The funniest part was when they were talking about Cindy Sheehan and the Rat that was opposing her said, "But she lost her son", to which, Coulter of course replied, "You just made my point", that the RATs put up these people with sad stories and they say we can't respond b/c of their tragedy.
The funniest part was when they were talking about Cindy Sheehan and the Rat that was opposing her said, "But she lost her son", to which, Coulter of course replied, "You just made my point", that the RATs put up these people with sad stories and they say we can't respond b/c of their tragedy.Bingo!
See also, from THIS recent thread:
Why Ann Coulter is right:
Kevin McCullough defends author for 9-11 widow comments
WorldNetDaily.com ^ | Friday, June 9, 2006 | Kevin McCullough
Posted on 06/09/2006 12:42:21 AM PDT by JohnHuang2
Liberals in America have been staging a new strategy on winning public-policy debates: Simply provide spokespeople that no one is allowed to respond to. Ann Coulter had the gall to challenge that and let loose with some direct observations in her newest best seller, "Godless: The Church of Liberalism," and true to form, liberals have been fomenting in response.
The reason they are is not because Ann has broken some sacred respect that one should have for a grieving mother, wife or relative. Rather, the reason they are so outraged by this is because it stabs through the heart the strategy of hiding behind spokespeople who "can't be criticized..."
-- snip --
...Ann's criticism is legitimate. If liberals in America wish truly to have a debate on the issues that we all have strong emotions about, then stand and make the point, but don't hide behind those who are ineffective, unskilled and often wrong in their views, simply because they're victims.
For the last few weeks, Rep. Jack Murtha has been crisscrossing the television pundit circuit criticizing the brave Marines who fell under attack via an improvised explosive device, after which some women and children tragically ended up dead. The Marines claimed that they were fired upon and that those firing upon them did so from behind women and children being used as human shields. The jury is still out, but thus far Murtha has yet to present evidence that contradicts the Marines' account.
Liberals are using the exact same tactics today – firing upon people of faith who believe in God, who believe God's model for marriage is what society should promote, but they do so from behind victims against whom, they believe, no one would fire back. People like the Jersey Girls, Joe Wilson, Cindy Sheehan and Jack Murtha. They do so knowing that they would lose in substantive, equitable fair debates...
CLICK HERE for the rest of that thread
Then their other tactic is to say we can't have an opinion on war unless we've been to war. But they can have an opinion because they're against the war. So, you can be against the war if you've never been but you aren't allowed be for the war unless you've been there. Does that mean that if you've been you can't be against?