jump to last post 1-21 of 21 discussions (130 posts)

Ann Coulter has finally lost her mind

  1. Uninvited Writer profile image81
    Uninvited Writerposted 6 years ago

    It's sad when Bill O'Reilly is the voice of reason...

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FXFUUGeV1DI

    1. stclairjack profile image80
      stclairjackposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      i live in the land of dial up so cant watch the video you linked but i must say that saying ann coulter has lost her mind is like saying i just lost my priceless reubens painting of a naked chubby girl,.... i had a priceless painting?

      that lady is just twacked, and i dont think you work hard to get that twacked,.. with her,... its a gift.

    2. lady_love158 profile image61
      lady_love158posted 6 years ago in reply to this

      I didn't see anything in Ann's argument that could lead anyone to conclude she's out of her mind. Quite the contrary she's educating a public about the truth of radiation and dispelling myths long espoused in the MSM about the dangers of radiation. Heck she even cited the NYT as a source to support her views!  Do you lefties EVER open your minds or are you so ideological that you reject everything that doesn't comply with the party's talking points???

      1. dingdondingdon profile image60
        dingdondingdonposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        She's right to an extent that some small radiation will not harm you. There's even radiation in bananas. She is not right that any amount of radiation is "good" for you. There is a difference between something not hurting you and something actually being good for your health.

        1. lady_love158 profile image61
          lady_love158posted 6 years ago in reply to this

          She NEVER said any amount of radiation is good for you! I swear you liberals just hear what you want! She said the government limits for safe dosage are well below what has been shown to be safe in various studies published by physicists! !

          1. dingdondingdon profile image60
            dingdondingdonposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            Yes, she said studies have been done with five times the amount of radiation over the government level, and the results were positive. I haven't read those studies and I'm not a scientist, so I can't make a judgment on that.

            My issue is that she then linked those studies to the current nuclear crisis in Japan, and said (or joked? But it's not a joking matter, frankly) that the current situation is good for the men working in Fukushima currently. On this she is dead wrong. The radiation level in Fukushima is only one below that of the Chernobyl disaster - and every volunteer who worked to suppress Chernobyl died within the year after it happened.

            1. lady_love158 profile image61
              lady_love158posted 6 years ago in reply to this

              I didnt hear her say that but I think her point is that the safe levels established by the government are well below what can be considered safe and that no one knows what the safe limit should be. There is also different radioactive compounds and these may also have an effect.

            2. Doug Hughes profile image61
              Doug Hughesposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              The problem here is what O'Reilly recognized. The irresponsible mixture of facts, opinions and faulty conclusions.

              Radiation of some types in small doses may be a tonic. True.

              The normal annual dose we get is 3 to 5 milirads. A dose ten times that high might be no hazard. Possibly true.

              The workers at the nuclear plant are being exposed to doses as high as 200 milirads in a short (not annual) span. Fact.

              Some of these guys won't live to collect retirement and they know it. My opinion, but I'm willing to take bets.

              If an explosion ruptured the containment structure and a complete meltdown happens and the prevailing winds take radiation inland, the high doses that the workers are exposed to will descend on the general population. Thus the evacuation.

              That Ann Counter can't see it proves she's a complete idiot. Likewise her defenders.

              1. lady_love158 profile image61
                lady_love158posted 6 years ago in reply to this

                Here's another fact... more people died in windmill acidents than died as a result of the chernobal disaster!

                1. dingdondingdon profile image60
                  dingdondingdonposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                  So? What's your point, that we should all go and vacation in Fukushima? It's not an "either/or" situation, it's not as if there's a big scary windmill farm outside the nuclear plant that the men will have to face should they leave.

                  Those men will die. Maybe not immediately, but should they survive now they will certainly die of cancer early in life. This is not something to scoff about, it's a terrible thing.

                  1. lady_love158 profile image61
                    lady_love158posted 6 years ago in reply to this

                    The point is everything in life carries risk.

                2. White Teeth profile image59
                  White Teethposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                  Citation please...

                  I think you misread. In the US there has been more deaths from windmill accidents than nuclear power plant accidents. I am not sure where you got Chernobyl out of this.

                  1. Doug Hughes profile image61
                    Doug Hughesposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                    She's just proving my 'complete idiot' assertion.

                3. kerryg profile image85
                  kerrygposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                  Of course, not all Chernobyl victims actually died.

                  http://i51.tinypic.com/1586s5z.jpg

                  http://i54.tinypic.com/1z1cxw8.jpg

                  1. lovemychris profile image80
                    lovemychrisposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                    That looks like the effects of depleted uranium. And white phosphorous burns the skin.

                    Kids, precious kids are made to suffer and die. Collateral damage for the War Profiteers. Or for our stupid religions.
                    What God would want his children treated this way?

          2. kerryg profile image85
            kerrygposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            LOL

            "As The New York Times science section reported in 2001, an increasing number of scientists believe that at some level -- much higher than the minimums set by the U.S. government -- radiation is good for you."

            http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=42347

          3. Flightkeeper profile image72
            Flightkeeperposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            Lalo, should you really be surprised?

            1. Greek One profile image77
              Greek Oneposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              i am willing to let her test the appropriate levels on herself, and then we can study the results

              1. Flightkeeper profile image72
                Flightkeeperposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                When the scientists find that level, perhaps we can depend on the media to publicize it instead of selectively publicizing information that sensationalizes.

                I find it is just as irresponsbile scaring an entire global population about radiation levels when it hasn't fully determined what level is dangerous.

                1. Greek One profile image77
                  Greek Oneposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                  Sure... perhaps we best start by examining the toxicity of the garbage she spews in the hopes of gaining publicity and noteriety for herself?

                  1. Flightkeeper profile image72
                    Flightkeeperposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                    Yes and we can look at the media who amplify it and put her on their live segments.

            2. lady_love158 profile image61
              lady_love158posted 6 years ago in reply to this

              Lol! No I'm not surprised! The left are like little sheep following the herder blindly over the fields... it's a perfect metaphor for liberals all wanting to be the same to achieve the.same level of achievement and prosperity the limit of which is determined by the herder! Even the most intelligent of them would rather close their eyes to the facts then be forced to think for themselves or decide for themsleves... better to let the herder do that! Lol! Pathetic!

              1. kerryg profile image85
                kerrygposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                Says the woman who claimed Ann Coulter didn't say radiation was good for you despite direct evidence to the contrary... lol

              2. TomC35 profile image60
                TomC35posted 6 years ago in reply to this

                Actually, those who do not believe in the whole, left, right, democrat, republican thing could say that about you Lady, as you obviously spout what you hear from people are blatantly in defense of the ultra rich.  Are you wanting to go back to a Noble/Surf class? If you are not a billionaire, you better hope the politicians you support do not get their ways, or else you will be one of the servants along with the rest of us, back to the 12 hour 7-day a week workdays for pennies.

                1. lady_love158 profile image61
                  lady_love158posted 6 years ago in reply to this

                  You could say that about me but it wouldn't be true would it? Because unlike you and the left I believe the human potential is limitless that as long as we are free we're capable of achieving anything! I don't need a government to define me as middle class or to impose some bureaucratic vision of "fairness" upon me or others... what I need us to be left alone free to make my own decisions and to keep as much of what's mine less what's needed to keep me free!

                  1. TomC35 profile image60
                    TomC35posted 6 years ago in reply to this

                    There is nothing free about their markets though.  You obviously have not worked inside of big business, as I have.  I came out of college with such ideals.  Then I saw reality.  There has to be rules and regulations unfortunately, because the industry leaders are and stock traders are not nice, fair people who want to play by gentlemen's rules.  They lie, cheat and steal when they can.  There is no way for everyone, even go getters to achieve their goals without regulation, as the few at the top will take all of the money and nothing is left to go around.  Money is finite so logically if 3% of the people owned 90% of the money for instance, how could all the other people, who even want to succeed make it?  They cannot.  You might hear a few success stories here and there, but most people who get rich did not start from nothing.  Many come from families with money and with connections.  Thus the rich stay rich.  Unfortunately since this is how many big politicians start out, this is why they usually do what is best for the upper class.

        2. White Teeth profile image59
          White Teethposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          I can't watch the video here from work so I don't know exactly what she said, but radiation hormesis is a real area of research. I believe there are some studies that do show a positive benefit from low level exposure (like dental x-rays).

          I think it is a stretch though to say that workers in Japan will be better off from the exposure.

      2. bgamall profile image84
        bgamallposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        Lady, I don't know the ins and outs of radiation, but this woman is borderline nuts. Read excerpts from her book that came out in 2009: http://mediamatters.org/research/200901040001

        She says Halle Berry race baited by saying she was black when she was half black and half white. This is truly one of the dumbest things I ever heard. She looks more black than white so why wouldn't she say she is black? Does Obama look white? Yet Coulter says he should say he is white.

        Coulter is part human and part Martian, so I can understand her wanting to say she is human. I am not sure most people would agree after reading her book controversies.

      3. Jillian Barclay profile image86
        Jillian Barclayposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        She is an educator, just like you LL!

        Nothing wrong with either of you!

        Think you should both be teachers in our high schools!

        That way, our students will know the truth, from the only two level-headed, fact oriented, real Americans in the country!

        1. lady_love158 profile image61
          lady_love158posted 6 years ago in reply to this

          Thank you! smile One thing is for sure if I was a teacher I wouldn't be indoctrinating my students with liberal lies!!

          1. Ron Montgomery profile image60
            Ron Montgomeryposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            Good point.  Wingnut lies are easier for the little block heads to swallow, plus there's an endless supply.

          2. Jillian Barclay profile image86
            Jillian Barclayposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            Absolutely, and you would make sure that you teach them that all liberal ideas are morally wrong and liberals, when in a group are evil. Maybe you could have them turn their liberal parents and neighbors in for subversion. Then they could be purged from our country...

            Forgot about Michelle Malkin! The three of you should get together, get your teaching credentials and then our school system could be saved! And I am sure that you would all do it for free, because it is so important and you three are probably the only 'real Americans'that can save the next generation!!

            1. lady_love158 profile image61
              lady_love158posted 6 years ago in reply to this

              Yes I certainly would show them the evil side of liberalism as well as their false claims. They sure wouldn't be wearing Map and Che tee shirts in my class. Yes I'm afraid I'd reveal the truth about your liberal heroes!

    3. livelonger profile image89
      livelongerposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      She says all those outrageous things on purpose, and, like Glenn Beck, probably doesn't believe any of them. She, like Beck, just knows that absurd right-wing conspiracies have a huge audience, and they can make millions saying things like that.

      1. Ron Montgomery profile image60
        Ron Montgomeryposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        That strategy worked well for P.T. Barnum.  Freak shows are always a hit.

    4. rhamson profile image77
      rhamsonposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      lol  Whats next?  Rabies is good for you? lol

      What is truly pathetic is that while we try to accept the theory that nuclear energy is clean and safe, we may all be in for it when the storage facilities for the nuclear waste reach their capacities and begin finding their way into our water and food sources.

      http://www.history.rochester.edu/class/EZRA/

    5. Ralph Deeds profile image70
      Ralph Deedsposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      She never had one to begin with! Actually, she has a clever mind but little respect for the truth.

  2. Hugh Williamson profile image88
    Hugh Williamsonposted 6 years ago

    If you didn't catch it, she said that a little radiation is good for you and that the Japanese would be healthier now that the air was radiated.

    Bill-O jumped in and correct her.

    1. stclairjack profile image80
      stclairjackposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      so truman had a healthcare plan long before obama, and he tested it on hiroshima and nagasaki?

      wow,....WOW MAN!

      i hope she moves there, realestate will be very reasonable near reactors 3 and 4.

    2. kirstenblog profile image74
      kirstenblogposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      I have actually heard some statistic, that in areas where there is higher background radiation there is a dramatically reduced number of cancer cases then in areas with less background radiation. Perhaps she has heard this report and kinda got the wrong end of the stick as they say? hmm

      I cannot say if this statistic is valid or right I should say, just that it is something I have heard before so its possible that Ann has heard the same and just took it on board as fact.

  3. tritrain profile image75
    tritrainposted 6 years ago

    She had a mind?


    Huh!

  4. Ron Montgomery profile image60
    Ron Montgomeryposted 6 years ago

    http://uglyrepublicans.com/republicans/United-States/Ann-Coulter/anti-ann-coulter.jpg

    1. DTR0005 profile image83
      DTR0005posted 6 years ago in reply to this

      I would have to stab myself with a dull pencil in the neck in order to avoid waking her up.....

  5. Mighty Mom profile image90
    Mighty Momposted 6 years ago

    Is it just me, or did Bill O'Reilly seem like he was giving her a wide berth, like he was afraid that if he didn't handle her just right she'd pull out a vial of radioactive material and demonstrate "harmless hermosis" right on his show?

    If I were Ann Coulter I'd be very, very careful the next time I go out for sushi...

    1. canadawest99 profile image59
      canadawest99posted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Some kind of person that wants to be the most hated woman in america.  Thats quite a goal in life.  On top of that, no man on the planet will touch that physco either.  so sad.

    2. DTR0005 profile image83
      DTR0005posted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Mighty Mom.. I thought the same thing. Though it might have been out of fear that she would drop her pants and her penis would be longer than his.. not sure....

  6. Mighty Mom profile image90
    Mighty Momposted 6 years ago

    Well now. This is interesting.
    Ann Coulter is not a lesbian (not that any self-respecting woman in America would have her).
    But take a look at her liaisaons. WOW!

    Boyfriend: Bill Maher
    Boyfriend: Dinesh D'Souza
    Boyfriend: James Tully
    Boyfriend: Bob Guccione, Jr.
    Boyfriend: (Democratic Senate staffer)
    Boyfriend: (FBI agent)

    1. I am DB Cooper profile image72
      I am DB Cooperposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      I think I see what you're getting at. Could Ann Coulter be a liberal troll out to make even the intellectual conservatives (she is Ivy League educated, after all) look like idiots? Is her entire career just a big prank on weak-minded Republicans?

      1. bgamall profile image84
        bgamallposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        I think she may change her views after exhausting the ones that made her rich. But there is only a small chance she will become Arianna Huffington.

  7. profile image0
    Sophia Angeliqueposted 6 years ago

    This is the way people who do not read and cannot think become the victims of information that is misleading.

    Her methodology?


    a=b, therefore c=d.

    Obviously, her logic is seriously flawed. But omg, is she a friend of those who want to build riches in the name of money, regardless of what it will do to the general population? Oh, yes, she is!

  8. Greek One profile image77
    Greek Oneposted 6 years ago

    she is disgusting...

    yet I would still sleep with her if I was single

    smile

    1. bgamall profile image84
      bgamallposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      You like the Praying Mantis Greek? smile

      1. Greek One profile image77
        Greek Oneposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        more like a foot long trouser snake smile

        1. bgamall profile image84
          bgamallposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          No, her silly. She is the mantis. She is all legs and arms and skinny ones too.

          She is about as womanly as Twiggy. I wonder if she barfs her food to stay skinny. I wonder sometimes. Well, only once, now. smile

          1. Greek One profile image77
            Greek Oneposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            are you implying she would eat me?

            1. Doug Hughes profile image61
              Doug Hughesposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              I can't tell if you are asking out of fear or hope.

              Don't send pictures.

            2. Ralph Deeds profile image70
              Ralph Deedsposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              Like a crocodile or a cobra.

            3. bgamall profile image84
              bgamallposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              She only eats other Manti. Is that the plural of Mantis? She thinks the Greeks are a little kinky. smile

  9. Uninvited Writer profile image81
    Uninvited Writerposted 6 years ago

    Somehow I just knew who would defend her smile

  10. kirstenblog profile image74
    kirstenblogposted 6 years ago

    yikes @ Kerryg's photos!

    I have heard that it was kids who were worst effected by Chernobyl, your pics are heart rending hmm sad

    1. kerryg profile image85
      kerrygposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      I know. It just breaks my heart. sad

      I know a lot of conservatives like to talk about the explosion of wildlife around Chernobyl in the aftermath, but they ignore the shortened life spans and high rate of mutations of animals in the area. Even the plants show effects. I read an interesting article awhile back about some trees growing all cattywampus because the radiation had interfered with the hormone signals that tell them which direction to grow.

      In fairness, the Japan situation is not nearly as awful as Chernobyl, but Coulter's remarks are still dangerously misleading.

      1. I am DB Cooper profile image72
        I am DB Cooperposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        Not to mention the fact that the biggest factor in the increased wildlife at Chernobyl is the exodus of 99% of the human population. If the human population went extinct tomorrow there would be a huge boom in wildlife around the world. I would hope conservatives don't see this as a positive potential outcome.

  11. superwags profile image79
    superwagsposted 6 years ago

    This woman is obviously an attention seeking fool who's hoping to jump on a particular band wagon for personal gain. It's utterly insensitive and poorly researched.

    However, I'd say that the attention of the media over the nuclear element of the Japan crisis is overblown. Infact a lot is made of nuclear radiation levels and the link to human cancer epidemics when the death rate is not that much elevated against background levels.

    The real story should be the ongoing humanitarian disaster after the tsunami and earthquake - but this is now over so the media focus on a "developing story" which they can sensationalise.

    1. bgamall profile image84
      bgamallposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      You saw her book excerpts right? http://mediamatters.org/research/200901040001

      She is probably out to make money. She should have done like Palin and just said she was running for president, but instead she became the Republican Class Clown.

      1. superwags profile image79
        superwagsposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        I'm not from the US. I saw her interviewed in the UK and she came across as a tool. The interviewer gave her a hell of a grilling, more disbelief than anything else on his part:

        http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UB9UE5eE2_k

        1. bgamall profile image84
          bgamallposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          I have certain religious views, however, I believe in a separation of church and state. Coulter's views are like the Church of England. They are both state religion. Seems like Christ said His kingdom was not of this world, so that is at odds with state religion.

          Look how the British monarchy, who claim to be the keepers of the truth, continually create scandal. That is sort of like the Republicans in our country. They claim to be the moral party, but since fusion of church and state is doomed to failure, morally speaking, they always get caught in scandals.

          1. superwags profile image79
            superwagsposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            I think your critique of the church of england is unfair - it's a historical state religion. It has nothing to do with the state, nor does the monarchy have anything to do with the government; in all but a symbolic sense. Our prime minister, deputy prime minister and leader of the opposition are atheists for example; I'm not sure you'd even get into congress in the US.

            I agree that the royal family should just keep well away from politics. We have an embrassing tit of a royal who's currently the UK's volunatry trade ambassador. Mind I feel a bit sorry for the kids who are mercilessly hounded by the media. It'd be pretty easy to create a media "scandal" out of my falling out of a nightclub at 3am - they are young people living in the 21st century after all.

            1. bgamall profile image84
              bgamallposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              I understand that the official power of the state separates church and state. I am fine with that.

              But the King or Queen of England are heads of the Church of England, which is a fusion of church and state. While my criticism of England as a democracy was not complete, and therefore, unfair, as you say, the criticism of the Church of England as being a fusion of church and state is accurate.

              Lol, in the US we have Republicans and Hollywood instead!

              1. superwags profile image79
                superwagsposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                You're right to be critical. There's a lot wrong with the Church of England; they are by far the country's biggest land owners and (staggeringly)their bishops gets to sit unelected in the House of Lords, for instance.

                I guess it's just a throw back to history - there was never the revolution as in the US or France. It's about as relevant as saying that the Queen is the head of state of New Zealand or Canada!

                It'll change over time, but I'm one of the few people who even sees these things as a problem here. Noone else really cares. It's difficult to try to explain, but I'd say we're generally comfortable and safe in our politics - we're not bothered - the church is seen as essentially harmless.

                I can see why to someone from the outside it appears troubling, but the church wouldn't dare try to exert pressure on the government. And if a minister was to invoke god in the way the US's elected members do, they'd be treated with a lot of suspicion and probably get a visit from one of the whips (people employed to keep mps within the party line)!

                1. bgamall profile image84
                  bgamallposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                  It is benign, but not harmless. It perpetuates the myth of state religion. It legitimizes that which is not legitimate.

  12. prettydarkhorse profile image63
    prettydarkhorseposted 6 years ago

    she loves to 'stir the pot", craves to be controversial just to be famous - she should be in "Hollywood". Look at Palin and Malkin. They know how to become rich.

    1. livelonger profile image89
      livelongerposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Agreed.

    2. BillyDRitchie profile image60
      BillyDRitchieposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Yeah, because we all know becoming rich is a bad thing.....

      1. PrettyPanther profile image84
        PrettyPantherposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        No, but becoming rich by feeding anger and lies to the fearful and ignorant is a bad thing, at least by most people's standards.

        1. BillyDRitchie profile image60
          BillyDRitchieposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          I'm curious if you would level the same criticism at people like, oh, I don't know.....Michael Moore?

        2. PrettyPanther profile image84
          PrettyPantherposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          I would if Michael Moore said things like:

          "My only regret with Timothy McVeigh is he did not go to the New York Times Building."  -- as quoted in the New York Observer, Aug. 20, 2002

          Referring to four women whose husbands died in the September 11, 2001 attacks:  "I've never seen people enjoying their husbands' deaths so much."

          "My libertarian friends are probably getting a little upset now but I think that's because they never appreciate the benefits of local fascism."---MSNBC 2/8/97

          "I think [women] should be armed but should not [be allowed to] vote. No, they all have to give up their vote, not just, you know, the lady clapping and me. The problem with women voting -- and your Communists will back me up on this -- is that, you know, women have no capacity to understand how money is earned. They have a lot of ideas on how to spend it. And when they take these polls, it's always more money on education, more money on child care, more money on day care."    Politically Incorrect, Feb. 26, 2001

          (talking about Norman Mineta's cautioning the use of racial profiling against terrorism) "[Secretary Mineta] is burning with hatred for America. He has taken the occasion of the most devastating attack on U.S. soil to drone on about how his baseball bat was taken from him as a child headed to one of Franklin Roosevelt's Japanese internment camps.

          God says, "Earth is yours. Take it. Rape it. It's yours."  Hannity and Colmes, June 22, 2001

          1. bgamall profile image84
            bgamallposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            Yes, the women believed, rightly so, that their husbands were killed by Cheney/Bush allowing and even facilitating 911.

          2. PrettyPanther profile image84
            PrettyPantherposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            This was meant as a reply to BillyDRitchie who said:  "I'm curious if you would level the same criticism at people like, oh, I don't know.....Michael Moore?"

          3. dingdondingdon profile image60
            dingdondingdonposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            I wonder, if she thinks women are all so stupid and can't understand money or the world... why is she still talking?

            1. PrettyPanther profile image84
              PrettyPantherposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              Good question.  A better question is why do people pay money to listen to and read her blather?

      2. prettydarkhorse profile image63
        prettydarkhorseposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        it is not as long as you don't mislead people and get paid for it. She pretends to believe what she says, so that she can become controversial and get paid for speaking engagements by your own party people, LOL

        1. BillyDRitchie profile image60
          BillyDRitchieposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          So because she writes something that you don't agree with, then she obviously doesn't believe it herself.....

          Ooooookay.....

          Um, it's called opinion, love.....

          1. prettydarkhorse profile image63
            prettydarkhorseposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            look at this thread, if her statements make sense to you, good luck

            1. BillyDRitchie profile image60
              BillyDRitchieposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              Doesn't matter.....if they are her opinions, she is entitled to them, she can write them down, and if a publisher wants to publish them, more power to 'em.

              I'm sure you have no problem with the printed blatherings of Al Franken, though, right?  Because he happens to be of the same mind as you?

              1. prettydarkhorse profile image63
                prettydarkhorseposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                as I am telling you good luck to you in believing in her words of wisdom!

                1. BillyDRitchie profile image60
                  BillyDRitchieposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                  I've found Ann to be pretty dead on about 85% of the time.....can't say I agree with her comments about Japan, though....

              2. PrettyPanther profile image84
                PrettyPantherposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                Yes, Coulter has a right to her opinions, a publisher has a right to publish them, and you have a right to spend your money to buy her books and listen to her speak. The same applies to Al Franken, Michael Moore, and David Dukes, for that matter. These are obvious facts, so what is your point?

                1. BillyDRitchie profile image60
                  BillyDRitchieposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                  All these comments leveled at Ann for her opinions, but I'm sure the same level of critique is not pointed at guys that you happen to agree with.

                  I like a lot of what Ann says but sometimes she does say things that make me say "Whatchoo talkin' bout, Willis?".

                  Will you be as intellectually honest in your critiques of leftist authors and commentators?  Because I don't see much of it (on these forums anyway)

                  1. PrettyPanther profile image84
                    PrettyPantherposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                    You like to state the obvious, don't you?  "All these comments leveled at Ann for her opinions, but I'm sure the same level of critique is not pointed at guys that you happen to agree with."

                    LOL

  13. Hugh Williamson profile image88
    Hugh Williamsonposted 6 years ago

    Coulter is probably more entertainment than a real danger because few take her seriously. If we expect to get the straight scoop from our elected pols, however, they are probably not a great fact source either.

    "Facing its biggest crisis in 25 years, the U.S. nuclear power industry can count on plenty of Democratic and Republican friends in both high and low places.

    During the past election cycle alone, the Nuclear Energy Institute and more than a dozen companies with big nuclear portfolios have spent tens of millions of dollars on lobbying and campaign contributions to lawmakers in key leadership slots and across influential state delegations.
    "

    Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/03 … z1HLKt1WRE

    Remember that Boehner and Obama said nuclear power was one thing that they agreed on. Small wonder.

  14. maven101 profile image75
    maven101posted 6 years ago

    I may not agree with some of Ms Coulter's titillating pronouncements, but I do enjoy the Left's torment in response to them...

  15. lovemychris profile image80
    lovemychrisposted 6 years ago

    You've got the attitudwe wrong PP, it's "sell your mother for a buck".

    That's Capitalism!! That's America!!!
    ...not mine. Not ever. No way.

    1. PrettyPanther profile image84
      PrettyPantherposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      I understand.  It has become acceptable to many people that pursuit of the all-mighty dollar is the highest calling of humankind, regardless of how many lives are ruined to create wealth for a very few.

    2. BillyDRitchie profile image60
      BillyDRitchieposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Man, and I thought I was going to have to go home without my LMC wealth envy post of the day......

      Whew, that was close....

      1. Flightkeeper profile image72
        Flightkeeperposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        lol lol

      2. lovemychris profile image80
        lovemychrisposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        It's not envy, it's disdain.

        1. BillyDRitchie profile image60
          BillyDRitchieposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          So you have disdain for successful people, yet somehow believe you are entitled to a portion of  their income.

          How much was that again?

          Why should the rest of us work hard for the "privilege" of giving money to people like you who do not wish to earn it?

          1. dingdondingdon profile image60
            dingdondingdonposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            You act as if what you're being asked to do is directly hand over an envelope full of money to him. What you're being asked is to support the community you live in by giving a portion of your money to services that cannot exist without funding from the society they benefit.

            1. BillyDRitchie profile image60
              BillyDRitchieposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              I'm also of the opinion that if government would learn how to live within their means and cut wasteful spending, they would have plenty of money for these projects you think we need.

              Or does that make too much sense?

              1. PrettyPanther profile image84
                PrettyPantherposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                It makes complete sense.  The question is not whether we spend too much money; most liberals would agree that our tax dollars are often spent unwisely.  We just disagree on where the money should be spent and where it should be cut.  I happen to think that removing the billions wasted on wars and defense spending, combined with a fair tax on the wealthy, would go a long way toward balancing the budget without hurting our most vulnerable citizens.

                1. BillyDRitchie profile image60
                  BillyDRitchieposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                  You think defense spending is wasted?  Really?

                  Tell me, exactly who would you prefer to be the world's leading superpower, because somebody is going to assume that role, I'd much rather it be us....

                  1. PrettyPanther profile image84
                    PrettyPantherposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                    That's not exactly what I said or meant, anyway, although I suppose one could interpret it that way.  There is a LOT of waste and unnecessary spending in many federal agencies, but because the defense and homeland security budgets have been deemed untouchable both by Republicans and Democrats, fraud and waste has become entrenched. 

                    I honestly don't spend a lot of time worrying about who is the world's leading superpower.  It won't matter a whit if that superpower's economy collapses due to misplaced priorities.

  16. Mighty Mom profile image90
    Mighty Momposted 6 years ago

    Typical hateful, violent liberal. lol

    1. kirstenblog profile image74
      kirstenblogposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      would you rather he woke her up? or worse stabbed her with that pencil? lol

      at least he is stabbing himself lol

  17. katiem2 profile image57
    katiem2posted 6 years ago

    crazy people with crazy money

  18. lady_love158 profile image61
    lady_love158posted 6 years ago

    Classic Michael Moors quotes:
    http://www.old-wizard.com/top-10-worst- … ore-quotes

    Talk about a hypocrite and a hater of America!

    1. John Holden profile image60
      John Holdenposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      I see nothing that makes him a hypocrite or a hater of America, just a bit of common sense!

      1. lady_love158 profile image61
        lady_love158posted 6 years ago in reply to this

        Lol! I wouldn't expect you to!

        1. DTR0005 profile image83
          DTR0005posted 6 years ago in reply to this

          http://s2.hubimg.com/u/4817149_f248.jpg

  19. profile image0
    Sophia Angeliqueposted 6 years ago

    So much for all the idiots who insist that radiation is good for you...

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article … -leak.html

  20. AnnCee profile image70
    AnnCeeposted 6 years ago

    Wow!   Citing specific scientific studies!   That CRAZY gal!  http://images.zaazu.com/img/crazy-crazy-mad-straight-jacket-smiley-emoticon-000187-large.gif

    People pay to be irradiated at Boulder Springs?   It's nothing new.

    One of Coulter's points is that the levels the scientific community adheres to may be more about an anti-nuclear power stance than about actual harm.   Sort of like global warming is used to push the world population toward one world control.

    She makes good points.  Morons shut down their minds and open their pie holes hysterically.

    O'Reilly had a good point too.  It is not good to poopoo the dangers in this situation.

    As an academic piece in a time when millions are not under imminent threat this would be simply interesting.

    The really CRAZY and perhaps evil ones are the Japanese officials who are refusing to expand the 12 mile evacuation zone.


    P.S.   Spew on writers.

    1. bgamall profile image84
      bgamallposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Now the radioactivity is leaking into groundwater and the Japanese government is considering taking over the plants.

      1. profile image0
        Sophia Angeliqueposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        They finally decided to decommission them...

  21. DonDWest profile image79
    DonDWestposted 6 years ago

    You're implying Ann Coulter actually had a mind in the first place to lose. . .

 
working