AJC.com > Opinion > Woman to Woman > Archives > 2007 > July > 08 > Entry
Ann Coulter helping Dems more than GOP?
Maureen Downey, a left-leaning columnist, stands in for Diane Glass on the commentary this week and Shaunti Feldhahn, a right-leaning columnist, responds.
Commentary
Early in her career, Ann Coulter discovered that she could sell more books and columns if she swore off thoughtful political analysis and just started calling Democrats “faggots.”
A cheap character assassin in black sheath and heels, Coulter has become the Paris Hilton of the right, admired as much for her blond good looks and her short skirts as her unapologetic viciousness against Democrats.
But now her shrill-and-kill approach to politic punditry is benefiting Democrats more than Republicans. She has crossed the line of decency so many times that smart conservatives turn their heads when they see her coming. Her comments have escalated from tasteless to hateful, and Democrats are rightfully capitalizing on the growing public revulsion.
In her latest belch of bile, Coulter sparred with the wife of presidential candidate John Edwards and ended up sending his supporters to their checkbooks. Coulter was hawking one of her books on MSNBC’s ”Hardball” two weeks ago when Elizabeth Edwards called the show. (Coulter says she was ambushed; “Hardball” producers say she was forewarned.)
In the past, Coulter charged Edwards of exploiting the 1996 death of his son Wade, writing that the candidate has a bumper sticker that says “Ask me about my son’s death in a horrific car accident” More recently, Coulter said, “If I’m going to say anything about John Edwards in the future, I’ll just wish he had been killed in a terrorist assassination plot.” (Her defense was that Bill Maher said something similar about Dick Cheney, but he’s a comedian. She’s an attorney who styles herself as a serious commentator.)
On “Hardball,” Elizabeth Edwards told Coulter, “I’m asking you politely to stop… personal attacks.” An irate Coulter dodged the issue and accused the Edwards campaign of exploiting her comments.
The Edwards campaign has indeed cited Coulter’s attacks in fund-raising pitches. Following her tense exchange with Coulter on “Hardball,” Elizabeth Edwards emailed supporters and generated record donations.
Coulter continues to fume over the “Hardball” episode, writing on her Web site, “I’m a little tired of losers trying to raise campaign cash or TV ratings off of my coattails.” If Coulter’s really tired of it, she ought to stop snickering about Hillary Clinton’s “chubby little legs” and start talking about the issues.
Rebuttal
I share many of Ann Coulter’s policy opinions, but I am the first to cringe at harsh and personal comments against those who don’t. Yes, we need more respectful dialogue - but there’s another key factor.
In trying to fire up the right, Coulter is actually a conservative version of political comedian Bill Maher, who is well known for his over-the-top comments on the left. But since most media gatekeepers share Maher’s ideology, he gets cast as an ironist and Coulter gets cast as a “character assassin.”
For example, after a terrorist attack missed Vice President Cheney on a February visit to Iraq, Bill Maher told his talk show guests - two congressmen - that “If [Cheney] did die, other people, more people would live. That’s a fact.” Despite suggesting that the assassination of the Vice President would be a good thing, there was almost no media outcry.
Fast forward a few months: Coulter’s recent comments were inappropriate - but twisted even more. Her supposed wish that John Edwards be killed by terrorists was widely reported. But almost no media (including my column counterpart) carried it in context, which was actually about trying to get away with what Mahar could get away with: “Bill Maher was not joking [when he said] he wished Dick Cheney had been killed in a terrorist attack. So, I’ve learned my lesson. If I’m gonna say anything about John Edwards in the future, I’ll just wish he had been killed in a terrorist assassination plot.”
The Edwards campaign raked in what they call “Coulter Cash,” while condemning her “hate words.” But again, few media have reported the “hate words” coming from the Edwards campaign - for example, many bigoted and anti-Christian comments like this 2006 blog from Edwards campaign staffer Amanda Marcotte: “What if Mary had taken Plan B after the Lord filled her with his hot, white, sticky Holy Spirit? You’d have to justify your misogyny with another ancient mythology.” Ugh.
Any approach that purposefully polarizes is counterproductive. But we conservatives should hold ourselves to an even higher standard. By ignoring the reality that the left-leaning media will magnify her already harsh comments, Ann Coulter ends up hurting the very beliefs that she is trying to promote.
.JPG)
Services »
Comments
Commenting is now closed for this entry.
By Craig also
July 8, 2007 11:08 AM | Link to this
What amazes me is that the Christian Coalition of Georgia had this vile evil person speak at their recent convention.
The difference, Shaunti, is that Ann Coulter describes herself as a Christian commentator. Bill Maher sure doesn’t. I’m always amazed at conservatives’ responses when they are criticized. “Well what about Bill Clinton. What about Bill Maher?” Do you really want to use these two gentlemen as your moral compass?
By mac
July 8, 2007 11:52 AM | Link to this
I wonder how it sat with Ann’s massive ego to find out that scads more people showed up in the middle of the night to see Paris Hilton get out of jail than did for her little prime-time festival of lies on Hardball? One of Coulter’s long held “truisms” is to draw comparisons between members of the Democrat party and terrorists like Osama Bin Ladden. She might do a bit of reflection where this habit is concerned as she has voiced repeatedly the desire to see demise of anyone associated with the left without regard to the fact that they are Americans. She would no doubt rejoice in the death of these American citizens if it were to occur on such a grand scale, an idiology that puts her squarely in the same arena of politics as the enemy hiding overseas. Ann Coulter=Terrorist wannabe.
By DANIELLE MANUEL
July 8, 2007 4:09 PM | Link to this
I have been a conservative (fiscal and social) for my entire adult life. At 51 years of age, I have withstood assaults from the media and left leaning polticians about my beliefs and philosophy. I’ve been attacked as being fanatical, being insensitive to the poor, as being beguiled by corporate america and just being a cold blooded S.O.B.
But the greatest attack on my beliefs is tht Ann Coulter pretends to represent my way of life. She is an abomination to the true conservative moment. She reminds me of Morton Downey Jr during his heyday. Another clown pretending to stand up for the God-fearing, patriotic American.
Ms. Coulter’s attack on a man’s family, regardless to what Bill Maher has done, is unforgiveable. To wish death on someone so caviliarly, even in jest, is not something that I applaud.
Ms. Coulter, do the conservative movement a favor. As we face enormous challenges over the next few years, weeding out those people who use our movement to advance their own philosophies and agendas, you can make the ultimate sacrifice for our cause.
COME OUT AS A BORN AGAIN LIBERAL AND DEFEND THEM INSTEAD!!
By Anonymous
July 9, 2007 8:53 AM | Link to this
Danielle makes an excellent point. If the Coultergeist really wanted to hurt the Democrats, she’d claim to be one of them.
By Archie
July 9, 2007 8:57 AM | Link to this
I don’t know if Ann Coulter is helping democrats but I do know she is making a lot of money. Coulter does what she does because she has seen the almighty dollar flow in big numbers to Limbaugh,Hannity, and O’reilly and she understands their technique which consists of bashing democrats with outrageous statements, calling women “broads”, and the trump card, putting minorities down whenever you have nothing else to talk about. Coulter knows the market for such behavior needs a female just as record companies market the same kind of artist under a different name. For example, now that Janet Jackson has gotten older and the hispanic population larger you need a J. Lo for that market and you need a Britney Spears for her market. Thus you now have 3 females in the dance music market whereas before Ms Jackson basically had all 3 markets black,white,etc. Coulter knows she can make big bucks moreso by being a female Limbaugh than she can by being an intelligent, lawyer-like conservative. As much as O’reilly complained about lyrical content he did not join Rev Sharpton in marching against that content in rap music because the real goal was to get the ratings up and that’s what Coulter is really about the almighty dollar not hating on Edwards. Coulter is conservative but Ann C. is really about that almighty dollar.
By Daedalus
July 9, 2007 9:10 AM | Link to this
Shaunti — if you were a real journalist and not a partisan perhaps you should read all of Bill Maher’s comments. You only quote a part of them — he finished with “but I hope he doesn’t die.” Why don’t you include that in your analysis?
Its because your a partisan and incapable of objectivity.
You have no problem believing Coulter’s version of what Maher said — but why not check out the transcript that is widely available on the web
Dick Cheney has always been for invading Iraq: WMD’s, spreading democracy, etc., those are just pretexts.
As for Bill Maher’s comment, I did not even know about it until Coulter made a point of wishing John Edwards dead. I never listen to him or watch him. He’s a joke like the rest of the Hollywood pundits.
Its a pity that conservatives like you however will not take Ann Coulter to task for her comments about Edwards. You say you “cringed” at them — and then went on to defend her.
Shame on you.
By George Shriver
July 9, 2007 9:24 AM | Link to this
Shaunti forgets to mention one important item. Coulter has become a millionairess with her books. Supposedly, she is a scholar. However, no one in their right mind would even suggest that she is. But, the public has made her very wealthy. Beside Ms. Edwards, Coulter is merely the period at the end of her warped sentences.Be the truth told she is no conservative; she is an American fundamentalist terrorist only interested in filling her coffers by appealing to the very lowest common denominator of thought and action.Let it be remembered that this self-proclaimed “brave” woman ran away from a non-dangerous pie in her face. She is a pitiful, anorexic materialist with limited research and writing ability but with enough hatred and venom to be a dangerous person. Sad indeed that the religious right supports this “Jesusless” person.
By Stuart
July 9, 2007 9:58 AM | Link to this
watch this and them comment http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NGsHB7Hjpi4
Ann Counter’s Bill Maher defense is wrong because she misquoted him which is a trick she does all the time. People that defend her didn’t even watch Bill Mahler’s show and those that say they did would have realize he was talking about freedom of speech and how the Huffington post pulled off of its site the posting in which someone said that ‘more people would be alive today if Dick Cheney would have been killed in the attack.’
It is funny that everyone believes that Bill Maher said this and Ann was trying to use his words as her defense when in fact he was actually quoting someone else words. And the people that defend Ann’s words should first find out what was actually said before getting behind her. So don’t tell me that Ann was taken out of context when she does the same thing all the time
By Stuart
July 9, 2007 10:13 AM | Link to this
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NGsHB7Hjpi4
Also could someone please tell me why Ann is smart. I hear this all the time that she is smart and funny or “I share many of Ann Coulter’s policy opinions” Please explain to me what I am missing I havent heard Ann talk about policy. I read some of her books and there is no policy in any of what i have read.
If someone could please make an honest response and point out what Ann’s views are and why they support them I would like to know. I am willing to learn. Maybe I am stupid and all of this goes over my head but instead of making more fun of me why not tell me what I am missing.
Also Jon Stewart is my idea of smart and funny
By Neal Summers
July 9, 2007 10:13 AM | Link to this
I sometimes wonder if the sky in Shaunti’s world (Planet Bush) is blue. Bill Maher is not in any way comparable to Ann Coulter. What Bill said as a statement of fact was completely different from what Ann said. Bill is thoughtful and funny. Ann is mean and cruel. Bill backs up his opinions with facts. Ann backs up her’s with lies. Bill did not wish for Dick Cheney’s assassination but Ann has wished for the death of those who oppose her many times over. If you want to know more about Ann’s lies visit anncoulterdotblogspotdot com.
By 2D
July 9, 2007 10:33 AM | Link to this
Ann helps doesn’t help the GOP or the Jack A*******es. She helps one person… Herself.
To me, she is nothing more than a less informed, less intelligent, female version of Michael Savage. While both go over the toop in an effort to get publicity, at least Savage has the following going for him.
By Mike Toreno
July 9, 2007 11:01 AM | Link to this
Jen, the point isn’t that Feldhahn managed to get married, the point is that she obviously isn’t satisfied with who she married. That’s the reason behind all her moaning about how heroes in romance novels supposedly make women dissatisfied with the men they have. There’s only one woman whose inner thoughts Feldhahn knows about, namely, her. When she talks about how romance novels affect “women’s” thoughts and make “women” dissatisfied with “their” marriages, who do you think she’s talking about? Instead of instead of facing up to the facts squarely, namely, that her own numerous and manifest defects forced her to settle for a man who would marry someone like her, she blames romance novels for putting the idea into “women’s” heads that there are better men out there and sees this as some sort of general social problem.
By Nunna Yo Biznezz
July 9, 2007 11:14 AM | Link to this
Babygirl..1st off,Bill is a comedian and Ann isn’t..
2nd,Bill is funny and Ann is not…
3rd,They are both men trying to prove their point..
And 4th..Bill is usually correct and he does lean towards the left but Ann falls all the way to the right (which is always wrong!!)..And Bill also is not always seeing eye to eye with the left as an do with the wrong,err,i meant right..
Wrong about the war..Wrong about WMD’s.. Wrong for America!! Clinton/Clinton for ‘08!!! No!!!!!
Nunna Yo Biznezz for ‘08!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
By Nunna Yo Biznezz
July 9, 2007 11:14 AM | Link to this
Babygirl..1st off,Bill is a comedian and Ann isn’t..
2nd,Bill is funny and Ann is not…
3rd,They are both men trying to prove their point..
And 4th..Bill is usually correct and he does lean towards the left but Ann falls all the way to the right (which is always wrong!!)..And Bill also is not always seeing eye to eye with the left as ann do with the wrong,err,i meant right..
Wrong about the war..Wrong about WMD’s.. Wrong for America!! Clinton/Clinton for ‘08!!! No!!!!!
Nunna Yo Biznezz for ‘08!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
By Nunna Yo Biznezz
July 9, 2007 11:15 AM | Link to this
Babygirl..1st off,Bill is a comedian and Ann isn’t..
2nd,Bill is funny and Ann is not…
3rd,They are both men trying to prove their point..
And 4th..Bill is usually correct and he does lean towards the left but Ann falls all the way to the right (which is always wrong!!)..And Bill also is not always seeing eye to eye with the left as ann do with the wrong,err,i meant right..
Wrong about the war..Wrong about WMD’s.. Wrong for America!! Clinton/Clinton for ‘08!!! No!!!!!
Nunna Yo Biznezz for ‘08!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
By Nunna Yo Biznezz
July 9, 2007 11:15 AM | Link to this
Babygirl..1st off,Bill is a comedian and Ann isn’t..
2nd,Bill is funny and Ann is not…
3rd,They are both men trying to prove their point..
And 4th..Bill is usually correct and he does lean towards the left but Ann falls all the way to the right (which is always wrong!!)..And Bill also is not always seeing eye to eye with the left as ann does with the wrong,err,i meant right..
Wrong about the war..Wrong about WMD’s.. Wrong for America!! Clinton/Clinton for ‘08!!! No!!!!!
Nunna Yo Biznezz for ‘08!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
By Nunna Yo Biznezz
July 9, 2007 11:15 AM | Link to this
Babygirl..1st off,Bill is a comedian and Ann isn’t..
2nd,Bill is funny and Ann is not…
3rd,They are both men trying to prove their point..
And 4th..Bill is usually correct and he does lean towards the left but Ann falls all the way to the right (which is always wrong!!)..And Bill also is not always seeing eye to eye with the left as ann does with the wrong,err,i meant right..
Wrong about the war..Wrong about WMD’s.. Wrong for America!! Clinton/Clinton for ‘08!!! No!!!!!
Nunna Yo Biznezz for ‘08!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
By Nunna Yo Biznezz
July 9, 2007 11:15 AM | Link to this
Babygirl..1st off,Bill is a comedian and Ann isn’t..
2nd,Bill is funny and Ann is not…
3rd,They are both men trying to prove their point..
And 4th..Bill is usually correct and he does lean towards the left but Ann falls all the way to the right (which is always wrong!!)..And Bill also is not always seeing eye to eye with the left as ann does with the wrong,err,i meant right..
Wrong about the war..Wrong about WMD’s.. Wrong for America!! Clinton/Clinton for ‘08!!! No!!!!!
Nunna Yo Biznezz for ‘08!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
By cranky old man
July 9, 2007 11:44 AM | Link to this
Bill Maher (usually) gets more of a pass for his biting sarcasm because he is better at it. His commentary is funnier, and appeals to a wider audience. Ann Coulter’s commentary frequently revolves around making points about double standards in the media. Copying the other side’s tactics, even when you have a valid point to make, doesn’t come across as original. So it won’t be as amusing, except to someone who already agrees with the point you’re trying to make. It kind of reminds me of the white cop in “Sanford and Son” trying to be cool by using Watts street slang.
By RectilinearPropagation
July 9, 2007 11:46 AM | Link to this
Ann Coulter, if Bill Maher jumped off a bridge would you jump too?
Even if Bill Maher wasn’t a comedian, even if he wasn’t quoting someone else, and even if he didn’t say, “I hope he doesn’t die” it doesn’t make what Ann Coulter does ok.
By Mara
July 9, 2007 11:52 AM | Link to this
Ann Coulter is the perfect poster-girl for the modern GOP…an angry foul-mouthed bully. A foul-mouthed adolescent bully at that!
By 2D
July 9, 2007 12:16 PM | Link to this
Not everyone finds Bill Maher funny. I personally don’t enjoy his style of humor. Sarcasm and satire can be funny, but he just seems to be mean, IMHO.
Another thing about Bill Maher… while he is a comedian, he does not just lampoon, like the old SNL skits (the new ones suck). He injects his own opinions, thereby giving his show a definite point of view. Quite frankly, I would not consider his show an opinion show on the lines of what Hannity/Limbaugh/etc. do on the radio. He simply injects his form of humor.
By Pompano
July 9, 2007 12:20 PM | Link to this
Looks like Ann is accomplishing her goal quite well… love to see her inflame the libs. Just like a lot of rats taking the bait. I especially enjoy the twisted logic being thrown around by the mental midget PC crowd trying to defend Maher yet resort to vile personal attacks on Ann. Pretty evident here that we have a lot of posters who are extremely intimidated by attractive, intelligent, outspoken women. Ann Rocks!
By 2D
July 9, 2007 12:43 PM | Link to this
Oops… I meant that I WOULD consider his show an opinion show along the same lines as Hannity, Limbaugh, etc.
By stuart
July 9, 2007 12:49 PM | Link to this
“I especially enjoy the twisted logic being thrown around”
You must. It is required of every Ann Coulter fan. Since thats the only kinf of logic she provides
By stuart
July 9, 2007 12:49 PM | Link to this
“I especially enjoy the twisted logic being thrown around”
You must. It is required of every Ann Coulter fan. Since thats the only kind of logic she provides
By Mara
July 9, 2007 12:53 PM | Link to this
extremely intimidated by attractive, intelligent, outspoken women
yeah, that’s it…we’re intimidated…
love to see her inflame the libs…Just like a lot of rats taking the bait
and another prime example of the “quality” of todays GOP.
2D - I feel the same way about Maher. Like Stuart who posted up-thread, I prefer the humor of Jon Stewart (and Stephen Colbert) :^)
By Mara
July 9, 2007 1:01 PM | Link to this
2D - Oops… I meant that I WOULD consider his show an opinion show along the same lines as Hannity, Limbaugh, etc
I think the difference is that Maher markets himself as a comedian first and a satirical commentator second. While he may have opinion content, he portrays himself NOT as a political pundit, but as an entertainer. Unlike Limbaugh, Hannity, Savage etc.
By 2D
July 9, 2007 1:02 PM | Link to this
Mara… I absolutely enjoy Colbert, but not so much Stewart. He just has a smugness that rubs me the wrong way, but I know lots of folks who like him. I think Colbert is funny and in no way appears to be anything other than entertainment. Sure there is some commentary, but not nearly as biting or mean spirited as Stewart or Maher.
For some reason, when Colbert lampoons some issue or position where he and I disagree, I can still laugh at the joke. Stewart makes my stomach turn and Bill Maher, well, it’s beyond even that.
By 2D
July 9, 2007 1:05 PM | Link to this
BTW… I don’t see how ANYONE would find Ann Coulter attractive. The SNL line from Darell Hammond summed it up for me when he addressed the Ann character on a “Hardball” skit as “you melted Barbie doll.”
By RectilinearPropagation
July 9, 2007 1:09 PM | Link to this
Looks like Ann is accomplishing her goal quite well… love to see her inflame the libs. Just like a lot of rats taking the bait.
So Ann Coulter is a troll! Thanks for clearing that up. :)
By Stuart
July 9, 2007 1:15 PM | Link to this
I completely appericate you point on Colbert and understand your feelings on Steward. The thing that got me about this latest Coulter mess is that so many people got outraged and so many people never even bothered to find out what was said. The media misqouted Coulter as well as misqouting Maher.
Again I invite people to view the clip
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NGsHB7Hjpi4
and then comment.
By 2D
July 9, 2007 1:17 PM | Link to this
Mara… You are right that Maher may market himself as a comedian first, but that doesn’t mean he isn’t actually a political pundit first. IMHO, hhe is a political pundits delivering his message through semi-comedic routines.
I am not a Bill Maher fan, so there may be material out there I don’t know about, however, I have not seen nor heard anything from Bill Maher that is NOT politically based. Other comedians have routines about, going to the dentist, first dates, or other mundane, everyday activites. Maher doesn’t. His comedy is designed to be political. More over, it appears to be designed and delivered to present a point of view and sway opinion. Given that, I believe he is a political pundit regardless of how he markets himself.
That is one of the items with which I do agree with Shaunti, although for not quite the same reason. Because Maher markets himself as a comedian, he can his bombastic statements and be labeled a satirist. Ann Coulter is labeled a character assassin. IMHO, they are BOTH character assassins, and neither are really worth our time or brain space.
By Almost Cut My Hair
July 9, 2007 1:32 PM | Link to this
Following 9/11, I recall a few liberal comedians like Bill Maher and Dennis Miller giving lip service to re-evaluating their core political views. I give Dennis Miller credit for actually moderating his views, whereas Maher, like Hillary Clinton, jumped off the bandwagon as soon as the opinion polls changed regarding the Iraq War.
By MrRogers
July 9, 2007 1:41 PM | Link to this
There goes the neighborhood.
By Almost Cut My Hair
July 9, 2007 1:51 PM | Link to this
It increases my paranoia…….
By Nunna Yo Biznezz
July 9, 2007 1:54 PM | Link to this
No one is inflaming us “Libs”,Pompano….She would not have been brought up in this conversation if it weren’t for the title of this blog sir..
We,(the inflamed libs)are just all in agreement that she is highly over rated by her close minded views..She is just the little girl in school who named call u,then would stick our her tung(hip hop spelling)and run!!
And the conservatives love and feast on that..
Why?????
Because the conservatives are the ones who were bullied when they were young and got beat up alot..So now they stick out their chest and say “we will bomb u,and u,and u”!!
When in reality,(just like our fearful leader and his assistant the VP)…
They get the people with the guts to fight,(Us Dems),to fight the battles that they are afraid to fight and didn’t..Punks..Just like little kids…
Just like all the deffermants that the VP and the man whom he has his hand in between the shoulder blades of his “stage act”,and tells it when to talk and what to say…
Cheney:”Say goodnite dummy” Bush:”Goodnite dummy” Cheney: “Thank u all,and goodnite”…
By Almost Cut My Hair
July 9, 2007 2:03 PM | Link to this
She is just the little girl in school who named call u,then would stick our her tung(hip hop spelling)and run!
Give me some tung, baby.
By Joeco
July 9, 2007 2:11 PM | Link to this
Very interesting site. Hope it will always be alive!
p.s. Thank you google!!!
By Joeco
July 9, 2007 2:11 PM | Link to this
Very interesting site. Hope it will always be alive!
p.s. Thank you google!!!
By Joeco
July 9, 2007 2:11 PM | Link to this
Very interesting site. Hope it will always be alive!
p.s. Thank you google!!!
By Mara
July 9, 2007 2:33 PM | Link to this
2D - Maher started out as a stand-up comedian in New York and most of his material is from current events. He’s done stuff regarding Hollywood, sex, drugs, euthanasia, pornography, music, etc. There’s a lot of stuff he’s done that isn’t “political” per se, but could be considered so because his views on these topics are so controversial. Here’s a quick example -
And finally…F—-ing around at the office is not a reason to lose your job. If it was, the unemployment rate in America would be 80%. This week, the CEO of Boeing - or as it’s now known, “Boing!” - had to step down because he was having an affair with a nice lady from Accounts Receivable. Who gives a d—-?! When did this country turn into Utah?!
Now, I know what you’re saying. You’re saying, “Hey, Bill, that attitude may be fine for you, leading your single, libertarian lifestyle, but when a 68-year-old airline executive named Harry Stonecipher bones somebody in the supply closet, what do we tell the children?” Yeah, right, the children who look up to geriatric arms dealers and don’t want to think of their government buying Apache helicopters from a fornicator.
“At Boeing, we will tolerate no sneaking around. Now get back to work on the Stealth bomber.”
You know, in other countries, a CEO committing adultery isn’t even called a scandal. It’s called a “business trip.” Why are there so many puritans in this country, and why can’t the rest of us make them go away?!
When did we get to be such a nation of busybodies? “Ooh, who is Harry Stonecipher f—-ing? I’ve got to know!” You know, just to put things into perspective, the Boeing Corporation is our second-largest defense contractor. They make things like the F-15, and we’re at war, with soldiers’ lives at stake. So I’ve got to think that the smooth, uninterrupted management of the Boeing Corporation would be important.
But apparently it’s not more important than stopping Harry Stonecipher from grappling naked in a burlesque of lust with 52-year-old “Gloria Hormth.”
You know, a couple of months ago, we found out there’s nine billion of our dollars missing in Iraq. Not misspent. Lost. Nine billion. But in the age of Bush, anything that involves money is legal, and the only scandal is sex. Gross, disgusting, AARP, “Early Bird Special” sex with Harry Stonecipher.
As if - as if a 68-year-old man having an office romance should be a shock in the aerospace industry. It shouldn’t. It should be a high-five in the pharmaceutical industry. This shouldn’t be condemned. It should be applauded! Harry Stonecipher’s extra-marital affair is the first time Boeing ever deployed an obsolete missile system and you and I didn’t have to foot the bill!
THAT’S Bill Maher. Political commentary? It touched on politics, but I wouldn’t exactly call it “political opinion”…
By stuart
July 9, 2007 2:35 PM | Link to this
Again I invite people to view the clip
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NGsHB7Hjpi4
and then comment.
By Stuart
July 9, 2007 2:38 PM | Link to this
Again I invite people to view the clip
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NGsHB7Hjpi4
and then comment.
By Pompano
July 9, 2007 2:41 PM | Link to this
Nunna Yo Biznezz Looks to me like Ms Coulter has really gotten under your skin. Which of her targeted demographics do you represent - unmarried mom, affirmative action zombie, etc.
You can’t even stand up to a skinny blond without whining about how unfair she is - whine, whine, whine. Nothing but low-end name-calling - typical of 5th grade educated Democraps - same as how you resolve everything else down in the ‘hood.
I do enjoy seeing you all get your panties in such a wad over a sarcastic remark by Queen Ann and especially enjoyed the rather hilarious remark about using Dems to fight. Dems don’t fight (they can’t win in a fight) - they file lawsuits in pursuit of activist judges.
By lozen
July 9, 2007 2:44 PM | Link to this
Well I learned some things this week: Who Bill Maher is;I don’t watch tv and I had never heard of him before. I watched some clips from his show and I agree he needs to do something about the greasy hair. I still don’t know if Ann Coulter is attractive or not having only seen her photo on her book jacket. Her photo doesn’t make her seem particularly unattractive physically. It’s her mind that makes her unattractive. I scanned one of her books, saw what propoganda it was, and never gave her another thought. It is no surprise that she’s making millions from being a shill for Bush and gang. As Mara said “another prime example of the “quality” of todays GOP.”
Mean people breed more mean people.
By Stuart
July 9, 2007 3:03 PM | Link to this
Nothing but low-end name-calling
Oh come on now have you never read her books.(yes I have) She is the queen of name calling. Without name calling their would be no Ann coulter
By Archie
July 9, 2007 3:09 PM | Link to this
Wow it is obvious Ann Coulter riles people up most often in a bad way. Lozen, Ann Coulter is nice-looking and she is smart but I can see through her as if I had x-ray vision. She is all about the dollar and if the public is paying attention you will note that he rhetoric is strongest when she starts hawking a new book. Coulter is appealing to primarily white male conservatives and she knows that which is why she has referred to women as “broads”. She went after the 9/11 widows with that commentary and it’s in her book. Coulter knows how to appeal to prejudice,sexism, and ego for main market, white males. Obviously Coulter appeals also to other genders and races but she knows who listens to Limbaugh and Hannity and she knows how to reel them in all the while making people think she actually believes her rhetoric. I used to watch her on Geraldo’s news shows and she was smart but did not engage in the extreme rhetoric that she does now but in the early 90’s no one knew Limbaugh’s bank account would be in the millions. You almost can’t blame any of these conservative people because no one is requiring them to do anything but bash liberals and minorities every now and then. Heck, they’re getting paid.
By Craig also
July 9, 2007 3:11 PM | Link to this
Thanks for the link Stuart. Kinda puts Maher’s comments into a different light. Of course, the wingnuts won’t check it out. Rush, or Neal, or Sean, has already told them what to think.
By Huh
July 9, 2007 3:16 PM | Link to this
Ann Colter?
Ann Colter WHO?
By Joeva
July 9, 2007 3:16 PM | Link to this
Good work!
Thank you google!!!
By Stuart
July 9, 2007 3:19 PM | Link to this
see it is so important to look at things before commenting on them. it only takes a minute to research then comment. I do the same for Ann as well. I would never talk about something she said without first hearing or reading it myself.
By 2D
July 9, 2007 4:04 PM | Link to this
Mara… I guess we can agree that we don’t particularly care for Bill Maher (at least I thought you agreed with me on that earlier).
We’ll have to disagree on his status as a political pundit. You seem uncomfortable giving him that moniker. I have no problem at all. As you said, even those snippets dip into “political” issues. His brand of humor is not Eddie Murphy in the hey-day, or Bill Cosby, or Jerry Seinfeld. His comedy is meant to critique and sway opinion. Perhaps I’m reading far too much into his schtick.
As for the poster describing conservatives as the ones who were beat up when they were little. I know a bunch of “conservatives” wearing the uniform, that are stationed all over this country right now who would like nothing more than to beat your sorry a$$ back under whatever rock you crawled out from for making a comment like that.
By Lily Toad
July 9, 2007 4:34 PM | Link to this
I’ve never seen Bill Maher do stand up, but I’ve seen his show a few times and it is definitely a political show. He invites guests and discusses politics. His “new rules” are about politics when I’ve watched.
By Stuart
July 9, 2007 4:35 PM | Link to this
I wish more people would do a little research on subjects before commenting. We would have a much more civilized discussion then what I see here. We live in the age of the internet with tools like youtube and goggle so why don’t people use them. I know better then to believe everything I read but I also have a brain and like to know what I am talking about before opening my mouth. I see both sides of this argument calling each other names and talking about who was beat up as a kid yet no will discuss their opinions on the subject. It must be because we are on the internet and people do not have to face each other. It gives a freedom to act in a way that you wouldnt otherwise act.
By Stuart
July 9, 2007 4:41 PM | Link to this
Yes his show is very political. He also used to host Politicaly Incorrect on ABC before he got fired.
By Pompano
July 9, 2007 4:48 PM | Link to this
Does anyone else notice the hypocrisy on Maureen Downey commenting on crossing the lines of decency? This after just today writing articles dismissing the principle of abstinence and another defending a convicted child molester. Where is this line?
Ask yourself the real self-serving reason that Libs don’t want abstinence pushed on our youth. It’s because they know full well that every new “baby-momma” is another potential Democrat needing to ride the government dole. Don’t want to reduce the output of newly born Dems into Society.
By Stuart
July 9, 2007 5:03 PM | Link to this
“It’s because they know full well that every new “baby-momma” is another potential Democrat”
That is simply not true. I am a Democrat and I have no problem with teaching abstinence but I do have a problem with only abstinence being taught. As a former teenager myself I know the more you tell kids not too do something the more they will want to do it. If you think that teaching abstinence alone is going to stop kids from having sex your making a big mistake. Also children growning up with a single parent are no more likly to grow up to be Democratic then Republican.
By Zayow
July 9, 2007 9:44 PM | Link to this
purchase diet pills online
By Zayow
July 9, 2007 9:45 PM | Link to this
purchase diet pills online
By Anonymous
July 10, 2007 8:30 AM | Link to this
Pompano seems dumber than the usual Bush supporter… perhaps because he’s apparently also a Coulter fan, which is really scraping the bottom of the barrel.
So, liberals want more pregnancies, huh? Tell us, genius: who’s the only party that defends birth control and reproductive choice, especially for the poor? And which party wants every woman chained to the kitchen popping out babies nonstop, As God Intended?
Sheesh. Speaking of barrels… like shooting fish in one. Pompano’s no challenge at all.
By Poster
July 10, 2007 9:04 AM | Link to this
Pompano’s no challenge at all
But he’s a Math Genius. I wonder if he can tie his shoes or is restricted to slip-ons.
By SusieHomeMaker
July 10, 2007 9:29 AM | Link to this
Ask yourself the real self-serving reason that Libs don’t want abstinence pushed on our youth. It’s because they know full well that every new “baby-momma” is another potential Democrat needing to ride the government dole. Don’t want to reduce the output of newly born Dems into Society.
That was a very ignorant comment. To compliment your ignorant comment I will make an ignorant comment too, (that way your comment won’t look so lonely): You must fall into the demographic of Anne’s faithful, (white, male, angry). I still can’t figure out what the heck you’re so angry about. White males rule the world, yet they still shout “Unfair!!, Reverse Discrimination!! They’re taking away all our rights, priviledges and women!!” Go figure……
Also if you “push abstinence on our youth” does that make you a “pusher” of morals? Were you abstinent in your youth, (by choice, not circumstances)? And if you were, (by circumstances), did you wish you weren’t?
OK enough of the ignorant comments from me. I eagerly await your ignorant retorts, (judging from your previous posts, you have made many, many, many such comments before).
By RF
July 10, 2007 10:02 AM | Link to this
Anyone who takes Ann Coulter seriously (considering her millions, there must be a lot of people who do) needs to have an IQ test. I don’t always find Bill Maher funny, but every now and then he makes an interesting point and does so without the childish, insensitive, unintelligent, anger-induced babble that Ann Coulter uses. If she had ever lived through the sudden, unexplained death of someone she loved, she’d understand how truly wrong her comment about Edwards was and how little it accomplished. As Archie said, she makes buttloads of money doing it, so why not? Her senseless prattle only serves to help the cause she so desperately wants to put down.
Like many on the extreme right, she only makes herself look more foolish. Every time she opens her mouth, her intelligence diminishes and she adds to the tainted image the ultra-conservative seem to be working so hard to polish and perfect.
By Reason
July 10, 2007 10:09 AM | Link to this
Typical libs, they’re all personal attacks and no actual substance (because they have no substance).
By 2D
July 10, 2007 10:20 AM | Link to this
Very few poeple on the extreme edges (either right or left) can make points of actual substance because they are driven by emotion and passion rather than reason and deliberation.
Multiple points of view must be examined in order to deliver clear and succinct messages. The extremes will not ever consider the other side(s) and therefore are not able to test and galvanize their own position into clear and succinct points. It takes an open mind to do such things.
At that point, the extremes will resort to name calling, personal attacks and fear campaigns either through the bad things that people have done or the potential bad things that could happen. This happens consistently when discussing the issues of our time (i.e. Iraq, Social Security, Affirmative Action, etc.).
By SAR
July 10, 2007 10:21 AM | Link to this
The Democrats have enjoyed the luxury of some of those in their camp such as Al Sarpton, Bill Maher, Jesse Jackson and a host of others(Cynthia McKinney)saying anything they wanted to say in front of an audience and a microphone and getting away with it. Now, when a woman (of all things..a woman) says some tough things the Dems cringe in the corner and cry foul. They want to remove all conservative talk raido off the air because of their failed attempt to have their own show with the disaterous titanic of a radio show Air Amercia that tanked miserably. Dems, never hire dumb actors such as Alec Baldwin to be your raido host, he needs a script…duh! John Edwards is an easy target, too easy for anyone not to have him in their crosshairs. I mean come on, the man didn’t pay four hundred bucks for a hiarcut, we now know he paid tweleve hundred dollars for a haircut. The man is an idiot for not thinking we’d find about that. Edwards simply cannot be taken seriously as a candidate, he is the Paris Hilton of the Democratic Party; prety rich and dumb, very dumb. The Democrats got use to being the Party of Double Standards with Clinton and now they’re upset that Ann is calling them out for what they really are and they can’t seem to shut her up. Keep talking Ann, if you’re pushing their buttons and making them mad, you are doing your job.
By ROFL
July 10, 2007 10:21 AM | Link to this
Reason, you are absolutely right. The dems never state specifics, they only revert to name-calling. Look at the 1st sentence of this blog written by craig. Right out of the starting blocks he called her evil and vile. What an outpouring of maturity that was.
By ViewFromMidtown
July 10, 2007 10:28 AM | Link to this
Shaunti, did you put on your hypocrite hat when you sat down to write this column? Indeed it takes a special kind of hypocrisy to criticize the media for supposedly taking quotes out of context and then turn around in the next paragraph and make such a blatant misrepresentation as But again, few media have reported the “hate words” coming from the Edwards campaign - for example, many bigoted and anti-Christian comments… The comments you claim as being from “campaign staffer Amanda Marcotte” were written by Marcotte on her personal blog before her hiring by the campaign and in fact she is no longer with the campaign. Way to spin and misrepresent! But then again, you’re a columnist, not a journalist so I guess you don’t have to worry about things like facts and accuracy.
By Joenc
July 10, 2007 10:37 AM | Link to this
I like this site!
p.s. Thank you google!!!
By Anonymous
July 10, 2007 10:44 AM | Link to this
SAR, you’re not getting it (big surprise). She’s not making us mad—she’s making us laugh. And she’s doing HUGE favors for her supposed “enemies” every time she opens her ignorant mouth.
The Coultergeist is the best thing to happen to the liberal agenda since Dan “Potatoe” Quayle.
By Ed
July 10, 2007 10:46 AM | Link to this
My, my the house is full of angry Democrats today. I think the Libs are starting to realize that their discombobulated party is about to lose, yet again. Nope, they won’t be able to stage the Almighty Comeback even after the miserable in the polls Presidency of one President George W. Bush. Sigh. The Libs know Queen Hillary will not lead the masses to the White House nor will the benign, sophomoric, momolithically unqualified Obama be The Flava of the Month. Sigh. Alas, you still have The Breck Girl and you can watch reruns with the few dozen other folks who watched Al Gore over the week-end in the ratings flop concert for global warming. Can you guys buy a clue even if someone gave you the money and drove you to the clue store? You Dems are so out of it it’s starting to be comical and no longer quiet as scary. You guys make Paris Hilton appear smart. If you look to Gore or Edwards or Obama or Hillary for direction, get use to being lost, losers.
By Mongrel
July 10, 2007 10:48 AM | Link to this
Pretty evident here that we have a lot of posters who are extremely intimidated by attractive, intelligent, outspoken women. Ann Rocks!
Keep up the good work, Pompano. So you know, the highest form of Lib flattery here on W2W is when someone accuses you of being a DOG. I just wish I could get some of these Lib geniuses into my poker game. Talk about shooting fish in a barrel……
By RF
July 10, 2007 10:51 AM | Link to this
The Democrats got use to being the Party of Double Standards with Clinton and now they’re upset that Ann is calling them out for what they really are and they can’t seem to shut her up
Basically, what you fail to realize is that both parties have double standards. Do we really need to point out the obvious in the news lately with Scooter and Bush? Both sides have their extreme idiots. McKinney and her ilk got booted out FINALLY for her extreme idiocy. Liberal idiots don’t last long, but when the extreme on the right spumes forth, it’s all about being on the ball and doing the right thing. Come on, isn’t it obvious that Ann is no better than the fools on the other end? They keep the rope taut between the extremes while the real work is done by the compassionate, intelligent, and compromising folks in between. 2D said it best:
Multiple points of view must be examined in order to deliver clear and succinct messages. The extremes will not ever consider the other side(s) and therefore are not able to test and galvanize their own position into clear and succinct points. It takes an open mind to do such things
We vote out or laugh off the foolish liberal extreme. The extreme right write books and make millions preaching just as foolish a message.
By Mouse
July 10, 2007 10:54 AM | Link to this
Ann C. makes the same mistakes as many others in the political world. The same comments that are hilarious and acceptable at a D.C. cocktail party will haunt you when made in a public forum.
By Sarah
July 10, 2007 10:57 AM | Link to this
Anonymous, we do get it. Ann gets it as well. You don’t get it, get it? RUDY 2008.
By 2D
July 10, 2007 11:03 AM | Link to this
RF… The liberal extreme makes their fair share of cash as well. It’s just in the form of talk shows (i.e. Rosie, Oprah), movies (just about anyone other than Bruce Willis) and any other media except for Fox News and AM talk radio.
By Mongrel
July 10, 2007 11:06 AM | Link to this
RUDY 2008.
Sarah, it’s a long time until the election, but I can’t see any candidate on either side who can challenge Rudy. He’s got my vote.
By tiff
July 10, 2007 11:11 AM | Link to this
Everytime one of these “Sicko” republicans get out of line the rest of the party pretends to distance themselves from them. But in reality they keep people like Ann “Cuddie” Coulter very close and hang on her every word. Think i’m lying, this person has sold more books filled with hateful-mean spiritedness than most people I know, which tells me they are listening to her, and sharing her same hate-filled message and way of life. Remember these are Christians we are talking about America. She wears less clothing than Betty Bop, and has the the nerve to talk about Bill Clintons lack of decency. The republicans call themselves the party of family values and Christianity, yet they support and praise the likes of a woman so nasty and vicious, most pit-bulldogs could take lessons from her. If their party is the way to salvation and God heaven help us all.
By kimberly
July 10, 2007 11:15 AM | Link to this
Wow! Ed really humbled all of us “angry Democrats” at 10:46, didn’t he? His use of clever nicknames just blows me away. I mean, I only THOUGHT I was a smart person trying to focus on the issues. But political discourse isn’t really about the issues and I know that now. THANKS, ED! I mean, I’m seriously humbled: “Queen Hillary, Obama De Flava of the Month, and Breck Girl,” followed by quip (Reagan perfected the art of Quip, you know) about us making Paris Hilton look smart? Whoa nelly, we are in the presence of true original genius folks!!! Stop, take a bow and chant, “We’re not worthy….” I’ve never MET anyone with an IQ as high as Ed’s! Ed, will you be our next leader and show us the way with your special, unique relationship to truth, and clever, original thinking?
By HUH
July 10, 2007 11:21 AM | Link to this
DOG?
DOG WHO?
By Mongrel
July 10, 2007 11:23 AM | Link to this
Think i’m lying, this person has sold more books filled with hateful-mean spiritedness than most people I know, which tells me they are listening to her, and sharing her same hate-filled message and way of life.
tiff—What say you about Michael Moore? He seems to make a pretty penny with his mockumentaries.
By lovelyliz
July 10, 2007 11:25 AM | Link to this
Having an extreme nut-job representing one’s political party makes the not so extreme nut-jobs appear to be normal which they are not.
By joejoe
July 10, 2007 11:28 AM | Link to this
Ann Coulter and Shawn Insanity do more make the Republican party a secondary party now than any other political leaders.
By Scalia
July 10, 2007 11:32 AM | Link to this
2D…how do you see Oprah as a liberal? I have never heard her express her opinion on Democrat or Republican. As a matter of fact, she had Bill O’Reilly on her show. She wasn’t attacking him, or anything like that. It was a civil discourse. You never hear her endorsing a candidate. She is equal, and allows her guests to speak her point.
By SusieHomeMaker
July 10, 2007 11:41 AM | Link to this
WE HAVE A WINNER!!!! Below is the dumbest comment anyone has ever made on thist post!!!
I think the Libs are starting to realize that their discombobulated party is about to lose, yet again. Nope, they won’t be able to stage the Almighty Comeback even after the miserable in the polls Presidency of one President George W. Bush. Sigh. The Libs know Queen Hillary will not lead the masses to the White House nor will the benign, sophomoric, momolithically unqualified Obama be The Flava of the Month.
Congratulations!!! You have just proven everyone’s point on the quality, education, and sanity of Anne Coulter’s defenders / followers!!! Your award, (a lifelong supply of high fat, high cholesterol, fried foods), will be sent to you in the near future!! Good Job Buddy!!!
By 2D
July 10, 2007 11:43 AM | Link to this
lovelyliz… You speak of extreme nutjobs??? I may regret this, but referring to an earlier post, how exactly do you call Michael Moore??? A semi-extreme nutjob, a not quite certified whacko, or totally normal???
By Ed
July 10, 2007 11:46 AM | Link to this
Kimberly, you sound fat.
By lovelyliz
July 10, 2007 11:48 AM | Link to this
Bill Maher:
But I have zero doubt that if Dick Cheney was not in power, people wouldn’t be dying needlessly tomorrow.
I’m just saying if he did die, other people, more people would live. That’s a fact.
Ann Coulter:
If I’m gonna say anything about John Edwards in the future, I’ll just wish he had been killed in a terrorist assassination plot
By Sarah
July 10, 2007 11:51 AM | Link to this
Kimberly….Ed must have hit a raw neve for you to post directly to him, do you have a secret crush on him? Kimberly, do you hate Ann because her little black dress size is a single digit and yours probably isn’t?
By lovelyliz
July 10, 2007 11:52 AM | Link to this
2D
Michael Moore is a Mid-Western leftie who doesn’t pretend to be anything but. He is generally factually correct goes after the big guys who are more than able to fight back.
Kind of a David and David fight (as opposed to David & Goliath)
By HB
July 10, 2007 12:01 PM | Link to this
Actually, Shaunti, I saw quite a few media stories on blogger Amanda Marcotte’s offensive words. The Edwards campaign quickly apologized for those remarks. Honestly, I don’t feel like the media does all that much reporting of Anne Coulter’s outrageous remarks — no need, she goes on camera and spews them for all to hear. Usually, what the media is guilty of is letting her get in front of a camera. So goes the old saying, if you give her enough rope…
As for comparisons to Bill Mahr, he gets away with many of his statements because:
1) he usually makes them on his own political show that mostly like-minded people watch (Rush Limbaugh gets away with a lot for the same reason), it’s on subscriber cable and just not seen by as many people
2) his remarks aren’t seen as attacking the “innocent.” By that, I mean private citizens who don’t put themselves in the line of attack. An argument can be made that politicians, by their vocation, have opened themselves up to harsh remarks. Many of us are offended by such discourse, but tend to let it slide as the usual political nonsense. Ann Coulter, though, has a habit of attacking innocents like the New Jersey widows. Her now infamous slur against John Edwards invoked such anger, not because it seen as an insult to him, but because it is a derrogatory term against gay men in general.
Her assassination remark really didn’t get that much coverage on its own and could have gone mostly unnoticed like Bill Maher’s had. The confrontation between her and Elizabeth Edwards over the remark is what was newsworthy. As for Coulter’s complaints that the campaign is now using her statements for fundraising, oh boo hoo. The Edwards are smart politicians turning enemy attacks to their own advantage.
By JP
July 10, 2007 12:09 PM | Link to this
Amen. I’m not a conservative, and her bile makes no progress in convincing me to become one.
By kimberly
July 10, 2007 12:10 PM | Link to this
Kimberly, you sound fat. HAHAHAHAHA! Dang, yer gooood.
do you hate Ann because her little black dress size is a single digit and yours probably isn’t?
HAHAHAHA! LMCLAO… HAHAHA! Ooooo… we’re having an intelligent discourse now! HAHA!
By RF
July 10, 2007 12:11 PM | Link to this
2D- Oprah is hardly an extreme liberal. Like most of us moderates, she gets lumped in with “them crazy libruls” because she presents something other than Limbaugh montra. Rosie, as we all can see, can’t keep a job because she rants. She seemed to be trying to reign herself in for a while, but she has slowly succumbed to her nature to argue with a fence post if it’s planted in conservative soil. As I said earlier, just about all the crazies on the left don’t seem to last long. I’m sure we could spend countless hours today pointing and saying “look at so-and-so” on either end of the spectrum. They’re all idiots.
As I look toward ‘08, I hope and pray that someone, anyone, will show up and stand between Hillary and Rudy and come up with some workable ideas. Let’s face it, neither side has presented any truly worthy candidates. As usual, it’s going to be a mud-slinging, money spending battle over left vs. right without any successful conclusion. Compromise, moderation, and real solutions aren’t exactly a guiding principle for either party in this country.
By Theresa
July 10, 2007 12:14 PM | Link to this
I’m just curious about how a woman becomes a shrew. Why is Ann Coulter so filled with hate?
By Mongrel
July 10, 2007 12:14 PM | Link to this
Ed and Sarah—Some friendly advice for you. Don’t ever play poker. You guys aren’t as smart as you think you are.
Gotta run, hope everyone has a blessed day.
By Mongrel
July 10, 2007 12:25 PM | Link to this
Why is Ann Coulter so filled with hate?
Theresa, if I’ve learned one thing in this life, it’s this: Ultimately, anger doesn’t need a reason, it’s a state of being which justifies itself. Just one more manifestation of the Evil One.
By Anonymous
July 10, 2007 12:37 PM | Link to this
Now I’m wondering if “Ed” and “Sarah” are the characters from “Ed, Edd, & Eddy” on Cartoon Network.
By Pompano
July 10, 2007 12:51 PM | Link to this
Queen Ann has surely pulled one over on the Dems this time! Has them throwing money at Edwards - totally unelectable. Great way to siphon money away from candidates and causes that stand a real chance - love that sound of Democrat money being flushed.
Ann Rocks!
By jewcowboy
July 10, 2007 12:55 PM | Link to this
I can’t believe the level of animosity and venom being spewed forth by both sides. I have been a lifelong liberal who holds true to the belief that it is my responsibility to help make this country stronger by helping myself and giving back to others.
I am ashamed that this country is being consumed by greed, cynicism and hate. Whether pundits on both sides believe the vile words they spew forth or just do it for the quick buck, they do great disservice to this nation.
Puerile name calling on either side will accomplish nothing except ratcheting up the level of irrational hate.
By 2D
July 10, 2007 1:02 PM | Link to this
RF… Not sure why you think Rudy isn’t a viable candidate. IMHO he and Mit Romney are the two most qualified candidates currently getting any substantial play.
I don’t buy into Senators making good executives (unless of course they have other experience, like say George Voinovich of Ohio). I personally want to see candidates that have had success outside of government and show skill as a leader of various groups or entities.
Mit Romney was successful in private business, was successful in reinvigorating the Salt Lake City Olympic committee when it was faltering and was a Republican governor of the very “Blue” state of Massachusettes. If not for his religion, I believe he, not Rudy or Hillary or Obama or even Fred Thompson would be the candidate to beat, regardless of party.
Rudy was a successful prosecutor and was Mayor of a city that has more people and more diversity than many of the States in this country. Right now, Mayor Bloomberg appears to be a more “popular” mayor, but I would suggest that his job was made substantially easier because Rudy came before him. Most of the New Yorkers with whom I went to college absolutely adore Rudy. His book on Leadership is also quite interesting.
I know of a few items about Obama, but nothing that makes me believe he can be the Chief Executive of the country. What’s his greatest leadership position, editor of the Harvard Law review? I apologize if that sounds trite, because it is a great honor, but does that compare to being Mayor of New York or Governor of Massachusettes or a successful executive in private industry?
And Hillary, she’s held one elected office and not been the leader of anything. She has experience as a partner to her husband, but that is not quite the same as the folks mentioned above.
Unfotunately, none of the candidates have the charisma of a Reagan or Clinton. So, in the dirth of such a personality, I would prefer to place my bet with someone who has a proven track record in leadership positions, even it may not be spotless. With a track record, I have an idea of what to expect, and being the more conservative and cautious person that I am, would prefer to deal with the devil I know than the one I have yet to meet.
By MrRogers
July 10, 2007 1:31 PM | Link to this
There goes the neighborhood.
By Ron McDonald
July 10, 2007 1:46 PM | Link to this
Ann Coulter is a lovely woman. I always give her free french fries at my restaurants.
By OneFifty
July 10, 2007 1:56 PM | Link to this
Ann Coulter is a lovely woman. I always give her free french fries at my restaurants
The guys sure know how to shut a woman up.
By RF
July 10, 2007 4:07 PM | Link to this
2D- I’ve not been displeased by Romney so far. I don’t see him getting the airtime that Rudy seems to be getting, though. I’d like to see him ramp it up some. Rudy’s history with NYC certainly gives him some experience with a diverse population, but I’m not sure a former NYC mayor has clean enough hands, you know? Too many possible connections to the wrong kinds of people IMO.
Hillary knows how to talk, but I will definitely distance myself from the dems if they put her on the ticket. She scares me, to be frank. Obama, I think, has potential but not enough experience and wisdom to take the executive job. The dems will have a tough choice, but I’ll bet they go with Edwards. His past isn’t nearly as tainted as many, and he seems to have at least a modicum of sense.
I really think they need to just throw the whole lot of them onto an island and see who survives two weeks. That’s the person who needs to be president.
By Lily Toad
July 10, 2007 4:21 PM | Link to this
Dennis Kuchinich is the only Dem running who will be a clear alternative to the Republicans. He’s against the Iraq war and is the only candidate to propose a single payer health care plan.
By Tony
July 10, 2007 4:41 PM | Link to this
I had something to say about Ann coulter but apperatly you have to go to rehad for using the word CU^T
By Tony
July 10, 2007 4:43 PM | Link to this
I had something to say about Ann Coulter but appearently you are sent to Rehab for using the word CU&T
By Logic
July 11, 2007 10:09 AM | Link to this
Thanks Tony for solidifying my point that you libs have no substance, just name-calling. Keep up the good work.
By Mongrel
July 11, 2007 10:30 AM | Link to this
You have just proven everyone’s point on the quality, education, and sanity of Anne Coulter’s defenders / followers!!
Susie, out of curiosity, what is your opinion of Anne Coulter’s detractors? Seems like the nastiest comments this week are coming from the Libs:
Ann Coulter=Terrorist wannabe.
She is a pitiful, anorexic materialist
A foul-mouthed adolescent bully at that!
She is just the little girl in school who named call u,then would stick our her tung(hip hop spelling)and run!
The Coultergeist
She wears less clothing than Betty Bop
Ann Coulter is a lovely woman. I always give her free french fries at my restaurants
I had something to say about Ann coulter but apperatly you have to go to rehad for using the word CU^T
So, tell me again how liberals are both smarter and more compassionate than conservatives.
By Mara
July 11, 2007 10:33 AM | Link to this
Logic Thanks Tony for solidifying my point that you libs have no substance, just name-calling.
I believe he was merely immitating Ms. Coulter in much the same way that she supposedly did with Maher’s comments.
If you recall, her words were “I was going to have a few comments on the other Democratic presidential candidate, John Edwards, but it turns out that you have to go into rehab if you use the word ‘f——t,’…”
Tony said “I had something to say about Ann Coulter but appearently you are sent to Rehab for using the word C—-“
if you want to throw brickbats at Tony for name calling, you’d best start pelting Ms. Coulter also.
By Archie
July 11, 2007 10:53 AM | Link to this
Oprah has endorsed Obama and keep in mind he is from Chicago so whether she is liberal or not that’s what she has done.
By Scorekeeper
July 11, 2007 10:54 AM | Link to this
Mara: 5 (three points for the slam dunk, and two more because she rocks) Mongrel: Negative 3. Do the math, loser.
By Mongrel
July 11, 2007 10:56 AM | Link to this
If you want to throw brickbats at Tony for name calling, you’d best start pelting Ms. Coulter also.
For the record, Mara, I don’t care for Anne Coulter. I read one of her books a few years ago and wasn’t impressed. I agree with Archie this week that she is essentially a self-promoter. When I want some real conservative food for thought, I pick up a book by Thomas Sowell. He has more to say than 20 Anne Coulters.
By GT95
July 11, 2007 10:57 AM | Link to this
Mara… Not sure if the Mongrel ever defended Ann Coulter’s comments as noble or even correct.
He merely stated that her detractors on this BLOG and elsewhere have slithered into the gutter with her, thereby removing the veil of moral superiority behind which those detractors want to hide. IMHO, the lunch comment/link was the most disgusting. Only gutter trash would come up with such a foul response.
By MrRogers
July 11, 2007 11:00 AM | Link to this
There goes the neighborhood.
By Mongrel
July 11, 2007 11:01 AM | Link to this
Do the math, loser.
Sounds like I’m 8 points ahead according to your reckoning. You forgot to deduct a point from Mara for poor spelling, however.
By sanhan
July 11, 2007 11:08 AM | Link to this
Just discussing this woman has made the whole tone of the blog in general much nastier than usual. It is possible to create a better world by ones attitude and intentions. It is possible to create a meaner, nastier world by ones attitude and intentions. This is a perfect example.
By Your Gold Teeth II
July 11, 2007 11:31 AM | Link to this
It is possible to create a better world by ones attitude and intentions. It is possible to create a meaner, nastier world by ones attitude and intentions.
Who are these children who scheme and run wild?
Who speak with their wings and the way that they smile?
What are the secrets they trace in the sky?
And why do you tremble each time they ride by?
Who are these strangers who pass through the door? Who cover your action and go you one more? If you’re feeling lucky you best not refuse. It’s your game the rules are your own win or lose.
By Lily Toad
July 11, 2007 11:35 AM | Link to this
I vote for Coultergeist as most creative, A foul-mouthed adolescent bully as most descriptive. I don’t believe in insulting people based on their weight, looks, etc.
By Mara
July 11, 2007 11:42 AM | Link to this
(sigh) I wasn’t aware I was feeding the dog…sorry.
By Mongrel
July 11, 2007 12:04 PM | Link to this
I vote for Coultergeist as most creative, A foul-mouthed adolescent bully as most descriptive. I don’t believe in insulting people based on their weight, looks, etc.
Good one, Lily. I saw a funny bumper sticker at the last Wiccan get-together. It said, “Get a taste of religion, lick a witch!” Yum, yum.
(sigh) I wasn’t aware I was feeding the dog…sorry
Awww, Mara. You know I love you, honey. Here’s a link which should brighten your day:
http://www.amazon.com/Genesis/dp/B000002IGK/ref=martpr_3/102-1887240-6557719
Scroll down the page and click on 9. It’s Gonna Get Better. For my true love, I recommend 6. You’re Taking It All Too Hard.
By Mongrel
July 11, 2007 12:07 PM | Link to this
Well, gotta run. Big wet doggy smooches to all.
By Maya
July 11, 2007 12:29 PM | Link to this
How easily most of us are led to drop our consciousness to the lowest common denominator, to react in kind to those with dark consciousness. How would the world change if we could remain true to our own light and, rather than being re-actors, maintain a higher consciousness and act and speak from that place? The consciousness of violence, the verbal violence displayed on these blogs, makes it so clear how we as a collective conscience create the violence that fills the world around us every day. And it is those who come from such low consciousness who are the first to condemn the violent offender, who want to treat him with violence, rather than seeing that we, each and every one of us, create the violent offender and are just like him in our hearts! We need not worry about the splinter in the other man’s/woman’s eye; we need to remove the log from our own eye.
By 2D
July 11, 2007 1:40 PM | Link to this
Maya… Huh???
Are we to not condemn genocide in foreign nations? Are we not to condemn the individual who rapes and murders the women and the children of this country? Are we not to condemn the lack of human rights that still exist in China? Are we not to condemn the raping and pollution of our environment by mega corporations?
Your post is warm and fuzzy and may very well provide some level of civility when applied to the W2W BLOG, but unfortunately, there is evil in this world and someone must confront it. So while debate should be contained to issues and not to personal lives.
If we do not debate, how can we ever test or refine our thoughts and ideas. If we do not condemn heinous acts of evil, how we can we ever gain the resolve to confront them. If we do not remove some of the splinters in the world, we very well may end up with bigger logs to haul away.
By Maya
July 11, 2007 4:40 PM | Link to this
Yes, 2D, you could be right.
By Lyrazel
July 12, 2007 8:29 AM | Link to this
Strange to me how uninformed people are about who is running for President of their country. Most people can recite the over-hyped media glitz names but few have ventured beyond TV. Candidates like Tommy Thompson, Bill Richardson, Christopher Dodd, Duncan Hunter, Ron Paul, Dennis Kucinich, Mike Gravel, Joe Biden, Sam Brownback, Tom Tancredo are ALSO in the ring but maybe have not had the TV press. Is TV running OUR elections? Are you being blitzed by TV’s decisions? I believe so based upon such misinformation about candidates spewed by pundits. Ask yourself before making a decision on a name-brand candidate: is it best for America’s future? Many of the unrepresented candidates have long histories of actual work in government and clearer plans to get programs to work and established traditions of MAKING GOVERNMENT WORK—but no hype. Be careful who you vote for and don’t let TV plug up your ears with who they spin.
By lozen
July 12, 2007 11:06 AM | Link to this
I’m so excited for Barbara Morgan. (Much better woman to talk about than Ann Coulter!) Morgan is the 55 year old astronaut who used to be a teacher. She’ll be part of the crew on the Endeavour when it goes to the international space station. What a woman! She’s been waiting 22 years to get into space. In 1985 she was Christa McAuliffe’s backup to become the first teacher in space. Then the Challenger blew up and Morgan went back to teaching. In 1998 she was selected as a full-fledged astronaut. She’ll be operating the shuttle’s robotic arm, coordinating transfer of cargo and talking to students from space. The Endeavour is scheduled to launch on Aug. 7!!! This is a woman to admire and so many have never heard her name.
By Chilao
July 12, 2007 11:33 AM | Link to this
Barbara Morgan….This is a woman to admire and so many have never heard her name.
Except people who listen to NPR; I believe she was on early in the morning a few Sat/Sundays ago. or SOMETIME recently on NPR, she was interviewed, it was lengthier, which makes me think it was a weekend morning.
By lozen
July 12, 2007 1:30 PM | Link to this
U rock Chileo as always. And NPR rocks too. I wonder if anyone associated with WtoW at the Ajc knows who she is. You think?
By NetBanker
July 12, 2007 1:54 PM | Link to this
Hey kids! Hope all is well and I’m sorry I haven’t had time to join in on any discussions here. I know my post will be waaaaaayyy off topic and my apologies for a copy/paste, but this reflects one of the ideas I’ve tried to put forth here at various times. I hope the right-side, capitalists who regularly post here will take note of the concept.
Later kids…off to the next round of endless meetings!
http://www.ajc.com/opinion/content/printedition/2007/07/12/dreheredu.html
What’s the greatest challenge facing American conservatives today? Liberalism? Don’t I wish. That would be relatively easy to defeat. No, it’s capitalism. You read that right. Conservatives have to come to terms with the fact that capitalism, in its current form, undermines not only the virtues necessary to the kind of society conservatives claim to want, but ultimately risks subverting itself. Capitalism is an ingenious system for increasing material prosperity. It succeeded historically because the free market is the most rational device for meeting human wants and needs. It also thrived because it rewarded creativity and industriousness, and encouraged both qualities. And the most prosperous people under capitalism tended to be those who understood the value of self-denial and delayed gratification. Today, however, capitalism is defined not by a producer mentality but by a consumer ethos. The prosperity we see is in some respects a mirage, purchased with a credit card. According to U.S. government statistics, the personal savings rate recently dipped into negative territory for the first time since 1933. Consumers are buying more and more stuff we can’t afford. When bills come due, the whole pyramid scheme stands to collapse. Our consumerist economy depends on people’s inability to discipline their consumption. The best consumer sees no reason why he shouldn’t have what he wants, right now. The best consumer, in other words, exists in a perpetual state of childishness. In his new book, “Consumed,” political scientist Benjamin Barber writes that ours is the first society that acts as if its survival depends on keeping maturity —- which involves learning to master one’s impulses —- at bay. There is little in American political, religious, social or economic life that prizes restraint and sacrifice for a higher purpose. “This strategy makes good commercial sense,” writes Barber, because of the market’s need “to sell unnecessary goods to people whose adult judgment and tastes are obstacles.” Better yet for capitalists, cultivate a market among people who have no adult judgment and taste to overcome: children themselves. James McNeal, a Texas A&M marketing professor, has written: “Brand marketing must begin with children. Even if a child does not buy the product and will not for many years … the marketing must begin in childhood.” McNeal’s perverse ideas are the enemy of the family. If marketers train children to think of themselves chiefly in terms of consumer wants, they are teaching them to be faithful not to what their parents teach them but to their individual desires —- prisoners of their own cravings. So what? Shopping isn’t bad in principle, and besides, if people want to behave as shopaholics, it’s a free country, right? Of course. But as Barber warns, private choices have public consequences. If the credit bubble bursts, it’s going to take down the good with the bad, the prudent with the spendthrift. More profoundly, adopting the consumerist mentality —- which defines liberty only as individual choice, without respect to what is chosen —- makes it difficult to inculcate a sense of obligation to any traditions or ideals higher than serving the autonomous self and its desires. Democracy requires virtue. So does a healthy capitalism. A nation that cannot govern its own appetites will, in time, be unable to govern itself. An economy that divorces economic activity from the restraining virtues that make for good stewardship will implode. We conservatives wail over the late, unlamented Republican Congress’ deficit spending. Yet the truth is that any politician who told voters to do more with less —- that is, to conserve for the sake of a higher good —- would be punished at the polls. President Bush is often derided for having responded to the Sept. 11 attacks by urging the American people to go shopping. But he faithfully represents the ignoble spirit of the consumer capitalist age, in which the public demands, in Barber’s telling, “war without conscription, idealism without taxation, morality without sacrifice.” Socialism is not the answer. But we can’t pretend that our prosperity does not present us with serious civic problems. Consumer capitalism contains within its unfolding dynamic the seeds of its own destruction, to say nothing of the way it chews up traditional loyalties to faith, family, community and place. We don’t talk about this much in American politics, especially not on the right, where we’ve been supposedly waging a culture war for the traditional values cause for some time now. But we’re starting to: The American Conservative, which excerpted Barber’s book as a recent cover story, is fast becoming the most interesting political magazine on the right because it recognizes a simple but radical truth: When it comes to defending the things traditional conservatives cherish, big business is as much a threat as big government.
By James
July 12, 2007 2:22 PM | Link to this
http://www.ajc.com/news/content/shared-gen/ap/FeatureStories/ODDLikeaVirgin.html
You should be talking about this story about a NY Theater looking for Virgins for a play.
By Canine Capitalist
July 12, 2007 3:18 PM | Link to this
NetB—Lending money has always been a part of capitalism and follows the same sort of cycles that every other aspect of capitalism follows. If you recall, home loans were easy to obtain a few years ago, which led to a lot of people buying more house than they could afford, which led directly to the glut of foreclosed houses on the market today. In response, the lenders have not only raised the interest rates, but have substantially tightened up the underwriting criteria for approval. While this has led to short-term pain for home sellers, it has set in forth the necessary market correction to keep the system healthy.
I don’t really buy into the thrust of your article, that capitalism itself is responsible for people not managing their money well. Conservative thought would say “Buyer Beware” when obtaining a loan. You can’t really blame the lenders.
By Canine Capitalist
July 12, 2007 3:24 PM | Link to this
True conservatism, NetB, preserves choice, which includes the choice to fail.
As for how to promote better values among our young people, I still think the conservative way is ultimately the best model, even if it’s darn hard to live up to most of the time.
By NetBanker
July 12, 2007 3:43 PM | Link to this
Canine…you miss the entire thrust of the article if you think it’s about credit practices. It’s about how consumerism as the current economic model has farther ranging consequences than we’re realizing.
In my mind these tthree quotes from the article are the primary point…”There is little in American political, religious, social or economic life that prizes restraint and sacrifice for a higher purpose.” “…the ignoble spirit of the consumer capitalist age, in which the public demands, in Barber’s telling, “war without conscription, idealism without taxation, morality without sacrifice.” ” and “private choices have public consequences….the consumerist mentality —- which defines liberty only as individual choice, without respect to what is chosen —- makes it difficult to inculcate a sense of obligation to any traditions or ideals higher than serving the autonomous self and its desires. “
We are reaping what was sown in the ‘me’ generation era and the harvest is not good for America. It is leading to American society disintigrating into tiny fractions each out for themselves with no “higher purpose” that guides us all. There are few common causes that truly bind us together or demand a sacrifice on our part. That is the point.
By Jeffrey
July 12, 2007 3:47 PM | Link to this
Seems most commenting here are too busy attacking each other to note that Maureen and Shaunti ultimately agreed with each other that Ann is helping the Democrats by the kind of over the top rhetoric she’s using.
Personally, I think Ann has had some absolutely brilliant columns that were intended to upset those on the far left. But she’s much better when she’s sticking to valid issues.
I think she had a point about Edwards using his son’s tragedy to further his political aspirations in the same way Kerry used his military service. But both of those men’s actions are not really worthy of a lot of serious comment. Yes, it’s tacky, but let’s move on to something of greater substance.
Maher? Disgusting comment, but really, he’s so insignificant as to not even be worthy of aggravation.
I agree with that poster who mentioned Jon Stewart and Colbert. I often disagree with their jokes, but they do it so well it’s still funny.
Maybe Ann should take a page from them and make sure the jokes are funny before hitting “submit”.
By Canine Capitalist
July 12, 2007 3:50 PM | Link to this
lozen—you may be proud to know that the 2007 freshman class at Harvey Mudd College, the #1 engineering school in the US, is 50% women for the first time ever. The average SAT score is well above 1500, so these gals have some brains. Many, many women in high positions in the world of science and technology are Harvey Mudd grads, including astronaut Gwen Bell Porter over at NASA.
By Canine Capitalist
July 12, 2007 3:56 PM | Link to this
There are few common causes that truly bind us together or demand a sacrifice on our part. That is the point.
NetB, what you say may be true, but I don’t see that as a fault or function of capitalism itself. Human values—or lack thereof—are not endemic to any given economic system. In fact, capitalism and the requisite freedom it is predicated upon usually stimulate the highest achievement in people by harnessing their greed. People who grow up under communism or socialism aren’t typically more civic-minded than the average American, IMO.
By kimberly
July 12, 2007 4:01 PM | Link to this
NetB, nicely put! It is also my perception that personal greed has been elevated to a “virtue” in our society. One need only note the consumer excess and materialism as it files into church parking lots on Sunday, often oblivious to poverty and suffering nearby. Kind of hard for me to reconcile, although many of my neighbors have no problem with it.
Jeffrey, what are you talking about? You’d like to believe Edward used his son’s death shamefully and Kerry’s military service was only an intended springboard to some future greatness, wouldn’t you? Who cares about the truth, right? Do you mind if I make up some stuff about YOU and repeat it over & over? Go back to looking up Ann’s skirt, whydoncha?
By Canine Capitalist
July 12, 2007 4:04 PM | Link to this
We are reaping what was sown in the ‘me’ generation era and the harvest is not good for America. It is leading to American society disintigrating into tiny fractions each out for themselves with no “higher purpose” that guides us all.
NetB—In case you missed it, it was our misguided adoption of Lib values and policies in the 1970s-present day that have led to the “me” generation and the balkanization of America, not due to corporate America running commercicals on TV. The “me” generation was raised on moral relativism, i.e. “If it feels good, do it”. And the current balkanization of America is a direct product of the “Diversity” movement, no?
By Canine Capitalist
July 12, 2007 4:17 PM | Link to this
Kind of hard for me to reconcile, although many of my neighbors have no problem with it.
Then why do you live in a wealthy neighborhood if you are immune to the consumerism you condemn? Let s/he who is without sin cast the first stone, right? ; > )
By RF
July 12, 2007 4:48 PM | Link to this
American consumerism (well, let’s call a spade a spade here—GREED) is running rampant. I was driving about today while I had a little time looking at houses and saw a few too many foreclosures in upscale neighborhoods I can’t afford to park in, let alone buy. I’m one of those who drive through just to see how the other half lives! What surprises me is how many people drive expensive cars and live in huge houses with no kids or maybe one. I have two and we squeeze into about 1300 sq. ft. of living space. It’s not fancy, but it meets our needs. Then I look at what my parent had to raise four kids in for years and realize I have it much better than they did at my age. Sure I’d love to show off a big house, but how many people really need 3000 sq.ft. on the golf course? It’s too easy for those who think they need that to get it and end up losing it when the ARM period is up or the balloon note comes due. We, as a country, are all about “stuff” and having lots of it to show off- regarless of the price we pay down the road.
By RF
July 12, 2007 4:57 PM | Link to this
Canine- I’ll cast a few stones. I live in a working class neighborhood where the largest home is the one with the closed in garage. All around me subdivisions of gargantuan homes are going up. In the last year, quite a few have become vacant with foreclosure notices on the windows—less than five years after being built. The people who lost them went for the biggest they thought they could afford without thinking about their needs. I’m sure many of them are either enjoying renting an apartment or living with relatives now until their credit disasters can be fixed (in about ten years!!).
By Canine Capitalist
July 12, 2007 5:01 PM | Link to this
RF—I live in a 1000 sq. ft. house and drive a 15 year old car. To me, that’s conservation, the foundation of true conservatism. IMO, people who live in big houses and drive expensive cars have no right to call themselves conservatives.
By Chilao
July 12, 2007 5:01 PM | Link to this
Family Values Party at its finest:
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,289137,00.html
By Anonymous
July 13, 2007 8:45 AM | Link to this
It’s a funny story, Chilao… but couldn’t you link to an actual news source? We’d like to think there’s some truth to this report, after all.
By kimberly
July 13, 2007 8:55 AM | Link to this
Mange-breath, it’s the schools, Einstein. D’OH! Some of us have responsibilities and commitments for which we are willing to sacrifice personal luxuries. That’s our choice to make, and I’m grateful that I can. But thanks for being a moral compass and preaching values to those of us with jobs and responsibilities, you know, when you’re not sleeping all day after a long night of… whatever it is you do. Yuk!
By Chilao
July 13, 2007 9:09 AM | Link to this
OKAY,Mokay, true, true, I HAVE been ‘busted’ for this before and I want to emphatically state that I do not exactly HANG OUT at FOX, but(stammering)…LOL
What is especially hilarious to me is, IF I wanted to partake of what he ALLEDGEDLY attempted, I am CERTAIN I could do it without 1)Spending $20, and 2)Engaging in PUBLIC activity.
http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/07/12/mccain.campaign/index.html
By 2D
July 13, 2007 9:12 AM | Link to this
NetB… Interesting article, but I totally disagree with one the points you quoted:
”There is little in American political, religious, social or economic life that prizes restraint and sacrifice for a higher purpose.”
Religious life does prize restraint and sacrifice for a higher purpose. The restraints and higher purpose may not be what you or the article value, but religion, particularly the denominations of Christianity that I am familiar with do.
They value sacrifice of time, talent (through the use of personal time) and financial means to support a variety of higher purposes.
Those purposes may be exterior to the church or the home (i.e. charitable organizations like Habitat for Humanity, Genesis Shelter, various food banks, various mission trips to Central and South America, etc.) or they may be tied to the church (i.e. property improvement, teaching classes, choir, etc.).
As with any organization made up of people, there are bad apples, but I do not believe that the blanket statement “religion does not prize sacrifice for a higher purpose” can be made.
By The Cost
July 13, 2007 9:47 AM | Link to this
As I walk through This wicked world Searchin for light in the darkness of insanity.
I ask myself Is all hope lost? Is there only pain and hatred, and misery?
And each time I feel like this inside, Theres one thing I wanna know: Whats so funny bout peace love & understanding? ohhhh Whats so funny bout peace love & understanding?
And as I walked on Through troubled times My spirit gets so downhearted sometimes So where are the strong And who are the trusted? And where is the harmony? Sweet harmony.
cause each time I feel it slippin away, just makes me wanna cry. Whats so funny bout peace love & understanding? ohhhh Whats so funny bout peace love & understanding?
So where are the strong? And who are the trusted? And where is the harmony? Sweet harmony.
cause each time I feel it slippin away, just makes me wanna cry. Whats so funny bout peace love & understanding? ohhhh Whats so funny bout peace love & understanding? ohhhh Whats so funny bout peace love & understanding?
By Visitor646
July 21, 2007 12:37 AM | Link to this
I have visited your site 306-times