Ann Coulter.

mycroft

Sand wrote:

And yet it is assumed Coulter is deadly serious that he U.S. foreign policy towards North Korea should be limited to nukes? Shes not throwing something wild out there to get her books sold? Theres no such thing as bad publicity.

We've someone who's dug up a quote from moore who's said he was using satire to illustrate a point, any chance you can get dig up a quote from coulter saying "just kidding folks"

Reminds me of Alice Coopers quote about Marlyin Manson

"See I'm Cooper when I'm on stage, when I go home I take off the make up, andd I'm just a guy, Manson doesn't so the first time someone snaps him drinking in starbucks or visiting his mom he's screwed."

Moore has consistently engaged in "wacky" Stunts in his show like his sodomymobile where he breach anti sodomy laws in US states, or the fake funeral he arranged for the guy who's insurance agency was trying to wriggle out of his policy and give him a new kidney (moore had a piper and the dude in a coffin wearing a t-shirt saying "i paid my life insurance and all I got is a lousy t-shirt" outside his insurance agencys HQ) he got the guy his kidney.

Fundamentally Moore has raised issued about dangers and hypocracy in US corporate society, and really actively made a difference in many people lives. Coulter on the other hand has just ended up spiting venom.

Zombrex

mycroft wrote:

Fundamentally Moore has raised issued about dangers and hypocracy in US corporate society, and really actively made a difference in many people lives. Coulter on the other hand has just ended up spiting venom.

Good point,

What ever you say about Moore, his tactics seem to come from a genuine aim to make things better for people. Since the whole F 9-11 thing I have kinda lost a bit of respect for him. He stopped standing up for the little guy and started trying to get everyone to vote for the Democratic Party (which screw the little guy nearly as much as the GOP). That is the problem with Bush being in power, all the liberals have become to concerned with fighting the Republican party than actually doing anything "good".

But what you can't say about Coulter is that she is looking out for anyone other than herself. She just hates liberals, no matter what they are doing or saying, she has defined herself along those lines and that seems to be all she does. It is a shame that Moore is turning into a left-wing version of her, simply defining himself as someone who hates Republicans.

pickarooney

Anne Coulter wrote:

Do you regret saying that?

Ann Coulter: Only that I didn't say it loud enough and in a large enough public forum. And when I said we should "execute" John Walker Lindh, I mis-spoke. What I meant to say was "We should burn John Walker Lindh alive and televise it on prime-time network TV". My apologies for any misunderstanding that might have occurred.

I still don't think you could say something like that without your tongue in your cheek.
Is anyone else reminded of Alan Patridge's "spine in a bap" non-apology to the farmers?

pete

pickarooney wrote:

I still don't think you could say something like that without your tongue in your cheek.
Is anyone else reminded of Alan Patridge's "spine in a bap" non-apology to the farmers?

In this specific example, I have no doubt that Coulter is trying to be funny.

However, I also have no doubt that she really does think John Walker Lindh should be publicly executed.

Sand

We've someone who's dug up a quote from moore who's said he was using satire to illustrate a point, any chance you can get dig up a quote from coulter saying "just kidding folks"

Sure, just stick Coulter in front of an audience of North Koreans in North Korea and Im sure shed be a little less forthcoming in the nuke North Korea ****e. Much as Moore was a little less willing to stand over his views when he was standing in front of a somewhat interested audience.

Honestly though, they both have the same motivation - say wild **** that generates publicity = book sales = profits!!!! Coulter does it, and Moore does it. Moore irritates the hell out of American Conservitives, and gets Liberal dollars out of it - Coulter simply cashes in on the payback by pissing off American Liberals and cashing on on Conservitive Dollars. If you look at both their statements, if they were translated to boards.ie theyd both be obvious trolls.

Leaning towards either without recognising them for what they are says more about your political sympathies than anything else. And thats how they make their cash. Honestly, would either of them be as rich or famous if they werent such....loudmouths? Its ironic how the so called cynical anti-capitalists are so easily taken in to be honest.

Moore has consistently engaged in "wacky" Stunts in his show like his sodomymobile where he breach anti sodomy laws in US states, or the fake funeral he arranged for the guy who's insurance agency was trying to wriggle out of his policy and give him a new kidney (moore had a piper and the dude in a coffin wearing a t-shirt saying "i paid my life insurance and all I got is a lousy t-shirt" outside his insurance agencys HQ) he got the guy his kidney.

I think thats called a "publicity stunt", rather than a "wacky" stunt. Another publicity stunt might be to say Walker should be burned alive on national T.V.

But dont listen to me. Go to Michaelmoore.com, buy all his books, DVDs, Teaching Packs and T-Shirts. Buy your part of the dream.

pete

Sand wrote:

Sure, just stick Coulter in front of an audience of North Koreans in North Korea and Im sure shed be a little less forthcoming in the nuke North Korea ****e.

You really think so? Because she doesn't really come across as the type to go back on stuff.... unless it's to go back and make it worse, of course. (see interviews quoted from / linked to above)

Much as Moore was a little less willing to stand over his views when he was standing in front of a somewhat interested audience.

Sorry, but this is complete crap. Anyone who read the chapter of Stupid White Men in question and didn't recognise it for the satire it so clearly is, well... they either must be a bit dim or else trying to deliberately misrepresent things.

I mean, really - please don't try to convince me you're that stupid. Have a little self respect.

Another publicity stunt might be to say Walker should be burned alive on national T.V.

Publicity stunt? Surely it would have to stick out in some way from the stunt-er's normal behaviour in order to attract any attention? I think the words you might be looking for are "a slight exaggeration for emphasis". The woman's a nutjob.

Here's three quotes from ONE article:

They hate us? We hate them. Americans don't want to make Islamic fanatics love us. We want to make them die. There's nothing like horrendous physical pain to quell angry fanatics. So sorry they're angry – wait until they see American anger. Japanese kamikaze pilots hated us once too. A couple of well-aimed nuclear weapons, and now they are gentle little lambs. That got their attention.

America is fighting for its survival and the Democrats are obsessing over why barbarians hate us.

Instead of obsessing over why angry primitives hate Americans, a more fruitful area for Democrats to examine might be why Americans are beginning to hate Democrats.

Can you point out which one is the "publicity stunt"?

How about quotes from this one:

This is no time to be precious about locating the exact individuals directly involved in this particular terrorist attack. Those responsible include anyone anywhere in the world who smiled in response to the annihilation of patriots like Barbara Olson.

Airports scrupulously apply the same laughably ineffective airport harassment to Suzy Chapstick as to Muslim hijackers. It is preposterous to assume every passenger is a potential crazed homicidal maniac. We know who the homicidal maniacs are. They are the ones cheering and dancing right now.

We should invade their countries, kill their leaders and convert them to Christianity. We weren't punctilious about locating and punishing only Hitler and his top officers. We carpet-bombed German cities; we killed civilians. That's war. And this is war.

One more? How about these:

On the basis solely of media coverage, Abu Ghraib was the biggest story of 2004, maybe the biggest story ever. And for good reason: An American soldier was caught on film not only humiliating Iraqi prisoners – but smoking!

He died bringing freedom and democracy to 28 million Afghans – pretty much confirming Michael Moore's view of America as an imperialist cowboy predator. There is not another country in the world – certainly not in continental Europe – that could have produced a Pat Tillman.

mycroft

Sand wrote:

I think thats called a "publicity stunt", rather than a "wacky" stunt. Another publicity stunt might be to say Walker should be burned alive on national T.V.

But dont listen to me. Go to Michaelmoore.com, buy all his books, DVDs, Teaching Packs and T-Shirts. Buy your part of the dream.

Uh huh so flippantly dismiss criticism of coulter when evidence is asked to prove she acts in a humourous manner.

As for publicity stunt. In transitition year in school, my religion teacher profoundly effected my life by showing me three films, the mission, the killing fields, and roger and me.

Roger and me was a film made by Moore, while he slept on peoples floors and made a brillantly crafted film where he shows compassion for the people of his home town, shows the real impact GMs policys have on a community, while at a same time, demostrating how a corporations actions destroy a community.

It's a well crafted, intelligent film very honest, sympathetic and funny. You can fling mud at Moore all you want, and frankly he deserves some of it, but there's nothing in the canon of coulter's words and works, which mathes the basic human decency displayed in that film.

FTA69

I think Moore is great myself, the right hate him because he exposes their inefficiencies and disregard for humanity while the irrelevant left hate him because he speaks to the working people and influences them more than any Marxist-Leninist rag.

He has his faults and he has his weaknesses but sure don't we all? The bottom line is that he is a spokesperson for decency in this world today as well as being a hands-on type person who actually involves himself in the subjects he criticises.

Nuttzz

Pete: no point attacking sand using coulter quotes I think that he has made it plain that he doesnt agree with anything she says....

completely OT imagine the fuss that would be caused if someone on the "right" brought out a book called stupid black men.......

pete

Nuttzz wrote:

Pete: no point attacking sand using coulter quotes I think that he has made it plain that he doesnt agree with anything she says....

You've missed the point. The issue isn't whether anyone agrees with her, it's whether Coulter is actually serious or not.

Sand maintains her extreme views are just a joke intended to create publicity. I maintain this is what she actually believes - certainly, she uses humour in her delivery, but it's still what she actually believes in.

I'm just looking for any evidence that she's kidding, having a laugh, winding people up etc. and none has been forthcoming.

Sand

You really think so? Because she doesn't really come across as the type to go back on stuff.... unless it's to go back and make it worse, of course. (see interviews quoted from / linked to above)

The fact she goes back to "make things worse" just shows up the hollowness of her views. Her objective is to really, really, really,really piss off the Liberals in the U.S. and indeed abroad. I get the very strong impression from reading her interviews and quotes that she will say anything to get under their skin. Look at what she does when shes challenged on anything, Walker for example.

Does she say " Well actually, what I said is a bit ...blunt, but Walker should be tried for treason, and seeing as we're in a time of war and he was fighting for the enemy the penalty for treason in wartime is death - dont blame me for expecting traitors to face the consequences of their crime - especially when he was trying to kill patriotic american soldiers defending our country"? **** no, that might be viewed as somewhat councilliatory and a defence of a view she actually holds as being sensible and practical.

No, the better way to get a reaction and generate publicity is to go back and say what she said, that Walker should be burned alive on national T.V. Thats no defence, it highlights the extreme nature of the view and thus practically invalidates it.

Same thing with her quote about McVeigh and the NYT building - when challenged on that she clarified it to mean McVeight should have blown up the NYT building with all their staff in it! Id have laughed at that, just imagining the rage it would provoke amongst the people angry about the *initial* quote and expecting some sort of apology.

I read an interview with her, linked from this thread I thought, but I cant see it now (?) and she just came across as having only one political idealogy - anti-Democratic Party. She talked about the Christian Right, not as her brethern but as a voting demographic and so on. She didnt mention anything she was "for", only the potential Democrat candidates in 2008 and how she could attack them - shes dreaming of a Hillary Clinton bid apparently. The woman is just very very good at promoting herself.

Can you not see she's winding you up or is she too good at it for it to get past the red mist descending on you?

Uh huh so flippantly dismiss criticism of coulter when evidence is asked to prove she acts in a humourous manner.

See above - I can see the funny side of winding people up like she does - you cant because your letting your political sympathies blind you. Its like movie directors receiving complaints from the producers about scenes being too offensive, and sending back a replacement scene thats twice as offensive.

It's a well crafted, intelligent film very honest, sympathetic and funny. You can fling mud at Moore all you want, and frankly he deserves some of it, but there's nothing in the canon of coulter's words and works, which mathes the basic human decency displayed in that film.

Actually Ive not seen that film because Ive such a low opinion of Moore that I wouldnt waste either my money or time on him ( SWM was a misguided gift, so at least Im not funding him there either). But - In my initial post I think I already gave him credit for seeming to believe he was fighting the good fight - as opposed to Coulter who doesnt pretend to care. But then, American Liberals tend to try and monopolise the high moral ground in American Politics, and Coulter enjoys more infamy from not even paying lip service to the high moral ground. She enrages them more because of that. More infamy, more publicity, more sales.

Theyre both making a lot of money from selling bad political sermons that are designed to polarise rather than compromise.

I'm just looking for any evidence that she's kidding, having a laugh, winding people up etc. and none has been forthcoming.

Well shes wound you up so successfully that you cant notice it even when its pointed out to you.

Memnoch

so saying how your going to nuke everyone is winding people up now?

come on sand get a grip.

If you say the word "bomb" as a joke in an american airport you get arrested and sent to jail. Don't talk about winding people up.

Ann coulter's racist hate propaganda is nothing else except racist hate propaganda, no matter how you try to pretend its just all one big joke at the "liberal's" expense. This isn't about liberals or conservatives.

Any decent human being would be apalled at the kind of rubbish she spews from her mouth. But by saying that conservatives "like" her or enjoy the way she "winds up the left" all you're saying is that conservatives are also ignorant racist fanatics. Because thats the only thing she stands for and represents.

pete

Jesus Christ Sand of course Coulter tries to be "funny" - nobody's denying that!

My point is that underneath this oh-so-funny let's kill all the arabs / gooks / canadians surface she actually believes this bomb the **** out of everyone first, ask questions later ****.

Now, getting back to the point you so carefully avoided:

Sand wrote:

Ive said Moore=Coulter, but Moore is actually far worse because hes taken seriously, abroad anyway, more due to political sympathies I think than any actual review of his tendency to obscure, deceive and outright lie about so called facts whenever he bothers to do any research - which no one can claim he did before sounding off on Northern Ireland.

Sand wrote:

Much as Moore was a little less willing to stand over his views when he was standing in front of a somewhat interested audience.

Do you still stand over these claims?

pete

Can't believe i missed this bit:

Sand wrote:

Well shes wound you up so successfully that you cant notice it even when its pointed out to you.

Oh Sand. How I dream of being as intelligent and dispassionate as you.

p.s. This above is satire - You know, like the stuff from "Mike's Comprehensive Peace Plan" in Stupid White Men you apparently didn't understand? Hope this helps.

mycroft

Actually Ive not seen that film because Ive such a low opinion of Moore that I wouldnt waste either my money or time on him ( SWM was a misguided gift, so at least Im not funding him there either).

Just on an aside, it's his best film, yes he is it in, because a huge chunk of it is his attempt to get the CEO of GM to come to flint and witness the decline of the town. It illustrations the human impact of the plant closure (over a period of months the shocking devastion and economic impact.

Seriously it's an excellent film and not caught up in baggage of his later work.

Oh and if you thought F9/11 was over the top you should witness the stupidity of canadian bacon......

Hobbes

Ann coulter's racist hate propaganda is nothing else except racist hate propaganda,

Exactly, and if all her intention is to wind up people then why invite her to the White house? I mean someone who goes on public record of saying "Nuke North Korea" who then gets invited to the whitehouse, what sort of message is that putting out from the white house?

Oh and if you thought F9/11 was over the top you should witness the stupidity of canadian bacon......

Or Lucky Numbers where Moore plays every right wings wet dream they had of what they think he is really like.

Sand

so saying how your going to nuke everyone is winding people up now?

No, Im sure its a serious, well thought out and developed political strategy for engaging with the world. No really, it is. Lose sleep over it.

Ann coulter's racist hate propaganda is nothing else except racist hate propaganda, no matter how you try to pretend its just all one big joke at the "liberal's" expense. This isn't about liberals or conservatives.

Total lack of surprise on my part.

My point is that underneath this oh-so-funny let's kill all the arabs / gooks / canadians surface she actually believes this bomb the **** out of everyone first, ask questions later ****.

Yeah but youve not shown anything to prove that shes believes the crap she spouts anymore than Moore - who despite advocating a tax on white people to compensate black people for slavery more than a century and a half ago hasnt put his considerable money where his mouth is and given his cash to black people, afaik anyway - and its come to the point where you accept she jokes around and doesnt defend her points but actually deliberately emphasises the offensive nature of them.

I mean Moore has some prayer to God that all American politicians get cancer. Terribly offensive yes? But wait, hes just kidding. And you absolutely ****ing know that if Coulter said she prayed to god that all Democrats got cancer youd refuse to accept that she might be just winding people up as much as Moore is. Its your political sympathies that are blinding you to the fact that theyre both smart, calculating people who make a lot of cash out of dumbing down politics and making divisive publicity grabbing remarks.

p.s. This above is satire - You know, like the stuff from "Mike's Comprehensive Peace Plan" in Stupid White Men you apparently didn't understand? Hope this helps.

I guess I didnt specify what I considered stupid in his section on northern Ireland. It wasnt the obvious satire, it was his introduction to the situation in NI......

The fact that the UK has no right to NI because its the UK of GB *and* NI <---stupidity. Catholics are left out of the political discourse of the UK<----stupidity. Catholics are a) Second Class citizens <----stupidity b) Rights continually violated <---- Stupidity c) Live under the thumb of an "occupational force of British soldiers" ( his actual words! ) <----stupidity. Peace proccess fell apart because Protestants deliberately sabotaged it by demanding stuff like IRA decommissioning <---stupidity. And remember he says himself hes referring to the present situation, not the historical situation. The guy doesnt have a clue.

All this is before he kicks into the satirical solution of converting all Protestants to catholicism. Hes setting the scene. Looking at his grasp of the facts do you see why I think the height of his research was watching The Devils Own passed out drunk? It reads like a SF press release and hes that ****ing lazy Im sure thats about as deep as he dug. He didnt see whether the majority in NI wanted to be in the UK (and they do), he didnt bother to investigate whether Catholics rights have improved since the fecking 50s. He didnt bother to see the historical cause for the prescence of the British Army in NI nor the fact that again the majority support their prescence. And despite being hyper critical of his own government he didnt bother to investigate beyond the SF press release why the peace process is in turmoil, something to do with Unionist reluctance to enter power with an armed and active terrorist faction that refused to renounce violence. Weird.

Can you see, given the effort he put in that I dont consider his work in anyway useful? How can I trust his grasp of the facts to be any more accurate on American politics, given his laziness and deceit regarding the situation in NI?

Seriously it's an excellent film and not caught up in baggage of his later work.

Again, how can I trust him to present the facts accurately, rather than simply pick a side and deceive, obscure, and slant the information to his advantage? I suspect that Moores work bears a great deal of resemblance to old USSR propaganda reels of happy smiling, workers welcoming collectivisation and discussing political thought openly on their lunch breaks. I might be wrong, but given his track record...

mycroft

Again, how can I trust him to present the facts accurately, rather than simply pick a side and deceive, obscure, and slant the information to his advantage? I suspect that Moores work bears a great deal of resemblance to old USSR propaganda reels of happy smiling, workers welcoming collectivisation and discussing political thought openly on their lunch breaks. I might be wrong, but given his track record...

Okay, and Coulter can do what? I'd recommend you watch it, and then *shrug* you're on your own.....

Victor

Ainsley Hayes http://westwing.bewarne.com/ainsley.html

syke wrote:

It was interesting that Sasha Baron Cohen is alleged to have caused a riot at a Texas Rodeo he apparently appeared as Borat and told the crowd he hoped the US nuked Iraq and GWB slit the thoats and drank the blood of every man, woman and child in Iraq. Whoever it was (for Cohen's agency has declined to comment except to say that they have nothing in production at present) they had to be escorted out for tehir own safety as the crowd was enraged.

I heared that story as, it was the rendition of the national anthem with different words that caused offence and he was pulled for fear of causing a riot. No riot happened.

Of course, that might be your point.

Ive said Moore=Coulter, but Moore is actually far worse because hes taken seriously, abroad anyway

Moore tells fibs to make good popcorn-munching movies. Coulter peddles hate.

Sand wrote:

And yet it is assumed Coulter is deadly serious that he U.S. foreign policy towards North Korea should be limited to nukes? Shes not throwing something wild out there to get her books sold? Theres no such thing as bad publicity.

Tell that to Prince Harry.

While your at it you can talk about how generous the Western banks were back in the 40s, 50s and 60s giving all that money to the Third World.

Actually much of it was 1970s money when the banks realised they had to do something with Arab oil money.

Nuttzz wrote:

completely OT imagine the fuss that would be caused if someone on the "right" brought out a book called stupid black men.......

I think you miss the point, he is attacking authority figures, not the "little guy".

Sand wrote:

Theyre both making a lot of money from selling bad political sermons that are designed to polarise rather than compromise.

While Moore may polarise, that isn't his objective, which is ridicule.

I mean Moore has some prayer to God that all American politicians get cancer.

One can choose to be a politician or not, you can't choose to be Arab / Korean / whatever.

Sand wrote:

Yeah but youve not shown anything to prove that shes believes the crap she spouts anymore than Moore - who despite advocating a tax on white people to compensate black people for slavery more than a century and a half ago

Of course us white people do still benefit from the historical legacy of slavery and Empire.

Again, how can I trust him to present the facts accurately, rather than simply pick a side and deceive, obscure, and slant the information to his advantage? I suspect that Moores work bears a great deal of resemblance to old USSR propaganda reels of happy smiling, workers welcoming collectivisation and discussing political thought openly on their lunch breaks. I might be wrong, but given his track record...

And this may be one of Moore's point that you are (deliberately?) missing "don't believe everything you are told by the media. Coulter has no such redeeming counterpoint.

pete

Sand wrote:

Yeah but youve not shown anything to prove that shes believes the crap she spouts anymore than Moore

And, despite repeated requests, you've not shown anything to prove that she doesn't believe it. Throw me a bone here, sand.

who despite advocating a tax on white people to compensate black people for slavery more than a century and a half ago hasnt put his considerable money where his mouth is and given his cash to black people, afaik anyway

Can you provide a source for that, please? I've skimmed through, but I can't find a reference to a "tax on white people" anywhere in the 'Kill Whitey' chapter of Stupid White Men. I'm assuming that book is where you found the reference given your admitted lack of exposure to his other works.

and its come to the point where you accept she jokes around and doesnt defend her points but actually deliberately emphasises the offensive nature of them.

No, I said she attempts to write in a humorous style. There's a difference between that and "joking around". A racist comedian telling racist jokes doesn't make him any less racist.

I mean Moore has some prayer to God that all American politicians get cancer. Terribly offensive yes?

Sand, sand, sand. Dear oh dear. And you say you own this book, yes?

You know, it's one thing to quote out of context, but it's common courtesy to actually read the damn thing first. You really should do a little more research before you start pontificating on things you apparently haven't even seen for yourself, for that way lies ignominy, ridicule and public humiliation.

It would appear you're referring to Moore's "A Prayer To Afflict The Comfortable" from chapter 11 of Stupid White Men, "The People's Prayer". That would be the chapter where Moore discusses the effect personal need has on one's political / ethical / moral outlook. Specifically, he says:

"... the only hope we have in this country to bring aid to the sick, protection to the victims of discrimination and a better life to those who suffer is to pray like crazy that those in power are afflicted with the worst possible diseases, tragedies and circumstances in life. Because I can guarantee you, as soon as it's their ass on the line, we're all on the way to being saved.

Oh wait - you wouldn't know that. You haven't actually read the book you're basing this line of argument on.

So as a favour to you, pal, here's the relevant excerpt from his "prayer":

Dear Lord (God / Yahweh / Buddha / Bob / Nobody)

We beseech you, O merciful One, to bring comfort to those who suffer today for whatever reason You, Nature, or the World Bank has deemed appropriate. We realise, O heavenly Father, that You cannot cure all the sick at once - that would surely empty out the hospitals the good nuns have established in Your name. And we accept that You, the Omniscient One, cannot eliminate all the evil in the world, for that would surely put Thee out of a job.

Rather, dear Lord, we ask that You inflict every member of the US House of Representatives with horrible, incurable cancers of the brain, penis, and hand (though not necessarily in that order.) We ask, Our Loving Father, that every senator from the South be rendered addicted to drugs and find himself locked away for life. We beseech you to make the children of every senator in the Mountain Time Zone gay - really gay. Put the children of senators from the East in a wheelchair and the children of senators from the West into a public school.

Yep, sure looks like he really does want them all to get cancer.

But wait, hes just kidding.

Yes, Sand, he is. A fact so blindingly obvious an illiterate 8 year old Mongolian goat herder would probably realise it.

And you absolutely ****ing know that if Coulter said she prayed to god that all Democrats got cancer youd refuse to accept that she might be just winding people up as much as Moore is.

That would depend on whether the lady gave any reason to believe she wasn't being serious. I have yet to see such evidence. How 'bout you? If so, please share.

Its your political sympathies that are blinding you to the fact that theyre both smart, calculating people who make a lot of cash out of dumbing down politics and making divisive publicity grabbing remarks.

I have never said both aren't smart, aren't calculating, aren't making a lot of cash, aren't dumbing down politics, aren't divisive (can anyone taking a position not be divisive?) and weren't seeking publicity.

What I did say was that there appears to be no evidence that Coulter isn't the nutbag warmongering hyper-nationalistic racist she makes herself out to be.

So prove me wrong.

I guess I didnt specify what I considered stupid in his section on northern Ireland. It wasnt the obvious satire, it was his introduction to the situation in NI......

Nice save.

No, really.

The fact that the UK has no right to NI because its the UK of GB *and* NI <---stupidity.

Eh, no. That's not what he said at all. Go back and read it again.

Catholics are left out of the political discourse of the UK<----stupidity

He was talking about the UK media (you'll note he said "political discourse", not "politics"), and I don't think it's an entirely unreasonable view, albeit somewhat simplistic.

Catholics are a) Second Class citizens <----stupidity b) Rights continually violated <---- Stupidity c) Live under the thumb of an "occupational force of British soldiers" ( his actual words! ) <----stupidity. Peace proccess fell apart because Protestants deliberately sabotaged it by demanding stuff like IRA decommissioning <---stupidity. And remember he says himself hes referring to the present situation, not the historical situation. The guy doesnt have a clue.

And these are his own views. We're all still entitled to an opinion, aren't we?

I mean, I'm no expert on norn iron politics, but I think it's possible that a substantial proportion of the population up there would agree with most, if not all, of his views on these matters.

Or do they not "have a clue" either?

All this is before he kicks into the satirical solution of converting all Protestants to catholicism. Hes setting the scene.

And is this a problem now?

Looking at his grasp of the facts do you see why I think the height of his research was watching The Devils Own passed out drunk? It reads like a SF press release and hes that ****ing lazy Im sure thats about as deep as he dug. He didnt see whether the majority in NI wanted to be in the UK (and they do), he didnt bother to investigate whether Catholics rights have improved since the fecking 50s. He didnt bother to see the historical cause for the prescence of the British Army in NI nor the fact that again the majority support their prescence. And despite being hyper critical of his own government he didnt bother to investigate beyond the SF press release why the peace process is in turmoil, something to do with Unionist reluctance to enter power with an armed and active terrorist faction that refused to renounce violence. Weird.

I hate to break this to you, but someone holding different views to your own is not in any way "weird".

Can you see, given the effort he put in that I dont consider his work in anyway useful? How can I trust his grasp of the facts to be any more accurate on American politics, given his laziness and deceit regarding the situation in NI?

Deceit implys wilfully lying. Got any actual evidence of this? You not agreeing with him doesn't really count as evidence, by the way.

Again, how can I trust him to present the facts accurately, rather than simply pick a side and deceive, obscure, and slant the information to his advantage? I suspect that Moores work bears a great deal of resemblance to old USSR propaganda reels of happy smiling, workers welcoming collectivisation and discussing political thought openly on their lunch breaks. I might be wrong, but given his track record...

Hey here's a thought - why don't you try reading it before referencing it, then?

Now... can we get back to talking about the mad woman again? I could have sworn we were meant to be talking about her.

Redleslie2

Sand wrote:

Hopefully Ahern, ashamed of his pathetic humilation of himself, his party, his country and liberal democratic principles in general, will swing into action with a plan to dig a mile wide, 200 meter deep canal all along the border with Northern Ireland and instruct the Army to shoot anyone crossing it. Oh, and shoot anyone in the Republic referring to the Republic as the "26 counties" or "free state" as traitors. Irish Question solved once and for all.

--> Stupidity.

More politically incorrect quotes from Coulter.

"It would be a much better country if women did not vote. That is simply a fact. In fact, in every presidential election since 1950 - except Goldwater in '64 - the Republican would have won, if only the men had voted." May 17, 2003.

"I think [women] should be armed but should not [be allowed to] vote...women have no capacity to understand how money is earned. They have a lot of ideas on how to spend it...it's always more money on education, more money on child care, more money on day care." - Politically Incorrect, February 26, 2001.

"I think there should be a literacy test and a poll tax for people to vote." Fox News, Hannity & Colmes, August 17, 1997.

Hobbes

Some more..

Ann Coulter wrote:

Being nice to people is, in fact, one of the incidental tenets of Christianity (as opposed to other religions whose tenets are more along the lines of 'kill everyone who doesn't smell bad and doesn't answer to the name Mohammed')"

"My libertarian friends are probably getting a little upset now but I think that's because they never appreciate the benefits of local fascism."

"Women like Pamela Harriman and Patricia Duff are basically Anna Nicole Smith from the waist down. Let's just call it for what it is. They're whores."

"Let's say I go out every night, I meet a guy and have sex with him. Good for me. I'm not married."

"To The People Of Islam: Just think: If we'd invaded your countries, killed your leaders and converted you to Christianity YOU'D ALL BE OPENING CHRISTMAS PRESENTS RIGHT ABOUT NOW! Merry Christmas." (She actually had to take this comment off her website)

Redleslie2

Nuttzz wrote:

Pete: no point attacking sand using coulter quotes I think that he has made it plain that he doesnt agree with anything she says.....

Uh, compare Sand's views about say for example, the death penalty and the French and I think you'll find they are not that dissimilar to the loony Coulter's.

Victor

can anyone taking a position not be divisive?

Actually taking a leadership position (i.e. the true mark of a leader) shouldn't be decisive. Hopefully.

Zombrex

Hobbes wrote:

Some more..

Crazy ...

People who say she is the right-wing version of Michael Moore are missing the mark .. I can't think of a left-wing person in America that spouts as much hateful dribble as this woman does in one paragraph ... Michael Moore has his faults but he doesn't repeatably suggest (and I believe actually mean it) that American foreign policy should include genocide

Michael Moore is slightly miss guided who has got himself caught up with the whole Democratic party and ended up making feature length campaign ads for them. Colter is a nut-case