That detestable harpy

By krempasky Posted in Comments (291) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »

I've said before that's its kind of ironic that just about every phrase Stewie from Family Guy uses to describe Lois could easily be applied to Ann Coulter. Well - once again, Ann proves us right.

Hawkins: How about dashing off a quick sentence or even just a word or two about the following individuals...

John Murtha: (Coulter) The reason soldiers invented "fragging."

Absolutely disgusting. I have very little love for Mr. Murtha - and I recently agreed with his opponent Diana Irey when she said his words and actions of late were not that of a patriot. But there's no excuse - NONE - for the allusion to soldiers who kill other soldiers. It's despicable - and frankly, so is Coulter.

Update [2006-6-14 19:9:15 by Moe Lane]: Hi, Moe Lane here. I've noticed that there are a lot of people defending Ms. Coulter in comments below, on various grounds. That's your privilege; but if Ann Coulter had come on this website and uttered that quote in comments I would have banned her on the spot.

Keep that in mind when deciding how thoroughly you wish to emulate her.

« Question and answer time: the Wes Clark thing.Comments (50) | It's Friday - go drinkComments (94) »
That detestable harpy 291 Comments (0 topical, 291 editorial, 0 hidden) Post a comment »

This is obviously tongue in cheek. So many conservatives have their panties in a bunch lately rushing to denounce Coulter. In their lust to tell liberals and the MSM who already have us pegged as self hating fascist warmongers (in the case of minority conservatives) or racist redneck pigs (in the case of non minority conservatives) we have forgotten that every now and then we make a couple of jokes. Oh I forgot we're also fanatic fundamental Christian wackos. Why do we care so much about how liberals are going to view us. Coulter is not an elected offical-though she has more balls than most GOP officials these days, but of course she does not speak for the GOP. She also has never been given a skybox next to Geogre Bush at the RNC. She's funny, she's dead on, and I'm sick of the wusses who are rushing to denounce every cherry picked out of context quote to further the cause of "Ann Coulter doesn't speak for us." If you haven't read her book , or watched FOXNews, then I really don't respect your opinion of Coulter because your picking cherry picked quotes by the liberal media that are out of context to intentionally slam Ann. Read her books or don't-but don't slam something you have no context for. For god sakes, I joined the Right because I thought they were tougher than the whiny Left. Lately I've been thinking about a box of tissues for both sides of the aisle.

Murtha truly has come to be a liberal version of Needhemeier from animal house. Anns job is to be over the top and theres no way anyone with a sense of humor couldn't at least chuckle at this.

No comment on content, but the way you set up the quote, on the first 3 glances, it appears Murtha responds to Hawkins re Coulter.

but she's really just being a good lawyer with the way she argues these things.  If you can use your opening or the phrasing of your questions to to get your opponent or your opponent's witness spitting, shaking, irrationally angry, you're well on your way to winning.  There are not a lot of people who can think clearly while gasping for breath.

I know that in my advocacy days, my SOP was to walk in, smile, shake hands, and hit somebody up side the head with a two by four.  People will start saying you're not nice, but the only thing that counts is who won.  Nothing personal, just tactics.

Once upon a time it was thought that the right were uptight church ladies and wannabe deacons. That was their image and they owned it. The left on the other hand was willing to experiment and try anything. They were the open and tolerant ones. It was the right that shut down comedians like lenny bruce and richard pryor. At least they could make those claims untill Andrew Dice Clay came along. Then the left revealed that they were fine with comics only as long as they were being funny about things they didn't like. If you stepped on their toes tolerance left their vocabulary.

Lets face it Air America failed because they are so pompous and have their heads buried so deep in their navels theres nothing left to be enjoyable or entertaining. Heaven only knows that these people are way to stiff to actually laugh at themselves.

When the modern conservative movement can no longer realize that a joke is a joke and laugh thats when it will be time to move on. I know we are no longer near that point but it is always good to remember freedom of speach is only important when people say things you don't like hearing.

Say, if you will, that Murtha is a rambling, illogical ex-patriot who has violated every iota of the Marine Corps code and who should be sent packing to the old folks' home to spit tapioca at the television.  But some things are not to be joked about, and fragging a fellow soldier is one of them.

Ann Coulter is right on with her insights and her comments are what more conservatives should be embracing in both tone and content.  No matter what conservatives do, the left will malign them - along with the spineless conservatives who think they can somehow placate the left by pandering to it.  Every one of us should grow a pair and try be be more like Ann.

I'm aware of cases where people in the military got time in the slammer for comments like that - as jokes.

This was not funny.

You guys are starting to sound like Leon about Harriet Miers. The woman deals in hyperbole. Why do you let it push your buttons?

First, it would be a waste of a perfectly good grenade.

Second, we want Murtha out in public shooting off his mouth.  He is an anchor, and a big one, on the DNC's little sail boat.

She's hugely prominent and a lot of people, sadly, think she speaks for conservatives.  Most of us have neither the time nor the inclination to denounce every last thing said on our side we disagree with, but every now and then you have to make clear that someone doesn't speak for the movement, lest we all get tarred with everything she says.

A graphic some comic posted under video of Bush speaking.  It read "Snipers wanted."

I didn't think that was funny.  Coulter's comment isn't funny, either.

OK by buckeye

Ann does go over the line at times.  But when it comes to her, Murtha, the MSM, the 9/11 Commission, the Jersey Girls and the rest of that lot, what they all have in common is they are all political "hacks".  

The difference is Ann is the only one that is not a fraud.

that points out the conservative movement has disavowed sweet Annie? Probably not, but you can find a whole bunch that say she does. Why? It suits their agenda. So say you don't like her, but the nitpicking is a bit tiresome.

She (rightfully) threw a fit when someone threw a pie at her, but she feels welcome to call for a man's murder?

Does she realize what she's even saying?  I'd wager there are more lefties mad at her, than righties mad at Murtha, if only because Coulter's worst brain droppings get more mainstream press airplay than Murtha's.

So if she declares it open season to kill Murtha, then what's that say to the left about her?

I think it's time I removed Town Hall from my bookmark list until she's expunged from it.  That's my part in the boycott.

John Hawkins: Do you think we're going to be able to successfully help the Iraqis become a Democratic country?

Ann Coulter: I was kind of hoping they'd go Republican.

Oh thank you for posting the link to the article this woman is a gem beyond price.

With all the rush to denounce Ann Coulter, I rushed out to buy her book last night.  After finding them all turned upside down in my local B&N (I returned them all to their rightful, prominent place), I happily bought it knowing it would be full of intelligent (and footnoted) commentary and scathing humour about the Left.

After finishing the first two chapters, I am not disappointed.

Since Ann is one of only a few on the Right who engages in the really scathing stuff (one - she does it well, and two - she is nearly always dead on in her analysis), maybe that's why some on our side find it so off-putting.

For myself, I find her different (much different) from the Left in that Ann doesn't stop with her scathing comments. They're almosyt always followed by insightful and true commentary on the Left.

While the left has nothing but their name calling and Bush-bashing, and conservative-hating, Ann has the truth on her side in addition to a quick whit and biting tongue.

In a media world where our arguments can not be encapsulated in a 5 second sound bite, and the MSM won't give us the time to actually explain what we believe, Ann at least gets some attention with her polemics.  

The Left doesn't fight fair, Krem, and neither should we.

I like it.

Also the reason Dishonorable Discharges are in the military justice system.

Better yet - send him to GITMO, he could develop his ties with his new 'brothers in arms'.

Before you do that consider what you will be losing.  Walter E. Williams, Thomas Sowell and Mike S. Adams.  If you want to do something about Anne on Townhall, contact the editor of the website and tell them that they should reconsider having her on their website, but don't boycot a good site because she is on it.  Remember, she is advertised here and yet here you are.

She did not call for anyone to kill the old dope. However, I think he should be shot, after an appropriate trial for treason, of course.

This is about her being published as part of the sitem, not advertising.

I don't think it makes sense to boycott someone because of their advertisers.  It's advertisers who support the product, not vice-versa.  I'm not going to boycott Red State because Ann Coulter's people support it in order to hawk their book.

Now, if Red State started publishing on the front page Coulter's syndicated column, I might consider leaving.  Because then it'd be RS supporting Coulter.

But Coulter is one of Town Hall's official columnists that they aggregate.  They're also helping her promote her latest book on the front page in addition to any advertising there.

So, bookmark deleted.

Let's face it, Ann's not a conservative, liberal or anything else.  She's a self aggrandizing individual who only cares about her own fame.

We all know that about her.

So when she says stupid, outlandish stuff to get more press, we shouldn't get ticked off about that.  

This really is par for the course for Ann.

And if anyone thinks she was serious, that person is stupid.  She's not serious about anything other than becoming more famous, more tall, and more blonde.

And for whoever said she would be in jail if she was in the military:  well, she ain't in the military and is under no duty to act as though she is.

about the Jersey Girls and the use of victimhood as a shield. I won't engage in this absurd piling on because she uttered--in vile, tasteless words to be sure--the truth about left-wing griefmongers. Not that Coulter minds; many more "discoveries" about what she has said and her latest tome (which I wouldn't buy or even bother to read) will stay Number One ad infinitum.

Get over it. She was right on the substance about professional victims, and there were far too few who would call the Left on that tasteless strategy.

They'd break her in half.  Someone give her a cheeseburger, please.  

what all I need to know. I am behind her 100%

Is it your claim that she meant to play Rep. Murtha in a good old MAP01 deathmatch, and frag him that way?

I love how Coulter's supporters always note how those who don't appreciate her lack a sense of humor AND that her books are serious arguments with FOOTNOTES.

I think both are false.  The claim that the editors of this site don't have a sense of humor is silly in the extreme.  Coulter just isn't funny.

I also think that her claims to seriousness are silly.  I have read her work.  It is populist boilerplate and over-the-top accusations.  So what if she has footnotes.  Since when do footnotes by themselves magically make an argument serious?

The reason I don't like Coulter is that she poisons the atmosphere with her ridiculous rhetoric and gives liberals a convenient cover to tar conservatives.

Just because many of her targets are deserving doesn't mean here tone and style are something we should applaud.  I find it hard to believe that she convinces anyone of anything.  All she does is stir up hot air to sell books. She leverages the emotions of her fans but at the expense of coherent and civil debate.

Ann has a spine. Thats just what we need.

Indeed.  She can't at once be a serious thinker and a humorous bomb thrower at the same time.

The two roles just aren't compatible.

It took me to a post about the Hadji girl song.

everything the Demms are again, goes bad for them.

Like the war in Iraq. Boy are we winning now. Even the MSm see's it.

we are tending to do what we sometimes excoriate the LeftyBlogs™ for doing, treating every comment someone makes as if it was carved on the obverse of Moses' tablets.

Ann is not, was never and never will be a soldier. Her allusion to 'fragging' is the kind of thing that someone who has no knowledge of the service says with casual abandon.

Murtha's comments on the otherhand is a different kettle of fish.

Just my $0.02 for what its worth.

...he can't really respond, now.  I've Lowered The Boom in the main post.

So because the hand is rotten you are willing to cut off the entire arm?  I am lacking the ability to understand this.  You don't have to read her column.  You are negating the good work of the website and the other opinion makers like the ones that I listed.  I don't read her stuff, but I am not going to do away with a good source of opinion like Townhall.  You are one of the intellectual forces on this site and I think you are making a bad choice.  And no, I am not an employee of the Hall.

Personally I've never criticized them for that, nor have I really been seeing others criticize them for that.

Though what I have seen is the regular excoriation of lefties who say outlandish things involving matters like shooting the President, the religious right being the American Taleban, American soldiers being like Nazis, and things like that.

Words mean things.  Accusations hurt people.  And just laughing it off doens't cut it if you make a habit of doing it.  And Coulter, like the netroots, has done just that.

You look at someone like Ann Coulter who is an attractive, intelligent, politically astute conservative and you say, what a waste.  She could have been a CCA Judge, Congresswoman, or SCOTUS nominee some where down the road if she wasn't so busy being her.

In one sense I guess she serves a purpose and she certainly has made a lot of money, but I've always been disappointed in the missed opportunities for the movement.

Boy do you know how to butter me up, heh.

Anyway, historically your analogy is spot-on.  Before penicillin, we had to cut off limbs when there was a runaway infection there.

I guess writing the note you suggest would be analgous to that pencillin.  So I'll try it, and if Coulter stays, I'll know not to go back.


It's the act of a soldier killing his superiors while in combat.

Anti-Vietnam war activists popularized the term, but I don't know if it's older than that.

By reading the other great commentary, you are not financially supporting the website.  You don't have to pay for the great, insightful commentary by Williams, Sowell, George Will and the other great people over there that aren't Ann Coulter.  My personal favs in case you wanted to know are Williams Sowell and Mike S. Adams--this guy is really hilarious.

Though technically if he answer to my question was in the affirmative, he ought to be able to answer.

So silence really say it all, heh.

I am sure she was joking around but it is time people point out that scumbags like Murtha are putting our troops lives in jeopardy. I am sick and tired of traitors like him getting a free pass from the left and right because he was a Marine. My son is in the army,  2nd Brigade 1st infantry division 9th engineer battalion 1st platoon 3rd squad.The big red one.

I am tired of the left and right saying that they should be punished if ... Who is the enemy in Iraq? What uniform does he wear? These Marines deserve to be innocent until proven guilty, and if they are guilty they should be dealt with leniently. They are under a lot of stress and their lives are in danger. We need to cut them some slack.

Murtha is traitor like Kerry and Fonda putting our military men in danger because of his propoganda.

Redstate is spending more time attacking Coulter than the Democrats. I'm getting pretty sick of it. Don't like her? Fine. Ignore her. Don't buy her books. Whatever.

If these keeps up, I imagine RS is going to lose some people, me being one of them. I'm not here for conservative in-fighting. You want to whine because she says something about that traitor/opportunist Murtha? OK. But do it on a site that's not about furthering the conservative agenda, because this garbage does not do that.

I realize Moe wants us to all be nice little robots who don't upset our dear leftist friends. That's fine. Me personallly, I don't want Democrats to run Washington again. Call me crazy.

Sure, I understand that Moe is an ex-Democrat who has lefty friends and all that.  But I'm not, and I don't, and I still can't stand Coulter.

So what's your excuse to me?

P.S. if you want Democrats to be forever in the minority, why NOT separate mainstream Republicanism from a woman who's hateful writing can easily turn moderates away from the cause?

Seeing as how Murtha isn't really anyone's superior anymore (especially in the moral and intellectual sense)...

a fragmentation grenade into the tent of an unpopular officer is the most common meaning from the VN era.  It happened, but not nearly as much as the ant-war crowd made it out to be.

There's plenty of RedStaters who like Coulter, we get that.  But some of us happen to think that she's an albatross for the conservative movement.  Plus, we don't, ourselves, want to be associated with her.

There is no way her comment could be taken in the negative way that is being presented except by the hypersensitive. It was not an invitation or exhortation to do harm Rep Murtha. It was a statement about the mans personality.

If this is enough to get me banned well its likely that this really isnt the place for me.

If we can all look back at the days of the John Birch Society and the battle they had with WFB, we will see that by Buckley pushing them away from Conservatism he did more for the movement's infantcy than anyone else could have.  One the other hand, I would be hard pressed to equate her current position of today with the Birchers' position of yesteryear.  She hasn't quite reached that point of no return yet. remember elementary standards of politeness and decorum - which lack is rapidly becoming a real concern.  I am weary of this, and it will stop.  Now.


PS: You may want to reconsider that attitude of yours, neighbor.  Particularly when it comes to telling me what my real motivations are.  I get a little funny in the head when people tell me what my real motivations are.

I used their feedback form and asked them to drop Coulter.  We'll see what happens I guess.

the intentional killing of another soldier, especially of a superior by a lower ranking soldier, then blaming it on enemy fire.

I hope #50 doesn't but you, heh.  I was just trying to take his premise and show it still insufficient to jump this conclusion.

This is a link straight to the editor.

I think you will get further this rout.  And send them more than one for it can be rather hard to get a reply.  Use the Andy Dufrane approach--a little Shawshank Redemption reference there.

was fragging was the resort for men who had an officer who would put them at unnecessary risk for his own greater glory or martinets who simply didn't care about their men.

So, in the sense that Murtha is denigrating the soldiers and arguably putting them at greater risk and he is a leader of the country if not a commander of troops it fits within the connotative meaning of the word.

That said, I sure wouldn't have said it, but she's crying all the way to the bank.

As is Joliphant, in case he was wondering.  I am an ex-Democrat with lefty friends.  I've kept that about as quiet as I have the fact that I'm a gaming geek - which is to say, not at all.

the free food?  Apparently I'm confused?  Whose night is it to buy?

Let me remedy that lack right now.  :)

right now as we speak.  The Cherry Wheat seasonal.  Umm-umm good.

I've been doing the conservative republican political thing for some time now...and don't need a lecture about why calling out ann coulter is bad for the ballot box.

A media whore? Needs a cheeseburger? The last one I agree with. She's a might skinny and could use some plumpin' up :-) What counts, however, is her capacity to think, reason, write, speak, drive home a point, answer questions, and give as good as she gets.

I think she is very serious about being a conservative. And she is a great conservative. According to you that makes me stupid. So be it.

Would you argue that Rush is not a conservative? Has he not also made statements that some considered over-the-top? How about Bill Bennett? Is a conservative to you only someone that does not ever offend your sensibilities? May as well go through life with your fingers stuck in your ears.

As too being a media whore, I have no idea what that even means, other than it is apparently not a ringing endorsement.

I was thinking peanut m & ms and mt. dew.  Unfortunately, my genes and general lack of self control have made those, too, outside of my reach.  Let me go straight to my fridge and pull out the bloody celery and LOW SODIUM (not even the REAL stuff) peanut butter and bemoan my state.  CHEERS.  I'm not at all cynical.

and he was polite and civil in his disagreement (hopefully he thinks I was as well). So, no, he doesn't expect us to all be nice little robots.

And he and I will disagree about whether or not Ann is beneficial to the conservative movement, but I doubt I'll be banned.

I also think that if push came to shove, he would have warned Ann about the comment before banning her. He seems to have a penchant for following procedure even when his emotions would lead him to other conclusions when acting in an official capacity for the web site. Besides, he'd probably calculate that Ann wouldn't back down, and then he'd be able to ban her by proper procedure. And he'd probably be right. :)

...and the more she gets on the news, the more encouraged she is going to be to continue.

She'll keep saying things, and keep pushing the long as she keeps getting airtime and keeps selling books.

There's not much sense in all this denouncing.  Obviously she doesn't care about that or she would have stopped this line of talk after her FIRST book.  The only value it brings is distancing from her...but there aren't many who are going to pay attention to that.

That said, there's no sense defending her to those who find these comments offensive.  You can keep it up all you want, but as soon as she opens her mouth again, she'll offend more of us.

I hate to see such a strong conservative voice spiraling out of control.  Unfortunately, she's not the first.

I wish she would get the message.

I had to walk away and take a break because I couldn't believe this thread.

I thought there was thicker skin around here.

There are extremes in every movement, how this is taken so seriously boggles.

Sorry, I just don't get it.

She has done well for herself, the movement and everyone who has read her work. I learned calculas from a book called calculas by discovery it was a comical introduction to the subject. I might never have gotten interested in higher mathematics if it wasn't for that book. Ann is a comical introduction to the hypocrisy of the left and the philosophies of the right. I can't help but ask how many will become conservatives because they read her books.

While there may be higher callings, In a world filled with so many things that would make us weep we should treasure those that can make us laugh.

This is a really wonderfull site

I'd have stopped after 6 words.

Coulter does what is required to get around the PC left and those that do damage to the right with their non-PC statements.  Not exactly right, but someone is required to state the truth regardless of the lefts PC requirements.  She just does it with a bit more enthusiasm than most...  Yes, it may be over the top, but the facts are there.

I am sick and tired of conservatives bringing knives to gunfights.

Don't EVEN THINK about threatening me...I'LL SAY IT!!!!!!


what I have to say on its merits.  

She has a great capacity to think, write, speak, etc.  She's very very smart.

But I submit to you that you can tell what a person is serious about based on how that person acts.  For instance, Bill Buckley is a serious conservative.  He is so because he tries to convey ideas in a manner that will convince others to become a conservative.  That's what he tries to do (along with commentary, etc.).

What does Ann do?  She says things, which may be perfectly true and valid, but ALWAYS in the most asinine way she can think of.

We've already established that she's smart, etc.  So she ain't doing this by accident.  She says things in an offensive way, then, for a purpose other than convincing people that she's right.

Why then would she use such tactless methods?  Well, the choices are:  (1) she's stupid (we know that's not true); (2) she's just a crass person (I doubt that); or (3) her goal is to get press rather than to win in the arena of ideas.

DING DING DING.  That's our girl.

She's entertaining, I'll give her that.  But I would NEVER base an argument with a Lib on an Ann Coulter quote.  She's a hindrance to conservatism.  

Ann threw a "fit" for being attacked?  Those words are pretty loaded Neil.

And you read the comment about fragging as a threat on par with placing an add for a sniper?

I agree with the commentor below who calls you one of the intellectual forces on this site (I've been on your side in most of my postings lately as well).  But the hyper political-correctness applied to Ann is over the top.

I'll join ranks with the "decent" folk when our side shoots of at the mouth.  I've denounced M. Savage, and stopped my subscription to the American Spectator (years ago) when all they could do was mock the Clinton's daughter and buy into every conspiracy theory (Foster suicide for example) that came along.

5 + 5...  Oh well, never commented much anyway...

If someone threw a pie at me I'd throw more than a fit, I suspect.

thanks though!

If not for the frag bit, but for the Marine bit...

Perhaps.  But for her line about Plame sending Wilson to Niger being "a bring your husband to work day gone horribly wrong" I will forgive quite a bit.  

Quite honestly, if Coulter was an elected representative I might be more upset. I find the nearly daily mutterings of Howard Dean, John Murtha, Paul Hackett, Cindy Sheehan, Both Clintons, Nancy Reid, Harry Pelosi et al far more offensive.

I like that quote you have there and I just laughed at it.

If she could stick to that and be condescending without going over the top, then none of these diaries and front page stories would happen.

Well done I was mistaken

He's a serious thinker and a funny bomb thrower.  Only a few can pull that off well.

Okay, now that we are done bashing Ann Coulter to death, who's next? Let's say Ann stops writing, speaking, and, all of sudden, turns brunette. Who is the next great offender in our sights? Shall we hammer Rush into submission? How about Bernie Goldberg for his "100 People Who Are Screwing Up America" book? Major offender there, eh? Wait! Instead, let's pile on Bill Bennett for offending us with his racist comments that were no such thing. Better yet, let's wait until liberals tell us who offends them and then we will just pummel that person to death. See? We don't even have to think.

C'Mon all you offenders! Line up and get your come-up-ance. Because we all know here that if you offend anybody you cannot possibly be a conservative. You have other motives so you must be shunned, banned, folded, spindled, mutilated and thrown on the curb with the rest of the trash.

So, who's next on our list? YOU! Please step to the front of the line and prepare yourself.

make a boat load of dough ..and...get out votes.


Huh. Can't help thinking of ole Tailgunner Joe. Shameless self promotion? Check. Over the top innuendo that is supposedly "truth"? Check. Tarring  those who disagree as traitors? Check. No way to censure Ms. Coulter however... Luckily, she's not as dangerous as the late Senator even in her wildest dreams.

I'd actually file him with Rush Limbaugh.  He's devastatingly funny and brings knowledge and reasoning to back up the humor, but he's not uncivil.

So you're going to ban me? You know, Coulter doesn't post here. And frankly I don't think she really has a significant influence on what community members do post, even with regard to people that like her.

Your 'my way or the highway' attitude has more in common with Coulter than it does with reasonable debate.

It's fine if you don't like Coulter.

But is bashing her really a priority? Are Democrats that correct in their thinking that we have to attack outlandish statements from the right... when every day, across the country, the left spews far worse?

There's a Dem congressional candidate in MN (Keith Ellison) who openly supports domestic terrorism. He campaigns with former SLA members and the like. He advocates killing police officers. And we have to talk about Coulter?

It's ridiculous, and this focus on her is making for less manners, not more like Moe is apparently claiming.

Are you saying that RedState may not really be that RED?  Okay, maybe they are become a bit toward the purple what!  Sorry, hehe...minimal offense intented...

So the focus of Redstate should be attacking albatrosses on the right?

Sounds like a brilliant strategy. Did you take that from the kos playbook of electoral victory?

and disregarded #5 (throws opponents into apoplexy while you continue to eviscerate them) mentioned elsewhere.

4) By enganging negative emotion against your argument, you ensure that only the logic of it determines an affirmation of your position.

Personally, I think she's on #5 or some variant of an eye for an eye stance. She dishes what libs dish,  and they can't take it. Personally I think she keeps  her own sense of humor even when she throws the most outrageous of her bombs. She's applying trial lawyer tactics to a media environment.

Personally I enjoy it, but then again, I also enjoyed watching Pat pummel Michael on Crossfire before Pat stepped over the edge.

The context was "what's the first thing that comes to mind?"  I don't think her point is Murtha should be flagged.  I think her point is if it weren't for traitor Marines like Murtha there wouldn't be flagging.  She's not a fraud and he's the kind of guy that would get flagged is what came to mind.  That is neither advocating it nor condoning it.  That's a leap.

Get some skin.  It's called rhetoric which is different than a physical pie in the face.  

Let me guess. You're using one of many handles you're comfortable with on an IP address from your next door neighbor's unprotected wireless signal.  Fair enough, see you when you are reincarnated!

I've seen people say that. How exactly did that help the Republican Party?

--it's funny, it's just not appropriate to say in public.  

Oh, Ann.  Is she a Moby? :P :D

How great a forest is set ablaze by such a small fire! And the tongue is a fire, a world of unrighteousness. The tongue is set among our members, staining the whole body, setting on fire the entire course of life, and set on fire by hell. For every kind of beast and bird, of reptile and sea creature, can be tamed and has been tamed by mankind, but no human being can tame the tongue. It is a restless evil, full of deadly poison. With it we bless our Lord and Father, and with it we curse people who are made in the likeness of God. From the same mouth come blessing and cursing. My brothers, these things ought not to be so. Does a spring pour forth from the same opening both fresh and salt water? Can a fig tree, my brothers, bear olives, or a grapevine produce figs? Neither can a salt pond yield fresh water. (James 3:5-12)

You brood of vipers! How can you speak good, when you are evil? For out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaks. The good person out of his good treasure brings forth good, and the evil person out of his evil treasure brings forth evil. I tell you, on the day of judgment people will give account for every careless word they speak, for by your words you will be justified, and by your words you will be condemned. (Matthew 12:34-37)

You have heard that it was said to those of old, 'You shall not murder; and whoever murders will be liable to judgment.' But I say to you that everyone who is angry with his brother without cause will be liable to judgment; whoever insults his brother will be liable to the council; and whoever says, 'You fool!' will be liable to the hell of fire. (Matthew 5:21-23)

(All quotations from the English Standard Version of the Bible)

if this was said by a 27 y.o. Iraq war vet, Rep., contesting a Dem held Cong. seat...what would the true reaction here be?

my bet ...our darling.

I'll keep saying it, and find ways to keep coming back in.  Frankly, Ann Coulter is Absolutely Right!!  I have heard all the crap out of the treasonous left over the last few years, especially with the crap they still unload over Vietnam, Nicaragua, the Cold War in general, and now Iraq.  Frankly, in the classic sense of the term, a great percentage of the Democratic Party IS guilty of treason, and should be rounded up in trucks, put in camps, tried, convicted, and executed for their crime of assailing our armed forces in time of war.  The fact is that in El Salvador and Columbia, to name two examples, the use of right-wing death squads were extremely effective in breaking the power of the communists in those countries and elsewhere.  Maybe we're missing something here.





the Rev. Jackson....


Bill and Hillary.....

the list, my friends, goes on and on....

and we are suppose to be the upholders of the 2nd Amendment...

Well, in the 50s the only way we could get a Republican elected President was to get a war hero so liberal he could have easily won the Democratic nomination as he did the Republican.

In the 60s an unabashed conservative Communist fighter only won the votes of those states who wanted to abuse federalism to keep racism institutionalized.

In the 70s the Republicans could get elected, but still preferred to nominate liberals.

In the 80s an unabashed conservative Communist fighter won in a landslide.

In the 90s few Republicans don't want the conservative label.

Me reading Coulter: Agree, agree agree agree, agree, laugh, agree, Ouch.  Agree, agree, laugh, laugh, What!? Agree, agree Uh-Oh!.

I take the weighted average approach in deciding that I like her.  

She has figured out a way to make a ton of money at the expense of what is good for the country.

Thats what I'm betting on.

So what? The JBS had nothing to do with any of that. If I recall correctly, it didn't even exist in 1964. Yes, Buckley moved to the center... which probably reduced his influence, more than anything else.

Changes in electoral patterns reflect changes in the parties, much more so than changes in voter attitudes (though those change, they often change across the board and not merely with one set of partisans).

Don't say that to me... I was talking about me being banned for agreeing with you.  It's possible that we may lose several to the PC crowd tonight...

See, I love it when one of you guys goes off the deep end. Its almost too easy. Its like you're TRYING to give republicans a bad name. Well, doesn't matter. If I judge the management here there going to ban you soon. So before you go, I'll just laugh and say this liberal is still posting here and you have to go change names.

P.S. Your support of death squads for the American political process is unAmerican. Traitor. Have a nice day!  :)

I agree with most of what you say here, but (you knew it was coming), to expand on your (3) point, her goal IS to get press as you say. Is this not the same goal that every public person has? Hence the term "public". I think that Ann and Rush have the same goal. To drive home the conservative message until everyone agrees with it. They both have huge fans, listening audiences, backers, detractors, and so forth, not because of who they are, but because of their message. Man, I really screwed up that sentence. What I mean is that the message draws the audience, makes the person "public", not the other way around.

As to your point about never basing an argument with a Lib on an Ann Coulter quote, Isn't that also true about quotes from Rush, Ingram, Bennett, and so on? What Lib wants to listen to any quote from any conservative?

Now on to Bill Buckley. The man is a God. I used to watch him on the old Point Counter-Point panels (If I remember the panel name correctly). He was VERY quick. Sharp. Amazing. He could take a liberal apart before the person knew that their hat was just handed to them.

so by Raven

As a party, Republicans are supposwed to sink to the same level as the Democrats?

So Both parties are to commit political suicide and leave a power vaccuum that God knows who/what could fill?

I know this may get me a warnbing at the least but, seriously, Are You Stupid?

of what is good for the country"    ?

come really believe that?

About the latest outrageous thing that Coulter said are just going to help her sell books and help her become more popular. I wonder how many additional books were sold by all the supposed outrage on the 9/11 widow comment? Many thousands for sure. I personally know people who ordered it for that very reason. Is it any wonder she says this stuff? Those of you who dislike Coulter are just playing into her hands with this outrage.

Anyone who is in, has been in, or has a family member who is the military should be able to laugh at this.  It's detestable.

And trying to play it off as a joke smears our armed forces as well.

Not. Funny.

I defended her in previous threads.  Can't say I can defend the fragging comment.  It's a really really tasteless joke.  That's it.  Jokes about soldiers killing their officers aren't funny.  Murtha's gone traitorish lately but as a Marine I can't assume he was anything but a stud.  I wish that Murtha was back.

The good news for our be-pedestaled editors at RedState is that the more Coulter makes comments like that the less she'll be taken seriously, and the more people will take her with a grain of salt.  Don't one will impugn the conservative movement because of her.  And so what if she did?  Lighten up a bit.  She's giving liberals back one time what they've given us tenfold.  Hard for me to get stuffy on this one.  Unlike Howard Dean and Nancy Pelosi, she speaks for no one except her self-serving commercial interests.  

There are better ways to do it than that.

I'm not one of those liberals who grudges someone a big payday.

I feel the need to distance myself from her, because I think if enough Republicans do it, then the damage she does to the image fo the Republican party will be minimized.

I'm just doing for my part what I expect lefties to do, when the prominent writers on their side say awful things.

isn't going to bring anyone to agree with you, which I am sure, since you ARE defensive you could care less about.  The bottom line is tossing the whole "so you are going to ban me now?" thing about is really old and the thing that most of the Koskids do.  Let's not do it here because it's unnecessary and pointless.  We're nicer than that, though if you push pointy sticks at others, banning isn't outside the realm of what you might deserve.

C'mon.  By enganging negative emotion against your argument, you ensure that only the logic of it determines an affirmation of your position.

No.  That is not a serious debating tactic.

Ann's problem is twofold. It's not wrong to be a self-promotor.  It's not wrong to say outlandish, mean-spirited, hateful things.

  1.  She either doesn't know where the line is or she's crossing it.
  2.  She is expecting a double standard for doing so because she's on the "Right."

Lemme dissect that joke about Murtha--- Is she suggesting that Our Boys murder their fellows outside the UCMJ as a regular practice?  Gee, where have I heard THAT this year from Iraq?

Buckley didn't move to the center in his fight with the Birchers.  He simply pointed out their hyperparanoia when they claimed that Ike was a closet Communist.  And if there is any doubt in his influence in Conservative politics, then what do call the Reagan Presidency?  It would have been near impossible to separate Reagan's electoral success from the influence of Buckley or National Review.

Republicans' vaunted support of the Military then, eh?

out here to calm some of you down. "If you all don't play nicely we WILL shut this website down for at least 2 hours.  Don't make us do it!  And we'll take away your playstation! Don't give me your excuses!"

Sorry, but some of the comments here are turning juvenile.  Doesn't this site have some kind of 18 and over connotation?

To me, it sums up how well the three meshed when I read about the 1964 Republican convention.  Goldwater's campaign people apparently hadn't had a chance to vet Reagan's speech, but Goldwater let him give it anyway after Buckley told him HE'd read it and that its contents were good.

But after This?  After "Joking" about Fragging not only a fellow soldier (detestable as that thought is) but a member of the Governmental body created by the Constitution that ALL soldiers are sworn to defend?

I'm almost willing to break my abject hatred of censorship where she's concerned.

full week in the sun before in the infighting erupts...

"Joking" about Fragging not only a fellow soldier (detestable as that thought is) but a member of the Governmental body created by the Constitution that ALL soldiers are sworn to defend?

How do YOU not?

Come on... I know it sounds over the top, but you really do understand the meaning... don't you?  I wish that some of Murtha's statements would be so dissected...

Many-a-time we on Red State have dissected the filth that comes from a Rep. Murtha, or a Senator Durbin, and others.

an last i checked....she never clained to speak for anybody but herself...unless i missed something.

Guess we're really comfortable livin with our fame now.  So sad.  Can't be tainted by someone who got you there.

While Buckley did (rightfuly) repudiate the Birchers, he was also avidly in the anti-communist ranks.

He was right on Alger Hiss (as declassified Russian documents would show in the late 90's) when it wasn't a popular thing to call people red spies.

I'll never forget the (typicaly) unflappable Buckley getting into a shouting match with Gore Vidal and calling him a pinko.  Funny moment, that.

I'd still give to Irey for Congress, heh.

So by Raven

"...the reason soldiers invented 'fragging'"

Has Nothing at ALL to do with our military?


Now play that on the MSM...  Unfortunately, you pointed to the reason it takes such comments by Coulter to make the news...

Did not invent the practice.

So you see, there is room for staunch Conservatism with removing the extreme fringes from the movement.  But again, I say, it may too soon to consider Coulter in the same light as the Birchers.  

need to be this huge issue that determines whether or not you are a "good" republican?  I'm starting to feel like I did when I was a kid and my self worth was totally dependent upon whether or not I was a "good" child.  This is getting ridiculous and it's worth as much now as it was then: not a stinking thing.  

What Ann Coulter thinks or does should not determine what we think about each other or about our party.  I do not understand why what I think or you think or what Moe or anyone else thinks about this junk situation is turning into, forgive my crassness, a peeing match as to what makes a good Republican and why if you do or do not support her you are or are not a good Republican.  If that determines how you view yourself or others politically or intellectually take a step back, turn off the computer, take a walk and don't come back until you've repeated the serenity prayer and actually listened to it because you cannot force your choices or beliefs on others.  

Seriously, this is out of hand.  I haven't seen the poo hit the fan like this in months.  I'd be lying if I said I wasn't fascinated by the drama, but at the same time, I'm wincing because there are an awful lot of people I've respected that are reverting to high school behavior and it makes me cringe.  

...person to try that; wonder if you'll have any better luck than the rest?

Let's find out, shall we?



PS: I'm merely ratifying a decision made while I was away, by the way.

Point to the MSM that these comments are discussed... unless it regards a comment by a conservative, usually divisive...

my take is she made a comment putting herself in the shoes of someone in the military...i'd be willing to  bet that many in the services now BELIEVE he should be fragged, let alone enjoy a chance to do it themselves.  Just like Kerry in VN..

How you, or anyone else gets so worked up about what a non military, non elected, social commentator says is beyond me...and as it looks, many others.

and yes, long time military family here...

"Moby" is apparently the state name of some idiot lefty musician, who stupidly telegraphed his plan when during the 2004 campaign he publicly called on Democraat to go to Republican websites, pretend to be Republicans, and try to stir up infighting against the President.

The term has since been generalized to be any Democrat who comes here and acts like a stupid or clearly fake Republican.

That was supposed to be 'stage name' if that wasn't clear enough.

...there are two sides to this mess.

One side could be accused of blind loyalty, the other side of falling for political correctness.  When you throw someone into the blender of this debate who is revered by some (like a Limbaugh) it makes the issue get personal.

Look at the debate on the thread in diaries dealing with "Tancredo vs Pence" and you get the same thing.

I'm not a big Coulter fan, but I think she isn't getting a fair shake.  I know people I respect on both sides of this issue.  I'd rather move on to something that we can all energeticaly agree on or at least disagree on with a little less passion.

Abortion anyone?

As one who has lost family in the millitary and served I didn't get your first comment. But hey everybodys entitled.

This one though is bordering on the deranged. Are you saying I don't support the millitary because I thought this was funny ?

Lets see if i can sum it up.

John Murtha has acted in a manner that harms our troops.

He advocated courses of action that if implemented would result in the sacrifices made by our troops to be in vain.

He has condemned our troops for things they have not done and failed to give them the same assumption of innocence that his party extends to terrorists in gitmo.

Ms. Coulter points out that someone who was under the command of such an officer might be driven to a dishonorable action. Think Benedict Arnold.

Go figure oh and the reason its funny is because it is true but nobody would normally say it for fear of giving offence. Think of the emperrors new clothes

This is a threat: more accurately, a Warning.  Cool. Down.  I will remove you from this weblog in a nanosecond if that's what it takes to reinforce the lesson that when a moderator sets a public limit to discourse, heed it.

Ask around.  Check and see if I bluff.

How many other people out there don't know it?

What have I done wrong? Is it not enough to follow the site rules?

If I have violated the rules, please note the rule and where I went astray. Otherwise, I would appreciate it if you would stop threatening me for disagreeing with you.

At least, would not say it because it is wrong and we hold ourselves to a better standard.

What you keep in the privacy of your home is 1 thing.  What you take out in public, Especially as such a visible personage, is an entirely Other thing.

and I agree...if you let anyone speak for you, or think anyone speaks for're an idiot.

it's like telling me to boycott something...seems to me if you have to convince someone of soemthing like that, your idea is on shaky ground.

i just went downstairs and made drink...hate to say it, but this is getting entertaining.

And so this isn't another NT post, since I've done too many today I think, I'll be helpful and paste the relevant excerpts from the rules:

 * No harassment or demonization of a particular individual.

Revocation of posting privileges (banning) will take place after a warning of behavior which violates the intent and spirit of these rules.

The proprietors of this site are the sole and final judges and enforcers of this policy.

How'd you react to Kanye West's representation of himself as Jesus?

By showing your extremist views (and getting banned for it) I think you show Coulter to not be as extreme as some here might think she is.

She clearly wouldn't buy into your bs.

going on in these posts.  It's going to be a long night.

didn't see it.  but, i think he's a maggot ...for the record.  that stems from what he said after Katrina

for a reaction here.  He'd have been jailed instantly and be awaiting Court Martial.

That is, if you're on the Coke side, heh, because I'm as much a Pepsi partisan as Greg Dean.

...the primary rule of discussion boards: to wit, you are arguing with someone with banning powers over his decision over what constitutes acceptable discourse.  Bluntly put: I get a vote on that, and you don't. Unfair, no doubt, but that's the way it is.

If you have a problem with my interpetation of the rules, there's a contact form right up there.     Maybe the other moderators will back you up: it's been known to happen.  Until then, please tone it down.  

I dislike banning regulars.

little guy on the shoulder talked me out of it

But a soldier didn't say it. And its hillarious, Ask anyone who has had to serve under a raw 1st lieutenant that just got out of ROTC.

When is the demonization of Ann going to be stopped?

Now we're supposed to believe that she advocates fragging?

ummm by Raven

Not the quote i was referring to (you replied thinking "George Bush hates Black People"  I was thinking the Rolling Stone magazine)

But it works and still applies.

So how do You get worked up when a (acknowledgeably) stupid, irreligious, non-elected, entertainer says something like that?

The Sopranos.  Someone had better get whacked on this episode!

If so best of luck and best wishes and listen to your top sargents.

is her Mouth.

It's one thing to stand up to someone.  It's something else entirely to say what she has said.

i personally get/got really pissed, because I hate the race issue.  in regards to your example, rel. and  abort I back away from. (to an extent)

but Coulter?...even West?...their impact is minimal.  in fact, i think their impact is little, only impacting those that can't think on their own, or form their own opinions.

an w/ the help of the media, presto!! a overblown, big freaking deal

Who has served under one of those raw 2nd Lieutenants.

I have also served under an officer who was everything in uniform that Murtha has been out of uniform recently.  There are OTHER and Better ways to respond to such a person and/or remove him.

I don't disagree that there are rules and you can make them.

I just want to clearly understand what they are, so I can avoid breaking one on accident.

you know..part of the new craze to serve and presume that because of that service millions should listen to your views ...

seems that way doesn't it.  I do see the other side but just barely...  When you look at the awful responese from the left, it just seems impossible to get any points across in the media...  but then, that's why they call it the Lame Stream Media... so far left these days that it takes outrageous statements to make the news.  We (Republicans) don't stand a chance...

There are OTHER and Better ways to respond to such a person and/or remove him.

Ann wasnt even advocating his removal, she was commenting on the ability of his type to inspire the desire for removal.

They Should be punished if guilty.  Regardless of who the enemy is.  Keep in mind:  If Guilty.

In the meantime, yes, everyone needs to remember that they are innocent until proven otherwise.

Murtha gets no free pass from Republicans.  Nor does any other Lefty speaker of any level.

Unfortunately, that is still read Lefty rather than Any.  No One should get a free pass for Any reason for speaking like that.  Especially those who claim to be on Our side.  We're supposed to hold Ourselves to a higher standard.  If we can't do that, then we have no place berating anyone else for failing to meet our standard.

This was absolutely despicable, and was rightfully derided by many on the starboard side of the blogosphere.

I don't see how Coulter is any different. We cannot sink to the left's level.

And by Raven

I repeat, "There are OTHER and Better ways..."

May it last as long as you do.

I sure wish that the Democrat leadership would speak up against Murtha....  He is doing great damage to the military institution with his comments.  Why does not anyone in the leadership speak up if they do not agree with him?

I suspect youre a drill instructor due to the humor impairment.

And no I don't normally think of murder as being funny unless it involves the three stooges and banana peels.

To start considering her as among those ranks;

But it's Far from too soon to warn her and ehr supporters that she and they are Moving toward that point.

bloodshed and mayhem that can only and must be taked seriously, and sanctimoniously, that no one is acting on them.  Could it be that people on the right recognize Coulter's remarks for what they are, dark and cutting humor, but still humor.

  "Calling for the death of Murtha"?  Failing expiration due to obesity it's a good bet Murtha will be around for a while.

    Can't say i've seen any conservative stuffing feces in mail boxes, or any conservative e-mailing a death threat from a republicans web page to a dem opponent.  Nope, and yet her remarks are supposed to be incendiary, must be a very small flame.  

      I've done the Coulter thing a few times, it gets tiresome and redolent of Rep/Con shakiness.  The Rove story should tell you the nature of the beast we're up against.  Innocent, guilty, it hardly matters.  Only jail and punishment matter, just like Howard Dean on Tom Delay.  And I'm not so sure it would stop with the top guys.

       And with this we have people tying their jockeys into knots over Coulter?  It's become a pale imitation of leftist self display and maybe we should redirect our concentration on people who are really, really dangerous.

No. by Raven

Recruiter.  And there are some things I do Not find funny.  Regardless of context.

This would be one of those things.

If she is, I'm not seeing it on the front page.

Editors, were her ads pulled?

Are Like that.  Republicans aren't supposed to be.

on the same day that all the Moderate Muslim Mullahs denounce the Extreme Jihadists.

Her kind of personal attacks for profit and attention further splits the country and weakens it.

There have been posts on this site that suggest that  the MSM or liberals are the enemy. I regect that.

The enemy are the people trying to kill our troops and scheming for our destruction.

Good American citizens who have differnent views and not morally equivelant.

heh by Ender

I thought it was funny. I was in the military, and my dad was in the military. So? You telling me what I should and I shouldn't find funny?

My wife feels that I've tossed my antlers around enough for one night - you think that I would have learned by now not to tell her about all the kewl things going on in the Internet - so we'll ratchett it back a couple of notches and explain.

We're trying to maintain community standards here at RedState that can pass for civil, at least in a bad light; so it becomes necessary, from time to time, to make public statements about what is and is not acceptable discourse.  To use the recent example, we're clearly not happy with even jokes about assassinating public figures, and if somebody tried to do that here I really would ban the person on the spot; there are other tripwires, but this is the one that's of interest right now.  This is one of my jobs here: to police comments.  So, I have to use my judgement.

So when I do, it is not helpful to get an argument in response, particularly when its couched in either a dismissive and/or insulting fashion.  That makes Happy Fun Moderator annoyed, which can easily lead to a more terse response, and, well, there's a potential vicious cycle there.  

So, the answer to your question is you got caught in the aforementioned vicious cycle: to be technical, you eventually got caught up in the 'being disruptive' section of the rules.  I am getting the impression that it was not really your intent to question either my or any other RS Contributor's motivations; if this is so, why then we shall smile and speak no more of it.


PS: AFAIK, the only person actually banned on this thread so far was somebody who deliberately flaunted his decision to break the ruling.

The reason I don't like Coulter is that she poisons the atmosphere with her ridiculous rhetoric and gives liberals a convenient cover to tar conservatives.

They tar us with or without Ann. No use in trying to butter them up.

but with Leon's recommendations and all the fuss about it I am going to go out and buy one. She is becoming more of a hero to me by the second (and every post against her).

Yes by zuiko

To listen to the left you would think we were all huge fans of Phelps (who isn't even a conservative), David Duke, assorted abortion clinic bombers and of course Der Führer (as everyone knows he was the original conservative). Coulter doesn't even make the list.

if they were, they wouldn't wake up every morning trying to convince others we are doomed.

good citizens don't undermine our tropps whent hey are in battle.

good citizens don't race bait, among many other things.

nothing AC weakens the country.  you may not like it , but that's your problem.  to date, the only group/person trying to weaken the country reside on the left.

It's a family story and a secret recipe.  Cures what ails ya!  

That detestable harpy?

Methinks you got the level of discussion you asked for.

Agreed by JPH

Even if Coulter is up to no good, i wouldn't worry so much about her harming the entire conservative movement, Pat Buchanan has said worse thing then Ann, and has been given certain labels by no less a personage then WFB, and that hasn't harmed the movement much.

The libs don't need an excuse to tar conservatives as "nuts", let's not pretend that they do.

Round these parts, "sweet tea" is a redundant statement, like "young baby". All babies are young, right?

... 5+

We can, and do, easily best the enemy on the battlefield. The enemy that is the most difficult is the one that lives among us, pretending to be us, all the while working against us.

My condolences. I always heard that was one of the toughest jobs in the military.

all those books she writes?

I don't see the point.  I can read this kind of stuff about Coulter at DU.

but I think he was hoping for something different...maybe confirmation.  Convservatives are such a wide and varied group!

well said

Sometimes this conservative desire to avoid controversy remind me of the Bob Michel days when the Republicans groveled happily under the table and were satisfied with the scraps that their masters the Democrats, rightful rulers of this great nation, gave them.

The point of the Reagan and Limbaugh revolution was to welcome controversy and use it to advance our ideas. While Ann does put out more noise then most, she's also great substantively for those who can get past her rhetoric.

Bottom line, Rush and Ann are the same to the libs. They'll find plenty of quotes to put Rush in the hot seat. I see no reason to defend Rush and others and not Ann, especially when her comments are clearly intended to be humorous.

I think it's "lighten up, Francis" time around here.  I think her greatest sin was comedic bad timing, what with Haditha, Hadji Girl and all the Rogue Soldier agitprop whirling around right now.    

Nobody reads DU...  Please tell me your kidding!  Now if that was hyperbole, then okay...haha...

we all appreciate the work you do...

Thank you.

are absurd. We are in a twilight zone.

it wasn't his title. It was Krempasky's.

There's a HUGE difference between a physical assault and hyperbole, IMHO

info on the enemy?

Someone's gotta do it.  Now hand me my nasal clothes pin and barf bucket... I'm... I'm.... goin in


to the waitress asking me if I want sugar with my tea.  Tea has sugar IN IT!  And you can't get it sweet enough if it is already cold.  There, rant over.

Could not help but wonder why you thought that he/we were mistaken that it was Moe rather than Krempasky who wrote the article (although they do both seem to agree)?  I know both are conservatives so why the clarification...

Which is why I'm going to gencon and play every game I can til I pass out.

Southern Monty Python and beer get together?

I'm JONESIN' HERE!!!!11!one!!exlcamation!1

I happened to read Ann Coulter's book Treason (I think it was) prior to the invasion of Iraq, and Ann despite the saucy, over the top language railed at the dems/libs for being weak on defense, weak on fighting communism, appeasing and defeatist etc. And, who would have guessed it, she pegged the dems and libs, who resort to the same mealy mouthed defeatism/hate america/fifth column template that they've uses since vietnam, in fighting the war on terror.

I'm sorry, but if the cap fits let em wear it. She may be over the top, but she absolutely pegged how the dems/libs were going to act in the war on terror even before we were aware of a war on terror.

Krempasky wrote the title that ConservativeD refers to, but it is Moe calling for civility.

The Fuzzy Puppy of the bunch!  :D

Imagine how the others would react! Too scary to think on for very long.

I wasn't really referring to Moe there, but also I don't think one could reasonably expect others to follow with a civil discussion given the starting point though.

that it's not fair I used Buckley. ;)

I actually gave some thought to a comparison between Ann and Rush.  I didn't address it earlier because I'm in the midst of Bar studying now, and just hop on RedState to recover my sanity now and again.

Two points though.  First, regarding the Ann quote v. Rush quote:  I would never argue with a Lib by saying "Ann said" or "Rush said . . ."  Instead, I was refering to quoting something either said without attribution.  By that I mean, Rush's attacks on Libs are usable, but Ann's use of logic is defeated by the words she chooses to use.

Second, regarding whether both are only out for themselves, here's my take on that.  Rush is definitely out for Rush.  But that man is a true believer, and you can tell because he really tries to formulate logical arguments.  Now, he is an entertainer, and I don't think he'd disagree with that.  

But Ann's main goal is NOT to drive home the conservative message.  I say that because the junk she gets famous for saying has nothing to do with the conservative agenda.  She insults the 9-11 widows, and though they may deserve it, who to insult and who not to insult has nada to do with the conservative agenda.

This is a crummy post, I know, but I'm sleep and cranky, and am if I type more tonight I'm sure I'll make a Coulteresque comment!

Its our fellow citizens....

And the way you win is by speaking the truth. So far, our system hasn't failed us yet and I don't believe its even remotely close to doing so....

What Ann does is motivated by money and spot lights - that is what she is all about. Truth be dammed

and our fellows, at times, are our enemies.

the way you win is by doing what's right, regardless of mounted efforts to derail the truth.

i don't give a hoot what is motivating the person, as long as the message is that point, it's up to me as a person to interpret.

Have that book also and as to your/her comments...amen.  She hit it right on the nose...and still does.  She may be over-the-top, but she is at least right....

Man I thought this was going to be about one of the Jersey Girls, or Cindy Sheehan, Helen Thomas or Molly Ivins at least!

I'm thoroughly disappointed. I hate hittin the rack disappointed......  :/

I see a number of us saying that this is what liberals do and that she's getting around the PC liberal MSM.  Not only do I think it's wrong when liberals do it, but I also don't think this is a wise political strategy.  What average Joe voter seems to respond to isn't invectives and venom-- which just looks mad, bigoted, means spirited, and even evil --but character and what seems reasonable.  If conservatives have increasingly increased their power in the last decade then this is because conservatives have appeared to be reasonable, responsible, self-reliant, moral, and composed.  We win through our dignity and the force of our arguments (and I mean real arguments, real proposals), not through demonization, name calling, and speculation about the motives of others.  I find this speculation about the motives of others especially pernacious and corrosive to public dialogue and it seems to be Coulter's calling card.  

Why is it so pernacious and corrosive?  Because once someone begins attributing motives to you there's no way you can defend yourself or ever convince the other person that those aren't your motives, no matter how much you provide evidence to the contrary or insist that this isn't the case.  As a result, an arms race ensues and rather than discussing actual issues and seeing if some sort of consensus can be formed with the best solutions in mind, everything becomes more and more bitter.  I've been pleased by the growth in conservative power during the last decade, but dismayed by the growing acrimony in the last six years.  I see many of my allies heaping the most vituperative scorn on those they disagree with, attributing the worst possible motives, using the foulest language and insults (and I'm not referring to obscenities), and then saying that it's the other side that does it, we're the reasonable ones, we're the ones that calmly discuss things.  It's ugly, it's base, it's id, and it's certainly not representative of what I admire most in the polished and transcendent speech I find in figures such as Lincoln or Reagan and the ideals they embody.  Nor is there any possible way I can see it as funny regardless of whether it's true (and again I have serious issues with any talk of hidden motives, as our ideas and principles should stand on their own in public debate and shouldn't be tarnished behind ad hominem forms of argument.  Nor is there any conceivable way I can see this as a Christian way of arguing).  I've never felt that the Coulter's of the world advanced our causes, and, repeating others in this thread, I do think, in light of what public discourse has become in the last six years despite the fact that we've gained power and are no longer underdogs, that we need to reflect on that plank in our own eye.  I see a lot of double standards.

we have had people living among us, pretending to be our fellow citizens, working against us. Surely you know that; why is it so hard to believe that they are here again?

And after re-reading what I wrote I don't see anywhere that I said the system was in danger of failing. But the fact that we can, and probably will, survive the machinations of the enemy among us does not mean we will not be injured by them. The actions of the press and significant members of the left are damaging us; our will to stand against the terrorists is being eroded and I think it is foolish of you to believe otherwise. We have large numbers of people who have come to believe that the President is a greater danger than the jihadists; people who are more than willing to believe that the most vile accusations against our troops are not only credible but represent the general truth about our men and women in uniform.

These things are all the work of the enemy among us; those you chose to call our fellow citizens. And these things all damage the public spirit, the public good, the commonweal.

Somehow I don't think that you have to worry about Ann Coulter coming over here to post.

maybe he knew what was coming...

We're not losing....we're winning.  But, the knee jerkers at RS need to grow up a little and get with the program.  First, the worst thing that the left can say about Coulter is that she's mean-spirited and nasty. They can't debate her premise because she's right on the money.  They say the same things about conservatives anyway so what's new.  Now we have some here saying the same thing as they are.  That means that they are in agreement with the left without considering the premise.  Do you see a problem with that?

WE are supposed to be defeating the left..not agreeing with them.  Certain RSers just gave the left what they wanted...a victory.  They have affirmed that the right is nasty and mean spirited which equals to being wrong to them.  As translates to our enemies across the world...the people in control of the US can be beat using the same tactics.  If you don't think this is true, just watch over the next few weeks and see. (They read this blog)  It looks to them as if the people with backbone just lost their's over a few comments from a political commentator.  Not taking that into perspective is juvenile and reactive, not reasoned, strategic and a sign of leadership.  This is the second time that I've been disappointed with the response of the usual suspects at RS.  I had hoped for more since the Ben incident.  Some never learn.

But you have seen the movie "What About Bob"? I enjoyed the remake "What About Harriet" and guess who played the Richard Dreyfuss part? Now we have a sequel "What About Ann" and it's like watching an open mike casting call to see oherwise rational people being driven nutso. Granted, it is a short ride for some of them. :-)

You guys condemn her for using the same level of insult that you use about her. No one wants to give a straight answer about why it's OK for redstaters but not for Ann.

And why oh why do we insist, like the liberals, on pretending our poor virgin ears have never come across snark before?

Sigh. This horse is dead I think.

If you want to pick on an annoying female, start in Shania Twain.

I was out trapshooting and missed the boom. Did I duck at the appropriate time?

What a fun night we had...

This has been beaten to death. Some of us on RS think civility is better so we can look nice for an MSM that's going to potray us as evil religous right wing racist warmongers that worship McBushHitler Von Halliburton. Some of us think we should have a pair and fight back against the vicious relentless attacks like the one above. Maybe if we blew up the New York Times building, our image would change ;) In the spirit of appealing to our liberal leftist friends some of us on RS have decided to imitate the left and attack everything Coulter says, take it out of context and go on a "Coulter doesn't speak for us because she's mean" crusade. I joined this site right after I joined the right, convinced that the GOP and the conservatives were loyal and would at least not distort the facts. Too bad-maybe an elephant isn't as faithful as I once thought.

...making jokes about blowing stuff up here.

Actually, ditch the 'maybe'.

I was quoted Coulter-you missed the reference. When she joked the NYTime's building should be blown up. It was tongue in cheek. Sorry to offend.

All right, then.  Sorry to blow up at you, then; just put quotes in quotes or something next time...

Sometimes this conservative desire to avoid controversy remind me of the Bob Michel days when the Republicans groveled happily under the table and were satisfied with the scraps that their masters the Democrats, rightful rulers of this great nation, gave them.

I remember it well.  They said very nice things to Repubs when they let them come out, though!  And Repubs might not have to read criticism in the NYT, either if they played nice.

We complain that our representatives don't listen to us when they get to Wash.  If we want to see our representatives take on our hard issues and listen to us rather than be intimidated by the BIG GOV'T-seeking liberals, we'd better show them that we will support them in the arena where they have to go to fight.  We must show them that conservatives will stand behind them and not shiver in our shoes if they say something bold calling out the Left.  They are on a different front than Ann Coulter and won't use her words, but they have to be just as bold.

There was no talk radio and the internet back then, but now that there is, remarks such as those Dick Durbin's made comparing our soldiers at Gitmo to Pol Pot got publicized.  He became the one shamed and was forced to back down.  The MSM wouldn't have ratted out his remarks, they were forced to acknowledge and report on them by our side.

That is why boldness works rather than shivering in our shoes.  Don't let the MSM select the way we define ourselves.  They can call me a bigot, a homo-phobe -- heck, make it interesting -- throw in murderer and a thief for good measure.  Anything they want.  I know what I am and what I'm not.  And I know why.

It's just a sticks and stones thing, ya know.  

This Coulter thing has brought out the worst in a lot of us and put us all on edge. But at least this has shown that we have a big tent. Unlike the left, we can't kick people out who diasagree with us on every little point. I know, because I was kicked out of the left my sophomore year in college when I ripped the college Left's position on abortion, feminism, vegetarianism and gun control. It was basically all of my Midwestern qualities angrily coming out in an extremely liberal East Coast school (I'm a senior at Wesleyan U). Shortly after, I was denounced by every left wing group on campus-but privately people were coming up to me and thanking me for what I wrote. Shortly after I began endorsing GOP candidates and switched Parties. In a campus of 2800, only 38 publicly support the President. But the Left's tendency to purify their movement is part of what drove me out and into the arms of the GOP. Indeed, my second article after that one was titled "Shelter in The Big Tent". Some of us back Coulter, some of us don't-but at the end of the day, we are all Republicans and our goal is to defend and stand for the values of the greatest country in the entire world.

Her business is rhetoric, not following orders under an oath of office.  She'll never serve in the military or public office.

If we had the same rehetorical standards for political journalists that we have for military personnel journalists couldn't criticize the Commander in Chief.  A vet could, but I have higher expectations from a vet.  Once you've served, I thin you always have a different moral obligation to the military and the nation.

I think she crossed the line.  It's a word and concept you just don't use, don't even go there.

That said, I think some are pushing it even further by suggesting she advocates the action.

I'm trying to find a good weekend for us.  :)

That's why I liked Delay so much. He was the only one who had the courage to tell it like it is without worrying that the MSM would label him "controversial".

There have been nonstop personal attacks on Republicans by elected Democrats. Calling the president a liar, congressional Republicans corrupt and so on. Can you cite one instance of a Republican getting a bit personal with Democrats? Like accusing them of advocating America'a defeat and the like (which is true)? I can't.

As in baseball, a little chin music goes a long way in knocking the batter off the plate. it's about time the Republicans figured this out.

I learn so much here.  Never heard the term chin music.  Like it.  

No, but elected Dems get away with personal attacks all the time.  The MSM never seems to notice.  No shock.  No horror.  

I loved the Dems and the MSM, panting while waiting for Delay's mug shot.  The ads were ready.  And he smiled!  Probably the best picture he's had taken in his life.  Just great!

Probably start with Treason, although all the ones I've read have been good. I still need to pick up How to Talk to a Liberal as well as Godless. Given the ranting here the past couple of days, I may just get them this weekend instead of waiting...

At the end of the movie, it is mentioned that

Niedermeyer was killed by his own troops in Vietnam----They call that "fragging".

I had two sailors in the Brig who were on 30 days bread and water for bringing personal handguns on a submarine to restore them while on a 6 month patrol. These weapons did not fire, and they had no ammo for them, nor did any of the ammo on the boat work in these weapons.

I told them both they should have gotten the CO's permission to bring them on the boat.

The CO told me when I inquired about the Bread and Water--THEY DON'T DESERVE TO EAT!

And this was in Jimmy Carter's Navy of the 70's.

Sometimes It is the Uniform Code of Military TOUGHNESS, not Justice.

Once you have served, peace or war, you have suffered for your country.

--Low Pay,

--Exotic Ports of call--most of them the armpit of whatever country you're in,

--Seperation from home, family, friends, especially at holidays.

--Military Marriages have a 70% chance of not making it through the 1st 5 years.

--Wounded Vets suffer for life

--Dead Vets families suffer for life

You BET we feel different about our country.

Why Does MURTHA not share that feeling. He's leading the HATE AMERICA bunch right now.

Get off the doggone Podium. My wife and I have

30 years military service combined, We both love

Ann, and you've flogged this horse to death.

Now go out and get your quota, and stop gripin.

Navy Boot Camp Marching song, by Companies

Ready to graduate to rookies, called Raisins

because they don't wear their watch caps right.



so by G Man

As a party, Republicans are supposed to roll over for the Democrats and not fight back?

So one party should pull out all the stops and demonize the Republicans with their monopoly of the media leaving only one party in power?

I know this may get me a warning at the least but, seriously, Are You Stupid?

After July 4th is very bad for me.......

I hope Murtha is going to be around for a while. Anybody who has served his country honorably deserves a lot more respect, even if I don't agree with his politics.

Coulter is just getting desperate for attention because she's over 40 and not married.  The expression "long in the tooth" was coined for her.

I don't want her to speak for me.  Not when we've got others who so ably do it without looking like they ought to be on medication.

When you start throwing bombs like "Godless" and "Party of Death", it doesn't really lead to any lasting solutions.  And believe me, solutions are what we need, not this kind of name-calling.  We've had our party in power for 5 years and I still don't see our borders secure, gas is at $3.30 where I live and Alaska is STILL building it's famous "bridge to nowhere" with federal money.  

I guess this is a banning statement, but, I'm sick of Ann Coulter, and I'm tired of thinking that half of the people I pass on my way to work every morning are my mortal enemies.

I comes from a military family that goes all the way back to the revolutionary war under Ethen Allen. Literally every male member of my family has done a stint in the military for the past 3 generations at least with one exception. Myself.

Regardless, I know my brothers and father and grandfather well enough to know that most of them would find her comment amusing and the rest wouldnt care 2 cents.

Frankly, I find the notion of people frothing at the mouth and calling her a dispicable harpy because she made a wise crack about Murtha far more tasteless than her comments. I dont always agree with Ann but I find her candor and willingess to say what's on her mind refreshing in this day of mousy, middle of the road, politically correct language utterly lacking in anything that remotley resembles testicular fortitude.

What is most important to the Left, and growing numbers on the Right, is Ann is "not nice".

Since when does being "nice" help any cause? She gets compared to Michael Moore all the time, as somehow "over the line". But people fail to notice the main difference between the two:

Ann uses hyperbole to illustrate a point of truth. Moore uses it to construct lies.

Screw being nice. Nice is for pussies who can't stand the pain of rational thought.

Nobody ever criticizes any evidence or logic she presents. They only attack her choice of words. As though being sledgehammer blunt somehow negates truth.

As Ann herself points out, the Left entirely misses the point of her book. They acquiesce to the thesis they are Godless, and supported a criminal for a President. They only care about pushing buttons regarding criticism of some "protected" group.

Protected indeed. Cindy Sheehan could defecate on her son's grave and honor him more than when she called her son's killers "freedom fighters".

But, I certainly wouldn't want to risk offending someone by actually saying that. :-)

Well, I did not see this response until long after you posted, but that was the exact point I was trying to get across without coming off as a "right wing nut".  Anyway, right on, and I did try to make the same referencea several times but probably with little effect and little response.  RS seems at times to get just a bit too PC...

Sorry Professor, I disagree.. The ordinary citizen, recognizes this kind of rightwing (pundit) commentary.  It does not necessarily reflect on the party.  Most of the invective of the rightiest pundits is in response to the liberal pundits and their statements.  It does not reflect upon the partys directly.  Neither does this....

Moe does not read Coulter!  Hmmm....

But if you get the jury "spitting, shaking, irrationally angry," then you're well on your way to losing.

I would never use that kind of slur in front of a jury or a judge unless I was accusing someone else of using it, and I was trying to destroy that person.

Yeah, getting the witness angry is great. But the jury in this election is comprised of voters, many of whom think all conservatives are like Ann Coulter because we keep letting her speak on conservatives' behalf.

She's our Michael Moore, just less subtle. We need to get rid of her.

"I am afraid that even after the American people will elect those who promise to leave Iraq, the U.S. will not do so." - Hamas leader Abu Abdullah

Redstate Network Login:
(lost password?)

©2008 Eagle Publishing, Inc. All rights reserved. Legal, Copyright, and Terms of Service