Ann Coulter seems pretty alright

[JS80]

Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor

Originally posted by: tangent1138
Why I'm a Democrat-- I disagree with the religious right. I don't need them dictating morality to me.

Wow. I thought morality was a good thing.

Take a look at my sig and guess who wrote that.

Brother of the one who makes great beers

 

[whistleclient]

Originally posted by: JS80

So 9/11 happened because Bush was elected?

don't be silly or simplistic. we both now that isn't true. we had good will in the region. there's very little left now.

 

[whistleclient]

Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor

Originally posted by: tangent1138
Why I'm a Democrat-- I disagree with the religious right. I don't need them dictating morality to me.

Wow. I thought morality was a good thing.

Take a look at my sig and guess who wrote that.

Wow, you just don't get it. I said I don't need them dictating morality to me-- their concept of morality.

I can quote stuff too:

"Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between man and his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legislative powers of government reach actions only, and not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should "make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof," thus building a wall of separation between Church and State."

 

[JS80]

Originally posted by: tangent1138

Originally posted by: JS80

So 9/11 happened because Bush was elected?

don't be silly or simplistic. we both now that isn't true. we had good will in the region. there's very little left now.

We never had good will in the middle east. You need to learn your history.

 

[Tom]

"Has nothing to do with ideology...just basic math. Tax Revenues have increased since the tax cuts. "

I doubt you are correct that tax revenues, as a % of gdp, have increased.

Or that spending, as a % of gdp, has increased, if you take out the War in Iraq.

If I am correct, that's why the deficit has grown, directly because of the tax cuts.

Those are the relevant numbers, not the absolute numbers. At least that's my opinion.

 

[whistleclient]

Originally posted by: JS80

Originally posted by: tangent1138

Originally posted by: JS80

So 9/11 happened because Bush was elected?

don't be silly or simplistic. we both now that isn't true. we had good will in the region. there's very little left now.

We never had good will in the middle east. You need to learn your history.

uh huh. sure.

link

link

link

 

[Minjin]

Originally posted by: Tom

Originally posted by: Minjin

Originally posted by: Tom
Besides the immediate tax rate, you have to consider what effect 10 trillion dollars of debt will have on the value of the dollar. I would estimate you'd have to make 3-5 million per year to break even.

Can you provide for us the calculations you used to obtain that figure?

Mark

Figure an inflation rate of 5-10% and the fact that with the tax cuts the richer you are, the smaller the percentage of your income you have to pay in taxes. Some one making $325k probably pays 25%, someone making 5 million probably pays 15-20%.

Nobody can say what effect a 10 trillion dollar debt will have, since there's never been a country wih a debt that big. So it's just my opinion.

So you just made up the numbers? Thanks for the clarification.

Mark

 

[Tom]

Originally posted by: Minjin

Originally posted by: Tom

Originally posted by: Minjin

Originally posted by: Tom
Besides the immediate tax rate, you have to consider what effect 10 trillion dollars of debt will have on the value of the dollar. I would estimate you'd have to make 3-5 million per year to break even.

Can you provide for us the calculations you used to obtain that figure?

Mark

Figure an inflation rate of 5-10% and the fact that with the tax cuts the richer you are, the smaller the percentage of your income you have to pay in taxes. Some one making $325k probably pays 25%, someone making 5 million probably pays 15-20%.

Nobody can say what effect a 10 trillion dollar debt will have, since there's never been a country wih a debt that big. So it's just my opinion.

So you just made up the numbers? Thanks for the clarification.

Mark

Anybody who discusses future economic phenomena is making up the numbers, instead of focusing on the numbers, examine the principal I've put forward. If you disagree with it, fine, but you have not accomplished any kind of analysis by questioning the numbers, which I did not claim were accurate to any particular degree.

I can tell you it is a fact that the average person making 326,000 pays a higher rate in taxes, than the average person making $3 million. I don't claim to know what the precise percentage is.

 

[HeroOfPellinor]

Originally posted by: tangent1138

Originally posted by: JS80

Originally posted by: tangent1138

Originally posted by: JS80

So 9/11 happened because Bush was elected?

don't be silly or simplistic. we both now that isn't true. we had good will in the region. there's very little left now.

We never had good will in the middle east. You need to learn your history.

uh huh. sure.

link

link

link

I see, so those pictures prove we were once loved by the Middle East. Wow, no wonder you make 500K a year...you're a frickin genius!

 

[whistleclient]

Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor

I see, so those pictures prove we were once loved by the Middle East. Wow, no wonder you make 500K a year...you're a frickin genius!

they were a simple way to disprove his erroneous view that "we never had any goodwill in the middle east".

yes, we gave stinger missles to the mujadeen, who became Al Qaeda. and before that we were friendly with Saddam. and before that we sold Iran F-14 Tomcats.

don't think because you've watched Fox news for a couple years you understand the region or its history.

 

[HeroOfPellinor]

Originally posted by: tangent1138

Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor

I see, so those pictures prove we were once loved by the Middle East. Wow, no wonder you make 500K a year...you're a frickin genius!

they were a simple way to disprove his erroneous view that "we never had any goodwill in the middle east".

yes, we gave stinger missles to the mujadeen, who became Al Qaeda. and before that we were friendly with Saddam. and before that we sold Iran F-14 Tomcats.

don't think because you've watched Fox news for a couple years you understand the region or its history.

So what do you think? Should we ship them a couple thousand Xbox's and pull out of Iraq and see if they'll call it even?

 

[JS80]

Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor

Originally posted by: tangent1138

Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor

I see, so those pictures prove we were once loved by the Middle East. Wow, no wonder you make 500K a year...you're a frickin genius!

they were a simple way to disprove his erroneous view that "we never had any goodwill in the middle east".

yes, we gave stinger missles to the mujadeen, who became Al Qaeda. and before that we were friendly with Saddam. and before that we sold Iran F-14 Tomcats.

don't think because you've watched Fox news for a couple years you understand the region or its history.

So what do you think? Should we ship them a couple thousand Xbox's and pull out of Iraq and see if they'll call it even?

lol i don't even know if those 3 pics deserve a response

 

[whistleclient]

Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor

So what do you think? Should we ship them a couple thousand Xbox's and pull out of Iraq and see if they'll call it even?

that's the best plan you got?

personally, I feel like we have the best shot at achieving peace in the Middle East by interfacing with Tehran. The youth of Iran are the most pro-American of the entire region. they love our music and culture. they want very much to be like us. of course, the problem is Ahmadinejad. he sounds like a madman, but he's very much beating the drum to keep his population from noticing their skyrocketing unemployment.

to put it simply, they're years away from the bomb and if we can engage them in the peace process then they become the lynch pin to solving the violence not only in Iraq, but the Israeli-Palestinian problem too.

but i guess your xbox thing could work too.

 

[whistleclient]

Originally posted by: JS80

lol i don't even know if those 3 pics deserve a response

i used pictures because i figured big words would scare you.

 

[HeroOfPellinor]

Originally posted by: tangent1138

Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor

So what do you think? Should we ship them a couple thousand Xbox's and pull out of Iraq and see if they'll call it even?

that's the best plan you got?

personally, I feel like we have the best shot at achieving peace in the Middle East by interfacing with Tehran. The youth of Iran are the most pro-American of the entire region. they love our music and culture. they want very much to be like us. of course, the problem is Ahmadinejad. he sounds like a madman, but he's very much beating the drum to keep his population from noticing their skyrocketing unemployment.

to put it simply, they're years away from the bomb and if we can engage them in the peace process then they become the lynch pin to solving the violence not only in Iraq, but the Israeli-Palestinian problem too.

but i guess your xbox thing could work too.

Ahmadine-what?

 

[aircooled]

Ann Coulter has an Adams Apple

"She's a man Baby!"

 

[whistleclient]

Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor

Ahmadine-what?

you and JS80 don't really have anything meaninful to say, do you?

i mean, you're good at making little one line retorts about how things "don't deserve a response" but mostly it's because you have no clue how to discuss this stuff. ignorance is bliss, i guess.

meh. i'm going swimming.

 

[JS80]

Originally posted by: tangent1138

Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor

Ahmadine-what?

you and JS80 don't really have anything meaninful to say, do you?

i mean, you're good at making little one line retorts about how things "don't deserve a response" but mostly it's because you have no clue how to discuss this stuff. ignorance is bliss, i guess.

meh. i'm going swimming.

OK...you linked to 1) a pic of rumsfeld and saddam back when he wasn't a jackass threat, 2) Bush escorting the Saudi King, and 3) a map of Israel. And you posted this to rebut my statement that we never really had any good will in the Middle East because you're statement that we did have it before Bush was elected implying that Bush caused the Middle East to hate us.

How am I suppose to respond to a rebuttal that's not a rebuttal?

 

[Mani]

Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor

Originally posted by: Mani

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: Queasy

Originally posted by: tangent1138

Originally posted by: Amplifier
For my summer class we had to do an essay on a political columnist or politician. The point of the essay was to find a person whose we thought we'd completely disagree with and defend their point of view.

I picked Ann Coulter.

So I started reading her columns on the internet and one of her more recent books "How to speak to a Liberal." Her arguments really impressed me. From a technical point of view she covers her bases very well while leaving enough of an opening to generate debate. It's actually kind of embarrassing how much more intelligent she seems than Hillary Clinton or Al Franklin. Not to say I agree with Ann Coulters politics, she just seems to put more thought into what she says. Liberals tend to talk to other liberals like they're children, which gets pretty annoying.

If anything I can appreciate how she gets under peoples skin. She could easily change the wording of her arguments so they wouldn't be considered controversial, but I guess being nice doesn't sell books. One of the topics I'm addressing in my essay is her criticism of the widows of the 9/11 attacks. She's actually echoing sentiments that myself and many other Democrats have about people using personal tragedies to make political points (in the case of the widows, quite idiotic statements). We feel that our politics can withstand direct criticism without using cheap tricks. Coulters points have a lot of validity to them, but they are intentionally sew together to piss liberals off (even at the expense of the argument itself). Saying she's a monster only proves her point that Democratic ideas aren't strong enough to stand on their own. They need to be served without a healthy dose of emotional pleas or ad homen attacks.

Coulter also illustrates (indirectly) a difference in Democrat and Republican mindsets.

What was our retort to "Godless"? We drag one of our most (unfortunately) recognizable faces in Hillary into a debate with a political pundit. Talk about trading a queen for a pawn. In contrast how did Bush handle Cindy Sheehan... "That's what's great about America, people are free to have their own opinion." He completely dismissed her until she lost all her political capital. How many times does Bush have to outmaneuver our party before we stop playing so sloppily.

Anyway, I've been to the dark side and it wasn't that bad. I'll definately read her columns in the future. And with the reaction I got when I told the class I was defending Ann Coulter I got to experience liberal bias in college for the first time!

just because people suffer tragedy doesn't mean they give up the right to have a political opinion. as Americans, it's our right to have an opinion and express it.

there, i just trumped her argument.

try not be such a sheeple.

Actually, you didn't even address the point of her argument. The point of her argument is that liberal puts forward people like these 9/11 Widows or Cindy Sheehan to attack the Bush Administration, conservatives, et al and proclaims that they have absolute moral authority and that you can't respond to them.

Meanwhile, people in the same situation that support the Bush Administrations, conservatives, et al don't get the time of day from the mainstream media.

Coulter is not the first person to make this point. Hideous editorial cartoonist Ted Rall did so as did columnist Dorothy Rabinowitz two years ago.

So she makes the point by personally attacking those widows? Somebody should kick her in her Adam's apple and shut her the fsck up!

LMAO

Misogyny is teh funnay.

Oversensitivity is teh retarded.

 

[sandorski]

Most people that knew Hitler personally thought he was alright too. Coincidence? Maybe.

 

[compuwiz1]

I'd be willing to bet that she is into bondage and other rough sex....that is, if she could really arouse anyone, or anyone could really arouse her Ann Cooter.

Ya gotta admit that she's a biatch, but I kinda like it.

 

[sandorski]

Originally posted by: JS80

Originally posted by: tangent1138

Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor

Ahmadine-what?

you and JS80 don't really have anything meaninful to say, do you?

i mean, you're good at making little one line retorts about how things "don't deserve a response" but mostly it's because you have no clue how to discuss this stuff. ignorance is bliss, i guess.

meh. i'm going swimming.

OK...you linked to 1) a pic of rumsfeld and saddam back when he wasn't a jackass threat, 2) Bush escorting the Saudi King, and 3) a map of Israel. And you posted this to rebut my statement that we never really had any good will in the Middle East because you're statement that we did have it before Bush was elected implying that Bush caused the Middle East to hate us.

How am I suppose to respond to a rebuttal that's not a rebuttal?

Saddam was always a jackass, especially back then. His worst atrocities occurred right around that time period.

 

[EpsiIon]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: BigJ
It's pretty cold what she said about them as people, but her viewpoints on their agendas and the manipulation are spot-on.

More than just cold, heartless and cruel.

Being heartless and cruel does not make a person's argument factually incorrect. Stop thinking with your heart.

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: Amused
And, again, your response just helps to prove her point.

No it doesn't.

Actually, it really does. You offer no logical reasoning or solid evidence that Coulter's claims about these widows are incorrect. Instead, you seem to have chosen to believe she is wrong because you do not want to believe she is right. You have become ignorantly offended at Coulter's criticisms of these widows and attacked her instead of her argument, which is exactly what she said would happen.

If instead of getting worked up about the issue, you researched it, you might be able to calmly refute her arguments instead of attack her personally. This would lend your position a lot more credit than it currently holds.

 

[compuwiz1]

Originally posted by: EpsiIon

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: BigJ
It's pretty cold what she said about them as people, but her viewpoints on their agendas and the manipulation are spot-on.

More than just cold, heartless and cruel.

Being heartless and cruel does not make a person's argument factually incorrect. Stop thinking with your heart.

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: Amused
And, again, your response just helps to prove her point.

No it doesn't.

Actually, it really does. You offer no logical reasoning or solid evidence that Coulter's claims about these widows are incorrect. Instead, you seem to have chosen to believe she is wrong because you do not want to believe she is right. You have become ignorantly offended at Coulter's criticisms of these widows and attacked her instead of her argument, which is exactly what she said would happen.

If instead of getting worked up about the issue, you researched it, you might be able to calmly refute her arguments instead of attack her personally. This would lend your position a lot more credit than it currently holds.

You want credibility in ATOT? Get real dude!

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: EpsiIon

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: BigJ
It's pretty cold what she said about them as people, but her viewpoints on their agendas and the manipulation are spot-on.

More than just cold, heartless and cruel.

Being heartless and cruel does not make a person's argument factually incorrect. Stop thinking with your heart.

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: Amused
And, again, your response just helps to prove her point.

No it doesn't.

Blah, blah, blah, blah, blah,blah, blah, blah, blah.

[insert wanking off emoticon] Well I guess you told me:roll: