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

Skip to comments.

Is Ann Coulter good for the conservative movement?
Catholic Exchange ^ | Jan. 2007 | James Fitzpatrick

Posted on 02/13/2007 9:01:47 PM PST by bstein80

James Fitzpatrick has a good article on this question over at Catholic Exchange...

"Would the late Russell Kirk think of Ann Coulter as a positive force in the conservative cause? It is not an easy question to answer. Kirk died in 1994, well before Coulter took center stage. Everyone knows her now. She is the willowy blonde queen of the wisecracking, populist brand of conservatism in vogue on the talk shows these days. She is also a best-selling author, with several books to her name. She once described the 9/11 widows who have become prominent critics of the war in Iraq as "broads" and "millionaires, lionized on TV and in articles about them, reveling in their status as celebrities." She added, "I've never seen people enjoying their husbands' deaths so much."

(Excerpt) Read more at theconservativerevolution.com ...


TOPICS: Philosophy
KEYWORDS: anncoulter; catholicexchange
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 121-122 next last
To: bstein80

I think she's GREAT for the movement and have thought so since the first time I saw her on cable, now years ago.


41 posted on 02/13/2007 9:37:48 PM PST by TAdams8591 (Guilianni is a Liberal who cannot beat Hillary!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: EyeGuy

She is dead on about the 9/11 widows, too.


42 posted on 02/13/2007 9:39:55 PM PST by sine_nomine (The United States...shall protect each of them against invasion. Article IV, 4. US Constition)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: brydic1

He defended our nation, restored morale, respect, and power to the military, revitalized the conservative movement, supported the cause of life time and time again, displayed Christian compassion and family values, returned honor, civility, and integrity to the White House, and provided steady leadership through all the screams and catcalls from both sides of the aisle.

Not only is he good for conservatism. He's great for America.

As for Ann, she could cut a bit close but overall, she's very good for conservatism.


43 posted on 02/13/2007 9:40:45 PM PST by Killborn (Age of servitude. A government of the traitors, by the liars, for the sheep.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: bstein80

She's a gadfly, an instigator; our side's answer to Michael Moore. Makes a bundle of money telling a partisan audience what it wants to hear. I've always thought of her as a type of stand-up comic.


44 posted on 02/13/2007 9:42:39 PM PST by Zeroisanumber (Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ronaldus Magnus Reagan

I believe in Creation, but that does not lead me to follow the rapture business. Creation is clearly taught in the Bible, but people have the right to follow their own light.
Just don't paint all of us with the same brush.


45 posted on 02/13/2007 9:42:42 PM PST by sine_nomine (The United States...shall protect each of them against invasion. Article IV, 4. US Constition)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: zbigreddogz

Why is Ann bad for debate?

There is nothing better than watching some second rate liberal on a prime time argument show start throwing spittle at Ann who usually cleans his/her clock.

They hate her because she is effective and uses their own tactics.


46 posted on 02/13/2007 9:43:57 PM PST by volunbeer (Dear heaven.... we really need President Reagan again!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

Personally I think she is a net positive.

Her 'over-the-top' rhetoric turns off a lot of people; But by the same token, even more people need to be 'beat over the head with a 2X4" to grasp even the most basic realities.

In her facts, she is rarely wrong. In her delivery of those facts... Well, I don't like to admit it, but she turns off a lot of people, even me, upon occasion.


47 posted on 02/13/2007 9:44:35 PM PST by LegendHasIt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: SoldierMedic
"Is there really a factual foundation for what she says? I would say no. I recall seeing an interview she had with a Canadian Journalist where she was adamant that Canada had been a big help to America in Vietnam, including sending large amount of troops. In actuallity, unless you count the 240 troops sent to monitor the cease fire, Canada sent no troops. They just sold us stuff to help in our war effort."

Welcome to the Canadian Vietnam Veterans Memorial Home Page

From the site: "Since 1959 when the United states officially entered the Vietnam war approximately 40,000 Canadians voluntarily joined and served beside their brothers and sisters from the United States in all branches of the U.S. armed forces. Who can explain as to why they volunteered to serve in Vietnam. Perhaps it was because they believed in the right to choose, the right to liberty, the right of unrestrictiveness and privilege. Maybe they believed in Freedom and chose to fight for it. Sometimes we take what we have for granted, for those of us who enjoy freedom on an every day basis, we have those who fought for it to thank."

You are a newbie here. Educate yourself before making obnoxiously ignorant posts as this mendacious CBC interview.

48 posted on 02/13/2007 9:45:35 PM PST by youngjim (Anger a liberal. Work hard. Succeed. Be happy.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Calpernia

I think she's great for conservatism - especially her writing. Every cause needs a bulldog that goes after the jugular. I wish the republicans in congress had some of her convictions and spirits.


49 posted on 02/13/2007 9:45:46 PM PST by aquila48
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Lancey Howard
Exactly. She's anti-PC - not easy in this squeamish, easily- offended society where speaking truth is offensive.
50 posted on 02/13/2007 9:46:29 PM PST by presently no screen name
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: bstein80
I equate Ann's style of combat with the enemy [Socialist left] on par with WWII's ROE

You can't defeat an enemy by playing nice, nice and worrying what the enemy [MSM et al] says about your unfair and brutal tactics!!

51 posted on 02/13/2007 9:49:36 PM PST by PISANO
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sine_nomine

Of course she is.

But of course she was "harsh" and "judgmental".

The judgmental thing is something even a lot of oh so sophisticated, nuanced and enlightened, "conservatives" soil themselves over.


52 posted on 02/13/2007 9:50:09 PM PST by EyeGuy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: youngjim

"Canadians voluntarily joined and served beside their brothers and sisters from the United States in all branches of the U.S. armed forces."

Canada didn't send troops, people in Canada left Canada to come to the US and serve the US military. Canada itself did not commit troops.


53 posted on 02/13/2007 9:50:52 PM PST by SoldierMedic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: SoldierMedic

quib·ble Pronunciation (kwbl)
intr.v. quib·bled, quib·bling, quib·bles
1. To evade the truth or importance of an issue by raising trivial distinctions and objections.
2. To find fault or criticize for petty reasons; cavil.


54 posted on 02/13/2007 9:55:28 PM PST by youngjim (Anger a liberal. Work hard. Succeed. Be happy.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: brydic1

Yes I'll answer. NO!


55 posted on 02/13/2007 9:56:23 PM PST by Islander7 ("Show me an honest politician and I will show you a case of mistaken identity.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: youngjim

Also from the website you posted:

"At the time Vietnam was considered a friendly state by Canada "


56 posted on 02/13/2007 9:56:48 PM PST by SoldierMedic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: Killborn

You are obviously a koolaid drinker. Bush's incompetence in office is so clearly demonstrated by his total inability to express himself, his idiotic compassionate conservatism which was just another way of justifying becoming the consumate New Dealer of his age, his repudiation of national sovereignty by leaving our borders open to every criminal and terrorist who wishes to come in, his kissing up to the Kennedy's and Clinton's, his unbelievable conduct of a politically correct war in Iraq which led to the loss of both Houses of Congress, a full retreat from conservative positions by almost all republican politicians and will surely lead to the loss of the presidency in 2008.


57 posted on 02/13/2007 9:58:12 PM PST by brydic1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: bstein80

She's great for the movement, hence the constant denouncement of her. She's saying the things I feel most of the time and the things that politicians are too cowardly to say themselves. So she spices it up a little, nobody is perfect.


58 posted on 02/13/2007 10:00:39 PM PST by word_warrior_bob (You can now see my amazing doggie and new puppy on my homepage!! Come say hello to Jake & Sonny)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SoldierMedic
Not the greatest exchange but Canada did send non combat troops to Vietnam in 1972, so technically she was right.

And 10,000 Canadians served in Vietnam in American uniform.

And this is their War Memorial

http://www.glanmore.org/cdncas/memorialair.html

59 posted on 02/13/2007 10:04:35 PM PST by Valpal1 (Social vs fiscal conservtism? Sorry, I'm not voting my wallet over the broken bodies of the innocent)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: brydic1

What movement?

The current president is not the problem; the real problem is the lack of a conservative contender. The conservative banner was dropped before GW ever took office, and it is being stomped into the ground by its own army.


60 posted on 02/13/2007 10:07:15 PM PST by antidisestablishment (Our people perish through lack of wisdom, but they are content in their ignorance.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 121-122 next last

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.

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