Coulter: I'll campaign for Hillary if McCain is the nominee

[DeclinetoState]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HuTqgqhxVMc

Don't know what she'll do if it's McCain v. Obama.

One response:

this is one of the funniest videos Ive seen in a long time. "Hillary lies less than John McCain" lol

[Lazarus]

Well isn't that interesting....:brow:

Ya know I'm not holding out any false hope - we are in a desperate struggle here to the identity of the Republican party... But.......... This early win by John McCain and all the Leftists weho are coming out to support his campaign may just be the catalyst we need to wake up Conservatives to make an all out effort to stop him...

They may have crowed too early and too loudly... There are still 44 states that must speak before the nominee is chosen... We may yet pull this out...

[Jack_Savage]

I hope conservatives wake up and vote for Romney on Tuesday.



http://tex.connectingzone.com/Romney.jpg

[Lazarus]

Tuesday may be my last chance to vote in this election... I intend to do my part... I hope all the Leftist support for McCain will wake America up to this evil man...

[d'urville]

Yes, I saw the H&C interview yesterday - in between the show, there was one of those politicals ads that showed Hillary's picture with a voiceover on the voting record that was actually's Juan's.

http://www.anncoulter.com/


I'd rather deal with President Hillary than with President McCain. With Hillary, we'll get the same ruinous liberal policies with none of the responsibility.

Also, McCain lies a lot, which is really more a specialty of the Democrats.


Nothing much to say to counter points like that, although I have noticed it freaks liberals out when we talk like this - it upsets their win-win scenario.

[Lubbock]

Well.

If McCain is the nominee, I'll be joining Ann on the campaign trail, working for Hillary.

[Lazarus]

Well.

If McCain is the nominee, I'll be joining Ann on the campaign trail, working for Hillary.Well now stay open-minded, Lub... You might have to work for Obama... :biggrin:

[MrSanity]

Well.

If McCain is the nominee, I'll be joining Ann on the campaign trail, working for Hillary.I'll join the ad campaign, making the case that she's a Reagan conservative.

Of course, much of that ad would have to rely on soundbites of her when she was a Goldwater girl.

I sense a McPain/Hucksterbee ticket from the GOP.

HONESTLY, IS THERE ANY DIFFERENCE BETWEEN HUCKSTERBEE AND MCPAIN? ANYONE?

:flame::punish::confused:

[Jack_Savage]

I'll join the ad campaign, making the case that she's a Reagan conservative.

Of course, much of that ad would have to rely on soundbites of her when she was a Goldwater girl.

I sense a McPain/Hucksterbee ticket from the GOP.

HONESTLY, IS THERE ANY DIFFERENCE BETWEEN HUCKSTERBEE AND MCPAIN? ANYONE?

:flame::punish::confused:

Not on the self-absorbed, pious, and pompous aspects of their campaign.

http://tex.connectingzone.com/Romney.jpg

[Naturalized-Texan]

Yes, I saw the H&C interview yesterday - in between the show, there was one of those politicals ads that showed Hillary's picture with a voiceover on the voting record that was actually's Juan's.

http://www.anncoulter.com/
Did you notice the sidebar there from Mark Levin (http://minx.cc/?post=253616)?

Of course, it’s one thing to overlook one or two issues where a candidate seeking the Republican nomination as a conservative might depart from conservative orthodoxy. But in McCain’s case, adherence is the exception to the rule — McCain-Feingold (restrictions on political speech), McCain-Kennedy (amnesty for illegal aliens), McCain-Kennedy-Edwards (trial lawyers’ bill of rights), McCain-Lieberman (global warming legislation), Gang of 14 (obstructing change to the filibuster rule for judicial nominations), the Bush tax cuts, and so forth. This is a record any liberal Democrat would proudly run on. Are we to overlook this record when selecting a Republican nominee to carry our message in the general election?

[MrSanity]

Not on the self-absorbed, pious, and pompous aspects of their campaign.Frankly, not in policy either.

Both would favor higher taxes, according to their RECORDS.
Both have catered to illegal aliens.
Both have supported bureaucratic solutions to the environment and health care system.
Both are big-government TR progressives.

[noon23]

I agree with Annie...Hillary is more conservative than McClinton.

I can't imagine any circumstance in which I would vote for John McCain. It's just not-gonna-happen

[EveningStar]

If Ann is serious, she's loony. And so is everyone here who goes along with her on this. Campaign for Hillary??? Good grief.

[PrezLeefun]

I watched the video..... HILARIOUS!!!!!!!!!!!

But this is the problem with Ann. She can kick ass, but often is an ass.

What she said was unreal.... I think it was for comedic value but if there is an ounce of truth in that sentiment then she has lost it.

(although on youtube i totally defened her)

[dajoga]

I hope conservatives wake up and vote for Romney on Tuesday.



http://tex.connectingzone.com/Romney.jpg

Or Huckabee....

If Ann would rather have shrillary than McC, she adds fire to the "dumb blonde" section!

[EveningStar]

I watched the video..... HILARIOUS!!!!!!!!!!!

But this is the problem with Ann. She can kick ass, but often is an ass.

What she said was unreal.... I think it was for comedic value but if there is an ounce of truth in that sentiment then she has lost it.

(although on youtube i totally defened her)
Ann throws bombs to get attention. She's like Jaye P. Morgan.

[PrezLeefun]

She doesnt have to throw bombs...all she needs to do is open her mouth. That pretty much does the trick.

I still like her but upon re-watching (and finding that my comment totally dissapeared) I think she is serious.

[S-T]

Well.

If McCain is the nominee, I'll be joining Ann on the campaign trail, working for Hillary.

I'll vote Libertarian. McCain as the nominee would be the best thing to happen to the Libertarian Party since it was formed.

Like Rush said of Reagan/Ford '76, we had to suffer through 4 years of Jimmy Carter but we won in the end.

[S-T]

Also remember, Hillary Clinton's husband, Disgraced ex-President Clinton, gave us the first Republican Congress in 40 years.

2010 will be a lot of fun if Hillary wins.

[Jack_Savage]

Or Huckabee....

If Ann would rather have shrillary than McC, she adds fire to the "dumb blonde" section!

Huckabee doesn't really have a chance but Romney does. Romney could handle the office and bring some new ideas.

I don't get that about Huckabee. I think he's only staying in the race to benefit McCain.

[EveningStar]

She doesnt have to throw bombs...all she needs to do is open her mouth. That pretty much does the trick.

I still like her but upon re-watching (and finding that my comment totally dissapeared) I think she is serious.
She seems serious to me too.

[Lubbock]

The Huckster [that's what he is] is bucking for VP.

[federalisthoosier]

McCain is Washingtonia. McCain cannot win.

Maybe he is the double secret shoeless joe jackson candidate, in the race to throw the election to Hillary.

[Nutrider99]

If the Republican Party nominates John McCain, I will change my voter registration and will no longer be a member of that party.

[Beowulf]

2010 will be a lot of fun if Hillary wins.
No it won't! America will have been totally destroyed by then. It won't take Hitlery very long at all!

[Jack_Savage]

No it won't! America will have been totally destroyed by then. It won't take Hitlery very long at all!

There is still time for courage to vote on Tuesday. If that doesn't happen then Americans deserve Hillary. Maybe that is the only way left for people to realize that this isn't some TV movie, and we can't just change the channel when we don't like seeing what we have created.

As Laz said, maybe its time to start rebuilding at the local level and then up.

Confronting it right where we live. For those of us who are close to Berkeley, there is alot to do. If times get tough enough, all of us will do something about it instead of blaming who we elect. Looking the other way, not confronting it where it starts, has made all of us accomplices in this mess.

[Bluemoon_Rising]

McCain is Washingtonia. McCain cannot win.

Maybe he is the double secret shoeless joe jackson candidate, in the race to throw the election to Hillary.

I don't know about that. I think McCain would beat Hillary. Obama would be much harder to beat. And if the two were to team up as P and VP, same thing. However, Hillary and some other lefty would lose.

But we'll see.

[maxparrish]

Well.

If McCain is the nominee, I'll be joining Ann on the campaign trail, working for Hillary.
Most likely I will feston my car(s) with Hillary or Obama bumper stickers. Ann was spot on about McCain, and his people freely gloat over having beaten "conservatives", the very label that he adopts (lies) about publically.

I will never forgive anyone who vote for McCain in the primaries - especially. He will destroy the conservatives within the party and is far more dangerious than any democrat.

John McCain will be tough for Hillary to campaign against because they are so close on the issues: how can she attack him for global warming, open borders, tax cuts, or any other issue ...he is AT LEAST as liberal as she is.

And, by the way, I also don't think he is very good on the war on terror - on every occasion he has tried to water down the effectivness of the CIA and GITMO processes. He just postures and preens, but he's a phoney.

Ann is great, she echos our thoughts...perhaps the only one that truely lets it hang out.

For Ann....:claps:

[Jack_Savage]

John McCain will be tough for Hillary to campaign against because they are so close on the issues: how can she attack him for global warming, open borders, tax cuts, or any other issue ...he is AT LEAST as liberal as she is.


For Ann....:claps:


I used to think that too. But not now. Those who are part of Soros's network don't really care about the issues, and enough of the far-left follows what he say's.

If hillary publically called for torture, Nancy Pelosi would not say a word. Same thing with Senator Reid. Murtha would go along with her and nobody would complain. Look at Bosnia, only the Republicans complained. Its all a political mess.

[TeenageRepublican]

I think the question is who will do the most damage to this country? I honsetly don't know. :(

[S-T]

2010 will be a lot of fun if Hillary wins.No it won't! America will have been totally destroyed by then. It won't take Hitlery very long at all!
Come on, man, have some faith in your country. We survived eight years of her husband, disgraced ex-President Clinton, who was an exponentially more competent politician than she is. We can certainly survive two years of Hillary Clinton while waiting for the voters to rebel against her Marxist policies and give Congress back to the Republicans.

Hillary Clinton's husband, disgraced ex-President Clinton, gave us the first Republican Congress in 40 years. Disgraced ex-President Clinton is more responsible for the Contract with America than any Republican, because he was so extreme that the voters could not wait to hand the Congress to Republicans to stop him.

The real key is not snatching defeat from the jaws of victory like we did in 1996.

[MrSanity]

I think the real question, initially, was whether or not Ann meant what she said about campaigning for Hillary if McCain gets nominated.

But think about it. Ann will exaggerate a little bit in order to make a point. Many of us should be thinking, "Ann, I see your point, and I agree that McCain is not a real conservative, but let's not overdo it."

They're too close ideologically, and my prediction is that McPain would win. He's too popular with independents, whereas too many people hate Hillary. And surely, enough "conservatives" will allow their hatred of Hillary to force-feed McPain as their vote.

I don't plan on voting for McCain. I will consider third-party.

WE STILL HAVE TO SHOW UP ON ELECTION DAY. LET'S KEEP REAL CONSERVATIVES IN CONGRESS, EVEN IF WE VOTE AGAINST McPAIN (OR NOT VOTE FOR A PRESIDENT AT ALL).

[MrSanity]

Hillary Clinton's husband, disgraced ex-President Clinton, gave us the first Republican Congress in 40 years. Disgraced ex-President Clinton is more responsible for the Contract with America than any Republican, because he was so extreme that the voters could not wait to hand the Congress to Republicans to stop him.Ironically enough, almost every liberal I've discussed BJ with thought he was too moderate and too conservative.

He took a few conservative positions, like free trade and capital punishment, and used them, along with "we've had enough of trickle-down economics, we've had enough of tax and spend..." moderate but meaningless rhetoric in order to manipulate the public into submission.

AT THE END OF THE DAY, HE APPOINTED A NEO-MARXIST GENERAL COUNSEL FROM THE ACLU TO THE SUPREME COURT IN ORDER TO KEEP INFANTICIDAL BEHAVIOR LEGAL FOR AS LONG AS POSSIBLE.

Hillary could never pose as a centrist so swiftly. Marxism flies out of her mouth without hesitation. But yet, she is believable and real to a lot of people when she sobs through an interview or a speech. So evidently, she hasn't learned nothing from her husband.

[RogerFGay]

You guys think too short term. Support McCain for the nomination. Let the nation get an accurate picture of where the two parties actually are. Let the conservatives AND moderates complain about it a lot. Push a more conservative agenda in mid-term elections. And here's the really hard part - find a serious conservative with a chance of winning to run in 2012. I submit, this idea is for a faster recovery than if Romney is the nominee. If he's the nominee, he'll pretend convincingly that he's a conservative, passifying the masses, and the country will continue its unbridled run to the left against insufficient opposition. And when he loses the election, it will be seen as a clear choice by the American people to go left rather than right.

[maxparrish]

You guys think too short term. Support McCain for the nomination. Let the nation get an accurate picture of where the two parties actually are. Let the conservatives AND moderates complain about it a lot. Push a more conservative agenda in mid-term elections. And here's the really hard part - find a serious conservative with a chance of winning to run in 2012. I submit, this idea is for a faster recovery than if Romney is the nominee. If he's the nominee, he'll pretend convincingly that he's a conservative, passifying the masses, and the country will continue its unbridled run to the left against insufficient opposition. And when he loses the election, it will be seen as a clear choice by the American people to go left rather than right.
I don't think you understand the dynamics of the two party system and how it plays into McCain's hands. If Hillary is President then Republicans will have someone to unite against and, like 1994, have a shot at regaining the majority - especially as she is likely to promote policies that will be controversial (e.g. universial medical care).

If McCain is President, he will do the same thing. However, he will represent the Democrats and the leadership of the Republican party (and the blue blood establishment types). People may be angry but they will have NO party that represents their views...thus it will not affect the elections.

California is a perfect example...conservative Republicans are stuck with Arnold. We got rid of Grey Davis, but it is impossible to recall our OWN...so 1/2 of us within the minority party (conservatives) are helpless.

McCain must be stopped at all costs. Ann is right.

[maxparrish]

Did you notice the sidebar there from Mark Levin (http://minx.cc/?post=253616)?

Good God, a bill of rights for trial lawyers? Damn, when are Republicans going to get the message?

[Bluemoon_Rising]

If Ann is serious, she's loony. And so is everyone here who goes along with her on this. Campaign for Hillary??? Good grief.

No she's not; we need more Ann Coulters. Lots and lots more Ann Coulters and a McCain type could never be the nominee of the Republican Party. That's the point. On the other hand, I won't be joining the conservative protest movement in support of the Democratic nominee if McCain heads the Republican ticket, and he will. Huckabee -- the spoiler -- is McCain lite; he's not getting out of the race until he's made sure McCain's the nominee. Romney's done.

Prez, Coulter is not an ass. I would submit that you simply don’t appreciate just how despicable the left is and just how badly its cultural constructs have undermined, distorted sensible political discourse. Coulter’s way of dealing with the left is precisely what is needed. The left’s hatred for her and its failure to marginalize her despite its Herculean efforts should tell you something. The left needs to be exposed, confronted on every point, scorned, laughed at, ridiculed, bitch-slapped, kicked, spit on by more and more influential voices again and again and again. And the more of those voices that are black, female or Hispanic, all the better.

Indeed, Republicans who don’t get Coulter are the most ill equipped to explain the McCain phenomenon.

On the stump, we need articulate, inspirational conservative leaders who are impervious to the left's slings and arrows, leaders who can affably disarm them with humor and charm. Leave the honey to the politicians. In the trenches, fighting the cultural war, exposing the lie, we need junkyard dogs like Coulter sneering at them, calling them what they are: indeed, fags and liars and traitors and pimps. The sheeple will get used to it and go with the winner, particularly when it seems commonplace and natural to confront and ridicule leftists in just that manner. In popular culture the patently insane conventions and viciousness of the left strike the unthinking as commonplace and natural. Prez, that’s what’s asinine and beyond the pale! Hello!

That needs to be reversed and can only be reversed Coulter's way. That’s what leftists fear most and should.

Ezra Klein, your run-of-the-mill leftist liar, admits as much in his backhanded praise of the new, emerging conservative punditry:

The ranks of conservative pundits are swelling with young advocates of odd upbringing and unlikely prominence. But their youthful looks and throwback sensibilities allow them to advocate and oppose where older, stodgier Republicans dare not tread.

Precisely. Unlike that pussy, that bootlick, Tucker Carlson and other Republicans like him, the vast majority of the X-generation practitioners of conservative punditry like Coulter and Malkin, for example, and the emerging Y-generation conservatives they inspire get it. And thank God for that.

[Bluemoon_Rising]

There's also this guy too: http://www.clashradio.com/index.html

[PrezLeefun]

I like her politics and am more likely to defend her than to diss her, but her manner is all vinegar and no honey. I need my folks sweeter than she is.

[maxparrish]

No she's not; we need more Ann Coulters. Lots and lots more Ann Coulters and a McCain type could never be the nominee of the Republican Party. That's the point. ..

Prez, Coulter is not an ass. ...Coulter’s way of ailing with the left is precisely what is needed.The left’s hatred for her and its failure to marginalize her despite its Herculean efforts should tell you something. The left needs to be exposed, confronted on every point, scorned, laughed at, ridiculed, bitch-slapped, kicked, spit on by more and more influential voices again and again and again. And the more of those voices that are black, female or Hispanic, all the better.

Indeed, Republicans who don’t get Coulter are the most ill equipped to explain the McCain phenomenon. ...

That needs to be reversed and can only be reversed Coulter's way. That’s what leftists fear most and should.

Ezra Klein, your run-of-the-mill leftist liar, admits as much in his backhanded praise of the new, emerging conservative punditry:

The ranks of conservative pundits are swelling with young advocates of odd upbringing and unlikely prominence. But their youthful looks and throwback sensibilities allow them to advocate and oppose where older, stodgier Republicans dare not tread.
Precisely. Unlike that pussy, that bootlick, Tucker Carlson and other Republicans like him, the vast majority of the X-generation practitioners of conservative punditry like Coulter and Malkin, for example, and the emerging Y-generation conservatives they inspire get it. And thank God for that.

:claps: Exactly Blue Moon. The old guard is exhausted and compromised. As the Republican establishment drifts to McCain it is clear that the Party is morally and ideologically bankrupt...something that has driven evangelical conservatives to Huckabee in a desperate bid to find someone who they can identify with. The WSJournal will soon declare for McCain (I am sure), the Weekly Standard will be happy to settle for no borders and 100 years in Iraq, and the National Review will represent the 'reasoned' voices of conservatism.

But the NR crowd is older, and less combative. They are not the you WFB's of old. Coulter represents that new generation...as does Malkin and others. They are not afraid to use their ideological fists, and to pound home the obvious - the Party is a wasteland of lost principles and special interests.

I could NEVER vote for McCain...not EVER. As I have said, he is a cancer, a malignancy within the party...he is our poison pill. He can't wait to dismantle conservatism - and that is EXACTLY what he intends to do if given the power.

Let us hope that McCain is somehow not nominated - or if he is that he loses. It is not over, voices against McCain are growing louder (it took talk radio WAY too long to start the process) and polls show Romeny and McCain are tied among all Republicans nationally. If Romney can hang on through super Tuesday, I see a chance to stop him.

But we will have to see. Romeny has told everyone he wil NOT drop out, no matter what. He will fight to the end. I hope the hell he can stop the McCain train...we shall see.

[The_Elucidator]

You guys make a nagging, bitchy, vindictive Mother-in-Law seem like a breath of fresh air.

[Bluemoon_Rising]

:claps: Exactly Blue Moon. The old guard is exhausted and compromised. As the Republican establishment drifts to McCain it is clear that the Party is morally and ideologically bankrupt...something that has driven evangelical conservatives to Huckabee in a desperate bid to find someone who they can identify with. The WSJournal will soon declare for McCain (I am sure), the Weekly Standard will be happy to settle for no borders and 100 years in Iraq, and the National Review will represent the 'reasoned' voices of conservatism.

But the NR crowd is older, and less combative. They are not the you WFB's of old. Coulter represents that new generation...as does Malkin and others. They are not afraid to use their ideological fists, and to pound home the obvious - the Party is a wasteland of lost principles and special interests.

I could NEVER vote for McCain...not EVER. As I have said, he is a cancer, a malignancy within the party...he is our poison pill. He can't wait to dismantle conservatism - and that is EXACTLY what he intends to do if given the power.

Let us hope that McCain is somehow not nominated - or if he is that he loses. It is not over, voices against McCain are growing louder (it took talk radio WAY too long to start the process) and polls show Romeny and McCain are tied among all Republicans nationally. If Romney can hang on through super Tuesday, I see a chance to stop him.

But we will have to see. Romeny has told everyone he wil NOT drop out, no matter what. He will fight to the end. I hope the hell he can stop the McCain train...we shall see.


Maybe. I certainly hope so, though let's face it, it's more likely the Party holds the White House with McCain than with Romney.

I have to tell ya, Max, I'm torn. I've never been so uncertain, so . . . I don't know . . . unsure of what to do. I cannot see how we can abide the likes of Obama or Clinton. We know Clinton's trailer trash, a tramp and a whore, politically speaking you understand, and even if Obama's sincere, you know, sincerely wrong and naive and all that, I can't see how taking a chance on McCain (yes, he'll set the conservative movement back some, harm the Party, force the base to regroup, reorganize and fight another day) is worse than handing the country over to a traitorous strain of rodents who would reverse our offensive posture in the war against terrorism at a time when we are winning. It's friggin' Détente all over again! All the lives, the years, the billions that would be wasted on an unnecessarily protracted war!

For those who will not vote for McCain, tell me how the nation is not better off with him for now? If Romney can’t win, we know that at least McCain will fight an offensive war on terrorism. He’ll help buy us the time we need. It’s imperative that the nation sees a Republican at the helm when our efforts in Iraq are vindicated and the left is once again proven to be on the wrong side of history. It’s every bit as imperative that we defeat this resurgent and virulently traitorous strain of liberalism at home as well as terrorism abroad.

The best way to do that as I see it is to get Iraq moving again on her own -- reasonably secure and stable -- as fast as possible, shift our military focus on the Afghani Theater and bear down on the Syrian and Iranian regimes with every ounce of ruthlessness short of war. Crash their economies, foment rebellion, menace them. We just need to buy some time while we move this nation toward energy independence as fast as possible.

Admittedly, McCain would be of considerably less use on that front, but for crying out loud the Democrats are infinitely worse. Their solution is not to get this nation on a nuclear-powered footing or concentrate on developing cleaner coal technology, for example. Our coal reserves are vast. We've got hundreds of years worth. They have no intention at all, and never have, of making this nation energy self-sufficient. Hell, we don’t deserve it. We’re evil and selfish and must be punished. No, their solution is to simply shrink the economy, strangle it, shut it down, reduce its energy demands! Problem solved.

Well, hallelujah!

Of course what these morons would really do is squander the very research and infrastructural capital the nation needs to quickly develop the technological innovations that robust economies produce. Not only would we be less wealthy and free, but dirtier and even less efficient than necessary and for longer than necessary too.

[Bluemoon_Rising]

I don't think you understand the dynamics of the two party system and how it plays into McCain's hands. If Hillary is President then Republicans will have someone to unite against and, like 1994, have a shot at regaining the majority - especially as she is likely to promote policies that will be controversial (e.g. universial medical care).

If McCain is President, he will do the same thing. However, he will represent the Democrats and the leadership of the Republican party (and the blue blood establishment types). People may be angry but they will have NO party that represents their views...thus it will not affect the elections.

California is a perfect example...conservative Republicans are stuck with Arnold. We got rid of Grey Davis, but it is impossible to recall our OWN...so 1/2 of us within the minority party (conservatives) are helpless.

McCain must be stopped at all costs. Ann is right.

Yes, max, I know. I understand what Ann's after, what your after. You summarize what's in the back of her mind and what she didn't say perfectly. I get it; I know what she's thinking. There are some on this thread who don't. One thinks she's nuts, another thinks she's an ass. I understand the stratagem and have been mulling it over for weeks. You guys could be right. It might be better that way. As I've said in the above, I'm torn. If not for the war on terrorism, I'd be considerably less concerned about a Democratic presidency, and the hell with McCain; let him lose. But . . . we are fighting a war against Islamic terrorism and that is my foremost concern right now.

[Bluemoon_Rising]

She doesnt have to throw bombs...all she needs to do is open her mouth. That pretty much does the trick.

I still like her but upon re-watching (and finding that my comment totally dissapeared) I think she is serious.

And you miss her point, which many of the rest of us immediately recognize without being told as much: http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=24882

I like her politics and am more likely to defend her than to diss her, but her manner is all vinegar and no honey. I need my folks sweeter than she is.

You mean like sugar and spice and everything nice?

We've got democratic senators and congresspersons peremptorily declaring defeat while the warriors who believe they are handily winning the war are in harms way. Throwing them to wolves, one of these legislators accused a handful of young Marines of atrocities with great fanfare and with little or no evidence and then neglected to apologize to them or their families when the case fell apart. Another compared the efforts of American interrogators to those of Nazis. And yet another brazenly suggested that our troops, in the midst of an urban war zone mind you, were routinely terrifying women and children in the dead of night as if it were standard policy to do so. In other words, the American fighting man is a monster because the enemy hides behind women and children.

*crickets chirping*

We've got mainstream TV programs at home that countenance dumb as dirt lunatics who accuse their government of mass murder while others are confronting the actual perpetrators abroad.

We've got a member of the Kennedy family -- hence, another fine target for assassination -- openly denouncing his country, a fine country that has poured out buckets of blood and treasure on behalf of oppressed people the world over, as he praises the propaganda-motivated charity of a dictator who has aligned himself with yet another dictator who has threatened to wipe Israel and the United States off the map!

And that’s just for starters. . . .

These are the people on whom Coulter has vented her spleen and with a great deal of success as a matter of fact. Many of the detractors who prophesized her demise from the other side of the swamp she steadfastly braves have fallen away. Laying her reputation and career on the line day after day, this frail woman confronts traitors, lunatics, cowards, liars and thieves. While Democrats continue to mainstream treason and Republican politicians mostly cower in the shadows -- prattling on about a peaceful religion and the merely misguided pronouncements of a loyal opposition or some such -- she takes everything the left has to throw at her, chews it up and spits it back out at them with devastating accuracy.

But you want honey? We should just throw the Queensbury rules at 'em and call it a day, eh?

Sorry, since 9/11 some of us are all out of honey when it comes to treason, particularly the sort that emboldens an enemy that mercilessly slaughters women and children like cattle.

I like you, Prez, and we agree on most things, but you simply cannot be taken seriously on this matter.

[Maggie_T]

If Ann is serious, she's loony. And so is everyone here who goes along with her on this. Campaign for Hillary??? Good grief.


:rolleyes:

ES, if I had a dollar for every time you took things seriously when you shouldn't have, I could retire to the life of leisure and luxury I'd so like to get used to.

Creeps' sake, man. Lighten up already.

Then again, I understand why you'd favor someone like McCain. He is the quintessential "Why can't we just all get along?" gasbag. The epitome of the High Priest of Civil Discourse. Always ready to cave in ... oh, beg your pardon, I meant "ready to talk" to the opposition, instead of bashing them, like mean old Ann does.

Saints preserve us. This country has a death wish, and no mistake.

[Maggie_T]

You guys make a nagging, bitchy, vindictive Mother-in-Law seem like a breath of fresh air.


That's because we prefer our air thick and stale. Yeah, I know. We're funny that way. :neener: :D

[maxparrish]

Maybe. I certainly hope so, though let's face it, it's more likely the Party holds the White House with McCain than with Romney.

I have to tell ya, Max, I'm torn. I've never been so uncertain, so . . . I don't know . . . unsure of what to do. I cannot see how we can abide the likes of Obama or Clinton. ...I can't see how taking a chance on McCain (yes, he'll set the conservative movement back some, harm the Party, force the base to regroup, reorganize and fight another day) is worse than handing the country over to a traitorous strain of rodents who would reverse our offensive posture in the war against terrorism at a time when we are winning. It's friggin' Détente all over again! All the lives, the years, the billions that would be wasted on an unnecessarily protracted war!

For those who will not vote for McCain, tell me how the nation is not better off with him for now?

... No, their solution is to simply shrink the economy, strangle it, shut it down, reduce its energy demands! Problem solved.

Well, hallelujah!

Of course what these morons would really do is squander the very research and infrastructural capital the nation needs to quickly develop the technological innovations that robust economies produce. Not only would we be less wealthy and free, but dirtier and even less efficient than necessary and for longer than necessary too.

Blue Moon,

I understand your conundrum and your reasoning. How often, over 35 years have I not given in to the same impulse to settle for less...too often. But I also recall a time when conservatives did not give in, when Reagan lost in 68, 76, and finally after the epi-zenith of liberalism ground the country to powder it turned to Reagan in 80. In retrospect it was a god-send that Ford lost in 76 (the fellow that said we needed to carry buttons that said "WIN...whip inflation now" as a solution to our economic ills).

Yes, the nation had four years of an undiluted liberal, it elected a moron who accelerated the chain of defeat after Vietnam, proposed green energy, etc... The liberal programs started by Johnson AND Nixon (EPA etc) and fully matured under Carter had the country by the throat...and like the communist collapse of 1989 the nation in 1980 turned radical, it elected a "far right extremist" who did not promote 'liberalism lite' but a free market.

Today we face a similar choice, except that McCain is far more dangerous and liberal than the milque toast Ford. Today we can choose a President that is VERY EVIL but less effective (Hillary) or just plain EVIL but far more effective (McCain). Makes your stomach churn?

My belief is that in the long run, we would be better off if Hillary (a "Carter") is elected and takes the blame for the bumbling and ruin. Consider the issues:

Who would be more effective in:

- stopping fences and providing legalization to illegals (driver's licenses, amnesty, etc.)? Answer: John McCain.

- creating caps on carbon for most American industries, small businesses, and individuals AND in banning products? Answer: John McCain

- promoting and signing punitive legislation aimed against unpopular sectors of American industries, like the one's John McCain calls crooks (e.g. drug companies, oil, etc.)?
Answer: John McCain

- signing federal restrictions on gun rights? Answer: John McCain

- Walling off federal lands to energy exploration (e.g ANWR) by using 'executive orders' ...yep, John McCain (although Hillary is nearly equal in this regard).

- Promoting more 'rights' of trial lawyers (as he did with Edwards) to sue on behalf of classes of 'wronged' persons, yep, John McCain.

- Creating a public loathing of Republicans and their policies, and denying conservatives a unified party platform to oppose liberals on...yep, John McCain.

John McCain is a statist. There is not a prejudice, peeve, or gripe that he holds that he does not think is a matter of federal concern...including baseball.

Of course, he has "promised" to learn about economics and keep tax cuts - something that will be impossible to achieve in a democratic congress...no doubt McCain will tout he fought the good fight but could not get them to stop the automatic sunset on tax breaks.

And then National Defense. Aside from the thought of Hillary Clinton, the other visceral fear of conservatives is National Defense. To be sure, that is a compelling concern. But we ought to be a little realistic. THIS is NOT the cold war, this is not Vietnam or Korea. We don't face an enemy with a vast invasion army deployed across the borders of western Europe, or a country with scores of thousands of warheads ready for launching against the western world. We don't face proxy wars in Angola, Cuba, South America, Asia, etc. funded by super powers.

Our concern is over terrorism by 10s of thousands of irregular fanatics scattered about the world. It is true that they can bring down an airliner, or blow up a train. But regardless of how effective they are, the difference between Presidents is not so dangerous or great as we faced in the cold war with communism (with one exception). Every President will respond to an attack, and will defend Israel. And when it comes to Hillary, she has a lot more balls than Bill.

There are only two areas in which I have to credit McCain as better: judges who will not be hyper liberals (I hope he does not consult with Kennedy and Ried on them) and McCain's seeming willingness to attack Iran if necessary.

However, these two areas are problematical hopes; in any event four years of Hillary are far better than four years of McCain. It will hurt, but we will be the better party for it. Sooner or later we need to get off the drug of RINO's that seem to be winning.

This is a war folks, against liberals from without, and from within. Be careful what you sow, for it is what you reap.

[Maggie_T]

Exactly, Max. That was a good bit of reality check. But you'll only get your head chewed up and spat out for your trouble. :rolleyes:

[maxparrish]

Bluemoon:Laying her reputation and career on the line day after day, this frail woman confronts traitors, lunatics, cowards, liars and thieves. While Democrats continue to mainstream treason and Republican politicians mostly cower in the shadows -- prattling on about a peaceful religion and the merely misguided pronouncements of a loyal opposition or some such -- she takes everything the left has to throw at her, chews it up and spits it back out at them with devastating accuracy.

Oh now there, Ms. Coulter can have her charming moments. She just gave great speech at CPAC (they did not invite her so she came at the behest of the Young Americans Foundation) she was asked by a guy in the audience:

"Is it true that you have had dated and had romantic relationships with liberals?:

She paused a moment, the flirtatiously looked through her eyelashes and cooed "They don't stay liberal for very long...".

It was priceless, I'll try and find the link.

[maxparrish]

Exactly, Max. That was a good bit of reality check. But you'll only get your head chewed up and spat out for your trouble. :rolleyes:

Mags...

I have always thought there are those that get it (high social IQs) and those that don't (low social IQs). The first kind of person understand groups and people, the other kind (no matter how smart) just don't get it.

The SM's (social morons) send money to con men, date the wrong kind of man or woman, plead and negotiate with their children over going to bed, blame their childhood on their current emotional problems, treat strangers better than their friends, and angrily vote for McCain to 'show the world' they are in control of their lives (or sheepishly do so when ordered by the party). They are the proverbial town slut who pulls down her panties as long as some cad says "Do this and I love you and respect you"...that's all the party faithful need to hear befoe they doff their cloths and run naked to McCain.

Sadly, they are the great unwashed herd, the chamber of commerce and fraternal organization men (and women) who need to belong...to be 'in the family' - and when the herd hears the clanging bell and Republican herd dogs round them up, they ramble off to the slaughter house.

All my life I have seen "group man" moronically assist in his own demise.

[Bluemoon_Rising]

However, these two areas are problematical hopes; in any event four years of Hillary are far better than four years of McCain. It will hurt, but we will be the better party for it. Sooner or later we need to get off the drug of RINO's that seem to be winning.

Maybe you're right.

[Maggie_T]

Mags...

I have always thought there are those that get it (high social IQs) and those that don't (low social IQs). The first kind of person understand groups and people, the other kind (no matter how smart) just don't get it.

The SM's (social morons) send money to con men, date the wrong kind of man or woman, plead and negotiate with their children over going to bed, blame their childhood on their current emotional problems, treat strangers better than their friends, and angrily vote for McCain to 'show the world' they are in control of their lives (or sheepishly do so when ordered by the party). They are the proverbial town slut who pulls down her panties as long as some cad says "Do this and I love you and respect you"...that's all the party faithful need to hear befoe they doff their cloths and run naked to McCain.

Sadly, they are the great unwashed herd, the chamber of commerce and fraternal organization men (and women) who need to belong...to be 'in the family' - and when the herd hears the clanging bell and Republican herd dogs round them up, they ramble off to the slaughter house.

All my life I have seen "group man" moronically assist in his own demise.



OUCH! Uuuhhh, that must have left a mark somewhere. You are going to be so busted, my friend. :lol:

[Maggie_T]

Bluemoon:

Oh now there, Ms. Coulter can have her charming moments. She just gave great speech at CPAC (they did not invite her so she came at the behest of the Young Americans Foundation) she was asked by a guy in the audience:

"Is it true that you have had dated and had romantic relationships with liberals?:

She paused a moment, the flirtatiously looked through her eyelashes and cooed "They don't stay liberal for very long...".

It was priceless, I'll try and find the link.

Brilliant! Vintage Ann! :claps::claps::claps: