Has she no shame? [Conason on Coulter--Some Men Just Can't Handle Blondes]

Salon ^ | July 4, 2003 | Joe Conason

[gedeon3]

Only because there were only two in my entire school.

[Woahhs]

Was he banned from the party, forbidden from representing the party, or removed from office?

Is there something about the term "distinction without difference" you don't understand?

If you think you can change minds by "special pleading," I think you are in for a disappointment.

[liberallarry]

Ad hominem attack?

A dictionary can help you understand.

It was more wit and charm than you've shown in all your posts

In addition to your other stirling qualities, you're not shy about heaping extravagent praise on your own efforts.

This thread is about Coulter's book. See if you can focus.

[Bush2000]

Yes. In the 1996 elections, those of us on post WERE NOT ALLOWED TO VOTE by his orders. How legal is that? A man who loved his country would mnot have done that.

Because Clinton-Gore's machine knew that military members primarily vote Republican -- and they did their level best to suppress the military vote.

[Bush2000]

Of course, they didn't - commercial television didn't yet exist. But they did have huge demonstrations that the enemy could and did use for propaganda - and some were openly sympathic to the Nazis.

There was a credible argument that the Nazis did not pose a threat to the United States proper; since national security was not at risk, protesting the war in Europe was not treasonous. This differs substantially from Iraq in that we know that Hussein possessed (and was holding talks with non-state terrorists such as Al Quaeda whose stated purpose was killing Americans) weapons of mass destruction capable of killing hundreds of thousands of Americans.

[liberallarry]

The issue is

At what point does protest against government policies pass from the legitimate into the category of aiding and abetting the enemy.

It's not an easy call. My inclination would be to say that anything that is not outright traitorous - such as spying - is legitimate. Not admirable - but legitimate. Obviously, circumstances are important. The bar is much lower whe we are at war and American soldiers are being killed.

There's a price to pay for having a free and open society. This is the price.

[jpl]

The isolationist, "America First" types back in World War II like Charles Lindbergh and Henry Ford were indeed wrong, and embarrassingly so. The primary difference between them and the folks that Coulter addresses in her book is that the isolationists are pretty much universally recognized as a joke today. Nobody of any significance nowadays supports them or apologizes for them with the notable exception of Pat Buchanan, who is about as marginal a figure as you can get.

The Stalin/Soviet-philes on the other hand are still fighting their damn fight even today, years after it has already been lost. Can you really deny with a straight face that the spirit of Walter Duranty still lives on to a large degree at the New York Times and most of the rest of the mainstream media? The inability of these people to admit that they were wrong about anything borders on pathological.

[liberallarry]

The Stalin/Soviet-philes on the other hand are still fighting their damn fight even today, years after it has already been lost. Can you really deny with a straight face that the spirit of Walter Duranty still lives on to a large degree at the New York Times and most of the rest of the mainstream media?

No, of course I can't deny it.

But what's the correct remedy - jail...or criticism in Coulter's book and on Free Republic? Also, I would say that political ideas never truly die. They morph to fit changing circumstances. Nazi race theories are hardly dead. Neither is the isolationist idea that we should retreat behind our borders and our superior weapons and let the rest of the world rot.

Vigilance, eternal vigilance. And the Internet which has forever changed the nature of political discourse for the better.

[isthisnickcool]

Speaking of "being banned" PapaJohnMN seems to have hit the bit bucket?

[zip]

Thanks to the moderator for dumping our leftist disruptor.

[Woahhs]

It's not an easy call. My inclination would be to say that anything that is not outright traitorous - such as spying - is legitimate. Not admirable - but legitimate.

I agree completely. I also think you have been nothing but fair-minded on this thread.

The unfortunate truth is what has conservatives so upset is the partisan control over the major organs for disseminating information. They've been disenfranchised by a defacto cabal called "the media."

My personal belief is the First Amendment as currently construed is as outmoded as liberals believe the Second Amendment. I dare say the Founders would have been much more circumspect with the language of the First if they had had any notion of the principals of advertising in the modern sense, and how it can be used in conjunction with what they thought of as "the press."

Thankfully, the problem is slowly being corrected by other emergent technologies. This Iraqi engagement is the first time in living memory that foreign policy dissidents are paying a sever penalty, and that extracted not by government, but by the American people...from whom there is no esoteric legal defence.

This is, no doubt, more what the Founders had in mind.

[liberallarry]

Thankfully, the problem is slowly being corrected by other emergent technologies

Not so slowly.

The Internet has given a voice to the ordinary citizen such as he's never had before. Conservatives are speaking louder than they have in 20 years. Liberals have been slower - which is surprising, and which I attribute to the ossifying effect of political correctness combined with power - but they'll catch up.

It's a new world - and I don't mean a Brave New World.

[Darksheare]

Yes.
There are people who remember that exact action.
Hopefully, they don't forget either.

[Darksheare]

I am focused.
You said that if anyone showed more wit than you, you'd admire them.
So far, all you've done is shown that my observation of you is correct.

And boy, have you shown that I am right about you.

[Darksheare]

I've seen democrats outright spout hate for this country firsthand, while in uniform.
I've been in uniform watching other men in uniform spout hate for this country.

That is sad.
Personally, I find Conason to be an arrogant lying sack of *.. well.. you get the idea.

[Darksheare]

Yes, the left believes that blind allegience and blindly following them is a mark of having seen the 'rightness' of their cause.

They also say we're intolerant if we disagree with them.
Almost funny.

[Darksheare]

No.
Just several other incidents where several Democrats in uniform made comments that were, shall we say, seditionist and defamitory to the uniform.

[Ramonan]

You have to remember one thing: In our litigous society, if ANY of Ann Coulter's information was wrong, incorrect, or unfounded, the survivors would be ALL over her with Libel and Defamation lawsuits. Sorry, but I haven't heard of any , and you can bet the Liberal Press/Networks/CNN would trumpet that every 5 minutes. Ann knows what she is doing. She too is an attorney.