Generation Terrorists » Forum
Sign up   |   Start new thread   |   Lost password?   |   Edit profile   |   Member List   |   myGT   |   Blog
Keyword
From
To
 

Ann Coulter Strikes Again!
ifihadahif Posted: Thu Aug 12 09:20:18 2004 Post | Quote in Reply  
  Brothers band together against Kerry
Ann Coulter


August 12, 2004

Democrats haven't been this upset about an American engaging in free speech since Juanita Broaddrick opened her yap.

Two hundred fifty-four Swift Boat Veterans have signed a letter saying John Kerry is not fit to be commander in chief, a point developed in some detail in the blockbuster new book by John O'Neill, aptly titled "Unfit for Command." At the 2003 reunion of Swift Boat Veterans, about 300 men showed up: 85 percent of them think Kerry is unfit to be president. (On the bright side, Kerry was voted, in absentia, "Most Likely to Run for President on His Phony War Record.") Fewer than 10 percent of all Swift Boat Veterans contacted refused to sign the letter.

Kerry was in Vietnam for only four months, which, coincidentally, is less than the combined airtime he's spent talking about it. It takes a special kind of person to get that many people to hate your guts in so little time. The last time this many people hated one person after only four months was when Margaret Cho had her own sitcom.

But our young Eddie Haskell managed to annoy other servicemen even before he came home and called them war criminals. About 60 eyewitnesses to Kerry's service are cited in the book, describing Kerry fleeing comrades who were under attack, disregarding orders, putting others in danger, sucking up to his commanders, creating phony film footage of his exploits with a home-movie camera, and recommending himself for medals and Purple Hearts in vainglorious reports he wrote himself. (This was apparently before the concept of "fragging" put limits on such behavior.)

After three months of combat, Kerry had collected enough film footage for his political campaigns, so he went home. He even shot three different endings to the episode where he chases down a VC guy after test audiences thought Kerry shooting a wounded teenager in the back was too much of a "downer." After filming his last staged exploit, Kerry reportedly told a buddy, "That's a wrap. See you at the convention in about 35 years."

Kerry is demanding to be made president on the basis of spending four months in Vietnam 35 years ago. And yet the men who know what he did during those four months don't think he's fit to be dogcatcher. That seems newsworthy to me, but I must be wrong since the media have engineered a total blackout of the Swift Boat Veterans.

In May, the Swiftees held a spellbinding press conference in Washington, D.C. In front of a photo being used by the Kerry campaign to tout Kerry's war service, the officers stood up, one by one, pointed to their own faces in the campaign photo, and announced that they believed Kerry unfit for command. Only one officer in the photo supports Kerry for president. Seventeen say he is not fit to be president.

The press covered it much as they covered Paula Jones' first press conference.

With the media playing their usual role as Truth Commissar for the now-dead Soviet Union, the Swiftees are having to purchase ad time in order to be heard. No Tim Russert interviews, no "Today" show appearances, no New York Times editorials or Vanity Fair hagiographies for these heretics against the liberal religion. The only way Swift Boat Veterans for Truth could get less attention would be to go on "Air America" radio.

If the 254 veterans against Kerry got one-tenth as much media coverage for calling Kerry a liar as Clown Joe Wilson did for calling Bush a liar, the veterans wouldn't need to buy ad time to get their message out. (Wilson, you'll recall, was a media darling for six or seven months before being exposed as a fantasist by Senate investigators.)

With their commitment to free speech and a robust exchange of ideas (i.e., "child pornography" and "sedition"), the Democratic National Committee is threatening to sue TV stations that run the Swift Boat Veterans' paid ads. Sue? Can you tell already that there are two lawyers at the top of the Democratic ticket? These are the same people who accuse John Ashcroft of shredding the Bill of Rights. WHY ISN'T THE PRESS COVERING THIS??? Wait, now I remember. OK, never mind. (Contribute to the Swift Boat Veterans here.)

The threat to sue is absurd, but will allow the very same TV stations that are already censoring the Swiftees to have an excuse to censor even purchased airtime.

Leave aside the fact that Kerry is a presidential candidate and – judging by the ads being run against George Bush – I gather there's nothing you can't say about a presidential candidate, including calling him Hitler. After reading "Unfit for Command," I am pretty sure Kerry doesn't want a neutral tribunal deciding who's telling the truth here.

The Swift Boat Veterans provide detailed accounts from dozens and dozens of eyewitnesses to Kerry's Uriah Heep-like behavior – which "Unfit for Command" contrasts with Kerry's boastful descriptions of the exact same incidents.

By contrast, Kerry's supporters have their usual off-the-rack denunciations of any witness against a Democrat. The veterans are: liars, bigots, idiots, politically motivated, and I was never alone in a hotel with Paula Jones.

Ron Brownstein, Los Angeles Times reporter and Bill Clinton's favorite reporter, compared the Swift Boat Veterans' ad to a "snuff film." He claimed the veterans have "strong Republican ties."

Apparently, before being permitted to engage in free speech against Democrats in this country you have to: (1) prove that you are not a Republican, (2) take a vow of poverty, and (3) purchase the right to speak in a TV ad. On the basis of Clown Wilson, Michael Moore, George Soros, Moveon.org, etc., etc., etc., I gather the requirements for engaging in free speech against a Republican are somewhat less rigorous. Hey! Maybe John Edwards is right: There really are two Americas!

O'Neill, the author of "Unfit for Command" and founder of Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, can be heard on the Nixon tapes – unaware that he was being taped – telling Nixon that he came from a family of Democrats and voted for Hubert Humphrey in the prior election. Unlike Joe Wilson, Anita Hill or Richard Clarke, Woodward and Bernstein, et al., O'Neill has said he will take no royalties on his book but will donate all his profits to the Navy. So I think even under liberals' rules, O'Neill is allowed to have an opinion.

Before the book was released and O'Neill could appear to defend it, liberals were on television denouncing the book. If memory serves, the last book Democrats tried this hard to suppress was the Bible. The DNC is threatening to sue to prevent the Swift Boat Veterans from buying ad time. When Democrats are this terrified of a book, it's not because they have a good answer. Howard Dean can accuse Ashcroft of book-burning all he wants, but it's the Democrats who are doing everything in their power to prevent you from reading "Unfit for Command." In bookstores beginning this week.





 
FN Posted: Thu Aug 12 09:41:35 2004 Post | Quote in Reply  
  ifihadahif said:
>Brothers band together against Kerry
>Ann Coulter
>
>
>August 12, 2004
>
>Democrats haven't been this upset about an American engaging in free speech since Juanita Broaddrick opened her yap.

Yap? How literate.

>
>Two hundred fifty-four Swift Boat Veterans have signed a letter saying John Kerry is not fit to be commander in chief, a point developed in some detail in the blockbuster new book by John O'Neill, aptly titled "Unfit for Command." At the 2003 reunion of Swift Boat Veterans, about 300 men showed up: 85 percent of them think Kerry is unfit to be president.

Why even vote? If the war veterans say he's unfit, there's no need for an election, lets keep bush, 254 swift boat veterans can't be wrong.

>(On the bright side, Kerry was voted, in absentia, "Most Likely to Run for President on His Phony War Record.") Fewer than 10 percent of all Swift Boat Veterans contacted refused to sign the letter.

What's bush's war record?

>Kerry was in Vietnam for only four months, which, coincidentally, is less than the combined airtime he's spent talking about it.

For how long was bush in vietnam?

>It takes a special kind of person to get that many people to hate your guts in so little time. The last time this many people hated one person after only four months was when Margaret Cho had her own sitcom.

Or bush who has people pissed off at him, and by doing so his country, throughout the world. In my book that's a little bigger than 254 swift boat veterans.

>
>But our young Eddie Haskell managed to annoy other servicemen even before he came home and called them war criminals. About 60 eyewitnesses to Kerry's service are cited in the book, describing Kerry fleeing comrades who were under attack, disregarding orders, putting others in danger, sucking up to his commanders, creating phony film footage of his exploits with a home-movie camera, and recommending himself for medals and Purple Hearts in vainglorious reports he wrote himself. (This was apparently before the concept of "fragging" put limits on such behavior.)
>
>After three months of combat, Kerry had collected enough film footage for his political campaigns, so he went home. He even shot three different endings to the episode where he chases down a VC guy after test audiences thought Kerry shooting a wounded teenager in the back was too much of a "downer."

If he had left him running, I'm betting he'd be a commy traitor, now wouldn't he.

>After filming his last staged exploit, Kerry reportedly told a buddy, "That's a wrap. See you at the convention in about 35 years."
>

Reportedly? Mkay. Reportedly bush has sexual intercourse with castrated chickens on top of the white house but is made invisible by david copperfield by the use of a remote controlled helicopter with mirrors attached to it made my mcguyver.

>Kerry is demanding to be made president on the basis of spending four months in Vietnam 35 years ago.

Don't know the guy but I'm guessing it's not the only thing he has going for himself.

Again, tell me, what did bush do exactly?

>And yet the men who know what he did during those four months don't think he's fit to be dogcatcher. That seems newsworthy to me, but I must be wrong since the media have engineered a total blackout of the Swift Boat Veterans.
>

Yeah, before kerry the media was all over them and you had interviews with swift boat veterans every 2 hours.

>In May, the Swiftees held a spellbinding press conference in Washington, D.C. In front of a photo being used by the Kerry campaign to tout Kerry's war service, the officers stood up, one by one, pointed to their own faces in the campaign photo, and announced that they believed Kerry unfit for command. Only one officer in the photo supports Kerry for president. Seventeen say he is not fit to be president.

Again, so what? How many millions (billions?) of people you want to say the same thing about bush.

>The press covered it much as they covered Paula Jones' first press conference.
>
>With the media playing their usual role as Truth Commissar for the now-dead Soviet Union, the Swiftees are having to purchase ad time in order to be heard. No Tim Russert interviews, no "Today" show appearances, no New York Times editorials or Vanity Fair hagiographies for these heretics against the liberal religion. The only way Swift Boat Veterans for Truth could get less attention would be to go on "Air America" radio.
>
>If the 254 veterans against Kerry got one-tenth as much media coverage for calling Kerry a liar as Clown Joe Wilson did for calling Bush a liar, the veterans wouldn't need to buy ad time to get their message out. (Wilson, you'll recall, was a media darling for six or seven months before being exposed as a fantasist by Senate investigators.)
>

How many airtime has bush gotten with his campaign ad, the "war on terror"?

>With their commitment to free speech and a robust exchange of ideas (i.e., "child pornography" and "sedition"), the Democratic National Committee is threatening to sue TV stations that run the Swift Boat Veterans' paid ads. Sue? Can you tell already that there are two lawyers at the top of the Democratic ticket? These are the same people who accuse John Ashcroft of shredding the Bill of Rights. WHY ISN'T THE PRESS COVERING THIS??? Wait, now I remember. OK, never mind. (Contribute to the Swift Boat Veterans here.)
>

Haha, republicans talking about civil rights, now I've heard it all. Patriot act/guantanamo bay, anyone?

>The threat to sue is absurd, but will allow the very same TV stations that are already censoring the Swiftees to have an excuse to censor even purchased airtime.
>

As far as I know, nobody is forced to show anything they don't want even if they would get paid for it if they would. You're saying that if the KKK wanted to run an add, it should be allowed to do so as well?

>Leave aside the fact that Kerry is a presidential candidate and – judging by the ads being run against George Bush – I gather there's nothing you can't say about a presidential candidate, including calling him Hitler. After reading "Unfit for Command," I am pretty sure Kerry doesn't want a neutral tribunal deciding who's telling the truth here.
>

Like bush not wanting to wait for the final and neutral blix report?

>The Swift Boat Veterans provide detailed accounts from dozens and dozens of eyewitnesses to Kerry's Uriah Heep-like behavior – which "Unfit for Command" contrasts with Kerry's boastful descriptions of the exact same incidents.
>
>By contrast, Kerry's supporters have their usual off-the-rack denunciations of any witness against a Democrat. The veterans are: liars, bigots, idiots, politically motivated, and I was never alone in a hotel with Paula Jones.
>
>Ron Brownstein, Los Angeles Times reporter and Bill Clinton's favorite reporter, compared the Swift Boat Veterans' ad to a "snuff film." He claimed the veterans have "strong Republican ties."
>
>Apparently, before being permitted to engage in free speech against Democrats in this country you have to: (1) prove that you are not a Republican, (2) take a vow of poverty, and (3) purchase the right to speak in a TV ad. On the basis of Clown Wilson, Michael Moore, George Soros, Moveon.org, etc., etc., etc., I gather the requirements for engaging in free speech against a Republican are somewhat less rigorous. Hey! Maybe John Edwards is right: There really are two Americas!
>

You mean the roger more documentary wasn't banned at first?

>O'Neill, the author of "Unfit for Command" and founder of Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, can be heard on the Nixon tapes – unaware that he was being taped – telling Nixon that he came from a family of Democrats and voted for Hubert Humphrey in the prior election. Unlike Joe Wilson, Anita Hill or Richard Clarke, Woodward and Bernstein, et al., O'Neill has said he will take no royalties on his book but will donate all his profits to the Navy. So I think even under liberals' rules, O'Neill is allowed to have an opinion.
>
>Before the book was released and O'Neill could appear to defend it, liberals were on television denouncing the book. If memory serves, the last book Democrats tried this hard to suppress was the Bible. The DNC is threatening to sue to prevent the Swift Boat Veterans from buying ad time. When Democrats are this terrified of a book, it's not because they have a good answer. Howard Dean can accuse Ashcroft of book-burning all he wants, but it's the Democrats who are doing everything in their power to prevent you from reading "Unfit for Command." In bookstores beginning this week.

Yeah hif, this frigid countrygirl has some interesting points. Not.


 
ifihadahif Posted: Thu Aug 12 10:02:53 2004 Post | Quote in Reply  
  You missed the whole point my metaphorically challenged friend.
It's not that Dubya never went to Vietnam or has a war record to trumpet.
The fact is that Kerry has made his "war record" a central theme in his run for the presidency, and now it's irrefutable that most of it is not true.
You keep trying to make this about Dubya and it's not, it's about Kerry.


 
DanSRose Posted: Thu Aug 12 10:17:57 2004 Post | Quote in Reply  
  Um, yeah. Christophe did what I was going to do.
hee. That was a new kind of funny.

Two qusetions:
Didn't Kerry only serve four months, as she said (I read it was longer, but hey, whatever), because he got shot?
How much combat did the President see?


 
ifihadahif Posted: Thu Aug 12 10:21:27 2004 Post | Quote in Reply  
  DanSRose said:
>Um, yeah. Christophe did what I was going to do.
>hee. That was a new kind of funny.
>
>Two qusetions:
>Didn't Kerry only serve four months, as she said (I read it was longer, but hey, whatever), because he got shot?
>How much combat did the President see?
>
See ? you're changing the subject again.
This is not about Bush, it's about Kerry and he was never shot.
He got 3 purple hearts and never missed a day of work and was never hospitalized. He actually applied for two of them himself instead of being recommended by his CO. They were for self inflicted wounds.


 
FN Posted: Thu Aug 12 10:41:27 2004 Post | Quote in Reply  
  ifihadahif said:
>You missed the whole point my metaphorically challenged friend.

I think you missed mine, my brainwashed comrade.

>It's not that Dubya never went to Vietnam or has a war record to trumpet.

Yeah that's the point, he bailed out.

>The fact is that Kerry has made his "war record" a central theme in his run for the presidency, and now it's irrefutable that most of it is not true.

Yeah well I wouldn't agree with kerry making it a central theme, but that's what your politics system has created, so don't come complainign about it.

And no matter how much of it is true, at least he didn't dodge it.

>You keep trying to make this about Dubya and it's not, it's about Kerry.

The fact that bush-fanatics are the ones who wrote this, makes it about bush as well.


 
Zacq Posted: Thu Aug 12 11:02:39 2004 Post | Quote in Reply  
  ! Have I been wrong about Kerry all this time! Well, no. All of Kerry's actual crewmates are completely against these ads and have endorsed him. Some of the people from the commercial have even said they've regretted saying these things, and the doctor who claims he treated Kerry was not the same as the name on the medical report.

Kerry's point is that this 'war president' has much less experience and understanding of war than he does. He's not just saying 'I was brave, vote for me.'


 
Zacq Posted: Thu Aug 12 11:06:20 2004 Post | Quote in Reply  
  Christophe said:
>The fact that bush-fanatics are the ones who wrote this, makes it about bush as well.

The initial funding for this was from Bob Perry, a man who has given millions to the Republican party.


 
Zacq Posted: Thu Aug 12 11:12:44 2004 Post | Quote in Reply  
  How about an example - the following is from factcheck.org.

First Purple Heart

Two who appear in the ad say Kerry didn't deserve his first purple heart. Louis Letson, a medical officer and Lieutenant Commander, says in the ad that he knows Kerry is lying about his first purple heart because “I treated him for that.” However, medical records provided by the Kerry campaign to FactCheck.org do not list Letson as the “person administering treatment” for Kerry’s injury on December 3, 1968 . The medical officer who signed this sick call report is J.C. Carreon, who is listed as treating Kerry for shrapnel to the left arm.

In his affidavit, Letson says Kerry's wound was self-inflicted and does not merit a purple heart. But that's based on hearsay, and disputed hearsay at that. Letson says “the crewman with Kerry told me there was no hostile fire, and that Kerry had inadvertently wounded himself with an M-79 grenade.” But the Kerry campaign says the two crewmen with Kerry that day deny ever talking to Letson.

Also appearing in the ad is Grant Hibbard, Kerry’s commanding officer at the time. Hibbard’s affidavit says that he “turned down the Purple Heart request,” and recalled Kerry's injury as a "tiny scratch less than from a rose thorn."

That doesn't quite square with Letson's affidavit, which describes shrapnel "lodged in Kerry's arm" (though "barely.")

Hibbard also told the Boston Globe in an interview in April 2004 that he eventually acquiesced about granting Kerry the purple heart.

Hibbard: I do remember some questions on it. . I finally said, OK if that's what happened. . . do whatever you want

Kerry got the first purple heart after Hibbard left to return to the US


 
breeze Posted: Thu Aug 12 11:25:21 2004 Post | Quote in Reply  
  Okay, I'm not saying that Kerry did that or not, I personally don't like neither Bush nor him. But I wouldn't take everything Ann Couter writes as an eye-opening truth. She always had those unprofessional insulting and angry articles about Democrats. I personally don't think she can be considered as professional journalist at all, she never gives objective opinion, rather pushing her own biased thoughts on everybody. Did you read her previous articles? In one of them she suggested force all Islamic countries to convert to Islam as an all-cure and in another article about Democrats she called their convention as "Spawn of Satan"! And whoever there tells me that she's wit and sarcastic, I don't buy it.


 
ifihadahif Posted: Thu Aug 12 11:42:23 2004 Post | Quote in Reply  
  breeze said:
>Okay, I'm not saying that Kerry did that or not, I personally don't like neither Bush nor him. But I wouldn't take everything Ann Couter writes as an eye-opening truth. She always had those unprofessional insulting and angry articles about Democrats. I personally don't think she can be considered as professional journalist at all, she never gives objective opinion, rather pushing her own biased thoughts on everybody. Did you read her previous articles? In one of them she suggested force all Islamic countries to convert to Islam as an all-cure and in another article about Democrats she called their convention as "Spawn of Satan"! And whoever there tells me that she's wit and sarcastic, I don't buy it.
>
What have you been living in a cave, no one ever said Ms. Coulter was unbiased, but she is a best selling author many times over, that should qualify her as a professional journalist. She is a die hard conservative, but that does nothing to diminish the quality of her writings any more that Molly Ivins being a die hard liberal would diminish the quality of her writings. DUH !
Most of Ms. Coulter's writings are satire and tongue-in-cheek and if you believed that "spawn of satan" and the call to convert Islam to Christianity then you should go back to your cave.


 
ifihadahif Posted: Thu Aug 12 11:44:01 2004 Post | Quote in Reply  
  Christophe said:
>The fact that bush-fanatics are the ones who wrote this, makes it about bush as well.
>
Not Bush Fanatics dude, but anti-kerry.
The author is a registered democrat since the 1970's !


 
breeze Posted: Thu Aug 12 12:01:37 2004 Post | Quote in Reply  
  I didn't say I believed in what she wrote, all i'm saying that the work she is publihsing cannot be called professional political analysis, and if she can't write articles without insulting her readership and people she is writing about, she shouldn't be writing on the first place. So she IS a "best-selling" author, what about her being kicked out from the National Review for some of her comments? You can attack poeple who have different opinion than you do, but you don't insult them! This is my personal opinion and if you enjoy reading her articles this is your personal decision.



 
FN Posted: Thu Aug 12 12:28:56 2004 Post | Quote in Reply  
  ifihadahif said:
>Not Bush Fanatics dude, but anti-kerry.

Haha, yeah, ann coulter isn't a bushfanatic.

I bet there's a waterfall in her panties every time he makes a spelling mistake.

>The author is a registered democrat since the 1970's !

So what? I can register with the greens as well, doesn't make me one.


 
ifihadahif Posted: Thu Aug 12 13:10:04 2004 Post | Quote in Reply  
  Christophe said:
>ifihadahif said:
>>Not Bush Fanatics dude, but anti-kerry.
>
>Haha, yeah, ann coulter isn't a bushfanatic.
>
>I bet there's a waterfall in her panties every time he makes a spelling mistake.
>
>>The author is a registered democrat since the 1970's !
>
>So what? I can register with the greens as well, doesn't make me one.
>
Ann Coulter has absolutely nothing to do with the Swiftboad Vets.


 
ifihadahif Posted: Thu Aug 12 13:14:29 2004 Post | Quote in Reply  
  breeze said:
>I didn't say I believed in what she wrote, all i'm saying that the work she is publihsing cannot be called professional political analysis, and if she can't write articles without insulting her readership and people she is writing about, she shouldn't be writing on the first place. So she IS a "best-selling" author, what about her being kicked out from the National Review for some of her comments? You can attack poeple who have different opinion than you do, but you don't insult them! This is my personal opinion and if you enjoy reading her articles this is your personal decision.
>
Then maybe Al Franken and Molly Ivins should also be considered unprofessional ?
Do you not understand the nature of satire ?
As for the National Review incident, she was picked up the same day by David Horowitz - not a bad jump.


 
breeze Posted: Thu Aug 12 13:27:14 2004 Post | Quote in Reply  
  ifihadahif said:
>Then maybe Al Franken and Molly Ivins should also be considered unprofessional ?
>Do you not understand the nature of satire ?
>As for the National Review incident, she was picked up the same day by David Horowitz - not a bad jump.

I do understand the nature of satire, however, there's a thin line between being satiric and being offensive. Some of her comments are just very unsensitive towards other people's opinions.


 
Zacq Posted: Thu Aug 12 13:29:45 2004 Post | Quote in Reply  
  Did I crush the Swiftboat Veterans thing and make you concentrate on a different subject, hif, or are you just distracted?


 
ifihadahif Posted: Thu Aug 12 13:37:04 2004 Post | Quote in Reply  
  Zacq said:
>Did I crush the Swiftboat Veterans thing and make you concentrate on a different subject, hif, or are you just distracted?
>
Yeah, you crushed it for me zacq,
I....just feel......so.........irresponisble now.


 
ifihadahif Posted: Thu Aug 12 13:38:31 2004 Post | Quote in Reply  
  breeze said:
>ifihadahif said:
>>Then maybe Al Franken and Molly Ivins should also be considered unprofessional ?
>>Do you not understand the nature of satire ?
>>As for the National Review incident, she was picked up the same day by David Horowitz - not a bad jump.
>
>I do understand the nature of satire, however, there's a thin line between being satiric and being offensive. Some of her comments are just very unsensitive towards other people's opinions.
>
Your statement tells me that you have no concept of the nature of satire.
What would you say about Al Franken ?
Is he the same type of journalist as Ann Coulter ?


 
FN Posted: Thu Aug 12 13:44:07 2004 Post | Quote in Reply  
  ifihadahif said:
>Ann Coulter has absolutely nothing to do with the Swiftboad Vets.

Where did I say she was and how is that relevant


 
ifihadahif Posted: Thu Aug 12 13:53:45 2004 Post | Quote in Reply  
  Christophe said:
>ifihadahif said:
>>Ann Coulter has absolutely nothing to do with the Swiftboad Vets.
>
>Where did I say she was and how is that relevant
>
The article is about the Swiftboat Vets and the author is not a Bush Fanatic.
You said this was written by Bush fanatics and went on to talk about
Ms. Coulter. True, she did write this article, but it is about the book written by Paul O'neill and the Swiftboat Vets.


 
FN Posted: Thu Aug 12 13:58:19 2004 Post | Quote in Reply  
  She wrote the article and everything it, the book gets only mentioned here and there, and yeah, she's a bush fanatic, a republican at least.


 
breeze Posted: Thu Aug 12 14:01:40 2004 Post | Quote in Reply  
  ifihadahif said:
>Your statement tells me that you have no concept of the nature of satire.
>What would you say about Al Franken ?
>Is he the same type of journalist as Ann Coulter ?

No, he's not. I like Al Franken, he IS funny; Ann Coulter - not! They are very different, I mean, the way they think and write is different. I agree with him, he knows how to break down the lies of people, I enjoyed his book about Lies and people who tell them. However, again, I do not like the way Ann Coulter presents her ideas, just because as I told you before she is crossing the line between being satiric and being offensive.


 
Zacq Posted: Thu Aug 12 14:06:48 2004 Post | Quote in Reply  
  Here's Ann Coulter's problem - she hates America. Half of it, at least. She goes on and on about how liberals and Democrats hate America and are evil and want the terrorists to win, which means she hates half the voting population. There are entire websites dedicated to the constant lies in Slander and Treason, she's incredibly offensive, and no, she's not pretty.

Just by the way, she said something funny in a recent article. In her rants against liberalism, she took the time to insult them based on the fact that they drive hybrids, and acted like this was grounds for laughter. Haha! Liberals want to save the world by stopping global warming and saving the environment! They so crazy ; )

And hif, the Swiftboat Veterans thing is krap and you should know that. Most political ads and such are lies anyway, Bush's and Kerry's both.


 
Zacq Posted: Thu Aug 12 14:08:21 2004 Post | Quote in Reply  
  Oh, and in the article Ann said:

After filming his last staged exploit, Kerry reportedly told a buddy, "That's a wrap. See you at the convention in about 35 years."

As a satirist, she should know not to use the word reportedly when making a joke. And if that's not intended as a joke, she's stupider than I... well that's impossible. Nevermind.


 
FN Posted: Thu Aug 12 14:08:36 2004 Post | Quote in Reply  
  Dumb people aren't too hard to find in the republican party one might think.

If she had a gram of intelligence she'd take things on more subtly and get her point across in a credible way.

Although I'm guessing she doesn't care about politics but just wants to sell books, in which case she's doing what she intends to. Good for her. I hope she dies alone.


 
Zacq Posted: Thu Aug 12 14:20:28 2004 Post | Quote in Reply  
  I've read entire Ann Coulter articles where if you were to ask her 'What were three main points you've informed the reader about?" she would stare blankly for a minute than stab you with a pitchfork. So much of what she writes is just opinion based on nothing that she disguises with crude and offensive or just plain stupid humor.


 
Nikki Posted: Thu Aug 12 14:29:10 2004 Post | Quote in Reply  
  why do you men continue to put down ALL women? why?


 
Puck Posted: Thu Aug 12 14:33:20 2004 Post | Quote in Reply  
  Nikki said:
>why do you men continue to put down ALL women? why?

Why do ALL women think ALL men put them down? lol ; )


 
erikagm Posted: Thu Aug 12 14:59:32 2004 Post | Quote in Reply  
  I'm not even going into this debate... My need for showing other people they are incorrect seems to have run away along with my ex gf, so I'm in a happy, read-it-and-smile-and-just-shake-your-head mood...

Heheheeh

Tsk... If I had known the bitterness created by my ex was the fuel to my debates here, I woulda never let her leave!

LOL


 
ifihadahif Posted: Thu Aug 12 15:17:33 2004 Post | Quote in Reply  
  Zacq said:
>>And hif, the Swiftboat Veterans thing is krap and you should know that. Most political ads and such are lies anyway, Bush's and Kerry's both.
>
read the book. it's not crap, how do you explain the fact that every single one of Kerry's CO's, THAT'S EVERY SINGLE ONE, is onboard with the Swiftboad vets ?
Of the 8 or 9 guys that are with Kerry, know this. They are not his peers, they were enlisted men and the longest tenure any of them had with Kerry was two weeks, some of them only a few days.
Among Kerry's peers, there is a virtual consensus that he is a liar and a total fuck up and he served his country with dishonor.


 
ifihadahif Posted: Thu Aug 12 15:31:49 2004 Post | Quote in Reply  
  Zacq said:
>I've read entire Ann Coulter articles where if you were to ask her 'What were three main points you've informed the reader about?" she would stare blankly for a minute than stab you with a pitchfork. So much of what she writes is just opinion based on nothing that she disguises with crude and offensive or just plain stupid humor.
>
And your statement about staring blankly is based on what facts ? or is it just opinion based on nothing ?




 
ifihadahif Posted: Thu Aug 12 15:32:55 2004 Post | Quote in Reply  
  Zacq said:
>Oh, and in the article Ann said:
>
>After filming his last staged exploit, Kerry reportedly told a buddy, "That's a wrap. See you at the convention in about 35 years."
>
>As a satirist, she should know not to use the word reportedly when making a joke. And if that's not intended as a joke, she's stupider than I... well that's impossible. Nevermind.
>
Yes, yes of course you are much much more intelligent and accomplished than Ms. Coulter !

Ann Coulter is the author of three books, all New York Times best sellers -- Treason: Liberal Treachery From the Cold War to the War on Terrorism (June 2003); Slander: Liberal Lies About the American Right (June 2002); and High Crimes and Misdemeanors:The Case Against Bill Clinton (August 1998). Her next book will be released this fall.

Coulter is the legal correspondent for Human Events and writes a popular syndicated column for Universal Press Syndicate. She is a frequent guest on many TV shows, including Hannity and Colmes, Wolf Blitzer Reports, At Large With Geraldo Rivera, Scarborough Country, HBO's Real Time with Bill Maher, The O'Reilly Factor, Good Morning America and has been profiled in numerous publications, including TV Guide, the Guardian (UK), the New York Observer, National Journal, Harper's Bazaar, and Elle magazine, among others. She was named one of the top 100 Public Intellectuals by federal judge Richard Posner in 2001.

Coulter clerked for the Honorable Pasco Bowman II of the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit and was an attorney in the Department of Justice Honors Program for outstanding law school graduates.

After practicing law in private practice in New York City, Coulter worked for the Senate Judiciary Committee, where she handled crime and immigration issues for Senator Spencer Abraham of Michigan. From there, she became a litigator with the Center For Individual Rights in Washington, DC, a public interest law firm dedicated to the defense of individual rights with particular emphasis on freedom of speech, civil rights, and the free exercise of religion.

A Connecticut native, Coulter graduated with honors from Cornell University School of Arts & Sciences, and received her J.D. from University of Michigan Law School, where she was an editor of The Michigan Law Review.




 
Zacq Posted: Thu Aug 12 15:38:31 2004 Post | Quote in Reply  
  Though you didn't in any way show that my point about her satire was wrong with her list of credentials.


 
Zacq Posted: Thu Aug 12 15:40:39 2004 Post | Quote in Reply  
  ifihadahif said:
>Zacq said:
>>I've read entire Ann Coulter articles where if you were to ask her 'What were three main points you've informed the reader about?" she would stare blankly for a minute than stab you with a pitchfork. So much of what she writes is just opinion based on nothing that she disguises with crude and offensive or just plain stupid humor.
>>
>And your statement about staring blankly is based on what facts ? or is it just opinion based on nothing ?

See, I used a device called humor. Only unlike Coulter, I actually had a point - that she has articles where she doesn't inform the reader of anything. My joke is not true - but it supplemented what I intended to show.
>


 
ifihadahif Posted: Thu Aug 12 15:47:54 2004 Post | Quote in Reply  
  Zacq said:
>ifihadahif said:
>>Zacq said:
>>>I've read entire Ann Coulter articles where if you were to ask her 'What were three main points you've informed the reader about?" she would stare blankly for a minute than stab you with a pitchfork. So much of what she writes is just opinion based on nothing that she disguises with crude and offensive or just plain stupid humor.
>>>
>>And your statement about staring blankly is based on what facts ? or is it just opinion based on nothing ?
>
>See, I used a device called humor. Only unlike Coulter, I actually had a point - that she has articles where she doesn't inform the reader of anything. My joke is not true - but it supplemented what I intended to show.
>>
Yeah, you go with that !
We'll see who gets respect among professional journalists and who gets nothing.


 
ifihadahif Posted: Thu Aug 12 15:50:41 2004 Post | Quote in Reply  
  Zacq said:
>Though you didn't in any way show that my point about her satire was wrong with her list of credentials.
>
That's because your point was irrelevant.


 
Zacq Posted: Thu Aug 12 15:58:30 2004 Post | Quote in Reply  
  First, stop ignoring or avoiding my points by not mentioning them or calling them irrelevant with no backup. That's the Bill O'Reilly way to have a debate (see Krugan-O'Reilly conversation).

ifihadahif said:
>Yeah, you go with that !
>We'll see who gets respect among professional journalists and who gets nothing.

Actually, there is a large and growing number of journalists who think she's out of her mind. And I don't really think it matters if right now she has more journalistic credibility than me - I'm fifteen freakin' years old.




 
DanSRose Posted: Thu Aug 12 15:59:22 2004 Post | Quote in Reply  
  Are you talking about Swift Boat Sailors Association or the Swift Boat Veterans?
The Swift Boat Sailors are sailors who fought in both Vietnam and Korea and served aboard Swift Boats, a class of military riverboats. All of Kerry's unit, including John Kerry, are part of this group.
The Swift Boat Veterans is a group funded by life-long Reagan and Bush Republicans. Several members recanted their testimonies against Kerry. The group's book, Unfit For Command, has contributions from officer's who heard from 2 members of Kerry's unit that his injury was self-inflicted and accidental. That memeber, Cmdr. George Elliot, recently said ""I knew it was wrong. ... In a hurry I signed it and faxed it back. That was a mistake."
Jerry Corsi, a major contributor to the book also said, "Islam is a peaceful religion -- just as long as the women are beaten, the boys buggered and the infidels are killed." He also called the Pope senile and called Catholics pedophiles.



 
DanSRose Posted: Thu Aug 12 16:00:22 2004 Post | Quote in Reply  
  And now, I'm done with this.



 
Zacq Posted: Thu Aug 12 16:00:30 2004 Post | Quote in Reply  
  Zacq said:
>First, stop ignoring or avoiding my points by not mentioning them or calling them irrelevant with no backup. That's the Bill O'Reilly way to have a debate (see Krugan-O'Reilly conversation).

Should be Krugman.


 
Zacq Posted: Thu Aug 12 16:04:12 2004 Post | Quote in Reply  
  DanSRose said:
>The group's book, Unfit For Command, has contributions from officer's who heard from 2 members of Kerry's unit that his injury was self-inflicted and accidental. That memeber, Cmdr. George Elliot, recently said ""I knew it was wrong. ... In a hurry I signed it and faxed it back. That was a mistake."

The other one was Louis Letson, and the people he claimed to have heard it from denied ever talking to him.


 
Asswipe Posted: Thu Aug 12 16:06:32 2004 Post | Quote in Reply  
  hif... it sucks, but you're a fucking idiot, man.


 
ifihadahif Posted: Thu Aug 12 16:15:41 2004 Post | Quote in Reply  
  DanSRose said:
>Are you talking about Swift Boat Sailors Association or the Swift Boat Veterans?
>The Swift Boat Sailors are sailors who fought in both Vietnam and Korea and served aboard Swift Boats, a class of military riverboats. All of Kerry's unit, including John Kerry, are part of this group.
>The Swift Boat Veterans is a group funded by life-long Reagan and Bush Republicans. Several members recanted their testimonies against Kerry. The group's book, Unfit For Command, has contributions from officer's who heard from 2 members of Kerry's unit that his injury was self-inflicted and accidental. That memeber, Cmdr. George Elliot, recently said ""I knew it was wrong. ... In a hurry I signed it and faxed it back. That was a mistake."
>Jerry Corsi, a major contributor to the book also said, "Islam is a peaceful religion -- just as long as the women are beaten, the boys buggered and the infidels are killed." He also called the Pope senile and called Catholics pedophiles.
>
I think you'll find that Elliott claims to have be misquoted by the Boston Globe *gasp what a shock!* and never recanted his testimony.
As for the off color jokes told by Corsi, I found them to be humorous in context and we have all told similar types of jokes amongst ourselves.


 
ifihadahif Posted: Thu Aug 12 16:16:13 2004 Post | Quote in Reply  
  Asswipe said:
>hif... it sucks, but you're a fucking idiot, man.
>
Yeah, and you're a fucking genius. DUH !


 
Asswipe Posted: Thu Aug 12 16:19:03 2004 Post | Quote in Reply  
  ifihadahif said:
>Asswipe said:
>>hif... it sucks, but you're a fucking idiot, man.
>>
>Yeah, and you're a fucking genius. DUH !

hey buddy, i'm not posting shit by a lady who claims kerry went to vietnam in order to create the sole reason to be elected president on, along with countless other downright fabrications.


 
ifihadahif Posted: Thu Aug 12 16:48:52 2004 Post | Quote in Reply  
  Asswipe said:
>ifihadahif said:
>>Asswipe said:
>>>hif... it sucks, but you're a fucking idiot, man.
>>>
>>Yeah, and you're a fucking genius. DUH !
>
>hey buddy, i'm not posting shit by a lady who claims kerry went to vietnam in order to create the sole reason to be elected president on, along with countless other downright fabrications.
>
The facts support the idea that he used his time in Vietnam to purchase a future political career. None of this is being made up, it's all there in black and white, except for the films he made of himself, they were in color.


 
Zacq Posted: Thu Aug 12 16:53:17 2004 Post | Quote in Reply  
  ifihadahif said:
>The facts support the idea that he used his time in Vietnam to purchase a future political career. None of this is being made up, it's all there in black and white, except for the films he made of himself, they were in color.

Did nobody notice my post about an example of lies, in this case concerning his first purple heart? Or whoever it was (I can't remember and am lazy) who mentioned how several have taken back their remarks since?


 
Asswipe Posted: Thu Aug 12 16:56:14 2004 Post | Quote in Reply  
  ifihadahif said:
>Asswipe said:
>>ifihadahif said:
>>>Asswipe said:
>>>>hif... it sucks, but you're a fucking idiot, man.
>>>>
>>>Yeah, and you're a fucking genius. DUH !
>>
>>hey buddy, i'm not posting shit by a lady who claims kerry went to vietnam in order to create the sole reason to be elected president on, along with countless other downright fabrications.
>>
>The facts support the idea that he used his time in Vietnam to purchase a future political career. None of this is being made up, it's all there in black and white, except for the films he made of himself, they were in color.

what do these videos show exactly? Outside of the mention of the videos, all of your so-called "facts" are based on hearsay.


 
Asswipe Posted: Thu Aug 12 16:56:47 2004 Post | Quote in Reply  
  Zacq said:
>ifihadahif said:
>>The facts support the idea that he used his time in Vietnam to purchase a future political career. None of this is being made up, it's all there in black and white, except for the films he made of himself, they were in color.
>
>Did nobody notice my post about an example of lies, in this case concerning his first purple heart? Or whoever it was (I can't remember and am lazy) who mentioned how several have taken back their remarks since?

i sort of skipped a lot, just read part of anne's article and wanted to call hif a dumb ass


 
Asswipe Posted: Thu Aug 12 17:00:20 2004 Post | Quote in Reply  
  if this bitch at least made any attempt to reference her "facts", or even refer us to what the hell she's talking about, i'd think about giving her some credibility, but ya know what? she doesn't.


 
Zacq Posted: Thu Aug 12 17:06:56 2004 Post | Quote in Reply  
  http://www.factcheck.org/article.aspx?docID=231

And if you want to think this is just a left-wing site, go to its homepage and see some things against both Kerry and Bush.


 
ifihadahif Posted: Thu Aug 12 20:21:48 2004 Post | Quote in Reply  
  Asswipe said:
>if this bitch at least made any attempt to reference her "facts", or even refer us to what the hell she's talking about, i'd think about giving her some credibility, but ya know what? she doesn't.
>
Her reputation is all the credibility she needs. True enough, she is a die hard conservative, but she doesn't lie and if you ever read any of her books, they are researched meticulously, and footnoted ad nauseum.
If you don't think she's credible, find me an instance where she's been forced to print a retraction for a falsehood she's printed.
I don't care if you like what she writes or not, prove it's not true.


 
mat_j Posted: Thu Aug 12 20:56:04 2004 Post | Quote in Reply  
  Aww i can't be bothered to read all this it's late at night. Can somebody just Bring Al Franken into it, if he ahsn't been already


 
Zacq Posted: Thu Aug 12 21:47:59 2004 Post | Quote in Reply  
  ifihadahif said:
>If you don't think she's credible, find me an instance where she's been forced to print a retraction for a falsehood she's printed.
>I don't care if you like what she writes or not, prove it's not true.

Really? Check back in a few hours, I'll do it tonight when I have some time.

And I promise not just to use all her lies from the Swiftboat Veterans thing.


 
Asswipe Posted: Thu Aug 12 21:56:47 2004 Post | Quote in Reply  
  ifihadahif said:
>Asswipe said:
>>if this bitch at least made any attempt to reference her "facts", or even refer us to what the hell she's talking about, i'd think about giving her some credibility, but ya know what? she doesn't.
>>
>Her reputation is all the credibility she needs. True enough, she is a die hard conservative, but she doesn't lie and if you ever read any of her books, they are researched meticulously, and footnoted ad nauseum.
>If you don't think she's credible, find me an instance where she's been forced to print a retraction for a falsehood she's printed.
>I don't care if you like what she writes or not, prove it's not true.

her reputation is all the credibility she needs? this brings me back to my first point: You're a fucking idiot, man.

while she may not lie, or she may, i don't know, there's no way of knowing if what she says actually has any actual credible meaning to it because she does not define everything she talks about. While this may fly well w/ you, as you seem to have heard about these issues/attacks before, for the rest of us it's not enough. to be actually credible, not just credible in a "oh god i love anne coulter and want to stick my tongue up her asscrack" sort of way, she needs to say where she is getting her info from, she also needs to define the objects that she is speaking about. for instance, DanSRose brought up the idea that the people who did speak out against Kerry happen to be affiliated w/ a group sponsered by hard-core conservatives. while it doesn't completely discredit their opinion, it does make the average joe think that maybe them[the conservative group] saying, he is unfit to be president, really has nothing to do w/ whether they knew him in the war or not, if they knew him at all.

while she may not lie, she doesn't present all of the facts.

it's the same stuff as when one of us lefties posted a quote, by bush, saying something that sounded completely insane, but when Casper put it back into context it wasn't really anything terrible.

it's slanting facts.

I do not believe that Kerry went to vietnam, shot a short film of him being all heroic, in the hopes of receiving an extra boost in politics. Why don't i believe that? Common fucking sense tells me a few reasons why i shouldn't.

how the hell could Kerry, an amateur politician, make a movie(like they did in hollywood) of him being a hero and actually make it realistic? Was he a film editing major or did he have some secret connections to one? Did he pay gooks to act? Did he stand up in the middle of a little skirmish, ask people politely to pose in various positions and then take a few pictures? I mean, that's what it sounds like Anne Coulter believes he did. do you actually believe someone would or could do that?

The only reason they stress the fighting junk for him is to show that he won't act like a pussy in office and may actually attack someone if we need to. why? so he can maybe get a few warhawk bush lover votes, to give him an edge over the complacent al gore who, correct me if i'm mistaken as i didn't follow that election too closely, was labeled as dickless.

she also says he was in 'nam for 4 months at one point in the article, then says 3 months at a diff spot. At least keep your "facts" straight bitch.


 
Zacq Posted: Thu Aug 12 21:58:56 2004 Post | Quote in Reply  
  Though I want to mention this one now, because it's in my recent memory, as I've just heard the Limbaugh clip. The lie isn't too big of a deal, but if you haven't heard this Limbaugh clip you should.

This part is from the O'Reilly Factor:

O'REILLY: Now are you buying into the -- this is just a hazing thing at Abu Ghraib?

COULTER: What, the media is hazing the American people by seeing how much we can take?

O'REILLY: Some of the right wing commentators say it's just hazing, what's the big deal? Are you buying into that?

COULTER: No, I don't think anyone is.

O'REILLY: No, they are. You know that. I'm not going to embarrass people but on the radio, talk radio you have right wing commentators say it's just hazing, what's the big deal?

COULTER: If I know what you're referring to, there were two hours and 59 minutes not saying that and at one point making fun of liberals for making fun of -- if you're talking about Rush, but Rush went on...

O'REILLY: ...program and he said it's not a big deal, it's just hazing.

COULTER: If you're talking about Rush, he definitely didn't say that.What other talk radio hosts say...

O'REILLY: I compete against him every day on the radio and I know what he says. He said many, many times and not only him that it wasn't a big deal.

COULTER: No, he didn't say that, but whatever -- no.

http://mediamatters.org/static/audio/limbaugh_montage.mp3


 
Zacq Posted: Thu Aug 12 22:08:40 2004 Post | Quote in Reply  
  I'm just scanning through things in my bookmarks folder about Coulter - on August 5 she said "[t]here's no one who can tell her to stop. She's funding that campaign." about Theresa Heinz Kerry, trying to say she's using her money to fund the campaign. Well it's been proven she's not, and Kerry even had to mortgage their home at one point to pay for the campaign.


 
Zacq Posted: Thu Aug 12 22:12:29 2004 Post | Quote in Reply  
  Found another bookmarked - this from June 14 on Hannity and Colmes.

COULTER: I want to focus on the people supporting John Kerry. George Soros, who's always going around prattling about the perfidy of the Jews...

COLMES: George Soros is a Holocaust survivor, OK?

COULTER: And what I just stated is true. He says the reason for anti-Semitism is the Jews.

[...]

COULTER: He [Soros] goes around blaming anti-Semitism on the Jews. He said that. In fact, the one thing I agree with him on is that he also blames himself [for anti-Semitism], and finally I have some area of agreement with him.


George Soros never said that. He said the following, which was twisted.

"There is a resurgence of anti-Semitism in Europe. The policies of the Bush administration and the Sharon administration contribute to that," Soros said. "It's not specifically anti-Semitism, but it does manifest itself in anti-Semitism as well. I'm critical of those policies."

[...]

"I'm also very concerned about my own role because the new anti-Semitism holds that the Jews rule the world," said Soros, whose projects and funding have influenced governments and promoted various political causes around the world.

"As an unintended consequence of my actions," he said, "I also contribute to that image."



 
DanSRose Posted: Thu Aug 12 22:27:52 2004 Post | Quote in Reply  
  huh. He's right, of course, but huh. I never knew she could have her head that far up her own ass. That's just ... wow. That borders on anti-Semitic:
>COULTER: He [Soros] goes around blaming anti-Semitism on the Jews. He said that. In fact, the one thing I agree with him on is that he also blames himself [for anti-Semitism], and finally I have some area of agreement with him.



 
Zacq Posted: Thu Aug 12 22:31:21 2004 Post | Quote in Reply  
  I just noticed hif specifically mentioned her writing, so here's basically a complete debunking of what Coulter called her favorite chapter.

http://slannder.homestead.com/files/chapter2critique.html


 
DanSRose Posted: Thu Aug 12 22:32:58 2004 Post | Quote in Reply  
  ifihadahif said:
>I think you'll find that Elliott claims to have be misquoted by the Boston Globe *gasp what a shock!* and never recanted his testimony.
Actually it went like this (taken from Disinfopedia)

On August 5, 2004, Elliott recanted his criticism of Kerry. He said, "It was a terrible mistake probably for me to sign the affidavit with those words. I'm the one in trouble here." The affidavit states that the incident for which Kerry received the medal was actually shooting "a wounded, fleeing Viet Cong in the back." Elliott said he felt "time pressure" to sign the affidavit "That's no excuse," Elliott said.

>As for the off color jokes told by Corsi, I found them to be humorous in context and we have all told similar types of jokes amongst ourselves.

Actually, he wrote: "Islam is a peaceful religion -- just as long as the women are beaten, the boys buggered and the infidels are killed."
And:
"So this is what the last days of the Catholic Church are going to look like. Buggering boys undermines the moral base and the lawyers rip the gold off the Vatican altars. We may get one more Pope, when this senile one dies, but that's probably about it."


 
Zacq Posted: Thu Aug 12 22:43:07 2004 Post | Quote in Reply  
  DanSRose said:
>On August 5, 2004, Elliott recanted his criticism of Kerry. He said, "It was a terrible mistake probably for me to sign the affidavit with those words. I'm the one in trouble here." The affidavit states that the incident for which Kerry received the medal was actually shooting "a wounded, fleeing Viet Cong in the back." Elliott said he felt "time pressure" to sign the affidavit "That's no excuse," Elliott said.

The Swiftboat people keep claiming he got a medal for shooting a wounded guy in the back. He actually got that medal for fighting back against an ambush, thus suprising the enemy and defeating them. The shooting of a man, whoever he may be, happened after and was not why the medal was awarded.


 
Zacq Posted: Thu Aug 12 22:47:38 2004 Post | Quote in Reply  
  Wow, it's almost like a bunch of random people with internet access just defeated the entire point of Ann Coulter's article. Who would've thought! I mean really, she does have that journalistic credibility to contend with.


 
Nikki Posted: Fri Aug 13 07:04:42 2004 Post | Quote in Reply  
  DanSRose said:
>"So this is what the last days of the Catholic Church are going to look like. Buggering boys undermines the moral base and the lawyers rip the gold off the Vatican altars. We may get one more Pope, when this senile one dies, but that's probably about it."

Oh yeah, of course, MORE anti-catholic sentiments, as if the only institution with abuse were the catholic church. Pope John Paul II has accomplished much more that YOU ever will in your snivelling miserable little life. He worked hard all his life and gave everything for humanity, so when he's old, suddenly he's senile and disposable. Then again, what can I expect, you probably only think that young blond and strong should live, ...right HITLER???


 
addi Posted: Fri Aug 13 07:39:35 2004 Post | Quote in Reply  
  I get so little time to post these days... it's a damn shame to waste it on you, Dikki. I really do try to keep above the moronic and totally immature babbling that seems to spew from your pea brain on a consistant basis...but this last post of yours shouldn't be ignored.

This pope and the ones preceeding him have done immeasurable damage to the lives of millions of people across the globe since the early middle ages. How any sane person can look to him as a doer of God's will is beyond me.

The cycle of poverty and disease that he perpetuates in strong Catholic Latin American countries alone, with the official vatican views on no use of birth control or abortions for women has indirectly caused terrible suffering, unfathomable by the cozy little world you've been raised in. Read and learn before you stick your foot in your mouth.

As Asswipe would say to you as a contestant on the Weakest Link game show:
"You truely are the dumbest cunt!, Good-Bye"


 
Nikki Posted: Fri Aug 13 08:05:54 2004 Post | Quote in Reply  
  your just so learned! ...and truly intelligent. I bet you just LOVE hearing yourself talk too..."Hi I'm Addison and I'm so educated, let me tell YOU a thing or two." What a joke!

...and so obnoxious too


 
Nikki Posted: Fri Aug 13 08:06:45 2004 Post | Quote in Reply  
  Oh, and btw, you must be protestant too, right? you fucking bigot


 
ifihadahif Posted: Fri Aug 13 08:50:10 2004 Post | Quote in Reply  
  Nikki, you are talking about a guy making a joke at the expense of Catholics, not the same as anti-catholic sentiment.
If your going to tell me that you've never told an off color joke about jews or catholics or protestants or blacks or irish, then I'll surely call you a liar, because my stupid stupid little girl, that is human nature.


 
FN Posted: Fri Aug 13 08:50:54 2004 Post | Quote in Reply  
  We're all overlooking the really important question here: nicky, is that you on your picture?


 
DanSRose Posted: Fri Aug 13 09:12:59 2004 Post | Quote in Reply  
  Nikki said:
>Oh yeah, of course, MORE anti-catholic sentiments, as if the only institution with abuse were the catholic church. Pope John Paul II has accomplished much more that YOU ever will in your snivelling miserable little life. He worked hard all his life and gave everything for humanity, so when he's old, suddenly he's senile and disposable. Then again, what can I expect, you probably only think that young blond and strong should live, ...right HITLER???

You know that I was quoting that dude? Right? Right?? Being a lifelong and very much proud Jew and student of the Holocaust, I can say for certain I'm not the biggest fan der Fürher.




 
DanSRose Posted: Fri Aug 13 09:13:54 2004 Post | Quote in Reply  
  huh. It looks no matter your few on Ann Coulter, we can all come together for a good Nikki bashing.

Just kidding. We love you, Nikki


 
Nikki Posted: Fri Aug 13 09:20:13 2004 Post | Quote in Reply  
  Hi Dan,
I'm sorry I blew a gasket...and smashed out two windows doing it too! lol

oh my it's off to Anger Management classes again....@$%$@%@ LOL

Yes my darling Christophe, that IS really me. :-)


 
Nikki Posted: Fri Aug 13 09:21:48 2004 Post | Quote in Reply  
  ifihadahif said:
>Nikki, you are talking about a guy making a joke at the expense of Catholics, not the same as anti-catholic sentiment.
>If your going to tell me that you've never told an off color joke about jews or catholics or protestants or blacks or irish, then I'll surely call you a liar, because my stupid stupid little girl, that is human nature.

(blows a kiss...ur such a SWEET old man, what can I say?) :-)


 
Asswipe Posted: Fri Aug 13 09:41:31 2004 Post | Quote in Reply  
  Nikki said:
>Yes my darling Christophe, that IS really me. :-)

don't get excited, even if she's not lying she still has a penis at heart.


 
Nikki Posted: Fri Aug 13 10:21:21 2004 Post | Quote in Reply  
  I'd say Christophe is the CLEANEST man here... and Asswipe, (of course...uuuggghhh), is the filthiest. You know: lazy = filthy??


 
Asswipe Posted: Fri Aug 13 10:49:32 2004 Post | Quote in Reply  
  Nikki said:
>I'd say Christophe is the CLEANEST man here... and Asswipe, (of course...uuuggghhh), is the filthiest. You know: lazy = filthy??

haha, what would a girl like you care about cleanliness?


 
Nikki Posted: Fri Aug 13 11:16:56 2004 Post | Quote in Reply  
  hahahaha ur just TOO funny ahahahaha


 
Nikki Posted: Fri Aug 13 11:17:29 2004 Post | Quote in Reply  
  ...and...ur just jealous because I prefer Christophe :-)


 
Asswipe Posted: Fri Aug 13 11:18:59 2004 Post | Quote in Reply  
  Nikki said:
>...and...ur just jealous because I prefer Christophe :-)

we've been through this. I really don't dig a moustache on my ladies.


 
FN Posted: Fri Aug 13 11:53:19 2004 Post | Quote in Reply  
  Nikki said:
>...and...ur just jealous because I prefer Christophe :-)

If I'd get a euro for every time I heard that... I'd have a few extra euros.


 
Nikki Posted: Fri Aug 13 12:40:07 2004 Post | Quote in Reply  
  Asswipe said:
>Nikki said:
>>...and...ur just jealous because I prefer Christophe :-)
>
>we've been through this. I really don't dig a moustache on my ladies.

??


 
Nikki Posted: Fri Aug 13 12:40:52 2004 Post | Quote in Reply  
  Christophe said:
>Nikki said:
>>...and...ur just jealous because I prefer Christophe :-)
>
>If I'd get a euro for every time I heard that... I'd have a few extra euros.

hugs and kisses my sweet, never mind the LOSERS xxoo


 
Asswipe Posted: Fri Aug 13 15:03:39 2004 Post | Quote in Reply  
  Nikki said:
>Asswipe said:
>>Nikki said:
>>>...and...ur just jealous because I prefer Christophe :-)
>>
>>we've been through this. I really don't dig a moustache on my ladies.
>
>??

oh, i'm sorry. i forget you're not old enough to grow a moustache, only a few more years. No worries, there's no rush.


 
mat_j Posted: Fri Aug 13 18:49:55 2004 Post | Quote in Reply  
  hehe moustache


 
Mesh Posted: Sat Aug 14 19:24:23 2004 Post | Quote in Reply  
  Nikki said:
>I'd say Christophe is the CLEANEST man here... and Asswipe, (of course...uuuggghhh), is the filthiest. You know: lazy = filthy??

Wrong, I make a point of showering at least once every three months, ya know ;)


 
Puck Posted: Sat Aug 14 23:15:02 2004 Post | Quote in Reply  
  The cause of Christophe's apparent indifferent attitude towards Nikki is starting to appear.
1)Asswipe said Nikki has a moustache. Christophe said I should lose mine. Might that be a turn-on?
2)Asswipe implied that Nikki has a penis. Christophe said, "Nothing can ever beat pussy."
j/k
; )


 



[ Reply to this thread ] [ Start new thread ]