Only W CAN THINK HE KNOWS (ANN COULTER WAS RIGHT)

World Net Daily. com ^ | 07/22/2005 | Andrew Longman

[sirthomasthemore]

A small town in Indiana and a brief filed saying that Roe v. Wade was wrongly decided are entirely positive signs on first inspection, but the second reveals only a leaning and not a falling off on one side or the other. This is, of course, by White House design for the public understanding of Judge Roberts. Bush has exhibited his recurrent traits and examining G.W. Bush right now is the only way to know what really is in the heart of Judge Roberts.

Roberts is deliberately without much record. He is deliberately congenial and with friends all around. He is deliberately professionally competent, hard to make controversial – fine. I say "deliberately" on Bush's part – it is unknown if Judge Roberts has achieved his stealth status by his own design or by chance. Seemingly driven, popular success would encourage an individual to remain somewhat vanilla, but great strategists also sometimes hold their tongue and bide their time. We don't know, and that's the point.

[John Filson]

Are we complaining about the nomination? And by the way, I doubt conservative views will hurt his chances! Aren't we mourning the victory that Frist could have had? Aren't we observing lost opportunities, opportunities that voters may remember? Aren't we saying: there's only so much time to save America. Why are we dallying? I suspect Roberts will be good. I liked congressman BillyBob's essay on the nomination. I agree that we need an intelligent judge. We also need one with huge brass ones. We could use a president and some congressional leaders like that right now, too.

[sirthomasthemore]

She makes similar comments about other people consistently.

Tired of taxes...me too, definitely. -:)

But, as I said, I only read Ann's columns when they're posted here. But, I can't imagine her savaging a Freeper, or Jim, or Dubya, Rush, or a fellow conservative- not in the manner that was done her.

But beyond that, intuitively, I'm sure you know the referenced attacks weren't intended to devalue her ideas, but they went to hurt her personally (skinny, no Adam's Apple, chicken legs, hooker)- Comments like that aren't intended to win an intellectual argument, they're intended to hurt.

I mean no one, no one, would hate to see Hillary be President, much less reelected as Senator, more than I. But, I really don't see any reason to call her "piano legs"--- there's so much to criticize with her views, I don't even have time to think about her appearance.

But, even there, attacking an arch enemy is one thing- attacking a person who -heretofore- has been everyone's favorite female columnist on this Board is quite another thing. And what's most infuriating is that, you know, as soon as she writes another great column attacking liberals, this Board will be overloaded with all those "sexy" photos of the incomparable Ann Coulter. It's unseemly, and intellectually dishonest.



TAGLINES

Pzifer: “Viagra won’t cause dementia or blindness". (Except if one wears a Black Robe)

Clean your muskets and sharpen your pitchforks and get ready to ride to the sound of the guns.(KELO) :o}-

Dems, hello??? We could get out of Vietnam; we can’t GET OUT of terrorism.

[alnick]

I read through the first hundred or so of the posts on the (one of the) Coulter article thread(s), and I saw many posters disagree with her and very few attacks.

[sirthomasthemore]

MY quote: But if you didn't see the references to her as a drunkard, hooker, skinny, ugly, lacking an Adam's Apple, psychologically troubled- then perhaps you should give it another read."
YOUR QUOTE; "Skinny isn't a personal attack...she is skinny. Beyond that she's just another columnist with an opinion."
You only mentioned "skinny", I assume therefore that you default on the others. Thank you for conceding my point.



TAGLINES

Pzifer: “Viagra won’t cause dementia or blindness". (Except if one wears a Black Robe)

Clean your muskets and sharpen your pitchforks and get ready to ride to the sound of the guns.(KELO) :o}-

Dems, hello??? We could get out of Vietnam; we can’t GET OUT of terrorism.

[biff0101]

Quit your crying, we call it like it is here...

[Chunga]

I've read your posts for at least six years cynicom.

Non-Republican "conservatives" aren't really "conservatives" at all. Real conservatives are interested in getting as much conservative bang-for-their-vote as possible and understand that voting Republican is the only way to do it.

Non-Republican "conservatives" help get Democrats elected. Have you taken a good look at the Democratic Party lately, cynicom?

With Democrat presidents you get Ginsberg, Breyer and Stevens. With Republican presidents you get Kennedy, O'Connor, Thomas, Rhenquist and Scalia. No contest - and Souter was nothing more than a mistake.

The RINO Arlen Specter pushed so hard for Clarence Thomas, the most conservative member of the Supreme Court, that I thought he'd hemorrhage. Arlen Specter!

So please cynicom; no more sermons about your fake conservatism. The best way to defeat liberalism is to defeat Democrats...and there's only one way to do that.

Vote Republican.

[CWOJackson]

Yes, I conceded that she's a skinny talking head with her own opinion, nothing else.

[rwfromkansas]

I was just trying to get a rise out of the guy to see if he would personally attack back since part of his criticism was people supposedly attacking Ann...wasn't actually mad when I wrote it or typing in rage.

I didn't see many people personally attacking Ann, but I did see a lot say "I disagree with her on this one."

[cynicom]

With that diatribe it appears that as an ideology, conservatism is also over your head.

[cynicom]

Tonight you have seen a cross section of the Coulter bashers. They range from the intellectually dishonest, to the socially retarded to the morally bankrupt. Some even qualify for more than one category.

They do have one thing in common, they are "republicans", with most masquerading as conservatives.

[Chunga]

With that reply it appears that as a meaningful word, "diatribe" is over your head.

[Darkwolf377]

Good post. Roberts should be judged on his record, not on who supports or dislikes him because of "feelings" about him.

[sirthomasthemore]

I read through the first hundred or so of the posts on the (one of the) Coulter article thread(s), and I saw many posters disagree with her and very few attacks.
**************
JUST WITHIN THE FIRST FIFTY POSTS-

1. Maybe she should eat something, and then comment.

2. Holy Crow! She DOES have an Adam's Apple!

3. obviously we can't treat someone who has serious medical conditions in dignified manner (/sarcasm)

4. Not exactly the picture of health, is she. Needs more meat on those bones IMO.

Don't read the rest of the 867, it's not pretty.


TAGLINES

Pzifer: “Viagra won’t cause dementia or blindness". (Except if one wears a Black Robe)

Clean your muskets and sharpen your pitchforks and get ready to ride to the sound of the guns.(KELO) :o}-

Dems, hello??? We could get out of Vietnam; we can’t GET OUT of terrorism.

[stylin19a]

blah...blah...blah...

[Gelato]

Ann is right.

Picking Roberts is like playing Russian Roulette. We don't know what we're getting. With the stakes so high and the courts destroying our country, we can't afford to play games. We needed a nominee who doesn’t require any guesswork, someone who has previously expressed his opinions, so we can rally deserved support around him.

The only reason Ann is being criticized on FR is because she is questioning the President's judgment. Some here believe we're supposed to "have faith" that Roberts is the right pick, even though no one really knows. That very notion proves Ann is correct. Bush should have picked someone who would have united us because we know what he stands for. Instead we're left with stunted enthusiasm as we debate whether he really was the best choice.

A stronger nominee would have given immediate dividends in the next elections. But now the big question mark over Roberts leads some of us to wonder whether the GOP really can deliver. We won't know for years to come if voting Republican in 2000 to 2004 gave us the Scalias and Thomases needed to reverse judicial activism.

Lukewarm just won't cut it anymore.

[CWOJackson]

"Picking Roberts is like playing Russian Roulette. We don't know what we're getting."

You NEVER know what you're going get.

Barry Goldwater was once a strong conservative and in his later years wondered to the left on many issues he had previously been to the right on. At one time Hilary Clinton was a "Goldwater Girl" and we know how she turned out.

No one, not even Ann Coulter, can name a single prospect for the Supreme Court that we KNOW will remain consistent.

[mountainfolk]

I like Ann and am as much amused as edified by her antics, writing, and personal appearances in various forums. I doubt seriously that she is offended by the potty mouths on FR who do not discriminate when commenting on any persons personal appearance. Ann would likely be more interested in the number of posts commenting on her article as that is what she does best, i.e. stir up the populous. I believe she is wrong about John Roberts being a possible Souter. And for all of those who think Roberts doesn't cut it as a conservative or an originalist I would say there is just as much a chance for disappointment with any nominee we might think we have figured out to be the exact perfect person for the job. Pres Bush is well aware that bringing the country back to the Constitution rests on his shoulders, and I have not seen him shirk a hard job yet. From what I have read about John Roberts, I see nothing to support the negative consequence some seem to have accepted as the outcome of this nomination.

[sirthomasthemore]

YOUR ORIGINAL QUOTE: I love Coulter, but to attack others for attacking a woman who routinely picks on people's physical characteristics? THAT, MY FRIEND, is the hypocritical treatment.
YOUR SUBSEQUENT QUOTE: And only my friends get to call me friend. Strangers who do so are instantly suspect.

***************

I retract the "my friend" comment, if it offends you. But, since you originally referred to me as "my friend", I merely responded in kind.

In passing, when you referred to me as "my friend", I though you meant it. I didn't feel because you were a stranger that you were "instantly suspect". Still don't.


TAGLINES

Pzifer: “Viagra won’t cause dementia or blindness". (Except if one wears a Black Robe)

Clean your muskets and sharpen your pitchforks and get ready to ride to the sound of the guns.(KELO) :o}-

Dems, hello??? We could get out of Vietnam; we can’t GET OUT of terrorism.

[Darkwolf377]

There's no inconsistency in my use of the term friend. But then you knew that.

Some folks who post these kinds of threads may be able to fool some of the people some of the time...

[sirthomasthemore]

Rather uppity, aren't you?

****************
If defending a woman from slanderous and unwarranted attacks from her "friends", and which woman has done more for the conservative movement than most, and who has been a loyal friend of FR, and who puts herself in dangers way every time she speaks for conservatives is uppity- then unrepentantly guilty as accused.



TAGLINES

Pzifer: “Viagra won’t cause dementia or blindness". (Except if one wears a Black Robe)

Clean your muskets and sharpen your pitchforks and get ready to ride to the sound of the guns.(KELO) :o}-

Dems, hello??? We could get out of Vietnam; we can’t GET OUT of terrorism.