Ann Coulter Attacks 9/11 Widows

No, sir!!! As I read what Edwards said, I read WHEN( at the time) KERRY becomes( is elected) President, People like Christopher Reeve are going to get up out of that wheelchair and walk again.

great, we are on the same page! and furthermore, i concede that the sentence reads as if those on wheelchairs would have been suddenly cured if Kerry had become president. i personally don't believe that's the meaning Edwards intended, but he's fair game for misinterpretation of his messianic turn of phrase.

Spoken by a man who doesn't understand the concept of an arithmatic mean!

Mr Gatos, Asherman knows me quite a bit more than you do as I know him as well. I don't believe you have confered with Mr Asherman in arriving at your conclusion as to my knowlege. On the other hand, the cosistent issuing of fart bubbles indicated by your "posts" indicates, to me, that knowledge is not your strong point.

Plain Ol Me takes me to task because I allegedly do not know the meaning of an arithmatic(sic) mean. No, Plain Ol Me, I do not know the meaning of an arithmatic( sic) mean, but I do know the meaning of an arithmatic mean. The "teacher" Plain Ol Me clearly flunks spelling.

I pity the poor students who see her spelling arithmatic( sic) mean on the board.

The more she writes, the more she proves that her arguments come from a person who has little or no real learning!!!

Bernie, you really shouldn't play the spelling game here. You have your own repeated failings.

But then if you could actually argue the point you would have refuted Plain line by line. Your failure to do so points to your failings and Plain's argument must stand by your own standard there Bernie.

Oh, stop with the Strawmen and get to the argument--Mr. Parados. Can you rebut Podhoretz or not? If you can't-- get out of the argument!!

Mr Dyslexia- I don't have to confer with Mr. Asherman as to your knowledge. You don't exhibit much! You make some pithy remarks but rarely give any evidence or links. You really ought to try it sometimes!!!

I don't have to rebut him.. see your statement here..

http://www.able2know.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=2108479#2108479

You have failed to give a link for Podhoretz. Without a link there is no reason to rebut anything as you have stated on more than one occassion.

Don't you just love your rules Bernie?

By the way, the line by line rebuttal is YOUR strawman Bernie, not mine. You stated that failure to rebut line by line proves someone loses. Can't you live up to your own standards Bernie?

As Mr Asherman once told me. "I can't give you sources for my knowledge because that would put people at risk" As to your statement that I "don't exhibit much (knowledge)" I have to ask as to when you have ever exhibited any degree of knowledge about anything other than your obnoxious opinion and then changing your user name to avoid reprocussions?

Here is your link- Mr. Parados


http://www.commentarymagazine.com/Production/file

what a lovely 404 error page Bernie..



I see nothing to rebut on the link.


I only see that you posted something you can't provide a link for. See your comments on "failure to provide links" for my response.

Improper use of the term strawman.

I think Bernie meant "scarecrow". He's afraid of scarecrows, like the one in Wizard of Oz that is smart but has no diploma.

Meanwhile Bernie has all those diplomas......

In New Column, Ann Coulter Again Slams Murtha and 9/11 Widow
In New Column, Ann Coulter Again Slams Murtha and 9/11 Widows
By E&P Staff
Published: June 22, 2006 12:15 PM ET

Ann Coulter used her latest Universal Press Syndicate column to repeat some of the controversial language she has used in her new book, on TV appearances, and elsewhere.

"I dedicate this column to John Murtha, the reason soldiers invented fragging," Coulter began the piece, posted late yesterday on her Web site. She had said much the same thing in an online interview last week. A spokeswoman for Universal told E&P at that time that it does not censor columnists and, in any case, the "fragging" comment had not appeared in one of her columns -- until now.

"In response to the arguments of my opponents, I say: Waaaaaaaaaah! Boo hoo hoo!" Coulter continued. "If you're upset about what I said about the Witches of East Brunswick, try turning the page. Surely, I must have offended more than those four harpies. ... "

Murtha (D-Pa.) is the hawkish Congressman --and former Marine officer -- who now opposes the Iraq War, while "fragging" is the term for soldiers killing their own officers.
Appearing on the Hannity & Colmes show on Fox News this week, she declared, that if Murtha "did get fragged, he'd finally deserve one of those Purple Hearts."

Coulter has been calling some 9/11 widows "harpies" and "the Witches of East Brunswick."

Usually, the columns on Coulter's Web site have a Universal Press Syndicate copyright at the end. The June 21 piece doesn't. E&P asked Universal whether this was an oversight on Coulter's part or whether the syndicate didn't approve of the version posted on Coulter's site. A Universal spokesperson told E&P this morning that the column Universal sent out and the column on Coulter's site have the same wording.

Coulter also discussed abortion in her latest column. She wrote: "Liberals don't care about women. They care about destroying human life. To them, 2,200 military deaths in the entire course of a war in Iraq is unconscionable, but 1.3 million aborted babies in America every year is something to celebrate."

Actually, more than 2,500 American soldiers have died in the war, and many more Iraqis.

In addition, Coulter defended "The Bell Curve," the 1994 book which alleged that blacks are less smart than whites because of genetic rather than socioeconomic differences.

"Liberals were afraid of a book that told the truth about IQ ... because they are godless secularists who do not believe humans are in God's image...," Coulter wrote yesterday. "(L)iberals are terrified of making any comment that seems to acknowledge that there are any differences among groups of people -- especially racial groups. It's difficult to have a simple conversation -- much less engage in free-ranging, open scientific inquiry -- when liberals are constantly rushing in with their rule book about what can and cannot be said."

After mentioning New York Times/New York Times News Service columnist Maureen Dowd, Coulter called the Times' Op-Ed section "the cartoon pages." She didn't mention if that description applies to the days conservative Times columnists David Brooks and John Tierney appear.

Coulter's column conclusion: "Finally, a word to those of you out there who have yet to be offended by something I have written or said: Please be patient. I am working as fast as I can."

Maybe she's working so fast because she thinks they won't let her write while in jail. (Voter fraud)

parados -- When BernardR wrote under the name massagatto on abuzz, he continually bragged about having attended Harvard and Magginkat always fired back about his having been a janitor there. This interest is literature is rather new. It was business, business, business before.

BBB -- Wow. Coulter is more of a disgrace than I thought. I heard a radio host dress her down for her continued rudeness and immaturity one evening.

if i read one more time that she said you can't say such & such, while saying the very thing she claims you can't say...i don't know what i'll do, precisely, so i hope it doesn't come to that.

I have to admit that she is amusing in a sense. I believe that she showed her true self in her voter and tax fraud. I hope it costs her big-time. She just can't go on like she is without some type of action stopping her. Perhaps it will be a libel or slander suit. Her statements about Murtha are truly repugnant, and seem to be calling on someone to take him out. Wow!

http://mediamatters.org/items/200606220013?src=other

BTW, is she a man or a woman, or a transgender? Did anyone notice her/his adam's apple?

You are correct, Mr.Parados, but are you too frightened to try another link?

search the Web and put in "Podhoretz Who is Lying in Iraq"

Under the paragraph you will bring up, you will find the link I gave you.

Then, unless you are afraid of being completely disqualified in this argument, read the essay.

I am sure that with your abilities, you will be able to show that the argument presented in Podhoretz' essay is wrong. You must, however, be able to show that the quotes he presents are somehow, in error.