BS: Ann Coulter Endorses Hillary

Subject: RE: BS: Ann Coulter Endorses Hillary
From: Little Hawk
Date: 04 Feb 08 - 04:58 PM

LOL!!!! By God...

Now look here, people. Let's be realistic, shall we? I am not attracted to Ann Coulter. Not even slightly. Matter of fact, I find her utterly repulsive. If she and I were the last people left on the face of the Earth...I would move to the other side of the planet in order to avoid her.

Thanks for the endorsement, Carol. ;-) Much appreciated, I can assure you.

Subject: RE: BS: Ann Coulter Endorses Hillary
From: Amos
Date: 04 Feb 08 - 03:32 PM

Little Hawk:

We have been friends for many years, even if occasionally obstreperous friends.

But hear me on this. If you accept an endorsement from that bleached and bony banderlog bitch, you can check me off your little black book permanently.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Ann Coulter Endorses Hillary
From: CarolC
Date: 04 Feb 08 - 03:25 PM

I'll endorse you, LH! Will that suffice? ;-)

Subject: RE: BS: Ann Coulter Endorses Hillary
From: Ebbie
Date: 04 Feb 08 - 03:23 PM

Oh, my dear Leetle 'awk. Don't tell me that Ann Coulter is in line to join Winona and Hillary? :)

Subject: RE: BS: Ann Coulter Endorses Hillary
From: Little Hawk
Date: 04 Feb 08 - 03:15 PM

The thing that really troubles me, and that keeps me awake at night, is this:

I have not yet received an endorsement from Ann Coulter!

Subject: RE: BS: Ann Coulter Endorses Hillary
From: Ebbie
Date: 04 Feb 08 - 01:26 PM

Is this the kind of thing that lets rational people charge Mayor Michael Bloomberg with being a Nazi?

The Daily Intel Rethinks a Nazi Comparison
By Sewell Chan

"In an item published late yesterday afternoon, New York magazine's Daily Intelligencer blog compared the Bloomberg administration's calorie-count requirement to the Nazi policy requiring Jews to wear a yellow Star of David. Overnight, someone thought better of the reference, revising the item and removing a link to a well-known historical photograph of two Jewish boys wearing yellow stars.

"Asked about the changes, Serena Torrey, a spokeswoman for the magazine, said in a statement: "Bloggers work in a hurry, and sometimes they make mistakes. The comparison was inappropriate and silly, and so we removed it."

"John P. Gallagher, a City Hall spokesman, declined to comment.
The headline, "First They Came for Wendy's," still evokes the famous quotation from Martin Niemöller, who spent seven years in Nazi concentration camps.
The original item, alluding to Mr. Bloomberg's plans for Rosh Hashana, the Jewish New Year, linked out to a photo of the boys from this passage:

"izzoner is going back to Boston for the holiday, we're told by his people, and perhaps while he's up there, enjoying the lean cut of brisket and fat-free kugel prepared especially for him by loving Mama Charlotte, he can reflect a little bit on what it means when your government tries to make you wear a sign saying what you are. We're just saying."



Pttuuuiii

Subject: RE: BS: Ann Coulter Endorses Hillary
From: Peter K (Fionn)
Date: 04 Feb 08 - 01:06 PM

Isn't Bloomberg Jewish? Lots of rich Jews, especially in the US, supported the Nazi rise to power Riginslinger. War was where the money was.

Slag, what dreadful, unuttereble word lurked behind your "(!)"? Hell? Surely not Fuck?? Go on, spit it out. Be a Devil!

Subject: RE: BS: Ann Coulter Endorses Hillary
From: Little Hawk
Date: 04 Feb 08 - 12:22 PM

Yeah, McGrath, I think they were primarily rebelling against foreign rule. Secondarily, I think there were some people amongst the American revolutionaries who had strong opinions against the idea of a hereditary monarchy and wanted to replace it with a different form of government....but whether that was true of the general rank and file or just of a few political theorists at the centre of the revolutionary struggle, I'm not sure.

Subject: RE: BS: Ann Coulter Endorses Hillary
From: bankley
Date: 04 Feb 08 - 08:58 AM

I know that but I think she has us confused with Australia, which Bush thinks is Austria...

Subject: RE: BS: Ann Coulter Endorses Hillary
From: Beer
Date: 04 Feb 08 - 07:44 AM

How very true.

Subject: RE: BS: Ann Coulter Endorses Hillary
From: mg
Date: 04 Feb 08 - 01:02 AM

There were lots of Canadians in Vietnam..not sent by Canada though. mg

Subject: RE: BS: Ann Coulter Endorses Hillary
From: bankley
Date: 03 Feb 08 - 07:33 PM

Does this mean that Ann is also a Celine Dion fan ?

After all, I heard it said that.... when Celine sings for Hillary, a kitten dies somewhere.

Subject: RE: BS: Ann Coulter Endorses Hillary
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 03 Feb 08 - 07:27 PM

The American revolutionaries took on the challenge of such a fundamental change when they proposed rebelling against the monarchy and replacing it with a Republic

Surely the American Revolutionaries were rebelling against foreign rule - I doubt if they would have felt any different if it had been a Republic in London, so long as that republic wished to exercise control over what happened in the American Colonies.

The question of what kind of constitutional system should be set up in place of foreign rule was a secondary matter - and the option of having a King was seriously considered.

Revolutions tend take on a momentum and direction of their own, and they rarely end up in the place the original revolutionaries thought they were headed. English, American, French, Russian, Chinese, Cuban... That's true of all those.

Subject: RE: BS: Ann Coulter Endorses Hillary
From: CarolC
Date: 03 Feb 08 - 07:12 PM

I suspect that the reason she's doing it is to help Romney by making McCain look really bad.

Subject: RE: BS: Ann Coulter Endorses Hillary
From: Beer
Date: 03 Feb 08 - 07:01 PM

She's a bigot and a racist making millions. I doubt that he support is going to help Hillary

Subject: RE: BS: Ann Coulter Endorses Hillary
From: bankley
Date: 03 Feb 08 - 01:12 PM

Coulter still thinks that Canada had troops in Viet Nam...

Did she/he have a sex change earlier on? She's some kind of strange all around.. but Rupert Murdoch likes her and Ms. Clinton too.. so it's no great leap...

Subject: RE: BS: Ann Coulter Endorses Hillary
From: CarolC
Date: 03 Feb 08 - 12:05 AM

Well, yes, I know...I was being rhetorical. ;-) As I think you know.

I do know. But I've been looking for an opportunity to use line since I came up with it last night. Your comment about heredity monarchy was the perfect opportunity.   ;-)

Subject: RE: BS: Ann Coulter Endorses Hillary
From: GUEST,Guest
Date: 02 Feb 08 - 10:05 PM

It really only takes one or two renegades to shake things up though. I mentioned Teddy Roosevelt bolting the Republican convention with his delegates as an example of the sort of thing that would rock everybody's world.

What would do it this year?

Dunno. If you have McCain on the Republican side, he could actually do quite a bit to rock the Republican party.

Ann Coulter and Rush Limbaugh are extremely distraught about McCain being the nom. They can't bully him into their way of playing the game, so it will definitely get interesting.

I'm wondering if McCain won't choose a woman running mate from the Republican Main Street Partnership, like Susan Collins.

Or what if he chose a Democrat to run with him?

Then what would happen to the race?

I see McCain as much more likely to do something like that to shake up the race and get people paying attention to him. Much more likely he will shake up the race than the Dems will, in spite of the "historic" candidacy crap.

Subject: RE: BS: Ann Coulter Endorses Hillary
From: Little Hawk
Date: 02 Feb 08 - 09:58 PM

Well, yes, I know...I was being rhetorical. ;-) As I think you know.

You're right, McGrath, that it's complicated. It requires a fundamental change in people's concepts of political action, and that's not easy. The American revolutionaries took on the challenge of such a fundamental change when they proposed rebelling against the monarchy and replacing it with a Republic...they had to fight a war of several years duration. The French took on such a challenge when they had their revolution...and that was a terribly bloody affair. The Russians took on such a challenge in 1917, and the Cubans in the late 50's. In all those cases, it required war and revolution to sweep out the old and bring in the new.

It's true that monied interests can bribe individual candidates just as they can party candidates...but they would lack the advantage of having an established bureaucracy and party structure already in place through which to do their bribing. It wouldn't be quite as easy to control ALL the candidates...as some would resist the bribery.

The other thing that would have to be done to reform the system is this...I had forgotten to mention it:

All candidates would have to have their campaigns funded EQUALLY from a common public fund only....NO private or corporate donations to anyone's campaign allowed....NO use of private money allowed. All candidates would receive EXACTLY the same amount of $ funding to conduct their respective campaigns....they would all get the same amount of air time to express their views...and the campaign would be limited to a far shorter time period than at present (say 6 weeks, like in Canada).

By controlling the funding and providing equal funding and coverage in the media...BINGO! You have eliminated the sources of corruption. The candidates who presented the best qualities and the best ideas and platforms would win under such a system.

All of the above would, of course, be anathema to those running the present system, so I doubt that it could be achieved except after a revolution.

Subject: RE: BS: Ann Coulter Endorses Hillary
From: CarolC
Date: 02 Feb 08 - 09:14 PM

I thought the USA was formed to resist the concept of a hereditary monarchy...(?)

It's the New Feudalism, LH. They've mixed it with a dash of Fascism, and they're serving it up like it's something new.

Subject: RE: BS: Ann Coulter Endorses Hillary
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 02 Feb 08 - 08:58 PM

It's a bit more complicated than Little Hawk makes out.

Stopping people setting up and joining political parties is quite a major operation. But even if you could achieve that, it woudln't mean that the interest groups that use political parties couldn't achieve the same kind of control via ostensibly indvidual and independent candidates.   

Above all there is still money and money can buy people.

Dealing with that takes a lot more than just abolishing parties.

Subject: RE: BS: Ann Coulter Endorses Hillary
From: GUEST,Guest
Date: 02 Feb 08 - 07:45 PM

Yup. We have Richard the II ruling it now.

Subject: RE: BS: Ann Coulter Endorses Hillary
From: Donuel
Date: 02 Feb 08 - 07:44 PM

When the right wing has spent 16 years defaming Hillary, they would hate to see it all go to waste.

Subject: RE: BS: Ann Coulter Endorses Hillary
From: Peace
Date: 02 Feb 08 - 07:43 PM

Is King Richard a certain Daly of Chicago infamy ('68 Convention)?

Subject: RE: BS: Ann Coulter Endorses Hillary
From: Don Firth
Date: 02 Feb 08 - 07:38 PM

Yeah, I'm sure there are a lot of Iraqi civilians who feel that way too. . . .

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Ann Coulter Endorses Hillary
From: GUEST,Guest
Date: 02 Feb 08 - 07:34 PM

I do dream, but I've never dreamt about politicians making the world, the country, my state, or my municipality a better place. Ever.

As to presidential elections, I'm thinking more and more like my father all the time. He used to say whomever was president of the US made precious little difference in his personal life. He was a Republican who voted for Kennedy (the only Dem he ever voted for in prez politics), and King Richard regularly. He said he voted for King Richard because he did a good job keeping the city running. He said who the mayor was mattered a lot, the prez, not so much.

Subject: RE: BS: Ann Coulter Endorses Hillary
From: Don Firth
Date: 02 Feb 08 - 07:32 PM

GG, I see that you're perfectly willing to be rude and insulting, but when I seriously ask if you have any suggestions as to how to solve the problem, you've got nuthin'.

So all you want to do is bitch and complain and insult people?

If you have any suggestions, let's hear them.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Ann Coulter Endorses Hillary
From: Peace
Date: 02 Feb 08 - 07:24 PM

Ya know, GG, I'm half with you. But not completely, because I think I dream lots. I think you are likely right, but damn, I hope not.

And I think you dream too, because of your envisioning.

Subject: RE: BS: Ann Coulter Endorses Hillary
From: GUEST,Guest
Date: 02 Feb 08 - 07:14 PM

I keep trying to envision what an Obama presidency will look like next year, and all I can envision is wheel spinning for years to come.

Subject: RE: BS: Ann Coulter Endorses Hillary
From: Peace
Date: 02 Feb 08 - 07:03 PM

I think folks may be missing something substantially important: Ya don't cause a revolution unless you are prepared to win it. Revolution for the helluvit is anarchy, and there are lotsa groups with more fire power than anyone here has access to.

If I were an American, I would consider voting for one of the big two and seeing what could be accomplished with that administration. Situations that are strategic only require tactics at a local level, and since logistics don't seem to be our long suit, and since so much of whatever comes down in the presidential election will be debt/economy driven, not putting in the best candidate (with a chance to make it) seems retrograde to me.

Subject: RE: BS: Ann Coulter Endorses Hillary
From: Little Hawk
Date: 02 Feb 08 - 06:56 PM

Ha! I like that. Well said, GG.

Slag, I have a solution to the partisan dilemma. Do away with political parties altogether. Vote for individuals instead...on the basis of their resume, their ideas, their presentation and their platform.

Stop artificially dividing the Congress and the political arena into 2 competing party power blocs. Let it become a genuinely democratic parliament of free-minded nonpartisan individuals who work together and discuss ideas together, debate those ideas, and pass the legislation which a 2/3 majority of them are willing to support.

Let your president represent NO party in future, but instead...his nation.

Do away in one stroke with the huge corrupt party power structures that have built themselves upon the symbolic scaffolding of the Democratic and Republican parties.

That's how you end partisanship.

It might require a revolution. Corrupt power systems are very seldom inclined to dismantle themselves of their own free will.

Subject: RE: BS: Ann Coulter Endorses Hillary
From: GUEST,Guest
Date: 02 Feb 08 - 06:32 PM

Don, honest to god, I don't care what you think, or who you vote for. I don't care if you listen to me, or not.

I don't post here to gain your approval or agreement, or anyone elses. Nor should you.

Subject: RE: BS: Ann Coulter Endorses Hillary
From: Slag
Date: 02 Feb 08 - 06:16 PM

First I want to say "Ha" and then "Ha ha!" and "Ha, Ha, Ha..." I'll save server space and delete the rest of my ha ha's.

Partisan? How can you avoid it? With one you have narcissism at best, megalomania at the extreme. Two? You either have a love fest or endless bickering (come to think of it, isn't that what our "two" party system really is?) or both, With three you have a "party"! Whoopee!

I suspect that when the Clintons and the Bushes (NO, not Clinton IN the bushes!) get together they all have a lot of laughs about the things they have to say to delineate themselves to their respective electors ( i.e. you and me). No hard feelings.   They really don't mean it. It's just the thing you have to do to get or keep your place in the circle which is propelled by OPM (again, yours and mine).

Subject: RE: BS: Ann Coulter Endorses Hillary
From: Don Firth
Date: 02 Feb 08 - 06:15 PM

GG, you seem to think that you know something about what I think. Pretty cloudy crystal ball you have there.

If I had voted for Nader, or any other third-party candidate in 2000 or in 2004, would it have made a difference? I think not. Now, if there were a reasonable supposition that millions of other people were going to also, then I quite probably would have, but it was obvious at the time that that was not going to be the case.

I presume that you're not suggesting that I should vote Republican. Are you?

As I say, you're not offering any solutions. Come up with a good one and I might just go along with it. I'm open to suggestions.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Ann Coulter Endorses Hillary
From: GUEST,Guest
Date: 02 Feb 08 - 06:12 PM

When it comes to the beauty contest equation, Obama beats Clinton hands down. He definitely scores higher than she does on the likability chart.

I put that largely down to sexism. No strong, powerful woman like Clinton could ever win the beauty contest, even if she runs against Jabba the Hut.

And Obama ain't no feminist, that's for sure. Of course, neither is Clinton.

Subject: RE: BS: Ann Coulter Endorses Hillary
From: Little Hawk
Date: 02 Feb 08 - 05:51 PM

GG is quite correct in saying,

"Does anyone REALLY think Ann Coulter supports Hillary Clinton? And if they do, have they had a lobotomy recently?

No, they are using this little bit of election year histrionics by Coulter as a propaganda club for Obama."

That indeed is exactly the strategy in use here behind the gleeful quoting of Ann Coulter's favorable remarks in support of Hillary Clinton. Just to help Obama, period. I mean...the people on this forum who are gleefully quoting her hope it will help Obama. What Ann Coulter herself is up to, I'm not quite sure. Maybe she's just speaking her mind. Maybe there's more to it than that.

I would prefer to see Obama elected than Hillary Clinton...but...I would also prefer to see the Democratic and Republican party machines cease to exist, because THEY and their corporate backers are what is basically wrong with politics in the USA.

Nonetheless, if it came down to voting and I had to choose between either of the Democratic candidates...and John McCain...or Mitt Romney... Well, I'd choose the Democrat. The lesser of two evils.

Obama might have a few surprises up his sleeve. He might turn out to be a genuine populist. I can't say. He seems pretty likeable and bright to me. But I'd be surprised if the Democratic Party machine would let someone like that slip past "security" and make it to the White House, I really would.

Still, a slight chance of it is better than none at all, I figure.

As for Hillary, I've always thought she was a very bright woman. That doesn't change the fact that I don't trust the Clinton machine one bit, and I shudder at the thought of "Billary" occupying the White House again. It would be just the latest move in the Bush/Clinton Duopoly Dynasty 2-step.

I thought the USA was formed to resist the concept of a hereditary monarchy...(?)

Subject: RE: BS: Ann Coulter Endorses Hillary
From: GUEST,Guest
Date: 02 Feb 08 - 05:47 PM

That isn't an accurate reflection of how I'm presenting myself, Don.

Though I understand how someone who thinks like you do might perceive me that way. You don't seem very politically savvy or self-aware of your tendency to repeat yourself over and over again like a broken record.

If you were, you wouldn't think that voting the same way for a third election in a row was going to result in a different outcome.

Subject: RE: BS: Ann Coulter Endorses Hillary
From: Don Firth
Date: 02 Feb 08 - 05:39 PM

Nevertheless, that's the way you're coming on.

But not all Sixties radicals were the same, a fact you don't seem to be aware of. And as predicted, you are being slightly more polite here, but saying "I guess your world view doesn't allow you to believe anything other than participating in the current political system by voting Democratic, as the one and only way of making the world a better place," is essentially the same as saying "you're either an idiot who doesn't understand how bad things really are, or that you are obviously part of the problem."

Some old same old.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Ann Coulter Endorses Hillary
From: GUEST,Guest
Date: 02 Feb 08 - 05:25 PM

You said the same thing to me in 2004 and 2000 Don. And by saying that, apparently you think you are successfully painting me into a Sixties stereotype that you find harmful, even if the rest of us can't quite figure out what stereotype it is supposed to be.

Sixties radical is my best guess. But that doesn't really make any sense, because *your* stereotypical sixties radical was very political, and tried damn hard to have an immediate effect upon electoral politics a la the 68 Democratic convention in Chicago.

Sorry to disappoint, but I spent my summer swimming at the water hole in MN that year, not mixing it up in Grant Park with the Yippies, Don. While the whole world was watching, I was working on my tan, playing marathon games of canasta, and drinking brews around the beach bonfire, waiting for the northern lights to show up.

I guess your world view doesn't allow you to believe anything other than participating in the current political system by voting Democratic, as the one and only way of making the world a better place.

God help us all if that is actually the case.

I don't believe that, and I never have. Not even in back in the Sixties.

Subject: RE: BS: Ann Coulter Endorses Hillary
From: Don Firth
Date: 02 Feb 08 - 04:54 PM

Re:    GUEST,Guest.

I met a lot of people like this back in the Sixties. Their shtick was to rage and storm about how rotten everything and everybody is, and they had all of the statistics to show it. If you tried to mutter something like, "Yeah, I know things are pretty bad, but I think we might be able to do something about it," they would land all over you and tell you that you were either an idiot who doesn't understand how bad things really were, or that you are obviously part of the problem.

And they never try to offer a solution. Other than, say, bloody revolution.

"Doom! Doom! Doom!" goes the hum-drum.

Same old crap. I think we can do better than that.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Ann Coulter Endorses Hillary
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 02 Feb 08 - 03:19 PM

No, you are wrong Amos.

Subject: RE: BS: Ann Coulter Endorses Hillary
From: Amos
Date: 02 Feb 08 - 03:16 PM

Ah, but you are. Look back over your own generalized negative statements about the people -- unnamed and undifferentiated in your vituperations -- on this forum, and ask yourself if those statements might be a bit vicious, over-broad, uncommunicative and intended only to make yourself look right by making others wrong, a very toxic if popular pastime.


A

Subject: RE: BS: Ann Coulter Endorses Hillary
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 02 Feb 08 - 03:10 PM

"Banderlogs, as any student of Kipling knows"

pardon my ignorance. I guess this is something that I wasn't told I had to know.

Subject: RE: BS: Ann Coulter Endorses Hillary
From: GUEST,Guest
Date: 02 Feb 08 - 03:07 PM

Bully for you.

Subject: RE: BS: Ann Coulter Endorses Hillary
From: Ebbie
Date: 02 Feb 08 - 03:06 PM

Guest/Guest or Guest/Guest, as bright as you claim to be, perhaps you will now understand why most of us consider to be a good thing the consistent nomenclature that membership beztows.

Subject: RE: BS: Ann Coulter Endorses Hillary
From: GUEST,Guest
Date: 02 Feb 08 - 03:05 PM

I'm not saying anything toxic, Amos. I'm just making an argument you don't agree with.

Again, you go straight for the ad hominem attacks.

Subject: RE: BS: Ann Coulter Endorses Hillary
From: Amos
Date: 02 Feb 08 - 02:55 PM

Banderlogs, as any student of Kipling knows, are noisy mindless creratures of the primate class who live in treetops and hurl epithets and other foul things at the hard-working animals trying to live peaceably down below them.


Although it has been a long time since I have Kippled, the term has stayed with me for useful moments like this.

Guest, Guest, your toxic emanations are a disgrace to thinking humans in spite of your Big Button on what passes in your own mind for critical thought.


A

Subject: RE: BS: Ann Coulter Endorses Hillary
From: GUEST,Guest
Date: 02 Feb 08 - 02:48 PM

Gee Ebbie, and all this time I thought it was Ron Davies pretending to be me in that 02 Feb 08 - 01:28 PM post.

I guess it was you.

Subject: RE: BS: Ann Coulter Endorses Hillary
From: Ebbie
Date: 02 Feb 08 - 02:43 PM

Guest/Guest, you seem to be set on proving that some women can be as nasty as some men. Perhaps you aspire to Coulter's shoes? If you are able, please substantiate your charge that Bloomberg is a Nazi.

Subject: RE: BS: Ann Coulter Endorses Hillary
From: GUEST,Guest
Date: 02 Feb 08 - 02:39 PM

So, how many of you have watched any of the Republican debates?

Yes, I went on over to Project Vote Smart to get the info on college education on the four candidates. That sort of cherry picking is far different than the game that Azizi plays though. She found herself a very partisan Dem blog (Daily Kos), and cut and pasted the hell out of it over here, apparently thinking she was "proving" that Obama Is Best.

Yawn.

Now, if people want to claim that Project Vote Smart is just as partisan as Daily Kos (which around this forum is probably inevitable), am I supposed to agree to disagree with a falsehood like that?

See--that's the problem I have with the partisan Dems on this forum. They can't think for themselves, much less think critically.

Does anyone REALLY think Ann Coulter supports Hilary Clinton? And if they do, have they had a lobotomy recently?

No, they are using this little bit of election year histrionics by Coulter as a propaganda club for Obama.

Again--yawn.

Some of us see through all these same old same old tricks, and don't fall for them.