Originally Posted By gadzuux So I'm driving home from work, and whaddya know but anne coulter is on with sean hannity. I couldn't resist. In short, she says it's all just a big joke, that people need to lighten up, and that her speech was "well received" by the audience. Out of nowhere, hannity comes out with some garbled audio tape - purportedly of ROGER clinton - using the "N" word - from who knows when, where or how long ago - and then asks where the outrage was over that, and decries the double standard between republicans and democrats. Republicans are funnier than they know.
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan I'm convinced there's not a thing she could ever do or say that would make Hannity not be her lap dog.
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan I'm surprised he only went to Roger Clinton and didn't go all the way back to Billy Carter or something. LOL -- why anyone believes those talk radio people I'll never know.
Originally Posted By SingleParkPassholder Truly pathetic. And completely predictable. But then again, the dinosaurs really didn't know their end was near either, did they?
Originally Posted By melekalikimaka So Ann wants to be compared to Roger Clinton? She wants to be on that level? Fine by me! LOL
Originally Posted By Dabob2 <So where was all the outrage when the word was used in October of 2004?> Um, that post was about the Pennsylvania STATE senate, so I'm assuming that no one outside the state of PA ever even heard about it. Quick - when's the last time anyone here heard about a dustup in a state senate in a state other than one's own? And was there outrage within the state of PA? Actually, the post indicates that yes, there was. So what exactly was the point?
Originally Posted By SingleParkPassholder "Um, that post was about the Pennsylvania STATE senate, so I'm assuming that no one outside the state of PA ever even heard about it. Quick - when's the last time anyone here heard about a dustup in a state senate in a state other than one's own?" I know, I know. The last time someone posted a link and text about it (without commenting) because the text was edited to make Democrats look bad?
Originally Posted By DAR Nothing these days needs to be edited to make Republicans or Democrats look bad, they do a fine job of that by themselves.
Originally Posted By JohnS1 Interesting parallel - Bill Maher made some jokes a few nights ago about Republicans being so enamored of Ronald Reagan that it was almost "a gay thing." Then he said some other similar remarks that are too crude to mention. I wonder if he will get as much publicity as Coulter did. And given that he is so amazed with the Republicans who admire Reagan, I wonder if he recalls the almost cult-like following of JFK by democrats of his era, and indeed for at least 2-3 decades after the Kennedy administration was over. And no - before the inevitable comment is made - this doesn't make Coulter's comments any more acceptable.
Originally Posted By melekalikimaka I think anyone watching that show would be so annoyed by the things Rosanne was saying that everything else said would pale by comparison.
Originally Posted By JohnS1 Watching Roseanne is like watching a talking pig. First you say, How'd they do that? Then after a while it gets old and you start getting critical about the pig's grammatical errors.
Originally Posted By melekalikimaka Well, I love Roseanne's tv show but I'm not going to watch her on any more talk shows or watch her comedy routines. She's waaaay out there.
Originally Posted By gadzuux She made a great cow in 'home on the range - an underappreciated disney movie.
Originally Posted By HyperTyper >>> You cannot equate maher and coulter as if they are somehow equal in stature or respectability. Of course, one can! It's all subjective. Saying Maher is more respectable than Coulter is like saying Michael Jackson is more respectable than Brittany Spears. Why is it that so many on the left reserve the right to be outraged AND outrageous? Exhibit A: Howard Dean. The man is the leader of the Democratic National Committee, for crying out loud, and a former leading presidential candidate. He has said the most vile and extreme things, including (among many other comments) that Republicans are evil, and that the only black people at GOP meetings are the help. He wasn't kidding, and he hasn't apologized (that I know of). The greatest reproof of Dean's comments from the left: A couple Democratic politicians have, after coaxing, admitted that 'Dean doesn't represent all of my views.' Dean, and other high-profile libs, have gone on to accuse conservatives of being terrorists, despots, thugs, and all sorts of nonsense ... all without comment or correction from the majority of the media or their peers. What gives? Apparently only those with certain political views are deserving of civil treatment, while not obligated to give out the same. Nut jobs like Coulter and Maher will say what they will say just to get people mad and talking. I'm more concerned about how and why powerful, "respectable" leaders like Howard Dean get a pass for saying and doing things that are clearly beyond the bounds of civility and decency.
Originally Posted By BlueDevilSF I don't know what planet you're living on, but Dean has been vilified over and over and over and over...by both sides.
Originally Posted By cmpaley >>wrestling nerd.<< Wouldn't that be an oxymoron? The concept of a wrestling nerd, that is, not the person (although I consider "professional wrestling" to be quite moronic).
Originally Posted By cmpaley >>Well, I love Roseanne's tv show but I'm not going to watch her on any more talk shows or watch her comedy routines. She's waaaay out there.<< Roseanne used to be funny. Now I find her to be just plain vulgar. MAnn Coulter is quite similer in hir approach, just without taking the Lord's name in vain and such. S/he is only doing what s/he does for attention. If we ignore hir, s/he'll go away. (Yes, I did that on purpose).
Originally Posted By cmpaley Upon further reflection, I take back the part about MAnn Coulter taking the Lord's name in vain. S/he claims to be a Christian and even wrote a book called Godless. Using God's title (His name is YWHW, not God) like that is just as bad as saying G-D this and G-D that like Roseanne does.
Originally Posted By BlueDevilSF There were two recent books about the demented Barbie. "Brainless" unfortunately lost credibility with me because of the author's hypocrisy. On the other hand, the "I Hate Ann Coulter" book by Unanimous is pretty funny...
