Ann Coulter sends seductive love note to SLC

[Gordon Gekko]

THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY: A VAST SLEEPER CELL
January 3, 2007


Fortunately for liberals, the Iraqis executed Saddam Hussein the exact same week that former President Ford died, so it didn't seem strange that Nancy Pelosi's flag was at half-staff. Also, Saddam's death made it less of a snub when Harry Reid skipped Ford's funeral.

The passing of Gerald Ford should remind Americans that Democrats are always lying in wait, ready to force a humiliating defeat on America.

More troops, fewer troops, different troops, "redeployment" ? all the Democrats' peculiar little talking points are just a way of sounding busy. Who are they kidding? Democrats want to cut and run as fast as possible from Iraq, betraying the Iraqis who supported us and rewarding our enemies ? exactly as they did to the South Vietnamese under Ford.

Liberals spent the Vietnam War rooting for the enemy and clamoring for America's defeat, a tradition they have brought back for the Iraq war.

They insisted on calling the Soviet-backed Vietcong "the National Liberation Front of Vietnam," just as they call Islamic fascists killing Americans in Iraq "insurgents." Ho Chi Minh was hailed as a "Jeffersonian Democrat," just as Michael Moore compares the Islamic fascists in Iraq to the Minute Men.

During the Vietnam War, New York Times scion Arthur "Pinch" Sulzberger told his father that if an American soldier ran into a North Vietnamese soldier, he would prefer for the American to get shot. "It's the other guy's country," he explained.

Now, as publisher of the Times, Pinch does all he can to help the enemy currently shooting at American soldiers.

After a half-dozen years of Democrat presidents creating a looming disaster in Vietnam ? with Kennedy ordering the assassination of our own ally in the middle of the war and Johnson ham-handedly choosing bombing targets from the Oval Office ? in 1969, Nixon became president and the world was safe again.

Nixon began a phased withdrawal of American ground troops, while protecting the South Vietnamese by increasing the bombings of the North, mining North Vietnamese harbors and attacking North Vietnamese military supplies in Cambodia ? all actions hysterically denounced by American liberals, eager for the communists to defeat America.

Despite the massive anti-war protests staged by the Worst Generation, their takeovers of university buildings and their bombings of federal property to protest the bombing of North Vietnamese property, Nixon's Vietnam policy was apparently popular with normal Americans. In 1972, he won re-election against "peace" candidate George McGovern in a 49-state landslide.

In January 1973, the United States signed the Paris Peace accords, which would have ended the war with honor. In order to achieve a ceasefire, Nixon jammed lousy terms down South Vietnam's throat, such as allowing Vietcong troops to remain in the South. But in return, we promised South Vietnam that we would resume bombing missions and provide military aid if the North attacked.

It would have worked, but the Democrats were desperate for America to lose. They invented "Watergate," the corpus delicti of which wouldn't have merited three column-inches during the Clinton years, and hounded Nixon out of office. (How's Sandy Berger weathering that tough wrist-slap?)

Three months after Nixon was gone, we got the Watergate Congress and with it, the new Democratic Party. In lieu of the old Democratic Party, which lost wars out of incompetence and naivete, the new Democratic Party would lose wars on purpose.

Just one month after the Watergate Congress was elected, North Vietnam attacked the South.

Even milquetoast, pro-abortion, detente-loving Gerald R. Ford knew America had to defend South Vietnam or America's word would be worth nothing. As Ford said, "American unwillingness to provide adequate assistance to allies fighting for their lives could seriously affect our credibility throughout the world as an ally." He pleaded repeatedly with the Democratic Congress simply to authorize aid to South Vietnam ? no troops, just money.

But the Democrats turned their backs on South Vietnam, betrayed an ally and trashed America's word. Within a month of Ford's last appeal to Congress to help South Vietnam, Saigon fell.

The entire world watched as American personnel desperately scrambled into helicopters from embassy rooftops in Saigon while beating back our own allies, to whom we could offer no means of escape. It was the most demeaning image of America ever witnessed, until Britney Spears came along.

Southeast Asia was promptly consumed in a maelstrom of violence that seems to occur whenever these "Jeffersonian Democrats" come to power. Communist totalitarians swept through Laos, Cambodia and all of Vietnam. They staged gruesome massacres so vast that none other than Sen. George McGovern called for military intervention to stop a "clear case of genocide" in Cambodia.

Five years after that, Islamic lunatics in Iran felt no compunction about storming the embassy of what was once the greatest superpower on Earth and taking American citizens hostage for 14 months. To this day, al-Qaida boosts the flagging morale of its jihadists by reminding them of America's humiliating retreat from Vietnam.

In addition to being wrong about Ford's pardon of Nixon, liberals were wrong about a few other things from that era. Democrats haven't admitted error in rejecting Ford's pleas on behalf of South Vietnam because there are still dangerous foreigners trying to kill Americans. Nixon is safely interred in the ground, but the enemies of America continue to need the Democrats' help.

[Mal Brossard]

Does anyone take Ann Coulter seriously anymore?  Did they ever?

Last time I wiped my ass, the marks on the toilet paper were far more valuable than anything she's ever put on any kind of paper.

[GeraldFord]

Hey Ann!

2003 called, they said your time is nearly up!

[Yesterday]

I am a Democrat, but have voted republican, but Ann Coulter has lost her freakin' mind.  Does she really believe what she is even saying.  I think the GOP needs to tell her to shut the hell up.

[Axlfreek]

she needs to die.

or have her vocal chords cut out.

[25]

Ann Coulter will be around forever. No matter how crazy or stupid she is, there's a long career ahead of her in the conservative media echo chamber. Remember how Nixon became respected and revered by conservatives again after he got too old to be taken seriously anymore? Coulter's already there. 

[Drew]

She can be annoying quite often but she was right on with her "faggot" comment the other week. The political correctness crowd in this country has become insane!

[SLCPUNK]

She can be annoying quite often but she was right on with her "faggot" comment the other week. The political correctness crowd in this country has become insane!

You would say that.....


WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Prominent politicians from both parties and a gay-rights group on Saturday condemned right-wing commentator Ann Coulter for her reference Friday to Democratic presidential candidate John Edwards as a "faggot."

"Ann Coulter's use of an anti-gay slur yesterday was un-American and indefensible," Edwards said in a posting on his Web site, www.johnedwards.com.

"In America, we strive for equality and embrace diversity. The kind of hateful language she used has no place in political debate or our society at large.

"I believe it is our moral responsibility to speak out against that kind of bigotry and prejudice every time we encounter it."

Edwards' campaign posted the video on their Web site, and asked readers to help them "raise $100,000 in 'Coulter Cash' this week to keep this campaign charging ahead and fight back against the politics of bigotry."

Coulter made her comment in Washington during an address to the 34th annual meeting of the Conservative Political Action Conference, during which she gave her opinions about the Democrats' slate of presidential hopefuls.

"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 'faggot,' so I'm - so, kind of at an impasse, can't really talk about Edwards, so I think I'll just conclude here and take your questions," said Coulter, whose comment was followed by applause.

CNN has reached out to Coulter's representative, and received no response.

But the New York Times reported that she responded, in an e-mail, "C'mon, it was a joke. I would never insult gays by suggesting that they are like John Edwards. That would be mean."

A spokesman for Sen. John McCain, a Republican presidential candidate, called Coulter's comments to the conservative group "wildly inappropriate."

In a written statement, Sen. Edward Kennedy, D-Massachusetts, said, "Ann Coulter's words of hate have no place in the public sphere much less our political discourse. Not only should she apologize but those who participated in the conference with her should denounce her shameful and divisive actions."

"Ann Coulter's use of this anti-gay slur is vile and unacceptable," said Neil G. Giuliano, president of the Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation, "and the applause from her audience is an important reminder that Coulter's ugly brand of bigotry is at the root of the discriminatory policies being promoted at this gathering."

In a written statement, Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean called on Republicans to denounce her remarks. "There is no place in political discourse for this kind of hate-filled and bigoted comments," he said.

During a question-and-answer session, Coulter referred back to the issue of gays by alluding to the bid for the Republican presidential nomination being made by former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney.

"I do want to point out one thing that has been driving me crazy with the media -- how they keep describing Mitt Romney's position as being pro-gays, and that's going to upset the right wingers," she said. "Well, you know, screw you! I'm not anti-gay. We're against gay marriage. I don't want gays to be discriminated against."

She added, "I don't know why all gays aren't Republican. I think we have the pro-gay positions, which is anti-crime and for tax cuts. Gays make a lot of money and they're victims of crime. No, they are! They should be with us."

A spokesman for Romney called Coulter's use of the slur "offensive."

[Drew]

She can be annoying quite often but she was right on with her "faggot" comment the other week. The political correctness crowd in this country has become insane!

You would say that..... ::

It's because it's so true. The politcal correctness crowd has become absurd.

[SLCPUNK]

It's because it's so true. The politcal correctness crowd has become absurd.

It has nothing to do with PC, but rather with a vile comment from a vile person.

[Drew]

It's because it's so true. The politcal correctness crowd has become absurd.

It has nothing to do with PC, but rather with a vile comment from a vile person.

I was regarding to the Michael Richards and Isaiah Washington absurdity.

[SLCPUNK]

I was regarding to the Michael Richards and Isaiah Washington absurdity.

Where?

She can be annoying quite often but she was right on with her "faggot" comment the other week. The political correctness crowd in this country has become insane!

[Drew]

I was regarding to the Michael Richards and Isaiah Washington absurdity.

Where?

You don't remember their faggot and Nigger comments? What happened next? They both apologized about a 100 different times. Isaiah met with G.L.A.D.D. and Michael met with the black groups. And they both sought therapy and anger management help to figure why they said these comments and what can help them to be a "better" person.. And the media just ate it up! 

That's the political correctness bullshit I'm talking about.

[SLCPUNK]

You don't remember their faggot and Nigger comments? What happened next? They both apologized about a 100 different times. Isaiah met with G.L.A.D.D. and Michael met with the black groups. And they both sought therapy and anger management help to figure why they said these comments and what can help them to be a "better" person.. And the media just ate it up! 

That's the political correctness bullshit I'm talking about.

Seemed more like PR than PC to me.......

[25]

She can be annoying quite often but she was right on with her "faggot" comment the other week. The political correctness crowd in this country has become insane!

If Ann Coulter has been right about anything, I can assure you it was purely accidental. Her only goal is self-promotion. If you talk shit for shock value as often as she does, you're almost bound to say something true eventually. It's the "enough monkeys with enough typewriters" theory.

[eddie_dean]

She can be annoying quite often but she was right on with her "faggot" comment the other week. The political correctness crowd in this country has become insane!

If Ann Coulter has been right about anything, I can assure you it was purely accidental. Her only goal is self-promotion. If you talk shit for shock value as often as she does, you're almost bound to say something true eventually. It's the "enough monkeys with enough typewriters" theory.

Coulter has an axe to grind like every other pundit.  She's just more educated and better at it than most.  Rather than read other's articles, she does her own research.  Is she biased, yes.  Does that mean she's a liar or inaccurate, no.  Rather than attack her perosonality, try to attack her points.  You can't do it.  9/10 what she says is spot on.   That's why you see people make such a big deal about how she was wrong about Canada's involvment in Vietnam.  That's one of the few things they can point at and say you were wrong.

Democrats want to lose this war.  They've fought against it tooth and nail from day one.  If America loses this war, it will be a rallying point for the DNC for 100 years.  The soldiers in Iraq have their hands tied and sit around all day w/o a mission.  Kicking in doors and being blown up on roadways by IEDs while you do patrols is a waste of our time and money.  This is the problem with Democracy.  You have politicans debating strategy and methods while in the middle of a war.  Leave that up to the Generals who actually know a thing or two about the military.  We haven't won a war in 60 years because Congress tries to manage the war from the floor of the senate.

Democrats are itching for anything they can find to paint the military and President in a bad light.  Just look at Walter Reed.  People want to blame a General for the mess there, but who's fault is it really?  That general can't sweep and mop, place out rat traps.  But the civil servants who are protected by laws put in place by Democrats sure can.  These civil servants sit on their ass because they can't be fired and look what happens.  Rather than place the blame on the fuckers who don't do anything, we blame the men as far away from it as we can.  Samething with Katrina.  Rather than blame the negligent Mayor and Governor (Democrats) they place the blame on Bush.

The Democratic party is so fucked up that they'll do anything to make the opposing side look bad.  Diversion tactics is all it is.  All that talk about change by the new Democratic congress and they have yet to do jack shit.  Wait till 2008 when Guiliani blows Clinton out of the water.  12 months from now Obama will be forgotten and John Edwards will still be a "faggot" as Ann Coulter would say.

[25]

Democrats want to lose this war.  They've fought against it tooth and nail from day one.  If America loses this war, it will be a rallying point for the DNC for 100 years.  The soldiers in Iraq have their hands tied and sit around all day w/o a mission.  Kicking in doors and being blown up on roadways by IEDs while you do patrols is a waste of our time and money.  This is the problem with Democracy.  You have politicans debating strategy and methods while in the middle of a war.  Leave that up to the Generals who actually know a thing or two about the military.  We haven't won a war in 60 years because Congress tries to manage the war from the floor of the senate.

Democrats are itching for anything they can find to paint the military and President in a bad light.  Just look at Walter Reed.  People want to blame a General for the mess there, but who's fault is it really?  That general can't sweep and mop, place out rat traps.  But the civil servants who are protected by laws put in place by Democrats sure can.  These civil servants sit on their ass because they can't be fired and look what happens.  Rather than place the blame on the fuckers who don't do anything, we blame the men as far away from it as we can.  Samething with Katrina.  Rather than blame the negligent Mayor and Governor (Democrats) they place the blame on Bush.

The Democratic party is so fucked up that they'll do anything to make the opposing side look bad.  Diversion tactics is all it is.  All that talk about change by the new Democratic congress and they have yet to do jack shit.  Wait till 2008 when Guiliani blows Clinton out of the water.  12 months from now Obama will be forgotten and John Edwards will still be a "faggot" as Ann Coulter would say.

Just about everything you said there was partisan crap. It must be very comforting to you to know that the ruling party which had absolute power for the first three years of the war isn't to blame for any of its failings. They were just held back by annoying things like laws. And yes, I'm sure the democratic governor was to blame for the Katrina incident, it's not as if these disasters can be blamed on the fact that instead of learning from the endless stream of misfortune America continues to rebuild in unstable areas.

I'm sure nothing would be significantly different if you'd been under the rule of the Democratic party since 2001, but if you think that makes up for the endless failings of the republican government then you're welcome to follow their lead towards perpetual incompetency. Frankly, if you believe that either side of the aisle is right, you're wrong. The sort of blind faith you're exhibiting has no place in politics. Maybe you should channel those energies into religion or sports? 

"This is the problem with Democracy.  You have politicans debating [. . . ]"  Probably the funniest political comment ever, no matter how you end the sentence. "The problem with Democracy is the democratic process!"

[eddie_dean]

I don't have blind loyalty to the GOP.  I just argue against the blind hatred towards it.  For every wrong the GOP committs, I can name two by the Democratic party but our board members turn a blind eye.  It's hard to take most people serious when they believe in conspiracy and fabricate reality to justify their views.  You never see an article here posted by our resident lefties showing the Dems in a bad light and you'll certainly never find an article showing republicans in a positive light.  Doesn't that go against the objectivity and level of education many of them claim?

[25]

I don't have blind loyalty to the GOP.  I just argue against the blind hatred towards it.  For every wrong the GOP committs, I can name two by the Democratic party but our board members turn a blind eye.  It's hard to take most people serious when they believe in conspiracy and fabricate reality to justify their views.  You never see an article here posted by our resident lefties showing the Dems in a bad light and you'll certainly never find an article showing republicans in a positive light.  Doesn't that go against the objectivity and level of education many of them claim?

If they choose to be cheerleaders for a cause then it's a waste of time to argue with them because it's not their place to be objective nor is it possible to dissuade them from their mantras. More importantly, their opinions hold less weight than a reasoned argument, so to lower a reasoned argument to a partisan level spoils it. Besides which, if you value your objectivity why take up arms in defense of either side? Especially if there's nothing to gain.

[eddie_dean]

excellent point