Ann Coulter

BigRob · 03-12-2007, 04:13 PM

I'm going to post this in the speakeasy even though there's a half dozen references to it on the floor by Burgandy.

Anyway, here's my opinion of the Ann Coulter/ John Edwards fiasco.

So what?

I even heard one news story say "John Edwards,who is married to a woman and has children..." As if that automatically disqualifies him from being

Ummmm...he'd a politician and they have a things called coverups.

And now people are wondering if her career is over because of this

Scrum · 03-12-2007, 04:20 PM

So wait, you think Edwards is gay?

Have anything other than Ann's comment to back it up?

Her career should have been over long before this. She is a sad, hateful person who says things for attention and people who read her books would be better off dancing on the highway.

Grouch · 03-12-2007, 04:30 PM

Ann Coulter sucks, she's a garbage journalist whose career survives only because she's a loud women talking shit about people. Even as a republican, (though very moderate) I find her and her behavior disgusting. I automatically lose respect, for anyone who respects her "journalism".

BigRob · 03-12-2007, 04:45 PM

I never said I respected her as a journalist.

I never said I think he's gay.

I said there's a big deal being made of it and I don't care.

I said that his defenders are saying he's not because he's married. I said that's a flimsy reason not. Why not just blow it off with a simple "I'm not gay" statement and let it drop?

I just think it's much ado about nothing.

JaJae · 03-12-2007, 05:14 PM

Originally Posted by BigRob

I just think it's much ado about nothing.

It's free publicity and being used as a marketing tool for his campaign. This is the best thing to happen to a candidate so far. I don't think Edwards wants it to end.

BigRob · 03-12-2007, 05:19 PM

Originally Posted by JaJae

It's free publicity and being used as a marketing tool for his campaign. This is the best thing to happen to a candidate so far. I don't think Edwards wants it to end.

I agee on that. After I posted I found this.

ENTERTAINMENT - Comcast.net

Coincidence?

I think not!

Plus, like you said,it takes some of the attention from Hillbillary and Obama.

Scrum · 03-12-2007, 06:04 PM

Originally Posted by BigRob

I said that his defenders are saying he's not because he's married. I said that's a flimsy reason not. Why not just blow it off with a simple "I'm not gay" statement and let it drop?

So any time some political hack uses a fancy word like "faggot" to describe a politician, they should have a press conference to say they aren't gay?

That's stupid.

Stylerod · 03-12-2007, 06:29 PM

Originally Posted by BigRob

I said that his defenders are saying he's not because he's married. I said that's a flimsy reason not. Why not just blow it off with a simple "I'm not gay" statement and let it drop?

He can't. Then the gay lobby would be like "Why are you saying you aren't gay? is there something wrong with gays?"

He would have to make a statement like "Now, there's nothing being wrong with gays. As a matter of fact, some of my best friends are gay. However, me personally, I'm not gay. Again, I see nothing wrong with that lifestyle. I just happen not to be. Ok?"

There would be no simple way he could do it

DosEquis · 03-12-2007, 06:39 PM

She said it had nothing to do with gays

David Octavius · 03-12-2007, 08:02 PM

Neo-cons - which I take to mean those that support a vigorous foreign policy like what Bush has - don't have a leg to stand on, never did. They got to power the same way they are desperately trying to keep it, by impugning the honor of those that question their fallacious logic.

September 11th, unfortunately was the best thing to happen for them, it gave them the opportunity to exploit our support and faith in the people in charge to make sense of such a tragedy to co-op power. They could not achieve this by the strength of their truth, it took the defining tragedy of our generation, which does not say much to their ideas. They were doom to fail because of it, bad policy does not automatically become good just because your in power. This to me is the reason why the constitution needs to be strong, to prevent our momentary lapses in judgment to limit the power hungry from controlling the system.

Stylerod · 03-12-2007, 09:51 PM

Originally Posted by David Octavius

Neo-cons - which I take to mean those that support a vigorous foreign policy like what Bush has - don't have a leg to stand on, never did. They got to power the same way they are desperately trying to keep it, by impugning the honor of those that question their fallacious logic.

September 11th, unfortunately was the best thing to happen for them, it gave them the opportunity to exploit our support and faith in the people in charge to make sense of such a tragedy to co-op power. They could not achieve this by the strength of their truth, it took the defining tragedy of our generation, which does not say much to their ideas. They were doom to fail because of it, bad policy does not automatically become good just because your in power. This to me is the reason why the constitution needs to be strong, to prevent our momentary lapses in judgment to limit the power hungry from controlling the system.

Well that is just a flat out lie. Remember this?

The Republican Revolution refers to the success of Republican Party in the 1994 U.S. midterm elections, which resulted in a net gain of 54 seats in the House of Representatives, and a pickup of eight seats in the Senate. The day after the election, Democratic Senator Richard Shelby of Alabama changed parties, becoming a Republican.

The gains in seats in the mid-term election resulted in the Republicans gaining control of both the House and the Senate in January 1995. Republicans had not held the majority in the House for forty years, since the 83rd Congress (elected in 1952) under Republican Speaker Joseph William Martin, Jr..

jimeigh · 03-12-2007, 11:03 PM

well if anyone's a homosexual, "Ann" coulter would sure as hell know. why is this? because she was once a homosexual man, before the operation.

Pro Street · 03-12-2007, 11:18 PM

Originally Posted by Stylerod

Well that is just a flat out lie. Remember this?

Newt Republicans were not neocons.

David Octavius · 03-13-2007, 01:00 AM

Originally Posted by Pro Street

Newt Republicans were not neocons.

That is right..its not a lie, neocons and the "Republican Revolution" are separate things. The neocons are not legitimate, very few of them are actually in power (mostly in the administration) and have forced the hand of Congress by attacking character and honor. Their ideology has been a complete failure, I hope this is the end of them and the true Republicans take back their party

DosEquis · 03-13-2007, 01:28 AM

You want to see the true Neo-con republicans just find the all the PNAC members.

Nonphixion · 03-13-2007, 01:39 AM

Originally Posted by Scrum

So wait, you think Edwards is gay?

Have anything other than Ann's comment to back it up?

Her career should have been over long before this. She is a sad, hateful person who says things for attention and people who read her books would be better off dancing on the highway.

Andersen Cooper the top CNN news reporter is a gay man, I wonder what he has to say about John Edwards?

Pro Street · 03-13-2007, 11:16 AM

Originally Posted by David Octavius

That is right..its not a lie, neocons and the "Republican Revolution" are separate things. The neocons are not legitimate, very few of them are actually in power (mostly in the administration) and have forced the hand of Congress by attacking character and honor. Their ideology has been a complete failure, I hope this is the end of them and the true Republicans take back their party

remove the neocons and many of us might come back.

IminWonderland · 03-14-2007, 12:39 AM

Originally Posted by Nonphixion

Andersen Cooper the top CNN news reporter is a gay man, I wonder what he has to say about John Edwards?

Anderson Cooper?!

Really?

All the hot one's....it's always the hot one's....

avsp · 03-14-2007, 08:20 AM

h'mm, ..., i'd been assuming that she was using the term in the non-sexually perjorituve sense of 'silly & ineffectual', ..., but then i didnt bother to actually view her comments coz shes an unentertaining git & troll

serves me right then dunnit?

Linzyhop · 03-15-2007, 11:33 AM

Originally Posted by jimeigh

well if anyone's a homosexual, "Ann" coulter would sure as hell know. why is this? because she was once a homosexual man, before the operation.

oh shit. that was damn funny. as far as Ann Coulter goes, to me she seems like a slightly more infamous version of that radio ass-clown, Laura Ingraham. It's one thing to make outlandish statements hoping to call attention to yourself and whatever cause you have, but when you start to do so by defaming others, you risk your own reputation and run the risk of not getting anyone to respect you in return.