Posted on 06/16/2006 5:05:55 PM PDT by ChessExpert
“As he turned to assault the next bunker an NVA machine gun opened up and he was mortally wounded. Captain Sosa-Camejo's valorous action and devotion to duty are in keeping with the highest traditions of the military service and reflect great credit upon himself, his unit, and the United States Army."
From his limousine Michael Moore sneers at this Cuban-American and his Band of Brothers as wimps and crybabies "with a yellow stripe down their backs."
Maybe I'm biased, but nothing – absolutely nothing – Ann Coulter has said about Murtha, Kerry or McClellan strikes me as remotely comparable in vileness, cowardice and rank stupidity as Michael Moore's blanket calumny against some of the bravest men of the 20th century.”
(Excerpt) Read more at newsmax.com ...
Yeah, important comments like, "That's the bong talking."
To whom are you addressing this incoherent babble?
Okay, Maybe we're not that far apart.
I wonder:
Are moderates moderate because their beliefs really are a blend of liberalism and conservatism?
Or are their convictions really a result of that age-old desire to be liked by everybody?
When I behave in a way that is wrong, sure enough a friend will come along and say, "Dude, you're screwin' up!".
Do I appreciate his observation? Well of course not.. At least not at first. { That mirror can be such an annoyance! Especially when our accuser is right.}
Are the current liberal juggernaut our friends, or are they our enemies? Is labeling them as enemies of the concepts this country was founded upon evil? Is evil even evil? Is good still good?
There are few people who have frustrated our political enemy more than Ann Coulter.
This is a net asset for the cause.
How many liberals have *you* frustrated today?
Get him to tell you about "blindfold chess", where you play multiple opponents on separate boards simultaneously, while blindfolded... /grin
Your whole post was so hilarious, that I missed this the first time through. I provided the link. I didn't come in half-cocked, I was pinged. I specifically asked him to keep me on the ping list, while asking him not to use it to pile-on fellow FReepers. I also told him how much I enjoy his articles. Why did he ping everyone, to send well wishes to the poster he quoted (as opposed to gang-piling)? Mendacious! Ok, I'm laughing all over again. (Go read the link again, if you even did the first time!)
I don't think I've frustrated any libs today, but I have frustrated them by virtue of volunteering at the polls. Look, I agree with her overall message, but not her delivery. I am so glad President Bush isn't calling those Jersey Girls "harpies" whose husbands might have been about to divorce them. Thank God.
Thanks for the link. According to it, she had "34 top secret documents stolen from her office in Washington". That doesn't sound like she had a right to have them in her purse. I have worked plenty of classified programs - and you don't just carry top secret documents around!
Circumstantial is often used as a euphamism for 'weak'. The FBI had a great case. From the facts in the link you provided, I don't see how ANYONE could excuse this spy. And while the author in question did admit her guilt, he also seemed to have thought the case was weak.
I'll tell you, if I came home with Top Secret documents, I'd spend a lot more time in jail than this woman did - even if I then took them back.
Ehh, rats. Lame way--not you, but just unfortunate--to leave off the conversation ("substance"), because there is still a crossing of the wires.
I'm glad to hear you are watching 24, though. Enjoy. :^)
I accept your complete surrender. It's fairly common for posters on this board to make the move to insults when their arguments are repudiated at every turn.
Well, you're obviously stoned if you think you've repudiated any arguments, when all you're doing is repeating some liberal tropes. This and this worthless carping about how AC's effectiveness could be better, all the while calling her a liar.
I have sympathy for your "war on drugs is a war on you and me" position. Yet I find it ironic that you come to a conservative forum, insult and attack a beloved member and supporter of this forum in Ann, and then lecture us on how to persuade the others to your point of view.
But even so, it looks to me like someone was being too cute by half--using the words "circumstantial" to imply that the case against the spy had no substantive basis.
From reading your later post, it appears that the book being reviewed was the thing that gave the impression of the case being "circumstantial". As your excerpt in 28 points out, the book authors waited until the end of the book to make it clear Coplon was a spy.
So when the review quotes the book, it could *at first blush* look like the reviewer was calling the government's case circumstantial.
Sounds to me like Ann or one of her researchers used Lexis-Nexis for the phrase circumstantial and did not carefully read the review.
Assuming for the moment your quote is accurate. I'm too lazy to look up the original article from the Seattle paper. :-)
Cheers!
I think they tend to be people who don't think about politics a lot. They believe that society has a list of problems and that it is the government's job to fix them. If the Republicans are the ones advocating a government program to solve their pet problems then that is who they will vote for. If it's the Democrats, then they get the vote. To me it seems that the word "moderate" is a euphemism for authoritarian".
The review could have been more carefully written to indicate (right where the phrase "entirely circumstantial" was used) that it was the case as it happened to have been presented which was circumstantial--and that there was conclusive evidence of Coplon's guilt.
But the review, like the book, took awhile to get around to that point.
So Ann is guilty of jumping the gun on poor writing.
Cheers!
Any normal guy in that proximity to Ann Coulter in that position--well, let's just say he'd get in big trouble with his wife real quick ;-)
Do you have chapter and verse for these quotes from Ann?
Cheers!
A. Sam Hill has not been able to puncture the accuracy of the article posted in #13.
2. Bruce Ramsey is not a liberal.
This and this worthless carping about how AC's effectiveness could be better, all the while calling her a liar.
She lied. What do you think I should call her?
I have sympathy for your "war on drugs is a war on you and me" position.
Glad to hear it. I may start a WoD ping list someday.
Yet I find it ironic that you come to a conservative forum, insult and attack a beloved member and supporter of this forum in Ann
I'm not sure why she is so beloved. I think someone like George Will is much more worthy. JMO.
and then lecture us on how to persuade the others to your point of view.
I was asked.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.