Skip to comments.
Frontpage Interview: Ann Coulter
FrontPageMagazine.com ^
| 1/12/04
| Jamie Glazov
Posted on 01/12/2004 2:30:42 AM PST by kattracks
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80, 81-92 next last
1
posted on
01/12/2004 2:30:42 AM PST
by
kattracks
To: kattracks
Amused bump
2
posted on
01/12/2004 2:47:25 AM PST
by
sinclair
(When government needs money they ask: What's in YOUR wallet?)
To: All
Rank |
Location |
Receipts |
Donors/Avg |
Freepers/Avg |
Monthlies |
8 |
Pennsylvania |
1,170.00
|
30
|
39.00
|
531
|
2.20
|
255.00
|
18
|
Thanks for donating to Free Republic!
Move your locale up the leaderboard!
3
posted on
01/12/2004 2:49:08 AM PST
by
Support Free Republic
(If Woody had gone straight to the police, this would never have happened!)
To: kattracks
Funny gal.
Here ya go....
4
posted on
01/12/2004 3:05:27 AM PST
by
IoCaster
("That to live by one man's will became the cause of all men's misery." - Richard Hooker)
Comment #5 Removed by Moderator
To: kattracks
The only statement I would disagree with:
"..letting the poor girl drown because you're a married man and a U.S. senator.."
Mary Jo didn't drown. She suffocated while waiting for help that never came. But then again, Ann was just speaking hypothetically.
6
posted on
01/12/2004 3:49:36 AM PST
by
Jaxter
("Vivit Post Funera Virtus")
To: kattracks
Oooooh Annie!
Dint suger coat it gal, Tell us how you really feel !!
7
posted on
01/12/2004 3:54:17 AM PST
by
mylife
To: mylife
Farn dingers!
8
posted on
01/12/2004 3:56:27 AM PST
by
mylife
To: Bob_Dobbs
Apart from the Holy Bible, I don't have a favorite.
She's a charlatan folks, cashing in on P.T. Barnum's vile estimate. Am I the only one who senses this?
Yes. You sir are alone in your opinion.
Apart from this curious attack on Ms. Coulter,
Do you read the Bible?
Do you understand its message?
My guess is the answer to both questions is "no"
and that's why you don't get her.
To: Bob_Dobbs
Reading an old issue of U.S. News & World Report recently, the editorial by Mort Zuckerman had an interesting statement. He wrote that we are at war with an enemy that wants to see us dead, and does not mind killing himself in the process in order to achieve thier end. That, if able to obtain a NBC weapon, would not hesitate to use it against us. So, what and/or how do you propose fighting such a group?
10
posted on
01/12/2004 4:18:23 AM PST
by
7thson
(I think it takes a big dog to weigh a 100 pounds.)
To: Bob_Dobbs
"FP: I think you are right about the state of the Democratic Party. They don't have a prayer in hell to beat Bush in 2004, right? AC: If they have a prayer, it will be answered by someone whose kingdom is not heaven."
Amen to that!
Some of your assessment may be warranted. OTOH, would a charlatan defend McCarthy?
I appreciate her nerve, candor, and humor. One of the things that deflates her message is the attempt to be humorous.
11
posted on
01/12/2004 4:19:19 AM PST
by
NicknamedBob
(I once thought that I would live forever, ... but that was an eternity ago.)
To: Bob_Dobbs
Ann is brilliant and funny. And your problem is ???
12
posted on
01/12/2004 4:33:54 AM PST
by
FormerACLUmember
(I say the emperor has no clothes. Doesn't anyone else see this?)
To: Bob_Dobbs
"...She's a charlatan folks, cashing in on P.T. Barnum's vile estimate. Am I the only one who senses this?.."
Yes, you are. Ann Coulter for President! Hell, Ann Coulter for Queen-for-life! She is the most outstanding female conservative in existence, IMHO. Sean Hannity is her male equal. Ann is brilliant, clever, and endlessly entertaining, but most importantly, she is RIGHT about EVERYTHING.
13
posted on
01/12/2004 4:46:35 AM PST
by
jim35
To: Bob_Dobbs
(Assuming she's serious: ...One would have to be rather thick.
One should not need to ask if something is, or is not, satirical.
Unless you're thick.
If a shrewd and cynical person set out to "create" a persona to hoodwink and bilk conservatives, ...
Hoodwink and bilk conservatives of what? About what? That modern liberalism is entirely antithetical to the doctrine of constitutional republicanism as set forth by our founders yet tries to pass itself off as its saviour? No, nothing neurotic about that, no sir! (Note to the thick: The last comment was intended to be a sarcasm.)
14
posted on
01/12/2004 6:06:17 AM PST
by
TigersEye
(That's pretty inspiring when you think about it.)
To: Bob_Dobbs
Coulter is not a master of Swiftian satire. One should not need to ask if something is, or is not, satirical. Ms. Coulter makes statements which simultaneously sound outrageous--and are plainly true. For example to anyone who takes journalistic objectivity seriously, McCarthy "embarassed the conservative movement" by "creating a climate of fear." To anyone who is willing to believe the evidence of his own eyes, that is patently absurd. I was 10 and 11 years old in 1950, so I lived through "the McCarthy era" as a youth. And it is far more true to say that Democrats conducted a witch hunt in the press for opponents of Communism than the other way around. It is useful to recall that although the Republicans elected Eisenhower in '52 and '56, and majorities in the House and the Senate in '46 and '52, Democrats otherwise controlled the political branches of government from the election of 1932 through 1967. IOW there was never a time when Democrats suddenly retrieved their courage and began to speak out against "McCarthyism" because there was never a time when Democrats stopped speaking and printing freely. Any self-respecting Freeper has seen plenty of examples of Democrats loudly declaiming things which are patently absurd and self-contradictory. This was the earliest example of which I was aware.
It wasn't McCarthy but his critics who have created a climate of fear of speaking out. Any use of the charge of "McCarthyism" simply illustrates that that campaign has never really stopped.
Apart from the Holy Bible, I don't have a favorite. That would have been gutless political correctness anytime from the founding through the 1950s--now in takes guts to say that (unless of course you're a Democratic politician, and thus are confident that your friends won't take you seriously).
When something seems to good to be true... Whether taken as a statement by Ms. Coulter that she is actually Miss Goodie Two Shoes, or as hyperbole illustrating the drastic shift in the moral climate--and there is seperate reason to think it is more the former--I do not find her comment exceptionable.
To: Bob_Dobbs
"Politics, not unlike reality, is complicated."
What a deep statement! Sounds like a person who once told me that "reality" is each one's own preception. This person has spent a good deal of time on a shrink's couch the past 30 years.
This is "NEW AGE" religion making everything shades of gray.
What Ann does is peel away all those layers of preceived reality, drawing a distinction between right and wrong, good and evil. The liberal mind always comes up short cause they need to complicate things, takes the heat off themselves.
The liberal mind feeds off others, that is the only way they survive.
To: Bob_Dobbs
Put a fork in your mushy middle, bob. It is sad that every time I see a hardcore conservative out pops one of the many moderate types to complain as to "how can they really be that way. Blah BlahBlah." Hell Bob, Ann is alright by me and I am not a caricature, nor is Ann.
17
posted on
01/12/2004 7:12:20 AM PST
by
ohioman
To: Bob_Dobbs
Yes, you are the only one who senses this. No one as brilliantly funny and articulate as this woman could possibly be a phony. The way she wraps her humorless interviewer up in a blanket and tosses him up in the air is a joy to read! And I love the fact that she doesn't have a favorite book - I've never yet met an authentic bookworm who had a "favorite" book.
Ms. Coulter is beginning to make Camille Paglia look tame.
To: kattracks; Bob_Dobbs; All
Lets stop this funnin' and a feudin' and POST MORE PICTURES OF ANN!
Am I the only one who sees this?

(Pic proudly stolen from another post.)
To: kattracks
This reporter was a whimp. Started off bashing McCarthy and then backed off in a hurry. Obviously the reporter was out of their league.
That's what I had about modern day reporting. Whimpy and obviously challenged by the facts.
20
posted on
01/12/2004 7:41:22 AM PST
by
sr4402
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80, 81-92 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