Ann Coulter calls John Edwards a "faggot" - Page 4 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 03-04-2007, 09:45 AM   #46
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,492
Local Time: 02:00 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by yolland
Ms. Coulter, asked for a reaction to the Republican criticism, said in an e-mail message: “C’mon, it was a joke. I would never insult gays by suggesting that they are like John Edwards. That would be mean.” At the conference, she said she was likely to support Mr. Romney.


okay, now that is kind of funny.

and i hope Romney wins the nomination. either Hillary or Obama will destroy him in the general election.

and too bad about McCain, he's totally DOA, isn't he.

as for Ann, i think she's an ironist. i really do. she's making money off of degrading political dialogue,a nd if people fall for it and buy her books, well, you're an idiot. it's all very "don't feed the troll," i think.
__________________

__________________
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 03-04-2007, 10:06 AM   #47
Blue Crack Addict
 
MrsSpringsteen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 24,984
Local Time: 02:00 AM
I'm not sure at all that Hillary or Obama would destroy Romney. People are falling for him already, and after two terms of Bush isn't anything possible? I'm scared.

Well with supporters like Coulter how can Mitt lose?
__________________

__________________
MrsSpringsteen is offline  
Old 03-04-2007, 02:13 PM   #48
Blue Crack Addict
 
U2Girl1978's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: At the altar of the dark star
Posts: 19,374
Local Time: 03:00 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by MrsSpringsteen
http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/03/...rds/index.html


Wow.
__________________
U2Girl1978 is offline  
Old 03-04-2007, 02:14 PM   #49
War Child
 
Ormus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Frontios
Posts: 758
Local Time: 03:00 AM
Quote:
She added, "I don't know why all gays aren't Republican. I think we have the pro-gay positions, which is anti-crime and for tax cuts. Gays make a lot of money and they're victims of crime. No, they are! They should be with us."
Well, to be honest, I think that if the GOP ever got its act together, there would be a lot more gay Republicans.

I say this out of anecdotal evidence. I think there's a lot of gay people who are nominally Democratic, solely because they're the "lesser of two evils." That is, they'd rather be in the party that gives lip service to them (Democrats), rather than the party that openly bashes them and introduces anti-gay legislation in Congress (Republicans).

But if the GOP did a 180 on the issue of gay rights, like they did with civil rights for racial minorities, they probably would gain a constituency that is, statistically speaking, fairly highly educated and has a lot of disposable income. They're going to be worrying about things like investment performance and tax cuts, and that's traditionally in the realm of the GOP.

The Democratic Party had best be worried, because they have a history of missing the boat, and when the GOP does a sudden turn-around (like they did with civil rights and even with the "Reagan Revolution"), they always get flustered and run around like chickens with their heads cut off.

I also say this as someone who used to be quite loyal to the Democratic Party, but is now so utterly disgusted by them that I almost think I'd take pleasure in watching them flounder yet again in an election....

...but, you see, I'm more comfortable with the party that pays lip service, rather than the party that openly hates me. I figure that there will be, at least, a slower pace of anti-gay legislation.

But I'm not a fool. Which president signed the federal "Defense of Marriage Act"? I'll give you a hint: it was the guy between the Bushes. And I've seen how this party works. They say a lot of really nice, Oprah-friendly things, but, in the end, they always have to prove something to the conservatives. And, regardless of the party, gays have been a convenient punching bag for them.

And they've all lost my loyalty, as a result.
__________________
Ormus is offline  
Old 03-04-2007, 02:15 PM   #50
Blue Crack Addict
 
U2Girl1978's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: At the altar of the dark star
Posts: 19,374
Local Time: 03:00 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by MrsSpringsteen
I'm not sure at all that Hillary or Obama would destroy Romney. People are falling for him already, and after two terms of Bush isn't anything possible? I'm scared.

Well with supporters like Coulter how can Mitt lose?
I really really hope the people of Massachusetts aren't dumb enough to vote Romney into office. He didn't really do much for the state.
__________________
U2Girl1978 is offline  
Old 03-04-2007, 02:20 PM   #51
War Child
 
Ormus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Frontios
Posts: 758
Local Time: 03:00 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by U2Girl1978
I really really hope the people of Massachusetts aren't dumb enough to vote Romney into office. He didn't really do much for the state.
And he didn't need to do anything for the state either. The Massachusetts legislature was--and still is--over 3/4 Democratic. They have and still can regularly override gubernatorial vetoes. Even the judiciary appointments in that state are done by a separate group, so Romney didn't even have the power to stack the judiciary. He was nothing; just a constitutional anachronism.
__________________
Ormus is offline  
Old 03-04-2007, 02:48 PM   #52
Blue Crack Addict
 
verte76's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: hoping for changes
Posts: 23,331
Local Time: 07:00 AM
Ann Coulter is a hole.
__________________
verte76 is offline  
Old 03-04-2007, 03:23 PM   #53
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
DrTeeth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: The Q continuum
Posts: 4,770
Local Time: 08:00 AM

I'm surprised nobody's coming to Coulter's defense claiming she didn't know what faggot meant.
__________________
DrTeeth is offline  
Old 03-04-2007, 04:15 PM   #54
Blue Crack Addict
 
MrsSpringsteen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 24,984
Local Time: 02:00 AM
(Reuters)Coulter said the comment was a joke and on her Web site she carried the speech with the comment, "I'm so ashamed, I can't stop laughing." She then said Edwards' campaign chairman's main job was "fronting for Arab terrorists."

Edwards, a 2008 presidential contender and the party's 2004 vice presidential candidate, said Coulter's comments were "un-American and indefensible."

"The kind of hateful language she used has no place in political debate or our society at large," he wrote in comments posted to his Web site on Saturday.

"I believe it is our moral responsibility to speak out against that kind of bigotry and prejudice every time we encounter it," Edwards added.

The candidate also posted a video of Coulter's comments, asking supporters to raise $100,000 in so-called "Coulter Cash" for his campaign to "fight back against the politics of bigotry."
__________________
MrsSpringsteen is offline  
Old 03-04-2007, 04:22 PM   #55
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,501
Local Time: 11:00 PM
Why does Coulter think Edwards must be gay?

Is she implying something about his choice in women?



http://www.byroncrawford.com/2004/07...dwards_wi.html
__________________
deep is offline  
Old 03-04-2007, 04:25 PM   #56
Blue Crack Addict
 
MrsSpringsteen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 24,984
Local Time: 02:00 AM
It has nothing to do with his choice in women, and I don't know why you would even bring that up or post that rude link. His wife is a lovely and impressive woman.

Ann just throws those words around just for the sake of it, as we all know.
__________________
MrsSpringsteen is offline  
Old 03-04-2007, 07:36 PM   #57
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: The American Resistance
Posts: 4,754
Local Time: 01:00 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by DrTeeth
I'm surprised nobody's coming to Coulter's defense claiming she didn't know what faggot meant.

I'd defend her if I could. But in the wake of the Grey's Anatomy flap and Tim Hardaway's comments she must have know full well that her comments wouldn't just be shrugged off.
If she was making a joke...I don't get it, and if she was making a point...it escapes me.
__________________
INDY500 is offline  
Old 03-04-2007, 07:58 PM   #58
ONE
love, blood, life
 
financeguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Ireland
Posts: 10,122
Local Time: 08:00 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Ormus
Well, to be honest, I think that if the GOP ever got its act together, there would be a lot more gay Republicans.
I think I read somewhere that around 25% of voters identifying as homosexual, voted for Bush in 2004.
__________________
financeguy is offline  
Old 03-04-2007, 08:38 PM   #59
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
BonosSaint's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 3,566
Local Time: 03:00 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Ormus


Well, to be honest, I think that if the GOP ever got its act together, there would be a lot more gay Republicans.

I say this out of anecdotal evidence. I think there's a lot of gay people who are nominally Democratic, solely because they're the "lesser of two evils." That is, they'd rather be in the party that gives lip service to them (Democrats), rather than the party that openly bashes them and introduces anti-gay legislation in Congress (Republicans).

But if the GOP did a 180 on the issue of gay rights, like they did with civil rights for racial minorities, they probably would gain a constituency that is, statistically speaking, fairly highly educated and has a lot of disposable income. They're going to be worrying about things like investment performance and tax cuts, and that's traditionally in the realm of the GOP.

The Democratic Party had best be worried, because they have a history of missing the boat, and when the GOP does a sudden turn-around (like they did with civil rights and even with the "Reagan Revolution"), they always get flustered and run around like chickens with their heads cut off.

I also say this as someone who used to be quite loyal to the Democratic Party, but is now so utterly disgusted by them that I almost think I'd take pleasure in watching them flounder yet again in an election....

...but, you see, I'm more comfortable with the party that pays lip service, rather than the party that openly hates me. I figure that there will be, at least, a slower pace of anti-gay legislation.

But I'm not a fool. Which president signed the federal "Defense of Marriage Act"? I'll give you a hint: it was the guy between the Bushes. And I've seen how this party works. They say a lot of really nice, Oprah-friendly things, but, in the end, they always have to prove something to the conservatives. And, regardless of the party, gays have been a convenient punching bag for them.

And they've all lost my loyalty, as a result.

Let me see if I get this right. Not being a big fan of the Democrats by any means....but if the gays get the full equal rights they are entitled to, a ton of them will then abandon many of the rest of us in our own struggles now that they got theirs.
That's troubling. I understand that mostly monolithic blocks vote in their own self-interest. But as a matter of self-interest, why would I continue to vote for pro-gay candidates and issues (which I have always done) when it is of no personal self-interest to me other than it is right, when many gays are then going to align themselves with a party that traditionally fucks my interests?
I will continue my voting pattern because I think it is right, but part of me is rightly disillusioned and a little bit disgusted.
__________________
BonosSaint is offline  
Old 03-04-2007, 08:50 PM   #60
ONE
love, blood, life
 
indra's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 12,689
Local Time: 03:00 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by BonosSaint



Let me see if I get this right. Not being a big fan of the Democrats by any means....but if the gays get the full equal rights they are entitled to, a ton of them will then abandon many of the rest of us in our own struggles now that they got theirs.
That's troubling. I understand that mostly monolithic blocks vote in their own self-interest. But as a matter of self-interest, why would I continue to vote for pro-gay candidates and issues (which I have always done) when it is of no personal self-interest to me other than it is right, when many gays are then going to align themselves with a party that traditionally fucks my interests?
I will continue my voting pattern because I think it is right, but part of me is rightly disillusioned and a little bit disgusted.
Unfortunately that type of reaction seems to be typical, no matter the group. Once you fit in with the "big boys" you don't give a flying fuck about those you used to be with. I think a part of it that people want to join the big party (I don't mean politically, although in this case that's what it is) they've been missing out on. I also think there might be a bit of a feeling that unless they join the "top" group they will be easier to push back down where they used to be.
__________________

__________________
indra is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:00 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com