Ann Coulter vs. Michael Moore

Newsmax ^ | 16 June 2006 | Humberto Fontova

[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.”

[grey_whiskers]

As I've said already, it's in portraying the words of a conservative writer who is favorably reviewing a book that exposes a communist spy as "Liberal refusal to accept any evidence that any person ever spied for the Soviet Union..." He flatly asserted that she was a spy. What would you call that, if not a lie?

BZZZZZZT! In your OWN quote, Ramsey says he is NOT a liberal.

Therefore, in saying liberals don't accept the evidence, she CAN'T have been talking about him. :-)

Cheers!

[JTN]

Must be you, you replied; but, couldn't answer it. Thus, you confirmed it. Enough said. Goodnight!

That's an interesting debating tactic you have. You post gibberish, then while your opponent is still baffled by your nonsense, you declare victory and go away.

[Steve Van Doorn]

"a True Tale of Espionage." by Bruce Ramsey stated, "the case offered by the government was entirely circumstantial. Coplon did have a right to have the documents in her purse. She had not passed them to the Russian; the government said she had intended to do it."

NOT even the courts believed that hog wash. They had to throw out the evidence because of an improper search.

I really do fail to understand this lie you are claiming Ann is making.

Don't you see Bruce Ramsey wrote his artical both ways.

[grey_whiskers]

These are people who aren't interested in the truth. Both Moore's and Coulter's followers only want to hear someone tell them what they think they already know. The weakest possible support for their position will do.

I call Bullshit.

I'm a great Coulter fan, I was the one who first posted this:
on Free Republic.

And yet I actually read your quotes and said Ann jumped the gun.

Nice try, though.

Cheers!

[JTN]

BZZZZZZT! In your OWN quote, Ramsey says he is NOT a liberal. Therefore, in saying liberals don't accept the evidence, she CAN'T have been talking about him. :-)

That's kind of the point. Ramsey is a conservative, but Ann pretends he is not. Otherwise, why would she quote him to support her point?

[Steve Van Doorn]

"Obviously he has accepted the evidence that she is a spy"

He did NOT. He said, 'she is a spy' in his article which is true... but he wrote his article BOTH ways. He stated she was innocent and guilty in the same dam article. It is nothing but double talk.

Try and explain to me how this artical wasn't just double speek.

[Steve Van Doorn]

”Ramsey is a conservative that writes for the Seattle Times?”

Ok.. now I believe everything.

Dude give it up.

[JTN]

He did NOT. He said, 'she is a spy' in his article which is true... but he wrote his article BOTH ways. He stated she was innocent and guilty in the same dam article. It is nothing but double talk. Try and explain to me how this artical wasn't just double speek.

Easy. He said that the court case that was presented against Coplon was circumstantial, but that looking at evidence that, for security reasons, was not used in court, one can easily see that she was actually guilty. It's really not that hard to understand.

[Sam Hill]

Let's quit kidding. You don't like Coulter because she is for the war on drugs and you like drugs.

Because of this lofty position you have latched upon some preposterous claim (that NO ONE anywhere else has made besides the author) to call Coulter a liar and to call her the equal of Michael Moore.

For crying out loud. Is getting high really so vital to you that you would stoop such such utter mendacity?

If so, God help you.

[JTN]

I really do fail to understand this lie you are claiming Ann is making.

Accusing Bruce Ramsey of "Liberal refusal to accept any evidence that any person ever spied for the Soviet Union..." when he states his belief that Coplon was a spy is a lie. I understand that his statement, "Coplon was a spy" is a bit ambiguous, but surely someone as smart as Ann Coulter could have figured it out.

[JTN]

Let's quit kidding. You don't like Coulter because she is for the war on drugs and you like drugs.

I accepted your surrender once already. There's no need to reinforce it.

[Steve Van Doorn]

”case that was presented against Coplon was circumstantial”

This is TRUE AFTER the courts threw the content of her bag out because it was an improper search.

Ramsey stated she had a right to have the documents in her purse. This was totally a lie. The documents where stolen.

[Sam Hill]

"Accusing Bruce Ramsey of "Liberal refusal to accept any evidence that any person ever spied for the Soviet Union..."'

This quote refers to the scores of examples Coulter has presented in the previous 17 pages of the chapter.

If you think Coulter has a clue (or a care) who Bruce Ramsey is, you are sadly mistaken.

It is upon this intentional misreading of that page you have hanged your whole mendacious argument.

It's pathetic. It's dishonest. It's bizarre. It's the kind of thing only a crackpot would do.

But there you are.

[Oztrich Boy]

What she posted was factually true.

"True but inaccurate" - It's called disinformation, a propaganda technique of presenting informantion, not technically inacurate, in such a manner to create a misleading impression. Much employed by agents of the Left.

The advantage is that when the actual dodgy claim is questioned, the Moonbats and Anndroids can pretend to the high moral ground.

[Sam Hill]

I hear you.

[JTN]

Ok.. now I believe everything.

Good point. Anyone who writes for the Seattle Times must be a leftist. For example, here is an article in which Ramsey stakes out his leftist position that there is too much beauracracy involved in building new housing. And of course, the article I linked in #13 comes from Liberty magazine, a well-known bastion of libertarian leftist political opinion.

[youngjim]

Why did he ping everyone, to send well wishes to the poster he quoted (as opposed to gang-piling)?

Your mendacity resides in your conclusion that he did it gang-pile on somebody, thus dismissing his (voluminous) work on that quite heated thread. You were half-cocked in quibbling with him in public about how to use his own ping list and he was quite right in removing you from his ping list. Tonite you continue to mendaciously claim that he was "calling in the posse (who never showed up!)." He was mopping the floor with that poster--he didn't need any piling on.

You could have kept it all private thru freep mail--instead you come here tonite to limp-wristedly lie that he "evicted" you from his ping list because he's "gotten too big for his britches." That sound you hear is me crying you a river.

[grey_whiskers]

That's kind of the point. Ramsey is a conservative, but Ann pretends he is not. Otherwise, why would she quote him to support her point?

Carelessness. Seattle is a very liberal place, it would be natural to jump to the conclusion that even the "token" conservative in such a place is really a liberal (see also ABC's Politically Incorrect with Bill Maher which was one of the most pro-PC places around.

So if she Lexis-Nexis for "circumstantial" + "Coplon" and sees an article from a Seattle paper, it's easy to make a note of it as "a liberal source" (playing the averages) without actually reading the thing.

Don't know whether that's what she really did. But it would account for all the facts without insisting she's a liar.

Cheers!

[Sam Hill]

You are confused (to put it nicely).

Disinformation is false information. (Like what you just posted.)

Disinformation - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Disinformation, in the context of espionage, military intelligence, and propaganda, is the spreading of deliberately false information to mislead an enemy as to one's position or course of action. It also includes the distortion of true information in such a way as to render it useless.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disinformation

What Coulter said was absolutely true.

Don't be confused by the trolls. Learn to read.

[JTN]