Classic Ann Coulter

[RandyWayne]

Originally Posted by SuzanneDeAZ

Do you all like the way she wears her hair and the type of dresses she wears?

Well, she IS pretty hot.

[Innocuous]

Originally Posted by Digging4Truth

And neither the media nor Ann Coulter are balanced... politically... or mentally.

Amen, I second that observation.

[franklyn4]

Originally Posted by RandyWayne

Well, she IS pretty hot.

[coadie]

Originally Posted by SuzanneDeAZ

Do you all like the way she wears her hair and the type of dresses she wears?

Never gave that thought. I suspect it is clever marketing. she is not exactly the male, slighty rounded cigar smoking conservative sterotype.
If she is what whe is, that really also doesn't endear the feministas.

[franklyn4]

Originally Posted by Innocuous

Amen, I second that observation.

I third that observation.

AC, Bill O'Reilly, Sean Hannity, Glen Beck, and Rush are no different from Kieth Olberman, Rachael Maddow, Chris Matthews, Ed Shultz and Matt Lauer. These guys are on opposite sides of the political spectrum and as i have said before when they call each other bias, its the pot calling the kettle black.

All of those names above have one think common, they are all MILLIONAIRES. Some of those guys really believe what they say, but there are few who are pure jokers and only see what they are doing as a means to lining their pockets.

Sometimes when i read the posts on this and other political thread i just shake my head because the blind partisan loyalty is so obvious and that is what both parties want that way you cant see what they are really doing.

Folks like AC only appeal to the hardcore conservatives, but they have no broader appeal. The beauty of Regan was he knew what he believed and he walked it in a non threating way and in doing so he got independents and democrats to vote for him. Thats the kind of leader the Republican party needs right now.

AC, Hannity, Rush, Beck, Olberman, Matthews, think they know better and can do a better job than the current politicians but guess what, they will never run for political office because they know in order to get broad support, they will have to COMPROMISE what they believe, if not, they wont win so they do the next best thing, write books, host a tv show and make lots of money.

[coadie]

AC, Hannity, Rush, Beck, Olberman, Matthews, think they know better and can do a better job than the current politicians but guess what, they will never run for political office because they know in order to get broad support, they will have to

what they believe, if not, they wont win so they do the next best thing, write books, host a tv show and make lots of money.

How do they plan on half way abortions? We will have gay marriage or we will not.

[franklyn4]

Originally Posted by coadie

How do they plan on half way abortions? We will have gay marriage or we will not.

You are missing my point. In order to win a national election there just isnt enough folks like you and me out there to give a true conservative the white house. PERIOD. The moral values of this country is changing and the entire country as a whole is moving left not right. AC, Beck, Hannity and Rush are being seen by more and more Americans as political extremist thats why the democrats are pushing the theme that Rush is the new leader of the Republican party. They want the American people to see him as the new face and they know most Americans cant stand the guy. These folks are only popular with a small block of voters. If Rush, AC and Hannity had that much influence, BO wouldnt be president.

As much as it pains you and i, gay marriage will be legalized and abortions will not be made illegal. the country is moving left and Bush's policies and attitude may have hastened it even more. What the conservative movement need is a new Reagan. Someone conservative but doenst come across as threatening. For this reason i like Huckabee and not Palin, Jindl or Sanford. Even thoigu at times Huckabee comes of to comdianish he has the potential of attracting people and votes from both sides

Frank Rich wrote a great piece that i think hits the nail on the head as it relates to the republican party and the Christian conservatives movement. Here are a few quotes
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/15/op...rich.html?_r=2

When Barack Obama ended the Bush stem-cell policy last week, there were no such overheated theatrics. No oversold prime-time address. No hysteria from politicians, the news media or the public. The family-values dinosaurs that once stalked the earth — Falwell, Robertson, Dobson and Reed — are now either dead, retired or disgraced. Their less-famous successors pumped out their pro forma e-mail blasts, but to little avail. The Republican National Committee said nothing whatsoever about Obama’s reversal of Bush stem-cell policy. That’s quite a contrast to 2006, when the party’s wild and crazy (and perhaps transitory) new chairman, Michael Steele, likened embryonic stem-cell research to Nazi medical experiments during his failed Senate campaign.

In our own hard times, the former moral “majority” has been downsized to more of a minority than ever. Polling shows that nearly 60 percent of Americans agree with ending Bush restrictions on stem-cell research (a Washington Post/ABC News survey in January); that 55 percent endorse either gay civil unions or same-sex marriage (Newsweek, December 2008); and that 75 percent believe openly gay Americans should serve in the military (Post/ABC, July 2008).

Even were the public still in the mood for fiery invective about family values, the G.O.P. has long since lost any authority to lead the charge. The current Democratic president and his family are exemplars of precisely the Eisenhower-era squareness — albeit refurbished by feminism — that the Republicans often preached but rarely practiced. Obama actually walks the walk. As the former Bush speechwriter David Frum recently wrote, the new president is an “apparently devoted husband and father” whose worst vice is “an occasional cigarette.”

Frum was contrasting Obama to his own party’s star attraction, Rush Limbaugh, whose “history of drug dependency” and “tangled marital history” make him “a walking stereotype of self-indulgence.” Indeed, the two top candidates for leader of the post-Bush G.O.P, Rush and Newt, have six marriages between them. The party that once declared war on unmarried welfare moms, homosexual “recruiters” and Bill Clinton’s private life has been rebranded by Mark Foley, Larry Craig, David Vitter and the irrepressible Palins. Even before the economy tanked, Americans had more faith in medical researchers using discarded embryos to battle Parkinson’s and Alzheimer’s than in Washington politicians making ad hoc medical decisions for Terri Schiavo.

What’s been revealing about watching conservatives debate their fate since their Election Day Waterloo is how, the occasional Frum excepted, so many of them don’t want to confront the obsolescence of culture wars as a political crutch. They’d rather, like Cantor, just change the subject — much as they avoid talking about Bush and avoid reckoning with the doomed demographics of the G.O.P.’s old white male base. To recognize all these failings would be to confront why a once-national party can now be tucked into the Bible Belt.

The religious right is even more in denial than the Republicans. When Obama nominated Kathleen Sebelius, the Roman Catholic Kansas governor who supports abortion rights, as his secretary of health and human services, Tony Perkins, the leader of the Family Research Council, became nearly as apoplectic as the other Tony Perkins playing Norman Bates. “If Republicans won’t take a stand now, when will they?” the godly Perkins thundered online. But Congressional Republicans ignored him, sending out (at most) tepid press releases of complaint, much as they did in response to Obama’s stem-cell order. The two antiabortion Kansas Republicans in the Senate, Sam Brownback and Pat Roberts, both endorsed Sebelius.

Perkins is now praying that economic failure will be a stimulus for his family-values business. “As the economy goes downward,” he has theorized, “I think people are going to be driven to religion.” Wrong again. The latest American Religious Identification Survey, published last week, found that most faiths have lost ground since 1990 and that the fastest-growing religious choice is “None,” up from 8 percent to 15 percent (which makes it larger than all denominations except Roman Catholics and Baptists). Another highly regarded poll, the General Social Survey, had an even more startling finding in its preliminary 2008 data released this month: Twice as many Americans have a “great deal” of confidence in the scientific community as do in organized religion. How the almighty has fallen: organized religion is in a dead heat with banks and financial institutions on the confidence scale.

[pelathais]

Originally Posted by Digging4Truth

None of our media is even fairly balanced.

I dunno. If you take large enough bites from carefully selected sources you can create your own "balanced media."

The thing is; the liberal media has pretty much controlled things ever since McCarthy gave conservatives a black eye. The Republicans at the time thought that he would eventually just hang himself, so they let him prattle on. When it was time to actually censure and "hang" the guy, the Republicans were surprised to find themselves twisting in the wind with Tailgunner Joe.

Republicans have been scrambling ever since.

[pelathais]

Originally Posted by franklyn4

...

AC, Hannity, Rush, Beck, Olberman, Matthews, think they know better and can do a better job than the current politicians but guess what, they will never run for political office because they know in order to get broad support, they will have to COMPROMISE what they believe, if not, they wont win so they do the next best thing, write books, host a tv show and make lots of money.

"Next best thing..." ??? Dude! That's the BEST THING. Only a sap would run for office. Obama took a huge cut in pay when he was elected. His two best sellers made him a multimillionaire.

Coulter and Hannity are making millions and Rush sits atop a huge pile of cash. Politics is for chumps. These guys - Obama included - found the real path to "enlightenment" in American. And I say, "good for them."

[commonsense]

Originally Posted by Pressing-On

I agree that her wit is sometimes hilarious. She has made me laugh out loud also. I think that a lot of times her presentation is caustic, much like Limbaugh, which can be unfortunate.

The reason we like them, to some degree, is there are things that need to be said and they are the ones that will do it.

I'm a big fan. She has a backbone!

She's abrupt and harsh perhaps, but as the old saying goes....The truth hurts.

Someone has to be the voice crying in the wilderness.

The media is verrry biased so her perspective swings the other way to bring balance.