Coulter commits a third degree felony

**Navaros** · 02-17-2006, 11:09

I do not give that article any credibility whatsoever because it calls Coulter smart whereas in actuality she is extremely stupid. Anyone needing empirical evidence of this simply must watch her interview with CBC television.

http://www.cbc.ca/fifth/sticksandstones.html

**Divinus Arma** · 02-17-2006, 14:41

Is this the best you hippies have? Whining about Ann Coulter's voting mistake and why Cheney's Staff didn't alert the self-important media before attending to his friend?

Hilarious. You guys are going to get totally owned in '08.

**Lemur** · 02-17-2006, 15:16

Divinus, if you're old enough to be a prospective Dad, you're old enough to not be a total partisan hack.

And your notion that (a) The people posting in this thread are attempting to build an important argument against the Republican Party, (b) You are the clever person who discovered this, and (c) Having unconvered the Liberals' plot, you now know how you will pwn the opposition.

Perhaps you, Like DevDave, are attempting a Coulterian stand-up routine?

**Divinus Arma** · 02-17-2006, 15:54

Originally Posted by Lemur

Divinus, if you're old enough to be a prospective Dad, you're old enough to not be a total partisan hack.

My fatherhood and age is unrelated to this. Your statement reeks of self-importance and arrogance.

By stating that I am a "total partisan hack", you simply reaffirm that you are indeed a partisan hack yourself. Which is fine. I actually don't care if I am viewed as a partisan hack. I identify with the Republican Party of tradition and as such am disgusted with both the current administration's lack of fiscal responsibility and lack of federal restraint. I happen to have a bigger problem with the values and ideals of the Democratic Party- a value system that makes minorities reliant on government, undercuts American competitiveness, desires centralized federal power, and seeks to interpret the constitution to fit the feeling of the moment.

And your notion that (a) The people posting in this thread are attempting to build an important argument against the Republican Party,

While boxing, is a jab not an attack? Chip, chip, chip- small steps towards a greater agenda. Soly has every right to post this, and I reserve the right to post my jabs at liberals as well.

(b) You are the clever person who discovered this,

Your (a) point was enough with out this snide remark. Is this your way of saying that you see your views as superior to mine? You certainly make your arrogance clear. Fine- you are a better person then me. Good luck with that.

and (c) Having unconvered the Liberals' plot, you now know how you will pwn the opposition.

This thread is a weak jab at Anne and I address it as such. I havsn't yet seen a comprehensive democratic strategy for political success in the coming elections. Even the Democrats admit they are fractured, without moderate leadership, and unable to take advantage of Republican Party weaknesses.

Perhaps you, Like DevDave, are attempting a Coulterian stand-up routine?

Nope.

**Reverend Joe** · 02-17-2006, 16:07

It's not a jab. It's a joke. It's funny.

Just say "who cares?" if you think it isn't important. Going into a self-righteous tirade about your assumptions concerning the 2008 elections makes you look like a pompous jerk, and I know damn well you are not that.

Go do a lude and come back later.

Edit: AND WHAT THE HELL IS UP WITH THAT HAMSTER?!

**Lemur** · 02-17-2006, 16:13

Originally Posted by Divinus Arma

Your statement reeks of self-importance and arrogance.

By stating that I am a "total partisan hack", you simply reaffirm that you are indeed a partisan hack yourself.

Oooh! We can play this one for a while! My turn: By affirming that I affirm that I am a partisan hack, you confirm yourself to be a hack! And Your statement that my statement reeks of self-importance is even more self-important! Your turn. Keep the merry-go-round turning ...

I identify with the Republican Party of tradition and as such am disgusted with both the current administration's lack of fiscal responsibility and lack of federal restraint.

As I've said many times elsewhere, I'm a budget hawk. So the total lack of fiscal responsibility we have right now makes my teeth ache. I've never identified with either party, although I tend to get grumpier at whichever one is in power. So I may be both a hack and arrogant, but I laugh at anyone who tries to call me partisan.

I happen to have a bigger problem with the values and ideals of the Democratic Party- a value system that makes minorities reliant on government, undercuts American competitiveness, desires centralized federal power, and seeks to interpret the constitution to fit the feeling of the moment.

As far as "centralized federal power," well, uh, I think we're seeing a pretty amazing grab at that right now. And as far as intepreting the constitution to fit the moment, well, George F. Will (liberal!) has come out pretty strongly against the current admin.'s power grab. So two of your four objections to the minority party apply equally well to the majority party.

While boxing, is a jab not an attack? Chip, chip, chip- small steps towards a greater agenda. Soly has every right to post this, and I reserve the right to post my jabs at liberals as well.

Liberals. There's a word you see slung around with abandon. Seems these days that anyone who isn't strictly on board with the administration is some sort of liberal, if not a hippie. Back in the day, only about 20% of Americans identified themselves as liberals. I guess they must have been breeding, or converting, or something. Here's the disconnect: I hear Republicans calling everybody under the sun "liberals," but there aren't enough libs to win elections. Perhaps they're not voting?

**Reverend Joe** · 02-17-2006, 16:16

Oh, no, no, no, no, no- don't do that... not again... god almighty, I would really like to see one- just one- backroom thread that doesn't devolve into a slugging match.

**Lemur** · 02-17-2006, 16:25

My bad, pardon. At least I tried to keep the tone silly ...

**Divinus Arma** · 02-17-2006, 16:37

Originally Posted by Lemur

Oooh! We can play this one for a while! My turn: By affirming that I affirm that I am a partisan hack, you confirm yourself to be a hack! And Your statement that my statement reeks of self-importance is even more self-important! Your turn. Keep the merry-go-round turning ...

I know you are but what am I? I'm rubber and you're glue, whatever I say... etc. Fine Who cares. But the father/age comment was an unnecessary ad hominem.

As I've said many times elsewhere, I'm a budget hawk. So the total lack of fiscal responsibility we have right now makes my teeth ache. I've never identified with either party, although I tend to get grumpier at whichever one is in power. So I may be both a hack and arrogant, but I laugh at anyone who tries to call me partisan.

Good for you on the fiscal responsibility. Seems most of your posts here have the liberal slant otherwise...

As far as "centralized federal power," well, uh, I think we're seeing a pretty amazing grab at that right now. And as far as intepreting the constitution to fit the moment, well, George F. Will (liberal!) has come out pretty strongly against the current admin.'s power grab. So two of your four objections to the minority party apply equally well to the majority party.

I agree. The centralization of power by the current administration is unacceptable. However, I do think it is important to give the executive branch the tools necessary to do the job.

Liberals. There's a word you see slung around with abandon. Seems these days that anyone who isn't strictly on board with the administration is some sort of liberal, if not a hippie. Back in the day, only about 20% of Americans identified themselves as liberals. I guess they must have been breeding, or converting, or something. Here's the disconnect: I hear Republicans calling everybody under the sun "liberals," but there aren't enough libs to win elections. Perhaps they're not voting?

Liberals in my defintion are those that interpret the constitution liberally and seek rapid social change. Besides, it's fun.

Edit: Oh and regarding the "disconnect that you detail here; The liberals dominate the democratic leadership. The rest of the moderate democrats are just screwed. Leiberman is a virtual outcast in the Democratic Party.

**Redleg** · 02-17-2006, 16:38

Originally Posted by Navaros

I do not give that article any credibility whatsoever because it calls Coulter smart whereas in actuality she is extremely stupid. Anyone needing empirical evidence of this simply must watch her interview with CBC television.

http://www.cbc.ca/fifth/sticksandstones.html

Coulter is obviousily smarter then you,