The only people who have been illogical in their thinking are Bush and company. For example, they didn’t listen when told they didn’t have enough troops, Bush isn’t listening with respect to the troop surge, and they never anticipated sectarian violence.

Political opportunism? This from the party that exploited the 9/11 events to start an unjust war?! Are you really that deluded?

Add to that the fact that Bush lied to the American people about WMD and the Iraq/Al Qaeda connection and I see that you truly have been deluded by the right wing nut jobs. Yes Ryan, it’s all there. In a sense, Bush did hypnotize us into going into Iraq. He lied.

Why don’t you just answer a few questions. How can you support a liar? How can you support Coulter knowing she is a thief and has no credibility?

It is her insinuation that Nancy Pelosi’s flag would be at half staff because of the execution of Saddam Hussein and not because of President Ford’s death. THAT is the kind of rhetoric and spite I am arguing against.

I totally agree that Coulter is excessive in her sarcasm.

However, the reason Coulter comes across so strongly with such blatant sarcasm against someone like Pelosi is because this is a leading contemporary Democrat that is contantly championing the cause to suggest that Bush hyponotized everyone into voting for the war.

Most Conservatives recognize and despise Democrats’ political opportunism in a time of war, and yes, indeed question their sincerity in fighting the war on terror when their actions seem so illogical.

I can agree to that. Have a good weekend.

I think we’ll have to agree to disagree.

Ah, I think I see the problem. It wasn’t until you put my quotes together like that that I saw how unclear I was being. Thank you.

Let me try again.

For the first pair of quotes: They are not at cross purposes with each other. The first one was meant to to illustrate that her description, in general, of liberals tend to take (carefully picked) facts of their missdeeds and blow them out of proportion and distort them into an impression of malfeasance. That it is an “impression” is the key word here. And it is this impression of anti-America or “surrender monkey” liberals or what-have-you that I believe is wrong. It is this depiction of liberals as something they are not that I am talking against. A lot of what she says of what Democrats have done is true, I agree. But that has never been my argument. It is the unnecessary, spiteful, antagonistic and full-fledged demonization of liberals that I am up in arms against. The second quote is not a contrary opinion to this, although I can see how it could be easily misunderstood. What I meant to say is that the people that she calls extremists actually aren’t at all.

As for the second pair of quotes: As I’ve just attempted to explain above, it is not the “facts” she has used of what the Democrats have done that I am against. I’m sure most of them are true. Once again I say it is the extreme nature of her rhetoric that I find abusive. There is no need for it. If you could remove all of her attacks and spiteful rants against liberals from the article you quoted above, I really doubt I’d have much of a problem with it.

Again, it is not what is in the article, but how the article is written. It is not the facts but the message. It is not the words but the intent. She did not write this to help further the political disscussions on this topic. She wrote it to inflame opinion and cause ire and hate. For some reason she wants people to be angry and incensed. She wants name-calling and demonizing. She wants people to go after each other. She does nothing but add gallons of fuel to the fire of division in this country. She is cruel. And she is hurting all who listen to her.

It is not what the Democrats have done that is at issue with me in this particular argument. It is Coulter’s assumption as to why the Democrats have done these things that I believe to be untrue and unkind. It is her insinuation that Nancy Pelosi’s flag would be at half staff because of the execution of Saddam Hussein and not because of President Ford’s death. THAT is the kind of rhetoric and spite I am arguing against. That single lowball,vindictive, hurtful, untrue, unreasonable and unrealistic accusation is not called for and goes far beyond good taste and reasonable argument.

And it is that and that alone that I am against when it comes to Ann Coulter. In short, she spreads hatred and I will not stand for that.

Cheney – Chicken hawked out of Vietnam
Wolfowitz – Chicken hawked out of Vietnam
Bush – Chicken hawked out of Vietnam
Limpbaugh – Chicken hawked out of Vietnam

and on and on and on.

“In order to achieve a ceasefire, Nixon jammed lousy terms down South Vietnam’s throat,”?

Wow Nixon was an evil Democrat in disguise.

Another swing and a miss Coulter.

Why do you listen to this discredited source Doug? Coulter steals thoughts and ideas from others. She’s nothing more than a brainless thief.

It’s actually quite funny. I do hope Coultergeist is reflective of the right’s thoughts about the left in general (or at least the leaders on the right). That is, they underestimated us in ’06 and will do so again in ’08.

I’m honestly confused now.

You say,

Except for the very small minority of radicals, her description of liberals fits NO ONE.

And yet,

She is not painting a picture of extremists.

You continue,

She is painting an extreme picture of people who have made terrible mistakes.

But admit that,

…I will agree with most of the “facts” of her article.

Now, I understand that facts can be twisted, distorted, couched in innuendo, and used for nefarious purposes.

And I think that this is exactly why her article demands a factual response and not a simple dismissal that she is a hater and an extremist. This is what Steve F was asking for, I believe… Paint a broad picture, using examples like Coulter does, that contradicts her argument.

The gist of her article is that “the Democrats have done A, B and C, which led to X, Y and Z. And they’re trying to do it again with Iraq…watch out!”

As evidence to support this thesis she doesn’t use the comments from DailyKos or the worst forum posts on Democratic Underground. She uses the views and actions of mainstream liberals.

If what those mainstream liberals said and did is distasteful, well, that says more about the liberals than it does about Ann Coulter.