RSS Feed
Loading ...
Silky’s wife pleads: The way to stop Coulter is by giving us money Updated
Tim Graham will tell you:
More importantly, no one seems to be questioning Elizabeth Edwards attacking Coulter for the “language of hate” when the Edwards campaign hired Amanda Marcotte and Melissa McEwan as official bloggers, who attacked “Christofascists,” smeared Pope Benedict as a dictator, and mocked the core doctrines of Christianity as excuses for misogyny. Mrs. Edwards was a player in hiring those feminist bloggers and their language of hate. Why is the liberal media ignoring the pot calling the kettle black?
Background of that little episode that they couldn’t use for fundraising purposes can be found here, here, here and here. So I guess Elizabeth Edward’s was for the hate speech before she was against it? Flip/Flop Flip/Flop
Here is what was said to set off the latest Edward’s fundraiser:
ANN COULTER (POLITICAL COMMENTATOR)
Though about the same time Bill Maher said - and by the way, I did not call John Edwards the F-word. I said I couldn’t talk about him because you go into rehab for using that word.
CHRIS CUOMO (ABC NEWS)
(Off-camera) You say you were you - you were joking.
ANN COULTER (POLITICAL COMMENTATOR)
About the - oh yeah. I wouldn’t, I wouldn’t insult gays by comparing them to John Edwards. Now, that would be mean. But about the same time, you know, Bill Maher was not joking and saying he wished Dick Cheney had been killed in a terrorist attack. So I’ve learned my lesson. If I’m gonna say anything about John Edwards in the future, I’ll just wish he had been killed in a terrorist assassination plot.
Trackposted to Outside the Beltway, The Virtuous Republic, Blog @ MoreWhat.com, Perri Nelson’s Website, DeMediacratic Nation, Maggie’s Notebook, Right Truth, Big Dog’s Weblog, The Pet Haven Blog, , Webloggin, Stuck On Stupid, Leaning Straight Up, Cao’s Blog, The Amboy Times, The Bullwinkle Blog, Conservative Cat, Pursuing Holiness, Rightlinx, , third world county, The Crazy Rants of Samantha Burns, The World According to Carl, Blue Star Chronicles, Pirate’s Cove, Nuke’s news and views, The Pink Flamingo, Planck’s Constant, The Yankee Sailor, and CatSynth.com, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.
June 27, 2007 - 09:21 AM on June 27th, 2007
I viewed the clip at Raw Story and found it more than entertaining. More often than not, Coulter makes me crazy. Occasionally I find her entertaining and less often I find her analysis on point. Probably due to the difficulty in paying attention between her tactical rants. Let’s be honest, Marcotte and her share some common tactics.
And this will be even more of a heretical statement if I claim to be independent or right leaning. I gave Mrs Edwards some credit for the light sparring the two did during the video. The funny thing was she showed more moxie than her husband ever has. Of course, that comparison doesn’t place the bar very high.
June 27, 2007 - 09:38 AM on June 27th, 2007
Well said Stanford…I used to like Coulter, but I just can’t tolerate the nastiness…that being said, i agree that if you do look to the core, she makes some very good points..I loved the jab about the fundraising and charging $55000 for a speech about poverty….:razz:
June 27, 2007 - 10:14 AM on June 27th, 2007
I was listening to the Glenn Beck Show on the radio and he played Coulter’s comment in context and it shows that both Elizabeth Edwards and Chris Matthews were both offbase in claiming that Coulter wanted Edwards to die in a terrorist attack when in fact, taken in context, she was pointing out the hypocrisy that allow Maher to say such things about VP Cheney and not be vilified by the MSM while they attack conservatives for doing the same thing or perceived same thing. Matthews should have done his research better but apparently he was confused by the facts.
June 27, 2007 - 10:22 AM on June 27th, 2007
Good point Carl and it leads me to the next topic…
June 27, 2007 - 10:26 AM on June 27th, 2007
Folks, if you read and article or watch a show you can not believe what they say. Whether you believe or agree with what is said in principal or not, you have to step outside yourself and try to look at it objectively.
Between the =media and governement, we a relied to every day.
June 27, 2007 - 05:12 PM on June 27th, 2007
In other words, you have to develop a bullshit detector. Mine goes off nearly every time I catch the evening news, hear a network news radio broadcast, or open up the local propaganda rag (newspaper).
June 27, 2007 - 06:02 PM on June 27th, 2007
Then, Robert, it must REALLY go off the scale whenever any politician especially a Congresscritter, open his or her mouth to speak, eh?
June 27, 2007 - 06:30 PM on June 27th, 2007
It sure does! It is astonishing to see these corrupt degenerates, time after time, stand up there pontificating and lying through their damned teeth, so obviously, yet people keep voting them back in.
June 27, 2007 - 09:48 PM on June 27th, 2007
Hi, I’m one of the destinations of your Trackpost. I’ve been coming and reading everyone who has trackposted to my site, so here I am.:smile:
I’m wondering what’s wrong with the term “Christofascist”? We have “Islamofascists” as people who want to impose an ultra-conservative form of Islam on socieities, by force if necessary. So someone who has the same beliefs and goals with respect to ultra-conservative Christianity would be a Christofascist. I’m not giving that title to anyone in particular, but still…there are some nasty authoritarian individuals who claim to represent Christianity…
June 27, 2007 - 11:54 PM on June 27th, 2007
“when the Edwards campaign hired Amanda Marcotte and Melissa McEwan as official bloggers, who attacked “Christofascists,” smeared Pope Benedict as a dictator, and mocked the core doctrines of Christianity as excuses for misogyny..”
“Christofascists” are just as evil as “Islamofacists”. Get off your holy roller coaster– you got no rep to march upon.
June 28, 2007 - 05:54 AM on June 28th, 2007
10, Tofu, you really are a weirdo. You can’t see anything anyone else does.
June 28, 2007 - 12:51 PM on June 28th, 2007
What else do you ever expect from someone married to a lawyer as unscrupoius as JOHN EDWARDS
July 2, 2007 - 10:44 AM on July 2nd, 2007
To #9: - because Christians don’t have a policy of killing everyone who doesn’t convert. And don’t refer back to the Crusades (the original intent of which were to drive the Muslim invaders out of Europe) or the Spanish Inquisition et al, which flew the banner of Christianity, but were not truly Christians.
July 2, 2007 - 10:59 AM on July 2nd, 2007
CatSynth…
Just to remind you…
“christofacists” have not, to my knowledge, been responsible for even one single airplane hijacking..let alone dozens
“christofacists” have not, to my knowledge, been responsible for suicide bombings of women and children on public buses
“christofacists” have not, to my knowledge, beheaded civilians
enough with the moral relativism, you nutjob.
July 2, 2007 - 01:15 PM on July 2nd, 2007
Until and unless I see evidence to the contrary, there are no such thing as “Christofascists.”
July 2, 2007 - 01:24 PM on July 2nd, 2007
nor is there any such thing as the “religion of peace”
or “moderate muslims” (when they start condemning terror, and actually helping us FIND and kill the animals.. I may change my mind)
July 3, 2007 - 11:31 AM on July 3rd, 2007
#16 - there are moderate Muslims who do condemn terrorism; however, their voice doesn’t get to the MSM. There would probably be more, except that they fear for their lives and the lives of their loved ones at the hands of the radical Muslims. An internet acquaintance of mine is married to a Muslim who belongs to one of the moderate sects (there are also some “secular” Muslims); her “master teacher” has spoken out against the terrorists, and for his pains, family members who were still living in a Muslim country were executed. As it is, the radical Muslims are still the main spokesmen for Islam.
July 3, 2007 - 11:45 AM on July 3rd, 2007
17. Then Islam really isn’t a “religion of peace” now, is it?
July 3, 2007 - 05:10 PM on July 3rd, 2007
“…or the Spanish Inquisition et al, which flew the banner of Christianity, but were not truly Christians.”
BAM! Right there is an example of an idividual unable to take logic to the next step with this thought.
If there were christians like those in the Inquisition who did terrible deeds in the name of Christ, but are “not truly christians“…why can’t there be muslims who do terrible deeds in the name of Allah, but are also “not truly Muslim“????!!!
My god, it’s so simple to understand…but so many refuse to get it.
There are over 1 billion peaceful muslims around the world. A very, very, very small fraction of these muslims are violent extremists.
Apparently, the numbers confirm that Islam actually IS a religion of peace. If they weren’t, we ALL be f*cked, like, yesterday.
July 3, 2007 - 07:42 PM on July 3rd, 2007
Read 16….I’m with Mike.
July 3, 2007 - 08:46 PM on July 3rd, 2007
“when they start condemning terror, and actually helping us FIND and kill the animals.. I may change my mind”
Prepare to change your mind…
UK Muslim group condemns car bombings
July 4, 2007 - 10:36 AM on July 4th, 2007
#19 - SFL
The difference is that the peaceful Christians are following their scriptures, and the radical Muslims are following theirs.