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, January 10, 2007
Ann Coulter :: Townhall.com Columnist
Stripper Lied ... White Boys Fried
by Ann Coulter
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
Poll
Will the Dems' health care Christmas Present to America be an improvement or detriment to our health care system?


About a month after members of the Duke lacrosse team were falsely accused of raping a stripper last year, 88 members of the Duke faculty fanned the flames of hysteria by signing a letter announcing that they were "listening" to students "who know themselves to be objects of racism and sexism."

Maybe they should have been listening to the accused, several of whom had iron-clad alibis. Now the professors are going to need a new example of "racism and sexism" at Duke since their case in chief has turned out to be a fraud.

In lieu of a gang rape perpetrated by high-stepping white male athletes against a poor black woman, the Duke lacrosse case has turned out to be another in a long string of hoax hate crimes in which whites are falsely accused.

The lacrosse players denied that any rape had occurred and immediately submitted their DNA to the state, confident that the DNA would prove them innocent.

It did: Not a trace of DNA from any of the lacrosse players was found on the accuser, though this girl had more DNA in her than a refrigerator at a fertility clinic.

She had DNA from five other men, which ought to have raised suspicions about her story that she had not had sex with anyone for the week before the alleged gang rape. Well, that was one of the several versions of events the accuser has offered police to date, although my personal favorite was the one in which Elvis came back from the dead and sexually assaulted her. (I think that was version No. 3—I'd have to check my notes.)

This is the second time this woman has accused a group of men of gang-raping her. One more time and it's officially considered a hobby.

And yet despite the vast privilege, untold wealth and bright shiny whiteness of the defendants, they are still under criminal indictment in this case. Three of the players face up to 30 years in prison for a crime every sane person knows they did not commit. Ah, the life of the privileged!

Duke English professor Cathy N. Davidson recently wrote an opinion piece defending her signing of the "listening" letter, noting that it was "not addressed to the police investigation," but rather "focused on racial and gender attitudes all too evident" after the alleged rape. She explained that the letter had merely "decried prejudice and inequality in the society at large."

This would be like defending a letter written during the Dreyfus affair on the grounds that the letter did explicitly accuse Alfred Dreyfus of treason against France, but simply took the occasion of his arrest to decry the treasonable attitudes of the Jews in society at large.

If poor black women are constantly being raped by rich white men, then how about they produce one case?

Professor Davidson's column—written when it was clear to everyone except Nancy Grace that three innocent men were facing 30 years in prison for a rape they did not commit—notes that she remains "dismayed by the glaring social disparities implicit in what we know happened on March 13" and says the incident "underscores the appalling power dynamics of the situation."

OK, this one they made up, but the case still illustrates a larger truth!

If anything, our awareness of the "power dynamics of the situation" is too high. What we need is a little of that skepticism liberals bring to every single criminal case that is not a white-on-black crime or a rape case involving Bill Clinton.

The truth, as opposed to the larger truth, is that the allegedly powerful white males are at risk of losing their freedom at the hands of a lunatic accuser and a power-mad prosecutor. Meanwhile the allegedly powerless poor black woman has destroyed people's lives with her false accusations, for which she will walk away scot-free.

Don't liberals ever have to pony up at least one example of a powerful privileged white male trampling on the rights of a powerless black woman in order to keep droning on about powerful privileged white males? Every real-life example invariably turns out to be a hoax, among the most spectacular the Tawana Brawley case and now the Duke lacrosse case.

According to the Los Angeles Times—in an article about another hoax "hate crime" on a college campus—false reports of racist hate crimes on college campuses have averaged about one a year for 20 years.

Liberal professors believe that crying wolf is valuable for calling attention to the societal problem of wolves, even though there's never a wolf in any particular case. Evidently, awareness of an alleged societal ill—of which we have no actual examples—is worth ruining the lives of three innocent people. After all, they're just powerful white men.

At the next White Males of Privilege meeting, someone ought to bring up how they can use their vast power to win the right not to be put on trial for crimes they didn't commit.

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.
times change
It used to be that lacross players of a college like Duke would have a degree of assumed credibility, while a stripper (prostitute who doesn't quite "put out" but nearly) would from the get-go not be given any benefit of the doubt.

Is it that the "hooker with the heart of gold" image portrayed in American cinema has become so ingrained in our perceptions that now we automatically give them (hookers, strippers, and other sex trade vocationists) the benefit of the doubt? And the always evil, undeservedly wealthy, preppy, conservative, white male beast has lost all benefit of said doubt?

In an age when celebs like rock stars, porn merchants (Larry Flint), and doped up runway models are worshiped in the media, it's no wonder our collective judgement is skewed.

Not to say her complaint should've been dismissed off the bat (not before the prosecutor would actually interview her and determine her credibility), but when did we cross into such biggoted territory? When did the pendulum swing so far to the left?

Ann wants ONE case
Ann says that if poor black women are being raped by righ white men, produce one case.

OK.

Thomas Jefferson raped Sally Hemmings

Strom Thurmond raped the daughter of his family's maid. Produced a child that he didn't acknowledge until he was in his 90s.

But of course Ann will discount, dismiss or come up with all kinds of exceptions.

With her and other Goebbel gobblers, there's always some exception.

Coulter and Tulia Texas
Imagine Ann Coulter has discovered a DA who wrongfully indicts innocents for political gain. Worse yet, she's never seen any who convicts innocents and then sticks to his guns when overwhelming evidence exonerates his victims.

Maybe Coulter wrote something on the injustices in Tulia Texas, but I doubt it.

And Lestat is up on the news, and he never heard of Tulia Texas. Lestat is not up on Herbert's articles?

Amazing.

Nifong=Richard Noggin

I TOLD you they didn't do it.
It's not over yet, but it will be.

60% not 69% typo
sorry for error

To jack doodle and Bonnie
I don't recall them saying anything about that case in the beginning of the case or afterwards. Whether or not the woman in the Bryant case was lying we will never no for sure because the case was settled out of court. (I think she was but there is no proof.) Given all that, the two cases are not parallel. The issue with this case isn't so much that the woman is lying about the rape, but that the prosecutor has made serious ethical breaches in the case. And probably should have dropped the case very early into the investigation. The evidence witholding can result in a felony charge against the DA himself. Also, it would be interesting to know what he told the Grand Jury to obtain the True Bill. If it can be shown that he lied to the GJ there's another felony and in this case he'll probably get more than disbarred.
This site as a discussion on the Bryant case and the fact that studies exist showing that 69% of rape charges are false.
http://ncfm-dc.org/issues/rape/kobebryant.html

Hate crimes against America.
The sad fact is ... racial tensions aid the Liberals and their political party. Like most stances in the liberal ideology, none this helps America, only the political fortunes of the Democrats.

When Liberals start thinking of America, before the Democratic Party or their childish ideology, then they can be called Patriots.

Until then, they are America's enemy within!

Only Libs lie about WMDs in Iraq!
Hey WWJD???

You and most liberals are pathetic excuses for Americans. You represent almost everything the Greatest of Americans would find despicable.

You are nothing, but little children who have discovered the word "why".

The only liars about WMDs in Iraq are Liberals. The Bush Administration and every foriegn intelligence service in the world were 'Mistaken' when they thought Saddam's Iraq had huge stockpiles of WMDs. The fact that Saddam had the capability to produce WMD stockpiles very quickly never seems to be discussed.

Liberals know they are lying about President Bush's 'mistake', but continue to do so, because they are hypocritical un-Patriotic Americans lusting for political power.


white girl lied...basketball player paid
isn't it obvious when a (wg) white girl has sex with a black guy and has a guilty concious afterwards, she has the option of "crying rape"and will be believed. i remember colby bryant awhile back, going through such an ordeal. i do belieive that our prisons are still full of men and boys who were accused of having sex with (wgs) and prosecuted needlessly, some have died for such. where's the credibility?

Diversion article this week?
I thought it was revealing this week when Coulter decided to discuss the Duke case, instead of the big, Big, BIG, BIGGER, BIGGEST news going on in the world - Bush's plan to increase troop levels.

I did note that more documentation of her fraudulent attempts to vote in Florida were exposed this week, so it was ironic that her headline this week was about a woman's lies coming to the fore.

But there are much more important issues going on right now, in a week where Bush and Cheney are circulating "tough talk" about Iran, instigating tensions in Kurdistan, Somalia and the Gulf and STILL NOT PROVIDING SUFFICIENT SPECIFIC EVIDENCE OF WRONGDOING BY IRAN TO JUSTIFY INVASION.

We see as much as 80% of the country rejecting Bush's surge, and we see a nation that wants out of Iraq. Why do they all mistrust Bush? Because the "responsibility rests with him" forthe quagmire in Iraq. Bush led a similar campaign of "tough talk" against Iraq before invading. We (well, the smartly suspicious of us) asked for proof then - and we got lies. Enough to fill bookstore shelves today. But the country trusted Bush - then. We do not now, except for the 20% or so of dead-enders led by blind faith in neoconservatism that tune in to Rush and Sean everyday for their daily suckle of media manipulation.

The Iranian citizenry wants peace, as do Americans. They are a hardworking, intelligent society, enamored of westen culture, looking to raise families and curtail conflict. Alas, they have leaders in place that thrive on violence and conflict for their political gain.

How do we know the people of Iran oppose escalation of confrontations? A peace delegation vistited Iran for the 2nd time this May, touring the country and speaking with the people, getting to know Iranians of all types. I saw a long video they posted online of the trip, though it was removed as it will be now released as a documentary.
http://www.forusa.org/programs/iran/may06.htm

I saw people concerned about violence, condemning their own leadership for "tough talk" and dangerous posturing. In fact the Iranian people acted since then, by voting democratically to lessen the power of Aminhidjad and his party and towards more moderate choices.

We need to do the same, getting rid of our war-profiteering leaders.

Not only do we look bad, it's immoral and unethical to lie and escalate armed conflicts. Initiating wars is immoral unless you are clearly attacked or provoked. Bush still thinks "war" will improve his low approval ratings, but is pushing for troop increases and new wars when he hasn't got the real troop numbers anymore. So he changes the law to force "volunteers" back into combat for unprecedented return tours. Way to go George, burn your armed forces, break promises and flail around in Iraq, trying to get to the end of your term.

We will see what happens in Congress when Bush finally puts his surge into writing - in likelihood, Congress will oppose it or dissect it. When it comes to the lives of our soldiers, we've all seen this plan fail before and is is immoral to do again just for political theatrics. That does not serve the country or the future of our children well.

Meanwhile, Ann can try to take a pass on the entire issue this week. Just like Rush and Sean and Boortz all try to gin up these relatively tiny 'slice of life' crime stories to fill out the broadcasting day, there are gravely serious things going on in the real world. Don't fall for it, people! Even if you support Bush's march into the quicksand, at least speak about THAT and don't let disgraced voting fraudster Annie direct the discussion away while she thinks up a position that won't make her look as big a tool as Bush now does.

To jack doodle
Sorry, your wild-eyed response to my comments does not hold water. I watch "24" with its black President and "The Unit" with its black lead hero. I watch numerous other shows with black supporting characters. I simply resent the constant attempt by liberal tv writers in California to portray white people as the number one reason for crime in this country. I can deal with it on a general level on most TV shows but I will not deal with it on a specific level with TV's obsession with white racists and neo-nazis under every rock. As I said previously, I live in NY and have never had any major dealings with these groups. I have seen much black racism and anti-semetism which is, not surprisingly, never shown on TV. (Come to think of it, all illegal-aliens shown on TV dramatic shows have hearts of gold as well.) I do not buy into TV's portrayal of almost all "minority groups" as victims and will boycott any show or movie that hits me over the head with this point. I wouldn't be surprised to see the liberals at "Law and Order" use the Duke Lacrosse case as one of their plotlines. Only the players unfairly accused will be black and the alleged rape "victim" white.

Boy ya'll slavery fixated goobers
Were you there dane? She might have been his girl friend, Sally Hennings that is.

You liberal numbnuts probably are a "Metro-sexual" and no real woman wants anything to do with you, Black, White or indifferent".

Typical liberal dribble, justifying prosecutorial malfeasance with democrat sanctioned slavery.

Andrew Jackson was the first democrat president, he owned slaves. You need to go kill yourself because he hated the Indians too.

God, you liberals are needing therapy. If logic was dynamite you couldn't blow you nose.

ann coulter
This women is also a true republican questioning someone else on their ethics while she is commiting voter fraud in palm beach. Of course she is in the political bed of powerful white men so she will not be held responsible for her own crimes.

ANN COULETR'S DUKE RAPE ARTICLE
tHOMAS jEFFERSON MIGHT BE A STRONG EXAMPLE OF WHITE RICHMEN RAPING POOR BLACK WOMEN... IN FACT EVERY WHITE SOUTHERN PLANTATION OWNER DURING THE TIME OF SLAVERY. Funny thing is they were all white. This article of hers is fitting for a power white women to write in defense of her powerful white men. And this comes from a typical and average white man.

You have a funny definition of Gentleman
So here we have the queen of conservative ethics supporting what is obviously at least abhorent social behavior by members of the Duke Lacrosse Team. I can not believe you would waste your time supporting this behavior.

DNA or not. These "fine gentleman of Duke" should not have been where they were. Such behavior from by Ambassadors of a collegiate sports program should not be tolerated or supported. They should be expelled regardless of criminal records.

To base your arguments in this case of 'No DNA and thus No Proof" is duplicitous when you consider how you support our administration for chooing war by mistake with no proof of WMD.

Your judgements continue to be quite selective to what ever suits you.

The Magic World of TV Racism
DA Nifong has probably been watching too much TV where the villains are always white. Despite the fact that the overwelming majority of crime in the city I live in and in most cities in America is committed by blacks and hispanics, in the twilight zone of TV and films, every other police officer or detective captain, FBI agent and, especially, judge is black. And they are doing a rough job fighting all those vicious white criminals running rampant in the cities of America.
Every time I pick up a TV Guide, it seems like an episode of "Law and Order" has as its villains, neo-nazis, white supremecists or militiamen. Now I'm Jewish and I live in NY. I've never run into any neo-nazis or white racists. I have seen a bunch of black hoodlums who call themselves the Black Israelites or Black Hebrews. They stand on various street corners in this city with microphones and broadcast the most hateful anti-semetism imaginable. Yet the liberals who create "Law and Order" never seem to find the time to do an episode about them, I'm shocked (yeah, sure.)
If you are as tired of this nonsense as I am, do what I do. If you pick up your TV Guide and read the plotline of a show wherein a nice black family is hounded by vicious white racists or an innocent black man is on death row because of racist white cops or judges or something of that nature, avoid this show like the plague. Even if it is a show you enjoy, do not watch it. I would never watch "Law and Order" under any circumstances. But I would also avoid shows I normally enjoy like "Cold Case" or "Without A Trace" if they ran an episode with a similar plotline to what I mentioned. I would also avoid spending my hard-earned money on a movie featuring a cool black hero taking on hordes of white racist villains.
Show a little self-respect. Only when millions of us boycott this anti-white racist nonsense will the slimy liberals running Hollywood sit up and take notice. And even if they don't, at least you'll feel better about yourself.

Critical Bill
Ann Coulter does not bring out the worst in US, she brings out the worst in YOU. I find her funny, if often superficial. I agree with you that she makes a great deal of money preaching to the choir, along with Rush Limbaugh and lots of others on the other side of the aisle who do the same. Oliver Stone, J Jackson, M Moore, A Sharpton, A Franklin do the same sort of thing. When compared to that left wing crew, Coulter comes out well ahead in wit and accuracy IMHO, but then, I'm a Jeffersonian Liberal, now called in the US, a conservative.
In one of your posts you (paraphrased) that Mangum may or may not have been raped, but she should be treated more kindly until the facts were in. Exactly. However, the Duke 3 were accused by her of many times more serious things than racist inspired lying. She accused them of actions which could lead to life in prison. The gist of Coulter's column was criticism of those who rushed to judgement of the 3. You found time to defend Mangum against unproven charges. I did not note any defense of the 3. Perhaps you also have an ox in the matter, and it depends on which ox got gored.
Since you have strong opinions on US actions on the internatinal stage, perhaps you have some on British actions. Why did the Brits attack Egypt?Why did the Brits kill a bunch of Argentinians in the Maldives? How come it took so long to implement the Balfour Declaration? Why were the boundaries between the nations created from the territory of the Ottoman Empire so silly? How come Britain has refused to maintain a credible defense capability, preferring to shelter under the US umbrella? I just read a British newspaper last week. Front page was a British General stating that current military financing would result in a "tinpot" military. His word not mine. I am more interested in your views on Britain and Europe, of which you know far more than i, than your views on the US.

To Mr. Ed
Sure, if you lay down with dogs you'll get up with fleas. This doesn't mean that you deserve to have some crooked politician throwing rattlesnakes in the bed with you.

This is all ludicrous
Men young and old alike are sure to notice that this sort of thing doesn't happen to men who avoid booze parties, stripper, and hookers. Getting drunk with strippers has readily-assessed risk associated with it, although most people think in terms of disease and robbery. Apparently, false accusations and incompetent and/or evil prosecutors can make a bad situation even worse.

Whatever wrongs the prosecuter committed, these "boys" wouldn't have suffered them if they hadn't been indulging in vice.


Re: svpallava regarding CollinsB
C)LINTON = C)hick, especially when the Guage is measuring Maturity! William Jefferson Clinton, our Nation's First Teenage President! Oh, how lucky we were!!!

Ann Coulter
Atta Gal!! Hit 'im again! Harder!! Harder!!

Duke case and Sharpton and Jackson
After reading this last commentary, I have to add something else about this that really rankles. Al Sharpton is the same age as me. He's probably got a few more pieces of paper from "schools" he went to, but, the real difference is this. He is a Black man and I am a White woman. He has never married, but, he probably has a very active sex life, that he probably pays for with our money. My husband's been deceased for ten years and in all that time, I've not had a man in my life. I am raising a teenaged daughter. I've worked all my life to get what I either wanted or needed. No one gave me any handouts, and I don't go spouting out all sorts of insanities about how the Black man has been oppressed. Does anyone else know that there are more Black millionaires than White? Anyway, in regards to the Tawanna Brawley case back in the 80s, when this woman (who was a girl at the time), first came forward with this story about being gang-raped by five White cops in NYC, the departments that handle this sort of case weren't allowed to question her in order to get the story straight according to her. As soon as they did, there was Sharpton and cronies claiming "cover up". What cover up? All the investigators wanted was her story in order to check out what happened. And what about the forensic evidence? I also remember the Dotson case, where an innocent man spent ten years in jail for a rape he didn't commit. And, then there's Sharpton and Jesse Jackson claiming "cover up" once again in regards to the Duke U case. Okay, here's a woman who's been exposed as a liar twice. Now, it's sort of like crying "wolf", don't you think. If she IS raped in the future, who's gonna believe her? And Nifong should be disbarred for his behavior. The judge in the case shouldn't even be able to sweep the floor of the courtroom let alone sit on the bench. The truth of the matter is that in this country we speak from both side of our mouths. Okay, I'll admit that my ancestors, as far as I can tell, went from France to England with Norman the Conqeuror. From there, an ancestor arrived in Virginia in 1620, so, although I'm not a Mayflower descendent, I am a descendent of one of the First Families of Virginia. Yes, that probably means that my ancestor had slaves (I do know he had indentured servants, which is different), but, I will not be sorry for this, mainly because it's in the PAST! What my ancestors did 13 generations ago, I can't help. But, what I can help is NOT to vote for Sharpton, if, indeed, he wants to run for president. Maybe he should really talk to Jackson about this, who was unsuccessful (resoundingly so) in a bid to run for president twenty or so years ago. What would be ideal in the Duke U case is for the judge and the prosecutor to face disciplinary charges about their conduct throughout this case; the Duke administrators should not only reinstate the players who've been falsely accused, but to reimburse them for tuition, or let them go to school for free for the year (their decision); the woman who's accused them falsely should spend some serious jailtime for this - not just a fine for filing a false report; and the news media should humble themselves by publicly apologizing to the men in this case who's lives - and, whose families lives - have been ruined in this case. I think the woman is the real culprit here. After all is said and done, what she's done is inexcusable. Her actions has set back all legal ground achieved when dealing in sex crimes. She will make it that much harder for the next real victim to come forward and see the case through. What she has done is an injustice to all women, regardless of whether they've been a victim of a sex crime or not. Does she realize that the next time a woman steps up to prosecute her offender that there's the very real possibility that, because of her actions, that other woman won't get justice? I mean, let's face it here. James Woods' character has said it best when it comes to the judicial system in this country: "justice isn't about truth, it's about what 12 people believe is right." This is all so true. Everyone - myself included - has been edgy about dealings with minorities since 9/11. We don't want to condemn a whole religion of nationality of origin because of the actions of a fanatical few, so, we go in the opposite direction. In this country, we have a Constitution which guarantees that we are "innocent until proven innocent", but, that's not how it's coming out now. There are no public executions anymore, but, the media fans the flames of "guilty until proven innocent". If these young men can find it within themselves to forgive those people who've "borne false witness", then they are all the better for it. I doubt I'd be able to. And Sharpton and Jackson, who're supposed to religious types, should be ashamed of how many of the Ten Commandments they've broken over the years. Maybe if they, too, spent some hard time in jail, they'd really understand how the world works (and it might help Sharpton with his weight problem). They are no better than the terrorists who crashed into the WTC and Pentagon (and, keep in mind, that bin Laden also claims to be "religious" and has all the money he needs to sustain himself in lavishness). And, as for our erstwhile administration in power, remember this: we have less than 2 years now until we can vote for a real president, and not some jibbering idiot carrying on his daddy's fight.

200+ comments---very impressive
Well done Ann. No one at TH generates the commentary she does and treadmill joe is absolutely right about her. The left hates her because she shows no reluctance to give to them what they have been giving to conservatives for years (decades)---ridicule and condescension. It is not satire, it is sarcasm: pointed, personal, insulting, often hyperbolic, very funny and always right on the mark. It also seems to me that people like Critical Bull and DimKim prove how effective she is---they can't restrain themselves from going on and on about her (although I notice that Dim Kim has been MIA recently).
BTW, the "guy" who prefers Helen Thomas to Ann Coulter either also has a great gift for sarcasm or needs to have his testosterone, eye-sight and/or IQ tested. I think Ann is pretty hot especially when you compare her to her counterpart females on the left.

Stripper Lied - White Boys Fried
Nornally I don't agree with anything you say, but this one I did. I'd be the first one to say "don't blame the victim", but, in this case, yeah, I do. I remember the Tawana Brawley case (white cops being accused of gang-raping and Black teenaged girl). I think this may fall in the same category. I've followed this case with interest, mainly because my own daughter will start college next year, and, although we are so white-bread, I will worry about her. It seems to me that in this country we are bending over backwards for all minorities - not just Blacks -and, we're blaming it all on the so-called "White Majority". These boys may be from families that might be well-off, but, that doesn't make them targets of reversed discrimination, which is what this is. An African-American woman who is a single mom and going to school at the same time is an achievement for sure. But, that same woman doesn't have license to falsely accuse White men of a crime that probably didn't happen. Just a few weeks ago, we all learned that this woman was pregnant, and now she's given birth. I really can't believe that I would ever say this, but, I really think this woman (who's no dummy) saw an opportunity to either get money or fame or maybe even both. She may have lied about this whole affair, but she'll get a book deal out of it for all of her "troubles". In the meantime, these young men will always go about with a cloud over their heads because of this. They'll have trouble in their professional and personal lives. In their professional lives, depending on what they wind up doing, there will be people who won't want to have business dealings with them. In their personal lives, they might not be able to have what most people take for granted - a marriage with kids of their own. Their families will be driven into bankruptcy (which was really the plan all along, wasn't it?) because how does one recover from this? My advice to these young men would be this: after you've been fully exonerated of these false accusations, take all parties against you to the cleaners (accuser, prosecutor and judge) and see how they like it when the shoe's on the other foot. I will keep these young men in my thoughts and prayers that this will be the only bump in the road of life for them.

and if you rode the "metro"
You must have been in Newcastle because in London the underground is called the tube. Built with American money mostly, as it happens...

No Gunny
That's just baiting... whereabouts in the States do you live Gunny? Just out of interest...

Critical Bill
That was not bait amigo, that was the truth.

I've been to England many times and rode the Metro. The air was as foul in there as in the turkish crapper I was in at Iskendrun.

Too bad
It's too bad these young men were not memebers of the "The Young Democrat Society". The press and libs would have immediately gathered around and give them Bill Clinton's often used, but well proven "she's crazy" treatment and jumped all over the accuser.

At least they can thank God they weren't members of the "Young Republicans" - they would have already been executed by now.

Coulter brings out the worst in us
Looking back at my marathon posting session yesterday, I can see that some of the things I wrote lacked sense and were written in haste. I should not have brought up Coulter's looks; it's totally irrelevant and reduces the whole thing to a prolonged slanging match rather than measured discussion. However, that's what Coulter does to people. Brings out the worst in them. I hate to look back at it and see that I fall for it, hook, line and sinker, and I hate to see myself on the same level as Trump and O'Donnell when it comes to arguing. Mulrony's post is one of the best I have seen on Townhall, even if it is a bit doom-laden. I believe that despite many of those beliefs being widely held, there is plenty of hope left. Here's why: I grew up surrounded by conservatives and still am. My father certainly is one; my best man was an army officer for ten years and now works for JP Morgan. He doesn't agree with me on much. All of my working life has been in London finance, not known a a hot bed of revolution. I know tht the majority of conservatives have hearts and are reasonable and loving people. I just happen to disagree with many of their positions. It usually works out with both sides accepting compromise. That's the way it has to be, but that's the last thing the exceptions, like Coulter, want it to be. They live by igniting controversy, then sitting back watching the sparks fly and their bank balances grow. That's the much more depressing reality than what Mulroney writes.
I'll try not to post much today; believe it or not I have a job to do. And I thought men can't multi-task... I do stand by many of my comments from yesterday, but will try to resist the bait set by the likes of Gunny etc. Bad breath indeed...
Here's to more civilised discussion in future.
cheers

ANN COULTER STANDS ALONE
ANN IS INCISIVE AS IN INCISORS, AND AS IN HAVING A BITING WIT BEYOND THAT OF H.L. MENKEN. BUT MORE THAN THAT SHE IS THE ONLY COLUMNIST I AM AWARE OF WHO HAS BOTH THE MORAL COURAGE (TO LEAVE THE HERD) AND PHYSICAL COURAGE.

ANN HAS THE MORAL COURAGE TO ATTACK LIBERAL PC, WHICH IS THE CONVENTIONAL CODE OF CONDUCT NOW FOR EVERYONE. OUR REPUBLICAN LEADERSHIP CAN’T POSSIBLY WIN THE POLITICALLY CORRECT GAME, THE RULES OF WHICH ARE CONTINUALLY REDEFINED BY LIBERALS. ANN STANDS ALONE WHEN SHE POKES HOLES IN THIS GIANT PAPER TIGER AGAIN AND AGAIN. MICHELLE AND STAR AND PHYLIS MAKE THE SUBSTANTIVE POINTS ABOUT HOW PC WRECKS MEN'S LIVES OR DESTROYS OUR NATION’S MORAL FABRIC. BUT ANN TELLS US HOW THEY DO IT. ANN GIVES CONTEXT TO THE LIBERAL NIGHMARE THAT WE ARE ALL SLEEPING THROUGH. WE ARE GIVEN THE BIG PICTURE AS IN “TREASON” OR “GODLESS”. AND SHE DOES IT IN SUCH A CUTTING AND ENTERTAINING WAY THAT HER READERSHIP INCREASES WHILE AT THE SAME TIME HAVING THEIR MEMORIES IMPROVED.

ANN ALSO HAS THAT SIMPLE SOMETHING THAT SO MANY COMFY ARMCHAIR, MONDAY MORNING, SCHOOL BOY COLUMNISTS LACK. SHE NOT ONLY HAS CONVICTIONS, SHE HAS THE COURAGE OF HER CONVICTIONS. ANN HAS BEEN PHYSICALLY ATTACKED ON MORE THAN ONE OCCASION AS SHE WORKS TO GET HER VIEWS ACROSS. WHITE MALES SEEM ALMOST INCAPABLE OF TALKING ABOUT GENDER POLITICS. AND THAT GOES FOR WHITE MALE COLUMNISTS AS WELL. GEORGE WILL, KRAUTHAMMER ETC. ALL SEEM TO BE OUT THERE SHOWING HOW SMART THEY ARE TO SOME IMAGINED TEACHER WITH A GOLD STAR TO AWARD. BUT THE PASSION AND THE CARING JUST AREN'T THERE.

REMEMBER WHEN ANN WAS ACCUSED OF VOTING IN THE WRONG PRECINCT. THIS IS POSSIBLE FELONY EXPOSURE. I DON’T KNOW WHAT ACTUALLY TRANSPIRED IN THAT SITUATION. BUT IT IS EASY TO IMAGINE ANN TEASING THE LIBERAL BULL WITH HER MATADORS CAPE. WHAT WOULD PC PROSECUTORS LOOK LIKE IF THEY CHARGED AND PROSECUTED ANN AND OBVIOUSLY DID NOT PROSECUTE HUNDREDS OF ILLEGAL VOTERS, ALIEN AND OTHERWISE. IT COULD HAVE HAPPENED. IT WOULD HAVE BEEN A VERY GOOD AND VALUABLE THEATER, IF IT HAD HAPPENED. I SUSPECT ANN PROACTIVELY VOLUNTEERED TO BE THE LACROSSE TEAM FOR THE GOOD OF OUR NATION. SHE STANDS ALONE.




Phil Byler
i want to thank you for your meritless response to my comment...

first you make an assumption about who i am and what i do in my life and then insult the person you believe i am... it's like a character attack on someone except that you're insulting your idea of someone, and not anything you can truly ascertain...

i can only assume that you found what i wrote "convoluted" because you are without a primary education...

but, apparently, you've had a vast education in the world of hard knocks... thus you obviously have a virtual library of anecdotal evidence to render my comments meaningless, but it is beneath you to illuminate what the same may be... it's a very convenient argument that i've seen many times before when someone has a visceral response to what someone has said but no real command of the english language so they just assert a vague insult...

as for being politically correct, i'm not so sure how it is that you interpret my comments as such... but, again, it's beneath you to mention why, so perhaps i'll never know...

well, it's nice to have corresponded with you, phil. i hope one day you learn how to provide a critical response to someone's ideas instead of throwing a fit.


Right On GI Joe!
Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson came out like gangbusters when this story broke. They accused these Duke players with no evidence, so nothing, except their own racist bias.

Sharpton and Jackson are the worst racists in this country but no one has the cajones to call them on it. And Sharpton wants to run for President? Good Lord what a hypocrite!

Where is their apology? They accused these guys of henious crimes that they did NOT commit. They were liars. Why isn't the media calling for them to apologize? Talk about a double standard!!!!!!

Good article by Ann Coulter. I may not always agree with her but she was right-on with this one.

Unknown
There are times that I think Ann is harsh. I mostly believe she is right, & actually think she is funny. I wasn't trying to cover the whole world of insults. There are too many to mention all of them. I try not to say anything I wish I could take back later. One thing I do is talk softer & lower when I feel tension from a person I'm talking to. I avoid the news programs that have the opposite sides yelling at each other. We are supposed to be the most civilized country in the world, yet we are so uncivil. Don't get me wrong, I believe in standing up for myself when needed (like when a sevice I'm paying for is not correct). But, I believe it can be done civilly even in a moment of anger. I hate cursing & blasphemy, because I believe words have power. If they didn't, we wouldn't be hurt by them (or encouraged & uplifted by them). I am not a prude, just careful with words. I don't see why a discussion can't take place where no one insults the others beliefs. I have children & grandchildren, & I can learn much from them. If you are closed to listening to the other person, you may miss a real gem of knowledge. Just a thought.

"Left Angle"?
Drewrush, was all that convoluted drivel in your "left angle" post the result of an "education" in a present day politically correct university? It seems to me that you need to spend some time in the real world. Or better yet, volunteer for military service. After real life experience, you can look back at what you wrote tonight and say to yourself: How in the world did I think what I was saying had any meaning to it?

Re: unknown at 7:02 PM
I applaud your acceptance of responsibility for "lack of civility," which shows more courage than most liberals exhibit here, at least as far as I have seen. But in the very next sentence you squandered the goodwill you earned by calling her Ann "the man" Coulter! The best repentence is to change your behavior. And the analogy of a bully is inappropriate because the victim usually cannot avoid the mistreatment. In this case, you are not compelled by risk of personal danger to lash out at anyone for comments that Ann made about someone else.

When Ann calls people names, they usually refer specifically to pertinent details about that person's public image. A good example is Ted "Chappaquiddick" Kennedy regarding the incident I described in an earlier post on this page. His conduct has a direct bearing on his public career, as does his continuing problem with alcohol. Do you really think these should be off limits to commentators? Now, it would be wrong to make fun of his children's appearance or his three-legged dog, but I don't see where she has done that. What did Ann say or write about the 9/11 widows that you think is a "negative personal attack?" When I read "Godless," I remember thinking that one of her comments was a little out of line, and it might have been about the 9/11 widows, but I don't remember exactly what it was that she wrote. Perhaps you can refresh my memory.

To everyone: I also have to add that I find Ann to be very beautiful (I'm 34/M/hetero. I don't think she has an abnormally large Adam's Apple, not that it's uncommon for women to have them, too. Ann is very thin, and that makes her throat show through her neck more prominently than people with more fat in their bodies, but I just don't see anything abnormal. The insulters are swimming against the tide here: I think most people would agree that Ann is physically attractive. You're not succeeding in your attempt to make us see something that really isn't there.

Rich
Your last post made me roflmao...well done.

And to all who said that the boys need to be taught not to cavort with strippers lest bad situations happen, I AGREE!

HOWEVER, this also means that GIRLS need to be taught not to put themselves in bad situations as well. Oh wait, the frigids at NOW don't want to hear that. According to their world, women should be able to prance naked and drunk in front of men while writing poems about their vaginas without fearing so much as an ogle.

Walk in the shoes of a white male...
For some strange reason, white males continuously seem to be targeted. Somehow or other, we have been marked as easy prey. Whether it's an innocent over-charge, business dealings, females or whatever. Was contracting for a while and lost several big jobs due to the color of my skin. I personally, have been sued almost 30 times (won all except the 3 ex-wives, the others were when I owned a roller rink)... and never once by a male... Moved to a foreign country, and get overcharged regularly, due to the fact that I'm white and male... I work very hard for my money. I once did 10 years without a vacation, many of the days were 16 hours or more. It's difficult not to take this stuff personally at some point....

It is Simple
Nifong is a race P*mp just like Jesse, Al, and most other so called civil rights leaders.

I never met anyone who owned a slave before. The white boy is (the liberal's Bogeyman). Why feel guilty at all about slavery or any other justification you put up in Nifong's defense?

You liberal numbnuts whose guilt induced "politically correct" non-since is pathetic, Nifong, Jackson, Sharpton, and most of you goofy liberals writing comments about slavery are racists.

The democrats started the civil war to defend slavery, they started the KKK, they suppressed the blacks in the South until Republicans in congress passed the Civil Rights act of 1964.

Nifong is a democrat race p*mp pandering for votes by sensationalizing what appears to be false accusations.

Man, where were ya'll when Bubba Clinton was accused of rape? Oh, wait it was a white woman, opps not that at all, he is a democrat.

Democrats have historically suppressed blacks even today they herd them into urban housing projects, promoting a new kind of slavery of welfare and poverty while pandering for votes.

Your liberal guilt is a mental illness that makes you hate every thing and everyone, especially yourselves and your country. It is so bad now when your not holding blacks down you are seeking our defeat overseas.

All you liberals will make good maggot farmers. Might get your chance after you manage to loss another war and the real bogeyman comes calling.

back to the matter @ hand
The simple fact is that a "victim" with no credibility and an ever shifting story was used by a vote seeking prosecutor to win an election. The case mushroomed because of the instant charges of racism and class disparity that the MSM played up; it all just fit so neatly in their preconvoened notions box that they saw no reason to treat the allegations skeptically. That is the basic point here and people seem to be missing it. The police, prosecutor, and media created a perfect storm that has sullied these men forever...please don't lose sight of that injustice!

PS: to all that have visited my blog and seen nothing new, give me a day or two and I will be updating it.

Critical Bull
I am still trying to figure out why you have your knickers in a knot over this issue.

After all, I thought that you Lefties keep saying we are not supposed to judge people with alternative lifestyles.

Why then are you judging interracial couples in the 19th century who weren't married?

I mean, we aren't supposed to judge all these single women who are kept by the state and keep popping out babies without marrying the daddy. Of course, when the slave woman was "kept" back then, she actually worked, and the daddy actually paid for the raising of his child.

So I have committed not to judge those alternative lifestyles in the spirit of liberalism, and I hope you will show that you are a real liberal as well and stop judging their relationshops.

injustices = injustice
i thought it over, it doesn't make sense when it says injustices.

maybe it does, but i just don't like it.

stbmom wrote:
"If we didn't give Health Care to anyone that needed it there wouldn't be 20 - 50 million illegals running across the border."

I reread the post, it doesn't say per year anywhere. Perhaps you read "running" as meaning that's the number of people currently crossing the border. I just don't know why you interpret it that way.

left angle
"One thing that I find unbelievable is that most repubs/cons think that institutional racism, discrimination, and sexism and no longer exist and are things of the past in the U.S. and that anyone who legitimately brings up these issues is playing the "race card"."

I don't think you're paying attention hard enough. Let me see if I can break this down into only the most pertinent parts because I have stuff to do.

FACT: The institutionalizatiom of racism against white people is prevalent in Durham, N.C., and most likely other communities in the United States.

Unlike liberals, conservatives understand that racist blacks undermine the project of promoting conciliation among the raceds. Whereas liberals believe racism is only a problem when it affects/violates the rights of "minorities," conservatives understand that not only are black racists perpetuating the animosity between our communities, and therefore such racism is a problem, but they also can have an effect on the rights of white citizens. Case in point: The Duke Rape Case.

The institutionalization of racism against whites became manifest in the abuse of the system Nifong committed. The sexism against men is also apparent in many rape cases, where men's lives are ruined even if the only thing proven is that false accusations have been made. The three lacrosse players had two things going against them which are indicative of the institutionalization of racism against whites in Durham, N.C.: they were white and they were male.

Perhaps you assume that because conservatives do not believe in the efficacy or fairness of liberal racist programs they don't believe that racism against blacks is a problem in this country. IF that is what you assume, you are dead wrong. We fully understand the problem, we know the consequences... and wouldn't you know it, we have a few black conservatives too! And they're not sell out Uncle Toms like people say they are. What conservatives value is the knowledge that meeting racism with racism is no answer to a problem, and doing that only serves to institutionalize more and different discriminatory beliefs.

What conservatives value is the knowledge that even in the face of racism, discrimination and sexism, if you merit respect, money and a good life you will get it in America. However, if ever you falter, if ever you disbelieve in the power of your own will you will never take advantage of all that America has to offer. The problem with the recognition liberals offer of racism is that it they claim blacks are powerless BECAUSE of it. Conservatives KNOW that blacks are powerful DESPITE it.

Conservatives KNOW that trying to shatter discrimination and other societal problems in one fell swoop with the force of law, it will most likely only perpetuate the problem it intended to solve. Good intentions, bad outcomes.

Liberals will complain, "But the Conservative only calls foul when a white man is subjected to racism." And where is the liberal when it occurs? In some corner festering in excitement and joy that a white man got his! And I don't mean just black racists, but white racists as well. White racists who feel white guilt and are part of the institutionalization of racism against whites.

Bear witness to the bloggers and writers and journalists who crucified the young men in the press BEFORE they knew all the facts because of their RACIST BELIEFS. Where are they now that they know a few white men had their rights violated? They are back in there corner, silent to these violations not because they were just, for they could not argue that, but because they were committed against white men. I've seen no apologies by leaders of the liberal fold who KNEW the boys were guilty and therefore destroyed their names.

Liberals are blind to injustice when expedient. Conservatives are not blind to injustices against black men and women. No, they see them all to well but understand that the liberal answers to the problems are no answers at all, but the geneses of further injustices. And when we offer our own answers, hard work, self-respect and the rejection of liberal morality, we are mocked that such is impossible, that black men and women will never be able to overcome WITHOUT the state. How foolish are the mistaken who do not realize that black men and women will never be able to overcome WITH the state, and that for black men and women nothing is impossible.

Whew!!

After reading all the postings of Coulter's article, I think I am going back to listening to Rush and O'Reilly to get my thinking straightened out.

I thought I was a Conservative before I started reading what has been put forward today, but now I am not so sure. It's too much for me to unravel.

I think the reason Critical Bill likes Clinton so much is because Clinton studied at Oxford and criticized the U.S. involvement during the Vietnam situation and continues to bash America when he is on foreign soil. Evidently, he thinks that's the proper thing to do.

Happy day to all and on to another topic.

To anyone who has insulted Ann
I can see disagreeing with her opinions, but I am really stumped as to why it's necessary to make fun of how she looks. How old are you anyway? You make me think of the current fight between Rosy & Donald. I was taught that it's not nice to make fun of an over weight person, for example. I'd like to see how you look, are you handsome or beautiful, or are you average & ordinary? I don't know many super models. Being perfect physically is not a prerequisite to being intelligent or special. I think it's a shame to stoop to the lowest denominator to make your weak point. Maybe you all are really 12 year olds after all.

John Mark Karr Raped Her.
And even if he didn't, I'll bet we can find some some jack@$$ ADA or prosecutor to go after him for it, despite the pucity of evidence.

This lying woman and those who have pusued the case long after it was dead should be rattling bars for a while. That might restore some of my faith in the system.

BTW, a word of wisdom to those complaining about the "nasty" tone of Ann's article: if you could be half as outraged by travesties like this Duke case as you are by the observations of people like Ann Coulter, this would be a much better and more just country.


I keep looking.....
...out my window for flying pigs. Why? Because I actually AGREE with something Ann Coulter wrote! Since this may be my only opportunity to ever say this without sarcasm....Good job Ann! Wait, was that a pig that just flew by? Oh, never mind it was just another blob of worthless hot air belched out by our elected "representatives" in D.C.

supposed victim
I wonder if Clinton has been tested for DNA regarding the supposed victim's pregnancy? A black Chelsea would be a hoot..

Critical Bill - I have to comment
You were saying that everyone in UK has Health Coverage and how many in the US lack it.

For the record - everyone in the US is entitled to and gets Health Care. Not everyone in the US has health insurance. Those without health insurance who are poor qualify for state or federally funded health insurance. Those with means who are not insured for one reason or another have to foot their own bill.
If we didn't give Health Care to anyone that needed it there wouldn't be 20 - 50 million illegals running across the border.

There are some non life essential health care that not everyone can get without the means to pay, but if you are having a medical emergency or in need of life sustaining medical care - you get it. If you are pregnant - you get the care you need. Now, if you have acid reflux and you don't have health insurance and you don't want to pay yourself - you just don't eat pizza.

Just wanted to set you straight on that one because I really don't like outsiders bashing my country. Kind of like family you know - we can talk about each other, but will defend each other to the end. Especially when folks or uninformed or just lie.

re: Mulroney
Great post. Unfortunately, people have discarded the idea that intelligent, well-meaning, sincere people can actually disagree without one or the other being evil, stupid, or having nefarious motivations. The art of debate has been lost, replaced by a contest to see who can yell the loudest and exhibit the most self righteousness. Persuasion has been replaced by the force of a gun, and everyone seems to believe they have a right not to be offended.

Re: Mulroney's post at 3:19 PM
GWB admitted before he ever ran for president that he had abused drugs and alcohol earlier in his life.

I don't know what happened to John Kerry, but there are credible witnesses who were with him in Vietnam who say he caused his own injury in one instance for which he was awarded a Purple Heart. If memory served me, Kerry's request for a Purple Heart was turned down by his superiors, so he circumvented them and applied for the medal in spite of their refusal. And why does he continue to this day to refuse to release his ENTIRE military medical records, as GWB has done? It has cost him politically, so you have to wonder, in light of eyewitness testimony against him, why he wouldn't simply release those records.

Ted Kennedy did allow someone to die after driving her off a bridge while he was drunk. He left the scene and returned to his hotel room without trying to help her or notify authorities. He only contacted the police after first talking to his own lawyer and attempting to concoct an alibi. At that point, Mary Jo had no chance of being saved. Ted didn't kill her, but his blatant disregard for her and overriding concern for himself ensured that she would receive no help that otherwise MIGHT have saved her life. Wikipedia offers the following information: "Kennedy entered a plea of guilty to a charge of leaving the scene of an accident after causing injury. He received a sentence of two months in jail, which was suspended. The sentence was notable in that the statute for the crime provided only for mandatory jail time and not the discretion of a suspended sentence." Do you think his rich, influential family had anything to do with his light treatment?

Who in the world claims that Barak Obama's father is a terrorist? Hearing one drunken idiot claim that at a New Year's Eve party (just a wild guess about where you heard that) does not amount to belief by "about 30% of Americans."

When asked directly, Nancy Pelosi refuses to answer questions about whether she supports NAMBLA. Is it really outrageous to think that she might be hiding her sympathy for the group because she knows her base also supports them? She just can't come right out and say so because most of America is nowhere near the liberal lunacy of San Francisco. What was she doing marching in a parade that included these monsters? She and her Dem colleagues rabidly attacked Speaker Hastert for supposedly knowing about Foley's activities with ADULT male pages, yet she couldn't be bothered to know what kinds of dangerous predators she was associating in a parade? If she really didn't know and later apologized, that would be fine for me: end of story. But she refuses to publicly repudiate her association with them, instead dodging any questions that come her way.

Harry Reid is clearly involved, through shell corporations, in shady RE deals, over which he exercised considerable influence from his Senate position, that made him millions of dollars overnight.
http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=17582

Anti-Semite is as anti-Semite does. I can't know Jimmy Carter's deepest thoughts, but I can judge his actions, and they scream at least anti-Israel bias. He peddles many lies in his latest book that make reasonable people (including heretofore-loyal colleagues) wonder why he would so blatantly invent and misrepresent facts and events in an apparent effort to discredit the only Jewish state on the planet. Does he exhibit similar animosity and dishonesty toward the other side of the "cycle of violence," as he likes to morally equivocate?

If you think that John Edwards' channeling of the spirit of a dead girl in open court does not qualify him as a "shyster," then you're in the extreme minority of Americans. It is inarguable that he made millions from lawsuits that alleged that "botched" vaginal deliveries of babies caused cerebral palsy. Those claims were already being debunked by serious scientists before Edwards made his claims, and the entire premise of his case was definitively disproved (with rigorous peer review) by subsequent scientific studies. Thus, there can be no doubt that the "evidence" Edwards used to win these cases had no basis in fact. If you're a personal injury lawyer, you've gotta love junk science. Did Edwards and his clients ever return those millions of dollars to the obstetricians from whom they fraudulently took them? And what about those women and babies who suffered the greater frequency of childbirth complications that resulted from increased use of C-sections to avoid lawsuits? Who will compensate them for Edwards' fraud?

I have never seen or heard anyone claim that "[t]hose who oppose the war in Iraq are terrorist loving commies who hate America." Many people, including me, have accused those who participate in blatantly anti-American rhetoric and do their best to undermine our war effort by providing aid and comfort to the enemy of treason. That's very different from what you said, and I think you're being intentionally dishonest about our views in order to cast them in the worst possible light. By the way, when did you stop beating your wife?

It is rare that we can know with 100% certainty that any event to which we were not eyewitnesses actually occurred. This is where a degree of faith ALWAYS comes in. When we assess the credibility of a witness or another piece of evidence, we're not establishing with 100% certainty the validity of that evidence. We're making a judgment based on incomplete information. There are facts to support many of the claims you ridiculed as unworthy of belief by "about 30% of Americans." I understand that you were just trying to estimate how many people you think believe these claims, but let's be clear that it is far from being a scientific figure. I would also question not only the notion that 30% of Americans believe that GWB perpetrated 911 (maybe 5% do), but that the same 30% believe in your ENTIRE list. (You stated that "[ALL] of them are believed by at least 30% of Americans.") Hyperbole does not help your cause in this case.

Obviously, your assertion that "[t]here is no proof for any of these things" is incorrect.

I find it interesting that most of the claims about libs/Dems are actually supported by substantial facts, yet most of what you chose to cite about conservatives/Republicans truly is baseless garbage. Is the juxtaposition supposed to lend credibility to the wild charges against the right, detract from the charges against the left, or a little of both?

Left Angle
I know there are still situations where blacks are discriminated against. But, so are old people (I'm 62), & I can see how old age is looked at as a problem. I don't see why a person who practiced slavery when it was legal should have to "pay for it". People who kill babies don't have to "pay for it". Pornies don't have to "pay for it". There are many immoralities that people don't have to pay for, except in their own conscience & what God may do to them some day (if you believe in a God). As long as it's legal, you have to except it or try to change the law.

coco: let me clarify...
you have a very valid point, but what i was thinking when i wrote the post above is that slavery was criminal in its intent even if it was legal and that the people who practiced it in this country should have been made to pay for it.

One thing that I find unbelievable is that most repubs/cons think that institutional racism, discrimination, and sexism and no longer exist and are things of the past in the U.S. and that anyone who legitimately brings up these issues is playing the "race card".

a list
a list of suggestions that are similar to black mulattos [sic]

some chocolate Neapolitan ice cream
a male hermaphrodite
a black black-and-white cookie
whole low-fat milk



perhaps
ann suffers from an intersexual disorder:

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

that would explain the existence of male secondary sex characteristics.

but then if she had sex with men, she'd be a little gay.

Critical Bill
You are a good example of why it is never a good idea to "think locally and act globally." You are from another country, admit to not knowing much about the story that you are commenting on, yet feel it is your duty to slam an American who you don't agree with using personal insults and degradation. So you know Ms. Coulter's birthday. Who cares? Why don't you worry about the fact that since your government banned guns, (and now kitchen knives, apparently,) strong arm robbery and assaults are skyrocketing through the roof of "Merry olde England." There is a reason we kicked you goons out 231 years ago. We didn't care what you had to say then, and nothing has changed.

Left Angle
I have to comment again on something you said about slavery being illegal. It was not illegal until after the Civil War. Did you know that it was legal to use coke at one time? It was legal to let a child sit anywhere they wished until safety seats became the law. I think there are many laws we have now that are totally immoral (like abortion & general porn) My opinion. The morality of slavery is different then the legality of slavery. Slavery has been legal in many places over the world's existence. I would guess that slaves in other times have been treated much worse then the slaves of early America. The building of the pyramids must have been backbreaking work. Blacks are no longer enslaved in this country, but in their own minds. My opinion. I know so many well-to-do blacks, much better off then me. Live in the present. Sorry if you have had bad experiences. My second husband is black & he notices people looking at us more then I do. I say, they must be admiring how good looking we are.

slavery racism and the south
I get so tired of people decrying the racism of the South as if the North was such haven of well being for their black brethren. There was just as much racism in the North it was just more hidden. Consider what Alexis DeTocqueville said in Democray in America:

“Whoever has inhabited the United States must have perceived that in those parts of the Union in which the Negroes are no longer slaves they have in no wise drawn nearer to the whites. On the contrary, the prejudice of race appears to be stronger in the states that have abolished slavery than in those where it still exists; and nowhere is it so intolerant as in those states where servitude has never been known.”

This was in 1831 and things haven’t changed in the North but they have changed in the South.

As to the posts about slavery, as someone else has posted, it ended in 1865-1866 when the War of Northern Aggression was over and the 13th Amendment was ratified. It couldn’t be more immaterial to a discussion about false rape charges.

As for Strom Thurmond acknowledging his daughter he acknowledged her her entire life providing financial support and visiting. It just wasn’t reported by the press until more recently. I guess the old press respected the right of privacy. The new press doesn’t respect anything but liberal democrats.



Critical Bill
Innocent until proven guilty is a legal principle. Guilty until proven innocent is a personal principle. She had no power over the fate of the 3 lacrosse players. Nifong did. He used the power of the state to seek justice for a non-existent crime. People can judge anything the way they want. They don't have the right to take away life or liberty based on their judgments though. It's when the legal system comes after people to prove their innocence that we have a serious societal/legal problem.

coco: Historically speaking..
I was talking about light complexioned black people. If you will check your history black mulattos came about because of race mixing during slavery, mostly from slave owners having sex with their female black slaves by ordering them to do it. in my book that is rape.

the "victim" (read: liar) at it again
She has now said that one of the Duke boys only "watched" even though he was "exhorted" to join in. She says he refused because he had a fiancee. But he does not. She also has now changed the TIME of the alleged incidenet (from around midnight to 11:30 TO midnight) so that she could refute one of the boys' cab and ATM alibis. However, she had earlier said she left "immediately" after the incident, but her cell phone indicates she left at 1:00.

Left Angle
How do light complextion people come into existence? Well, I have two wonderful grandsons who are mixed & their father definately did not rape my daughter. Then, there is my son, who married a wonderful black girl this last May. I expect them to have children someday & it won't be by rape. I am white, my children are white. Sometimes, people are conceived in love of any skin color.

One More
Oh, and how could I forget:

Ann Coulter is actually a man.

Critical Bill
That's how it works in America these days:

Bill Clinton is a serial rapist.

Dubya is a former cokehead, alcoholic, and draft dodger.

John Kerry shot himself to get his purple hearts.

Laura Bush killed killed someone while driving drunk.

Ted Kennedy killed someone while driving drunk.

Dick Cheney shot a guy in the face while hunting drunk.

Barak Obama's father is a terrorist.

Denny Hastert knew Mark Foley was boffing the pages, but covered it up (and may have participated).

Hillary murdered Vince Foster.

Barbara Bush was an abusive mother, and is a racist.

Ronald Reagan was senile during the last six years of his administration (major decisions were made by Nancy and her astrologer).

Nancy Pelosi is a supporter of NAMBLA.

Gay male prostitute and reporter Jeff Gannon (Guckert) was having using drugs and having homosexual sex with several members of the Bush Administartion in the White House (for cash).

Harry Reid is involved in real estate fraud.

Jimmy Carter is an anti-semite.

Condi Rice is a lesbian.

John Edwards is a shyster who made millions from frivolous lawsuits.

David Drier is a homosexual.

9/11 was executed by Dubya and the neo-cons as an excuse to kill Saddam and steal Iraq's oil.

Those who support the war in Iraq are facist racists who only care about the oil.

Those who oppose the war in Iraq are terrorist loving commies who hate America.

The Duke players are gang-rapists.

There is no proof for any of these things, but I'd bet that if you took a pool, all of them are believed by at least 30% of Americans.

Politics in America has become a very sad spectacle where truth matters very little to the zealots on both the left and the right.

I expect another civil war in the next 25 years.

P.S. Bill Clinton is a rockstar up in Canada, too. The only people who don't like him are middle-easterners, and about 30% of Americans.

unknown
Dang, hit post too soon.

My post should have included that the last time Helen Thomas had a boyfriend, the Titanic was still ABOVE the waves!

But if she floats your boat, who are we to say anything about it. I mean, even 200 year old women need loving too.

unknown
If you fantasize about Helen Thomas, I sure hope, for the sake of animals everywhere, that you don't have any pets!

unknown
"I'll play it safe and fantasize about Helen Thomes."
===============
You should email her and hook up!

"Rand"y
Forgot to add, I've done time in Eurabia and between the four stench from the mouths of Brits and the fetid odor emanating from the various bodily orifices and crevices of the French, I'm surprised that birds aren't falling dead from the sky over Europe.

Believe me, corpses in the Kuwaiti sun smell better than a Brit breathing last week's Steak and Kidney pie in your face.

unknown
All I know is that she looks a H*LLUVA lot better than YOUR lib pundits, Helen Thomas, Susan "Screecher" Estrich, Andrea "FUGLY" Dvorkin, noted lib lawyer and current jailbird Lynne "Bearded Lady" Stewart.

As to her gender, maybe you know something we don't? Or just parroting the party line as usual?

unknown
Sorry, I had the specific facts wrong, relying on my memory of what happened almost a decade ago. That said, the LIE is on your end. Here is the headline and blurb from what I was talking about:

Judge Orders Clinton to Pay $90,000 to Jones's Lawyers


July 30, 1999, Friday
By NEIL A. LEWIS (NYT); National Desk
Late Edition - Final, Section A, Page 13, Column 5, 848 words
DISPLAYING ABSTRACT - Federal Judge Susan Webber Wright, in what could be final chapter in Paula Corbin Jones's sexual misconduct lawsuit, orders Pres Clinton to pay Jones's lawyers nearly $90,000 in compensation for extra work they performed because of President's false testimony about his relationship with Monica S Lewinsky.

http://select.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=F20B10FB3E550C738FDDAE0894D1494D81


Bottom line, justice was denied to Paula Jones because a pathological liar got away with it. But then, lying LIbErals will never admit it. For you feminazis, womens' rights do not extend to those on the right of the spectrum.



Rand"y"
Great post.

Think you skinned Critical Bill/English Bob alive.

He calls himself Critical Bill like he's some important VIP...critical to XYZ.

I prefer calling him English Bob after the twit played by Richard Harris in The Unforgiven.

Yammering about how great England is while living in the USA (English Bob) but the hypocracy escaped him. Reminds me of our English Bob but thankfully HE stays in England.

Wait, I forgot that he visited Mount Rushmore and called it, was it "mediocre?"

The truth doesn't matter.
We all know by now that with the left it's the seriousness of the charges that really matters.

And besides it's just unPC to not believe a woman when she accusses a man of anything.

It's also unPC to disbelieve a black person when they accuse a rich white person of anything.

It's absolute PC requirement to believe a black woman when she is accusing rich white guys.

You bunch of racists! How dare you let facts get in the way of political correctness!

Personal injury lawyer on a banana peel?
http://www.givemetheinfo.com/blog/blogger.htm

Critical Bill revealed himself
WHen he called Bill Clinton St William of Arkansas or some such. He says that's what 'we' meaning Europeans call him. Is there anything else you need to know about Critical Bill?

Secondly, Critical Bill, like all Europeans that I have run into lately, like to lecture us poor dumb Americans on how stupid we are. Talk about arrogance. So, we are obsessed with straight teeth and that's a moral failing? How about dental health, you moron? Or beauty? I watch a lot of Brit cop shows on BBCAmerica, and their teeth are just terrible. And the Brits I've met in person have the worst breath, which I suspect is caused by a lack of dental hygiene.

Thirdly, Critical Bill apparently doesn't even understand his own legal system which we mostly adopted. The fact that someone is not convicted of theivery does not mean they are not in fact a thief, it means that the state could not prove it beyond a reasonable doubt. There is truth, and then there is what can be proven in a courtroom and they are not the same. The burden of proof is on the state so that we err on the side of our lack of facts. But Critical Bill keeps stating as a fact that people who are not convicted are not guilty of anything. What a load of crud. But then, you see, Europeans have something else going for them that we don't have: they don't believe in God anymore. So, they don't believe in God's justice, who will hold the thief accountable for his thieving (or Bill for his raping) when perfect justice is administered, they only believe in man's justice. They have rejected Christianity's belief that man is imperfect and imperfectible. Liberals believe man is perfectible if only they could install socialism. Socialism does not work, as several have said here today, because of the nature of man. See comment on Christianity above. So, it is all connected. The thing that gripes me the most is the arrogance of the Brits who come on this site and lecture us. Even when they start off by saying that they don't know what they are talking about.

GunnyG points out that socialist medicine doesn't work, but Critical Bob's remark is personal (we Americans are obsessed with straight teeth) and then critical of our economy-free to choose. If you work, you can buy insurance. Duh.

And his personal comments about Ann's sex life, figure, and brains are way out of line. It's just like a short fat balding man to criticize a woman for how she looks. Arrogance, they name is Critical Bill. And if we can believe you, you're ugly too!

Story changed again. Surprise!
Back to the original story...stuff that came out after Ann's article.

Now she changed the asault time (now 11:40 to midnight), starting just after she got off her cell phone. (She called 911 at 12:53.)

Photos showed the two women dancing abetween 12:00 to 12:04. ("Do you smoke after rape?" "No, I dance.")

Two rapers, not three, but they apparently confused her by using multiple names. Maybe too much booze. ("Hi, I'm Adam, and I'll be your rapist tonight." "But your nametag says Brett.")

Seligman had no part (he had taxi and ATM receipts). Good choice to drop him.

She now claims that she was mistaken about Evans's having a mustache. (Nobody at the party remembers his putting on a fake mustache for the rape, either.)

Hey, give her a break - it's surely traumatizing when you get raped by a guy without a p*nis...

Does anybody remember that there were members of the team that weren't even at the party?


Good Article
Way to go Ann! Tell it like it is, since that is very rare in today's world. She was black, she lied and it has become news all over the world. If the situation were reversed, we would never have heard anything about it. That stinking DA used this situation as a political ladder for him. He actually used the young girl as well as the Duke students to aid his own goals. That DA must go. To jail would be nice.

unknown
I love when you libscum call Ann Coulter a man. You simply can't stand the fact that a woman slaps you around like a bunch of little girls. Your "tolerance" ideology only extends to those on the Dhimmicrat plantation I guess.

What's next?

Puking your pablum that you're a right-winger and Ann is damaging us...yabba, blabba, blabbba.

Lenin coined a phrase for people like you and I'd LOVE to tell you it but I'm just recently back from exile and have to avoid insulting the libdrones.

lunch break
Critical Bill, wow, looks like you've been taking some heat all morning. Concerning Ann, don't know how you can make such presumptive statements concerning her faith. Do you really want this to turn into another useless series of postings regarding what "true faith" is and is not?

I admire Ann. She can be abrasive and harsh. But she has the temerity to stand for truth and justice. I don't see how she does anything that "feigns religion."

Not sure why she bothers you so much. Perhaps it is because you cannot answer directly? And are left speechless at her comments?



Come on Drewrush
Give me a chance. I'm running out of energy here. Ok - Coulter is passing judgement on bill clinton being a rapist based on what facts? unless it is proved in court that you have raped someone, and you are sentenced accordingly, you ain't guilty of diddly squat. Thankfully, if Clinton were ever to go to trial for a crime like that, Coulter would be very far removed from having any say in the judgement. I am not defending anyone who judges before the facts are known - all those who have done that to these Duke students are wrong. But Coulter is no better.
And to those of you who are defending Mountain Rose - she put mixed race children from the time of slavery down to mixed race marriages!!!!!! Just about the dumbest comment I've seen on TH, and that's saying something. Although I know I've said that lots of times before too.

three little words
it

didn't

happen

CB - Mountain Rose
To paraphrase you, if you think you won your little slirmish with Mountain Rose, good luck to you, you'll need it.

Left Dangle made the implication that all light-complexioned blacks are the result of white-on-black rapes that occurred 150-300 years ago, Mountain Rose challenged his nonsense, and you stepped once more into the muck. I hope you have a good shoe polisher!

Critical Bill
No comments on my post to you?

Critical Bill/English Bob
I have to agree with Steve O, Mountain Rose gave you a good spanking but I think you secretly loved it.


Truth
Liberals/Progressives/Socialist/Communist are all the same--they have different names created by the "serpents of semantics" to obscure. Thieves all--ridding our nation of them would be a service to our culture and Republic.

Steve O
Y'old charmer you. I suggest you get back to that show where they attach wires to their testicles, what's it called, on MTV... my mind has gone blank. No wonder, I've put myself through the Townhall paces today.
Each to their own; think I've held up quite well, and I don't expect to change any minds here. If you think Mountain Rose won our little skirmish, good luck to you. I think you'll need it. Oh, and if you're going to sling insults, try to think of somethiing a lttle more insulting than big fat dunnyhead. Those kindergarten memories come flooding back...

Critical Bill (easier to repost)
you wrote:

"The point is, just like the Duke lacross players, you can't run around calling people rapists if nothing has ever been proved against them."

You make the point of every conservative here. Nearly every MSM outlet and liberal blogger assumed the guilt of the boys. Many members of both the liberal and black communities were doing exactly what you say they should not.

The difference between Ann and the MSM is that Ann is passing judgment on the people she writes about after all the facts are in. The facts with which she makes her cases strongly support her claims.

The MSM and liberals made their case against the three boys BEFORE all the facts were gathered. The difference between Ann and the liberals are that Ann does not believe liberals are guilty because they are liberals: she does it because of the facts that are found regarding those particular liberals. The MSM and liberals believed the boys were guilty because they were white and "privileged." (Though, being from Long Island, I can tell you, growing up in Garden City does not mean "privileged" as in my dad drives a Bentley and is the CEO of a corporation.) Now that all the facts are out, many liberals would just like to drop it and forget about it.

justice4twosistas.blogspot.com

visit that site. you don't see any reference to finding justice for the white boys now that the evidence goes against the stripper's story. you don't see any reference to nifong's abuse of the legal system. why? because they will not support justice for all, only justice for some.

It may be true that Ann picks on liberals because they are her political adversaries, but that does not make the evidence or her claims any less reliable taken at face value. But it would be naive to believe that the MSM and the black community of Durham didn't want to prosecute the boys because they were white and privileged and the victim was black.

liberalgoodman asked why it was that conservatives don't give a hooey about a black man if he's wrongly accused. first i'd say: ask thomas sowell and larry elder if they agree. second, why should white people care about everyone when, as shown above, there are many liberals who only will seek justice for some? it seems that liberals and the black community of durham support someone because of their skin color. why is it that white people cannot do the same? the fact is that in america if a white person aids another white person, it's considered racism, but if a black person aids or defends another black person it's called solidarity.

Always was skeptical of the stripper...
But the irony that the accusations against these men took hold because of their race and class in defiance of the facts is striking to me. It's what low to middle-class black men have been trying to tell people all along. The justice system isn't blind and neither is society.

*correction
the last sentence should read:

the fact is that in america if a white person aids another white person, it's considered racism, but IF* a black person aids or defends another black person it's called solidarity.

Justice may yet be served!
In February when the evidenciary hearing takes place I suspect all charges will be thrown out by the judge. The two key items will be the photo lineup and the hidden DNA results. At that time at least a dozen civil suits will be filed. Not only against DA Nifong but also against Durham itself.

Follow that up with at least two NC state bar actions against Mr Nifong.

Only this will restore faith in the legal system.

Critical Bill
I generally don't attack people personally, but I'll make an exception in your case.

You're a big fat dummyhead, and are impervious to reason. There. I said it.

A freshman failing his first year's philosophy class can categorize the logical errors in your mean-spirited, incoherent ramblings.

You might be a genius over at KOS, but this forum seems to be a little bit out of your league. And when you try to volley with Mountain Rose, you are really, really at a severe disadvantage.

Are you really so dense that you can't even recognize that Mountain Rose has shredded you? And have you never seen a mixed race couple?

I don't actually think you're stupid, just intellectually lazy.

See?
i can't even spell it.

Primus, my old foe
you are so right. My one man stand for the day is drawing to a close and you'll be free of me very shortly. Still, no regrets and all that. And just so you know, I'm not a socialist.

CB
you wrote:

"The point is, just like the Duke lacross players, you can't run around calling people rapists if nothing has ever been proved against them."

You make the point of every conservative here. Nearly every MSM outlet and liberal blogger assumed the guilt of the boys. Many members of both the liberal and black communities were doing exactly what you say they should not.

The difference between Ann and the MSM is that Ann is passing judgment on the people she writes about after all the facts are in. The facts with which she makes her cases strongly support her claims.

The MSM and liberals made their case against the three boys BEFORE all the facts were gathered. The difference between Ann and the liberals are that Ann does not believe liberals are guilty because they are liberals: she does it because of the facts that are found regarding those particular liberals. The MSM and liberals believed the boys were guilty because they were white and "privileged." (Though, being from Long Island, I can tell you, growing up in Garden City does not mean "privileged" as in my dad drives a Bentley and is the CEO of a corporation.) Now that all the facts are out, many liberals would just like to drop it and forget about it.

justice4twosistas.blogspot.com

visit that site. you don't see any reference to finding justice for the white boys now that the evidence goes against the stripper's story. you don't see any reference to nifong's abuse of the legal system. why? because they will not support justice for all, only justice for some.

It may be true that Ann picks on liberals because they are her political adversaries, but that does not make the evidence or her claims any less reliable taken at face value. But it would be naive to believe that the MSM and the black community of Durham didn't want to prosecute the boys because they were white and privileged and the victim was black.

liberalgoodman asked why it was that conservatives don't give a hooey about a black man if he's wrongly accused. first i'd say: ask thomas sowell and larry elder if they agree. second, why should white people care about everyone when, as shown above, there are many liberals who only will seek justice for some? it seems that liberals and the black community of durham support someone because of their skin color. why is it that white people cannot do the same? the fact is that in america if a white person aids another white person, it's considered racism, but a black person aids or defends another black person it's called solidarity.

Primus54
"Socialism does not work. Not because it isn't a good idea, but because it ignores the nature of man... and has NEVER succeeded and never will. But that won't keep liberals from trying it again and again and again."
====================
DING DING DING!

We have a winner. Great post Primus54.

The reason liberals try it again and again and again ad infinitum?

Because STUPID IS AS STUPID DOES.

There can be no other explanation.

CB
What I meant is that you merely repeated a previous assertion. But enough of this, the topic here has become repetatively boring. We'll lock horns on something else later. Cheerio!

Critical Bill
To my cousin, Critical Bill:

You need to give it a rest, cousin.

You are out-matched and your posts are becoming increasingly shrill, a sure sign of desperation.

I've never met a liberal who wasn't well-intentioned or a supporter of the well-intentioned. (as in all things, there ARE exceptions, of course).

The difference between most liberals and most conservatives? Conservatives don't just judge intentions, but also judge results. And as students of proven history, dislike having to live through the same failed experiments of the past just because there is a new generation of liberals who think they've found a better way to implement their policies than the previous generation.

Socialism does not work. Not because it isn't a good idea, but because it ignores the nature of man... and has NEVER succeeded and never will. But that won't keep liberals from trying it again and again and again.

no gunny
I think all of his earnings are offshore. No idea what tax he pays but it ain't a lot for someone who earns a hundred million bucks a year or thereabouts. He's off to LA Glaxy because he's past his best and the US league has just removed its salary cap. Good luck to him; not the brightest bloke but a dedicated dad and a dedicated athlete who has been treated shoddily by the England selectors.

cheers frog...
but I have a leaving do to go to tonight so I'm outta here soon. Bloody addictive though, having it out with Townhallers. I blame my mother.

Critical Bill/English Bob
THAT really sucks.

Being a British Subject and playing in Spain and getting the H*LL taxed out of you by two socialist crapholes.

NO WONDER he left. I'm surprised he waited as long as he did. He should know that once socialists start sucking that tax teat, it's all over but the crying.


tbmbuzz
You'll need to run that one past me again... thought I had replied?

CB - outted again!
Nice deflection and non-answer to my direct response to you. Game, set, match!

Dryfus affair?
It seems we've exceeded the kangaroo courts France and exceeded their liberalism & separation of church and state.

KennyG
He plays for Real Mardid at the mo, has done for at least three years I think. Can't speak a word of Spanish yet though, so he's gonna struggle with the language barrier in LA... jeez I can't believe I just wrote that...

English Bob
I guess Beckham finally decided to play in the MEN's league, that's why he left.

That or he got tired of having half his wages seized by the Queen's agents.

CB, well mannered or...
pompous, I'm not sure which. Maybe a little of both. Still I gotta admire his determination in standing up to the flying arrows. The dude is standing there taking all comers. I'd tip my hat if I wore one.

Racism and slavery
Slavery in the United States should be a non-issue at this point. Roughly half a million Americans died in a war started over slavery. Oh, by the way, Slavery was abolished during that war. No one lives whose parents were slaves or slave owners and a very few live whose grandparents were. A great many of us (myself included) had at least a portion of their families immigrate after 1865, and in any event slavery was not so common that everyone in the south had a slave. The vast majority didn't make enough money. Slaves were expensive to buy and "maintain." If you didn't feed and shelter your slave he won't be able to work. The middle class and certainly the poor couldn't afford it. It's a black stain on American history, to be sure, but the blood of those 500,000 or so killed in the Civil War should have done something to ameliorate that stain.

Racism is another matter. The problem with racism was summed up in another column, the author and data I do not recall off hand. Paraphrasing: A racist used to be anyone who hated blacks, now it's anyone who blacks hate (The actual phrase was used to describe anti-Semites, but the idea is the same). Are there white racists? Of course there are. To say otherwise would be idiotic. It's worth noting that the three accused in this crime haven't even been credibly accused of racism. That I'm aware of, there's no evidence to support any claim that they are (any more than their being rich, white, privileged Liberals. Or at least being associated with a school that caters to that segment of the population).

Using the crimes of 140 years ago to support the idea that whites are inherently racist now is foolishness. It's a non sequitur. It makes no sense. Fairer-skinned blacks are far more a product of consentual relationships nowadays than rape, especially since rape is one of the most often misused arguments in favor of abortion. Even those who claim that Thomas Jefferson fathered children with one of his slaves claim that it was an on-going affair, not rape. In modern times, it is impossible for a crime by a white against a black to be considered anything but a hate crime. Because of all the racist politics from the Left -- trying to keep racial divisions in place -- any time something bad happens to a black person, it's because of racism. Black kid is murdered by black gang member? Racism created gangs. Inner-city blacks get high on dangerous drugs like crack cocaine? The Racist CIA put it on the streets to kill blacks. AIDS is a scourge in Africa? The racist CIA created the virus and introduced it to Africa. A hurricane wipes out a black neighborhood? That racist President Bush managed to create the storm and direct it to New Orleans, never mind that he had the Army Corps of Engineers blow up the levees. The list goes on and on and on. White privilege counts against you when you are accused of a crime against a black person.

This sort of thing serves no one, except Leftist politicians and "Civil Rights" leaders. The first thing most of America thinks when a black woman accuses a white man of rape is "Tawana Brawley." Kobe Bryant was never called a racist when he was alleged to have raped a white woman (which accusation wasn't much truer than the Duke one, though Kobe DID admit to having consentual intercourse with his accuser.) The more blacks cry racism when it isn't there, the less their cries will be believed in those cases where the complaints are valid. Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton are losing credibility in the black community. I've met several blacks who say "They don't speak for me." Their credibility with whites (excepting white liberal politicians) was exhausted a long time ago.

When we can stop pretending that everything bad that happens to blacks is because of racist whites, and when we can stop pretending that it's 1865 and the slaves were freed yesterday, we might actually be able to fix the real problems out there.

Blimey
David Beckham off to LA Galaxy. Yippee - we've finally offloaded Posh Spice!!!!

David
Nonsense. We are all entitled to innocence until being proved guilty, even people in public positions. Does becoming a politician mean that basic judicial rights are waived? I think not. I agree on editorial criticism, but that ain't the same as calling someone a rapist.
Not sure what point you are trying to make about who crewed the slave ships - it doesn't make a blind bit of difference.

Critical Bill
While you are correct in Miss Coulters tolerance, or lack of, for people with differing views your charge of hypocrisy would seem to be off the mark.

Her critisims and slanders are personal opinions. Slanders brought by people who can then bring felony charges against these individuals they are not opinions.

Crit Bill
You wrote:
I don't know much about this paticular case, but to make light of someone who may or may not have been gang raped is low. Rape, either by gangs or individuals, ruins lives. It ruins thousands of women's lives across the globe. It isn't a laughing matter.


First line....you don't know much about this particular case. Then why be insulting, disagree and wave that pale dainty pompous finger at others who actually DO know about this case.

Ann is not making light of someone who was raped, because if you knew about the case, the accuser was not raped. She cried rape to exploit money from the white rich college boys. Why? Because we here in the US are so plagued by liberal guilt that the media are so quick to put these boys in jail before they ever had their day in court.

She did not fan the flames of controversy, as you had stuttered. If you knew about the case, which you said you didn't, then you would understand that the accuser, her lawyer, and the media fanned those flames of controversy.

Ann is merely points out the obvious, which clearly sailed over your head and across the other side of the ocean.

Cheers!

English Bob
I think you miss the difference between Bill and Hillary Clinton and the Duke boys. Bill and Hillary have made themselves public figures and have been able to make themselves above the law.
They are thus open to editoral critisim as per Ms. Coulter. The Duke boys are private citizens and do not wish to be made public as per the Clintons. They are thus innocent till proven guilty and should not even be discussed in the news.

As to your slavery comments, let me point out that your brother Englishmen were the ones crewing the ships and making the slaves pregunant. That is until about 1830 (not sure of the date) at which time the job was taken over by predominantly New England captains and crews.

Sorry
that should read can't complain...

wiseone
I don't know if it happened or not, not being privvy to Bill Clinton's every move. Only they know if it is true or not and the damage it has or hasn't done to her is for her to tell. The point is, just like the Duke lacross players, you can't run around calling people rapists if nothing has ever been proved against them. Coulter does, and plenty of people here do too. So I don't suppose anyone on the right who calls Clinton a rapist can complain when someone on the left calls the Duke players rapists. It's all wrong.

The Problem
The problem in the lacrosse case is the legal system. It needs overhauling. Talk to anyone involved in the legal system about the need for change, and you will be treated as though you attacked the flag, motherhood, decency and honor, and apple pie -- all in one sentence. The fox (attorneys) are in charge of the chicken house.

Here in North Carolina we have an elected judge whose law licence was revoked because he had robbed the life savings of an elderly client prior to his being elevated to the bench. Judges cannot practice without a law licence, but our state had to continue to pay his salary. The only way our state could not pay him was that he resign, and there was no legal way to do that in our state. Fortunately (and belatedly) he found enough decency to resign.

No more need be said about a politically motivated prosecutor who saw the case as the guarantee to be elected. Expediency, not truth or justice, was the most important thing. Hiding exculpatory evidence is not only inexcusable, it is illegal. The white lacrosse players may not be paragons of virtue, but they do have the right to be judged fairly. The Durham DA should be off the case and out of office. Maybe that will eventually happen. But the legal system works entirely too slowly. That is the problem. It takes forever for a case to work through the system!

Getting change so that justice works more swiftly and fairly seems impossible. It is more than that -- it is frustrating! As I said, the fox is in charge of the chicken house.


Mountain Rose
If you re-read the post to which you originally replied, it starts with the phrase "it happened during slavery". You countered that argument by talking about interracial marriage - of which there was practically none during slavery. I put the word "mulatto" in inverted commas because that is how mixed race people were referred to back then. You manage to make yourself look more stupid with every post...

RICHARD
Re: "Godless" (Coulter's book on liberalism as a religion).

You made great points in your post. Let me add one.

Critical Bill's posts confirm many of the things "alleged" by Coulter in "Godless" and also in "Slander".

Question for Critical Bill. Since Clinton was never even tried, let alone convicted of raping Juanita Broadderick, does that mean it never happened? Does that mean the emotional and prychological damage it caused her doesn't exist? Or does it just mean that Mike Nifong wasn't the DA in that jurisdiction?

re: tbmbuzz
The Paula Jones case was a civil suit, not a criminal case. It involved sexual harassment, not rape.
_____________

I would agree with Critical Bill to an extent -- Ann has made her living with over-the-top rhetoric in which anyone who disagrees with her isn't just wrong but stupid, or evil, or naive. And yes, she has been guilty of the "guilty until proven innocent" approach with anyone she deems a "liberal". Has she said the precise words "Bill Clinton is a rapist"? I don't know, but I do know that I have heard her refer to him as one. Has she ever said the precise words "All Muslims are terrorists"? I don't know, but she certainly has said that rhetorically, if not literally.

I would point out that if one is going to criticize C-Bill for personal attacks, the point would be better made without using personal attacks in the criticism.

Critical Bozo
Critical Bill writes: Thursday, January, 11, 2007 10:24 AM
Mountain Rose
Give it a rest. Your chat stinks worse than New York when there's a strong westerly blowing. How much interracial marriage existed during slavery??? I don't know the answer, but I'd be prepared to bet my life on there not being much. In fact, slave ship crews were encouraged to get african slaves pregnant on the crossing because "mulatto" children were worth more in the slave markets.
****************************************

I see a lot of mixed children here in Los Angeles, and they are usually accompanied by parents of two different races.

If you want to keep using racist terms like "Mulatto" to keep mixed-race people in a disempowered position, that is your perogative.

However, if you check carefully, the stink is coming from your vacinity.

HE WHO SMEALT IT, DEALT IT!

Great post, Pamela
You brought good points to light regarding this case that had remained previously under-discussed.

English Bob
http://croziervision.com/wiki/index.php/NHS_horror_stories

http://www.readersdigest.ca/mag/2003/04/health.html (not exactly a right-wing rag, eh what?)

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1366412/posts Assoc Press.

http://www.opinionjournal.com/extra/?id=110006785
Great look at the British NHCS by one who saw it first hand. (Pay attention to the last paragraph English Bob)

Its already been done Ms. Coulter
A. Coulter comments:

"At the next White Males of Privilege meeting, someone ought to bring up how they can use their vast power to win the right not to be put on trial for crimes they didn't commit."

I'd say slavery fits that bill quite nicely.

Shells
White liberals started it and then fled to the suburbs.

That's how they work, start trouble, screw up the situation, create a class of victims, and move far enough away where they can either commute via train or simply telecommute from their gated communities in Conn/RI/VT!

KennyG
That NHS sucks website link you posted - the site has 77 members according to its front page. Whoopee doo.

Justice?
An 'Emily Litella' "NEVER MIND" hardly constitutes justice. It is too bad the three accused lacrosse players cannot demand their day in court. I would truly love to see Mike Nifong have to attempt to prosecute them in court. There is no end to the shame and humiliation that should be heaped upon him for his outrageous conduct. As for Crystal Mangum, most states have a law against initiating a false police report. She and Mr. Nifong should both be prosecuted for their actions. And then the civil trials should begin.

InIt2WinIt

Hamilcar Barca

If roles were reversed
Imagine a white stripper falsely accusing a bunch of black college students for rape?

There would be no end of marches from Jesse and Al up and down each campus street. Justice against the white stripper would be in the works, she would be jailed. The falsely accused black guys would be heros and on Oprah. Maybe even a movie deal. Sensitivity training cocktail parties for all!

There is such reverse discrimination going on, and no one can plainly say it---there is discrimination against white people. Period. We allowed this to happen out of guilt from the past of which you, me and every breathing person alive has nothing to do with at all. Why are we carrying the load of bricks?????

selective anger
Libs are only interested in crime if 1) It is commited against a minority, 2) It is committed against a poor person, 3) it is commed against them. All other crime is a social evolution or balance for perceived past injustice

Dicky old boy..
... were you upset at the lack of a response? Ok, I'll say it again - don't give up the day job just yet.

But what does Ann think?
I just don't understand the fascination (including mine) with other people's opinions. Since neither Ann nor I know the facts in the case (although, I'm sure she has Frist's ability to determine facts from video), why is her opinion greeted with high fives and pats on the back. And what does this one case have to do with what is going on in our daily lifes. I'm sure people will argue that it is a mirror on our society, but aren't there like a billion other relevant mirrors that we can also hold up to back our perception of reality. My own perception is that dogs are taking over the world and my proof is that the US has the highest population of dogs with 61 million. One day now they will turn on us and take over. And than (in my opinion) we will all find out that Ann is their ringleader!

tbmbuzz
So that constitutes a conviction does it? Pull the other one - you're either convicted of a felony or you're not. And St William of Little Rock, as he is known across Europe, has not to my knowledge been convicted of rape. Just like the Duke lacross team members.

Mr Bill
Surprisingly few in this country have no health insurance. The statistics you may have seen tend to neglect those on medical assistance (i.e. socialized medicine). Further, no person can be denied emergency care or imminent o.b. care in any hospital due to the EMTALA laws. This is regardless of their ability or willingness to pay. In Massachucets they actually have a system called "Free Care" that lets those with no coverage be seen for free. They have no maximums, no copays, no prescription copays, no need for pre-approvals, etc. These are the annoying things that those of us with insurance have to deal with. There are systems like this all over the country. Contrast this with a system in which someone could actually die while waiting for months to years while waiting for care. If you cannot access care in a timely fashion, what good or comfort is it to "have coverage" at all? Incidentally, we have Canadians coming here daily for care and paying cash rather than waiting their turn in the national system.

Critical Bill ...good letter..
Critical Bill writes: Thursday, January, 11, 2007 6:02 AM
--"Guilty until proven innocent
Is a concept that Coulter is very familiar with. Anyone who disagrees with her on foreign policy is a traitor. Bill Clinton is a rapist. Hillary Clinton is a crook. Anyone who believes in a woman's right to choose is a murderer. All Muslims are guilty of being terrorists. As far as I am aware, no-one has stood trial based on one of Coulter's accusations, never mind been convicted, but they are all guilty in her eyes.
This is a particuarly nasty piece, even by her own standards. I don't know much about this paticular case, but to make light of someone who may or may not have been gang raped is low. Rape, either by gangs or individuals, ruins lives. It ruins thousands of women's lives across the globe. It isn't a laughing matter.
I don't know why she does it; she is either so consumed by hate that she actually believes what she writes or she knows that fanning the flames of controversy is where the money's at. I would bet on the latter."--



I think we all (Lame-brained Libs included) owe a big 'Thank You' to Critical Bill for the perfecting of the liberal form of argumentation.
The thing to remember about how libs argue is that mentally, they all, with no exceptions, are nothing but 15-year-old spoiled little, ignorant, lazy, good-for-nothing b-tches.
In this case, she first attempts to copy Coulter, but it's not easy to follow the act of an honored legal expert like Coulter. Read her resume, sweetie, and you'll see that you are in over your head.
Then this foolish twit Critical Bill has a twinge of conscience, and admits that she really
doesn't know much about what she's writing about.

This illustrates a very important part of the lib style of argumentation. Always argue, no matter what, because that gives the opportunity to throw the accusation back at the accuser, which kids just seem to do: "Oh, yeh, well doubles back on you, so there!"

Nothing else matters, because she isn't really arguing against the writer, Coulter in this case, but what she, Critical Bill is doing, is reciting a litany that can be tacked on any subject whatsoever. All the arguing is for the audience, not the opponent. They don't care if they look like idiots, because they just want to spout their little sayings, and get out of sight before the truth starts being spoken. That's why they're so rude and interupt all the time-- they know the value of putting thoughts into peoples' minds.

Remember Coulter's book about the religious aspects of liberalism? If you didn't read it, you missed a good read. Anyway, libs keep making up litany, which mostly sound like bumper stickers, such as "Bush lied...people died".

No proofs exist of their false statements, but that doesn't matter. They are lieing, and they know it, but they want the bystanders to hear the argument, in the hopes that just one might be swayed. They believe that these "mantras" they recite can actually convert listeners to their beliefs. And it does work, but their problem is that only certain kinds of people fall for it-- the young, inexperienced idealists; the lazy, rebellious haters of authority, and lonely losers and other alienated loners.

The only real question here is, which of these pathetic types is Critical Bill?
###