Columnist Ann Coulter should probably not sign up to be a guest on Bill Maher’s HBO show anytime soon. Maher writer Chris Kelly took her column on the death and funeral of her father, John Vincent Coulter, and mocked her and the dead man relentlessly on The Huffington Post. He even compared her dead father to Hitler. Remember, in our Special Report, we recalled Arianna Huffington proclaimed her site wouldn’t be known for "flame-throwing, name-calling, and simplistic attack dog rhetoric." (What a pile of souvlaki that boast was.)
Chris Kelly, who on this day qualified as the Least Compassionate Man in America, explained he had "taken the liberty of going through the eulogy -- cutting the Kennedy material -- and punching up the rest." Such as:
The longest baby ever born at the Albany, N.Y., hospital, at least as of May 5, 1926, who grew up to be my strapping father, passed away last Friday morning.
And by "strapping" I mean, "he beat me with a strap."
As Mother and I stood at Daddy's casket Monday morning, Mother repeated his joke to him, which he said on every wedding anniversary until a few years ago when Lewy bodies dementia prevented him from saying much at all: "54 years, married to the wrong woman." And we laughed.
Because he was dead.
John Vincent Coulter was of the old school, a man of few words, the un-Oprah, no crying or wearing your heart on your sleeve, and reacting to moments of great sentiment with a joke. Or as we used to call them:
Assholes.
Men. When he was moping around the house once, missing my brother who had just gone back to college, he said, "Well, if you had cancer long enough, you'd miss it."
Unlike Lewy bodies dementia, apparently.
He'd indicate his feelings about my skirt length by saying,
I can see your balls.
"You look nice, Hart, but you forgot to put on your skirt."
Your parents are your whole world when you are a child.
Especially when other children avoid you out of instinct.
You only recognize what is unique about them when you get older and see how the rest of the world diverges from your standard of normality.
Or the cops come.
Besides being very funny, Father had an absolutely straight moral compass without ever being preachy or judgmental or even telling us in words.
If you call a five-decade joke about hating his wife, another about his son being like cancer, and another based on looking at his daughter's ass "funny."
Father hated puffery, pomposity, snobbery, fake friendliness, fake anything. Like Kitty's father in "Anna Karenina," he could detect a substanceless suitor in a heartbeat.
"War on the one hand is such a terrible, such an atrocious thing, that no man, especially no Christian man, has the right to assume the responsibility of beginning it." - Tolstoy
"We should invade their countries, kill their leaders and convert them to Christianity." - Some Fatherless Creep
He hated unions because of their corrupt leadership, ripping off the members for their own aggrandizement.
I know I'm forgetting some of the other things he hated, but you're starting to get the picture. Oh yeah, yogurt. Hated it. And mom.
But he had more respect for genuine working men than anyone I've ever known. He was, in short, the molecular opposite of John Edwards.
John Edwards being alive.
Father spent most of his nine-year FBI career as a Red hunter in New York City.
Where Stalin had sent his legions to steal the secrets of Broadway's Golden Era.
He never talked much about his FBI days.
Or dressing like a woman.
Father mostly had contempt for Soviet spies.
Reserving "hate" for unions, snobs, phonies, mom and us kids. Think of him as a kind of grown up Holden Caulfield, crossed with Hitler. Hitler Caulfield. The Catcher in the Rhine. This guy in the front row, he gets it!
Coulter has never been known as a tender humanitarian when it came to pouncing on the flaws of the left. As sad as it sounds, it’s probably not a good idea for a left-wing hate object like Coulter to mourn her father in public with the expectation that someone on the left isn’t going to lob rhetorical grenades and laugh at her loss.
That doesn't excuse Kelly, whose idea of "humor" is mercilessly kicking someone when they're down. Someone should wash out his computer with soap.
—Tim Graham is Director of Media Analysis at the Media Research Center.
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
Funny stuff there Chris
January 15, 2008 - 00:28 ET by USA4freedomFunny stuff there Chris Kelly. At least Ann knew her dad.
Very classy Huf po.
These are the boys of Pointe du Hoc. Ronald Reagan- 40th Anniversary of D-Day
Wow! I'm sure we're going
January 15, 2008 - 07:23 ET by motherbeltWow! I'm sure we're going to be hearing calls for Maher to "repudiate" those comments, and to "disassociate" himself from them, and maybe even to fire the guy!!!
I can't wait!
>>> Begins holding breath.......
*preps an O2 tank for
January 15, 2008 - 09:49 ET by Cortillaen*preps an O2 tank for reviving MB*
Anyone want to guess what we'd be hearing out of the left if O'Reilly, Lavin, or Hannity had made those comments about the passing of a liberal's father? Headlines, reports, condemnations, and plenty of calls for both job and head on a platter sounds about right to me. Not only are people like that dispicable, hateful curs, they hypocritically claim to be otherwise. Between the NYT and now this, I may have to stay away for a bit: Too much of this bunk makes it hard to think without tending into fantasies of directed homocidal rage.
www.rhjunior.com Great comics with a hefty dose of Christian and anti-nutjob goodness.
"With your mind as high as Mt. Fuji you can see all things clearly. And you can see all the forces that shape events; not just the things near to you." -Miyamoto Musashi
AS IF Ann wouldn't expect this from [this]
January 15, 2008 - 00:32 ET by drillanwrAll's I gots to say, Mr. Chris Kelly, iz yu`iz in for it now.
Well classless is what they
January 15, 2008 - 00:38 ET by USA4freedomWell classless is what they are known for.
http://bumpshack.com/?p=1353
These are the boys of Pointe du Hoc. Ronald Reagan- 40th Anniversary of D-Day
Ann Coulter's Dad: An American
January 15, 2008 - 00:42 ET by Lame CherryI believe Ms. Coulter simply like when John Wayne went to his reward could have simply like the Japanese headlines read stated, "An American is Dead".
That would be the best compliment to write of him as he sounded like the foundation which built and keeps America going.
My deepest sympathies to Ms. Coulter as in my experience whether one loves their dad or detests him, a child always is ripped to shreds inside and it takes years to get through a parent leaving this world.
My only comment on this Chris Kelly creature is what comes around goes around. God repays.
*HIC IACET ARTORIVS REX QVONDAM REXQVE FVTVRVS
Great line L.C. I remember
January 15, 2008 - 03:28 ET by USA4freedomGreat line L.C.
I remember when my Grandfather (who raised me) died, a man that somehow in my mind was too big a man to ever die. I was completely devastated. I remember it like not like it was yesterday, but an hour ago.
May God look out for you Ann.
These are the boys of Pointe du Hoc. Ronald Reagan- 40th Anniversary of D-Day
Low
January 15, 2008 - 00:47 ET by scamoramaI could vent my spleen - and stoop to Kelly's level - but I'll simply quote Molly Ivins speaking of Camille Paglia:
"Sheesh, what an asshole."
Karma is
January 15, 2008 - 00:55 ET by bigpapaa bitch to be accounted for Chris... something I'm sure you will learn soon enough.. I hope.
Sorry for your loss Anne..
Sorry for your loss Ann, I
January 15, 2008 - 00:56 ET by RexzeitgeistSorry for your loss Ann, I lost my father about ten years ago and it is still tough to this day.
I will say a prayer for you and your family!
Sorry Ann
January 15, 2008 - 01:01 ET by RebelI understand her pain I lost my dad in April 2007 and the hardest thing I ever went through in my life.nobody should be treated that way and people like that make me sick.
Go WVU
Never vote for Byrd
O.K. I'm gonna channel
January 15, 2008 - 00:58 ET by BlazerO.K. I'm gonna channel Mr. Kelley here and try and use some of his liberal humor here, but from a conservative perspective. Let's see how this work's, wish me luck:
Your trapped in a room with two terrorist's and a liberal. You have a gun but only two bullet's. What do you do ?
Shoot the liberal twice
The United States is attacked by a fundamentalist Islamic regime with a rogue nuclear device. How should we retaliate ?
Bomb San Francisco.
Nope. Dont' see how Mr. Kelley does it, just doesn't work for me. Liberal humor is definitley an oxy-moron.
"You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy. We must be cautious. "
- Ben Kenobi on Liberals, and the MSM.
" The Cake is a lie."
True, Blazer, liberal humor
January 15, 2008 - 07:20 ET by motherbeltliberal humor is an oxymoron. -Blazer
A liberal's idea of cutting-edge humor, is, like this column, to spew their usual venom, and then say "Hey, it's a joke! It's called humor! Lighten up!"
(How often does a conservative need to use that line?)
In typical fashion, as once again show here by Kelley, the political is always personal.
Or is it vice versa?
Doesn't matter.
My father died last summer; and it was and is still painful, even though I know he is happy now that he is with his wife of 58 years again. My sympathies and prayers for Ann and her mother.
That Kelley would actually insult and denigrate a dead man, just because he is Ann Coulter's father, is beyond contempt.
Yup, Arianna, that's some classy blog you've got there.
Somehow, it seems fitting
January 15, 2008 - 00:58 ET by R D HelmSomehow, it seems fitting that a no-class, no-talent embicile like Bill Maher would have someone of even lesser talent and lower-class writing for him.
Little wonder the once vaunted "entertainment industry" is going the way of the dinosaur.
None are so hopelessly enslaved as those who falsely believe they are free. -J.W. von Goethe
WOW!
January 15, 2008 - 01:14 ET by iveseenitallWOW! Just when you think "liberals" can't get any lower... PUKE!
NEVER,NEVER trust a "liberal"
LIBERAL HATE...
January 15, 2008 - 04:57 ET by danybhoyiveseenitall,
The hard left in this country are lower then whale crap, but there are times we need to be reminded. Real Time w/ Bill Maher is almost always are 4 on 1 lib beatdown of a conservative, Tony Snow just learned that this week. Maher is the #1 reason I won't pay for HBO.
As for Ann, my thoughts are with her over the loss of her dad, I almost lost my dad & I'm not sure how I would deal with that. He had a heartattack a couple of years ago. The attacks on Ann in this case are classless, even by their standards.
"Some of us are wise, some of us are otherwise" Mark Levin
As my mother used to say: No
January 15, 2008 - 07:10 ET by motherbeltWOW! Just when you think "liberals" can't get any lower...
As my mother used to say: No class, all A$$.
The writers strike
January 15, 2008 - 04:06 ET by KC MulvilleThey tell me there's a writers' strike. Hadn't really noticed. Professional writers are refusing to work unless some other gang of thieves cuts them in on a share of the loot.
If this is what they're not writing ... we can only hope for poor negotiators.
My prayers for Ann and her family.
Huff Po Nutcase
January 15, 2008 - 01:23 ET by d1carterThis thing has a sickening feel to it. No matter the names of the individuals involved. Is this where we have come to...?
Godless liberal hate mongers
January 15, 2008 - 01:42 ET by BritcomGodless liberal hate mongers with delusions of self-importance and self-righteous justification for their Marxist death-cult of morally bankrupt vanity... or as we like to call them: Democrats.
-
Democrats - Noun, a contraction derived from old Greek, demo-crats (Demolition & Bureaucrats) To destroy, specifically, to destroy government and its effectiveness.
This is the third time I
January 15, 2008 - 03:53 ET by tracheostomyThis is the third time I have visited this particular blog, and I'm still numb from the overal stunned confusion I'm feeling.
What purpose was Kelly trying to serve with this? It's obvious this has gotten personal. I believe some serious lines have been crossed and will be crossed again.
I wonder how Kelly's peers reacted to this. I wonder if Maher will make a statement. I don't want to hate these people for what they're doing, which is nothing less than spitting on someone's grave just to spite the relative they have a quarrel with. It's petty. But this is nothing but base provocation to hate. I wonder if there is grounds for a proper lawsuit here.
There is simply no honor in this act. All this does is damage Kelly's rep for resorting to tactics that are truly sub-civilized. There isn't a single Coulter column (or even all of them together) that could be so vitriolic as to excuse this one act of pure vindictive hatred.
I wonder if Ann knew something like this was coming. I wonder how Maher and Kelly's family/peers are reacting to this.
-PJ
"Trake: Your lofty convictions are another blemish on the rump of congregational sectarianism." -Tumbler 5/15/07
but, but both sides do it right?
January 15, 2008 - 04:13 ET by mastersofdeceitbut, but both sides do it right?
//
Sorry I just wanted to see what it felt like to type something that sarcastic. Before someone pops up and actually types it with a straight face.
Masters is right and he was
January 15, 2008 - 18:03 ET by tracheostomyMasters is right and he was in before it all started, just as he predicted. =)
Two wrongs don't make a right, and this is clearly not an example of Reagan conservatism.
-PJ
"Trake: Your lofty convictions are another blemish on the rump of congregational sectarianism." -Tumbler 5/15/07
This just proves the old
January 15, 2008 - 04:17 ET by Clear thinkerThis just proves the old adage... Liberals suck!
Rush Limbaugh stated that of the top 5 Republicans running for the presidency, only one was a true conservative. http://www.fred08.com/
I 'd like to see how funny he thinks it is
January 15, 2008 - 04:54 ET by Slicksterwhen someone smacks him across the chops with a ball bat.
Zsa Zsa
January 15, 2008 - 06:36 ET by Jack BauerZsa Zsa Huffington's...
Ann Coulter can look after herself, and I'm sure she could care less what hatemongers like Kelly think.
But you have to hand it to her, she really gets to these extreme loony leftists so they reveal to everyone just how much hatred they have bottled up inside them.
If you connect that up to a power grid, they could power a third world country with all the bile that ferments inside their vile bodies.
Remember after the nomination, whoever you favored first, these are they base of the party that wants to defeat any Republican.
Read the comments, and ask yourself do you really want 8 years of a Democrat President who owes her election in part to these "activists."
I feel sorry for Mr. Kelly
January 15, 2008 - 06:51 ET by Jcon96Obviously he has never had a larger-than-life person who becomes the center of your world. Someone who, as a previous poster put is, is too big to die. His life is all the more empty for not having this person around. My heart goes out to you Ms. Coulter, many of us know how you feel. Do not worry though, Mr. Kelly may someday know your pain. I, for one, certainly do not wish it on him, but it may happen. I just hope no one is as callous as he.
I also will never get HBO
January 15, 2008 - 07:23 ET by ArchConservativeI also will never get HBO until Bill Maher is off its airwaves. Now let's try it this way:
Bill Maher's dad died today, because he couldn't stand to be around his SOB of a son. Before taking his own life, he wrote a note saying the only thing he regretted was getting his "wife drunk and spawning that ugly baby molester his mother and I named Bill". "The only bad side to being dead", he wrote, "will be that now I have to be with the whore that was my wife, for eternity." Oh well, I'm sure they will both enjoy hell together as they save a place for their "little mistake" to die also.
Yea, funny stuff. When they do it, it's 'cute' or 'smart' or 'innovative'. When it's done to show a point, it's 'cruel' or 'hateful'. These people are sick, they are the most hateful and vengeful people in American politics today. They claim to be all-inclusive and understanding when in reality, they are the most devisive and uncaring people you will ever find. When given a choice between supporting a terrorist and supporting their country, these self-loathers will support the murding bastards every time.
Why else would they, right after 9/11, say that we had to 'understand them' or maybe it was 'our fault' that 'those little Eichmanns died' in the towers or in DC or in that field in Pennsylvania? Why else would they think that their own government would kill 3000 innocents? Why else would they think that a member of the Joint Chiefs of Staff would try to 'fake' an incident off the coast of Iran? Why else would they think that the lie that is so-called-man-made-global-warming is more dangerous than terrorists who want us wiped off the face of the earth?
If you have HBO, cancel it and write to the idiots in charge that you won't have your money go to someone like this. If you have HBO and don't cancel it.....well, I guess you enjoy being insulted , verbally slapped around, and having Mr. Maher and Mr. Kelly take your hard-earned cash.
You support the troops by supporting the mission! If you don't support the mission, have the guts to say you don't support the troops.
Chris Kelly?
January 15, 2008 - 07:20 ET by Kuso JijiNever heard of him.
Bill Maher actually pays this no talent to help him be funny?
Now I know why Maher's stuff is lame.
Strike One!
January 15, 2008 - 08:11 ET by CrashAnn's a big girl, she can take it.
Besides, I thought the writers were on strike over not getting more pennies from evil producers. Yet apparently they'll write for free on blogs. Should we mail the writer a penny, give 'em food stamps, or something?
Stee-rike Two! Why is our steroid bloated government conducting hearings on steroid use in baseball with millions of our tax payer dollars?
The Looney Hateful Left Strikes Again
January 15, 2008 - 08:36 ET by NoMoreClintonsThis has become all-too-common from the classless, hateful left. What conservative or even middle-of-the-roader ever writes with such venom? This is solely the purview of the left. It's no wonder they are called the Looney left. To attack somebody's recently departed parent, no matter how much you disagree with them, is beyond vile. Is nothing off limits for these hate mongers? My deepest sympathies to Ann on the loss of her father who obviously meant the world to her.
Old movie
January 15, 2008 - 08:38 ET by AgnosticTo paraphrase a character in an old Cary Grant movie, 'People will Talk':
Chris Kelly, you are a small man. You are not small because of your stature but because of your mind and your character. Today, you tried to bring down a man bigger than yourself but only managed to make yourself even smaller still. If you climbed the tallest tree on the highest mountain you would not be able to touch the sole of this man's shoe.
Good movie, btw, if you like old movies.
agnostic ... you're right.
January 15, 2008 - 08:54 ET by Jack Baueragnostic ... you're right. Small man, small talk.
As a comparison, I think all us conservatives can agree that we think Olbermann is an odious man. Youn know, the way the left thinks of Coulter.
But here's the differnce.
Can you think of one prominet conservative blogger who could even contemplate writing a hateful diatribe if HIS dad died and he wrote a eulogy to him.
Kelly isn't some anonymous hate-filled poster. He's a featured writer on Zsa Zsa Huffingtons. I've never heard of him, but apprently he has a following.
Mark Levin is a harsh critic of Olbermann. Can you imagine him writing a snide riposte like that. I mean, NO WAY.
Seriously folks, these Stalinists are bent on dragging America into 1984 with their lust for hating conservatives that goes way beyond mental stability.
Only one Jack...Ann Coulter
January 15, 2008 - 08:55 ET by LeonOnly one Jack...Ann Coulter
That's pathetic. Even by
January 15, 2008 - 08:56 ET by Jack BauerThat's pathetic. Even by your standards.
Yeah you're right Jack, my
January 15, 2008 - 10:12 ET by LeonYeah you're right Jack, my list above is pathetically short.
I totally forgot Savage, Beck, Limbaugh, O'Reilly, Prager, Morris, etc. etc. etc.
This must be
January 15, 2008 - 11:14 ET by BDThis must be proven.
Please provide examples of such from the death of a parent of the Kennedies, Clintons, a member of the MSM, or anyone else on the left by ANY of the people listed above.
You could retract that statement right now, of course.....
BD, Will do when time
January 15, 2008 - 11:26 ET by LeonBD,
Will do when time permits.
Here's one to add to the Coulter examples I've already posted on this thread. From our favorite death-wisher, Michael Savage:
"Oh, you're one of the sodomites. You should get AIDS and die, you pig! Why don't you see if you can sue me, you piece of garbage? Go eat a sausage and choke on it. Get trichinosis."
This was directed at 'anyone else on the left'. Pretty intense.
When I have a minute I'll be sure to provide his hate-filled commentary on the death of Coretta Scott King (one day after her funeral).
BD, keep in mind I'm not condoning what Kelly has done (in fact, I think he sucks. He's not funny at all and his attempt to hurt Coulter was lame) but all of these idiots are the same. I have no compassion for those that make their money off of hate, so I see no reason to defend Coulter from these twisted attacks. She deserves to be treated the same way that she treats others.
Leon, I don't care who
January 15, 2008 - 17:04 ET by tracheostomyLeon, I don't care who started it. I only care about where this will end.
I used to be a huge Michael Savage fan. I also bought 3 of Ann Coulter's books. Their philosophy, and those of their supporters are: "they're too stupid to reason with, so if they want to play rough, then let's get scrappy."
I don't condone any of that. I dropped Savage a long time ago after saying something truly in-sane (anyone remember his foaming 3 minute "ism" rant?).
And even though I agree with much of what she says, I'm starting to have guilty thoughts for taking up sides with Coulter at one time as well. I felt that my "ism" was being bullied and I took vindictive satisfaction in watching someone strike back. I didn't expect the hostility to escalate to this level. It's truly going from "snarky" to "gloves are about to come off."
I may have a faulty translation of what it means to be a Reagan conservative, but I'm pretty sure it doesn't mean pointless ad hominem for its own sake. I know Coulter's chosen role is the hard one of the reactionary polemicist, but I feel it's gone on far enough. When and where does the reactionary pundit retire after we've had our cathartic moment?
I don't like that kind of punditry anymore. The initial goal was reasoning to convert liberals; not to emotionally destroy them. We cannot afford to sustain an ideological war with our own. If we cannot get liberals on the facts alone, and feel we must reduce ourselves to their level, then we've already lost.
This will only end in tears.
-PJ
"Trake: Your lofty convictions are another blemish on the rump of congregational sectarianism." -Tumbler 5/15/07
Tim, How'd you feel when
January 15, 2008 - 08:54 ET by LeonTim,
How'd you feel when Ann mocked Charlie Dean's death?
How about when she mocked the Edwards' dead son?
Did you stand up for either of their families? Did you title an op-ed 'Coulter Horror'?
Ann Coulter has routinely mocked the suffering of others. I have little sympathy for her.
So Chris Kelly, mock on. If you thrive off hate, don't cry when you get it back.
Leon, Coulter used those
January 15, 2008 - 09:11 ET by motherbeltLeon, Coulter used those comments to point out the fact that Democrats were using deceased family members as campaign props.
I didn't like it, because she did it in a snarky way.
But to have a valid comparison, Coulter would have had to take John Edwards' son's eulogy, and dissect it with insults, line by line, as Kelly has done here.
Not the same.
Leon has a point
January 15, 2008 - 09:48 ET by AgnosticThe disgrace of this 'writer' is not that he insulted Anne Coulter who is a public figure who has used negative statements in the past in a very insulting way that while may be useful in drawing attention to circumstances none the less causes personal pain and discomfort to some. The disgrace is that this person attacked a person he only knew from an obituary and mocked the death of a person just to gain attention (perhaps auditioning for Countdown). Anne has said enough that she should expect this type of response and I am in no way saying that she deserves or asked for it but it was bound to happen. Afterall, she has covered funerals were her political opposites have acted out just as rudely and they didn't have the internet to hide behind.
New Low For Po
January 15, 2008 - 10:03 ET by NoMoreClintonsI agree. The left can attack Ann all they want, as she is fair game. She's a big girl and she can handle it. But to smear the memory of her dead father is way beyond despicable. It's a new low for Hate Po, if that is possible.
Ag, I agree that Kelly
January 15, 2008 - 10:15 ET by LeonAg,
I agree that Kelly was unfair in targeting Ann Coulter's father to get to Ann, but that's the exact same tactic she uses on a regular basis.
She DOES deserve this. She deserves every ounce of hate she gets. She's a terrible human being who cares only about making money and will say anything to drive up her book sales. I have zero sympathy for her or her sheep (who are forced to sacrifice their principles and debase themselves to defend her).
In the a spin on the Beatles, the hate you take, is equal to the hate you make.
Sorry Leon,
January 15, 2008 - 12:06 ET by AgnosticI just don't understand this type of venom but your welcome to it if that is what you believe is right. I'm not a big fan of hers but have read a little of what she has written. Her articles usually make only one point and they do so in a sarcastic and insulting manner which may be fun for some but I choose not to deal with her for the same reasons I can't deal with many not all) on the left - the evocation of too much emotion. I've never actually heard her insult a dead person to attack an ideological foe but like I said I don't read her much.
I don't know about you but an attack on my family is going to hurt a lot more than an attack on me. So in this respect I don't agree that she is getting what she deserves nor would I ever condone this action under the guise of "the other person did it too" argument even though is a popular argument style in today’s politics. It is one thing to draw comparisons or create standards via comparisons but it is wrong to make excuses for wrongs by way of comparison.
Leon, it's NOT the "exact
January 15, 2008 - 13:19 ET by motherbeltLeon, it's NOT the "exact same tactic."
Saying that Al Gore used his son's death and his dying sister for political gain is a slap at Al Gore, not his son or his sister.
Even when Coulter had the chance to make a smart-a$$ remark about Elizabeth Edwards' illness, when she called Chris Matthews that time and was lecturing Coulter about being "hateful" she passed it up. She could have said something nasty, like Edwards sending his dying wife out to defend him, (which actually would have been a slap at Edwards, not Elizabeth at any rate) but she didn't. She just called Edwards "the wife of a Presidential candidate."
Well, Ann can take care of herself. I'm glad to know you won't have any sympathy for Kelly either if she lambastes him.
MB, Not sure why you
January 15, 2008 - 13:24 ET by LeonMB,
Not sure why you bring up Al Gore when I've only specifically referenced John Edward's son and Charles Dean.
See my examples below. Those were direct attacks against the deceased.
If you can rationalize and defend these statements that I've posted, then you might want to seek professional help immediately.
Sorry, Leon, had my
January 15, 2008 - 13:49 ET by motherbeltSorry, Leon, had my candidates mixed up.
As for your examples, I will split with you: (emphasis mine)
"If you [John Edwards] want points for not using your son's death politically,
don't you have to take down all those 'Ask me about my son's death in a
horrific car accident' bumper stickers?"
She is implying Edwards has bumper stickers advertising his son's death. That is an attack on Edwards, a crude one, yes, but on Edwards, not his son. If Edwards brings up his son's death, he is vulnerable to criticism on doing it.
I will give you the Dean one. That was making a joke about Charlie Dean's actual death. Out of bounds.
OK?
MB, Glad you agreed on
January 15, 2008 - 13:54 ET by LeonMB,
Glad you agreed on Dean.
Saddened that you would even attempt to defend her comments about Edwards' son. It's exactly the same thing that you are angry at Kelly for. What's the difference? Kelly uses Ann's dead father to attack Ann. It's the same. Both are sick.
Seriously I need to understand how you defend Coulter's bumper sticker comment. She mocked his dead son, made light of his tragic death, and used that to attack Edwards, but since Edwards was the intended target (and not the dead son) it's ok?
I really can't follow that logic.
Leon, I just don't know how
January 15, 2008 - 16:53 ET by motherbeltLeon, I just don't know how else to say this....jabbing John Edwards for exploiting his son's death is NOT insulting to his son; it is insulting to John Edwards!! She never said a single disrespectful thing about his son, or how he died. It may have been insensitive, but she said nothing about Edwards' son!!
That's why I said I would give you the Dean thing...because it was a making fun of the death of Charlie Dean.
As for your contention that that's the exact same thing, Kelly did, you're wrong.
Whatever Kelly wanted to say about Ann would be fair game. But her father is dead, and Kelly said that he beat her with a strap, dressed like a woman while in the FBI, and was a cross between Holden Caulfield and Hitler! (ah, yes, what list of denigration would be complete without the Hitler reference?) among other things.
Please feel free to point out those things that Ann Coulter said about John Edwards' dead son that are equivalent.
I have been consistent; I disagreed with Coulter mocking Dean's death, and Kelly mocking and insulting Ann's dead father. Ann said nothing derogatory about Edwards' son. Period.
If you still can't see the logic in my comparison, I can't help you, and I'm done trying.
From what I've seen,
January 15, 2008 - 10:00 ET by CortillaenFrom what I've seen, Coulter's snarkiness was directed at the people trying to use said deaths as political tools. Her edge was obviously for the politicization of the deaths, not the deceased or even the politicizers (in a personal way). Had they just been remembering their dead, I doubt she would have said anything on the subject. Regardless, Kelly's intent was purely a stab at the heart here, something anyone should find deplorable, especially those who repeatedly claim to be oh so compassionate.
On a side note, Leon, are you going to condemn Kelly's actions, or will you continue to try to deflect blame for them onto Coulter?
www.rhjunior.com Great comics with a hefty dose of Christian and anti-nutjob goodness.
"With your mind as high as Mt. Fuji you can see all things clearly. And you can see all the forces that shape events; not just the things near to you." -Miyamoto Musashi
Cortillean, I won't
January 15, 2008 - 10:03 ET by LeonCortillean,
I won't denounce Kelly's actions.
Coulter deserves everything she gets.
Take a look at the long line of her mocking victims and get back to me.
I suspected as much. To
January 15, 2008 - 10:14 ET by CortillaenI suspected as much. To you, Coulter is evil because she tells people who need to get their collective head screwed on straight to do so and disparages the politicization of the deaths of loved ones. However, when someone on your side of the aisle dissects her remembrance of her father to add line after line of ruthless, pointless, and (at least in part) false insults, it's perfectly fine because you don't like her. Again I note the hypocrisy inherent in the leftist viewpoint, as well as the lack of real compassion.
www.rhjunior.com Great comics with a hefty dose of Christian and anti-nutjob goodness.
"With your mind as high as Mt. Fuji you can see all things clearly. And you can see all the forces that shape events; not just the things near to you." -Miyamoto Musashi
Cortillean, No, that's
January 15, 2008 - 10:17 ET by LeonCortillean,
No, that's not what I said at all.
Kelly and Coulter are both scum and therefore deserve what they get. I won't denounce Kelly for employing Ann's own tactics against her.
You're right though, those 9/11 Widows deserved the cheap insults Ann threw at them. They definitely deserved to be called harpies at the very least.
What you are saying is "An
January 15, 2008 - 11:10 ET by CortillaenWhat you are saying is "An eye for an eye," a concept all liberals claim to despise, but willingly endorse whenever it can be used to justify attacking a conservative. I'm sure you'll keep repeating yourself in different words no matter how many times I point out the problems with the actual content, so I'll let you have the last word: This will be my final post in this topic. If you think Kelly's insults are in any way justified, regardless of what you think Coulter has done, I suggest a little soul-searching to find that missing compassion, the kind you claim Coulter lacks. If you are really so much better, surely you have it.
As for your purpose here, to deflect criticism from Kelly back on his victim, don't expect it to work, and don't try to tell me you are doing otherwise. You're nothing if not transparent, Leon, even if you don't realize it yet. You hate Coulter, ostensibly for the reasons you claim here, likely for considerably more, and you seek to justify anyone who trashes her and her family, no matter how low they sink to do so, by trying to equate their actions to hers. You even go so far as to dispense with the concept of graduated morality in order to consider Kelly's purely vitriolic attacks on Coulter and her father to be on the same level as Coulter's pointed political commentary on other deaths. Would that you could take a more objective view of your own mind's workings here, but some things are impossible. Yes, I'm claiming to understand how your mind works, Leon. It's the one unique talent I have: Give me enough pages from a book, and I can rewrite the whole thing. You've given me plenty to peruse, enough that, as the saying goes, I can read you like a book. I'm sure you'll have fun claiming your enigmas, but maybe this will make you stop and think about things a little. Consider that maybe holding such hatred for someone as to condone attacking her over her father's deathbed is not healthy.
www.rhjunior.com Great comics with a hefty dose of Christian and anti-nutjob goodness.
"With your mind as high as Mt. Fuji you can see all things clearly. And you can see all the forces that shape events; not just the things near to you." -Miyamoto Musashi
Leon is not saying "an eye
January 15, 2008 - 16:59 ET by motherbeltLeon is not saying "an eye for an eye." He is using Sean Connery's character's tactic from "The Untouchables": they send one of your guys to the hospital; you send one of theirs to the morgue.
In other words, you escalate. Ann Coulter goes after John Edwards, who has a dead son, you go after Ann's dead father.
I was trying to point out to Leon that her jabs were at those who used the deaths as political fodder, not at the deceased. But he still refuses to see my point, and I give up.
To repeat myself, I think
January 15, 2008 - 17:10 ET by JasonCTo repeat myself, I think that seeing this altercation, as it were, between Coulter and Kelly as a microcosm for the politics of Left v. Right is a mistake.
"He was, and is yet, most likely, the wearisomest, self-righteous
pharisee that ever ransacked a Bible to rake the promises to himself
and fling the curses on his neighbors." -Emily Bronte
I've never understood this
January 15, 2008 - 14:41 ET by JasonCI've never understood this line of reasoning with respect to the Jersey Girls. The totemic "Victims of the Tragedy of 9/11", and pathos-laden references to same, have been appropriated by the right to bolster the War on Terror, Giuliani's presidential bid, waterboarding, and Bush's tax cuts (OK, the last one I made up, but I bet it happened at least once). This enthymemic claim that those women were inappropriately using their husbands' death as campaign tools, and thus should be berated, is nonsense. What Ann Coulter clearly disliked about those women was that they had lost family in 9/11 and yet were willing to make statements that did not gel with the traditional narrative of 9/11 invocation. The fact that they were effete East coast-types probably didn't help.
"He was, and is yet, most likely, the wearisomest, self-righteous
pharisee that ever ransacked a Bible to rake the promises to himself
and fling the curses on his neighbors." -Emily Bronte
Get It Right
January 15, 2008 - 09:58 ET by NoMoreClintonsAnn did not mock Edwards' dead son. She was mocking Edwards. Nice try.
NMC, By using his dead
January 15, 2008 - 10:01 ET by LeonNMC,
By using his dead son.
You're right, that's way classier and less hateful!
What a joke.
You people have such a hypocritical stance concerning Coulter. Constantly you back up her hate, but then whine and cry when she gets it back.
You can't have it both ways. Sorry.
Coulter is an idiot. Leon,
January 15, 2008 - 15:36 ET by Roger the ShrubberCoulter is an idiot. Leon, er, Alan, you are skirting "idiot" territory yourself by condoning your fellow Hufftards.
At least you are not using the same gross generalizations you are accusing the denizens of Newbusters of using. Whoops, I guess "you people" qualifies. Sorry, Alan!
Rog, You people was
January 15, 2008 - 15:49 ET by LeonRog,
You people was direclty aimed at the specific poster that I was replying to.
Clearly I meant people like him.
Furthermore, I explicitly stated that I don't condone this behavior.
keep stretching. E for effort.
Got that, roger?
January 15, 2008 - 17:46 ET by RJ"you people" means a single individual, except that it also means a group of people.... :^)
RJ, "you people" means
January 15, 2008 - 18:13 ET by LeonRJ,
"you people" means defenders of Coulter. Obviously, but who would expect you to know that. As exhibited time and time again, you lack even basic reading skills.
Troll logic, leon
January 15, 2008 - 23:31 ET by RJNo matter how how you try to avoid it, you said "you people" means both a single individual and a group of people....you're a real goof, leon...and always good for a chuckle. :^)
Yea, RJ...
January 15, 2008 - 23:39 ET by JAB...and you using the word "Logic" & "Leon" in the same sentence is also a "goof" and good for a chortle (at your expense), thanks ;-)
"Too bad Ignorance isn't painful..."
LOL, JAB
January 15, 2008 - 23:47 ET by RJ...but doesn't adding the word Troll turn your logic upside down? :^)
No RJ it doesn't, because you created the oxymoron first...
January 16, 2008 - 00:06 ET by JAB...I didn't add anything ;-)
"Too bad Ignorance isn't painful..."
Bamm-It on me, RJ.
January 16, 2008 - 00:11 ET by JABYep, after a second read you got me there. Touche' on you, better luck on me next time ;-)
"Too bad Ignorance isn't painful..."
1. Ok. I am writing this
January 16, 2008 - 11:41 ET by Roger the Shrubber1. Ok. I am writing this down. When you use "you people" you are only referring to THE ONE PERSON you were replying to. Got it. My bad not "understanding" your use of the English language. That Swarthmore education is definitely shining through!
2. After searching for your "not condoning Kelly's behavior", I found this interesting timeline of your posts on this thread:
7:54am - So Chris Kelly, mock on.
9:03am - I won't denounce Kelly's actions.
9:15am - I agree that Kelly was unfair in targeting Ann Coulter's father to get to Ann, but that's the exact same tactic she uses on a regular basis. (I thought I heard a But-Monkey!)
9:17am - Kelly and Coulter are both scum and therefore deserve what they get. I won't denounce Kelly for employing Ann's own tactics against her. (Woo! Another But-Monkey!)
14:49pm - Furthermore, I explicitly stated that I don't condone this behavior.
Yep, you have explicitly stated you do not condone that type of behavior.
NMC, God Ann sure is
January 15, 2008 - 10:08 ET by LeonNMC,
God Ann sure is hilarious. Clearly she wasn't mocking Edward's son's death (*end sarcasm):
"If you want points for not using your son's death politically, don't you have to take down all those 'Ask me about my son's death in a horrific car accident' bumper stickers?"
Oh and she was definitely attacking Howard Dean and not mocking his brother with this comment (*end sarcasm):
Howard Dean talks about his brother Charlie's murder at the hands of North Vietnamese communists. Bizarrely, after working on the failed George McGovern campaign, Charlie Dean went to Indochina in 1974 to witness the ravages of the war he had opposed. Not long after he arrived, the apparently ungrateful communists captured and killed him. Hey fellas! I'm on your s-- CLUNK!
Ann Coulter and Chris Kelly are the same, they employ the same tactics, and they deserve whatever they get.
Facts speak the truth...
January 15, 2008 - 10:55 ET by SyriusLeon,
There's no way they would search for disparaging remarks by Ms. Coulter. Rose colored glasses and all. Thanks for showing them the hypocrisy of Ms. Coulter.
Syrius
"I cannot comprehend how any man can want anything but the truth." -Marcus Aurelius
Syrius Lee...can you?
January 15, 2008 - 14:01 ET by LionKingCan you provide these disparaging remarks? Preferably not from some site which uses misquotes.
Thanks.
Clearly she wasn't
January 15, 2008 - 15:06 ET by stratmanRead the article and there was no mocking of the son, only of the father's use of the son's death for political gain.
I am inclined to agree with you that Coulter directly mocked the arrogance, ignorance or naivety of Charlie Dean foolishly placing himself alongside the Ho Chi Minh Trail in Laos during the vigorous bombing campaign of that area during the war. It's not as if he could not have known of the dangers of that area prior to embarking on his trip. I write this without enmity towards Charlie or John.
It was a regretable and senseless loss of life, and it was a foolish loss as well. One does not enter the cage of an angry tiger and expect nothing to happen. Coulter was within bounds to mock a candidate that uses the death of a loved one for political gain. She did, IMO, go over the line in mocking the actual death of the brother. Her statement was more appropriate for the Darwin Awards than political commentary.
Killing them with kindness isn't working. Time to get scrappy with the Donkeys.
The kitchen.
January 15, 2008 - 09:00 ET by Shooter1002Somehow I doubt Ms. Coulter will sink, teary eyed, into anonymity because of this to-be-expected, almost baited poor attempt at ridicule.
The kitchen's heat needs be much greater!
wow..
January 15, 2008 - 09:59 ET by pwozif someone made any kind of comments regarding my father's death, they'd still be in the hospital.. and he died about 18 months ago...
The mocking comments
January 15, 2008 - 10:23 ET by JasonCThe mocking comments inserted into this eulogy aren't the least bit funny. Yes, they're offensive. But predictably, the posters on this site immediately took to shredding liberalism across the board, ostensibly in Ann's defense. This isn't liberalism, though. It's a comedian with an inflated sense of his own talent. Please stop confusing ideology with the politics of entertainment.
It strikes me as a bit appalling the way that Coulter inserts her own politics and her own Leave it to Beaver-fantasy version of masculinity into a eulogy, but I suppose that's no one's business but her own.
I guess the only logical thing to ask Ann would be whether she is "enjoying" the death of a loved one.
"He was, and is yet, most likely, the wearisomest, self-righteous
pharisee that ever ransacked a Bible to rake the promises to himself
and fling the curses on his neighbors." -Emily Bronte
well..
January 15, 2008 - 10:40 ET by pwozmy father was a very funny and sarcastic guy, and at the funeral, we all were saying jokes and remembering the funny things about him.. heck we even had a keg afterwards..
I am a very cynical and sarcastic person, and I say out-of-line things about death quite often.. it's definitely a way to cope, and maybe that's what Ann was doing as well.
Amusingly, in the same post
January 15, 2008 - 11:15 ET by Roger the ShrubberAmusingly, in the same post where you admonish Newbusters for lumping in all Liberals into one big dirty, ignorant dumpster, you manage to stereotype yourself as one of the dumpster-dwellers yourself with your little Coulter rant. Interesting tactic.
Well gee f---ing whiz Rog,
January 15, 2008 - 14:50 ET by JasonCWell gee f---ing whiz Rog, I guess I was mistaken when I saw posts like this:
Godless liberal hate mongers with delusions of self-importance and
self-righteous justification for their Marxist death-cult of morally
bankrupt vanity... or as we like to call them: Democrats.
and this:
This just proves the old adage... Liberals suck!
and this:
But you have to hand it to her, she really gets to these extreme loony
leftists so they reveal to everyone just how much hatred they have
bottled up inside them. If you connect that up to a power grid, they could power a third
world country with all the bile that ferments inside their vile bodies.
-and somehow came away with the impression that the resident NB knee-jerks are conflating liberal ideology with an inconsequential dust-up between two entertainers whose forte happens to be somewhat politically inclined. Why people think a bitch-slap contest between two TV personalities has one lick to do with realpolitic and ideology is beyond me. So I guess my admonishment was accurate.
What rant?
"He was, and is yet, most likely, the wearisomest, self-righteous
pharisee that ever ransacked a Bible to rake the promises to himself
and fling the curses on his neighbors." -Emily Bronte
Thank you for quoting me.
January 15, 2008 - 14:54 ET by Jack BauerThank you for quoting me. At least you got that right.
That's a first for you.
Bonus if you can tell me from where I got my "vile bodies" phrase.
Waugh? Poor guy, must
January 15, 2008 - 14:58 ET by JasonCWaugh?
Poor guy, must have been tought growing up with a first name like his.
"He was, and is yet, most likely, the wearisomest, self-righteous
pharisee that ever ransacked a Bible to rake the promises to himself
and fling the curses on his neighbors." -Emily Bronte
Not as much as being a boy
January 15, 2008 - 15:00 ET by Jack BauerNot as much as being a boy named Sue.
But we all know Sue got his
January 15, 2008 - 15:33 ET by JasonCBut we all know Sue got his redemption at least.
"He was, and is yet, most likely, the wearisomest, self-righteous
pharisee that ever ransacked a Bible to rake the promises to himself
and fling the curses on his neighbors." -Emily Bronte
Is this too short to be
January 15, 2008 - 15:11 ET by Roger the ShrubberIs this too short to be considered a rant?
"It strikes me as a bit appalling the way that Coulter inserts her own politics and her own Leave it to Beaver-fantasy version of masculinity into a eulogy, but I suppose that's no one's business but her own. I guess the only logical thing to ask Ann would be whether she is "enjoying" the death of a loved one. "
Your words, not mine. Quit making excuses for the a-holes at Huffypo. I am not making excuses for people here at Newsbusters.
Perhaps you should be asking yourself why am I sticking up for those idiots?
Considering I referred to
January 15, 2008 - 15:31 ET by JasonCConsidering I referred to Huff's comments as "offensive" and "not at all funny" and referred to them as well as Coulter as entertainers with a somewhat politically-inclined bent, I guess I have a distorted view of what your idea of "Sticking up" for something would entail.
I wouldn't have qualified what I said as a rant exactly, at least not on par with Dennis Miller; I was just a little surprised that she injected the kind of zingers she puts in her column into a eulogy. As I said from the beginning, it's Ann's business, but if she's making this sort of thing available to the public, well, I think criticism is allowed.
"He was, and is yet, most likely, the wearisomest, self-righteous
pharisee that ever ransacked a Bible to rake the promises to himself
and fling the curses on his neighbors." -Emily Bronte
Like I explained to Bal
January 15, 2008 - 15:41 ET by Roger the ShrubberLike I explained to Bal elsewhere on this thread, using the but erases any platitudes used before that word. You could have left thnigs at "offensive" and "not at all funny" and been the better man, but you could not help yourself with your "well Coulter deserves the abuse" line of thinking that I am seeing here from Alan Colmes, Syrius, Balboa, and you. You four are doing wonders dispelling the "all liberals are heartless a-holes" blanket statements on this thread. Way to go!
That's just ridiculous,
January 15, 2008 - 16:31 ET by balboaThat's just ridiculous, Rog. I've said that I think it was written in poor taste about a billion times.
Yes, you have, following
January 16, 2008 - 11:21 ET by Roger the ShrubberYes, you have, following that sentiment with a "but". Sorry, Bal, you canot help yourself. At least be honest with yourself.
Kelly's rant is very
January 15, 2008 - 11:26 ET by balboaKelly's rant is very mean-spirited and I don't condone it in any way.
But when you're Coulter, and you spew so much attention-getting vitriol, you can't be surprised that it comes back at you every so often.
Right on
January 15, 2008 - 11:53 ET by iveseenitallRight, Bal. Moral equivalence. An eye for an eye, no matter how digusting it is. You "liberals" are simply hypocrites. You can justify any of the scum you dish out. But you get so "offened" when it comes back to you. How refreshing it would be if you were honest for once. But that's beyond you and your ilk.
NEVER,NEVER trust a "liberal"
What a bunch of
January 15, 2008 - 11:56 ET by balboaWhat a bunch of baloney.
Reread my post. I don't condone what Kelly wrote. It's just not surprising.
Good
January 15, 2008 - 12:14 ET by iveseenitallGood. The woman's father just died--just died. What don't those on the left understand about humanity? "Liberals" are soulless hypocrites. In no manner are they "liberal". They'd allow the sucking of a baby's brains out for their political purposes. Clinton, in fact, did just that.
NEVER,NEVER trust a "liberal"
Yes, everyone on the right
January 15, 2008 - 12:15 ET by balboaYes, everyone on the right is a shining example of humanity. We're the terrible people on the left, blah blah blah. Whatever makes you feel better.
Left <--> Right
January 15, 2008 - 12:28 ET by AgnosticI like to blame the media for the habit of taking the extremes and making them the normal. It is a habit many people take into thinking progress, especially in informal debates. Every liberal is living in the basement wondering what happened to the sixties and every conservative carries a bible and a gun. The more heated the argument the more likely the participants are to revert to such nonsense.
In one of Herberts novels he says something to the effect that if you continually try to prove facts until you get to the most base ideas you will find that most of our truths are merely what we believe (paraphrasing of course). Loved many of his books and his ideas on social programming were very interesting.
That is not to say that things are not factual but the who, what, why, when and how (the realm of the news media) are subjective and therefore arguable. IMHO, extremes on either side are bad for different reasons.
Blind
January 15, 2008 - 12:52 ET by iveseenitallNone so blind...
NEVER,NEVER trust a "liberal"
That's a label you apply to
January 15, 2008 - 12:58 ET by balboaThat's a label you apply to anyone who thinks that one side of the political spectrum is soulless and the other is only good. That's not reality.
Other side?
January 15, 2008 - 15:26 ET by iveseenitallWho said that "the other side is only good"? I said what was done by that "liberal" is soulless and I implied that most extreme left-wing "liberals " are soulless. They are . Remember the Wellstone "funeral"? Sorry, I've not seen that kind of a display from even the extreme right. The extreme right has done much wrong throughout history. However, turning a blind eye to evil, or justifying it as "liberals" do for political ends, is wrong. Moral relevance is the way of the modern "liberal"; it is evinced in almost all they say and do.
NEVER,NEVER trust a "liberal"
That's right. A group that
January 15, 2008 - 15:32 ET by ArchConservativeThat's right. A group that by large numbers believes our President should be equated with Hitler or that believes our government had ANYTHING to do with 9/11 or that actually believes the stupidity and inanity of so-called-man-made-global warming or that doesn't actually believe that there IS a global war against Islamofacists is terrible. And no, it doesn't make me feel better to know that the neoprogressives and (D)emocrat party don't dismiss and throw to the side these misfits.
You support the troops by supporting the mission! If you don't support the mission, have the guts to say you don't support the troops.
What does it mean to be conservative...?
January 15, 2008 - 16:38 ET by SyriusTell me, I really want to know. The "liberal" label is thrown around so much on this site. It's a word that now describes anything anti-conservative. Good vs. Evil. I truly want a definition on what takes to be a conservative.
So, ArchConservative, lay it out there for all to see-
The definition of a conservative is...what?
Syrius
Oh, by the way...
The best way to support our troops is to...
-give them a mission they can accomplish.
-give them the armor they need.
-give them some time off.
-give them better pay.
-give them better care now & in the future.
-give them whatever they need to support their families.
-give them hope.
-bring them home.
That's what I want to see instead of some idiot driving a huge SUV with a yellow ribbon sticker that says "Support Our Troops!".
You haven't clue on how to support the troops.
-this was a former posting to PawPaw copied for your pleasure.
First of all, by it's very
January 16, 2008 - 07:43 ET by ArchConservativeFirst of all, by it's very definition, anything that is anti-conservative IS liberal or neoprogressive. All the liberal sites throw around the word neoconservative and it has no meaning except to try and tar and feather us on the right who support President Bush's actions in the Middle East.
Second of all, I AM a troop. So, let's go through your list:
We do have a mission we can accomplish if the left and the (d)ems and the neoprogs get on board and actually support us.
We do have armor, we do have good pay (no taxes in a designated hostile zone), we do have FSGs (Family Support Groups), we do have hope that we will succeed even though we are being cut at the knees by the MSM every day and in every way.
YOU have no clue on what it means to support troops. You think we are rounded up against our will and were forced to join the Armed Services. We want to be there. Every person who has joined after 9/11 knew where they were going when they signed the dotted line.
I agree that more work needs to be done with the VA but I received really good care with them when I came home. If you privatized a lot of their programs (instead of the socialized program it is) their services would be greatly improved.
We will come home when the mission is done and not a minute earlier.
And by the way, what the hell does driving an SUV have to do with being an idiot? Do you hate people who have the means to buy an SUV? Do you believe that 'evil SUVs' are destroying the planet? Probably you do.
You support the troops by supporting the mission! If you don't support the mission, have the guts to say you don't support the troops.
Definition, please? You didn't answer my question...
January 16, 2008 - 12:39 ET by Syrius"Conservatism.""Dynamic conservatism."Progressive, dynamic conservatism.""Progressive moderation.""Moderate progressivism.""Positive and progressive." -Dwight D. Eisenhower, Eisenhower policies
Define conservativism...you can't b/c most of the top conservative intellectuals today cannot pin it down. Currently, the 3 top choices are fiscal, social, & neo-conservative. Each differs in it's relationship to the other. I would see you more as a neo-conservative for your views on the war and the military.
Again, I'll repeat you don't know me, who I am, or what I am. I will tell you I have family members currently serving in theater. He's a one star with his sons serving next to him. I'm proud of their service and of yours. So, allow me to comment and rebut some of your statements
So, let's go through your list:
We do have a mission we can accomplish if the left and the (d)ems and the neoprogs get on board and actually support us.-the mission has been changing throughout the war. Goal posts are reset in order to further our own interests in the region.
We do have armor, we do have good pay (no taxes in a designated hostile
zone), we do have FSGs (Family Support Groups), we do have hope that we
will succeed even though we are being cut at the knees by the MSM every
day and in every way.-Your armor should have been in theater at the beginning of the war. Your pay is not in line with the tens of thousands of contractors in theater. That money has been/is being wasted. You should realize I'm in support of more pay for you not adequate pay. Divorce and Suicide rates have increased since the war has gone along for so long. The MSM can only report on you, your suffering, and your plight caused by the lack of support by the powers that be. I'm an optimist, I want to see positive effects of your visit in Iraq.
YOU have no clue on what it means to support troops. You think we
are rounded up against our will and were forced to join the Armed
Services. We want to be there. -I do have a clue and I speak from the heart in my support of the effort. I never said nor thought you were rounded up against your will and forced to join the Armed Forces. I understand the passion on being their and trying to complete a mission in honor of the fallen.
Every person who has joined after 9/11
knew where they were going when they signed the dotted line.-and raised their hand in defense of the constitution of the United States...they thought they were going to get Bin Laden. They didn't know of extended, repeated tours in Iraq, the stresses put upon their families, the horrors they were about to face, the rotten apples of Abu Gharib, etc...
I agree that more work needs to be done with the VA but I received
really good care with them when I came home. If you privatized a lot of
their programs (instead of the socialized program it is) their services
would be greatly improved.-You should demand the best care, period. Privatized means a corporation making money & does not relate to better care from them. The military men & women involved in your 'socialized' care are there for you since they signed up on the same dotted line you signed. Are you saying they aren't doing a good job?
We will come home when the mission is done and not a minute earlier.- The mission to find Bin Laden, WMDs, securing Iraq...? Which one is up on the screen now?
And by the way, what the hell does driving an SUV have to do with
being an idiot? Do you hate people who have the means to buy an SUV? Do
you believe that 'evil SUVs' are destroying the planet? Probably you
do.-You're trying to relate prosperity to owning an SUV?!? 'evil SUVs' suck up a lot of gas that could be going to Humvees in theater. It's not a renewable resource. Each time gas goes up the cost of the war goes up. That's simple economics. You'd like to suck me into a planet destroyer argument. Not going to happen...Just the simple cost of being at war gets my goat. Save more money on gas, more money to the troops.
Syrius
"Morale is the greatest single factor in successful wars."-Dwight D. Eisenhower
You do sound like a
January 16, 2008 - 14:22 ET by ArchConservativeYou do sound like a liberal, calling me a 'neo-conservative'. Neo-Conservative would mean that I'm newly conservative on certain issues when I have in fact been a conservative since I was a kid watching Reagan as President.
Conservativism has not changed since then: smaller government, more money for defense, less government involvement in personal lives (i.e. smoking laws), lower taxes, less of the public on welfare, rigid enforcement of immigration policies, health care not being designated a right and not being put in the hands of the government, the knowledge that there is no so-called-man-made-global-warming, and being against abortions paid for by tax dollars. Those are the highlights.
Now to rebut the rebuts:
-They didn't just join to get Bin Laden. They joined to destroy terrorist operation centers such as Afghanistan and Iraq. That is happening. And as far as all the other examples you cited, families of the military have always known and supported their service members, you know this. We have always dealt with deployments, horrors of war, and the misdeeds of fellow members of the Armed Forces.
-There is no lack of support from the office of the President. The only lack of support comes from the Dick Durbins and Harry Reids who kick our legs out from underneath us everyday. People like Hillary who claim the surge to be a failure and slam a good man like General Petreaus before he even has a chance to speak.
-Did family members in WWII know that some loved ones would be gone for years at a time (not just 12 month tours) with almost 500,000 casualities? No. The survival rate for this war is the best for any foreign conflict in recent history. Retention is staying level. Re-enlistment and enlistment is staying fairly level. The troops don't have a morale problem. If I didn't have certain ailments, I'd still be serving overseas.
-The mission was never a simplified one-item statement (Get Bin Laden). It was a multi-tier platform that hasn't changed. The President has always said that this is a new war and will last longer than his stay in the White House. The only thing that has changed is the tactics on the ground which is par-for-the-course in all wars.
-As far as the VA goes. It's socialized medicine and care. You can only do so much and so good with that type of system. Who cares who profits as long as the care is the best available. Haliburton is a big corporation and they took great care of us. Just because it's a giant conglomerate does not mean that they dont' care about the people they are treating.
-The final point about SUVs eating up gas supplies so that we have to pay more for it is incorrect. Look at the price compared to the rest of the world. Look at the price with inflation. If you are truly concerned with the price of oil then write your congressional representatives that you want us to drill offshore and in ANWAR and that new refineries need to be built. We do that, and you will see the price drop.
You support the troops by supporting the mission! If you don't support the mission, have the guts to say you don't support the troops.
You do sound like a Neo-conservative.
January 16, 2008 - 16:28 ET by SyriusArchCon,
Neo-Conservative would mean that I'm newly
conservative on certain issues when I have in fact been a conservative
since I was a kid watching Reagan as President.-You're incorrect. A 'neo-con' is defined as a foreign policy conservative, not freshly minted (and implanted with the newest brain chip-sarc). Plus, for you to think for a moment you could comprehend what Reagan conservatism was about as a kid is a stretch. I would fathom to say you liked Reagan as a President (I voted for him, twice.) and learned through your family what conservatism was about would be more believable.
Conservativism has not changed since then: smaller government, more
money for defense, less government involvement in personal lives (i.e.
smoking laws), lower taxes, less of the public on welfare, rigid
enforcement of immigration policies, health care not being designated a
right and not being put in the hands of the government, the knowledge
that there is no so-called-man-made-global-warming, and being against
abortions paid for by tax dollars. Those are the highlights.-Actually, it's better defined as 'movement conservatism' and it's more about rolling back New Deal policies from the FDR era.
Now to rebut the rebuts:
-They didn't just join to get Bin Laden. They joined to destroy
terrorist operation centers such as Afghanistan and Iraq(Iraq was not on the radar screen in 2001, only in the minds of the Admin.'s Neo-cons). That is
happening. And as far as all the other examples you cited, families of
the military have always known and supported their service members, you
know this(What choice do they have? Except maybe divorce.). We have always dealt with deployments(repeated, extended deployments?), horrors of war(BlackWater contractors?), and
the misdeeds of fellow members of the Armed Forces(Unsupervised soldiers gone bad, the cover ups,...?)
-There is no lack of support from the office of the President(You mean the Vice President). The
only lack of support comes from the Dick Durbins and Harry Reids who
kick our legs out from underneath us everyday(It would be political suicide, at this moment in time, to announce they have stopped supporting the troops. You're reaching on that point.). People like Hillary who
claim the surge to be a failure and slam a good man like General
Petreaus before he even has a chance to speak.(The Surge was to delay the inevitable. We should have had more troops in the beginning not towards the end. How about the fine service of all the past Generals before Petreaus? They tried to work with what the Admin. had given them. It's time to face the music and start looking at the war realistically. Eventually, we have to leave.)
-Did family members in WWII know that some loved ones would be gone
for years at a time (not just 12 month tours) with almost 500,000 causalities? No.(You answered your own question. The answer is actually, Yes. They knew there loved ones were going to fight and possibly not return. You cannot compare this war to WWII. As a Neo-con you would love to have the same comparison, it's apples & oranges.) The survival rate for this war is the best for any
foreign conflict in recent history(Grenada had a pretty good survival rate. Bosnia, too.). Retention is staying level(They're not allowing them to go home).
Re-enlistment and enlistment is staying fairly level(Interesting what a little cash will do). The troops don't
have a morale problem(oh, really?!?). If I didn't have certain ailments, I'd still be
serving overseas(I'm sure you would be, Thanks for your service.)
-The mission was never a simplified one-item statement (Get Bin
Laden). It was a multi-tier platform that hasn't changed (Proof?). The President
has always said that this is a new war and will last longer than his
stay in the White House(Once again, PROOF?). The only thing that has changed is the tactics
on the ground which is par-for-the-course in all wars.(Don't forget the politics...)
-As far as the VA goes. It's socialized medicine and care. You can
only do so much and so good with that type of system(Wow, you really think the Men & Women of the VA are socialists?. Who cares who
profits as long as the care is the best available(You should care, you're the one receiving the care. Icare because it's my tax dollars at work.). Haliburton is a big
corporation and they took great care of us.(Can you say, no bid contract...?) Just because it's a giant
conglomerate does not mean that they don't care about the people they
are treating.("One flew over the Cuckoo's Nest" comes to mine. Stop taking the pills & you'll start seeing the reality.)
-The final point about SUVs eating up gas supplies so that we have
to pay more for it is incorrect.(Halliburton has unlimited fuel supply & they give huge discounts on the fuel they supply the Military because they support the troops, right? There's been little oversight on the profiteering of this war. Wake up!) Look at the price compared to the rest
of the world. Look at the price with inflation.(Oil is a commodity traded on the global market. As the cost and demand rise so does the price.) If you are truly
concerned with the price of oil then write your congressional
representatives that you want us to drill offshore and in ANWAR and
that new refineries need to be built. We do that, and you will see the
price drop.(We should find alternatives to foreign oil so we can be less dependent to the countries who harbor and foment terrorism. The drilling of ANWAR & new refineries would not help in the short term. The future is to wean ourselves of fossil fuels. The SUV & other inefficient machines only promotes the fossil fuel dependency to continue.)
Syrius
I just got around to your
January 26, 2008 - 12:57 ET by ArchConservativeI just got around to your response, but I will only say this. You know nothing of conservativism or conservatives. If you did, you wouldn't make such inane statements such as " 'neo-con' is defined as a foreign policy conservative, not
freshly minted (and implanted with the newest brain chip-sarc). Plus,
for you to think for a moment you could comprehend what Reagan
conservatism was about as a kid is a stretch. I would fathom to say you
liked Reagan as a President (I voted for him, twice.) and learned
through your family what conservatism was about would be more
believable. "
And I highly doubt that you voted for Reagan, but nice try.
You're a liberal through and through who has a superior attitude regarding those who support this mission, this war, and this President. And for the record, yes, I was very aware of Mr. Reagan and his policies when I was a youth. Just because you don't think anyone else can comprehend ideals and ideas is another of your problems. You think that I called the people who work at the VA socialist when in fact what I said was that the system they work in is socialism.
Your comebacks to my remarks are snide (the "oh really" statements) and don't refute what I said. You don't think that my loved ones thought that I wouldn't be in danger and that there was a distinct possibility that I would not come back? And for you to respond to my comment about the horrors of war by saying "Blackwater" is one of the most foolish things I've seen on this blog. No you idiot, that is NOT the horrors of war. You're a fool and a neoprogressive who has not a clue what the real world is like outside of your ivory tower.
Go back and listen to President Bush lay his groundwork for the invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan and you will hear his multi-tiered reasons. The arguments you use are lame and do not hold up. There is more than enough oil on this planet for hundreds of years so this whole ideal you have about "weaning" ourselves off of fossils fuels is silly. Nothing else works as effectively or as cheaply as oil and gas. If we did drill off the coasts and in ANWAR and added refineries you would see the difference but it's people like you that thwart those efforts. You want 'bio-fuels' like ethanol that is causing the price of corn and everything associated with it to skyrocket with no discernable difference in the price at the pump.
We could keep going back and forth, but, I have a life outside this blog so this will be my last entry on this posting. Syrius, it seems to me that you don't support our actions in Iraq, hate oil, think Halliburton is a Bush/Cheney front, think that Cheney runs the country and that Bush is his puppet, that the troops have no morale, and that people at young ages are too stupid to think and learn from their true leaders like Reagan. Yea, just like a neoprogressive.
You support the troops by supporting the mission! If you don't support the mission, have the guts to say you don't support the troops.
Using the word "but" means
January 15, 2008 - 14:58 ET by Roger the ShrubberUsing the word "but" means "forget everything I said up til then".
sigh...no it doesn't. I mean
January 15, 2008 - 15:06 ET by balboasigh...no it doesn't. I mean what I said.
Yes it does. Laura
January 15, 2008 - 18:07 ET by tracheostomyYes it does. Laura Ingraham practically made her career off "but-monkey statements."
The statement before the "but" is often seen as disingenuous padding to slip your negative statement in.
-PJ
"Trake: Your lofty convictions are another blemish on the rump of congregational sectarianism." -Tumbler 5/15/07
Get a Rope
January 15, 2008 - 14:25 ET by JEB StewartI have a nice tree to hang him from.
indignity
January 15, 2008 - 15:54 ET by WesenThis is in such poor taste. Lampooning an honest man because the writer hated the fellows daughter. Way to go Chris. You should lose your job.
Kelly is classless...along
January 15, 2008 - 18:02 ET by bigtimerKelly is classless...along with HuffnPuff...says a lot about Maher too as far as I am concerned.
Sorry for her loss.