Friday, June 09, 2006

MAnn Coulter - Attention Whore

"It seems that Miss Coulter's whole sense of self comes from thinking she is a "hot young babe" who drives, presumably myopic, men wild with a sexual desire so ardent they no longer hear the nonsense she is saying. Goodness me, who would have ever guessed that the Achilles heel for most Republican men would be the sight of pre-operative transsexuals in dresses made for someone 20 years younger?"
A brilliant book review by Mrs. Betty Bowers.

41 comments:

Jason H. Bowden said...

That about sums it up.

If Coulter was a skinhead making these abrasive comments, nobody would take her seriously. But being a decent looking blond woman seems to change things.

I can understand the contempt of people like Michael Berg, Cindy Sheehan, and the Jersey Girls who use their victimhood status as a shield when they preach socialism to the media. But I don't see the point in rolling in the mud with these people. Unless you want to sell books, perhaps. ;)

Stardust said...

By definition, I would not consider Michael Berg or any of those you mentioned to be socialists. They are all pretty well-off and of higher social standing than many Americans. They just are angry that they lost their sons and husbands, and their intentions are good, though futile in this world of so much hostility.

MAnn Coulter has been pathetically seeking attention in outlandish ways since the days of her youth. She must have either been coddled by mommy and daddy, or not given enough attention.

I think she has a lot of pent-up anger for whatever reasons and is redirecting that anger instead of dealing with the real issues of her past.

Jason H. Bowden said...

Stardust--

Michael Berg is running for office in New Jersey under the Green Party ticket-- the Democratic Party isn't leftwing enough for him. Here is a link of him speaking with the literally *Stalinist* (I'm not using an epithet -- it really is a Stalinist organization) ANSWER, which coordinates many anti-war rallies. Go to link and see what the guy has been up to.

"Socialist Workers newspaper? (Enthusiastically) Oh, yeah , oh yeah, oh yeah … (gives info) my e-mail is the best way to contact, because my wife probably will slam down the phone on just about anyone who calls; she’s still in a very emotional state. My son was a member of the Socialist Workers Party, yes he was, my son David, not my son Nick, my older son David. I supported his efforts working with the Socialist Workers Party, and I went with him to the headquarters in NY and I attended the rallies and I supported his trips to Cuba and … I don’t really want to say (gestures to me) because he’s (got a tape recorder)."

Yes, Commies do exist. They are the scum of the earth.

Cindy Sheehan, another Communist, really puts the red in red white and blue. Again, this isn't Communist as in the Jason is teasing people left of center sense, but Communist as in literally believes in the works of Marx and Lenin sense.

I haven't seen evidence that the four Jersey Girls are involved in socialist politics, but they do hate America much more than other 9/11 victims, which explains why they get more press time.

Stardust said...

Jason - I read your links and now have stand corrected on Berg and Sheehan's political affiliations. This does not mean that much of what they feel against war is not genuine or their grief any less. They hate the violence that killed their loved ones and I cannot call people who are hurting that much, scum. Misguided maybe...but not scum.

However, how do all these references to Sheehan and Berg, etc. make Ann Coulter any less of a Nazi bitch?

Jason H. Bowden said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Jason H. Bowden said...

nn Coulter is an abrasive clown. I agree with you 100% there. But consider this. Maybe the left hates her, instead of dismissing her, because many look at her and see themselves in the mirror? Ann Coulter's modus operandi is to hurl a lot of insults at liberals, and then when called on it, say she is being funny and the liberals have no sense of humor. But think about what a LOT of liberals do -- they consistently call the President a chimp, a racist, a war criminal, a terrorist, and when called on it, they say, "oh, I'm joking. Get a sense of humor!" Which is exactly what Coulter does. But people like the Jersey Girls, Michael Berg, and Cindy Sheehan aren't joking. They really believe what they say.

Coulter, in her new book, writes that Democrats "choose only messengers whom we're not allowed to reply to. That's why all Democratic spokesmen these days are sobbing, hysterical women. You can't respond to them because that would be questioning the authenticity of their suffering." This has been on of my biggest criticisms of the left lately. Influenced in one way or another by Nietzsche and Heidegger, they see reality constituted by "perspectives" and believe "authenticity" to be a more important property than truth. That's why Michael Berg hates Bush more than Zarqawi-- Zarqawi killed his son himself, while Bush the Terrorist kills people (like the guy who killed his son) inauthentically from behind his desk. If Coulter simply stuck to the truth, the left would ignore her like they ignore serious thinkers like Thomas Sowell, Roger Scruton, Francis Fukuyama and so forth. The fact that she questions the authenticity of lefty prophets is what gets the left up in arms.

Just something to think about. Note-- you won't see me buying any of her books.

Stardust said...

What Coulter does is much worse than posting photos of chimps. You don't see someone going around trying to sell chimp books while dressing like a transvestite hooker and calling random people names like "gay boys" from a podium and trying to INSTIGATE controversy simply for HERSELF. She isn't doing it for political reasons...only self-centered reasons to gain Jerry Springer attention to herself.

The thing about Coulter is that she is NOT joking, and she cannot discuss things in a civil and intelligent manner. She is obviously out to publicize HERSELF. She sells herself with SLANDER by writing books, doing interviews on television, etc.

Stardust said...

Jason, Do you see some of the same similarities between your neo-conism and Nazism? (Replace Jewish race with Muslims who don't go along with our democratic ideology.)

NazismLINK

Nazi rationale also invested heavily in the militarist belief that great nations grow from military power and maintained order, which in turn grow "naturally" from "rational, civilized cultures". The Nazi Party appealed to German nationalists and national pride, capitalizing on irredentist and revanchist sentiments as well as aversions to various aspects of modernist thinking. Many ethnic Germans still had heartfelt ties to the goal of creating a greater Germany and some felt that the use of military force was necessary to achieve it.

Fascism: Fascism is a radical authoritarian political philosophy that combines elements of corporatism, totalitarianism, extreme nationalism, militarism, anti-communism and anti-liberalism.

Krystalline Apostate said...

stardust:
the sight of pre-operative transsexuals in dresses made for someone 20 years younger?"
Hey. That's insulting transexuals. Seriously. They're people too.
Jason:
Maybe the left hates her, instead of dismissing her, because many look at her and see themselves in the mirror?
"Oh, they get upset, so it must be true"?
What are you, 12?
But think about what a LOT of liberals do -- they consistently call the President a chimp, a racist, a war criminal, a terrorist, and when called on it, they say, "oh, I'm joking. Get a sense of humor!"
I call the Shrub ALL of those things - he is - AND I'M NOT JOKING AT ALL. Nor do I, nor will I, ever, EVER, back down on those accusations. Any neo-con who swings on me gets a rude surprise, I guarantee that, my friend.
This has been on of my biggest criticisms of the left lately. Influenced in one way or another by Nietzsche and Heidegger, they see reality constituted by "perspectives" and believe "authenticity" to be a more important property than truth.
WTF? Is 'ad hominem' your middle name or something?
I see fallacies aren't restricted to the religious.
Oh wait. You're a neocon? Chances are strong you're an xtian, ain't they?
Lemmee take a few swings at your 'truth', bozo:
Any time you protest AGAINST the president, you're herded into a 'free speech zone' (yeah, Clinton created the friggin' things: Shrub-boy's abusing them).
Shrub Admin CENSORED the EPA report. Make of that what you will (you will anyways).
NO WMD'S! (Can you say 'fucking liar'?)
Gawd tole ole Shrub to 'invade Iraq' & found a state for the Palistineans.
I could go on & on, but you won't listen anyways.
This administration is a bunch of ill-informed INCOMPETENTS! I say we run 'em outta town on a rail.
& before you snort & begin your tally of excuses for these boneheads, look up this term:
RES IPSA LOQUITOR.

Stardust said...

Hey. That's insulting transexuals. Seriously. They're people too.

ra - I guess that would be insulting to transexuals to be compared to Mann Coulter. No one wants to be associated with this bitch.

Also, talk about incompetency in government, my husband just received a letter that he is one of the millions of military veterans who now have to worry about identity theft because information of 26.5 MILLION veterans was stolen from some moron government employee's home. We would like to know why was this person able to take the information out of a secure area and no one knew about it??? WFT! And right-wingers wonder why liberals don't trust the government. The information that was stolen was CLASSIFIED. This is how veterans who serve their country are treated.

Jason H. Bowden said...

Stardust --

Based on Ra's comments right here, you can see the doublestandard. Al Franken says Karl Rove should be executed for Treason, and many on the left think that is funny, if not true. Ted Rall calls Condaleeza Rice an "Aunt Jemina" and people on the left simply shrug and admire how cute this kind of racist journalism is. It should be denounced. Ann Coulter, unlike Michael Barone, George Will, and other intelligent conservative commentators, alone gives back what the left dishes out on daily basis, and you guys freak. People like Ra don't like Ann Coulter because their own tactics are being used against them.

On Iraq, I believe Muslims are capable of democratic government. The liberals think these brown people are not capable because of the actions of a terrorist minority people like Cindy Sheehan consider "freedom fighters," and they have the nerve to call Republicans Nazis. I could invoke Godwin's rule, but I'm holding all of the cards here, so I will continue.

The founder of PlannedParenthood promoted abortion so inferior races wouldn't reproduce, the environmental movement has its roots in 1930s Germany, the left defends fascists like Saddam Hussein, and it wants government to control everyone's health care, retirement, and education -- think twice before calling others Nazis.

Stardust said...

People like Ra don't like Ann Coulter because their own tactics are being used against them.

I can't believe you are defending that self-centered bitch. People don't like Ann Coulter because she is a Nazi Fascist Bitch.

he left defends fascists like Saddam Hussein,

Donald Rumsfeld shook hands with Saddam Hussein and sold him the weapons of mass destruction. Do you remember the Iran Contra affair? These were right-wing government officials (Ronnie Reagan), not some "peace-seeking hippies" walking around with a placard.

Stardust said...

BTW -
Saddam's U.S. purchases weapons were all destroyed in 1990-1991

Stardust said...

Security Archives
Shaking Hands with Saddam Hussein:
The U.S. Tilts toward Iraq, 1980-1984

Stardust said...

Nuclear nonproliferation was not a high priority of the Reagan administration - throughout the 1980s it downplayed Pakistan's nuclear program, though its intelligence indicated that a weapons capability was being pursued, in order to avert congressionally mandated sanctions. Sanctions would have impeded the administration's massive military assistance to Pakistan provided in return for its support of the mujahideen fighting the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan.)

All of this U.S. "meddling" and wheeling and dealing with enemies has made a mess of things. History shows that nuclear problems get worse when Republicans are in charge.

Stardust said...

The founder of PlannedParenthood promoted abortion so inferior races wouldn't reproduce,

This is twisted around. Where did you get this absurd accusation about this organization?

Planned Parenthood promotes responsibility. If you cannot afford children, one should not have them. Since neo cons are against welfare, you should be pleased that we have such organizations as Planned Parenthood.

Right winger xians are against welfare, but against programs that will relieve the welfare problem...like educating the poor and ignorant about birth control.

Jason H. Bowden said...

Stardust--

The West supported Hussein because Iran was on the verge of winning the Iran-Iraq war and we didn't want Iran to win for obvious reasons. The world would not have been better off with Iran as a superpower. The left, on the other hand, talks about how secular and enlightened Hussein was, which is not the case. Over 500,000 people died under the sanctions, a number that dwarfs the 35,000 people killed in the current conflict.

Here is the truth about Margaret Sanger. I'm personally pro-choice with some restrictions. But my point is that people shouldn't throw around the fascist label so recklessly when it can *easily* be made to stick to them.

Another example would be the environmental movement, which also didn't have a noble birth.

Which U.S. Senator is a former KKK Wizard? That would be Senator Byrd of the *Democrats*.

Ann Coulter may be mean. But is she really a Nazi? While she isn't the most noble person in the world, she may be correct about the nature of her name-calling critics.

Stardust said...

The left, on the other hand, talks about how secular and enlightened Hussein was,

WHO on the left? And do you have quotes?

but my point is that people shouldn't throw around the fascist label so recklessly when it can *easily* be made to stick to them.

Don't like labels? Well, you like them when you call ALL liberals fascists, commies, hippies, socialists, Marxists, and so on. If you read the link about Nazism in comparison with the current administrations ideology, there are many similiarities, not all, but many. I know you can read, so I am not going to take up comment space by rewriting them from the Wikipedia link I provided earlier.

Ann Coulter worships only herself USING Nazi tactics. Therefore she is a Nazi bitch who is only concerned about book sales...in other words, she is doing exactly what she accuses the 9-11 widows of doing and capitalizing on a tragedy.

Stardust said...

Margaret Sanger died in 1966. You seem to be the one stuck in the 60s rather than the "hippies" you despise. It's 2006...not 1960.

Have you read up on the Planned Parenthood of TODAY? Unlike Rummy and the turmoil in the middle east...it has improved over the years and has been educating women about pregnancy prevention, and so forth.

You are against welfare but also don't want people having dozens of children on the public dole. So, what are these people supposed to do?

Krystalline Apostate said...

jason:
Based on Ra's comments right here, you can see the doublestandard.
Yeah, well bite my ass, fella.
NOBODY gets a free pass. No 1. Not you, me, NOBODY.
Al Franken says Karl Rove should be executed for Treason, and many on the left think that is funny, if not true.
I've seen this monkey dance before.
Criticize the criticizers, so it devolves into a 'he said, she said' scenario.
Nice try.
Ted Rall calls Condaleeza Rice an "Aunt Jemina" and people on the left simply shrug and admire how cute this kind of racist journalism is.
When & where did this happen?
It should be denounced. Ann Coulter, unlike Michael Barone, George Will, and other intelligent conservative commentators, alone gives back what the left dishes out on daily basis, and you guys freak.
I don't. Turnabout's fairplay.
Waitaminnit, weren't you denouncing those tactics?
People like Ra don't like Ann Coulter because their own tactics are being used against them.
Listen fella, you don't know me well enough to make a general blanket statement like that. Plus, that qualifies as 'poisoning the well'.
For the record, I think we should bulldoze BOTH parties, the Demos are wussies & the frickin' Repubs are fascist bullies.
On Iraq, I believe Muslims are capable of democratic government.
Oh yeah, force-fed democracy. That makes a LOT of sense.
The liberals think these brown people are not capable because of the actions of a terrorist minority people like Cindy Sheehan consider "freedom fighters," and they have the nerve to call Republicans Nazis.
Man, what are you smoking?
I could invoke Godwin's rule, but I'm holding all of the cards here, so I will continue.
Anyone ever use the word 'delusional' w/you? Holding all the cards?
Godwin's rule, BTW, is a catch-22: 1st person to use the concept of Nazism means thread is over.
The other part? Whoever invokes it LOSES THE DEBATE AS WELL. That includes MENTIONING it.
The founder of PlannedParenthood promoted abortion so inferior races wouldn't reproduce, the environmental movement has its roots in 1930s Germany, the left defends fascists like Saddam Hussein, and it wants government to control everyone's health care, retirement, and education -- think twice before calling others Nazis.
Your fucking kidding me - appeal to ridicule, yepper - you can't seriously BELIEVE all that right-wing propaganda?
Ad hominem, poisoning the well, christ, you're a WALKING TALKING fallacy, fella.
Cheeses crust, you believe all of that folderol?
Gimmee your address, so I can ship some grease to your house.
You'll need it to get that HAND outta your ass.

Krystalline Apostate said...

Jason:
Did some research on your 'nazi environmentalism' birth charge.
You're a quart low, fella.
You're a neocon quoting an anarchist? That's rich.
Anyways, another charge slaughtered:
http://www.theodoreroosevelt.org/life/trrancher.htm

"Always a man to take action, when he became President in 1901, Roosevelt became a saviour of natural resources and a pioneer of environmentalism. He established the U.S. Forest Service and by signing the 1906 Antiquities Act he proclaimed 18 national monuments. He also obtained Congressional approval for the establishment of five national parks and 51 wildlife refuges and set aside land as national forests.

He angered many who saw potential profit in the large scale development of beautiful spaces such as the Grand Canyon but perservered crafted ways to preserve them regardless. "
You MAY actually want to do some REAL research on topics, instead of quote-mining & cherry picking your POV on the 'Net.

Krystalline Apostate said...

stardust:
Margaret Sanger died in 1966. You seem to be the one stuck in the 60s rather than the "hippies" you despise. It's 2006...not 1960.
JHB is pulling 1 of those hat tricks neocons use all the time - claiming dark histories in order to invalidate the ideology of the present.
For instance, I read somewhere (sorry, no link, memory only) where some neocon was claiming that the abortion movement was based (Roe vs. Wade) on a lie, Roe(?) changed her story, the 2 women lawyers wouldn't listen, etc.
While this technique has some value (i.e., modern day - goes to examining agenda), it really is kind of limp & impotent as a movement/ideology grows older.
For instance, Hellen Keller was a socialist, & helped found the ACLU. Does that mean the entire org. is communist? Of course not.
It's pandering, pure & simple. Diversionary tactics only.
And dishonest.

Jason H. Bowden said...

Ra --

I'm not using dark histories to discredit anyone. I'm pro-choice, and very pro-environment.

Take your ritalin and pay attention.

If someone is painting another person with the national socialist label, you better make certain your background and your behavior is squeaky clean. Otherwise, you're throwing stones from a glass house.

Secondly, Coulter's behavior is reprehensible. The left seems to think Coulter herself is reprehensible, but her behavior is not. Why don't people like Ted Rall, Michael Moore, and Al Franken get the same scrutiny Coulter does? I don't think Coulter minds it, since it helps her sell books, but think about it.

Stardust said...

If someone is painting another person with the national socialist label, you better make certain your background and your behavior is squeaky clean. Otherwise, you're throwing stones from a glass house.

And that goes for both sides or just the commie liberal side?

Again...Coulter is only doing what she does for her OWN GAIN. She is using everyone...republicans, 9/11 victims, etc and not for political purposes...it is for the purpose of "hey everyone look at me I am a 45-year-old leather-clad anorexic bitch!"

Stardust said...

"oh, and by the way...buy my book and make me richer you suckers".

Krystalline Apostate said...

JHB:
I'm not using dark histories to discredit anyone. I'm pro-choice, and very pro-environment.
Then why the crapola about the 'nazi origins' of the environmentalist movement?
Take your ritalin and pay attention.
A touch! A veritable sting forsooth!
I'm willing to bet $ to donuts my attention span is better than yours.
If someone is painting another person with the national socialist label, you better make certain your background and your behavior is squeaky clean. Otherwise, you're throwing stones from a glass house.
Well, MY metaphorical house ain't made o' glass, Confucius notwithstanding.
Besides which, define 'squeaky clean', if you'd be so kind.
Secondly, Coulter's behavior is reprehensible. The left seems to think Coulter herself is reprehensible, but her behavior is not. Why don't people like Ted Rall, Michael Moore, and Al Franken get the same scrutiny Coulter does? I don't think Coulter minds it, since it helps her sell books, but think about it.
Wow, you need to get out more.
Unless you frequent crap sites like moorewatch.whatever-the-freakin'-extension-is.
I'm still waiting the source of the 'aunt jemima'/Rall charge.
& I find the 'what about the criticizers themselves' nonsense to be more or less a bad revamp of poisoning the well.
Address the argument, if you'd be so kind.
If the charges have merit, then they NEED TO BE ADDRESSED.
Worry about the message, and the facts, not the messenger.
'Cause we ain't on Jerry Springer.
So cut the 'hating america' crap.

"It is the duty of the patriot to defend his country against its government" - Thomas Paine.

Jason H. Bowden said...

Stardust--

This goes for *all* sides. Ra appears to be too partisan to understand this.

Ra--

I agree that stating someone hates America shouldn't be used as a rhetorical device. However, there are people who hate America. America haters denounce the United States for whatever it does. Secondly, America haters believe the wildest conspiracy theories in order to to put the United States in a negative light, while giving the worst of dictators and terrorists the benefit of the doubt.

Since you feel it is important, Ted Rall didn't call Condaleeza Aunt Jemima. I'm mistaken, that was a different liberal being "funny." Rall actually called her a "house nigger" in one of his cartoons, and wrote that Rice should be "sent to a racial reeducation camp." That's pretty vile stuff.

Jason H. Bowden said...

I'll sum up here with a few other intelligent opinions in the blogosphere and be done with this thread.

Captain's Quarters, a conservative blog, had this to say about Coulter:

"This represents the downside of provocateurs, even those entertaining enough to enjoy for 80% of the time. Instead of arguing facts or philosophy, the provocateur usually relies on ad hominem attack in order to degrade and dismiss their opposition. A little of that goes a very long way, and unfortunately Coulter delivered it in droves yesterday. She owes these victims closest to 9/11 an abject apology and a retraction of her remarks, and she should pray that she doesn't ever experience the kind of loss that these people have had. Regardless of their politics, their grief was and is all too real, and that drives their public engagement. I doubt a single one of them wouldn't gladly trade their influence for one more day with the ones they lost. Shame on Ann for implying otherwise."

Rightwing Nuthouse, another very conservative blog, explained

"She has descended into a black hole of necessity from which there is no escape; where she is forced to please her rabid base of red meat conservatives usually by going beyond the bounds of decency and proper public discourse in order to make a point that could have been made without resorting to the kind of hurtful, hateful, personal attacks that have become a hallmark of her war with liberals.

Make no mistake. Ann Coulter is a brutish lout, a conservative ogre who should be denied a public platform to spout what any conservative with an ounce of integrity and intellectual honesty should be able to see as unacceptable. To descend to the level of your opponents in order to criticize them is not an excuse. And for such a gifted wordsmith, Coulter does not have the excuse of ignorance."

Lastly, the Atheist Jew, from the reasonable left, had this to say:

"Take me for instance. I don't apologize for terror. In fact, I'm as hard on terrorists and radical Islam as much as any Far Right Republican is for that matter. I know that radical Islam must be reformed or exterminated. And I deny God's existence, and I know evolution is fact. I am proof that Coulter is a know nothing rhetorical wind bag. I know many Atheists and Agnostic who share my views on Islam. A lot of them comment on this blog. Coulter is an embarrassment to anyone who is Pro-War on Terror. The War on Terror has nothing to do with believing in evolution. In fact, most of who we are fighting are staunch God believers and most Jihadists do not believe in evolution."

Stardust said...

Jason - There are no American haters in this discussion. Disagreeing with current administration policies does not make one an America hater. A real America hater would be one that follows blindly and one who wants all to be of one mind, and one way of thought. It is when we cannot admit our flaws that we are in real danger. We are not "borg"...we are a nation with people of differing views and the right to express those views. In addition, we also have the right to dispute views and policies we disagree with. That in itself is VERY American. America was founded on this kind of thing. If we don't question our government, we run the danger of losing our freedoms that others have died to win for future generations. It keeps them on their toes when they know we are watching and scrutinizing. Clinton was scrutinized and criticized etc in the same manner. I do not know of one president who went unchallenged on his policies and the job he was doing while in office.

Jason H. Bowden said...

Stardust--

People can have different views without hating America. One can disagree with the decision to enter Iraq, like me, without believing the worst about American officials and the best about dictators and terrorists.

At the same time, the fact that someone has a different doesn't mean they don't hate America. I'm glad WWII didn't happen today. People would be protesting in the streets, calling Roosevelt a terrorist and a war criminal, demanding that we give peace a chance with Hirohito and Hitler, complaining that the war is taking too long, crying that the use of our military only encourages fascism, insisting that we should be using more "diplomacy" with Mussolini & company, our use of nuclear weapons was unfair, ad infinitum. THAT is the legacy of the 1960s generation. I should be able to call people anti-American on the basis of the two criteria I provided above. They believe the worst about us, and they think America does wrong no matter what.

Anti-Americanism has consequences, as I'll show in the next post.

Stardust said...

Jason, and when the tables are turned...then conservatives who bitch and complain hate America?

WWII was a whole other war and we had something called ALLIES back then, also. You do not know how people would react when the whole world is involved.

We can keep making scenerios till the cows come home. The main point of this comic is that ANN COULTER IS A SELF-CENTERED BITCH no matter whose side she claims to be on.

As for GW...he is still a chimp. The conservatives were all over Clinton over a cigar and a consenting intern. People in the public eye will be made fun of for their fuck ups.

Jason H. Bowden said...

The mission as it stands today is to defend a nascent democracy against attacks by totalitarians who wish to topple it.

A big problem with the left is that they don't see connections between anything -- many of them don't even believe in an objective world and see reality constituted by "perspectives." As many communists in Vietnam will testify, at times they felt like giving up, but they only had to look to the protesters in the United States as inspiration to keep up the fight.

General Giap in an interview after the war said that the US anti-war movement gave them hope and they felt that if they could just hold on, delay, and inflict as many US casualties as possible, the US government would lose its resolve and ultimately withdraw from Vietnam. Interesting, that seems to be exactly what happened. Our armies cannot be defeated in battle, but they can be defeated by self-righteous hippies at home, and evil people know this.

Find the Wall Street Journal interview with Bui Tin, who served on the General Staff of the North Vietnam Army and received the unconditional surrender of South Vietnam on April 30, 1975. During the interview Mr. Tin was asked if the American antiwar movement was important to Hanoi's victory. Mr. Tin responded "It was essential to our strategy", referring to the war being fought on two fronts, the Vietnam battlefield and back home in America through the antiwar movement on college campuses and in the city streets. He further stated the North Vietnamese leadership listened to the American evening news broadcasts "to follow the growth of the American antiwar movement." Visits to Hanoi made by persons such as Jane Fonda, former Attorney General Ramsey Clark and various church ministers "gave us confidence that we should hold on in the face of battlefield reverses." Mr. Tin surmised, "America lost because of its democracy; through dissent and protest it lost the ability to mobilize a will to win." Mr. Tin further stated that General Vo Nguyen Giap (Commanding General of the North Vietnam Army) had advised him the 1968 Tet Offensive had been a defeat.

The terrorists in Iraq, even though they get their asses handed to them over and over again, are counting on people like Ra. Here's is what Captain Ed reports:

Captured AQ Documents: "Every Year Is Worse Than The Previous Year"

-------------------------
4. The policy followed by the brothers in Baghdad is a media oriented policy without a clear comprehensive plan to capture an area or an enemy center. Other word, the significance of the strategy of their work is to show in the media that the American and the government do not control the situation and there is resistance against them. This policy dragged us to the type of operations that are attracted to the media, and we go to the streets from time to time for more possible noisy operations which follow the same direction.

This direction has large positive effects; however, being preoccupied with it alone delays more important operations such as taking control of some areas, preserving it and assuming power in Baghdad (for example, taking control of a university, a hospital, or a Sunni religious site).
...
At the same time, the Americans and the Government were able to absorb our painful blows, sustain them, compensate their losses with new replacements, and follow strategic plans which allowed them in the past few years to take control of Baghdad as well as other areas one after the other. That is why every year is worse than the previous year as far as the Mujahidin’s control and influence over Baghdad.
-----------------

Jason H. Bowden said...

Stardust--

I agreed on Ann Coulter. I also agreed that both sides need to turn it down with the insults.

You wnet beyond this and claimed that no one hates America and people just have "different" views. Well, sometimes those different views are anti-American. Since the Vietnam war, our enemies have learned that the far, far left can be a reliable propaganda mouthpiece for them.

This isn't a cheap insult. As my last post shows, with testimony from the commanders in Vietnam to confiscated al queda documents, it is a matter of cold, objective fact.

Jason H. Bowden said...

I'll add another thing. Under Clinton, Republicans behaved in two different ways. Many of them, following John McCain, claimed that they didn't agree with the decision to go to Yugoslavia, but that since we are there, we should play to win. Others, like Tom Delay, who is human scum, took this approach.

That's one of the reasons why I was supporting the Democrats back then, and one of the reasons why I don't support the far left today.

Stardust said...

You wnet beyond this and claimed that no one hates America and people just have "different" views.

You must have skimmed...you can re-read what I wrote exactly in the comment above...I quote myself

"There are no American haters in this discussion. Disagreeing with current administration policies does not make one an America hater."

Making fun of politicians is how America copes with the frustration and stupidity. But most of us don't go around on public television and public speaking engagements to aid our own financial gain.

outofcontrol said...

Jason
A big problem with the left is that they don't see connections between anything????
Where do you pull this crap out of?
Conservatives stick with one topic, gay marriage, and win with it. The other party has so many thoughts and ideas that they see all connections and appear to not be focused. They are the party that includes people not excludes them for being different.

Krystalline Apostate said...

JHB:
This goes for *all* sides. Ra appears to be too partisan to understand this.
& there you go again, making snap judgements.
Kudos to staying calm under fire, BTW.
I agree that stating someone hates America shouldn't be used as a rhetorical device. However, there are people who hate America. America haters denounce the United States for whatever it does. Secondly, America haters believe the wildest conspiracy theories in order to to put the United States in a negative light, while giving the worst of dictators and terrorists the benefit of the doubt.
So 1st you say it shouldn't be used as a rhetorical device, & then you use it.
C'mon.
I love this country, sure I do, but I'm certainly not blinded by the rabid mad-dog patriotism most folks are.
& that last sentence sounds suspiciously like the 'aiding & abetting the enemy' propaganda the Shrub admin keeps trotting out.
Also, I note that you're not trotting out any news sources. Just blogs you agree with.
& how on earth is Sheehan a communist? How does a commie mom send her son out to fight in a US war?
Really, you neocons get right up my nose.
Next thing, you'll be saying the ACLU is a socialist organization, just because Hellen Keller (who helped found it) was a socialist.
It's really too far out in left field (literally, figuratively, & metaphorically).

Stardust said...

Ann's Master Plan
By Madeleine Begun Kane

A right-wingnut woman named Ann
Had a book tour publicity plan:
She would spew on TV
Lies and venom with glee,
And they'd let her, cause Ann ain't a man.

Duane said...

I'm astounded that your blog even ends up with people like Jason. How in the hell do they stumble their way in? They obviously belong in another blog somewhere.

Stardust said...

I'm astounded that your blog even ends up with people like Jason. How in the hell do they stumble their way in?

I am just damned interesting and smart I guess. LOL! Most of the stuff I put is very brief, comical, and "light" but the little I write seems to be enough to "ruffle feathers" sometimes. :-D

MilukFrog said...

Forgive my typing, as I write this i have a nursing baby on my lap. i wanted to point out that, as i read in the paper some days ago, some of the jerseu girls voted for bush in 2000 and are repubs. they are angry and disillusioned with bush admin not because they are 'socialists' or whatever. also i think i read on orcinus that the far right relies far more on personal attacks and 'eliminationist' rhetoric than the left, as based on an analysis of goings on in 2004.