration had moved on Afghanistan sooner and gone after the Taliban and Bin Laden, the heightened status of US security could have discouraged or lead to the capture of the terrorists that were already in the US.

Or second… if the Bush Administration had moved on Afghanistan sooner and gone after the Taliban and Bin Laden, the terrorist may have accelerated their plans and executed the attacks successfully in the Spring of 2001.

Without reading the still classified portions, or possessing some from of clairvoyance, it’s impossible to determine any scenario.

However, not to get back on point but… the originally argument was that Ms. Rice stated "We were not left a comprehensive strategy to fight al-Qaida" that has been proven false. Ann’s argument that Clinton did nothing has also been proven false… did he do enough, well that’s a debatable opinion but, it’s a fact that he not only did something, he did multiple things.

Also, one personal note… you played the “ignore the message but attack the messenger” game when you previously pulled only the left of center links and left leaning lines from our mission statement page. That would make someone in the center appear to be a left wing liberal however; is there a reason you did not included the following?

Anthony’s site has links to the NRA, Christina Children’s fund, Veterans of Foreign Wars Foundation, Joe Scarborough (R), Rudy Giuliani (R), Colin Powell (R), Sen. Arlen Specter (R), and John McCain (R).

And here are a seven “gems” from his mission statement:

1. Outsourcing our jobs to cheap overseas foreign labor is not an American value.

2. The elimination of privet firms & offshore companies controlling our voting boxes

3. Making our National Elections a National Holiday

4. Increasing the Federal Minimum Wage before Congress votes themselves another raise

5. Balancing the Federal Budget & the current Trade Deficit

6. The end to lobbyists and their influence of our elected Representatives and Senators

You seemed to have ignored those… Hmmm... Strange? Feigned ignorance perhaps? (BTW, I have got to get my comments/blog PHP working again on my website, I totally miss debating like this and Ann doesn’t reply to my emails!)

Thanks,
Anthony
http://www.manualfordemocracy.com

Hello Qratwhisperer
Hello Qratwhisperer,

You said “BTW in this regard I see Bush as no better.”

Wait a minute… are you saying ‘the decider’ is no better! How dare you insult W, the greatest military leader since Julius Caesar!

Okay, I admit that was a smart-a$$ comment but, you left that one hanging there for me to spike. :)

Anyways… your 1, 2, & 3 are basically opinions, you see a weak and expensive miss I see a military strategy, you quote a two groups that claimed they were responsible, I see a country that need to establish clear proof before going to war in Afghanistan and two months and 15 or so days is not enough time. Especially when you consider less than a month later Bush had won the election and there needed to be a “hand off”… you can’t begin a war during an administration hand off.

Your number 5 quotes the sailor but… I’m still waiting for proof of what you called “Clintons’ rules of engagement” … I said he did not change the rules, he did not prevent sailors from defending themselves. Also, where in the rules of engagement does it say that if someone charges you, pulls a gun, cocks it back, and screams death to America… you have to wait until he shoots you before you can fire? If the sailors had perceived the approaching boat as a threat, they would have fired upon it.

Then you talked about certification of a war and compared it to the Oklahoma city bombing. No, you do not certify actions like that… you make an arrest based on probably cause, you establish evidence, present that evidence to a grand jury, etc, etc. A country does the a similar thing… it does not lanch into a war without proof.

As for elected republicans statements… Republican Senator Gramms of Minnesota invoked the movie, Wag the Dog. Republican Senator Coats of Indiana questioned Mr. Clinton's judgment. Republican Senator Ashcroft of Missouri, the future attorney general, echoed Coats. Even Republican Senator Arlen Specter questioned the timing.

As for, I think you meant Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, not “Al Zawrkarwi” Zarqawi was in the North of Iraq, in an area controlled by the Kurds and only later, after the US invasion, called himself “Al Qaeda in Iraq”

I also recall that Saddam Hussein viewed Abu Musab al-Zarqawi as a dangerous radical, Saddam was secular and wanted nothing to do with radical Islam and nothing to do with Al Qaeda, there were no links between Al Qaeda and Iraq according to the recent Republican lead Senate commission report

Quote from the Republican Senate report Hussein’s government “did not have a relationship, harbor, or turn a blind eye toward Zarqawi and his associates”

The Senate report added that the Iraqi regime had repeatedly rejected al-Qaeda requests

Saddam Hussein had no ties with Al-Qaeda or slain operative Abu Musab al-Zarqawi before the Iraq war, according to a US Senate report,

Lastly, wow have we strayed off topic!

Anthony
http://www.manualfordemocracy.com

aspirin factory
Hi again Qartwhisperer,

Once last thing… you said “I was talking about the US missile "attack" which killed the janitor at the aspirin factory.”

The United States does not attack Aspirin factories however; if the CIA states that the Aspirin Factory is a cover for a bio/chemical weapons plant and also has a children’s school on one of it’s floors… the United States might wait until late night, after all the legitimate workers left along with all the school children, before hitting that target… hence, only a janitor would be in the building.

No American President would arbitrarily launch an attack on an Aspirin Factory.

Anthony
http://www.manualfordemocracy.com

Anthony - Clinton's Comprehensive Plan

So what you referred to as "Clinton's comprehensive plan" was not a "comprehensive plan" at all. You merely posted something that, at face value appeared to support Clinton and undermine Bush, but was in fact hogwash.

I read the memo in its entirety, and having 20 years experience, as a Project Manager (managing large projects) I could not find any discernable "comprehensive plan.” What I did however, find was what appeared to be the by-product of a career hack, not intent on making any waves, covering his butt and biding his time on the way to retirement.

Bottom line is, I asked that you defend something you wrote; you deflected, by asserting it was Clinton’s position. You summarized by stating, “Without reading the still classified portions, or possessing some from of clairvoyance, it’s impossible to determine any scenario.” Huh? How about writing, “I haven’t a clue as to what the still classified portions of the documents include but I’m certain that it’s damning evidence against Bush, so I will read anything I want that serves my political ends into Richard Clarke’s cya memo?”

In a manner of speaking Anthony, there’s no difference between either one of those two conclusions. And that, in my opinion, would make you, disingenuous at best, or downright Clintonian at worst.
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.