Ann Coulter on Leno

[skinz1972]

is ann coulter a...................................BUSHOPHILE?

she is also a sean hannityphile.she's a colmeslester LOL

[boozeman3]

I really haven't read any of her books or paid attention to anything but her most sensational media moments-- I just don't care what she has to say. I judged the book by its cover and by the outrageous stuff she says and the rude, nasty way she says things. I personally have no desire to use my "hyperbole filter" to dig deeper and find the underlying message of someone who is so clearly trying to get her moment in the sun and make some money in the process. Their messages to me are a waste of everyone's time and begin to reveal how unimportant civil debate, discussion and compromise are in modern political forums (and politics). The 24 hour news networks are too focused on delivering entertaining shows that they've forgotten all about the truth and what should be the true goal of their business.

Wow.

Couldn't have said it better myself.

[drums and skins]

Alright, I don't particularly like this thread because people in politics are too stubborn with their views that they can never really take a step back and actually consider that other different thoughts or ideas. It doesn't matter what party or movement you associate with; you have :pooh: that stinks.

Anyways, the one thing that popped out to me as I just read this thread was this..

Coulter and many others in the Republican Party seem to believe that Christianity is the be-all and end-all of social and societal morality. I disagree. No religion holds any moral high-ground at this point in history, so far as I'm concerned. We need to disassociated morals and religion from each other as a culture. We need to rebuild the concept of a cultural morality over a religious morality.

and then you go and bunch them together in association...

Nope. I know a lot of Liberals who attend a church, synagogue, mosque or other religious services. I do believe that a large percentage of Liberals have no regard for the traditional morals and values that this country was founded on, however.

Just an observation...

[CoachingWinsChampionships]

Wow.

Couldn't have said it better myself.

Sure you could, you're just not trying hard enough. Seriously, I put in a couple minutes of work and you just throw your arms up in the air and tell me you can't do it. That's cuz you ain't got enough of that Protestant work ethic in you. Goddamn lazy liberals expecting the government to do it all for them.

Thank you for the flattery tho.

[CoachingWinsChampionships]

Alright, I don't particularly like this thread because people in politics are too stubborn with their views that they can never really take a step back and actually consider that other different thoughts or ideas. It doesn't matter what party or movement you associate with; you have :pooh: that stinks.

Anyways, the one thing that popped out to me as I just read this thread was this..

and then you go and bunch them together in association...

Just an observation...

I'm pretty sure you missed something here in what Mass_SkinsFan said, I'm just not sure what. His argument is perfectly valid and makes sense (whether you agree with it or not is an entirely different matter).

Maybe that second section would be better worded like so:

Nope. I know a lot of Liberals who attend a church, synagogue, mosque or other religious services. I do however believe that a large percentage of Liberals have no regard for the traditional morals and values that this country was founded on.

He claims that even though liberals may have "religous morality", they can still lack "cultural morality" because the two are based upon different values and traditions. That right there is pretty much a textbook example of dissassociating two concepts; I'll bet you just read it wrong seeing as how it's 3 A.M.

Onto my opinion- Mass_SkinsFan, you hit the nail on the head with that first blurb that drums and skins posted, but I disagree with the second one. We most likely disagree because we have different views on what exactly the "traditional morals and values that this country was founded on" are. But let's not hijack this thread with a discussion on that, my good man... another time

[drums and skins]

I'm pretty sure you missed something here in what Mass_SkinsFan said, I'm just not sure what. His argument is perfectly valid and makes sense (whether you agree with it or not is an entirely different matter).

Maybe that second section would be better worded like so:

He claims that even though liberals may have "religous morality", they can still lack "cultural morality" because the two are based upon different values and traditions. That right there is pretty much a textbook example of dissassociating two concepts; I'll bet you just read it wrong seeing as how it's 3 A.M.

so, because its late I must have read it wrong? Some people do have sleeping schedules that fit with midnight shift work...

anyways, no I did not miss something he said... and you touched on the reason why. It probably is because "traditional morals and values" of the founding fathers are typically associated with their religious values (as the argument of the right is often that of 'the country was founded on christian principles' or whatever they like to say). And thus "traditional morals and values" begets a religious connotation (and thus, contrary to what he said).

Anyways, this really depends on his view of the "traditional morals and values" he speaks of. If it is indeed one of "cultural morality", then I concede. Seperating morality into two clauses is bogus anyways... morals are morals. Religious or athiest/agnostic, the morals are usually the same (except for the divine principles and respect such as the first commandment).

[CoachingWinsChampionships]

fair enough drums and skins. I'd like to make a few other points, but Iwon't right now for two reasons:

1. Not everybody has a sleeping schedule that fits with midnight shift work. I'm tired!

2. I don't want to be too closely associated with Mass_SkinsFan. Don't get me wrong, I respect him, and happen to agree with him on some issues, such as this one, but this recent pattern of agreement has officially become an alarming trend.

Goodnight.

[Mass_SkinsFan]

Anyways, the one thing that popped out to me as I just read this thread was this..

and then you go and bunch them together in association...

Actually, you did miss something. The first comment was directly related to morals and values. The second comment was related to Liberals/Dems being "Godless" To me there is a difference between being religious and being moral. Yes, most people who actually follow the tenants of their religion are generally relatively moral, but not all of them.

I know many people personally who are highly religious, attend church on a regular basis, are actively involved in their faith and are also some of the most immoral and unprincipled people I have ever met. To me those people are not "Godless", they're just immoral and unprincipled.

Hope that helps explain it.

[Mass_SkinsFan]

He claims that even though liberals may have "religous morality", they can still lack "cultural morality" because the two are based upon different values and traditions. That right there is pretty much a textbook example of dissassociating two concepts; I'll bet you just read it wrong seeing as how it's 3 A.M.

Actually, I don't believe that most liberals have any morality. As I mentioned above, I just don't necessarily associate "Godlessness" and immorality anymore than I associate "Godfearing" with morality. Being religious and being moral are two different things. One would like to think they'd go together, but they don't always and to lump them together genericly is a common misconception.

You are correct that I believe there is a difference between religious morality and cultural morality. The former comes strictly from a philosophical text and deals with a "perfect" world that does not exist. The later comes from societal and cultural influences including family, community and personal experience. It may be based in part on philosophical or religious morality but has expanded from there to deal with the realities of the world we actually live in.

Onto my opinion- Mass_SkinsFan, you hit the nail on the head with that first blurb that drums and skins posted, but I disagree with the second one. We most likely disagree because we have different views on what exactly the "traditional morals and values that this country was founded on" are. But let's not hijack this thread with a discussion on that, my good man... another time

Thanks, CWC. Two people can honestly and respectfully disagree on that topic. That's fine. I'm sure we'll discuss it at some point in the future so there is no point in going into it here and now.

[Mass_SkinsFan]

Anyways, this really depends on his view of the "traditional morals and values" he speaks of. If it is indeed one of "cultural morality", then I concede. Seperating morality into two clauses is bogus anyways... morals are morals. Religious or athiest/agnostic, the morals are usually the same (except for the divine principles and respect such as the first commandment).

d and s, in my case I really believe that there are two types of morality. Religious and Cultural. They are closely related and they cross over each other in many places. The differences are often a matter of intent and extreme. For example, Religious morality tells me that simply looking at a woman with lust in my heart is committing adultery. Cultural morality tells me that so long as I do not engage in any illegal (rape) or unethical (sex with another man's wife) behavior with her, I'm alright. Does that make it a little clearer?

When I talk about the "traditional morals and values" of the United States I am talking about those things the Founding Fathers and the American population of their time held near and dear. Yes, a large part of their morals and values were based on religious law. However, they also based their beliefs on things like the Magna Carta, British law and other ideals; many of which trace their roots back to an ancient non-religious set of rules... The Code of Hamarabi. The Founding Fathers went out of their way to set up a system of laws that WASN'T solely based on religious law. The put provisions into the system to ensure the country never could become based on religious law. Therefore there has to be other defining morals and values they used. Does that make my position a little clearer as well?

[Prosperity]

Some of you need to get a life.

I have to say, that is an odd comment from someone that spends his time reading Coulter's books, not to mention spending his money on them.

[DCRunner]

She's totally the chick that burns all your clothes after the breakup.

You don't know how close to the truth you are with that quip. Ann had quite the rep in the DC area before she moved to NYC. There's a reason people think she's a psycho and it's unrelated to her political views.

To add a little funny and perhaps some insight into her delightful personality - a close friend grew up in her circles in Connecticut. They would attend the same kid parties or activities. One of the mothers warned my friend about Ann with the prophetic words: "Watch out for that one. She hits." :laugh:

Edited to add: My friend also claims Ann is lying about her age.

[skinz1972]

You don't know how close to the truth you are with that quip. Ann had quite the rep in the DC area before she moved to NYC. There's a reason people think she's a psycho and it's unrelated to her political views.

To add a little funny and perhaps some insight into her delightful personality - a close friend grew up in her circles in Connecticut. They would attend the same kid parties or activities. One of the mothers warned my friend about Ann with the prophetic words: "Watch out for that one. She hits." :laugh:

Edited to add: My friend also claims Ann is lying about her age.

ann isnt 45?

[Baculus]

A recent Ann quote:

"In an e-mail interview with John Hawkins at the Right Wing News Web site, Coulter was asked for comments on several prominent individuals. When the name of Pennsylvania Democrat and ex-Marine Murtha came up, Coulter remarked: "The reason soldiers invented ‘fragging.’”

For all my criticism of Bush and cohorts, I have never suggested "fragging" someone. And, MSF. your views on Democrats I would also apply to some Republicans as well. I don't think you can necessarily apply such thoughts to merely one side. I also do not know if you realize that many current American policies are socialistic, including Republican poilicies, so you really can't apply the same tired "Socialist" cliches to the Left, considering that some on the Right also support soclialist policies.

Also, I would venture to guess that you would not fare well if you said to many New Yorkers, "I bet you would rather be in a socialist European country than the USA!" I know a lot of New Yorkers, and you would receive a solid New York "No!" to that question or statement. Trust me - New Yorkers love their country; after all, New York IS America at the core, inspite of such assertions as "socialist Euro-lovers."

What about Anglophile conservatives? There are some who love England almost more than the USA - perhaps they'd rather be a part of the United Kingdom?

Every politician and political pundit lies. It's their standard MO. The liberals/Dems have no more of a right to claim indignation about lying than we Conservatives and the Republicans (who are not Conservative).

I always separte Conservatives and Republicans. The issue is that many of the so-called Right's heroes such as Limbaugh and Coulter have been caught in blatant lies, repeatedly. And the response is usually "Well, your side lies too!" as opposed to "That's terrible that they lie in that manner." Personally, I am try not to be so stuck on ideology that I can't recognize lying, no matter who it may be and on "which side."

Some on the Left lie, but it is very obvious when it comes to the lying of the "Right's" media. That side of the political spectrum used to have more honest representatives, but they have been replaced by the likes of Coulter and Limbaugh, and their deceitful ways are now "shucked off" since supposedly everyone does it.

Everyone doesn't - it is time to return to integrity.

I hate liberals too. I believe that their policies are evil and stupid. I don't think they should be killed outright though.

Why "hate" an entire group of people" I don't "hate" conservatives - I just don't like certain members of their group and representatives. It is ignorant to "hate" when you don't know. And do you realize that all liberals do not represent Liberalism, especially in the classic sense? Do you realize that the U.S. is considered a Western Liberal nation? Do you hate such liberal traits such as freedom of speech and Woman's rights? When you say that you "hate liberals," WHAT about liberals do you hate?

Let's try to be clear here, my friend, for you just declared your hatred for a lot of people.

[InTikiITrust]

Does Ann Coulter have any other dress besides that black one she wore on Leno. I swear, every time I see a picture of her, she's wearing that black dress.

[Mass_SkinsFan]

And, MSF. your views on Democrats I would also apply to some Republicans as well. I don't think you can necessarily apply such thoughts to merely one side. I also do not know if you realize that many current American policies are socialistic, including Republican poilicies, so you really can't apply the same tired "Socialist" cliches to the Left, considering that some on the Right also support soclialist policies.

I definitely agree that there are many Republicans who are just as bad as the Democrats. I'm not a member of either party so I'm just as willing to hammer the Repubs and I am the Dems.

Yes, I'm quite aware that a LARGE amount of American governmental policies (on both sides of the aisle) are currently Socialistic. It's a large part of the reason that I believe the system needs to be torn down and rebuilt the right way again.

Also, I would venture to guess that you would not fare well if you said to many New Yorkers, "I bet you would rather be in a socialist European country than the USA!" I know a lot of New Yorkers, and you would receive a solid New York "No!" to that question or statement. Trust me - New Yorkers love their country; after all, New York IS America at the core, inspite of such assertions as "socialist Euro-lovers."

Considering the people the citizens of New York continue to send to their state and federal legislatures, their Governor's office and the policies of those people, they'd have a very difficult time PROVING that to me. That's one of the differences between me and a lot of other people... I care more about what people DO than what they SAY.

For example, I'm all for the NRA (which I am a member of) revoking the membership of every Massachusetts member who has ever voted for Ted Kennedy or John Kerry. Obviously if you're voting for those two people you're NOT interested in preserving the history of private gun ownership rights here in the US.

What about Anglophile conservatives? There are some who love England almost more than the USA - perhaps they'd rather be a part of the United Kingdom?

If that's so (and I don't doubt it), then they definitely should return to England. Then again there are parts of my family that may have participated in hanging Tories after the American Revolution, so I probably have a bias on the topic.

Some on the Left lie, but it is very obvious when it comes to the lying of the "Right's" media. That side of the political spectrum used to have more honest representatives, but they have been replaced by the likes of Coulter and Limbaugh, and their deceitful ways are now "shucked off" since supposedly everyone does it.

Everyone doesn't - it is time to return to integrity.

Sorry, there hasn't been an honest Senator, Representative, or President on any side of the political spectrum since before the Civil War. The media has just latched onto the concepts from the parties and carried it through to the public sector. Yes we need to return to integrity. Unfortunately the only way to do it is to tear down the entire system and rebuild it from scratch.

Why "hate" an entire group of people" I don't "hate" conservatives - I just don't like certain members of their group and representatives. It is ignorant to "hate" when you don't know. And do you realize that all liberals do not represent Liberalism, especially in the classic sense? Do you realize that the U.S. is considered a Western Liberal nation? Do you hate such liberal traits such as freedom of speech and Woman's rights? When you say that you "hate liberals," WHAT about liberals do you hate?

Let's try to be clear here, my friend, for you just declared your hatred for a lot of people.

First off, let me say that I don't believe "hate" is necessarily a bad thing in all cases. In many cases I believe it is a very good thing. I hate liberals because I believe that their philosophy, values and ways of looking at the world are DEAD WRONG and DANGEROUS. There is nothing good to be found in the liberal philosophy or lifestyle so far as I am concerned. No redeming factors whatsoever.

Yes, I realize that the US is considered a Western Liberal nation. It disgusts me, because I don't believe that's what this country was intended to be.

I don't believe that Freedom of Speech is a useful concept without the value of Honesty being directly tied to it. Of course that would put all politicians, most lawyers and a large part of the media out of business immediately, so it will never happen.

I don't want to comment too much on the women's rights thing. I'll just point you back to my earlier comment in this thread about one reason I dislike Ann Coulter being that I am against women in the media. I think that should put you on the right track towards my "women's rights" beliefs.

Bac, I have a hatred for a vast majority of humanity. I always have and always will. The species is quickly becoming nothing more than a huge waste of genetic material so far as I'm concerned. I've discussed it in other threads so I'll step down off my soap-box.

[GaryClark4Canton]

Her appearance is entirely relevant to this discussion, which you would realize if you'd seen the interview. During one question, she responded by essentially calling herself sexy (w/ a hot dress and long hair), thus bringing her appearance into any discussion of what actually transpired last night.

On a separate note, Carlin was being respectful of Leno by piping down. Would it have been great to see him zing her a few times? Absolutely- but not in that forum. She was Jay's guest, and I'm sure Carlin is aware that Jay doesn't make a living by allowing his guests to be ambushed onstage.

Then why have Carlin on at the same time as Coulter? Cowinkydink? I think not.

GC

[Predicto]

Whether I agree with Carlin or Coulter on any particular issue, I don't believe it's appropriate to attack them on a personal level. Whether it's in regard to their lifestyle, their appearance, etc.... That's the last bastion of people who can't actually make a reasonable case for their own point to begin with; and it's what this thread appears to be quickly devolving into. Disagree with Coulter's positions, opinions and writings all you want. That's fine. When you start making the personal attacks you lose the vast majority of your credibility in my mind.

I have never really paid much attention to her, since I'm not really in favor of women in the media...

Ok this amazes me. How you can say something that makes so much sense and something that makes so little sense in the exact same thread? :laugh:

[GaryClark4Canton]

Ann Coulter is the type to "hate" liberals but drool over Big Black Liberal Caucus members.

GC

[Mass_SkinsFan]

Ok this amazes me. How you can say something that makes so much sense and something that makes so little sense in the exact same thread? :laugh:

Let's just say the latter comment makes sense to some of us as well. But it would take some knowledge of the difference between genders and traditional values to acknowledge that and since neither of those things are taught to children anymore I wouldn't expect most people to understand it.

[Destino]

Let's just say the latter comment makes sense to some of us as well. But it would take some knowledge of the difference between genders and traditional values to acknowledge that and since neither of those things are taught to children anymore I wouldn't expect most people to understand it.

You seem to be one of those "a womans place is in the home" people. That is easy to understand - and equally as easy to disagree with.

[Mass_SkinsFan]

You seem to be one of those "a womans place is in the home" people. That is easy to understand - and equally as easy to disagree with.

Yes I am one of "those people". The fact that those of us who believe in traditional values and differences between the genders would be labeled as such says a lot about what you've been taught in school and society over the years, Destino.

You don't have to agree with or like the way I see it. That's fine, because I definitely don't agree with the way you see the issue. Let's agree to disagree on the topic and move on. Or this is liable to get REAL ugly, REAL quick.

[Destino]

Yes I am one of "those people". The fact that those of us who believe in traditional values and differences between the genders would be labeled as such says a lot about what you've been taught in school and society over the years, Destino.

You don't have to agree with or like the way I see it. That's fine, because I definitely don't agree with the way you see the issue. Let's agree to disagree on the topic and move on. Or this is liable to get REAL ugly, REAL quick.

You are too defensive bud. I don't have a problem with you thinking that a more traditional way of doing things is better. Like I said I disagree but I don't view your opinion as being all that horrible. As long as you don't want it imposed on others I don't see any harm in it. In truth I hope you find a woman that shares your beliefs.

[Predicto]

LOL. Let's just say that I now know better than to try to argue with him about it

[Prosperity]

As long as you don't want it imposed on others I don't see any harm in it.

I do wonder, MSF would you use coercion to instill "traditional values" back into American society?