Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: tapakeg on July 10, 2006, 04:02:43 PM
-
On the morning Adam Corolla show, she called in WAY late and said she was short on time.
http://movies.crooksandliars.com/Adam-Carolla-Coulter-7-6-06.mp3
-
Why the long face?!
:rofl
-
that
was
AWESOME!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl
-
Someone will be in her next book for sure. lol
-
I love Ann, she can get liberals panties so wadded up that they hang up on her, because they KNOW they'll lose a debate with her. You go Girl! LOL! :rofl
-
Adam Corolla has a show?
-
...as Rip desperatedly tries to troll on Coulter's coat tails.
-
:lol
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort
I love Ann, she can get liberals panties so wadded up that they hang up on her, because they KNOW they'll lose a debate with her. You go Girl!
You have sex with her, then. Watch out for the Crying Game gambit.
-
I agree rip, it was worth wading through one and a half minutes of shock radio vomit just to hear Anns sweet little voice :D
-
Even if Ann makes a mistake once in a while, listening to her is worth every minute just to hear her piss off liberals. :rofl
-
Originally posted by john9001
Adam Corolla has a show?
Ann Coulter can debate?
-
I have a clip of Coulter insisting that Canada fought along side the US in Viet Nam:rofl
-
Originally posted by xrtoronto
I have a clip of Coulter insisting that Canada fought along side the US in Viet Nam:rofl
Was she talking about this?
During the years 1954 to 1975 Canada served on 2 international truce commissions and provided medical supplies and technical assistance. Canadian diplomats were involved in negotiations between Washington and Hanoi and successive Canadian governments, both Liberal and Conservative, maintained that Ottawa was an impartial and objective peacekeeper, an innocent and helpful bystander negotiating for peace and administering aid to victims of the war. However, Cabinet papers, confidential stenographic minutes of the truce commissions as well as top-secret American government cables revealed Canada to be a willing ally of US counterinsurgency efforts.
Canada's record on the truce commissions was a partisan one, rooted in the presumption of Hanoi's guilt and Saigon's innocence and designed to discredit North Vietnam while exonerating South Vietnam from its obligations to uphold the Geneva Agreements. Canadian delegates engaged in espionage for the US Central Intelligence Agency and aided the covert introduction of American arms and personnel into South Vietnam while they spotted for US bombers over North Vietnam. Canadian commissioners shielded the US chemical defoliant program from public inquiry, parlayed American threats of expanded war to Hanoi, and penned the reports legitimating both the rupture of the Geneva Agreements and the US air war over North Vietnam. Ottawa would later assert that these actions were necessary to counter-balance the activities of the Eastern bloc countries with whom they shared membership on the truce commissions.
Canadian aid during the war went only to S Vietnam, $29 million 1950-75, routed through the Colombo Plan and the Canadian Red Cross. Although humanitarian in appearance, Canadian assistance was an integral part of the Free World Assistance Program, co-ordinated by the US Department of State with the International Security Office of the Pentagon as the point of contact. In the field, Canadian capital assistance was regulated by the US-RVN Health Defense Agreement and administered by the International Military Assistance Force Office in Saigon. On a number of occasions, Ottawa stopped the shipment of ecumenical medical relief to civilian victims of the war in North Vietnam.
At home, 500 firms sold $2.5 billion of war materiel (ammunition, napalm, aircraft engines and explosives) to the Pentagon. Another $10 billion in food, beverages, berets and boots for the troops was exported to the US, as well as nickel, copper, lead, brass and oil for shell casings, wiring, plate armor and military transport. In Canada unemployment fell to record low levels of 3.9%, the gross domestic product rose by 6% yearly, and capital expenditure expanded exponentially in manufacturing and mining as US firms invested more than $3 billion in Canada to offset shrinking domestic capacity as a result of the war. The herbicide "Agent Orange" was tested for use in Vietnam at CFB Gagetown, NB. US bomber pilots practiced carpet-bombing runs over Suffield, Alberta and North Battleford, Sask, before their tours of duty in SE Asia. And the results of the only successful peace initiative to Hanoi--That of Canadian diplomat Chester Ronning--would be kept from public knowledge in order not to harm official US-Canadian relations. Ten thousand young Canadian men fought in the US armed forces in the war.
Or maybe this...
Larry Semeniuk of Windsor, Ontario, joined the US Army in January 1967. In December, he was deployed as a paratrooper of Company B, 3rd Battalion, 187th regiment, 101st Airborne Division to Vietnam. In January 1968, Semeniuk saved the life of an officer at the risk of his own. A few days later, he was killed in action. He was awarded the Silver Star posthumously.
Gary Butt was born May 9, 1951 in Montreal, Quebec. He enlisted in the US military at Plattsburg, New York in 1968. Since Butt had superior skills in marksmanship, the US Army gave him the position of rifleman with the 173rd Airborne Brigade. Butt volunteered for duty in Vietnam and served from July 1970, to April 1971. He was killed on April 3rd. At the time of his death, Butt held the position of sergeant with the 4th Battalion, 503rd Infantry, 173rd Airborne Brigade.
-
LOL..like coulter would know ANYTHING about that stuff
-
here's one of many links to the interview:
link (http://www.commondreams.org/views05/0206-23.htm)
-
You can "win" an argument simply by spewing the most bile? If that's the case, then yes, that vile avacado could win an argument with anyone. Rush and Gerafalo might come close in the irrelevant facts and half truths department, but for pure bile my money is on Coulter. Good call, drip.
-
The Hitler vs. Coulter Quiz (http://www.people.virginia.edu/~jac3he/GiveUpQuiz/hitlercoulterquiz.html)
:D
-
I was listening to Randi Rhodes on Air America the other evening... she and Coulter pretty much balance each other.
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort
I love Ann, she can get liberals panties so wadded up that they hang up on her, because they KNOW they'll lose a debate with her. You go Girl! LOL! :rofl
Adam's a liberal? You listen to the clip? Hanging up on annoying *****es doesn't make you a liberal. Just makes you a normal guy.
-
Originally posted by Sandman
The Hitler vs. Coulter Quiz (http://www.people.virginia.edu/~jac3he/GiveUpQuiz/hitlercoulterquiz.html)
:D
I doubt Hitler ever spoke any of those words.... he spoke German.
-
ya dude i wouldnt mess with her! she would win and theres nothing any 1 can do about it. pluss we need some 1 to shut the stupid liberals up.
-
Someone is thinking with their little head.
-
:rofl :rofl :rofl
-
Originally posted by Holden McGroin
I doubt Hitler ever spoke any of those words.... he spoke German.
Hehe... http://www.giveupblog.com/hitlercoulterquiz.html
-
Originally posted by SirLoin
:rofl :rofl :rofl
I rest my case.
Originally posted by ujustdied
how to talk to hot girls so that every time i talk to them they'ed want to u know "do stuff".
-
She & Tucker Carlson would have great secks.
-
well... it is easy to win if the other person isn't allowed to speak...
lazs
-
I heard the lead up to this, btw... this was her second booking on the show, as she had completely missed the first.
-
How to win an argument in true Moonbat fashion.. Dont let the opposition talk..... How can you compare Rhandi Rhodes to A.C. ??? Thats like comparing John Kerry to an actual war hero..
-
What a p***** . He obviously didn't have the courage to spar with her on the phone but had to hang up before trouncing her with his manshowliness.
-
Originally posted by T0J0
How to win an argument in true Moonbat fashion.. Dont let the opposition talk..... How can you compare Rhandi Rhodes to A.C. ??? Thats like comparing John Kerry to an actual war hero..
It's like comparing a draft dodger to somebody who had their dad get them into the country club squadron, and then bailed without letting his commanding officer know. I mean... two completely different things.
-
Originally posted by Dos Equis
It's like comparing a draft dodger to somebody who had their dad get them into the country club squadron, and then bailed without letting his commanding officer know. I mean... two completely different things.
So we went from a draft dodging president to one who avoided combat by joining the guard. At least we're showing improvement in our choices. Will be interesting to compare McCain's military record with Kerry's should it come to that.
-
Originally posted by Sandman
Ann Coulter can debate?
No she sucks, she is the poster girl for retarded right wing hacks.
Even Bill Oreily as lame as he is managed to make her look like a dolt on some radio show I ended up listening to in traffic.
She is like an uninsteresting female(maybe) howard stern, in that she says retarded outragous **** to get people to look at her.
I am not a liberal.
-
I would have to agree with Holden, Coulter and Rhodes are two peas in a pod, both insufferable.
shamus
-
Originally posted by GtoRA2
No she sucks, she is the poster girl for retarded right wing hacks.
Even Bill Oreily as lame as he is managed to make her look like a dolt on some radio show I ended up listening to in traffic.
She is like an uninsteresting female(maybe) howard stern, in that she says retarded outragous **** to get people to look at her.
I am not a liberal.
Using the terms
1: Right wing Hack
2: She Sucks
3: Howard Stern
and miss spelling most of the larger then three letter words makes you Librule by default.... .
-
Hardly.
I am not a right wing hack who likes idiots that spew a bunch of bull**** to piss the other side off.
She is an idiot and makes conservatives and Republicans look like idiots, and not just the ones who think she is great.
I lump her right in with Peta, for being useless for anything but a contemptuous laugh.
If she wasn't an almost good looking blonde she would be nobody. The guys here who hump her leg because of that (no one notices the adams apple?) are sad.
-
Ann Coulters a babe, Im humping her leg right now :D
Adams apple! what adams apple???:aok
-
Originally posted by GtoRA2
If she wasn't an almost good looking blonde she would be nobody. The guys here who hump her leg because of that (no one notices the adams apple?) are sad.
interesting, reference to "hump her leg" (dogs), "adams apple" ( she is a man or manly).
conclusion: anyone who does not hate her is a sad homosexual dog.
sounds like GTO is the one who "spews the bull****".
-
Originally posted by john9001
interesting, reference to "hump her leg" (dogs), "adams apple" ( she is a man or manly).
conclusion: anyone who does not hate her is a sad homosexual dog.
sounds like GTO is the one who "spews the bull****".
Lol John if you feel threatend by that I am sorry. I didnt mean to call people who like coulter studmuffins, just idiots. :D
And who here does not spew bull**** from time to time?
-
Originally posted by Yeager
Ann Coulters a babe, Im humping her leg right now :D
Adams apple! what adams apple???:aok
Dude go look at some pictures, Laura Bush is way hotter!:D
-
Originally posted by GtoRA2
Lol John if you feel threatend by that I am sorry. I didnt mean to call people who like coulter studmuffins, just idiots. :D
And who here does not spew bull**** from time to time?
i never feel threatened, i only observe and comment.
-
Im not a librule!
Bush is evil
Im not a librule!
Coulter sucks!
Im not a librule
Shes gotta adams apple! so there!
Im not a librule!
Howard Stern roxs dude:
Im not a librule!
You coulter fans are leg humping phags
Im not a librule:
Shutup rightwing hax.
Looks liker one, acts like one, miss spells like one, rude like one....
Might as well just hangup the phone on me too!
-
Originally posted by T0J0
Im not a librule!
Bush is evil
Im not a librule!
Coulter sucks!
Im not a librule
Shes gotta adams apple! so there!
Im not a librule!
Howard Stern roxs dude:
Im not a librule!
You coulter fans are leg humping phags
Im not a librule:
Shutup rightwing hax.
Looks liker one, acts like one, miss spells like one, rude like one....
Might as well just hangup the phone on me too!
Needs more cowbell.
-
Tojo
You’re funny
So I attacked your little princess and you don't like it so I can't be in the conservative club anymore?
God what will you do if I attack Rush? Will I be a commy then?
You act just like her, you make to many assumptions, but hey I guess that's who buys her book.
Being fairly conservative I like the people who go around expressing views similar to mine to not be raving loons who attack people like the 911 widows for having a different point of view.
She and all the people like her right and left are a part of the problem with politics in this country.
-
Originally posted by lukster
Needs more cowbell.
LOL doesnt everything?
-
Not to get in the way of a good, mindless rant, T0J0, but I'm pretty sure that GtoRA2 compared Coulter to Stern by saying that they both say dumb, outrageous stuff for recognition. Hence, they're both media potatos.
And he's right about that one.
-- Todd/Leviathn
-
Originally posted by Dead Man Flying
Not to get in the way of a good, mindless rant, T0J0, but I'm pretty sure that GtoRA2 compared Coulter to Stern by saying that they both say dumb, outrageous stuff for recognition. Hence, they're both media potatos.
And he's right about that one.
-- Todd/Leviathn
Mindless rant it was...
The "Im not a liberal" comment was to funny....
TJ
-
This is fun so far.
-
Coulter: I think that the US should begin a policy of ethnic cleansing.
Librual: Dear god in heaven, that's awful.
Annfan: Ha! Ha! Look at teh libraul!
Librual: Dude, she's advocating ethnic cleansing.
Annfan: Yeah, but it's worth it because it makes me laugh.
Librual: ...ethnic cleansing.
Annfan: Yeah!
The dude on the radio show did the only thing you can with a Coulter, "click". There is no exchange of ideas with her. There is no debate. There is no arguement. In order for there to be a rational exchange, both parties must have a sincere desire to be intelectually honest. She has no desire to do so. She just wishes to sell some more books. "Click".
-
4- Members should post in a way that is respectful of other users and HTC. Flaming or abusing users is not tolerated.
-
Originally posted by BGBMAW
4- Members should post in a way that is respectful of other users and HTC. Flaming or abusing users is not tolerated.
The widows have a right to say anything they want, just like coulter does, this is the united states and free speach is protected for all, not just the people you like BGB.
Second she does not debate them or anyone else she makes outlandish claims with nothing to back it up other then personal insults.
You want to debate them and shoot their points down fine, thats great, but calling them names because they don't agree with you is childish and stupid, but I see you have a pretty good handle on that yourself.
You guys are like sharks, you smell soneone who doesnt agree with you (or even one that does most of the time) but doesnt like your poster girl (who come of like a raving loon everytime she opens her mouth) and you go on feeding frenzie mode.
Wake up and have a mind of your own for a change, letting coulter and her ilk do your thinking for you makes you look foolish.
I find shehan to be repugnant, but if I was going to debate the topic of the war with her I wouldnt start by calling her an ugly media potato. Coulter would and would lose the argument in the eyes anyone with an ounce of maturity or class.
Let me spell out the point again.
I do not like her, not because she is a conservitive, but because she makes conservitives look like idiots.
If you like looking like an idiot, thats great buy her book and spout her BS.
Some of you guys really should learn something about the person you acuse with your oh so clever your a liberal insults.
-
Originally posted by GtoRA2
The widows have a right to say anything they want, just like coulter does, this is the united states and free speach is protected for all, not just the people you like BGB.
Second she does not debate them or anyone else she makes outlandish claims with nothing to back it up other then personal insults.
You want to debate them and shoot their points down fine, thats great, but calling them names because they don't agree with you is childish and stupid, but I see you have a pretty good handle on that yourself.
You guys are like sharks, you smell soneone who doesnt agree with you (or even one that does most of the time) but doesnt like your poster girl (who come of like a raving loon everytime she opens her mouth) and you go on feeding frenzie mode.
Wake up and have a mind of your own for a change, letting coulter and her ilk do your thinking for you makes you look foolish.
I find shehan to be repugnant, but if I was going to debate the topic of the war with her I wouldnt start by calling her an ugly media potato. Coulter would and would lose the argument in the eyes anyone with an ounce of maturity or class.
Let me spell out the point again.
I do not like her, not because she is a conservitive, but because she makes conservitives look like idiots.
If you like looking like an idiot, thats great buy her book and spout her BS.
Some of you guys really should learn something about the person you acuse with your oh so clever your a liberal insults.
*stands on chair and cheers*
:)
-
Wow who knew this forum was Horseface Coulter Fanboi Central?
-
Coulter is hilarious. She often says the not so politically correct things that many people are thinking.
-
I'm sure the part was edited where Adam Corolla goes "Whew - dodged that bullet." Hmmmmmmm Adam Corolla vs. Ann Coulter in a discussion about Politics. That’s like putting a dodo bird in a cage with a lion. She would have ate him up and crapped him out just like she did to Matt Lauer. Alan Colmes however did do a good job jabbing back at her. He held his ground against her. Even I was impressed.
-
Originally posted by Dago
Coulter is hilarious. She often says the not so politically correct things that many people are thinking.
That is a very sad indictment of "many people", but fortunately I think you're wrong, unless by "many" you mean "a vast minority". Though I don't doubt you think she's a genius.
-
(http://img145.imageshack.us/img145/8779/coulter8rg.gif)
-
Originally posted by SOB
That is a very sad indictment of "many people", but fortunately I think you're wrong, unless by "many" you mean "a vast minority". Though I don't doubt you think she's a genius.
Dude, a vast minority in this country can still be in the millions. And yes, you can bet a lot of people agree with her, that is why she is famous, rich, her books sell and she gets on TV alot.
Don't try to minimize her because you don't agree with her, or her tactics. You don't have to agree with her, that is for sure, but don't try and pretend she doesn't have fans or people who see as she sees.
-
:rofl "I'm a fan of Ann Coulter":rofl
-
A troll is someone who comes into an established community such as an online discussion forum, and posts inflammatory, rude, repetitive or offensive messages designed intentionally to annoy and antagonize the existing members or disrupt the flow of discussion.
She's a troll plain and simple.
-
Originally posted by Dago
Dude, a vast minority in this country can still be in the millions. And yes, you can bet a lot of people agree with her, that is why she is famous, rich, her books sell and she gets on TV alot.
Don't try to minimize her because you don't agree with her, or her tactics. You don't have to agree with her, that is for sure, but don't try and pretend she doesn't have fans or people who see as she sees.
You're right, I just had a momentary lapse in judgement and let my hope show through. Hope that millions of Americans could not revel in the disgusting vitriolic bile that spews out of that ****'s mouth. I suppose those types of people need something to watch when there aren't any Jerry Springer reruns on TV though.
She's simply a horrible person and a waste of good air; a fact that would remain just as true if she cast her nastiness in a different direction.
-
whaaa...
i never claimed to be a fan of this chik
i know...coulter is satan..Air America is the l33t
and dont take offense when u hear.."liberalsim is a mental disorder"...if you arent one
-
For the leg humpers (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-6861509121978861149&q=label%3Anude)
yea its work safe ... maybe
-
Originally posted by Roscoroo
For the leg humpers (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-6861509121978861149&q=label%3Anude)
yea its work safe ... maybe
LOL Wow, she really is the queen of debate.... owned by Katie Curric!
-
Katie has the better leggs :D
-
Originally posted by Roscoroo
For the leg humpers (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-6861509121978861149&q=label%3Anude)
yea its work safe ... maybe
ouch, that's gonna leave a mark
-
Originally posted by GtoRA2
LOL Wow, she really is the queen of debate.... owned by Katie Curric!
Ann made some good points too, so good in fact that Katie just moved on with the interview. Owned not....
-
Can somebody hook me up with password to pigtailsandroundasses dot com ?
There's got to be some usefulness that can be gleaned from this thread.
-
goodness... the liberals here are making fun of someone based on their looks?
That does not seem so enlightened to me. Not really socialist and nurturing you know.
I like to listen to coulter... about 75% of the stuff she says is pretty much common sense...
I can see why the liberals hate her so much tho.
Never understood liberals.... they love acting like liberals and attacking anyone who doesn't tow the liberal line but..... they go ballistic when you call em liberals.
Guess they need a new name like "progressive"... that would be funny huh? "progressive" no one would buy that I guess.
lazs
-
This thread proves Ann's point that at least some liberals would rather completely dismiss a person as being fanatical, crazy, or ugly, rather than consider their ideas.
-
Here is the video clip of Ann vs. Matt Lauer on the Today Show. She slaps him around pretty good. I especially enjoyed the "War on Terrorism" exchange. Ann wins this one hands down. It's a shame Matt couldn't use any of his editing magic tricks to try and make himself look good.
Video (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4xv05FK69KU)
-
Originally posted by lazs2
INever understood liberals.... they love acting like liberals and attacking anyone who doesn't tow the liberal line but..... they go ballistic when you call em liberals.
Guess they need a new name like "progressive"... that would be funny huh? "progressive" no one would buy that I guess.
lazs
how about, "neo-lib" that seems to drive them crazy.
-
Originally posted by Sandman
Someone is thinking with their little head.
Boy did you ever say it Sandman.
hap
p.s. what passes for "debate" thesedays appals.
-
Originally posted by lukster
This thread proves Ann's point that at least some liberals would rather completely dismiss a person as being fanatical, crazy, or ugly, rather than consider their ideas.
What if the person's ideas were "fanatical, crazy or ugly?" ;)
-
Originally posted by Nash
What if the person's ideas were "fanatical, crazy or ugly?" ;)
Then you address the failings of ideas rather than the physical shortcomings of the person espousing them. Do I really need to explain that?
-
Rip is currently batting 1.000 with the "Panties in a bunch" comments in Coulter threads. Keep up the good work Rip.
-
Originally posted by midnight Target
Rip is currently batting 1.000 with the "Panties in a bunch" comments in Coulter threads. Keep up the good work Rip.
Its quite disturbing that you're paying attention to my replies rather than the subject at hand. Need help? (http://www.thamike.com/faux_newz/112_118/stalker.html)
-
Originally posted by Nash
What if the person's ideas were "fanatical, crazy or ugly?" ;)
Well then you would fit right into that category now wouldn't you Nash...
-
Originally posted by EN4CER
Here is the video clip of Ann vs. Matt Lauer on the Today Show. She slaps him around pretty good. I especially enjoyed the "War on Terrorism" exchange. Ann wins this one hands down. It's a shame Matt couldn't use any of his editing magic tricks to try and make himself look good.
Video (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4xv05FK69KU)
You sure you linked the right video?
"why do you think the president has such low approval ratings?"
"uh, hmmm, well, hmmmm........................ ........................ I don’t know um,(you can almost see the 20 watt bulb go off above her head) immigration"
People may be unhappy with Bush a bit on immigration, but that isn’t going to account for those numbers, its all about the war.
Some victory that was.
-
Originally posted by T0J0
Well then you would fit right into that category now wouldn't you Nash...
Whatever you say. I don't believe I've ever blamed 9/11 on gays.... which Ann was defending here when she said this.
And lukster, I don't believe Couric or anyone else attacked Falwell's "physical shortcomings" when they criticised him for those ideas. Do I really need to explain that to you?
-
(http://www.rob-clarkson.com/duff-brewery/cletus/02.jpg)
"Ann Coulter's the smartest woman I ever knowed."
-
Originally posted by Nash
Whatever you say. I don't believe I've ever blamed 9/11 on gays.... which Ann was defending here when she said this.
And lukster, I don't believe Couric or anyone else attacked Falwell's "physical shortcomings" when they criticised him for those ideas. Do I really need to explain that to you?
Dont forget to include fred phelps in that list too!
(http://www.sbcbaptistpress.org/images/IMG200344534LO.jpg)
Coulter and Falwell are in good company!:lol
-
Its funny when someone says stuff tungue in cheech..and the other side doesnt get it...
very similar to Oreilly-Rush-Savage-Coulter..they make alot of jokes about the stereotypical Linguine Spinned Liberal..then they go ape poo poo. over it...
Funneee
-
Coulter was on some cable talk program yesterday and I actually put fourth the effort to pay attention to the interview. I lasted about four or five minutes with it all before coming to the conclusion that I'd rather waste my time watching something more entertaining. All I can say is that she, like everyone else, is entitled to her opinions. I really didnt think she was that smart or stupid. Seemed rather average to me, like 98% of the people I know.
Also, she really isn't that attractive, but then again, she isn't unattractive either.
I think she is out to make money from political rhetoric :rolleyes:
-
Originally posted by Nash
Whatever you say. I don't believe I've ever blamed 9/11 on gays.... which Ann was defending here when she said this.
And lukster, I don't believe Couric or anyone else attacked Falwell's "physical shortcomings" when they criticised him for those ideas. Do I really need to explain that to you?
If you want to discuss what Falwell said then throw it out there. What did he say that you find so offensive or idiotic? A quote would be a good starting point.
-
Originally posted by xrtoronto
Dont forget to include fred phelps in that list too!
(http://www.sbcbaptistpress.org/images/IMG200344534LO.jpg)
Coulter and Falwell are in good company!:lol
So are all the anti-Bush crowd. Two can play that game.
(http://www.news24.com/Images/Photos/2004051815491312-beheading.jpg)
-
"And, I know that I'll hear from them for this. But, throwing God out successfully with the help of the federal court system, throwing God out of the public square, out of the schools. The abortionists have got to bear some burden for this because God will not be mocked. And when we destroy 40 million little innocent babies, we make God mad. I really believe that the pagans, and the abortionists, and the feminists, and the gays and the lesbians who are actively trying to make that an alternative lifestyle, the ACLU, People For the American Way--all of them who have tried to secularize America--I point the finger in their face and say "you helped this happen."
-
Originally posted by Nash
"And, I know that I'll hear from them for this. But, throwing God out successfully with the help of the federal court system, throwing God out of the public square, out of the schools. The abortionists have got to bear some burden for this because God will not be mocked. And when we destroy 40 million little innocent babies, we make God mad. I really believe that the pagans, and the abortionists, and the feminists, and the gays and the lesbians who are actively trying to make that an alternative lifestyle, the ACLU, People For the American Way--all of them who have tried to secularize America--I point the finger in their face and say "you helped this happen."
You have an opinion about this?
-
Yes.
I think it's "fanatical, crazy and ugly."
You?
-
Originally posted by Nash
Yes.
I think it's "fanatical, crazy and ugly."
You?
Falwell is a christian preacher. Christians typically believe that God will punsih sin or at least that sin has negative consequences. He cited what he believes to be sin and was simply preaching god's judgement on that sin. I think it was poorly timed but I don't necessarily disagree with his assessment.
What exactly do you find offensive about it?
-
Originally posted by lukster
Falwell is a christian preacher. Christians typically believe that God will punsih sin or at least that sin has negative consequences. He cited what he believes to be sin and was simply preaching god's judgement on that sin. I think it was poorly timed but I don't necessarily disagree with his assessment.
What exactly do you find offensive about it?
So you think god uses islamic terrorist as a tool and your ok with that?
Since he is saying god gave us the big smack down for letting gays, the ACLU and Feminists somehow force god from the government?
You sure that last picture does not apply to you more then the bush haters? Hell they are islamic terrorists hacking a head off a man in the name of god, the tools falwell is saying his christian god used to kill our countrymen after all.
:rolleyes:
Personaly if god wants to make a point I would rather he do something traditional, like turning everyone in a City to salt or something. Using islamic terrorosts seems a bit silly. You would think god would be smarter then that.
-
Funniest part of this thread is how guys like GTO, Carolla, and I, are painted as liberals for disliking this ****. If neoconservatives think guys like us are liberal, they might want to re-examine the original definition of conservatism.
-
Originally posted by GtoRA2
So you think god uses islamic terrorist as a tool and your ok with that?
Since he is saying god gave us the big smack down for letting gays, the ACLU and Feminists somehow force god from the government?
You sure that last picture does not apply to you more then the bush haters? Hell they are islamic terrorists hacking a head off a man in the name of god, the tools falwell is saying his christian god used to kill our countrymen after all.
:rolleyes:
I think you're reading way to much into what has been said. I personally believe that everyone has free will. God doesn't make anyone do anything. While I believe that Falwell meant that God did not prevent this from happening due to the sinful nature of our country he didn't say that.
You could as easily blame the "corruption" of moral values in America on those persons Falwell cited. This "corruption" and the spreading of American influence to the middle east cannot be denied as one of the factors which causes many Muslims to hate America so much. Looking at it from that perspective you could say that Falwell was simply stating the obvious.
-
Originally posted by FUNKED1
......they might want to re-examine the original definition of conservatism.
You're going to have to go back quite a few years to find an example of it. :)
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort
Ann made some good points too, so good in fact that Katie just moved on with the interview. Owned not....
Ann was pwned Rip .. She has a tendency to smile and try to change the subject when heavily confronted ... I'm not tottally against Ann, but I see her as an Extreamist in her idea's and not always doing enough or correct research on some of her subjects .
Katie still has better leggs :D
-
Originally posted by FUNKED1
If neoconservatives think guys like us are liberal, they might want to re-examine the original definition of conservatism.
Funked has really hit the nail on the head. Look at the GOP 1964 Platform. Go back further if you like.
http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/showplatforms.php?platindex=R1964
The above link is VERY USEFUL for polical watchers of all ilks. Really, give it 4 mins and ask yourself how much of what Goldwater and Co. for America's future looks like what we have today?
What passes for conservative, historically, is not. Where the Right Went Wrong is a thoughtful read. Don't know that I agree with everything Pat Buchanan has to say. But I VERY much do prefer an American Republic over an American Empire.
And to simply say, well that's how it was then and here's how it is now is worse than thoughtless. It shows an abandoment of many cherished American political principles.
hap
-
Originally posted by Roscoroo
Ann was pwned Rip .. She has a tendency to smile and try to change the subject when heavily confronted ... I'm not tottally against Ann, but I see her as an Extreamist in her idea's and not always doing enough or correct research on some of her subjects .
Katie still has better leggs :D
Agree about Katies legs, but I think the interviewer has the power of "moving on to the next question" when confronted with an answer that they, the interviewer, does not have a response for.
Anyway, as I've said before, I'm not a big Coulter fan, but I love how she gets panties in a bunch...pure hysterical entertainment for me. Similar to Rush...strictly entertainment, not to be taken seriously, yet the liberals get soooo uptight everytime she talks...:rofl
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort
Its quite disturbing that you're paying attention to my replies rather than the subject at hand. Need help? (http://www.thamike.com/faux_newz/112_118/stalker.html)
hehe.. Keeping track of silly posts AND the topic at hand is hardly a juggling act.
Someday BGBMAW will even learn how to spell "linguini".
-
(http://img145.imageshack.us/img145/8779/coulter8rg.gif)
I'd Hit It!!!!
:D
-
Originally posted by T0J0
Well then you would fit right into that category now wouldn't you Nash...
~Touche~ TJ
:rofl
Mac
-
Originally posted by midnight Target
hehe.. Keeping track of silly posts AND the topic at hand is hardly a juggling act.
Someday BGBMAW will even learn how to spell "linguini".
A trained ape has more of a shot at that then BGB:D
-
Originally posted by FUNKED1
Funniest part of this thread is how guys like GTO, Carolla, and I, are painted as liberals for disliking this ****. If neoconservatives think guys like us are liberal, they might want to re-examine the original definition of conservatism.
Come on funked for them to ever re-examine that definition, Rush, Coulter and Hannedy would have to do it first. :D
-
Originally posted by FUNKED1
Funniest part of this thread is how guys like GTO, Carolla, and I, are painted as liberals for disliking this ****. If neoconservatives think guys like us are liberal, they might want to re-examine the original definition of conservatism.
I think only ONE poster painted them as a liberal in this thread funked. Besides, most of us know the liberals, you know you're a liberal when....
You pale at the execution of child killers, but defend the killing of unborn children as an expression of choice.
You think trees have feelings, animals can conceptualize and the fetus is a blob of protoplasm.
You are convinced that Frank Capra films and Norman Rockwell paintings are lies and distortions but "Platoon," "Dances with Wolves" and "Thelma and Louise" are realistic
You think a moment of silent prayer at the beginning of the school day constitutes government indoctrination and an intrusion on parental authority, while sex education, condom distribution and multiculturalism are values-neutral.
You think marriage is obsolete - except for homosexuals.
You believe homosexuality is genetically determined, but fascism and spouse abuse aren't.
You think AIDS is spread by insufficient funding.
You consider the Catholic bishops noble and idealistic when they oppose capital punishment and welfare cuts but dangerous fanatics trying to legislate their theology when they defend the right to life.
You are convinced that proponents of welfare reform hate the poor and opponents of affirmative action hate minorities, but AIDS activists who bash the Pope and People for the American Way types who go psycho over Protestant "fundamentalists" are guardians of democracy.
You attribute every minority problem to entrenched, institutional racism and the legacies of slavery and segregation.
You think the black middle class is a myth created by Republicans.
You don't understand all of the whining about affirmative action and are more than willing to sacrifice someone else's employment or education opportunity to assuage your guilt.
You see no correlation between welfare and the rise of illegitimacy, judicial leniency and surging crime rates, or addiction and an entertainment industry that glorifies drug abuse. But you believe Ronald Reagan is responsible for everything horrible that's happened in the past quarter-century.
You think those child-abusing, religious fanatics at Waco had it coming but the illegal immigrants roughed up by California deputies - after leading them on a high-speed chase - are the victims of the decade.
You own something that says, "Kerry for President, " and still display it.
You've tried to argue in favor of anything based on, "Well, they're gonna do it anyway so..."
You've said, "We really should call the ACLU about this."
You believe that a few hundred loggers can find another career, but the defenseless spotted owl must live in its preferred tree.
You ever based an argument on the phrase, "But they can afford a tax hike because..."
You've ever argued that with just one more year of welfare that person will turn it around and get off drugs.
You think Lennon was a brilliant social commentator.
You keep count of how many people you know in each racial or ethnic category.
You believe our government must do it because everyone in Europe does.
After looking at your pay stub you can still say, "America is undertaxed."
You think the rich can get richer off people who have no money.
You've named your kids "Stardust" or "Moonbeam."
You've tried to argue that all of societies problems are based on the fact that McDonald's, by law, only has to pay $5.15/hr.
You utter the phrase "There ought to be a law" at least once a week.
You have ever used the phrase "protecting prisoner's rights".
You find yourself nodding vigorously and saying "someone finally said it right" during an episode of Oprah.
You've ever referred to the Military/Industrial Complex during a conversation.
You know you never laughed as a kid, the world was in just too bad a shape.
Your friends told you how much fun you had at the Phish show, but your not sure what year you saw them.
You file suit against the mall rent-a-cops for posting signs stating that your bags are subject to inspection.
You've ever argued that "you can't legislate morality".
You've referred to the Founding Fathers as "those aristocratic, chauvinistic, lily white, slave owning, land stealing oppressors of indigenous personnel".
You argued that a few more months of sanctions and Sadam Hussein would have folded like rookie poker player.
You know more than 2 people who have a degree in "Womyn's Studies."
You've ever said "But look at all the good Ted Kennedy has done for the women of this country!"
You blame things on "The Man."
You believe that Bart Simpson only needs a little more affection.
You argue that the only flaw with Marx is that Russia was an agrarian society.
You've ever called the meter maid a fascist.
You argue that the Second Amendment only refers to Federally organized militias.
You view Jane Fonda as a courageous heroine with strong convictions.
You've ever referred to "the glass ceiling."
You believe it because "Dan Rather wouldn't lie about something this important."
You ever told a child that Oscar the Grouch "is a victim of Draconian budget cuts."
You are outraged that Baseball Players make millions and the poor clerk at the unemployment office only makes 28 bucks an hour doing such good work.
You think that Al Gore macherena thing was a laugh riot.
You feel that Greenpeace is misunderstood.
You've ever stated "How does what he does in his personal life have any bearing on doing his job?"
You can't talk about foreign policy without using the word conspiracy.
You think Ralph Nader makes a lot of sense.
You think solar energy is being held back by those greedy oil companies.
You would rather have Bill Clinton make your investments than Fidelity.
You've never had to worry about marginal tax rates.
You have to use the term "mean spirited" in every sentence when talking about welfare reform.
You actually expect to collect Social Security.
You got teary eyed during the film "The American President."
You think Ayn Rand is an African currency.
You think the Free Market is where they hand out Government cheese.
You think Carter should be on Mt. Rushmore.
You believe personal injury lawyers when they say they are just trying to defend the little guy.
You know that those profit mongering drug companies could find a cure for AIDS if they really wanted to.
You actually believe the NY Times and Washington Post.
You know at least one vegan.
You think that the Teamsters are misunderstood.
You think public housing is great, but just NIMBY (Not In My Back Yard).
You think the anti-war protestors from '60s are the real heros.
You think that Supply Side Economics refers to your dope dealer's stash.
You actually think that poverty can be abolished.
You admire the Swedish welfare system.
You go to Gay Pride Day parades so that no one can call you homophobic.
You think that pornography corrupts women, but find nothing wrong with a 50 year old president seducing a 21 year old intern.
You want to know why we don't offer schooling in prisons (hey, isn't that what public schools are for?).
You tout the NAACP, but criticize anyone referring to a black man as a "colored person."
You feel that banning smoking in public indoor places limits your constitutional rights.
You honestly feel that alcoholics deserve social security disability benefits.
You've named your kids with hyphenated first and last names.
You've tried to argue that poverty could be abolished if people were only willing to redistribute their wealth.
You've ever referred to someone as a "bigot" or "Nazi".
You support diversity, as long as others agree with you.
You've ever uttered the phrase, "you hypocrite".
You answer to "No One".
You support PETA and Greenpeace, but still eat beef, fish, lamb, and wear leather garments.
You protest your neighbor clearing their yard of weeds.
You only let your kids watch PBS and listen to NPR.
You scream at the thought of agreeing with a Republican.
You've argued that Western values are no values.
You agree that all the world's problems can be traced back to white Anglo-Saxon men taking advantage of others.
You really think that guns kill people. Not people kill people.
You've ever said "reduce paper, save a tree".
You donate money because it makes you "feel good".
You don't mind contributing 4 months of your salary to the government. You're only sorry it can't be more.
You think people who make above minimun wage are rich and should be taxed at 90 percent.
You blame the Republicans for rainy weather.
You ever said, "differently abled" when you mean "crippled."
You think Newt Gingrich should be dipped in gravy train and fed to a pack of ravenous poddles.
You think heterosexual love is a male chauvinist plot to oppress women.
You ever referred to someone's GI Joe figurines and matching tac nukes as "war toys."
You think Al Franken is actually funny, but Rush Limbaugh is not.
-
and....
You own an espresso maker, a cusinart, a vibrator, and a heated water bed and yet oppose off shore oil drilling and the construction of nuclear power plants.
You think that Doctors should be made into government bureaucrats, but that lawyers should not.
You can't write or speak the word "he" without following it with, "or she."
You think the phrase, "separation of church and state" is contained in the Constitution.
You think Michael Moore makes good documentaries.
You think organically grown vegetables are worth the higher price.
You think the New York Times is fair and balanced, but Fox News is ultra right-wing...
You think homophobia is a far worse social disease than herpes.
You speak out on the "evils of corporate America" but spend a great deal of your time at Starbucks.
You look at Yassir Arafat as a "man of peace".
:)
-
This book is pertinent I would think.
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0670037745/ref=pd_rvi_gw_1/104-0869493-1595921?%5Fencoding=UTF8&v=glance&n=283155
And this synopsis is also pertinent:
In his seventh book, Dean, the former Nixon legal counsel whom the FBI has called the "master manipulator" of the Watergate coverup, weighs in with a rebuke to Christian fundamentalists and other right-wing hard-liners. A self-described Goldwater conservative (indeed, Goldwater had planned to collaborate on this book before his death), he rails against the influence of social conservatives and neoconservatives within his party. Suffused with bitterness stemming from the controversies in which he has been embroiled, Dean's book paints a thin social science veneer over a litany of mostly ad hominem complaints. Purporting to show that social conservatives and neoconservatives are, on the whole, demonstrably authoritarian, bigoted, irrational and amoral, Conservatives Without Conscience offers helpful hints such as "Conservatives without conscience do not have horns and tails," and evinces a telling fascination with politicians' shady book deals. Though there is clearly much to condemn in the policies and tactics Dean deplores, assailing everyone from French political theorist Joseph de Maistre to Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist to the chairman of Yale University's conservative association as "Double High" social- dominance-oriented authoritarians undermines his journalistic credibility. Dean's lurid accusations may be entertaining, but they add little to the reasoned debate that Washington so sorely lacks today.
The synopsis is from Publisher's Weekly.
hap
-
I think only ONE poster painted them as a liberal in this thread funked. Besides, most of us know the liberals, you know you're a liberal when....
This is WHY I like RIP!!!!!
:aok
Mac
RIP '08!!!!
:aok
-
hey look ... a cheering section.
(http://www.comic-mint.com/media/client/homer-fat-pride-crowd-cheering-e0656_sml.JPG)
-
You know you're a Republican when...
You think "proletariat" is a type of cheese.
You've named your kids "Deduction one" and "Deduction two"
You've tried to argue that poverty could be abolished if people were just allowed to keep more of their minimum wage.
You've ever referred to someone as "my (insert racial or ethnic minority here) friend"
You've ever tried to prove Jesus was a capitalist and opposed to welfare.
You're a pro-lifer, but support the death penalty.
You think Huey Newton is a cookie.
The only union you support is the Baseball Players, because heck, they're richer than you.
You think you might remember laughing once as a kid.
you are not at all embarrassed by Tom Delay. Or Jack Abramoff. Or Scooter Libby.
it's OK with you if the government taps your phone and reads your email.
you're poor and country, and you think George W. Bush is just a good ol' boy.
you're rich and corporate, and you know George W. Bush is your boy.
you believe it is really OK to spend $5 billion a month in Iraq, while at the same time 44 million Americans have no health insurance.
you still think Saddam must have had a hand in 9 / 11.
you believe the WMDs are there somewhere. We just haven't found them yet.
you believe you are supporting the troops by placing a yellow magnet "Support the Troops" ribbon on your SUV.
you are convinced that a couple of guys marrying each other will doom your marriage.
you think it is the government's job to force women to have babies -- at least, poor women who can't afford to go to Switzerland for an abortion like they did before Roe.
you think Rush tells you the truth. And O'Reilly. And Hannity.
you see nothing wrong with revealing the identity of an undercover CIA agent.
you are not at all embarrassed by Pat Robertson.
you think labor unions present dangerous interference with corporate decision-making.
you think environmental laws present dangerous interference with corporate decision-making.
you don't mind at all that you are paying for Bush's tax breaks to the top 1 percent.
you think George W. Bush is doing a heckuva job.
-
definition of a conservative: Someone who understands that the government can't run Amtrak
-
:rofl oh boy, you guys are out of hand. I'm going to be a convserveral. A little conservative, a little liberal....no, no i'm not. QUIT LABELING ME:cry
Liberals, conservatives, I laugh in your faces.
-
Originally posted by nirvana
QUIT LABELING ME
you...you...neo-coniberal:p
-
oooh nice!
-
Originally posted by bj229r
definition of a conservative: Someone who understands that the government can't run Amtrak
...and yet in a Republican controlled House, Senate, and presidency Amtrak is still allowed to survive.
-
That's impossible. We all know Republicans are strict conservatives devoted to small government and personal liberty.
-
Definition of a liberal, a conservative who has been charged with a crime.
shamus
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort
CUT AND PASTE
-
May hafta get me one o' these:
(http://images.cafepress.com/product/51406345v4_240x240_F.jpg)
-
hah!! thats funny..
your list of "republican" beleifs is wayy crappy compared to the linguini spinned liberals...
lolol..that wasnt even close to being as funny
btw..this republican party is just like the democrats..bunch of fat blobs wasting our money
Only real diffenrce is..Democrats want to sheite on our USA much faster then the other side
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort
(http://www.illlogic.net/images/japan2002/a-big-big-straw-man-6-18.jpg)
-
Originally posted by Sandman
...and yet in a Republican controlled House, Senate, and presidency Amtrak is still allowed to survive.
Lol..who said there were any conservatives in government?
(snippet from ann's newest column:)
We're in a battle for our survival and we don't even know who the enemy is. As liberals are constantly reminding us, Islam is a "Religion of Peace." One very promising method of distinguishing the "Religion of Peace" Muslims from the "Slit Their Throats" Muslims is by following the al-Qaida money trail.
But now we've lost that ability — thanks to The New York Times.
-
Originally posted by Momus--
(http://pic4.picturetrail.com/VOL767/2726312/8668097/166637142.jpg)
-
Don't you mind me Rippy, please carry on. It's funny watching a pretend conservative attention-seeker who specialises in bogus arguments and personal attacks defend another pretend conservative attention-seeker who specialises in bogus arguments and personal attacks. I suppose it's more fulfilling for you than bragging about your new garden shed or whatever it is this month...
-
:lol
-
Originally posted by Momus--
Don't you mind me Rippy, please carry on. It's funny watching a pretend conservative attention-seeker who specialises in bogus arguments and personal attacks defend another pretend conservative attention-seeker who specialises in bogus arguments and personal attacks. I suppose it's more fulfilling for you than bragging about your new garden shed or whatever it is this month...
Hmmm...someone sounds bitter! Or is that envy? ;)
-
liberal.... conservative... I am neither but, I like to listen to coulter. She has a wicked sense of humor and... as seen here... she gets the liberals panties all bunced up (how dare she use the media.. that is their venue)
I may be a republican tho by xtorontos defenition... except the being rich part.
and... you don't get ahead by getting to keep more of your minimum wage... you get ahead by not working for minimum wage and keeping more of what you earn. Who works for minimum wage anyway? guys on parole or rehab and teenagers... boo hoo...
health care? you want health care run and provided by the people who run social security and welfare? move to the friggin neatherlands or england or something...
Nope... ann is fun to listen to because she makes fun of liberals but... I don't want any party to have more power... I want the government to have less.
lazs
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort
Hmmm...someone sounds bitter! Or is that envy? ;)
Oh yeah that'd be right. (http://www.fortunecity.com/underworld/playstation/128/jealous.wav)
Like I said, bogus arguments and personal attacks - keep it up..
-
this thread keeps going and going but never gets better......come on guys :cry
-
Originally posted by Yeager
this thread keeps going and going but never gets better......come on guys :cry
Gotta keep realistic expectations. This thread was doomed from the start.
-
shes funny...linguini's are mad..which makes it funnier
end of story
momus...i dont remember reading what you or rip said..but you sound like a player hater when you type like that
and whats the straw beast thing ??
-
Originally posted by Sandman
Gotta keep realistic expectations. This thread was doomed from the start.
Yeah a story about a ****, no mater how much you talk about it you still have a big steaming coulter at the end.
-
Originally posted by GtoRA2
Yeah a story about a ****, no matter how much you talk about it you still have a big steaming Kennedy at the end.
It really is great how a simple country god fearing women lawyer can extract
the essence of what makes you a librule with such little effort....
The women is hilarious to watch in debate..... she isn't that attractive but most of you librules have done much worse on a a regular night out with the boys at starbucks...
Tj
-
Originally posted by T0J0
It really is great how a simple country god fearing women lawyer can extract
the essence of what makes you a librule with such little effort....
The women is hilarious to watch in debate..... she isn't that attractive but most of you librules have done much worse on a a regular night out with the boys at starbucks...
Tj
:aok
-
Originally posted by lukster
May hafta get me one o' these:
(http://images.cafepress.com/product/51406345v4_240x240_F.jpg)
Just wear a shirt that says "I am with stupid" just make sure the arrow points up.
It will have the same effect on most of the people who look at it. :D
-
Originally posted by T0J0
It really is great how a simple country god fearing women lawyer can extract
the essence of what makes you a librule with such little effort....
The women is hilarious to watch in debate..... she isn't that attractive but most of you librules have done much worse on a a regular night out with the boys at starbucks...
Tj
Did you ride a small yellow bus to school?
-
Originally posted by GtoRA2
Did you ride a small yellow bus to school?
Do you always wear your panties in a bunch?
-
Originally posted by lukster
Do you always wear your panties in a bunch?
No bunching here, infact the thread has been amusing as hell. Watching you guys fall over yourselves defending an person like coulter and going on the attack, is funny.
It's like watching the keystone cops.
Maybe one day you guys will grow up enough to see she does more damage to her cause then helps it.
:rofl
-
GtoRA2 is a liberal? That's funny. :rofl
-
Originally posted by bj229r
But now we've lost that ability — thanks to The New York Times.
:rolleyes:
-
Originally posted by GtoRA2
No bunching here, infact the thread has been amusing as hell. Watching you guys fall over yourselves defending an person like coulter and going on the attack, is funny.
It's like watching the keystone cops.
Maybe one day you guys will grow up enough to see she does more damage to her cause then helps it.
:rofl
Only thing likely to help my "cause" is if all the liberasocialist drop dead. If Ann can cause 'em all to have an "Annurism" we might get somewhere. ;)
-
I dunno GTO.. I just don't see where she ever says anything all that outrageous. Maybe you can point to some?
let's face it... we all felt the "widows" of all those high powered people killed in the WTC were probly left pretty well off anyway yet we showered em with even more wealth.... I would venture to say that by any standards on this BB they are all very wealthy indeed. I have not heard much in the way of thanks tho.
I get a kick out of listening to here... I haven't maybe heard that much of what she says so I could be wrong but what I have heard is much less anoying than what I hear from liberals.
Nice change of pace... and....
let's face it.... most of the guys making fun of her looks here would crawl across broken glass just to sniff at her crotch.
she is too skinny for me but...
lazs
-
Originally posted by GtoRA2
she does more damage to her cause then helps it.
Interesting... damage the cause...
Damage like for example:
Leaking national security information?
Or maybe....
Sawing off liberals heads with a dull kitchen knife.....
Or maybe....
Endorsing the killing of babies by abortion...
Or maybe....
Obstructing justice?
Or maybe...
Witness tampering?
Or maybe...
She wrote a couple of best selling novels...?
Or maybe?
Shes Blond, 110lbs and scares the hell out of you?
.
TJ
-
Originally posted by T0J0
Interesting... damage the cause...
Damage like for example:
Leaking national security information?
Or maybe....
Sawing off liberals heads with a dull kitchen knife.....
Or maybe....
Endorsing the killing of babies by abortion...
Or maybe....
Obstructing justice?
Or maybe...
Witness tampering?
Or maybe...
She wrote a couple of best selling novels...?
Or maybe?
Shes Blond, 110lbs and scares the hell out of you?
.
TJ
Yellow bus confirmed.
-
Originally posted by lazs2
I dunno GTO.. I just don't see where she ever says anything all that outrageous. Maybe you can point to some?
let's face it... we all felt the "widows" of all those high powered people killed in the WTC were probly left pretty well off anyway yet we showered em with even more wealth.... I would venture to say that by any standards on this BB they are all very wealthy indeed. I have not heard much in the way of thanks tho.
I get a kick out of listening to here... I haven't maybe heard that much of what she says so I could be wrong but what I have heard is much less anoying than what I hear from liberals.
Nice change of pace... and....
let's face it.... most of the guys making fun of her looks here would crawl across broken glass just to sniff at her crotch.
she is too skinny for me but...
lazs
I can't give you an interview by interview account or anything Laz, I avoid listening to her since her voice is annoying to me on top of it all.
She came off like an idiot in both interviews posted here, and on the one I heard a few days ago. The other ones I heard where two long ago to count for much.
And I don't give a **** about the widows, my point on them is she attacked them personally instead of their politics making her look bad and causing many people to discount her as a loon, and confirming it for many others.
I don't listen to liberal wack jobs either.
You are prolly right on the last point. :D
-
Originally posted by GtoRA2
And I don't give a **** about the widows, my point on them is she attacked them personally instead of their politics making her look bad and causing many people to discount her as a loon, and confirming it for many others.
Just pointing out that, "since her voice is annoying to me on top of it all" and "no one notices the adams apple?" could be considered to be personal attacks which you find to be repugnant.
-
Originally posted by Holden McGroin
Just pointing out that, "since her voice is annoying to me on top of it all" and "no one notices the adams apple?" could be considered to be personal attacks which you find to be repugnant.
True Holden, but I am not a media figure or a well know conservative author either.
My audience is this board; Coulter would fit in fine here lol. :D
-
(http://images.cafepress.com/product/51406345v4_240x240_F.jpg)
I want one!!!! and send another to Hilleray!
and another one to Nash. LOL
:aok
Mac
-
Originally posted by GtoRA2
My audience is this board; Coulter would fit in fine here lol. :D
add name/ignore/click
-
Comedy Gold
" [T]hey believed the entire country was required to marinate in their exquisite personal agony. Apparently, denouncing Bush was an important part of their closure process."
# "These broads are millionaires, lionized on TV and in articles about them, reveling in their status as celebrities and stalked by grief-arazzis. I've never seen people enjoying their husbands' deaths so much."
"These self-obsessed women seemed genuinely unaware that 9/11 was an attack on our nation and acted as if the terrorist attacks happened only to them."
"To a liberal, 2,200 military deaths in the entire course of a war in Iraq is unconscionable, but 1.3 million aborted babies in America every year is something to celebrate."
"[m]y only regret with [Oklahoma City bomber] Timothy McVeigh is he did not go to the New York Times building."
By 1973, John Kerry had already accused American soldiers of committing war crimes in Vietnam, thrown someone else's medals to the ground in an anti-war demonstration, and married his first heiress.
Democrats always assure us that deterrence will work, but when the time comes to deter, they're against it.
Democrats couldn't care less if people in Indiana hate them. But if Europeans curl their lips, liberals can't look at themselves in the mirror.
If John Kerry had a dollar for every time he bragged about serving in Vietnam - oh wait, he does.
If we're so cruel to minorities, why do they keep coming here? Why aren't they sneaking across the Mexican border to make their way to the Taliban?
Liberals become indignant when you question their patriotism, but simultaneously work overtime to give terrorists a cushion for the next attack and laugh at dumb Americans who love their country and hate the enemy.
Taxes are like abortion, and not just because both are grotesque procedures supported by Democrats. You're for them or against them. Taxes go up or down; government raises taxes or lowers them. But Democrats will not let the words "abortion" or "tax hikes" pass their lips.
The New York Times editorial page is like a Ouija board that has only three answers, no matter what the question. The answers are: higher taxes, more restrictions on political speech and stricter gun control.
We've finally given liberals a war against fundamentalism, and they don't want to fight it. They would, except it would put them on the same side as the United States.
When we were at peace, Democrats wanted to raise taxes. Now there's a war, so Democrats want to raise taxes. When there was a surplus, Democrats wanted to raise taxes. Now that there is a mild recession, Democrats want to raise taxes.
While the form of treachery varies slightly from case to case, liberals always manage to take the position that most undermines American security.
Have we been cryptic? Right-wingers said Clinton was a lying, unscrupulous traveling salesman. It turned out he was a lying, unscrupulous traveling salesman. Now liberals scratch their heads demanding to know: So what was it about him you didn't like?
-
Originally posted by GtoRA2
My audience is this board; Coulter would fit in fine here lol. :D
I think Skuzzy would hit her with the ban stick. She'd be PNG inside of a month.
-
Originally posted by Sandman
I think Skuzzy would hit her with the ban stick. She'd be PNG inside of a month.
LOL prolly true.
It would be kinda funny to see list of Political view points for the banned and if they were banned for going overboard in Political threads.
I wonder what side would have more.
Not that we could even come close to acurate numbers but it is interesting to think about.
I would think lefties but mostly because the most of the righties are still around.
Though we have had for more righties here historicaly... so who knows.
(now I am only talking about the wackos, not us normal guys Sandy! ;) )
-
funny GTO..
"I cant quote anything she has said....but..shes bad!!"
uh ...err uhhh...her voice is annoying
classic
-
She's a lunatic. (http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Ann_Coulter)
-
Originally posted by BGBMAW
funny GTO..
"I cant quote anything she has said....but..shes bad!!"
uh ...err uhhh...her voice is annoying
classic
That’s not what I said. Can you send the trained ape up; it will be easier to make him understand.
I pointed out the two interviews she looks like a dolt in, and a radio interview that she went after the widows on.
I don't need much more then that to form my opinion, and since we are not passing out IQ tests (lucky for you huh?) and this is all about opinion, that’s all I need.
BUT, if you really want to go read more of her garbage, you’re buddy tojo posted more of it. It has no more substance then the jokes that got posted in this thread as well, just a bunch of tired lame jokes that only paint the extreme of either side as the norm.
-
blah blah blah ann coulter is mean and I hate her blah blah blah
-
Originally posted by lukster
blah blah blah ann coulter is mean and I hate her blah blah blah
dont you mean...blah blah blah ann coulter is my hero, I wish i could grow breasts blah blah blah
-
Originally posted by xrtoronto
dont you mean...blah blah blah ann coulter is my hero, I wish i could grow breasts blah blah blah
I do admit to liking her. She isn't buffaloed by the PC police and often succeeds at humor in her verbal jabs. That she irritates so many of those I find repulsive is a big plus. :aok
-
Originally posted by lukster
blah blah blah ann coulter is mean and I hate her blah blah blah
"Baah baah baah! Coulter is a god, a hero, she must be worshiped! No one can speak ill of her! I love her so..... I must prove it be defending her to the point that I look like a total fool baah, baah BAAAH"
You know the whole thread is about opinions, no one is saying you can’t fawn over her like a 8 year with his first hot babysitter. Its cool man, I am no threat, why? Because I understand free speech and as much as I think she is dolt, she has a right to spew whatever she wants. That's what makes America great.
Now that we have that out in the open, maybe you can stop humping my leg for having a counter opinion for your female hero.
It's ok, people can think different things, and you know what, even if they do, they don't hate America, or want to support terrorists.
As much as I disagree with a guy like Nash or Sandy on almost everything, I don't think they are secretly plotting how to let more terrorist in, or burn the Bill of Right or Constitution , hell, some even like guns.
I think they both want a better America, (not so much sure why Nash wants this him being from Canada, but hey its cool) they just differ on how to get there.
If you really think the liberals of this country are as bad as Coulter or any of the far right guys portrays them you are a sad person and part of the problem in the country. Sure maybe a few of the Politicians fit that extreme but we are not talking Politicians, I am talking people, and since 99% of politicians Dem/rep whatever are total scum, we can leave them out.
I have friends, many are libs, every one of them wants a better America and they all love this country. None fit Coulters BS stereotypes.
Grow up.
-
Ann is much more succinct and amusing but your diatribe isn't without entertainment. Ease up though, I really wouldn't want to cause you an "Annurism".
-
Originally posted by lukster
Ann is much more succinct and amusing but your diatribe isn't without entertainment. Ease up though, I really wouldn't want to cause you an "Annurism".
You give yourself way too much credit sparky.
I find the entire conversation very amusing.
:rofl
-
Ann Coulter On Democrats:
* "In the history of the nation, there has never been a political party so ridiculous as today's Democrats. It's as if all the brain-damaged people in America got together and formed a voting bloc." — Jan 12, 2006
Now, that is the stuff she says that amuses me. And so true too! :rofl
-
Originally posted by Dago
Now, that is the stuff she says that amuses me. And so true too! :rofl
I can see why...she used a whole bunch of big words.
I bet you like loud noises and shiney things too?
-
Yes........ Libs are a mental disorder
I am surrounded by them..see them all the time...hear them all the time
I guess the folks at CODE PINK and NOTIN OUR NAME...and MOVEON.ORG
are just "misunderstood".....no way in hell i would stand near those "people"
Reminds me of guns....Do you see and hear what those people think about our guns?...holy crap...YA..im not letting them speak unchallenged..
-
Originally posted by BGBMAW
Yes........ Libs are a mental disorder
I am surrounded by them..see them all the time...hear them all the time
I guess the folks at CODE PINK and NOTIN OUR NAME...and MOVEON.ORG
are just "misunderstood".....no way in hell i would stand near those "people"
Reminds me of guns....Do you see and hear what those people think about our guns?...holy crap...YA..im not letting them speak unchallenged..
You so missed the point.
This is not about Liberals being right; this is about coulter making conservatives look like idiots. That’s why I don't like her, she is mean, she twists things around so they are not true anymore and can't back down Katie Curric, and she sucks.
I do not want someone like her defending my views, she makes us all look stupid because she is our PETA or ALF.
You want to challenge them? Then do it by being smart and right, not by being a name calling idiot.
If you are smart and you argue with facts and prove your point you can convince people.
If you come out and spew things like the 911 widows are harpies who revel in the husbands deaths, anyone who is not familiar with them is going to think your a pile of **** for saying something like that and they will ignore you or worse use you as an example of why people who think like you should be ignored.
I don't like any of the groups you’re talking about, they are all pretty fanatical. I was talking normal people. Not the mindless drones that just spout the party line and never use their heads.
Also every liberal I know is fine with guns to one degree or another and several own guns, hell I sold one both my evil assault rifles.
This is not hard stuff chief.
-
Originally posted by GtoRA2
You so missed the point.
This is not about Liberals being right; this is about coulter making conservatives look like idiots. That’s why I don't like her, she is mean, she twists things around so they are not true anymore and can't back down Katie Curric, and she sucks.
I do not want someone like her defending my views, she makes us all look stupid because she is our PETA or ALF.
You want to challenge them? Then do it by being smart and right, not by being a name calling idiot.
If you are smart and you argue with facts and prove your point you can convince people.
If you come out and spew things like the 911 widows are harpies who revel in the husbands deaths, anyone who is not familiar with them is going to think your a pile of **** for saying something like that and they will ignore you or worse use you as an example of why people who think like you should be ignored.
I don't like any of the groups you’re talking about, they are all pretty fanatical. I was talking normal people. Not the mindless drones that just spout the party line and never use their heads.
Also every liberal I know is fine with guns to one degree or another and several own guns, hell I sold one both my evil assault rifles.
This is not hard stuff chief.
Whatever happened to freedom of speech? No one speaks for me, not even my wife, much less Ann Coulter. I suggest you ease up on worrying about whether what someone else says reflects on you.
-
Originally posted by lukster
Whatever happened to freedom of speech? No one speaks for me, not even my wife, much less Ann Coulter. I suggest you ease up on worrying about whether what someone else says reflects on you.
If you think anything I said is a threat to freedom of speech you are beyond help.
Maybe BGB is the smarter one between you too. I still think the trained ape would be easier.
Where have I said I wanted her stopped? As I said before, she has every right to spew her drivel and that’s what makes this nation great, but having the right doesn’t make her smart or right. All I have said is, I wish she would shut up because she makes herself and conservatives look bad.
There is a difference, but I am getting tired of writing in crayon for you guys.
Saying “Jesus shut up you idiot” is far different from saying “hey government shut her up”. The later is not something I would ever wish for.
Now I am getting tired of repeating myself.
For both our sakes, start at the beginning of this thread, read my replies, then try and come up with something new if you really feel the need to keep going on this.
Also try it in other threads, you won’t look as silly.
-
Originally posted by lukster
Whatever happened to freedom of speech? No one speaks for me, not even my wife, much less Ann Coulter. I suggest you ease up on worrying about whether what someone else says reflects on you.
Aww dammit!
See GtoRA2?
You done gone and made him cry!
(and no.... it's soooo not my turn to make a store run for Kleenex's)....
But jesious.... Where's your sensitivity? Your sense of humanity?
Guys like lukster have feelings too.
-
Originally posted by GtoRA2
If you think anything I said is a threat to freedom of speech you are beyond help.
Maybe BGB is the smarter one between you too. I still think the trained ape would be easier.
Where have I said I wanted her stopped? As I said before, she has every right to spew her drivel and that’s what makes this nation great, but having the right doesn’t make her smart or right. All I have said is, I wish she would shut up because she makes herself and conservatives look bad.
There is a difference, but I am getting tired of writing in crayon for you guys.
Saying “Jesus shut up you idiot” is far different from saying “hey government shut her up”. The later is not something I would ever wish for.
Now I am getting tired of repeating myself.
For both our sakes, start at the beginning of this thread, read my replies, then try and come up with something new if you really feel the need to keep going on this.
Also try it in other threads, you won’t look as silly.
You have expressed a lot of animosity. If you aren't afraid of Ann Coulter reflecting on you then why do you go on so? I'm not worried about you denying anyone their freedom to speak. I was trying to point out to you that you should recognize this and not worry so much about what anyone else says. Oh well, you want to apologize for Ann and wring your hands over what some of your "liberal friends" think of her you go right ahead.
-
Originally posted by lukster
You have expressed a lot of animosity. If you aren't afraid of Ann Coulter reflecting on you then why do you go on so? I'm not worried about you denying anyone their freedom to speak. I was trying to point out to you that you should recognize this and not worry so much about what anyone else says. Oh well, you want to apologize for Ann and wring your hands over what some of your "liberal friends" think of her you go right ahead.
You really should stop.
If you had followed your own advice you would not have called me a "libral".
You flatter yourself if you think any of this is any real concern, you just made yourself and easy target by being totally wrong.
All I got from this was amusement.
-
Originally posted by GtoRA2
You really should stop.
If you had followed your own advice you would not have called me a "libral".
You flatter yourself if you think any of this is any real concern, you just made yourself and easy target by being totally wrong.
All I got from this was amusement.
I don't recall calling you a liberal. I don't know if you are or not and I really don't care much. I like Ann Coulter, though I do think she jumps off the deep end on occassion. However, she is no doubt attacked quite often by those she ridicules so harshly so I cut her some slack in her sometimes extreme expressions.
-
ToJo and Rip in '08!!!!
:aok
Mac
-
Folks continually call Ann Coulter a liar, refer to Fox News as 'Faux'....but they never cite any examples.... I know I would never want to get into a debate with Coulter
-
Originally posted by GtoRA2
If you are smart and you argue with facts and prove your point you can convince people.
That statement sums it up right there for me. When you argue, stick to the facts to the win the argument. Once you start the name calling and labeling, all bets are off. Also, don’t expect to win a squabble on the internet; it’s like trying to get a bill passed by the feds.
I do enjoy Ann’s venom though. She openly states what the majority of us on the right are thinking but sometimes afraid to say. Not all the time but a good percentage. To watch and listen to @#%$bags like Al Franken foam at the mouth commenting on her latest book is entertaining. In a good open debate I would rather have Laura Ingraham at bat then Ann. I’ll save Ann for the bench clearing brawl.
I would have to disagree with you though about hurting the right wing cause. I think sometimes, someone like her wakes some of the fence straddlers up, and chips a few blocks away from the “Politically Correct” wall that the Clintonoids threw down and brainwashed some of the centrists with. She makes some great points in her books (I have read all of them) but sometimes comes up short in the interviews failing to convey her points clearly. Maybe she should train at the Jedi Academy and learn to control her anger.
:)
-
Originally posted by bj229r
Folks continually call Ann Coulter a liar, refer to Fox News as 'Faux'....but they never cite any examples.... I know I would never want to get into a debate with Coulter
Go get Franken's book "Lies". He has a whole chapter on Coulter and her lies.
-
Originally posted by midnight Target
Go get Franken's book "Lies". He has a whole chapter on Coulter and her lies.
A book about lies from a liar.
Dear Attorney General Ashcroft,
I am currently a fellow at Harvard's Kennedy School of Government, where I am working on a book about abstinence programs in our public schools.
-
Hurts her cause? What is her cause? I have been told on these boards that I hurt my cause plenty of times.
I don't have a cause. I point out the right and wrong of things as I see em and let people either see it or not.
I am not here to beg and wheedle... that is for the liberals and wanna be one worlders who live in countries that could be great except for all the socialism.
Like her tho... I feel that liberal socialists are the biggest threat to anyone anywhere...
Unlike her... I feel that conservatives with a lot of power are a threat too.... a much milder one but a threat nonetheless...
I am more of an individulaist than she is but I like her style and I like that she can lambast the liberals who often feel that political satire is something that they own 100%
It amuses me to here them crying foul when she uses their tactics.
People here ask if she would be banned here.... Better to ask how we would do in her venue. Up against other political satarists.... I have a feeling that most of the guys here would end up crying themselves to sleep at being treated half as badly as her.... she is tougher and smarter than most here.
I could be wrong tho.... just looks that way to me.
lazs
-
Originally posted by Krusher
A book about lies from a liar.
Dear Attorney General Ashcroft,
I am currently a fellow at Harvard's Kennedy School of Government, where I am working on a book about abstinence programs in our public schools.
Yeah, that was a lie. Kinda like when John Wayne lied and claimed to be Davy Crockett.
-
Originally posted by midnight Target
Yeah, that was a lie. Kinda like when John Wayne lied and claimed to be Davy Crockett.
More like claiming your lie depends on what is is.
-
Originally posted by midnight Target
Yeah, that was a lie. Kinda like when John Wayne lied and claimed to be Davy Crockett.
So it was all play acting? ok then :)
Al bases most of his "lie" claims using the "my facts are better than your facts" method. If you want to use his standard for fact checking then you could always use this site frankenlies (http://www.frankenlies.com/) At least this guy is decent enough to call them errors, falsehoods, and misleading passages.
-
Originally posted by Krusher
So it was all play acting? ok then :)
Al bases most of his "lie" claims using the "my facts are better than your facts" method. If you want to use his standard for fact checking then you could always use this site frankenlies (http://www.frankenlies.com/) At least this guy is decent enough to call them errors, falsehoods, and misleading passages.
I just took a look at that site and I have to recant. Midnight Target is right. Al Franken's books are much more like John Wayne playing Davy Crockett, pure fiction.
-
Originally posted by Sandman
She's a lunatic. (http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Ann_Coulter)
Thanks for the link Sandman that’s some funny stuff. Political satire at it’s best. Coulter’s a brilliant humorist. Smart, quick, and fearless; utilizing a “straight faced” delivery that confounds the dim witted. I find her hilarious even when I disagree. The vitriol spewed against her is the undeniable proof of her genius.
Some of the funniest people I know never crack a smile (or type jk) when they’re being humorous. Couch a germ of truth in absurdity and challenge your listeners figure it out. Good stuff. I don’t know what’s funnier the humor or the reactions of the intellectually challenged who don’t recognize it as such.
Case in point: Sandman wrote: “She’s a lunatic”
He leaves it to the reader to figure out what he means. Does he just not get it, takes the satire as absolute seriousness and evidence of mental instability. Does he mean, you go girl that’s some crazy stuff I’m lovin’ it. Or, does he mean she’s crazy to say those things in a society largely populated by the slow minded and reactionary. Most will interpret what they read/hear to justify their own beliefs/indignations and never once consider the possibility that there are things they just don’t/can’t comprehend.
Again thanks, anybody got more links?
-
Originally posted by KONG1
Coulter’s a brilliant humorist.
:rofl
(never in my lifetime did I expect to see that anywhere!!!! How embarrassing for you!)
-
Originally posted by KONG1
Again thanks, anybody got more links?
Ya...here's one for ya champ!
link didn't work anymore...here is what it said:
Published on Sunday, February 6, 2005 by Doug Ireland
Ann Coulter Sticks Her Entire Leg in Her Mouth
by Doug Ireland
Ann Coulter is a loudmouth ignoramus who spouts her outrageous nationalist inaccuracies on American television with little challenge from the empty talking heads who interview her. But she finally found someone to stand up to her, in Canada--and she was exposed for the arrogant fool she is. Interviewed by the Canadian Broadcasting Company's Bob McKeown for the investigative TV broadcast "The Fifth Estate," which devoted an hour-long January 26 special to how U.S. media have been highjacked by conservative bullies, Coulter was berating Canada for not sending troops to Iraq when she displayed her empty-headedness in the following exchange:
Coulter: "Canada used to be one of our most loyal friends and vice-versa. I mean Canada sent troops to Vietnam - was Vietnam less containable and more of a threat than Saddam Hussein?"
McKeown interrupts: "Canada didn't send troops to Vietnam."
Coulter: "I don't think that's right."
McKeown: "Canada did not send troops to Vietnam."
Coulter (looking desperate): "Indochina?"
McKeown: "Uh no. Canada ...second World War of course. Korea. Yes. Vietnam No."
Coulter: "I think you're wrong."
McKeown: "No, took a pass on Vietnam."
Coulter: "I think you're wrong."
McKeown: "No, Australia was there, not Canada."
Coulter: "I think Canada sent troops."
McKeown: "No."
Coulter: "Well. I'll get back to you on that."
McKeown tags out in script:
"Coulter never got back to us -- but for the record, like Iraq, Canada sent no troops to Vietnam."
Now THAT is brilliant!:rofl
-
Originally posted by xrtoronto
Ya...here's one for ya champ!
link didn't work anymore...here is what it said:
Published on Sunday, February 6, 2005 by Doug Ireland
Ann Coulter Sticks Her Entire Leg in Her Mouth
by Doug Ireland
Ann Coulter is a loudmouth ignoramus who spouts her outrageous nationalist inaccuracies on American television with little challenge from the empty talking heads who interview her. But she finally found someone to stand up to her, in Canada--and she was exposed for the arrogant fool she is. Interviewed by the Canadian Broadcasting Company's Bob McKeown for the investigative TV broadcast "The Fifth Estate," which devoted an hour-long January 26 special to how U.S. media have been highjacked by conservative bullies, Coulter was berating Canada for not sending troops to Iraq when she displayed her empty-headedness in the following exchange:
Coulter: "Canada used to be one of our most loyal friends and vice-versa. I mean Canada sent troops to Vietnam - was Vietnam less containable and more of a threat than Saddam Hussein?"
McKeown interrupts: "Canada didn't send troops to Vietnam."
Coulter: "I don't think that's right."
McKeown: "Canada did not send troops to Vietnam."
Coulter (looking desperate): "Indochina?"
McKeown: "Uh no. Canada ...second World War of course. Korea. Yes. Vietnam No."
Coulter: "I think you're wrong."
McKeown: "No, took a pass on Vietnam."
Coulter: "I think you're wrong."
McKeown: "No, Australia was there, not Canada."
Coulter: "I think Canada sent troops."
McKeown: "No."
Coulter: "Well. I'll get back to you on that."
McKeown tags out in script:
"Coulter never got back to us -- but for the record, like Iraq, Canada sent no troops to Vietnam."
Now THAT is brilliant!:rofl
I think it was reasonably well proven in another thread that Canada did in fact send troops to Vietnam.
Coulter 100001
Liberals 0
-
Originally posted by lukster
I think it was reasonably well proven in another thread that Canada did in fact send troops to Vietnam.
Coulter 100001
Liberals 0
then you ARE as stupid as her!
PROVE IT!
-
did canada send troops to vietnam? (http://www.google.ca/search?hl=en&sa=X&oi=spell&resnum=0&ct=result&cd=1&q=did+canada+send+troops+to+vietnam&spell=1)
SORRY lukster...you just like ann are dead , stupid wrong!
Next time you want to rewrite history try talking to small children.
-
Originally posted by xrtoronto
then you ARE as stupid as her!
PROVE IT!
Actually it was this thread. It just seemed like another since this one has gone on so. I'll just repost Holden McGroin's quote for you.
quote:
During the years 1954 to 1975 Canada served on 2 international truce commissions and provided medical supplies and technical assistance. Canadian diplomats were involved in negotiations between Washington and Hanoi and successive Canadian governments, both Liberal and Conservative, maintained that Ottawa was an impartial and objective peacekeeper, an innocent and helpful bystander negotiating for peace and administering aid to victims of the war. However, Cabinet papers, confidential stenographic minutes of the truce commissions as well as top-secret American government cables revealed Canada to be a willing ally of US counterinsurgency efforts.
Canada's record on the truce commissions was a partisan one, rooted in the presumption of Hanoi's guilt and Saigon's innocence and designed to discredit North Vietnam while exonerating South Vietnam from its obligations to uphold the Geneva Agreements. Canadian delegates engaged in espionage for the US Central Intelligence Agency and aided the covert introduction of American arms and personnel into South Vietnam while they spotted for US bombers over North Vietnam. Canadian commissioners shielded the US chemical defoliant program from public inquiry, parlayed American threats of expanded war to Hanoi, and penned the reports legitimating both the rupture of the Geneva Agreements and the US air war over North Vietnam. Ottawa would later assert that these actions were necessary to counter-balance the activities of the Eastern bloc countries with whom they shared membership on the truce commissions.
Canadian aid during the war went only to S Vietnam, $29 million 1950-75, routed through the Colombo Plan and the Canadian Red Cross. Although humanitarian in appearance, Canadian assistance was an integral part of the Free World Assistance Program, co-ordinated by the US Department of State with the International Security Office of the Pentagon as the point of contact. In the field, Canadian capital assistance was regulated by the US-RVN Health Defense Agreement and administered by the International Military Assistance Force Office in Saigon. On a number of occasions, Ottawa stopped the shipment of ecumenical medical relief to civilian victims of the war in North Vietnam.
At home, 500 firms sold $2.5 billion of war materiel (ammunition, napalm, aircraft engines and explosives) to the Pentagon. Another $10 billion in food, beverages, berets and boots for the troops was exported to the US, as well as nickel, copper, lead, brass and oil for shell casings, wiring, plate armor and military transport. In Canada unemployment fell to record low levels of 3.9%, the gross domestic product rose by 6% yearly, and capital expenditure expanded exponentially in manufacturing and mining as US firms invested more than $3 billion in Canada to offset shrinking domestic capacity as a result of the war. The herbicide "Agent Orange" was tested for use in Vietnam at CFB Gagetown, NB. US bomber pilots practiced carpet-bombing runs over Suffield, Alberta and North Battleford, Sask, before their tours of duty in SE Asia. And the results of the only successful peace initiative to Hanoi--That of Canadian diplomat Chester Ronning--would be kept from public knowledge in order not to harm official US-Canadian relations. Ten thousand young Canadian men fought in the US armed forces in the war.
Or maybe this...
quote:
Larry Semeniuk of Windsor, Ontario, joined the US Army in January 1967. In December, he was deployed as a paratrooper of Company B, 3rd Battalion, 187th regiment, 101st Airborne Division to Vietnam. In January 1968, Semeniuk saved the life of an officer at the risk of his own. A few days later, he was killed in action. He was awarded the Silver Star posthumously.
Gary Butt was born May 9, 1951 in Montreal, Quebec. He enlisted in the US military at Plattsburg, New York in 1968. Since Butt had superior skills in marksmanship, the US Army gave him the position of rifleman with the 173rd Airborne Brigade. Butt volunteered for duty in Vietnam and served from July 1970, to April 1971. He was killed on April 3rd. At the time of his death, Butt held the position of sergeant with the 4th Battalion, 503rd Infantry, 173rd Airborne Brigade.
-
Canada did not send troops, but individual Canadians joined the US armed forces.
-
where does it say canada sent troops with canadian uniforms?[/u] it doesn't! if a canadian joins the US forces they fight as americans not as canadian troops!
something wrong with your comprehension?
Now i know what kind of people coulter really appeals too!:rofl :rofl :rofl
-
Originally posted by xrtoronto
where does it say canada sent troops with canadian uniforms?[/u] it doesn't! if a canadian joins the US forces they fight as americans not as canadian troops!
something wrong with your comprehension?
Now i know what kind of people coulter really appeals too!:rofl :rofl :rofl
I can understand why Ann pulls no punches when dealing with rabidity like this. There are claims by many that there were troops in Canadian uniforms in Vietnam. Believe what you want, discussion with you seems pointless.
-
X,
What do you think it demonstrates when she has written several books, appeared on who knows how many shows, and participated in countless discussions and you have to work really hard to find one ‘mistake’ that itself is debatable?
Nobody can hang with her, she’s just too quick, too sharp, and suffers no fools. If anybody knows of any interviews where somebody has managed to keep up. Let me know, love to see/hear it.
-
Originally posted by KONG1
X,
What do you think it demonstrates when she has written several books, appeared on who knows how many shows, and participated in countless discussions and you have to work really hard to find one ‘mistake’ that itself is debatable?
Nobody can hang with her, she’s just too quick, too sharp, and suffers no fools. If anybody knows of any interviews where somebody has managed to keep up. Let me know, love to see/hear it.
Try reading the thread, there is an interview posted on page one with Katie Curric, who completly destroys Coulter.
:rolleyes:
-
ya...Katie Couric..theres a brain child..I dont see this magic interview she did...please link?
Hmm kAtie Vs Coulter..ya..what a challenge..LOLOLOLOLOLLOLO
I think GTOs favorite Girl is Susan Estridge
-
katie curic? Now there is a horrible airhead. She is just downright annoying to me.
GTO... who do you think would love to have your guns confiscated and you indoctrinated at a center for even thinking of owning em...... coulter or curic?
lazs
-
Katie Couric vs. Ann Coulter impromptu would be no brainer win for Ann. Without her (Katie) support staff she’s a just a life support system for a hole.
A well prepared Katie Couric vs. an overconfident Ann Coulter turned out to be learned experience for Coulter.
I still think she did well against Matt Lauer. He may have thrown her a curveball or two in the beginning but he started moving the questions along real quick when they weren’t being answered the way he was hoping for.
-
Originally posted by Roscoroo
For the leg humpers (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-6861509121978861149&q=label%3Anude)
yea its work safe ... maybe
Sorry BGB it was the second page.
That’s the one with the 2 by it.
And yes Katie Curic is a lightweight, a hack, yet she still makes coulter look pretty stupid.
I don't even know who Susan Estridge is and since this is from you I am not going to bother doing a Google search because the odds of you spelling the name right are up there with winning the lottery.
You fall on your head much as a kid, you are to young for led based paint chips to be the cause?
-
Originally posted by lazs2
katie curic? Now there is a horrible airhead. She is just downright annoying to me.
GTO... who do you think would love to have your guns confiscated and you indoctrinated at a center for even thinking of owning em...... coulter or curic?
lazs
Exactly Laz, she sucks, be still managed to make coulter look stupid.
I am sure Curic would love to ban guns but thats not the point, the point is the Hack made the chick these guys are falling all overthemselves to defend look like an idiot at best and a liar at worst.
I am not putting curric up as something good, nor do I like or watch her, It was linked, I watched it and was suprised how badly coulter came off.
Curics politics hold no interest to me at all.
Think coulter sucks does not mean I like liberal politics.
-
:rofl
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/feature/-/542607/ref%3Dac_bk_2/%24%7B0%7D/002-7732384-9475261
"Ann Coulter Answers The Significant Seven
Seven Questions We Ask Every Author
When she's not taking on the cadres of liberal elite or buried in preparing her latest columns for her own cadres of fans, pundit Ann Coulter leads a pretty darn interesting life. And to get a glimpse of it--not to mention her disarmingly charming sense of humor--check out the answers she gave to the Amazon.com Significant Seven questions that we like to run by every author.
Amazon.com: What book has had the most significant impact on your life? Ann Coulter: Matthew--no, wait: Mark. Luke was great, too. And I just loved John. Amazon.com: You are stranded on a desert island with only one book, one CD, and one DVD--what are they? Coulter: Book: Getting off a Desert Island for Dummies. CD: Anything rap. I could while away the days correcting the grammatical errors. DVD: Red Dawn or Die Hard. No-- Doctor Strangelove. Actually, I don't care as long as it's not a rental. Those late fees will kill you. Amazon.com: What is the worst lie you've ever told? Coulter: Hiring that hot Israeli guy for $100,000 and telling everyone he was my Homeland Security consultant. No, I'm sorry, that wasn't me. It was the time I said, "I'm sure some liberals love their country." Amazon.com: Describe the perfect writing environment. Coulter: A clean, well-lit, heavily endowed university with a dozen unpaid college ghostwriters at my disposal. In other words, Al Franken's office. Amazon.com: If you could write your own epitaph, what would it say? Coulter: "Can I please finish my thought, Alan?" Amazon.com: Who is the one person living or dead you would like to have dinner with? Coulter: Sir Francis Bacon. Either him or this really cute guy who just moved into my building. Whichever. Amazon.com: If you could have one superpower, what would it be? Coulter: The United States of America. Oh--that isn't what you mean? Then x-ray vision. That way I could become the first blond white female ever hired as an airport security checkpoint guard."
-
Originally posted by GtoRA2
I don't even know who Susan Estridge is and since this is from you I am not going to bother doing a Google search because the odds of you spelling the name right are up there with winning the lottery.
She's one of Hillary Rotten Clinton's top right hand people. One look at her combined with a chirp from her constant nasal congested sounding vocal chords has poster liberal child written all over her. Always wondered if her and Hil had a thing going on.
-
well GTO... ya gotta admit that coulter has said/written some funny stuff and some real common sense stuff.... So far as I know... curic is from mars... not one thing I have ever heard her say did I agree with. I will admit tho that, like you with AC..... I have not listened to curic very much.
lazs
-
Originally posted by lazs2
well GTO... ya gotta admit that coulter has said/written some funny stuff and some real common sense stuff.... So far as I know... curic is from mars... not one thing I have ever heard her say did I agree with. I will admit tho that, like you with AC..... I have not listened to curic very much.
lazs
I could never understand what she could possibly see in Bill Maher? Yes, they dated. I guess opposites do attract. Kind of like Carville and Matlin.
-
Originally posted by EN4CER
She's one of Hillary Rotten Clinton's top right hand people. One look at her combined with a chirp form her constant nasal congested sounding vocal chords has poster liberal child written all over her. Always wondered if her and Hil had a thing going on.
Better watch out man, since you know who she is you must be a bigger Libral then I am. Watch out BGB will write something insulting about you now. :rolleyes:
-
Originally posted by GtoRA2
Better watch out man, since you know who she is you must be a bigger Libral then I am. Watch out BGB will write something insulting about you now. :rolleyes:
lol - Thanks for the compliment. Still laughing.
-
Originally posted by lukster
There are claims by many that there were troops in Canadian uniforms in Vietnam.
show me just one!
Originally posted by lukster
Believe what you want, discussion with you seems pointless.
just like coulter...she ran away too when the CBC asked her to verify her statement!:rofl
-
Originally posted by GtoRA2
You so missed the point.
You want to challenge them? Then do it by being smart and right, not by being a name calling idiot.
.
If the shoe fits....so to speak! Short bus, yellow bus.... or whatever you threw at me earlier... Go have a latte with Nash now and let the gun owners have fun...
TJ
-
Originally posted by T0J0
If the shoe fits....so to speak! Short bus, yellow bus.... or whatever you threw at me earlier... Go have a latte with Nash now and let the gun owners have fun...
TJ
I must have missed that one Tojo. Gto threw a few of those names my way also in this thread and another.
-
Originally posted by lazs2
well GTO... ya gotta admit that coulter has said/written some funny stuff and some real common sense stuff.... So far as I know... curic is from mars... not one thing I have ever heard her say did I agree with. I will admit tho that, like you with AC..... I have not listened to curic very much.
lazs
She isn’t without talent completely but she has pushed things to far. All she is capable of doing now is selling books to those who like her "Humor".
Prolly really her goal anyway.
-
Originally posted by GtoRA2
Try reading the thread, there is an interview posted on page one with Katie Curric, who completly destroys Coulter.
:rolleyes:
The googley eyes are cute, but I watched the Curric interview. It kinda makes my point for me. Who knows the countless man hours spent going through the myriad of mussings by Coulter just to try to find some little thing they could “gotcha” her with. She comes on not knowing what they’ll be talking about and does a pretty good job against some basically petty semantic gripes. Speaks her mind on larger substantive issues using words and ideas way too large for Curric.
-
Originally posted by T0J0
If the shoe fits....so to speak! Short bus, yellow bus.... or whatever you threw at me earlier... Go have a latte with Nash now and let the gun owners have fun...
TJ
Have you contributed anything to this thread?
I mean come on what have you posted to far?
"der, look and the dumb librah, he dont like coullers"
"Hey look he is a librahal, really, he is cause I says soo"
As much as I disagree with just about everything Nash posts, he is at least interesting. I bet a conversation over Coffee with him would be far more entertaining then with you.
I am sure I wouldn't have to read the menu to him.
-
Originally posted by GtoRA2
Have you contributed anything to this thread?
I mean come on what have you posted to far?
"der, look and the dumb librah, he dont like coullers"
"Hey look he is a librahal, really, he is cause I says soo"
As much as I disagree with just about everything Nash posts, he is at least interesting. I bet a conversation over Coffee with him would be far more entertaining then with you.
I am sure I wouldn't have to read the menu to him.
What have you contributed other than profusely spewing the epithets?
-
Originally posted by lukster
What have you contributed other than profusely spewing the epithets?
allot more than you...he doesn't pass off lies as truth and then run away like some injured school girl when asked to verify the statements made!
Lukster you've been pwnd!:cool:
-
Originally posted by xrtoronto
allot more than you...he doesn't pass off lies as truth and then run away like some injured school girl when asked to verify the statements made!
Lukster you've been pwnd!:cool:
I haven't run anywhere. You still insisting that Canada had no uniformed troops in Vietnam. If I can prove you wrong will that shut you up?
-
Originally posted by lukster
What have you contributed other than profusely spewing the epithets?
Still humping my leg I see.
I have defended my point over and over to guys like you who seem to fail to get it every time.
Not everyone missed the point like you did.
People called me a Liberal. (Laughable)
I laugh and explain why they are wrong. They keep humping my leg.
I keep explaining they keep humping.
Your hips are not tired yet?
You’re getting back the attitude you gave and now you’re crying about it too?.
Dude give up. The thread is about opinions, I tried to make that clear last night and you just kept bringing up more stupid BS, like the free speech thing, my god man what were you thinking there.
You can't win; you are incapable of changing my opinion of coulter.
Maybe you can go away now and stop playing BBS stalker and looking like fool.
I would like to change my pants before the stains set.
I will make it so simple even you can follow. One final time, after that I am just going to ignore you tell you come up with something so dumb I can’t resist making fun of you(probable) or something new and interesting to talk about (Highly unlikely).
I do not like her.
I stated that as an opinion.
I gave reasons why.
I don't give two ****s what you think of her, you can fawn over her all you want. I will listen to counter arguments from guys like Laz who I respect. You can defend her to the point you look pathetic and further, but its still about opinion.
You know that thing we all get to have on anything we want, and it does not have to conform to the views of some narrow minded guy who can't stop defending something that needs no defense.
Mmmm thanks.
-
Originally posted by lukster
I haven't run anywhere. You still insisting that Canada had no uniformed troops in Vietnam. If I can prove you wrong will that shut you up?
you betcha!
-
Originally posted by xrtoronto
you betcha!
Will this do?
http://www.forces.gc.ca/admpol/eng/defence/peace_pastsupops_e.htm
International Commission for Supervision and Control (ICSC) (1954-1974). The ICSC was established under the General Agreement of 1954, and was mandated to supervise the withdrawal of French forces and monitor cross-border infiltration in Cambodia, Laos and Vietnam. The Canadian Forces initially contributed 133 military observers to the mission. This number was reduced to 20 in 1973. (see also ICCS)
-
Originally posted by GtoRA2
Still humping my leg I see.
You've done a fair amount of humping yourself calling those who disagree with you stupid, idiots, fools, etc.... You want to stop the nonsense then by all means, please do.
-
wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canada_and_the_Vietnam_War)
Canada had eagerly joined the United States in earlier Cold War conflicts such as the Korean War and was viewed as the closest ally of the United States. While Canada was committed to the western cause in the Cold War, the country was also committed to multilateralism and the United Nations, especially under Lester B. Pearson from 1963 to 1968. Canada thus found itself in a difficult position caught between its two foreign policy objectives. Canada never agreed with the Truman or Eisenhower Doctrines that communism itself must be opposed, rather its policy was that illegal acts of international aggression must be opposed.
During the first conflict between France and the Indo-China nationalist and communist parties Canada remained uninvolved but provided modest diplomatic and economic support to the French. Canada was however part of the multinational committee that oversaw the 1956 Paris peace accords that divided Vietnam and provided for French withdrawal. Behind the scenes Canadian diplomats tried to discourage both France and the United States from escalating the conflict in a part of the world Canadians had decided was not strategically vital.
Canada thus laid out six criteria that it would need to meet before it joined a war effort or an Asian alliance group like SEATO.
It had to be more than a military alliance, also involve cultural and trade ties.
It had to demonstrably meet the will of the people in the countries involved
Other free Asian states had to support it directly or in principle
France had to refer the conflict to United Nations
Any multilateral action must conform to the UN charter
Any action had to be divorced from all elements of colonialism
These criteria effectively guaranteed Canada would not participate in Vietnam.[/u]
At the start of the war Canada, to its relief, could not enter combat as it was appointed to the UN truce commissions and thus had to remain officially neutral in the conflict. The Canadian negotiators were strongly on the side of the Americans, however. Some delegates even engaged in espionage on behalf of the Americans, with the approval of the Canadian government. Canada also sent foreign aid to South Vietnam, that while humanitarian, was directed by the Americans.
Canada played both sides of the fence: On one hand, it actively supported the war by exporting materiel, spying for the Americans while on the ICC, and trying to play a mediator role to help reach a conclusion that could allow the U.S. to honourably leave the conflict. On the other hand, there was occasional (and mild) public criticism of American war method, which pleased a Canadian public that was becoming increasingly suspicious of Canadian complicity in the war.
As the war escalated, relations between the two nations deteriorated. The lowest point was in April 2, 1965 when Pearson gave a speech at Temple University in the United States which, in the context of firm support for U.S. policy, called for a pause in the bombing of North Vietnam. Meeting with Pearson the next day, a furious President Lyndon B. Johnson grabbed the much smaller Canadian by his lapels and talked angrily with him for an hour. After this incident, the two men somehow found ways to resolve their differences over the war--in fact, subsequently, they twice met together in Canada.
Draft dodgers
A large number of draft dodgers, young American men facing conscription for the Vietnam War, decided to relocate to Canada rather than serve in the armed forces. Concentrated in Montreal, Toronto and Vancouver, this group was at first assisted by the Student Union for Peace Action, a campus-based Canadian anti-war group with connections to Students for a Democratic Society in the United States. Canadian immigration policy at the time made it easy for immigrants from all countries to obtain legal status in Canada. By late 1967, dodgers were being assisted primarily by over 20 independent and locally based anti-draft groups, such as the Toronto Anti-Draft Programme. As a counselor for the Programme Mark Satin wrote the Manual for Draft-Age Immigrants to Canada in 1968. It sold over 100,000 copies in eight editions.[1]
Following the dodgers, deserters from the American forces also made their way to Canada. There was pressure from the United States and Canada to have them arrested, or at least stopped at the border. In May 1969 the Canadian government ceased its active discrimination against deserters after facing extensive criticism.
The population of draft dodgers had an impact on Canadian society. The influx of young, educated, and left-leaning individuals affected Canada's academic and cultural institutions. These new arrivals tended to balance the "brain drain" that Canada had experienced. While some draft dodgers returned to the United States after they were pardoned by Jimmy Carter in 1977, half stayed in Canada. Deserters were never pardoned and may still face pro forma arrest and release, as the case of Allen Abney demonstrated in March 2006[2]. Estimates of how many Americans settled in Canada to avoid service vary greatly. Canadian immigration statistics show that 20,000 to 30,000 draft eligible males came to Canada as immigrants in the Vietnam era; estimates of the total number of American citizens who moved to Canada due to their opposition to the war range from 50,000 to 125,000 [3]. This group may have helped to shift Canadian politics farther to the left of those in the United States.
Prominent draft dodgers who stayed in Canada permanently, or for a significant amount of time include:
Corky Evans - MLA for Nelson-Creston
Jack Todd - award-winning sports columnist for the Montreal Gazette
Eric Nagler - Children's entertainer on The Elephant Show.
The founding members of Heart - a popular rock/pop band
Anti-war activism
Anti-War activities were nearly as widespread in Canada as they were in the United States with demonstrations on most Canadian campuses. In English Canada the movement was fuelled by the draft dodgers. Quebec also had a strong and - ironically - violent anti-war movement as well. The separatist FLQ was also stridently anti-American and against the war.
One of the most visible expressions of this was at Expo '67. President Johnson was visiting for the opening of the American pavilion, which would involve a large American flag being unfurled. The FLQ secretly informed the government that anyone who tried to raise the flag would be shot. The original government plan was to use a Boy Scout to raise it, under the assumption the FLQ would not assassinate a child, but this idea was rejected and an extremely nervous Scout leader wearing a bulletproof vest did so. While he was not shot, it was discovered upon the unfurling of the flag that the canton with the stars had been cut out by a protester.
[edit]
Canadians in the U.S. military
Concurrent with the draft dodging and defections to Canada, several thousand Canadians joined the U.S. military and fought with the Americans in Vietnam; estimates range from 3,500 to 10,000. Several thousand more Canadians joined and served with the U.S. military but did not fight in Vietnam. One hundred and ten (110) Canadians died in Vietnam and seven remain listed as Missing in Action. Many of these were Canadians who had long lived in the United States, Canadians with US citizenship who were drafted or had previously served in the U.S., and out-of-work soldiers who had been the victims of recent government cutbacks. Still others volunteered because of ideological or moral support of the American war effort.[4] This cross border enlistment was not unusual: in both World War I and World War II tens of thousands of Americans had joined the Canadian forces while their homeland was still neutral. Canadian Peter C. Lemon won the U.S. Medal of Honor for his valour in the conflict.
In Windsor, Ontario, there is a small, privately funded monument to the Canadians killed in the Vietnam War. However, many Canadian veterans returned to a society that was strongly anti-war. Unlike in the United States, there were no veterans organizations or help from the government. Many of them moved permanently to the United States. There has been ongoing controversy among Canadian Vietnam veterans who want their comrades' deaths to be formally acknowledged by the government, especially in times of remembrance such as Remembrance Day.
[edit]
Military assistance
Canada's official diplomatic position was as a non-participant, but the country was not neutral in the conflict: it professed explicit support for the United States. Canada was also a major supplier of equipment and supplies to the American forces. Under UN rules Canada could not send these directly to South Vietnam, but they could sell them to the United States. Throughout the Vietnam War Canadian manufacturers profited greatly from the conflict. These included relatively benign items like boots and whiskey, but also napalm and Agent Orange the use of which was fiercely opposed by antiwar protesters at the time. Between 1965 and 1973 Canada sold some $2.5 billion worth of matériel to the American forces. Canada also allowed their NATO ally to use Canadian facilities and bases for training exercises and weapons testing.
In 1973, Canada also provided peacekeeping troops to Operation Gallant, the military operation associated with the International Commission of Control and Supervision (ICCS) Vietnam, along with Hungary, Indonesia, and Poland. Their role was to monitor the cease-fire in South Vietnam as per the Paris Peace Accords.
-
Con'd...
Post-war
After the fall of South Vietnam in 1975 thousands of refugees, known as boat people, fled Vietnam for both political and economic reasons. Canada agreed to accept many of them in one of the largest single influxes of immigrants in Canadian history. This created a vibrant Vietnamese community based especially in Vancouver and Toronto.
As in the United States, the Vietnam War was an important cultural turning point in Canada, perhaps even more so than in the United States. Coupled with Canada's centenary in 1967 and the success of Expo '67, Canada became far more independent and nationalistic. The public, if not their representatives in parliament, became more willing to oppose the United States and move in a different direction socially and politically.
Lukster read the above article from the encyclopedia. I had forgotton just how much the Canadian gov opposed the Vietnam war...we gave asylum to US draft dodgers. Does this sound like the same government that would send its uniformed soldiers to fight there?
Hope this sheds some light for you bro!:aok
cheers!
-
Originally posted by lukster
You've done a fair amount of humping yourself calling those who disagree with you stupid, idiots, fools, etc.... You want to stop the nonsense then by all means, please do.
No not everyone, just the ones who have proven it.
-
Lotta words there xtoronto. Guess it didn't shut you up afterall. I knew better but had the time to waste anyhow.
-
Originally posted by GtoRA2
No not everyone, just the ones who have proven it.
You just can't stop can you?
-
Originally posted by lukster
Lotta words there xtoronto.
those words are verbatim from the encyclopedia, which makes them an authoritative source.
take the time to read them?
-
What the heck xtoronto. I'll take one more shot. Ann Coulter didn't say "uniformed" Candians fought beside Americans in Vietnam, she said Canadians. She was right, there were thousands. To discredit her, some made the distinction between individual Canadians and Canadian soldiers.
On the other hand. I didn't say that uniformed Canadian soldiers "fought" in Vietnam (though I think you're very naive to believe they didn't), just that they were there, which I have proven.
-
dude, this is the conversation:
Coulter: "Canada used to be one of our most loyal friends and vice-versa. I mean Canada sent troops to Vietnam - was Vietnam less containable and more of a threat than Saddam Hussein?"
McKeown interrupts: "Canada didn't send troops to Vietnam."
Coulter: "I don't think that's right."
McKeown: "Canada did not send troops to Vietnam."
Coulter (looking desperate): "Indochina?"
McKeown: "Uh no. Canada ...second World War of course. Korea. Yes. Vietnam No."
Coulter: "I think you're wrong."
McKeown: "No, took a pass on Vietnam."
Coulter: "I think you're wrong."
McKeown: "No, Australia was there, not Canada."
Coulter: "I think Canada sent troops."
McKeown: "No."
Coulter: "Well. I'll get back to you on that."
McKeown tags out in script:
"Coulter never got back to us -- but for the record, like Iraq, Canada sent no troops to Vietnam."
-
And I just proved that Canada did in fact send troops to Vietnam.
We're going around in circles here. There's nothing left to be said in this regard. Call me a little girl if it makes you feel more manly.
-
I don't want to win this argument on a technicality. I suspect Ann incorrectly believed that Canada supported us more in Vietnam than what they did. Everyone makes mistakes. I think you are mistaken in that Canada offered no support there.
She's still hillarious in my book and usually on target imo.
-
Originally posted by lukster
Midnight Target is right.
-
GTO I never said or implied that you were a liberal. For the rest of you... I have known him for a while now and he is NOT a liberal.
He is from the bay area tho so some contamination does creep in. How could it not? It is like working in the disease ward of a hospital.
All of us have some dislike for one person or another that we just can't put into words. I think that is the case here. Knowing GTO I can't imagine anything that AC actually says that would tick him off... more like how she says it or how she looks or something like that. Something not so tangible.
If you liberals think you have made a new friend.... you will be destined to heartache that only a liberal betrayed can feel.
On the canada thing.... If I had been her I would have just said... "What? they didn't send actual troops? You sure? Oh well... I guess I was mistaken on that guess it was just a few canadians that were there and not troops."
When they inevitably said "yes you were wrong as you are wrong on lots of things..." I would have said.... "could be.... give me some more examples."
I would agree that the liberals had shot their wad and a such an non issue as the canadian soldier thing was indeed the best they could come up with.
lazs
-
Originally posted by GtoRA2
Have you contributed anything to this thread?
Yes..actual examples of offensive\humorous Coulter comments....
But I cant take credit for the over sized adams apple comment.... And never really had a use for the term "Short bus" or plan to throw it out at anyone to win an argument...
Nash fishs as good as anyone on this bbs, and never backs down from a good fishing expedition or argument... I respect him for that... I assume he can handle the Latte/Starbucks comments without popping a blood vessel or two, he should no its meant as humor...
Laz coined it properly, you live in CA, you have been infected, its not your fault..
I will be more sensitive to your challenged demographic short comings in the future..
TJ
-
nash is simply the enemy. We must do everything we can to keep people like him from having any control over our lives.
Other than that... I like him well enough. He is a little petulant and arrogant but that is not too bad and will probly go away as he ages.
He is entitled to his outrage and his opinions. he is not entitled to have a say in what we do...in fact... he can't even vote.
I say that he is the best thing that ever happened to anyone who hates socialists and democrats in general on this board. I like that he pretends to be impartial while hammering his democrat socialist message out and I especially like the fact that he won't admit to himself that he is fooling no one.
lazs
-
How come you aren't infected yet lazs?
-
you havent been to dixon ...have you MT?...hehehe
-
Oh C'mon... Nash stirs the pot and makes others think... you may not like it but Nash rocks!
Mac
-
Okay... who stole AWMac's account?
-
next thing you know I'll be voting republican and Nash will be running the NRA.
-
Originally posted by BGBMAW
you havent been to dixon ...have you MT?...hehehe
I've taken the time to drive by and roll up my windows.
-
OMFG I am infected with liberalism??
****, maybe thats why I am stilll puking almost everymoring! :mad:
:rofl
-
Newspaper drops Coulter's column. (http://www.mediainfo.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1002838462)
-
from that newspaper clip sandman posted:
“Liberals have never liked her, and we’ve always gotten complaints [from them]. But the complaints that mattered the most were from the conservative readers,” who felt that their views were being misrepresented.
The above is the precise reason Gto gave as well (previously in this thread)
-
He's a librul!
-
This isn't the middle east or some communist country where anyone is forced to read Ann Coulter. That she can say pretty much whatever she wants is another freedom I happily enjoy. Attempts to shout her down, hanging up the phone during an interview, incensed name calling against her supporters serve only lend her more credibility. Liberals are their own worst enemy.
-
Originally posted by lukster
This isn't the middle east or some communist country where anyone is forced to read Ann Coulter. That she can say pretty much whatever she wants is another freedom I happily enjoy. Attempts to shout her down, hanging up the phone during an interview, incensed name calling against her supporters serve only lend her more credibility. Liberals are their own worst enemy.
You left out throwing pies, etc. at her while she is onstage giving PAID speeches:confused: (It wasn't enough that she was only speaking to those who paid (i.e. various conservative student organizations)...campus libs regularly have to show up and shout her down, sabatoge sound systems, etc. Is this what the 'free-speech' movement of the 60's has morphed into?
-
Originally posted by Sandman
Newspaper drops Coulter's column. (http://www.mediainfo.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1002838462)
Ain't the first time and it's not going to be the last. She'll be back soon as the Lefties put their cross hairs on someone else.
-
Originally posted by Sandman
Newspaper drops Coulter's column. (http://www.mediainfo.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1002838462)
Im sure the best selling book is a much better position then section d of a fish wrapper... No one makes money as an op ed writer...
She will get plenty of death threats from the best seller...
-
Nevertheless, it makes GTO's point.
-
Originally posted by Sandman
Nevertheless, it makes GTO's point.
It does indeed, but then its prolly the lies of a left wing rag.... :D
I have been trying this new cream, its tingly, hopefully it saps the infection right out of me :rofl
-
Forget the cream, it won't work. Try a dose of this.
(http://ec3.images-amazon.com/images/P/1400054206.01._SS500_SCLZZZZZZZ_V65593521_.jpg)
-
Originally posted by lukster
Forget the cream, it won't work. Try a dose of this.
(http://ec3.images-amazon.com/images/P/1400054206.01._SS500_SCLZZZZZZZ_V65593521_.jpg)
What I have is bad enough, I don't want what that will give me since I am allergic to penicilian, I prolly won't be able to get rid of it. ;)
-
Props to Adam for speaking truth.
She's a baseless sensationalist, and nothing more. There are for sure counterparts across the political spectrum. Doesn't matter what side she supports, she does it without justification and, more importantly, without presenting anything resembling a solution to the problems she foams about.
Then she calls in and says she's pressed for time???
Political discourse in this country will be so much more beneficial to our nation's development when we all stop listening to these horrid people, regardless of what 'side' they espouse.
-
Originally posted by 68Hawk
Props to Adam for speaking truth.
She's a baseless sensationalist, and nothing more. There are for sure counterparts across the political spectrum. Doesn't matter what side she supports, she does it without justification and, more importantly, without presenting anything resembling a solution to the problems she foams about.
Then she calls in and says she's pressed for time???
Political discourse in this country will be so much more beneficial to our nation's development when we all stop listening to these horrid people, regardless of what 'side' they espouse.
Spot on.
-
Originally posted by 68Hawk
Political discourse in this country will be so much more beneficial to our nation's development when we all stop listening to these horrid people, regardless of what 'side' they espouse.
:aok
-
Originally posted by 68Hawk
Props to Adam for speaking truth.
She's a baseless sensationalist, and nothing more. There are for sure counterparts across the political spectrum. Doesn't matter what side she supports, she does it without justification and, more importantly, without presenting anything resembling a solution to the problems she foams about.
Then she calls in and says she's pressed for time???
Political discourse in this country will be so much more beneficial to our nation's development when we all stop listening to these horrid people, regardless of what 'side' they espouse.
I would agree that pointing out a million plus abortion murders a year could be considered foaming but I dont think the solution is that invisible to need a road map and directions...
The country was much more peaceful when the MSM was entirely controlled by librules, the soviet union was fairly peaceful with one state run media source as well.....Go figure...
What you described is a nice fantasy..... Good luck with that!
TJ
-
The shear sillines of our current political situation is evidenced by the fact that instead of folks rooting for the players, they are rooting for the chearleaders.
-
Originally posted by Furious
The shear sillines of our current political situation is evidenced by the fact that instead of folks rooting for the players, they are rooting for the chearleaders.
I was born when Eisenhower was president of the US. I was sad when Kennedy was killed, sore at Johnson's inabilty to win in Vietnam, embarrassed by Nixon's actions, and frustrated with Carter's impotence. I never really got angry at a president until Clinton gave our secrets to the Chinese and made a mockery of the presidency. That so many came to his defense is what created the current rift in this country imo, not Ann Coulter.
-
Now imagine if Bubba had done something really bad, like 20,000 casualties and $300 billion expense over some trumped up bull****!
-
No...
Two Words....or One Name...
Karl Rove.
And I've voted Republican since Reagan, but his is the politics of division..of course that's his job and why he get's paid.... and give him credit...he is damn good at.
-
Ok.. some of you don't like her. Some of the stuff she says is not very amusing but then.... most of the stuff jon stewart says is pretty not funny.
She does get some good ones in once in a while.
Our politicians are all tools and making fun of them is the only sane thing to do. They are not in touch with us and they all want to increase their power. Every one of em is a phony in makeup and hundred dollar haircuts with an empty head and a gluttony for power. Every one of em seeks to control the people for their own purpose.
They could not be further from what the founders wanted in government if the tried and... they try every day.
lazs
-
Lazs,
Not sure why the Jon Stewart reference in a thread about Coulter, but......
The difference between the two is Coulter takes herself serious, and isn't trying to be amusing......
-
Originally posted by Stringer
Lazs,
Not sure why the Jon Stewart reference in a thread about Coulter, but......
The difference between the two is Coulter takes herself serious, and isn't trying to be amusing......
How can you say that?
"we risk being lured into misguided pursuits, including bestiality, slavery, and PETA membership"
-
stringer if u think coulter doesnt make tongue in cheeck jokes.....
I guess the sound of WHOOOSSHHHH happens frequently over your head..
its probably a bit more painful for you to realize ...becuase the left wing of the party makes much more fools of them selves then the other side
Yes they both are pigs..but one side is so far off the scale...at first its funny..but then its just sadddddd
Dean Gore Feinstein Schumer Kennedy Pelosi ah the list goes on.....whos the Black chik who slugged the Capitol Officer?...LOLOLOL..classic lines from her to....Thats why Rush Limbaugh has the HUGEST radio show on earth...just liek the rest of the "right Wing " radio..The democrats make it tooooo easy to laff at them
Red state ..blue state.. that map sure says alot
-
Yep... I think coulter is laughing her butt off at the reaction some of you have. I also think that even tho jon stewart is prettending to be tounge in cheek....
He has an agenda an a beliefe system that is liberal socialist and dead serious.
I see no real difference in the two except that stewart mugs more... is more slapstick and is preaching to the choir more.
The people stewart makes fun of are more secure than the people coulter makes fun of is all.
There is no tolerance where liberal socialism is involved.
lazs
-
BGBMAW,
Woosh is all that goes on in your head, me thinks
I'm not labeling material, so lefty really doesn't mean anything to me....LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLLOLOLO LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL OLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOOLOLOLOL OLOOLOOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLO LOLOLOLOLOLOLOOOLOLOLOLOLOLOL OLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLLOLOLOLOLLOLO LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL OLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL
-
lazs2
Again I will remind you that liberal socialist is a contradiction in terms. You're just lumping everything that's not rightwing together.
BGBMAW
You not knowing Cynthia Mckinney's name but only knowing her as,
the Black chik who slugged the Capitol Officer?
proves her right that she is profiled as a black woman and defended herself accordingly when the officer grabbed her arm. I give her a lot of credit. While she is human, and therefore no saint, she has been one of the few people in government actually trying to look out for the people.
Personally I would love to see Jon Stewart repeat what he did to that freak in a bowtie Tucker Carlson with that retched blond woman. Whats her name again?
http://mediamatters.org/items/200410160003
A beautiful piece of oratory. Jon Stewart is a comedian. Coultier is a political pundit. There is a difference. I think Stewart himself highlights it best in the video on the link.
-
Originally posted by 68Hawk
lazs2
Again I will remind you that liberal socialist is a contradiction in terms. You're just lumping everything that's not rightwing together.
Not necessarily.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_spectrum#Left_and_Right
social liberalism is generally assigned to the center, center-left or sometimes (when viewed by conservatives) the left
-
Originally posted by lukster
Forget the cream, it won't work. Try a dose of this.
(http://ec3.images-amazon.com/images/P/1400054206.01._SS500_SCLZZZZZZZ_V65593521_.jpg)
My eyes are playing tricks on me, I thought it said
"The Church of Lesbianism"
-
Originally posted by Stringer
No...
Two Words....or One Name...
Karl Rove.
And I've voted Republican since Reagan, but his is the politics of division..of course that's his job and why he get's paid.... and give him credit...he is damn good at.
Name something Rove has done that James Carville hasn't
-
Originally posted by bj229r
Name something Rove has done that James Carville hasn't
Carvilles wife?:D
-
Originally posted by bj229r
Name something Rove has done that James Carville hasn't
Was Carville ever part of the White House staff?
-
Originally posted by GtoRA2
Carvilles wife?:D
Pretty good one! :lol I still don't know how those two stay married - Carville and Matlin. The local Police Department has got to have pre-loaded DIRs (Domestic Incident Report) for that household.
-
Carville ran Clinton’s 1992 campaign. Carville did not take a position in Clinton’s administration, but continued to act as an informal political advisor.
-
Originally posted by Holden McGroin
Carville ran Clinton’s 1992 campaign. Carville did not take a position in Clinton’s administration, but continued to act as an informal political advisor.
Correct, however he could have filled the position of "Court Jester" had Buba appointed one.
-
In other words, no.
-
In other words... Rove has done a lot LOT more than Carville.
-
Originally posted by Furious
The shear sillines of our current political situation is evidenced by the fact that instead of folks rooting for the players, they are rooting for the chearleaders.
He r smart.
-
lukster
wikipedia is a sketchy source at best, and that article is extremely general. Find something credible.
Still it backs me up.
Quote me:
You're just lumping everything that's not rightwing together.
Whoever contributed that to wikipedia didn't know what they were talking about either.
-
Originally posted by Sandman
In other words... Rove has done a lot LOT more than Carville.
ok....how about something evil and/or illegal?
-
Originally posted by 68Hawk
lukster
wikipedia is a sketchy source at best, and that article is extremely general. Find something credible.
Still it backs me up.
Quote me:
You're just lumping everything that's not rightwing together.
Whoever contributed that to wikipedia didn't know what they were talking about either.
I can't speak for lazs but as I've said before, many of today's self proclaimed "liberals" are well entrenched in their ideology. This is largely due to wanting power for their political party. This ideology can accurately be described as socialistic. Labels mean little, the proof is in the pudding.
-
Liberal socialist is at least as legitimate a term as "neocon" or any of the other new terms.
As was pointed out.... a liberal in the U.S. is heavily into socialism... rather than being a contradiction in terms... Liberal socialist can.... at best... be called
Redundant.
The leveling of the social playing field is the goal of the socialist and the liberal. I believe that you simply do not like being outed.
and for good reason.... it is a rare American that wants to be called a liberal or a socialist... they have (and rightly so) become curse words..
I, like many Americans, am not "right wing" but... and individualist. The country was formed with individualist ideals and they stay with us to this day....
"Right wing" or "neo con" or even "libertarian" are not terms that gag an individualist so much as being called either a Liberal or a socialist.
Liberal socialist implies loss of freedom for an individualist... loss to the group and forced fitting in. It implies a womanly type of rule like a strict mother. It reeks of being effeminate and weak and.....
In most Americans eyes... dishonest and sneaky.
It is no wonder that liberal socialists do not like the term.
So... think of a new one. that is really what the liberal socialists are good at.... 1984 speak.... big brother.
lazs
-
Except.... neoconservatives are socialists.
-
funked... all government becomes socialist when it achieves enough power... Big government is allways the demon.
There are two ways to reach this state of tyranny.... you can start out with liberal socialist ideals and the government will grow in size and power to accomadate you.. or...
You can simply grow the government in power and have it eventually control all social issues..
Either way... a weak government is your friend and a powerful one is your enemy.
lazs
-
5- Flamebaiting, trolling, or posting to incite or annoy is not allowed.
-
and... I do got to ask... what is a neocon? I know several people have defined it but the defenition is never the same. Is there some generaly agreed upon defenition?
lazs
-
Originally posted by lazs2
and... I do got to ask... what is a neocon? I know several people have defined it but the defenition is never the same. Is there some generaly agreed upon defenition?
lazs
Neo- — ... is a prefix, derived from Greek that means new or recent, or in a modern form.
According to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neo-
therefore: neo-new
con-conservative
= new conservatives
-
I have to admit that I didn't even know Adam Corolla had a show until he hung up on Ann Coulter. The Man Show was pretty funny for a while, in a sophmoric sort of way. Is his radio show any good?
-
Originally posted by FUNKED1
Now imagine if Bubba had done something really bad, like 20,000 casualties and $300 billion expense over some trumped up bull****!
Imagine if Bubba had done anything other then chase split tail around the oval office.... Other then witness tampering, obstruction of justice, and attempted rape.... Or other then giving defense secrets to china, or screwing up the North Korea issue... Hindsight being what it is you know...
Your more likely to be killed driving a car in texas then serving in Iraq by a cell phone using texan motorist.
2001
deaths in texas = 3739
Injuries = 340,555
Thats just one state....!!
Where is the outrage? Bush must be teh blame for this too?!!!
You were just fishing though right?
TJ
-
Originally posted by lukster
I have to admit that I didn't even know Adam Corolla had a show until he hung up on Ann Coulter. The Man Show was pretty funny for a while, in a sophmoric sort of way. Is his radio show any good?
He's been on the radio a long time. Even during the Man Show, I think he still had a radio show.
He's like Howard Stern. You either love him or hate him.
-
Just to pop in here...
I am on page 155 of here book and there has not been a single opinion stated that is did not fully agree with so far! :aok
great book footnoted with all here sources, great read! highly recommended. it reminded me of things i breifly heard blurbs in the news about in the past but forgot about until now.
-
6- Members are asked to not act as "back seat moderators". Issues with any breach of rules should be brought to HTC's attention via email at support@hitechcreations.com.
-
Ahh... so neocon is someone who is new to thinking consevatively? Huge groups of people had some sort of epithany all at the same time?
What do you suppose caused this sudden and huge shift in thinking?
lazs
-
Originally posted by lazs2
Ahh... so neocon is someone who is new to thinking consevatively? Huge groups of people had some sort of epithany all at the same time?
What do you suppose caused this sudden and huge shift in thinking?
lazs
epithany=> I think you meant: epiphany
"What do you suppose caused this sudden and huge shift in thinking?" ... this is a good question Lasz, I don't have an answer for you. I know it started in Canada about 10-15 years ago...kind of around the same time as political correctness grew legs.
-
Originally posted by T0J0
Imagine if Bubba had done anything other then chase split tail around the oval office.... Other then witness tampering, obstruction of justice, and attempted rape.... Or other then giving defense secrets to china, or screwing up the North Korea issue... Hindsight being what it is you know...
Your more likely to be killed driving a car in texas then serving in Iraq by a cell phone using texan motorist.
2001
deaths in texas = 3739
Injuries = 340,555
Thats just one state....!!
Where is the outrage? Bush must be teh blame for this too?!!!
You were just fishing though right?
TJ
Hahahahaah good point man!!!
Thousands of deaths and tens of thousands of wounded and hundreds of thousands of civilian casualties, it's really insignificant! :aok
Mass murder is fine as long as teh presidant doesn't have sex!! :aok
-
lolol mp4 ur funny
-
Lazs, Neoconservative is a 40-year-old term.
It describes all the hawkish liberals who left the Democratic party to hijack the Republican party. They pay lip service to the kind of conservatism that you and I understand, but are really for big government, massive spending, and using military power as a foreign policy tool rather than for self defense. Rumsfeld, Cheney, Wolfowitz, et al.
-
Ok... so neocons are former liberals? That would describe about everyone.. most children are liberals for a period in their life. they tend to grow out of it.
Would David Horowitz be considered a neocon? You point out examples that are only powerful politicians... can anyone be a neocon?
If it has been around for 40 years how come it is just now being bandied about?
All the answers just seem to bring up more questions to me.
xtoronto seems to have some grip on it.... new cons or, ex liberals are formed by political correctness or.... the realization that newspeak is liberal in nature and 1984 was about liberals taking over.
lazs
-
As I understand it... neocons aren't former liberals. It's not as if they gave up their lefty cards and moved to the right.
It's a different ideology than the standard leftist (big government, small military & send them everywhere) versus right (small government, big military & keep them home) type stuff.
It's big government, big military & send them everywhere. It's PNAC (http://www.newamericancentury.org/).
Knowing that we have a two party system and that adding a third is near impossible, the neocons have done something else. They've taken the GOP and shifted the agenda to suit their own.
Of course, I could be wrong. It's just an opinion.
-
John Dean wrote a book that explains it all pretty well.
Conservatives Without Conscience (http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0670037745/sr=1-1/qid=1153506192/ref=sr_1_1/103-1949733-9283806?ie=UTF8&s=books)
-
so these guys call themselves neo cons? I'm not sure if I understand the defenition all that well. There is nothing new about some conservatives wanting to project power or thinking that the military needs to defend the country no matter where the threat is.
I would probly not read a book writtten by John dean unless I wanted a perspective of the nixon years. I allways thought that he was a semi bright self serving little weazel. I can't imagine him having a grasp of anything except his own self interest.
lazs
-
Originally posted by lazs2
I allways thought that he was a semi bright self serving little weazel.
You've just described most politicians.
-
we agree. We need less politicians and less things for them to do.
I would also add tho that he is an extremely bitter little weazel who is probably a little unhinged by his bitterness. This would also describe a portion of politicians but I believe that deano would be a poster boy for such a type.
lazs
-
Lazs if you are still confused, you can read this article. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neoconservatism_(United_States)) I realize that this is very stressful for your factproof worldview but please bear with me.
-
This one is interesting: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neo-liberalism
-
Originally posted by lazs2
so these guys call themselves neo cons? I'm not sure if I understand the defenition all that well. There is nothing new about some conservatives wanting to project power or thinking that the military needs to defend the country no matter where the threat is.
I would probly not read a book writtten by John dean unless I wanted a perspective of the nixon years. I allways thought that he was a semi bright self serving little weazel. I can't imagine him having a grasp of anything except his own self interest.
lazs
Not to argue, but I actually worked with (for) John Dean back in the '80's. He is a venture capitalist and bought our company. He was a very engaging man and spoke about the watergate years with anyone who asked (not many did). He even agreed to be interviewed by one of our employee's kids for a school history project on the 70's. I found him to be very nice and scary smart. Mo was still a babe then too.
(http://www.watergate.com/silentcoup/14.jpg)
-
Originally posted by midnight Target
Not to argue, but I actually worked with (for) John Dean back in the '80's. He is a venture capitalist and bought our company. He was a very engaging man and spoke about the watergate years with anyone who asked (not many did). He even agreed to be interviewed by one of our employee's kids for a school history project on the 70's. I found him to be very nice and scary smart. Mo was still a babe then too.
(http://www.watergate.com/silentcoup/14.jpg)
Gordon Liddy has always had a lot of nice things to say about Dean:lol
-
mt... I find most liberals very engaging and they smile with that little twinkle in their eye as only those who feel superior can... they are very friendly and engaging until....
Until you don't agree with them... then they go bottle rocket in my experianmce... downright foam at the mouth and get pissed.
I doubt that dean would let a peasant see that tho. He would not get where he is if he did... read some of the things he writes... the bitterness is very apparent.
funked... Now this is getting confusing... according to the site you link.... neo cons are former liberals who still think liberal and want to expand government but are simply different from regular liberals in that they are more hawkish.
The site also has a defenition of "neo liberal" that is even more confusing and convoluted. The only difference is that there is no such thing as former conservatives or individuals who become liberals... it doesn't flow that way.
I believe the jews are our allies. I think we should support our allies. I believe that the forces that they are facing are barbaric terrorists.
I don't know if we should be in Iraq or anywhere in the mideast but we probly will have to be someday in any case. They are easy to whoop now.
I do not want a strong military to equal a strong government. I don't care if that is a socialist one or a conservative one or one run by mormons... It is all the same to me.
Maybe I don't read... or maybe I simply do discount "facts" by such wonederful sources as you may link....as you say funked but I do understand history and governments and how they morph. How they build their power at the expense of the individualist and how they are inherantly evil.
Some of the socialists here describe their governmens as a socialist paradise... in most cases it is because getting "free" stuff at others expense is better than the restrictions that don't really apply to them (yet). So long as only other people are being punished it is a good system.
Neo liberals and neo cons do not exist... they are simply all socialists with slightly different ideas about how to control the citizens.
funked... not saying you are wrong but... What "facts" have you seen me ignore in order to form my worldview?
lazs
-
Ignoring the fact that you think you can perceive the personality of a person better than someone who as actually met him, John Dean is hardly a liberal.
-
C'mon MT just because you knew the guy doesn't qualify you to know more about him.
facts:lazs::22 rifle:Sherman tank
-
Back on track:
"I knew the events in the Middle East were big when The New York Times devoted nearly as much space to them as it did to a New York court ruling last week rejecting gay marriage."
http://www.anncoulter.com/cgi-local/welcome.cgi
-
MT didn't "know" the guy... anymore than I "know" the fighter pilot Carr that I ate dinner with and talked to for an hour.
and...
I know what a 22 rifle is and what a sherman tank is. I have fired plenty of 22 rifles with hundreds of thousands of rounds in all types... single, thumb trigger, bolt and semi auto...even full auto. I might be able to speak with authority when talking about em.
I know a little about sherman tanks but only from bits gathered here and there and a couple of books. I would be hesitant to claim that the few things I have read were the absolute truth on em.
I think this whole neo con thing is a boogey man that might describe 4 or 5 people in the world. neo lib too.
I would agree that a liberal socialist that is hawkish is a bad thing.
I also say that dean is a pretty sleazy, bitter little worm. I watched him lie and then lie again and then lie even more to get himself away from jail. He is not someone I would trust in anything is all.
lazs
-
someone forgot their metamucil.
-
At his age dean probly forgets a lot of things. some rather conviently
lazs
-
If I met him, it would be hard calling him "John Dean" and not "John Weenie". :D
-
First off, authoritarianism is not left, center or right. All sides can be capable of authoritarian despotism. Conservatism was the first, then liberalism reacted to it (producing our modern democracies). Then people thought that liberalism hadn't gone far enough so socialism came along. All these doctrines are capable of producing genuinely benevolent movements intended to help humanity, and all are capable of producing despotic movements.
Neo-liberalism vs. Neo-conservatism
These are both essentially the same animal. Liberalism and conservatism factor into their true operating methods only slightly. BOTH agree that the advancement of American power should be the foremost goal of American foreign policy, and that a heirarchical order is the right and just form of world order (with America on top of course, cuz they wouldn't accept anything less).
The difference comes down to means. Neo-libs seek American hegemony through the use of soft power. Soft power is the carrot, the economic incentives (or just plain buying power weight). Soft power is the coercive 'scratch my back' that the mafia uses first and foremost. It's much less invasive than the alternative. Neo-cons seek American hegemony through the use of hard power. Hard power is the stick, the military, the gun in your face telling you to do something.
Both groups are working towards the same objectives and both groups of people shoud equally, and simultaneously, be taken out back and shot many, many times in the heads. Most people don't realize that they're not competing ideologies, but really cooperative and complimentary. The Neo-cons strengthen the military and throw it around the world while the Neo-libs force people in third world countries to accept grossly unfavorable trade relations (or other such economic 'deals') to supposedly better their country. It's something of a good cop/bad cop situation, and when the good cop (supposedly the libs) don't get their way they send in the bad cop (so sign the paper or else face trade embargos).
The conservative and liberal in these terms is disengenuous. They have nothing to do with the political right or the political center of this country, but rather represent (and are linked directly back to) a small group of individuals who seek to corner American politics to their favor. They don't care about any of us, regardless what values we believe in. They care only for their own money, power and control.
Illustration---
Conservatives have currently been duped into accepting and promoting the current preparations for a full out survailance/police state, justified in the name of our own 'security'. This is happening under our noses right now. Have the liberals been defending us? NO! They have been duped into promoting a regime of authoritarian and unneccesary gun control. It's not about left-right, its about one objective. They each play a role.
9 out of 10 despots agree, gun control works!
What would 'true' socialism say about gun control?
"It advocated the abolition of standing armies and proposed the universal arming of the people."
Notes to the communist manifesto, pg 81. Referring to The Paris Workers' Congress, July 14-20, 1889.
Not everyone trying to control minds and force social control on others are socialists. Not everyone arguing for small government is a conservative. The evil is all around us, from all sides, but at the same time, we have friends on all sides too.
Don't ever let anyone convince you something is good or bad because of talking points. Look into it for yourself. It was already posted, but check out the PNAC website here:
http://www.newamericancentury.org/
and read some of their opinion papers. Their mission statement wraps it all up, and scares the crap out of me. I hope building new nukes, sending our military all over the globe and unconditionally forcing others to our whim scares the hell out of all you as well. The chairman is calling for us to attack Iran, saying they will love us and come out with open arms to accept us. Isn't that what these people tried to feed us about Iraq?
http://thinkprogress.org/2006/07/19/kristol-iran/
Watch the video, check out these criminal organizations, and tell me that you aren't scared for your children's future.
-
Afterthought:
Neo-conservatism can best be summed up as an accumulation of various tributes from across the political spectrum, including (but certainly not limited to) social control, financial consolidation and military hegemony. Most of us just call this fascism, but this word might make them look bad.
Did you know that certain founding members of the PNAC have ancestors (ancestors that lived in America) that supported the Nazi movement and even had companies siezed in this country during WW2 that were found to be helping the Nazi war effort?
-
Originally posted by 68Hawk
Did you know that certain founding members of the PNAC have ancestors (ancestors that lived in America) that supported the Nazi movement and even had companies siezed in this country during WW2 that were found to be helping the Nazi war effort?
So ****ing what?
-
Did you know that the founder of the ACLU was an avowed communist? that he was violently against capitalism and the tenents of the constitution?
As sandie says... so what?
I am still thinking that this whold neo con and pnac thing is just a couple of guys that the sunday morning pundits don't like.
I don't see any around me... I don't see any democratic party alternatives to Bush or whoever the republicans get to run next time.
I don't see any democrats who are my champions... who escwe the welfare state and defend the second amendment.
There are no alternatives... vote for the republicans no matter what label the pundits put on em.
Better to try to shape the republicans than to try to make the democrats do a 180.
lazs
-
Originally posted by lazs2
Did you know that the founder of the ACLU was an avowed communist? that he was violently against capitalism and the tenents of the constitution?
So what?
-
so what?..lolol
ya..Sandy..So can you point out these bueatiful ..Great guys who run a great communist country?!!
You should move there Im thinking
-
Originally posted by BGBMAW
so what?..lolol
ya..Sandy..So can you point out these bueatiful ..Great guys who run a great communist country?!!
You should move there Im thinking
He won't need to move anywhere. We're becoming as communist as the next.
-
In 1940, the ACLU formally barred communists from leadership or staff positions, and would take the position that it did not want communists as members either.
-
These are the founding members of the PNAC as found on the mission statement at the PNAC website:
Elliott Abrams Gary Bauer William J. Bennett Jeb Bush
Dick Cheney Eliot A. Cohen Midge Decter Paula Dobriansky
Steve Forbes Aaron Friedberg Francis Fukuyama Frank Gaffney
Fred C. Ikle Donald Kagan Zalmay Khalilzad I. Lewis Libby
Norman Podhoretz Dan Quayle Peter W. Rodman Stephen P.
Rosen Henry S. Rowen Donald Rumsfeld Vin Weber
George Weigel Paul Wolfowitz
These are the members of the PNAC who participated in the 'rebuilding americas defenses' project:
Roger Barnett
U.S. Naval War College
Alvin Bernstein
National Defense University
Stephen Cambone
National Defense University
Eliot Cohen
Nitze School of Advanced International
Studies, Johns Hopkins University
Devon Gaffney Cross
Donors' Forum for International Affairs
Thomas Donnelly
Project for the New American Century
David Epstein
Office of Secretary of Defense,
Net Assessment
David Fautua
Lt. Col., U.S. Army
Dan Goure
Center for Strategic and International Studies
Donald Kagan
Yale University
Fred Kagan
U. S. Military Academy at West Point
Robert Kagan
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace (if this one isnt a contradiction, I don't know what is)
Robert Killebrew
Col., USA (Ret.)
William Kristol
The Weekly Standard
Mark Lagon
Senate Foreign Relations Committee
James Lasswell
GAMA Corporation
I. Lewis Libby
Dechert Price & Rhoads
Robert Martinage
Center for Strategic and Budgetary
Assessment
Phil Meilinger
U.S. Naval War College
Mackubin Owens
U.S. Naval War College
Steve Rosen
Harvard University
Gary Schmitt
Project for the New American Century
Abram Shulsky
The RAND Corporation
Michael Vickers
Center for Strategic and Budgetary
Assessment
Barry Watts
Northrop Grumman Corporation
Paul Wolfowitz
Nitze School of Advanced International
Studies, Johns Hopkins University
Dov Zakheim
System Planning Corporation
I put some of the key names and organizations in bold for you. Still think this is just a few odd people who have no influence?
These people are highly placed in government, big business and especially the military/industrial complex. Some of them are also members of the Carlyle Group. Fail to take them seriously at your own peril.
-
Neocon is used as a polite way to point out a jewish conservative without sounding insulting...
Now using the names PNAC and Neocon in the same conspiracy type conclusion to a current world issue makes it sound "SINISTER"
Usually thrown out there by people who believe in conspiracy theories or thrive on them for attention, or make them up to win an argument :)
TJ
-
Neo-Conservatism and Neo-Liberalism have nothing to do with religion at all. Some of the members of these movements claim to be highly religious, but the movements themselves couldn't give a damn, except to use religion as a tool to their advantage.
The project for a new american century is technically a 'think tank' that validly represents the core of the neo-conservative movement. Look it up for yourself if you think you know something about these movements. Or don't, its up to you, but if you want to name yourself after a Japanese war criminal you might want to take a more critical view of your own government.
Many of the lies people are telling themselves today to keep themselves feeling good about what's happening in the world are the same as people told themselves in Germany and Japan to help them not see what was happening around them.
-
ya,,Sandman
Ya ACLU ..throwing out its commies is like...Saddam giving his country food and medicine for OIL FOR FOOD..
We saw how that worked..lololol
Islam Is Peace...and ACLU is here to protect you
btw...Rainbows have pots of gold at the end
-
Except for the complete and total lack of substantive information, you make a compelling argument. Bravo. :aok
-
Originally posted by Sandman
In 1940, the ACLU formally barred communists from leadership or staff positions, and would take the position that it did not want communists as members either.
I thought they were the great protector of civil liberties? Why the banning of communists from their ranks? Where's the civil liberty in that?
-
AFAIK, a private organization is free to ban whomever they choose.
-
Originally posted by Sandman
AFAIK, a private organization is free to ban whomever they choose.
Of course they are. They are protected by the constitution, just like the rest of us. They would have you believe that they, rather than the constitution, are the protectors of your civil liberties. I just find it hypocritical that they exclude a group protected by the constitution, especially considering that group founded them.
-
ya sandie..."in 1940 they completly banned the commies"
" in 1992 Saddam completly banned Oil for Arms"
same as your statement..not my fault..just following your lead
lolol..too funny I use same crap as yours..and Im wrong one
I dont care..Liberalism is a mental disorder..heres soem stuff to help you drink the Kool-aid
Liberalism watches as a baby is partially delivered, stabbed in the head, its brains are sucked out, and then says that a constutional right has just been exercised.
Liberalism wants the name of God completely out of sight and speech so as to not offend the 10% who don't believe in Him (despite offending the 90% who do).
Liberalism sees a hard-working and successful business and says, "You have too much money, not fair!" It then seeks a way to take that business's money away from them so as to give it to those who have less (but only in the form of a social program, i.e. another government agency with government employees - none of which are any of these said people who have less, by the way)
Liberalism wants to change the definition of marriage, so that 3-4% of the population in this country can legally marry (even though only 25% of that segment actually wants it, and more than half of the entire country doesn't want this)
Liberalsm is intolerant of those beliefs it deems intolerant. (read that one again)
-
This just in... the majority isn't always right.
-
well duh...didnt the popular vote go one way ..and the electoral go the other?..lololol
-
Now if we could just get someone to drop her in a Turkish prison...wooo hooo.