Skip to comments.
L’Affaire Coulter
National Review Online ^
| 10/3/01
| Jonah Goldberg
Posted on 10/03/2001 11:35:13 AM PDT by BamaG
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 161-180, 181-200, 201-220 ... 281-282 next last
To: TLBSHOW
"look this is the girly-boy and she is correct again." Oh, get off it already. If the photo of you that's repeatedly posted here is accurate (and I don't think I've seen you challenge it), then you're not exactly an Arnold Schwartznegger yourself.
181
posted on
10/03/2001 3:21:38 PM PDT
by
Don Joe
To: TLBSHOW
I hope she doesn't "slam dunk" him. I hope this ends here. I hope both parties realize how petty this looks. I hope they realize that they are pundits, not celebrities. I hope zealots on boths sides of the issue come to their senses. I hope I never hear someone call Jonah a "girly man" again. I hope I never hear someone call Ann "crazy" again.
I wish Ann had found a better way to express her opinion and had rationally explained why she felt that way. I wish National Review had found a way to resolve the issue and keep printing Ann. I wish Ann hadn't bad-mouthed National Review on TV and to the Washington Post. I wish that Jonah hadn't responded in an equivalent manner.
In short, I think I've had enough of this thread and all related threads. I'm only feeding an issue I would like to die.
To: Roscoe
"Here in California the LP once ran a whore for Lieutenant Governor." Trying to go mainstream, are they? Good luck catching up -- the D's & R's have been running 'em for office for decades.
183
posted on
10/03/2001 3:24:02 PM PDT
by
Don Joe
To: Don Joe
Trying to go mainstream, are they? And failing miserably.
184
posted on
10/03/2001 3:25:33 PM PDT
by
Roscoe
To: winstonchurchill
I would hardly characterize Buckley as
nominally a Christian. If you read his book,
Nearer My God... you would understand why.
There are three camps of NR antogonists in this debate: the Coulterites, who in their devotion to Ann, fail to understand the importance of NR regarding conservative thought, the Offended Christians who think that implications of forced conversion are okay, and the Nuke 'Em crowd who don't understand that in order to protect our country's principles we have to fight a principled war.
NR is not a Christian magazine in the same manner that Free Republic is not a Christian board. There are many elements in both that support Christianity but the thrust of these entities is to further conservative principles.
To: BamaG
As I
said yesterday, Coulter deserved to get canned:
- Her original column went way over the line.
- She publicly mocked the editors at NRO. I don't know about anybody else, but my bosses don't look too kindly on being publicly mocked.
- She has a marked tendency to be much too full of herself. In some ways, she resembles little Billy Clinton--it's all about her.
186
posted on
10/03/2001 3:44:29 PM PDT
by
beckett
To: TLBSHOW
Stand with Ann? Never--she is a self-absorbed idiot whose remarks in this episode, both in the original column and in her comments since, have gone WAY over the line.
187
posted on
10/03/2001 3:47:04 PM PDT
by
beckett
To: beckett
and the left hopes she goes away too! Hummmmmm........
188
posted on
10/03/2001 3:47:31 PM PDT
by
TLBSHOW
To: Vets_Husband_and_Wife
You mean the Susan Estrich who has a voice like a gravel crusher with a piece of metal stuck in it?
To: All
And let's finally put an end to excusing Coulter because she lost her good friend, Barbara Olson. Ted Olson lost his wife and the comments I've seen him make demonstrate class and restraint.
Additionally, it may have not occurred to several of you that since the offices of NR are in Manhattan, they too were directly affected by the events of 9/11. You don't suppose that anyone at NR lost friends in the WTC?
To: TLBSHOW, ken5050
Thanks for the connection.ken5050 did at #26, not me. Me
thinks your
thanks should be properly attributed.
To: Bob J
Goldberg's failures in this episode are very minor compared to Coulter's. She has acted like an ass and shown herself to be nothing more than a self-absorbed diva.
Sometimes it appears that Freepers and other conservatives are so taken with her blonde hair (the claims that she is a great beauty are hilarious) that they are completely oblivious to the mean streak a mile wide that runs down her back.
Good riddance to Ann Coulter.
192
posted on
10/03/2001 3:52:33 PM PDT
by
beckett
To: BamaG
I've always been a fan of Ann Coulter and I still am; however, she's wrong in this one.
She knows better than to whine about her first amendment rights. This is not a first amendment issue.
Writers do get edited. Like Maher, Ann's rights are still fully in tact. Coulter and Maher are as free to say anything that they would like to say as they ever were. Certain parties may no longer pay them to say it. Tough toenails.
193
posted on
10/03/2001 3:55:44 PM PDT
by
alnick
To: Paradox
Please always give credit to the person you are quoting. In this case you should have said "In the words of St. Rodney, can we all git along" thereby giving one of our modern heroes credit for one of his teachings. /sarcasm off
To: Don Joe
Thanks for the correction!! That is the one,.. the one and only!!! Maybe I mentally block out how to spell her name,.. I really can't stand to even stay on a channel she is on, she irritates us that much!! Thanks Don Joe!
To: TN Republican
You mean the Susan Estrich who has a voice like a gravel crusher with a piece of metal stuck in it? Thats the one!!!! I'm not even sure I agree with anything she says, because she is so obnoxious I can't listen to her!!! ;o)
Thanks for the "correction" on her last name. Funny how people knew who I was talking about anyway LOL!!
To: TLBSHOW
Woo Hoo! I knew you would stand firm for Ann. Are you FReeping National Review?
197
posted on
10/03/2001 4:10:33 PM PDT
by
TKEman
To: BoomerBob
the Offended Christians who think that implications of forced conversion are okay Nobody -- repeat nobody -- ever sugested the impossible, a 'forced conversion.'
And of course that was not what Jonah Goldberg objected to. He objected to Christianity. On that point, he is wrong and Ann is right.
As to Buckley being a Christian. I haven't read the book to which you refer, but his allegiance through the years has always been to the RCC not to Jesus Christ. He may have become wiser as he became older. I certainly hope so.
To: beckett
Her original column went way over the line. And that line would be -- the line between paganism and Christ.
I want to be on her side of that line. You certainly don't object to being on the side of Truth, do you?
To: TKEman
Woo Hoo! I knew you would stand firm for Ann. Are you FReeping National Review?
I am until William Buckley Jr. steps in and does the right thing and throws these 2 fools right out the door. Goldy can always ban people for his mommy.
200
posted on
10/03/2001 4:50:58 PM PDT
by
TLBSHOW
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 161-180, 181-200, 201-220 ... 281-282 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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson