Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

I think these women started out sincerely enough and then they smelled money and fame and were co-opted by the lefties.
1 posted on 07/02/2006 8:05:45 AM PDT by Chi-townChief
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-34 last
To: Chi-townChief
Grief stricken liberals like the haughty four deal with their overwhelming pain by going to "A" list parties in Washington DC and New York, drinking Crystal and Dom, cackling about how evil George Bush is.

They make weekly appearances on the leftwing talk show circuit, adorn in their Donatellas, Laurens and Versaces, smiling and giggling, UNTIL of course they get the cue to play the ultimate VICTIMS of 911 and blame the evil wicked BUSH for their husbands deaths.

These four women, like their "COMMON FOLK" ally, Cindy Sheehan are female PIMPS for the DNC.

Nothing more, but maybe a lot less!!

28 posted on 07/02/2006 8:57:51 AM PDT by PISANO (We will not tire......We will not falter.......We will NOT FAIL!!! .........GW Bush [Oct 2001])
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Chi-townChief

I think 'enjoying' was the right word. 'Exploiting' has the connotation that they are trying to obtain as much financial recompense as possible. But they are doing more than that. Right after 9/11, they started courting the limelight, appearing on TV and making other appearances all over the country, as frequently as they could. There is an unseemly aspect to their activities - and there is no reason for seeking the limelight so much unless they really do enjoy it.

I question how much grief they are really feeling - doesn't real grief have a more private aspect to it?


30 posted on 07/02/2006 8:59:55 AM PDT by Hartmann
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Chi-townChief
4) "And by the way, how do we know their husbands weren't planning to divorce these harpies? Now that their shelf life is dwindling, they'd better hurry up and appear in Playboy."

My verdict: Just stupid.

But Laz takes it one step further, still:

"Not only that, but how do we know that these women weren't actually complicit in their husbands' deaths? Isn't it even remotely possible that one -- or all of them -- were secretly conspiring with Al Qaeda? What if they wanted their husbands dead, and found the perfect group to git-r-done?"

Laz shoots for over-the-top. HE SCORES!

31 posted on 07/02/2006 9:01:40 AM PDT by Lazamataz (Proudly Posting Without Reading the Article Since 1999 !!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Chi-townChief
Michael Bowers has missed the point, as have most journalists who have written about Ann Coulter's book.

If any of them had written the book instead of Ann, they would have been careful not to offend when they were attempting to make their point about the 9/11 widows. However, the way Ann wrote her book was guaranteed to stir up discussion concerning the points she made. The cries of indignation coming from the liberal left in newspaper articles, TV interviews, and talk radio deploring Ann's language have caused more people to become aware of the "Victim" strategy used by the liberal left to attack the right than would have ever resulted if Ann had used less inflammatory language.
32 posted on 07/02/2006 9:02:03 AM PDT by DJ Taylor (Once again our country is at war, and once again the Democrats have sided with our enemy.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Chi-townChief
The Jersey Girls were just 9/11's "Cindy Sheehan"...

There a prototype political tool the left has standardize on

37 posted on 07/02/2006 9:18:10 AM PDT by tophat9000 (If it was illegal French Canadians would La Raza back them? Racist back their race over country)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Chi-townChief

Boo hoo, Ann offended somebody. The liberal media, government liberals, and the kool-aid-drinker voters that support them are more offensive than a normal person can stomach.


39 posted on 07/02/2006 9:41:02 AM PDT by Excuse_My_Bellicosity ("Sharpei diem - Seize the wrinkled dog.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Chi-townChief

OK, it nice that Michael Bowers's logical mind can grasp the suability of Coutler's comments. But how does he feel about the New York Times aiding the enemy?


40 posted on 07/02/2006 9:45:57 AM PDT by GOPJ (NYT treason? Is Harriet telling Bush to ride the storm? Careful, next leak might sink the ship...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Chi-townChief

Ann is brilliant in her satire, ridicule and blasphemy of leftist shibboleths.
Stupid? Maybe, but stupid like a fox.


41 posted on 07/02/2006 10:04:57 AM PDT by Louis Foxwell (Here come I, gravitas in tow.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Chi-townChief
The writer's timing is on the mark! Just as some of the Supremes are shedding tears over the "rights and privileges" of accused terrorist detainees, Michael Bowers reminds us of how some others are exploiting this nation with their own demands for special privileges. The Wonder Widows obviously crave the limelight and are thrilled by the sound of their shrill political cat calls.
46 posted on 07/02/2006 11:43:54 AM PDT by OkeyDokeyOkie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Chi-townChief

This four harpies exploited their husbands death so they could help the very same democrat party that decimated CIA in the 70s
and build the great chinese wall between the goverment agencies in the 90s. This kind of party loyalty can only be reached if you follow their ideology like a religion. Ann Coulter was right on target by going after the Breitweiser Four because they are perfect example that for some people liberalism is the religion.


47 posted on 07/02/2006 12:21:10 PM PDT by contra9602
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Chi-townChief

48 posted on 07/02/2006 12:26:32 PM PDT by Donald Rumsfeld Fan ("Fake but Accurate": NY Times)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Chi-townChief

Best commentary I've seen on the whole Coulter/Jersey Girls thing! BUMP!


53 posted on 07/02/2006 5:03:56 PM PDT by soccermom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Chi-townChief

I thought one of the reasons Ann went after the widows is that within a week or two, they had hired either publicists or lawyers to handle potential future financial opportunities?


59 posted on 07/02/2006 8:34:25 PM PDT by roofgoat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Chi-townChief
They are classic New Jersey harpies - gimme gimme gimme. The only difference between them and welfare moms is that the harpies married well.

When they were promised money from the federal government, they immediately demanded more, and said it was because their husbands were better earners than the lower class individuals who were also murdered, therefor, they should get more.

Pressed, they "needed the money," to support their lavish lifestyles. Everyone else who lost an earner found a way to deal with it. Perhaps sell the McMansion and the Escalade, and have little chubby attend public school? GASP!!

These women were lionized because their husbands had the bad luck to be in the World Trade Center on September 11th. Poppycock. They're greedy scum. I lived among them for too long.

64 posted on 07/03/2006 7:18:15 AM PDT by sig226 (There are 10 kinds of people in the world: those who understand binary and those who do not.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-34 last

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson