Originally posted by: hysperion
Originally posted by: shadow9d9
Originally posted by: herkulease
eh, she's alright I guess. So is moore.
though I've seen more deceptive things from moore. I remember someone had a website that listed some errors and what not from his movie.
But you know what I find those two are out for a buck. I doubt the extreme right wing coulter is really her but rather a persona that she created to make money off from.
can't blame her either. She probably made a few million. Sure there's people who hate her but there's just enough people who like her to buy her books. All the money she made will balance out her haters.
Yep, there are websites pointing out "errors", that serve to create an atmosphere of mistrust toward him. If you actually research the facts, you will find that they use their personal opinion of his presentation as proof of "errors." In reality, not ONE fact in over 6 pages of facts and sources used for Fahrenheit 9/11, for example, has been proven false. You could find websites disproving everything out there... However, the websites are almost overwhelmingly opinions trying to be disguised as fact to create reader suspicion upon the targets.
F 9/11 is full of sensatialism and outright misinformation and lies..........Points are taken out of context and miscontrued throughout the film.........I don't think any reasonable person takes Ann Coulter or MM seriously.....obviously you fail........
Originally posted by: hysperion
Originally posted by: shadow9d9
Someone here said that they hadn't met a democrat with a functioning brain... I found it kinda funny.
Personally, I am independent with some liberal leanings. I don't like either party. My father is Republican but doesn't like this administration and what it has done. He believes in higher minimum wages, women's rights, rights to have an abortion. Otherwise, I have yet to meet a real "conservative." Everyone I know, both highly educated, or not, seem to support these "liberal" values. I have yet to meet someone that actually believes the Bush administration has done a good job overall, or is against women's rights. I have talked to people, like my wife's parents, who are against abortion...however they are not Republican. I feel too many people, including Coulter, lump everyone they disagree with as "liberal democrats." There are certainly some extreme Democrats out there, but a MAJORITY of people have views in both camps. I hate the propogation of terms such as "liberals" and "conservatives" that seem SO OVERWHELMINGLY in places like ATOT. I find myself having to ignore any post that uses these kind of terms. These people seem to think that this is all a game and there are 2 definitive groups of people, and they want to be on the "winning side." I consider such a view to be void of all rationale and real life experience.
As for Coulter, I think that she says outrageous things to sell books. I don't like her methods while I do enjoy Michael Moore's methods I find it easy to distinguish Moore's produced facts from his blatant opinions. That is the way it should be. I can't do the same with Coulter. Just IMHO. I feel like Moore brings attention to important issues-gun control, GM(I believe it was gm)'s abuse of its employees, and some important truths and about Bush's past and how he has handled the middle east. His opinions are blatant and he even provided a list of sourced facts used in F 9/11 for those who were unable to distinguish between his opinions and his used facts. I do not see Coulter providing similar information. People often miss this difference because of their hatred of other's opinions. If someone could find me where Coulter has posted a listing of her sourced facts used in her books, I will stand corrected.
Ya- gun control is important! Look at all the crime all those laws stop.......Ever notice how the areas with the most gun laws have the most gun crimes which continue irreguardless of the laws passed..........Lots of good gun bans have done for the UK with gun deaths increasing since the nationwide ban........
Defending Michael Moore? Both him and Ann Coulter are both sensationalists.......in Moore's defense- he tries to be humorous......in Coulter's defense- she is rarely untruthful..........both of them suck..........
And you are a liberal in the worst degree if you are a gun grabber.......
Originally posted by: Engineer
Originally posted by: Excelsior
P&N please.
Ann Coulter isn't even good enough for P&N. Send that bitch to the trash. There she would fit right in.
Originally posted by: shadow9d9
Originally posted by: hysperion
Originally posted by: shadow9d9
Someone here said that they hadn't met a democrat with a functioning brain... I found it kinda funny.
Personally, I am independent with some liberal leanings. I don't like either party. My father is Republican but doesn't like this administration and what it has done. He believes in higher minimum wages, women's rights, rights to have an abortion. Otherwise, I have yet to meet a real "conservative." Everyone I know, both highly educated, or not, seem to support these "liberal" values. I have yet to meet someone that actually believes the Bush administration has done a good job overall, or is against women's rights. I have talked to people, like my wife's parents, who are against abortion...however they are not Republican. I feel too many people, including Coulter, lump everyone they disagree with as "liberal democrats." There are certainly some extreme Democrats out there, but a MAJORITY of people have views in both camps. I hate the propogation of terms such as "liberals" and "conservatives" that seem SO OVERWHELMINGLY in places like ATOT. I find myself having to ignore any post that uses these kind of terms. These people seem to think that this is all a game and there are 2 definitive groups of people, and they want to be on the "winning side." I consider such a view to be void of all rationale and real life experience.
As for Coulter, I think that she says outrageous things to sell books. I don't like her methods while I do enjoy Michael Moore's methods I find it easy to distinguish Moore's produced facts from his blatant opinions. That is the way it should be. I can't do the same with Coulter. Just IMHO. I feel like Moore brings attention to important issues-gun control, GM(I believe it was gm)'s abuse of its employees, and some important truths and about Bush's past and how he has handled the middle east. His opinions are blatant and he even provided a list of sourced facts used in F 9/11 for those who were unable to distinguish between his opinions and his used facts. I do not see Coulter providing similar information. People often miss this difference because of their hatred of other's opinions. If someone could find me where Coulter has posted a listing of her sourced facts used in her books, I will stand corrected.
Ya- gun control is important! Look at all the crime all those laws stop.......Ever notice how the areas with the most gun laws have the most gun crimes which continue irreguardless of the laws passed..........Lots of good gun bans have done for the UK with gun deaths increasing since the nationwide ban........
Defending Michael Moore? Both him and Ann Coulter are both sensationalists.......in Moore's defense- he tries to be humorous......in Coulter's defense- she is rarely untruthful..........both of them suck..........
And you are a liberal in the worst degree if you are a gun grabber.......
Wow... Umm, I said the movie dealth with gun control... I did not say his opinion, and I did not give my opinion on the matter... so how are you coming up with a reaction to something I didn't say? Get a grip.
Originally posted by: hysperion
Originally posted by: shadow9d9
Originally posted by: hysperion
Originally posted by: shadow9d9
Someone here said that they hadn't met a democrat with a functioning brain... I found it kinda funny.
Personally, I am independent with some liberal leanings. I don't like either party. My father is Republican but doesn't like this administration and what it has done. He believes in higher minimum wages, women's rights, rights to have an abortion. Otherwise, I have yet to meet a real "conservative." Everyone I know, both highly educated, or not, seem to support these "liberal" values. I have yet to meet someone that actually believes the Bush administration has done a good job overall, or is against women's rights. I have talked to people, like my wife's parents, who are against abortion...however they are not Republican. I feel too many people, including Coulter, lump everyone they disagree with as "liberal democrats." There are certainly some extreme Democrats out there, but a MAJORITY of people have views in both camps. I hate the propogation of terms such as "liberals" and "conservatives" that seem SO OVERWHELMINGLY in places like ATOT. I find myself having to ignore any post that uses these kind of terms. These people seem to think that this is all a game and there are 2 definitive groups of people, and they want to be on the "winning side." I consider such a view to be void of all rationale and real life experience.
As for Coulter, I think that she says outrageous things to sell books. I don't like her methods while I do enjoy Michael Moore's methods I find it easy to distinguish Moore's produced facts from his blatant opinions. That is the way it should be. I can't do the same with Coulter. Just IMHO. I feel like Moore brings attention to important issues-gun control, GM(I believe it was gm)'s abuse of its employees, and some important truths and about Bush's past and how he has handled the middle east. His opinions are blatant and he even provided a list of sourced facts used in F 9/11 for those who were unable to distinguish between his opinions and his used facts. I do not see Coulter providing similar information. People often miss this difference because of their hatred of other's opinions. If someone could find me where Coulter has posted a listing of her sourced facts used in her books, I will stand corrected.
Ya- gun control is important! Look at all the crime all those laws stop.......Ever notice how the areas with the most gun laws have the most gun crimes which continue irreguardless of the laws passed..........Lots of good gun bans have done for the UK with gun deaths increasing since the nationwide ban........
Defending Michael Moore? Both him and Ann Coulter are both sensationalists.......in Moore's defense- he tries to be humorous......in Coulter's defense- she is rarely untruthful..........both of them suck..........
And you are a liberal in the worst degree if you are a gun grabber.......
Wow... Umm, I said the movie dealth with gun control... I did not say his opinion, and I did not give my opinion on the matter... so how are you coming up with a reaction to something I didn't say? Get a grip.
There I bolded it for you........I don't think a supporter of gun rights/2nd amendment would ever call gun control an important issue.........also- since you happen to be worshipping Michael Moore- I think even the stupidest member of these boards could figure out how you feel about firearms.........
Michael Moore may throw 5 facts in a film and then sensationalise the rest. One of my favorite is in his columbine movie where he acts as if the NRA having a scheduled meeting after the killings somehow insulted the dead. Those who support gun rights don't blame firearms for being abused- they blame individuals...........Obviously, the guns used were illegally obtained thru a straw purchase and the laws against that as well as bringing a gun into school and murder didn't stop them. I guess that proves we don't have enough gun laws already :roll: If only the 'gun-show' loophole would have been closed their is no way they would have had the weapons :roll:
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!
Originally posted by: her209
Hardball with Chris Matthews? for June 30
Bylines: Chris Matthews, Frank Luntz, David Shuster
Guests: Ann Coulter, Howard Fineman, John Lott, Carol Lear, Willie Brown, Bob Dornan
Originally posted by: thereaderrabbit
People can dis Cindy Sheehan all day long, but her effect on Bush's poll numbers was and continues to be real. Bush did not handle this situation well and continues to pay a high price.
Hillary is a bit of a partisan hack (this coming from a liberal New Yorker) and I think everyone knows that... Still I don't see Coulter running for office. Reason being that she is much more of a partisan hack than Hillary will ever be (and people don't like voting for them). If Hillary went one-on-one with Coulter Hillary would do just fine, but for the moment, Hillary seems to be above such things (so no women?s mud wrestling/slinging for the moment).
-Reader
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!
Originally posted by: totalcommand
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!
This post is complete BS. Amplifier does NOT completely disagree with Coulter to begin with. This is just a shameless plug by a far right-wing anandtech user.
Sources:
http://forums.anandtech.com/messageview...atid=52&threadid=1844381&enterthread=y
http://forums.anandtech.com/messageview...atid=52&threadid=1840434&enterthread=y
And ESPECIALLY: http://forums.anandtech.com/messageview...hreadid=1677379&enterthread=y&arctab=y
If you need further proof of Amplifier's penchance for trolling, let me know.
Originally posted by: totalcommand
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!
This post is complete BS. Amplifier does NOT completely disagree with Coulter to begin with. This is just a shameless plug by a far right-wing anandtech user.
Sources:
http://forums.anandtech.com/messageview...atid=52&threadid=1844381&enterthread=y
http://forums.anandtech.com/messageview...atid=52&threadid=1840434&enterthread=y
And ESPECIALLY: http://forums.anandtech.com/messageview...hreadid=1677379&enterthread=y&arctab=y
If you need further proof of Amplifier's penchance for trolling, let me know.
Originally posted by: MooseKnuckle
She's a piece of a$$, I'd marry her in a hearbeat...
Yes, I do feel gas prices for a large part are contributing to Bush's low aproval raitings. But I still don't think Sheehan's impact was negligible to moderates. Bush seemed out of touch by avoiding a harmless mother of a fallen US soldier. I'm not sure how that makes her a nut, but you're free to your opinion, but do you consider Bush a nut too?Originally posted by: Queasy
Originally posted by: thereaderrabbit
People can dis Cindy Sheehan all day long, but her effect on Bush's poll numbers was and continues to be real. Bush did not handle this situation well and continues to pay a high price.
Actually, Sheehan's effect on Bush's poll numbers was pretty negligible. Gas prices and the immigration debate is what really brought him down. Sheehan has shown herself to be a nut. Yes, it is tragic that she lost her son but she is still a nut.
Originally posted by: Queasy
Originally posted by: thereaderrabbit
Hillary is a bit of a partisan hack (this coming from a liberal New Yorker) and I think everyone knows that... Still I don't see Coulter running for office. Reason being that she is much more of a partisan hack than Hillary will ever be (and people don't like voting for them). If Hillary went one-on-one with Coulter Hillary would do just fine, but for the moment, Hillary seems to be above such things (so no women?s mud wrestling/slinging for the moment).
-Reader
If Hillary is above such things then why did she respond to Coulter's "Today Show" appearance with a personal attack on Coulter? Just saying.
Originally posted by: thereaderrabbit
Yes, I do feel gas prices for a large part are contributing to Bush's low aproval raitings. But I still don't think Sheehan's impact was negligible to moderates. Bush seemed out of touch by avoiding a harmless mother of a fallen US soldier. I'm not sure how that makes her a nut, but you're free to your opinion, but do you consider Bush a nut too?Originally posted by: Queasy
Originally posted by: thereaderrabbit
People can dis Cindy Sheehan all day long, but her effect on Bush's poll numbers was and continues to be real. Bush did not handle this situation well and continues to pay a high price.
Actually, Sheehan's effect on Bush's poll numbers was pretty negligible. Gas prices and the immigration debate is what really brought him down. Sheehan has shown herself to be a nut. Yes, it is tragic that she lost her son but she is still a nut.
Originally posted by: Queasy
Originally posted by: thereaderrabbit
Hillary is a bit of a partisan hack (this coming from a liberal New Yorker) and I think everyone knows that... Still I don't see Coulter running for office. Reason being that she is much more of a partisan hack than Hillary will ever be (and people don't like voting for them). If Hillary went one-on-one with Coulter Hillary would do just fine, but for the moment, Hillary seems to be above such things (so no women?s mud wrestling/slinging for the moment).
-Reader
If Hillary is above such things then why did she respond to Coulter's "Today Show" appearance with a personal attack on Coulter? Just saying.
"Perhaps her book should have been called 'Heartless,'" the senator said.
The New York Democrat and former first lady said she found it "unimaginable that anyone in the public eye could launch a vicious, mean-spirited attack on people whom I've known over the last four and a half years to be concerned deeply about the safety and security of our country."
"[Clinton] masturbates in the sinks."---Rivera Live 8/2/99
"God gave us the earth. We have dominion over the plants, the animals, the trees. God said, 'Earth is yours. Take it. Rape it. It's yours.'"---Hannity & Colmes, 6/20/01
The "backbone of the Democratic Party" is a "typical fat, implacable welfare recipient"---syndicated column 10/29/99
To a disabled Vietnam vet: "People like you caused us to lose that war."---MSNBC
On Princess Diana's death: "Her children knew she's sleeping with all these men. That just seems to me, it's the definition of 'not a good mother.' ... Is everyone just saying here that it's okay to ostentatiously have premarital sex in front of your children?"..."[Diana is] an ordinary and pathetic and confessional - I've never had bulimia! I've never had an affair! I've never had a divorce! So I don't think she's better than I am."---MSNBC 9/12/97
"I think there should be a literacy test and a poll tax for people to vote."---Hannity & Colmes, 8/17/99
"I think [women] should be armed but should not [be allowed to] vote."---Politically Incorrect, 2/26/01
"If you don't hate Clinton and the people who labored to keep him in office, you don't love your country."---George, 7/99
"It's enough [to be impeached] for the president to be a pervert."---The Case Against Bill Clinton, Coulter's 1998 book.
"I think we had enough laws about the turn-of-the-century. We don't need any more." Asked how far back would she go to repeal laws, she replied, "Well, before the New Deal...[The Emancipation Proclamation] would be a good start."---Politically Incorrect 5/7/97
"The presumption of innocence only means you don't go right to jail."---Hannity & Colmes 8/24/01
"I have to say I'm all for public flogging. One type of criminal that a public humiliation might work particularly well with are the juvenile delinquents, a lot of whom consider it a badge of honor to be sent to juvenile detention. And it might not be such a cool thing in the 'hood to be flogged publicly."---MSNBC 3/22/97
"I am emboldened by my looks to say things Republican men wouldn't."---TV Guide 8/97
"Anorexics never have boyfriends. ... That's one way to know you don't have anorexia, if you have a boyfriend."---Politically Incorrect 7/21/97
"I think [Whitewater]'s going to prevent the First Lady from running for Senate."---Rivera Live 3/12/99
"My track record is pretty good on predictions."---Rivera Live 12/8/98
"The thing I like about Bush is I think he hates liberals."---Washington Post 8/1/00
"The swing voters---I like to refer to them as the idiot voters because they don't have set philosophical principles. You're either a liberal or you're a conservative if you have an IQ above a toaster. "---Beyond the News, Fox News Channel, 6/4/00
"You want to be careful not to become just a blowhard."---Washington Post 10/16/98
Originally posted by: Ameesh
your a fvcking troll idiot.
Originally posted by: DonVito
Here are some gems from the good Ms. Coulter, who passes for a right-wing pundit in the 21st century. Where we used to have William F. Buckley and George Will, we now have Rush, O'Reilly, and this skank:
"[Clinton] masturbates in the sinks."---Rivera Live 8/2/99
"God gave us the earth. We have dominion over the plants, the animals, the trees. God said, 'Earth is yours. Take it. Rape it. It's yours.'"---Hannity & Colmes, 6/20/01
The "backbone of the Democratic Party" is a "typical fat, implacable welfare recipient"---syndicated column 10/29/99
To a disabled Vietnam vet: "People like you caused us to lose that war."---MSNBC
On Princess Diana's death: "Her children knew she's sleeping with all these men. That just seems to me, it's the definition of 'not a good mother.' ... Is everyone just saying here that it's okay to ostentatiously have premarital sex in front of your children?"..."[Diana is] an ordinary and pathetic and confessional - I've never had bulimia! I've never had an affair! I've never had a divorce! So I don't think she's better than I am."---MSNBC 9/12/97
"I think there should be a literacy test and a poll tax for people to vote."---Hannity & Colmes, 8/17/99
"I think [women] should be armed but should not [be allowed to] vote."---Politically Incorrect, 2/26/01
"If you don't hate Clinton and the people who labored to keep him in office, you don't love your country."---George, 7/99
"It's enough [to be impeached] for the president to be a pervert."---The Case Against Bill Clinton, Coulter's 1998 book.
"I think we had enough laws about the turn-of-the-century. We don't need any more." Asked how far back would she go to repeal laws, she replied, "Well, before the New Deal...[The Emancipation Proclamation] would be a good start."---Politically Incorrect 5/7/97
"The presumption of innocence only means you don't go right to jail."---Hannity & Colmes 8/24/01
"I have to say I'm all for public flogging. One type of criminal that a public humiliation might work particularly well with are the juvenile delinquents, a lot of whom consider it a badge of honor to be sent to juvenile detention. And it might not be such a cool thing in the 'hood to be flogged publicly."---MSNBC 3/22/97
"I am emboldened by my looks to say things Republican men wouldn't."---TV Guide 8/97
"Anorexics never have boyfriends. ... That's one way to know you don't have anorexia, if you have a boyfriend."---Politically Incorrect 7/21/97
"I think [Whitewater]'s going to prevent the First Lady from running for Senate."---Rivera Live 3/12/99
"My track record is pretty good on predictions."---Rivera Live 12/8/98
"The thing I like about Bush is I think he hates liberals."---Washington Post 8/1/00
"The swing voters---I like to refer to them as the idiot voters because they don't have set philosophical principles. You're either a liberal or you're a conservative if you have an IQ above a toaster. "---Beyond the News, Fox News Channel, 6/4/00
"You want to be careful not to become just a blowhard."---Washington Post 10/16/98
"Robert Bork's America is a land in which women would be forced into back-alley abortions, blacks would sit at segregated lunch counters, rogue police could break down citizens' doors in midnight raids, schoolchildren could not be taught about evolution, writers and artists could be censored at the whim of government."
Originally posted by: Linflas
If I was bored I could go out and dig up a similar sampling of quotes from Al Franken, Michael Moore or some other lefty pundit but all that will end up showing is that the mudslinging takes place on both extremes. Here is one rather famous slander that I've yet to see an apology for:
"Robert Bork's America is a land in which women would be forced into back-alley abortions, blacks would sit at segregated lunch counters, rogue police could break down citizens' doors in midnight raids, schoolchildren could not be taught about evolution, writers and artists could be censored at the whim of government."
Originally posted by: DonVito
Originally posted by: Linflas
If I was bored I could go out and dig up a similar sampling of quotes from Al Franken, Michael Moore or some other lefty pundit but all that will end up showing is that the mudslinging takes place on both extremes. Here is one rather famous slander that I've yet to see an apology for:
"Robert Bork's America is a land in which women would be forced into back-alley abortions, blacks would sit at segregated lunch counters, rogue police could break down citizens' doors in midnight raids, schoolchildren could not be taught about evolution, writers and artists could be censored at the whim of government."
I wouldn't agree that Al Franken is "extreme," and while I don't consider Michael Moore a credible "pundit," I've never seen anywhere near the level of contemptuousness in his commentary as what Coulter exhibits in the handful of quotes I've provided.
As for your Kennedy quote, it's certainly not slander - you might want to consult a Torts hornbook before you start throwing around words you don't understand. I'm not particularly a fan of Senator Kennedy, but he has certainly had an impressive career in terms of public service - apparently former President Bush agrees.
Slander
Noun
S: (n) slander (words falsely spoken that damage the reputation of another)
S: (n) aspersion, calumny, slander, defamation, denigration (an abusive attack on a person's character or good name)
Verb
S: (v) defame, slander, smirch, asperse, denigrate, calumniate, smear, sully, besmirch (charge falsely or with malicious intent; attack the good name and reputation of someone) "The journalists have defamed me!" "The article in the paper sullied my reputation"