Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: midnight Target on September 25, 2003, 03:26:15 PM
-
I plan on debunking the tripe this "lady" spews... don't think it will be hard.
This is from http://www.anncoulter.org/
In a public school in St. Louis, a teacher spotted the suspect, fourth-grader Raymond Raines, bowing his head in prayer before lunch. The teacher stormed to Raymond's table, ordered him to stop immediately and sent him to the principal's office. The principal informed the young malefactor that praying was not allowed in school. When Raymond was again caught praying before meals on three separate occasions, he was segregated from other students, ridiculed in front of his classmates, and finally sentenced to a week's detention.
Not necessarily true.... Rev. Earl E. Nance Jr, a member and former chairman of the St. Louis school board, adds "I don't think the child was prevented from praying over lunch. I think the child was probably instructed in another matter and mistook that for understanding he couldn't pray over his lunch, and went home and told his parents." Nance is the pastor of Greater Mount Carmel Missionary Baptist Church. He characterized the lawsuit as simply "frivolous."
When the school district refused to adopt a policy clarifying the rights of religious students, the family sued the school district and the principal, Cleveland Young, on April 18. The suit seeks monetary damages. The school district has filed a motion to dismiss and that action is pending. The child, Raymond, now attends a private religious school.
http://www.holysmoke.org/hs00/gingrich.htm
-
see, it's all just a "misunderstanding"
-
If you're going to dedicate your life to debunking Anne Coulter, you might want to make a more respectable showing. This one was pretty weak.
MiniD
-
She's a skinny female Limbaugh.
-
To quote you,
"Poor troll. Bait not quite stinky enough."
-
MT all the racism directed at your black sons was a misunderstanding - every single time.
-
Originally posted by GRUNHERZ
MT all the racism directed at your black sons was a misunderstanding - every single time.
Roland Martin!
-
I'm not fishing.
-
Here's a gem...
from http://www.anncoulter.org/columns/2003/091003.htm
The British made Germany's war-torn economy worse by trying to impose socialism in their zone (as well as in their country). Predictably, economic disaster ensued. Over the next five years, the U.S. was required to spend the equivalent of about $200 billion annually in today's dollars to bail out Western Europe under the Marshall Plan. I note that there was no need for a Marshall Plan in Japan.
So Anne is saying that the huge cost of the Marshall Plan was due to the Socialist (read liberal) policies of the Brits?
Do I really need to debunk this or does everyone remember that little war that happened just prior to this "economic disaster"?
-
Originally posted by GRUNHERZ
Anyway we all know that this racism thing is overblown and not real.
:eek:
-
If the story she repeated didnt originate in her mind then how did she "lie". Obviously the family of the boy was made enough to sue so maybe it began with them.
'Ole Rev Nance (I will guess a black liberal minister :p) is one of the ones being sued. What do you think he would say?
Anne maybe a liar but I would have thought if it was that obvious you would have came up with something a little better then this.
-
"Anyway we all know that this racism thing is overblown and not real."
All a misunderstanding - just like in MT's article. :rolleyes:
-
Originally posted by midnight Target
Rev. Earl E. Nance Jr, a member and former chairman of the St. Louis school board, adds "I don't think the child was prevented from praying over lunch. I think the child was probably instructed in another matter and mistook that for understanding he couldn't pray over his lunch, and went home and told his parents." Nance is the pastor of Greater Mount Carmel Missionary Baptist Church. He characterized the lawsuit as simply "frivolous."
Oh, c'mon MT this is really weak.
1. The guys was not there, so he does not what has happened
2. He starts with "I don't think..."
3. He has a vested interest in a lawsuit being "frivolous".
-
Is she cute?
-
Originally posted by Sixpence
Is she cute?
I think she looks like Giligan in the face :eek: :lol :rofl
-
Originally posted by mietla
Oh, c'mon MT this is really weak.
1. The guys was not there, so he does not what has happened
2. He starts with "I don't think..."
3. He has a vested interest in a lawsuit being "frivolous".
Did you read the link?
What about the second example? HUH???
-
MT "I think" this is a foolish thread - give it a rest...
-
I will not rest until Anne has been branded.....
A BAD GIRL!
-
Ohh now I understand! Does your wife know yet? You should be honest with her... :D
-
I think Sandman would hit it.
-
Originally posted by Gunthr
I think Sandman would hit it.
Damn straight baby... I would destroy that prettythang... :cool:
-
Originally posted by midnight Target
I plan on debunking the tripe this "lady" spews... don't think it will be hard.
This is from http://www.anncoulter.org/
Not necessarily true....
http://www.holysmoke.org/hs00/gingrich.htm
You call "Not necessarily true" debunking? Guess someone needs a refresher on the definition of that word. How 'bout this one:
debunk
v : expose while ridiculing; esp. of pretentious or false claims and ideas; "The physicist debunked the psychic's claims" [syn: expose]
-
Anne Coulter isn't so much a liar as she is just plain dumb.
MRPLUTO
-
Coulter - For decades the New York Times has allowed loose association between Nazis and Christians to bew made in its pages. Statements like these were not uncommon: "Did the Nazi crimes draw on Christian tradition?"... "The church is co-responsible for the holocaust."
The first quote is from a 2001 book review and the reviewer was framing the question asked by the book.
The second quote is a quote of a quote from a 1998 article. The Times auther wasn't saying that, he was quoting a critic of the church. There are quotes from supporters of the church in the same article.
bad Anne... bad.
-
I stand with MT when I say that I agree with a lot of what Ann Coulter says.
-
Originally posted by midnight Target
I plan on debunking the tripe this "lady" spews... don't think it will be hard.
Well, you are 0 for 1 so far. Better luck next time.
-
Ann Coulter, the right wing's dial-900 girl, a rail-thin, chain-smoking, hard-drinking, big-eyed leggy blonde who winkingly serves up X-rated ideological smut on liberals, is at it again.
"Whenever the nation is under attack, from within or without, liberals side with the enemy," Coulter writes, or sneers, in Treason, her follow-up effort to the best-selling Slander. Like its predecessor, Treason sits atop the best-seller charts, riding higher than one of Coulter's signature miniskirts.
But this time around, it isn't the liberals who are up in arms, it's the conservatives.
Coulter's slurring of Democrats from Harry Truman (soft on communism) to Tom Daschle (soft on Iraq) has set off a howling chorus on the right. David Horowitz, Andrew Sullivan, and Dorothy Rabinowitz, among others, have been sternly giving Coulter history lessons, dredging up (once more) the old anti-Communist credentials of Cold War liberals like Truman, John F. Kennedy, Lyndon Johnson, and Hubert Humphrey. She may have nailed it for new liberal Democrats, but she can't hang pro-communist tags on those old guys.
Ann Coulter may have committed "treason" against conservative good taste.
But she's done the rest of us a favor. She has exposed the often empty semantic difference between the "responsible" right and its supposed "fringe."
Besides -- she's a *****.
-
Originally posted by midnight Target
Here's a gem...
from http://www.anncoulter.org/columns/2003/091003.htm
So Anne is saying that the huge cost of the Marshall Plan was due to the Socialist (read liberal) policies of the Brits?
Do I really need to debunk this or does everyone remember that little war that happened just prior to this "economic disaster"?
I dunno but American had its "little war" too and detonated two nukes in Japan and we got them on their feet ok..
Dunno I may be wrong:D
-
Originally posted by Hortlund
Well, you are 0 for 1 so far. Better luck next time.
Slow reader?
-
Originally posted by midnight Target
Slow reader?
Dont go there.
I mean how long have we "known" eachother on these boards? 2 years? Do I honestly strike you as someone with a reading comprehension problem?
-
Well, no.
But I have posted at least three examples. Yet you say 0-1. So....
-
I'm with you Hortlund except that I thought he was 0 for 2.
ooops, shoulda read the whole thread, MT's right, 0-3.
-
Going back to the 1st one... since you guys don't want to read the link.
School officials and the school's attorney have declined to elaborate on exactly why the boy was punished because they are required by law to protect his right to privacy. Superintendent David Mahan responds, however, that the boy "was disciplined for some matters that were totally independent of silent praying. We did a very thorough investigation. We talked to teachers, administrators, and also to some students, and we could not find any evidence of the allegations that the parent and the student made."
-
Going back to the second one... Were the Brits and their Socialistic policies the cause of the huge cost of the Marshall PLan?
Paaaleeez
-
Originally posted by midnight Target
Going back to the 1st one... since you guys don't want to read the link.
Just prior to your excerpt was this one:
"According to the Raines family, which describes itself as devout Pentecostals, when Raymond Raines was a fourth-grader when he had the habit of bowing his head to say a silent prayer before eating lunch. They claim that beginning in December 1992, several school officials, including the principal, an assistant principal, and librarian, removed Raymond from his seat and instructed him not to pray. When he refused to stop praying, they say, he was sent to the principal's office to eat, detained after lunch, or sent to the library (details from the family's attorney are not clear). His mother, Ellen Raines, complained and says she was told that praying was not allowed in school. When the school district refused to adopt a policy clarifying the rights of religious students, the family sued the school district and the principal, Cleveland Young, on April 18. The suit seeks monetary damages. The school district has filed a motion to dismiss and that action is pending. The child, Raymond, now attends a private religious school."
The family's claim isn't so easily refuted as a lie by the boy and a one time incident according to the above. I guess we'll leave the final debunking to the courts on this one.
-
Originally posted by midnight Target
Going back to the second one... Were the Brits and their Socialistic policies the cause of the huge cost of the Marshall PLan?
Paaaleeez
You're not intentionally taking that out of context are ya?
"By contrast, the German occupation was run as liberals would like to run postwar Iraq – a joint affair among "the Allies," the United States, Britain, France and the Soviet Union. It took 45 years to clean up the mess that created.
The Soviets bickered with the French, refusing to treat them as "allies" (on the admittedly sensible grounds that they didn't fight). While plundering their zone, the Soviets refused to relinquish any territory to France. Trying to be gallant, the U.S. and British carved a French zone out of their own sectors. The Soviets then blockaded Berlin, built the Berlin Wall, and Germany was split for the next 45 years.
The British made Germany's war-torn economy worse by trying to impose socialism in their zone (as well as in their country). Predictably, economic disaster ensued. Over the next five years, the U.S. was required to spend the equivalent of about $200 billion annually in today's dollars to bail out Western Europe under the Marshall Plan. I note that there was no need for a Marshall Plan in Japan."
-
Since ya didn't post a link MT, and I'm too lazy to look it up, I guess I won't be debunking your third debunking. Unless you insist.
-
MT and Hortlund have been together for 2 years? how cute, lets hope they last a lifetime
-
Animal, what happened to the informative "Aminals Tips" series?
-
They will be making a comeback due to popular demand
-
MT got PwN3d :D
-
OK, let's start over, and I'll type really slow.
1. She claims as a fact that a kid was disciplined for simply bowing his head.... not a fact at all, but a claim by the kids parents in a lawsuit.... may not even be true.... LIE.
2. She claims that liberal policies led to the cost of the Marshall plan.... uhh no. It was a determination that we wanted to spend the money to stop communism from spreading into western europe. Hardly a fact. In fact, a LIE.
3. The NYTimes "quotes". Do I need to spell out how insidious her claims are? Its as if I were to quote Anne as saying "Liberals suck", then someone on this board claiming MT said "Liberals Suck". It was right there in his post.
3 for 3 You guys need to try harder.
-
MT you are really reaching here... You are grabbing quotes out of context trying to score some on that? I dont think so. You are 0-3 no matter how bad you want the score to be otherwise...
Debunk Ann Coulter...phu-leeze..that is the wet dream of every stinking lib on the planet, and they have yet to come even close.
-
pWn3d!!!!
:eek: :p :rofl :lol :rofl
-
Originally posted by Udie
pWn3d!!!!
:eek: :p :rofl :lol :rofl
You keep saying that word... I do not think it means what you think it means.
And Stevie... you're wrong.
-
Originally posted by midnight Target
OK, let's start over, and I'll type really slow.
1. She claims as a fact that a kid was disciplined for simply bowing his head.... not a fact at all, but a claim by the kids parents in a lawsuit.... may not even be true.... LIE.
2. She claims that liberal policies led to the cost of the Marshall plan.... uhh no. It was a determination that we wanted to spend the money to stop communism from spreading into western europe. Hardly a fact. In fact, a LIE.
3. The NYTimes "quotes". Do I need to spell out how insidious her claims are? Its as if I were to quote Anne as saying "Liberals suck", then someone on this board claiming MT said "Liberals Suck". It was right there in his post.
3 for 3 You guys need to try harder.
I'll type even s l o w e r
1. She believes the parents. The parents haven't been disproven. Not a lie.
2. She was comparing the rejuvenation of Japan with Europe (more specifically Germany). Britian's socialization was but one factor among many she cited that made for much expense, effort, and time in rebuilding and normalizing. Which of these exactly is a lie? That it took much money and time or that Britian was socializing? I see no lie here.
3. Ah, if your third debunk was that liberals don't suck we have to look only so far as your past beloved leader's concubine. Ya gotta admit this one. ;)
-
Originally posted by AKIron
I'll type even s l o w e r
1. She believes the parents. The parents haven't been disproven. Not a lie.
2. She was comparing the rejuvenation of Japan with Europe (more specifically Germany). Britian's socialization was but one factor among many she cited that made for much expense, effort, and time in rebuilding and normalizing. Which of these exactly is a lie? That it took much money and time or that Britian was socializing? I see no lie here.
3. Ah, if your third debunk was that liberals don't suck we have to look only so far as your past beloved leader's concubine. Ya gotta admit this one. ;)
1. So it is a fact? Hardly.... a Lie.
2. She mentions a lot of factors, but her exact words are..."The British made Germany's war-torn economy worse by trying to impose socialism in their zone (as well as in their country). Predictably, economic disaster ensued. Over the next five years, the U.S. was required to spend the equivalent of about $200 billion"
Don't try to sugar coat it, she is a lying skank.
3. You missed the point completely on that one. You may want to reread the first post.
-
I don't recall her saying it was a 'fact'. You like to quote her, especially out of context, where did she say it was a fact?
I was making a joke about number 3, since you didn't post a link and I'm not real sure what the hell you meant.
-
Originally posted by AKIron
1. She believes the parents. The parents haven't been disproven. Not a lie.
The case was three years ago and it was dropped a week later by the parents, without explanation.
"Religious Right Group Drops Texas Bible Lawsuit
A Religious Right legal group that accused a Texas public school teacher of throwing two students’ Bibles in the trash abruptly withdrew its lawsuit only 13 days after it was filed.
Controversy flared in May, when two Texas middle school students, Angela and Amber Harbison, claimed that a teacher confiscated their Bibles, called the religious texts “garbage” and threw them in the trash. Another student asserted that he was ordered to remove a book cover featuring the Ten Commandments. With assistance from the Orlando, Fla.-based Liberty Counsel, the three students and their parents filed suit on May 19 against the Willis Independent School District.
The case quickly became fodder for Religious Right leaders who claim that public schools are hostile toward religion. As Jerry Falwell told supporters in the June 1 edition of his Falwell Confidential, “Leftists who hate the Judeo-Christian heritage of our nation are constantly attempting to discover new ways to ignore and neglect that history. As a result, students of faith are frequently targeted and persecuted for even the most simple expression of their faith. These brave young students are the martyrs of our day.”
But now it appears that the incidents may have never happened. On June 1, Liberty Counsel attorneys dropped the suit without public explanation. The announcement was welcome news to school officials, who maintained that the charges were inaccurate.
“The district has always maintained that the allegations contained in the suit were untrue,” read a statement released by the school district. “Students of Willis Independent School District have not been told they cannot bring Bibles to school, and Bibles were never confiscated or thrown into the trash.... The allegations contained in this lawsuit are totally inconsistent with the actions of this school district and its employees.”
This lie by Coulter was completely debunked on AGW here.
http://agw.warbirdsiii.com/bbs/showthread.php?s=&threadid=24950
Coulter is a liar, and it baffles my mind that MT would give her this much air time.
-
Originally posted by midnight Target
You keep saying that word... I do not think it means what you think it means.
I disagree with almost everything you write, but I can't help but like you when you post things like this!
-
So, it's only true when decided by a court? No such thing as private settlements? You guys are establishing some shakey ground for yourselves here.
-
Hoo boy, people defending Coulter now? Check this site out if you want to see how she uses lies, misdirection and out of context quotes in her piece of fiction "Slander".
http://slannder.homestead.com/files/slanndermain.html
Argue all ya want about the slant, left or right, of the site but read the content regardless for some info exposing how she twists history past and present to push her RW agenda.
Nothing new...happens from both sides of the isle.
-
Originally posted by MrLars
Hoo boy, people defending Coulter now? Check this site out if you want to see how she uses lies, misdirection and out of context quotes in her piece of fiction "Slander".
http://slannder.homestead.com/files/slanndermain.html
Argue all ya want about the slant, left or right, of the site but read the content regardless for some info exposing how she twists history past and present to push her RW agenda.
Nothing new...happens from both sides of the isle.
I didn't even know who she was or what she looked 'till someone menioned her on this board a while back. Anyone that inspires the ire and hate of the liberals like she has automatically gets my attention if not admiration.
-
Originally posted by AKIron
So, it's only true when decided by a court? No such thing as private settlements? You guys are establishing some shakey ground for yourselves here.
Bull****. There was not private settlement. The case was withdrawn shortly after the investigation into it's veracity was started. To state anything different is weak at best, dishonest at worse. Unless you actual have some evidence or proof to put forth, or are you just talking out of your arse? Much like a woman I'm familiar with by the last name of Coulter? ;)
-
MT, this thread... your own words (unless I'm clearly mistaken) are one of the root problems I have with "The left".
How do you come to the conclusion that a disproven statement is a factual lie based on the statement of another disproven statement that includes the words "I think"?
Not that I give a crap about Ann, however given the choice of Ann or Al?... hmmmmm
Now, to take this a step further... I'd like to ask k2cok a question based on his description of Ann Coulter. I gotta know this. You think Janet Reno is hot dontcha...DONTCHA!!
:lol
-
Originally posted by Thrawn
Bull****. There was not private settlement.
Excuse me but what the hell do you know about that?
-
Originally posted by Thrawn
Bull****. There was not private settlement. The case was withdrawn shortly after the investigation into it's veracity was started. To state anything different is weak at best, dishonest at worse. Unless you actual have some evidence or proof to put forth, or are you just talking out of your arse? Much like a woman I'm familiar with by the last name of Coulter? ;)
You have a link or are you just talking out your prettythang?
-
Now, to take this a step further... I'd like to ask k2cok a question based on his description of Ann Coulter. I gotta know this. You think Janet Reno is hot dontcha...DONTCHA!!
I wouldn't do either one of them, shemales are disgusting. :D
-
Whooooo go buckeyes!