Glory Be, Alan Colmes Stumps Ann Coulter

[HolyWarrior]

Take a look at the latest rankings on Amazon.com!

"Treason" outselling "Living History"

[Sava]

oh please HW, Hillary's crap will end up making way more money than Coulter's trash

[Boris Godunov]

Nevermind that Hillary's book came out earlier, so it has had time to settle on the list, and that Amazon.com's rankings aren't necessarily indicative of overall sales figures nationwide.

But HW lives for the tiny, shallow victories he can muster in the face of his other constant defeats, Sava.

[Sava]

ut HW lives for the tiny, shallow victories he can muster in the face of his other constant defeats,

I suppose that's better than spanking to an Ann Coulter poster.

[Boris Godunov]

Probably does that, too.

[Sava]

She's at least an 8 beer girl.

[Guynemer]

Maybe an 80 beer girl.

Frankly, Jessica Tandy has more sex appeal than Coulter. And I'm not talking Tandy during her "breathing" phase. I mean today, six feet under.

Over the past few weeks, I had to perform several pelvic exams and pap smears on women tipping the scales over three large; one checked in at 420 lbs. I take each and every one of them before that vicious horse-faced anorexic harpy.

[Sava]

Do you ever get propositioned Guynemer?

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by Sava
Do you ever get propositioned Guynemer?

He started blocking my PMs.

[Berzerker]

Meldor -

Let me just step up and be the first to say that I find her to be intelligent and well spoken. It is interesting that instead of refuting her ideas, you would rather attack her looks and personality. The only thing said against her ideas is that they are mad?

Didn't you read what happened when Colmes asked her to identify these traitors? She said we'll have to wait for evidence from Iraq!!! She has no evidence, yet she makes the accusation and does so in general terms - them liberals.

The agruement that she makes in the book is to equate the ideas and desires of the liberals to treason.

And that is not how the Constitution defines "treason". Kind of relevant, wouldn't you say? She's basicly saying anyone who doesn't agree with her, or with "conservatives", is guilty of treason.

To point out how they have lead America down a dangerous path.

Sorry, but we have this problem with terrorists because both liberals and conservatives keep sticking their noses into the affairs of people half way around the world. And btw, if you want to look at the homicide rates for the 20th century, you'll see that safety is not really a high priority of the 2 parties since they are both so intent on waging their drug war.

Asking to point to a specific person and prove they are treasonous is a silly ploy and Alan new it was a cheap way to get around the facts revealed in her book.

You mean asking an author to identify the traitors they've just written a book about is cheap? If someone wrote a book accusing conservatives of treason and didn't bother identifying these conservatives, I'd say there was a serious flaw in their argument.

If you can't argue with the facts then try and make a side issue to win points.

Yes, fact - Ann Coulter wrote a book accusing liberals of treason. Fact - she wouldn't identify any living liberal as a traitor. Fact - she says we will have to wait for evidence. Fact - Ann Coulter wouldn't argue facts on H&C.

You are most likely the ones who will defend every word in Hillary's book as the complete truth.

Ah, which brings me to Ann's previous book - "Slander".

I will now return you to your regular scheduled bashing of the right.

This thread was started by someone on the "right"; of course, I'm so far right, many conservatives sound like left wingers to me.

Sorry, but it something done by everyone. It is an exagerration to make a point. Would you like me to list all of the quotes from the left, calling right-winger everything from treasonists to madmen.

Ah, would that be called avoiding facts to score points on a side issue? But are you now equating Ann's tactics with those employed by people on the left? You know, those people who are the subject of her book on "Slander"? I thought it was hilarious for Ann to write a book about slander while she got her credentials by slandering all sorts of people...

“Liberals have a preternatural gift for always striking a position on the side of treason,” says Coulter. “Everyone says liberals love America, too. No, they don’t.” From Truman to Kennedy to Carter to Clinton, America has contained, appeased, and retreated, often sacrificing America’s best interests and security. With the fate of the world in the balance, liberals should leave the defense of the nation to conservatives.

So it is treason to oppose conservatives. Let me give you an example to refute this nonsense about who loves or hates America: had you lived during the heyday of the KKK, would you have loved them? Do you love political corruption from the 2 parties? Do you love what happened at Waco and Ruby Ridge? Do you love the way the Republicrats keep making enemies for us abroad only to tell us once we are attacked here at home how they will need to take more of our freedoms to make us "safer"? You see, when people express their opposition to what the Republicans want, they are accused of "hating America" when the actual target of this "hate" is the GOP. Naturally, the Dems use similar terminology to demonise their opponents, but the end result is the same - do what we say and love it or you must "hate America".

Coulter reveals how liberals have been horribly wrong in all their political analyses and policy prescriptions.

Being wrong does not equal treason. The Founders would have never sanctioned the liberal or conservative foreign policy over the last 50 years.

Sorry, but this country was founded on a series of treasons acts and ideas put forth by some of the very people who wrote the constitution. The strict definition of treason in the constitution is a protection against the state attempts to stifle political opposition. Something the good folks posting inthis thread might take note of.

Hmm...is someone here preventing you from debating? But yes, the Founders, while not considering themselves traitors, certainly knew that was how the King viewed them. That's kind of the point, they wanted a succinct and objective definition of treason so people like Ann couldn't run around accusing people of treason without facing possible lawsuits for slander (that's why she avoided Colmes' question). But at the same time, those Founders would have never considered a person a traitor for opposing political parties that were trashing the Constitution. Their definition of treason assumes the Constitution was and still is applicable, the Republicrats have made sure the Constitution is nothing more than a footnote in US history...

BTW, how is defending her right to political speech and opinion yammering? Oh yeah, it comes not from a liberal who has every right to throw out these kinds of statements, but from a conservative. My, and you look to teh constitution for support, should you look at the whole thing?

I have looked at the whole thing. Now, who's attacking Ann's freedom of speech/press? If you cannot cite someone here, then just what are you defending? It is a bit ironic for Ann (or her defenders) to complain about her constitutional rights when she doesn't give a **** about the rights of others...

[Sikander]

Originally posted by monolith94
I hate Coulter with a depth that I never believed, when I was younger, I could hate anyone with.

Are you sure that you don't just want to fvck her, hard?

[Sikander]

Originally posted by Ecthelion

in golden showers?

Would Ann Coulter be a good source to read in order to get into understanding the American right?

If you are looking for someone to merely confirm your own biases without making you think, yes.

[Sikander]

Originally posted by Guynemer

A Freemason-alien plot? Hell! For the love of heaven, Coulter believes that women shouldn't be allowed to vote! What's the point of trying to out-absurd that?

You have to admit, she makes a very good case for this by using herself as an example.

[Dis]

sounds great to me, she is not a very smart woman for using the word treason. She really has no idea what she's talking about.

Liberals may be stupid and have no idea how to deal with foreign affairs, but they are not treasonous.

[SpencerH]

The sale of the satelite technology to the Chinese may have been treasonous, but we'll never know since it seems to have become a non-issue.