Sunday, June 25, 2006

Are You An Ann Coulter Republican?

It's time.

You are either for her or against her. Since Ann Coulter has found much money for painting the political world in her two-tone dialectics, then it's time to paint her and her supporters with the same brush.

"
The question, "Are you an Ann Coulter Republican?" should confront every Republican running for every office in the land, from President to dog catcher. Every Democratic candidate should accuse his or her opponent of being in favor of poisoning Supreme Court Justices and killing Congressmen. At every opportunity, every Republican should be made to answer: "Do you agree with Ann Coulter that the 9/11 widows are witches and harpies?" And George W. Bush, Tony Snow, Dick Cheney, Laura Bush and Barney (the only lapdog with a good excuse) should be confronted with these questions as well."

More of the article here.

No middle ground for those of you who devour her bile as Truth - either you are with her hateful, mindless group or you're opposed to her.

Period.

The End.

22 comments:

John H said...

It always cracks me up to hear people practically bending over backwards to defend what they say is her underlying point, and in the next breath talk about the lack of civility among the left/progressives, etc.

Right up there with the inevitable followup to the complaint about how unfair and unbalanced the MSM is: I watch Fox News..

newscoma said...

Well said, my dear. Her bile is disgusting and she spews more hate-filled bullshit that seems to be endorsed not only by the right, but mainstream media for ratings.
Blech.

Anonymous said...

OK, so why can one not agree with her point, and still condemn its delivery?

The 9/11 widows, like Cindy Sheehan and Michael Berg, are riding the coattails of their grief to not just a political platform from which to spout, but they have parleyed thoses losses into some kind of absolutism where no one can disagree with them, lest they be charged with "insensitivity" or lack of sympathy for their loss.

What utter horse-puckey!

Sheehan in particular has made a career of this reprehensible practice. She spews her venom at Bush, the US, the military, while cozying up to communists and the likes of Hugo Chavez, yet ignoring the lack of a headstone on her son's grave ... but should anyone dare to utter, even under their breath, their disagreement with her views, they are cast as hateful, insensitive and callous!

But she lost her son in Iraq! (Glossing over the fact that her "child" was a grown man capable of making his own grown-up decisions, even ones mama disagreed with) How dare you even look cross-eyed at this poor woman! She's a grieving mother! She has MORAL AUTHORITY to speak out against Bush and the war, and no one should dispute anything she says!

Horseshit. She's a loon ... a dispicable, crazy, embarassment to this country. So are the 9/11 widows.

And Berg? Oh. My. God. This delusional idiot is allowed out without supervision?

Ann Coulter has not a graceful, classy bone in her body. But she does have a point. And anymore, to be able to be heard above the shrill keening from the left, she had to meet and even surpass their volume. Ugly? Yes. Truthful? Most definitely. Louder than the left? Just barely.

The real question is, can the left face the truth?

Joe Powell said...

Hey Anonymous - can you get MY point?
Either you agree with her and her methods or you don't.

No middle ground.
No fence-sitting allowed. No dismissing her tactics and embracing her vile, McCarthyism.
Either you think widows and relatives have a right to their opinion or you don't.

As for who elevated Sheehan to prominence in the news? That man's name is Bush, and he gave her a mission by refusing to talk to her.

If you think Coulter is right, then grow some balls and put YOUR name to your viewpoint and don't hide out as Anonymous.

John H said...

Anonymous: Coulter's argument that you can't attack the widows is rendered invalid by the very fact that SHE publicly is given a forum to attack the widows.

You and every other conservative to right-wing blogger and commentator seem to have no trouble attacking these widows. For a group of people impervious to attack, they seem awfully attacked to me.

My point is that if you endorse the way Coulter delivers her points, you have no room to attack the tone or civility of the 'other side'.

Joe Powell said...

And which person is it who has ridden the coattails of 9-11?? No one can touch Bush for using the tragedy for personal political gain.

Ann Coulter neo-cons are deeply hypocritical.

Newscoma is spot on - the media uses her to boost raitings, as the recent hysteria afforded her appearance on Jay Leno. But the vile crap she endorses is usually provided her lock-stepped acolytes in private fundraising dinners for the GOP

And John gets it too - you either support the Messenger or you don't. The Messenger IS the Message.

Anonymous said...

No middle ground.
No fence-sitting allowed. No dismissing her tactics and embracing her vile, McCarthyism.
Either you think widows and relatives have a right to their opinion or you don't.


They have a right to their opinion. No one, including Ann Coulter disputes that. Yet, you sit there and state that I cannot have MY opinion, that Coulter does have a point, but her methods of communicating it are disgusting. Just who died and made YOU King of the world?

What IS disputed is the right of others to disagree with them, WITHOUT being called down for being "mean" to some poor widows. Just like with Sheehan ... can't say anything against HER, she lost her son! Coulter wasn't "given" a forum, she created it, and is being attacked for doing so. PRECISELY the point of what she is saying!

Much of what the Jersey Girls say is utter delusional bullcrap. They are using their status as widows to create the forum to state their views AND to cloak themselves in a mantle of irrefutability. That's disgusting and a total dishonor to their husbands' memory. They should be ashamed. Sure, speak your piece, but for God's sake, stick around for the debate that follows and participate in it, instead of running and hiding!

And for the love of all that is holy, please acknowledge that Bush DID meet with and talk to Sheehan. She is perhaps the looniest whacko to ever stand in front of a TV camera EVER. She is filled with a festering, cancerous anger and hatred that has pushed aside all sense of reason. She needs to be locked up before she does something dangerous. Have you not noted that only the furthest fringe elements have fled the Sheehan camp? She's gone way over the edge, where only the likes of commies and Chavez lurk.

I post anon because I have endured death threats from Lefties that I debated in the past. Rightwingers don't seem to get as riled when I crawl up their ass though ... funny how that works.

John H said...

I have read what seems like 400 blog posts about Cindy Sheehan in the past three or four months. Maybe a half dozen weren't as severely critical of Sheehan as your post above. Seems like the anti-Sheehan folks are making out just fine to me.

Can't you see that she (and the widows) aren't getting a free pass? Who is giving them this free pass? Is anyone stopping you from criticizing what THEY ARE SAYING?

I have no idea what they are saying because I am not paying attention to them and neither is the media, at least around here. The 'inviolate' widow brigade seems to be more of a creation of the right-wing blogworld and commentary world than anything else.

Joe Powell said...

Again, Anonymous - this post and the question posed is pure Grade A Coulter-style debate.
Either you agree with her or you don't.
Her approach is that anyone who does not agree with her is the Enemy - guilty of "Slander" and "Treason" and "Godlessness."

If you're on her side, embrace it or lose your support of her. You can't have it both ways.

Sucks to be boxed into a faux corner, doesn't it?

Anonymous said...

Are you really that incapable of exanding your mind to be able to grasp the concept of there being a difference between accepting the point being made and how it is being made?

Let's say that someone is completely against computers, the internet, blog, web sites and all that goes with it. Technology is Satan's right hand. To that end, to that person, everything YOU say would be invalid and wrong, correct? But they agree with you that Ann Coulter is vile and disgusting.

But that can't be! You say Coulter is vile and disgusting on a web site! Therefore, this person cannot agree with you because they think the way you deliver your message is abhorent! Then it stands to reason that they must love dear old Ann, correct?

Do tell me about that corner, dear ... how is it?

Back in a moment ...a Rightwinger is ragging on gay marriage again ... gotta snark at them for a bit.

OXYMORON said...

I think your "Anonymous" poster is a fine example of a Coulter Bitch. Diane West of the Washington Times is another.
Anonymous simply has some venom for everybody, not that is a sign of any kind of courage just someone who can't stand up for anything.
If Cindy Sheehan and and the WTC widows "have their right to their opinions" why the contreversy? You can evaluate their focts on their own merits, take them or leave them. How does their opinions and conduct rate the contempt you direct toward them? Do they make you feel uncomfortable at you own lack of core principles?
I personally think Coulter is simply pathetic and only pathetic if she didn't have morons like Anonymous who needed people like here to atriculate their own lack of principles, lack of wisdom though experience and just general common sense and decency.
There are those like Anonymous and Coulter who out of sheer spinlessness and cowardliness hold their view in a moral and spiritual vacume , formulate spread this venom because they wish to use external powers to realize their impulses for violence against others and compensatory desires for power through an external agent.
I do not consider myself a Liberal but "Conservatives" like Coulter, Michael Savage, Neil Boortz, and that ilk make me prefer to wear the label of any other type of human being save the label of Pedophile. And yes, Anon and Coulter are in the ranks of Pedophiles.

OXYMORON said...

Oh, yea, Anon..
That crap about "death threats from Lefties" is what we refer to as a "hoot" around here.
How do you loons sense so much danger in pacifists?

Anonymous said...

Holy crap you people are stupid ... can you not READ?

I disagree with Coulter's methods. They are vile, reprehensible and disgusting. Are we clear on that? Any confusion so far? OK ... moving along.

The Jersey Girls, Cindy Sheehan, Michael Berg, etc all have the right to state their views on whatever their little hearts desire.

Are you still with me? Did I lose anyone yet? Any questions so far?

OK, now here is where it gets difficult for you all (nice gang of High-5ers you got here, Joe, BTW)

I am disgusted (meaning I dislike and find disagreeable) that people such as the Jersey Girls and Sheehan invoke the names of the dead and their own grief to shield themselves from any sort of criticism.

Just to review here, and I am typing very slowly so you all can keep up with me ... I disagree with them. I am not saying they cannot state their views, or even should not. This will be on the final exam.

Now here is the part that seems to blow your little minds apart ... how can you reconcile stating what opinion I MUST have (either I agree with Coulter AND her point, or I don't) and that it is NOT OK for me to dispute their "moral authority" and absolutism of their statements based on the fact that a family member of theirs died?

So what if someone died? They should still expect and bear the consequences of their actions and words, and fully expect people to take umbrage for their outrageous statements and respond accordingly. To think otherwise is an egregious offense against the memory of their lost loved ones.

Oh well ... lost ya'll again. I don't think you will be able to reason with that. It's probably somewhere out there with being opposed to the death penalty yet being pro-choice. I never could figure that one out ...

Oh, and Oxymoron ... pacifist? Right ... like the "anti-war pacifists" that send death threats to Michelle Malkin and Charles Johnson? Yeah, I know about them and all those other hypocritical lefty loonies. Are you one of them?

Anonymous said...

Just in case you're a little rusty on history, here's some help:

Holier than thou Sheehan speaks
http://tinyurl.com/lbnk6

With the added bonus of leftie temper tantrums and an amazing disply of hypocrisy from them.

newscoma said...

Wow, Joe. You weren't lying.
Anonymous, I suggest you get a blog and say your peice. That might help you vent with your "temper tantrum" which you are accusing us "lefties" of having.

Joe Powell said...

Well, Anon you're almost able to reach the point of this post - keep trying.

It's very simple - Coulter Logic demands you're with her or against her. Her rules, not mine,Bub.

If that seems distasteful to you, then welcome to Coulter's World of all or nothing.

And if ya don't like it here - nobody is asking you to stay. :)

The Editor said...

I'm Now An Ass... um, I mean, Anonymous,
1. Please look up the word Irony.

2. Please unwad your panties.

3. Please realize that someone did die and made ME God.

Joe Powell said...

wheeeee! i have a gang of hi-5ers! do i get a group discount?

The Editor said...

Joe, it's not a "gang," it's a club.

And I think we have 501-3c status.

newscoma said...

Glad you became God, Editor.
Now, about the lottery and me so not winning it ...

AT said...

Joe, how do you sign up for the vitriolic asshole style commentators?

Joe Powell said...

i am not sure, AT, but they seem to be as dense as dense can be. amazing that people go trolling in search of ways to show off their witless grasp of the world!