Posted on 06/17/2006 8:42:22 AM PDT by marc costanzo
The left-leaning Newsweek magazine lied about what she wrote in her book, an indignant Ann Coulter said during an appearance on Thursday night's Hannity & Colmes show on Fox News Channel.
"I'm sitting in a Fox studio in L.A.," Coulter said. "I don't know why there's a copy of Newsweek here rather than Human Events. Here is Newsweek describing Ann Coulter as saying '9/11 widows enjoyed their [husbands'] deaths.' That is simply a lie . . . That is a lie. If you can't deal with the facts and you refuse to say what the argument is, I think that's a total lack of confidence in your position and it certainly shows a complete lack of understanding [that] Americans can find out the truth these days - that it's not the mainstream media monopoly it was 10 years ago."
(Excerpt) Read more at newsmax.com ...
Hmm, another person who misses the point. Go ahead with your mudslinging--oops, I mean intellectual discussion.
Yo dude, your credibility just took a considerable hit. It didn't have to be that way. You chose it that way. But hey, that's your problem -- not mine. Deal with it. Or don't. It doesn't matter to me -- it's your loss, not mine.
There's no escape. See tag line.
Yo, dude, until you explain your original post, I can't even figure out what my error was, dude!
I'd say Coulter should do a better job analyzing connotations, but I think she was fully aware.
Admitting that I am not a mental genius, I assume most normal folks got the same inference.
Sadly, it seems I was wrong.
I think she used "enjoy" in the way we commonly understand it: to derive pleasure from. It was only when she was challenged that she fell back to this "derive benefit from".
Perhaps she would be given a break if she, and her sycophants, would admit she could have used a better, more clear, more appropriate word. But, since I don't recall that Coulter has EVER admitted she might have made a mistake, she's certainly not going to back off in this case, when the klieg lights are in her face.
This is cult-like behavior.
I do not assume ulteriors from Conservatives.
You're right, and I've wasted enough time on it for a Saturday afternoon. Thanks for pulling a couple people off from dog-piling on me. ;-)
You are supremely generous-minded. Good day!
I'm just happy to not be anal retentive.
FRegards.
You are, quite simply, an idiot.
Their husbands were about to divorce them?
What the HELL are you talking about? This isn't about them being pleased that their husbands are dead. This is about them gaining benefits, after the fact, from those deaths. Are you truly that stupid?
The evidence indicates she used "enjoy" to mean "drew pleasure from." All of her other comments are consistent with this interpretation.
What other evidence? You have offered nothing but worthless drivel. You have not addressed even the simple evidence of the definition of the word "enjoy," let alone Ms Coulter's particular intent. You are a light weight. Admit it, admit your total defeat and move on. You should go back to DU and practice some more before you try to engage your betters.
Go back to your day's playing ZORK, you immature and totally incompetent failure
You are in a deep pit.
Step one, stop digging.
None of these routes actually involve discussing what the widows say and why their demands are unreasonable.
OK, let's discuss what "the widows" (you seem to promote the anti-American lie that these four TRAITORS speak for all of the families of the 3,000 victims) have to say:
From the Wall Street Journal, "The 9/11 Widows Americans are beginning to tire of them." from 2004
But the best known and most quoted pronouncement of all had come in the form of a question put by the leader of the Jersey Girls. "We simply wanted to know," Ms. Breitweiser said, by way of explaining the group's position, "why our husbands were killed. Why they went to work one day and didn't come back."
The answer, seared into the nation's heart, is that, like some 3,000 others who perished that day, those husbands didn't come home because a cadre of Islamist fanatics wanted to kill as many of the hated American infidels in their tall towers and places of government as they could, and they did so. Clearly, this must be a truth also known to those widows who asked the question--though in no way one would notice.
Who, listening to them, would not be struck by the fact that all their fury and accusation is aimed not at the killers who snuffed out their husbands' and so many other lives, but at the American president, his administration, and an ever wider assortment of targets including the Air Force, the Port Authority, the City of New York? In the public pronouncements of the Jersey Girls we find, indeed, hardly a jot of accusatory rage at the perpetrators of the 9/11 attacks. We have, on the other hand, more than a few declarations like that of Ms. Breitweiser, announcing that "President Bush and his workers . . . were the individuals that failed my husband and the 3,000 people that day."
Let's start there. Is there any argument in that piece that you disagree with? I've provided the link. You can research that to your tiny little hearts content, regardless of the pain you cause to the families of the other 2,996 families who lost loved ones. Go ahead. Make your case.
The attack on the World Trade Center was George W. Bush's fault. That's their basic argument.
Defend that, if you care to, you soul less troll.
... 310 pages of carefully documented facts ...
BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!
You have it EXACTLY right. It must be read and understood in context. As usual the MSM, NewsWeak, the harpies, etc. take it out of context to destroy its meaning and confuse the issue.
If she meant derived benefit from, why didn't she use "benefit" rather than "enjoy"?
Because she knew hacks in the MSM and on forums would take the bait. She described some of the benefits, thus adds to the context of 'enjoying'
For, since day one on this forum you've not risen to the occasion.
What "occasion"?
See tag line.
The antis on this thread have nothing to their argument but intellectual dishonesty and visceral hatred for the author. That they need to abuse AC (NY TIMES BESTSELLING AUTHOR 50,000+ copies sold) only displays their own pathetic weaknesses.
"Self-righteousness is like a drug, creating the warm sensation that you are more moral, more compassionate, more sensitive than anyone else in the universe. Once you've done it, you have to do it again and again and again."
Godless p. 58
The lie is she 9/11 widows as a whole and not a group of four that, well, seem to be enjoying their husbands' deaths.
Wow! Trying to inject a note of reason into the discussion really makes the hyenas howl!
Good job smoking out the true idiots!
I disagree and here is why:
If she had used the word enjoyed, it would indicate an occurance from the past and that they gained pleasure from their husbands' deaths. Since she used the word enjoying, she obviously meant the present. That is no accident. In the present, they enjoy celebrity, wealth and power caused by their husbands' deaths. To me, the difference is obvious.
It is possible that she didn't mean it that way but the language says otherwise.
I don't have to give her the benefit of the doubt here. The language indicates the second definition. I would need something more substantial to jump to the conclusion that Ann meant "enjoyed" their deaths (in the past) rather than "enjoying" the wealth, celebrity and power (in the present) brought about by their deaths.
My only post in this discussion
was #26. I don't find any retort
to that post. What did you want me
to respond to?
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.