I Can't Stop Laughing

[MMMMMM]

Is this a form of stream-of-consciousness writing, or...what? Just how does she come up with this stuff?

I'm talking purely about style here...wow....and wow.

[ QUOTE ]
Vermont Gov. Howard Dean has been issuing diatribes against the Bush administration that would surpass even Tariq Aziz with severe menstrual cramps. This strategy has made him the runaway favorite of the Democratic Party. Even Mr. War Hero, John Kerry, is getting shellacked by Dean. At times Kerry seems almost ready to surrender, making him look even more French. (If only Kerry had a war record or an enormously rich spouse to fall back on!)

[/ QUOTE ]

That's the opening paragraph in a new article by Ann Coulter. I haven't even read the second paragraph yet. Maybe she will make some good points in the article. I don't care if she does or not. This stuff is priceless.

[MMMMMM]

Well I just read the rest of the article. Some good points, some not-so-good points, but oh, the style.

A few choice excerpts:

[ QUOTE ]
In the wake of Dean's success, the entire Democratic Dream Team is beginning to sound like Dr. Demento. On the basis of their recent pronouncements, the position of the Democratic Party seems to be that Saddam Hussein did not hit us on 9-11, but Halliburton did.

Explaining his vote for a war that he then immediately denounced, Kerry recently said his vote was just a head-fake, leading some to wonder how many of Kerry's other votes in the U.S. Senate this would explain...


[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
None of the Democrats has the guts to come out and demand that U.S. forces turn tail and run when the going gets tough. If only one of them had the courage to demand cowardice like a real Democrat!...

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
Inconsolable that their pleas to "work through" the U.N. did not stop Bush from invading Iraq and deposing Saddam Hussein, now all the Democrats are eager for the U.N. to get involved so it can wreck the rebuilding process. Since we didn't let the U.N. lose the war for us, the least we can do is let them screw up the peace.

The idea that we would involve those swine in the postwar occupation of Iraq is so preposterous that it's under serious consideration as next week's slogan for the Howard Dean campaign...


[/ QUOTE ]

For anyone (except Cyrus) who might care, here is the full link:

http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=9802

[skaboomizzy]

It'd be nice if she could remember to spell Senator KERREY'S name right.

[John Cole]

M,

Let the swine pay for the rebuilding process, sez Bush. Oink, Oink, sez Coulter. I'm waiting for more of them animal analogies from the Casey Stengel of "journalism."

John

PS. I'd love to see where Kerrey said "head fake."

[andyfox]

"If only one of them had the courage to demand cowardice like a real Democrat!"

"our draft-dodging, pot-smoking commander in chief"

The fact that such thinking is taken seriously by anyone goes a long way towards explaining why there is a lack of serious political discussion in this country. Gee, Clinton smoked pot. That's much more important than the fact that Richard Nixon was a pathological liar and a war criminal or that Ronald Reagan didn't know anything about anything. But they were Republicans, by definition good and heroic. Like Joe McCarthy. Surely her hero Dubya never smoked pot.

After all, real Democrats are cowards. And traitors. Sandbox journalism, worthy of a tantrum-possessed three-year old. It would indeed be funny if it wasn't so sad and so dangerous.

She's a disgrace.

[MMMMMM]

Unintentionally hilarious is my first impression. But then, I react similarly to many of my opponents at the poker table, I just try not to show it. Wonder how she'd be in a Hold'em game...now I'm laughing again...just imagine what she might say if anyone put a bad beat on her... /images/graemlins/tongue.gif

[TAFKAn]

Coulter is a ditzy blowhard demagogue who can't construct a even a half-baked argument much less a real one. I'm not saying this because I hate her politics. I'm a guy who thinks Bush is too liberal for the most part. She's just plain stupid.

She's embarassing to us extreme right-wing libertarian wackos who are also brilliant.

[MMMMMM]

I think that "liberal" has become nearly inverted from it's true and original meaning. Doesn't the word "liberal" itelf seem to imply "to allow" rather than "to control?" Yet so-called liberals are usually in favor of greater and greater government control and interference with the citizens, rather than the opposite.

I read the Libertarian platform and agree with most of it, except I think it doesn't take into account the need to hunt down terrorists worldwide. The U.S. in the role of a sitting duck just waiting to absorb the next blow isn't exactly a winning model, IMO, when confronted with insane dedicated attackers. So too the Platform doesn't take into account the need to prevent regimes such as North Korea from arming terrorist organizations.

Other than that, I think it pretty much makes sense. My feeling is that the Libertarian Party is growing and becoming better known, as it should.

Strange too how ideas merely calling for individual self-determination are considered "right-wing" today. I suppose most liberals today would think of Henry David Thoreau as a right-winger, too, if they really stopped to think about it. How absurd. I pretty much agree with Thoreau's philosophy.

[John Cole]

M,

You'll also find in Emerson that same strain that you see in Thoreau. See, especially, "Self-Reliance." Of course, both writers called for the formation of a national literature and a national consciousness. Thoreau's Walden, as so ably documented by Stanley Cavell in The Senses of Walden, becomes America's first sacred book, its Bible. Walden is about mourning and morning--what has been lost and how it can be recaptured. For Cavell, Emerson, and Thoreau, we find what has been lost in words. Read in a certain way, Walden screams "Wake Up!" But it never quite does so directly. As Emerson says, the teacher never instructs but, instead, provokes.

Thoreau was no right-winger; he used both wings.

John

[MMMMMM]

I don't think he was a "right-winger" either.

Note, though, how diametrically opposed most of his philosophy is to today's liberalism.

Thoreau basically said the profession of "doing-good" is overfull and for the most part counterproductive. Contrast this with the left's calls for ever greater "social programs."

Many today would think it an extreme right-wing position to simply cut out all forms of government welfare (saving not only the cost but the immense and inefficient overhead as well, and relieving those being forced to pay for it from that burden which has been forced upon them).

Why should allowing self-determination be considered a right-wing position? Why should governmental non-interference be considered a right-wing position? Methinks non-interference is actually the most liberal position, in the truest sense of the word.

[ACPlayer]

Great thought MM. My one minute of research found this:

lib·er·al·ism (lĭb'ər-ə-lĭz'əm, lĭb'rə-)
n.

1. The state or quality of being liberal.

2.

a. A political theory founded on the natural goodness of humans and the autonomy of the individual and favoring civil and political liberties, government by law with the consent of the governed, and protection from arbitrary authority.
b. often Liberalism The tenets or policies of a Liberal party.
3 An economic theory in favor of laissez-faire, the free market, and the gold standard.
Liberalism
4
a. A 19th-century Protestant movement that favored free intellectual inquiry, stressed the ethical and humanitarian content of Christianity, and de-emphasized dogmatic theology.
b. A 19th-century Roman Catholic movement that favored political democracy and ecclesiastical reform but was theologically orthodox.
lib'er·al·ist n.
lib'er·al·is'tic (-lĭs'tĭk) adj.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition Copyright © 2003 by Houghton Mifflin Company. Published by Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved.


Perhaps, I am a liberal and did not even know it - except for the religious part ofcourse. One can ofcourse now add

5. A pejorative used by Republicans to label anything we dont agree with.

So, if the liberals on this forum - nicky g., cyrus, et al read this they may renounce liberalism.

I may have to research this some more.