Your response is 'we're not ALL calling her a chicken-legged drunkard' and 'some folks who like her article call her pretty so since we don't like her article we can call her ugly.' Reasoned debate to you means that not ALL of you insult her that way, so it's perfectly okay to do so, and then, of course, that it's appropriate to insult her person because others complimented it?
Are you trying to make me laugh or being serious?
Funniest of all, you try to indignantly claim I'm doing it, too. Gosh, let me rush to apologize like you did for your insult-spewing compatriots...
...but before I do, let me think, where have I heard the everyone-is-scum-so-our-acting-scummy-is-okay strategy before...hmmmmm...
I never said that. I never excused the insults.
Me: I opposed certain aspects of Coulter's article. I never called her chicken-legged or drunkard. Many other posters also opposed aspects of her article and never resorted to these personal attacks.
You said that Coulter's opposition almost never stops going after the woman personally. Meanwhile out of the first 50 or so posts, I only counted one who criticized her weight and none who called her a drunkard.
That's reasoned debate to you. That's what you consider a reasoned response. The smear of all in opposition because one in the opposition commented on her weight.
As I said before you do what you complain about. You should really correct the record.
As far as Coulter's weight goes, if some posters think that it's germain to the argument to comment on Coulter's weight and how she looks good, then it's not surprising that others would comment that they think she's too skinny. How shocking!
I could see it now. Some posters would comment on Hillary's lovely leg's and you would be so shocked to see other posters saying that they are not.
Your erroneous comment still remains, yet to be corrected;