It's sad when Bill O'Reilly is the voice of reason...
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.
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???
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.
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! !
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.
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.
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.
Here's another fact... more people died in windmill acidents than died as a result of the chernobal disaster!
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.
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.
Of course, not all Chernobyl victims actually died.
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?
"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."
i am willing to let her test the appropriate levels on herself, and then we can study the results
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.
Sure... perhaps we best start by examining the toxicity of the garbage she spews in the hopes of gaining publicity and noteriety for herself?
Yes and we can look at the media who amplify it and put her on their live segments.
damn liberal media and their biases!! They are everywhere!
Limbaugh, Beck, Fox news, et al....
Yeah, and I guess those conservative morning shows on ABC CBS and NBC practically have none.
And yet you manage to find Coulter in your late waking hours.
Not really.. I just clicked on the link in the OP post
I also have the benefit of being alerted to similar conservative commentaries thanks to many Hubbers who draw attention to them (either out of disgust, or in order to spread their words of 'wisdom')
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!
Says the woman who claimed Ann Coulter didn't say radiation was good for you despite direct evidence to the contrary...
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.
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!
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.
Money isn't finite! Just look at a graph of world GDP. This assumption that the rich just collect money and pile it up in a safe somewhere is bogus and you know it! Even if they put cas in the bank that money is then invested and loaned in some cases to young entrepreneurs with a new idea the market is just waiting for. No one ever said getting rich is easy its not its hard but nothing worthwhile is easy! Giving up and crying life us unfair and its not fair the rich are rich and you're not isn't the answer! Man up and get out there don't quit and don't buy into the liberal BS!
Have you made it rich? If not do tell me about it. Again, there is a such thing as idealism. It is what leads people to join Amway and be in a "positive" attitude as they are being killed. I consider myself a realist, and realistically the odds show I am right more often than you.
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.
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.
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!
Thank you! One thing is for sure if I was a teacher I wouldn't be indoctrinating my students with liberal lies!!
Good point. Wingnut lies are easier for the little block heads to swallow, plus there's an endless supply.
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!!
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.
Whats next? Rabies is good for you?
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.
She never had one to begin with! Actually, she has a clever mind but little respect for the truth.
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.
so truman had a healthcare plan long before obama, and he tested it on hiroshima and nagasaki?
i hope she moves there, realestate will be very reasonable near reactors 3 and 4.
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?
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.
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...
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.
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....
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)
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?
This is the way people who do not read and cannot think become the victims of information that is misleading.
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!
she is disgusting...
yet I would still sleep with her if I was single
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.
I can't tell if you are asking out of fear or hope.
Don't send pictures.
She only eats other Manti. Is that the plural of Mantis? She thinks the Greeks are a little kinky.
@ Kerryg's photos!
I have heard that it was kids who were worst effected by Chernobyl, your pics are heart rending
I know. It just breaks my heart.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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:
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.
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.
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!
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)!
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.
Yeah, because we all know becoming rich is a bad thing.....
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.
I'm curious if you would level the same criticism at people like, oh, I don't know.....Michael Moore?
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
Yes, the women believed, rightly so, that their husbands were killed by Cheney/Bush allowing and even facilitating 911.
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?"
I wonder, if she thinks women are all so stupid and can't understand money or the world... why is she still talking?
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
So because she writes something that you don't agree with, then she obviously doesn't believe it herself.....
Um, it's called opinion, love.....
look at this thread, if her statements make sense to you, good luck
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?
as I am telling you good luck to you in believing in her words of wisdom!
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?
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)
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."
Well, the difference is that it is more often conservatives who may actually disagree with their own than liberals.......at least from what I have seen.
Again, are you willing to be as intellectually honest when it comes to the blatherings of such leftist luminaries as Mikey Moore or Bill Mahr?
I believe so, but if you ever find evidence otherwise on these forums, you can let me know.
Re your statement that conservatives disagree more with their own, do you think the reason you believe that is because you mostly watch, read, or listen to conservatives and therefore are more likely to see disagreement?
Also, did you read Habee's thread where she asked liberals about the recent military action in Libya? I saw quite a lot of varying opinions from liberals here.
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.
I may not agree with some of Ms Coulter's titillating pronouncements, but I do enjoy the Left's torment in response to them...
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.
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.
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....
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?
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.
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?
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.
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....
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.
Brilliant! Lol! I thought the left were supposed to be thoughtful intellectuals.... you've just shattered that image for me!
Classic Michael Moors quotes:
http://www.old-wizard.com/top-10-worst- … ore-quotes
Talk about a hypocrite and a hater of America!
So much for all the idiots who insist that radiation is good for you...
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article … -leak.html
Wow! Citing specific scientific studies! That CRAZY gal!
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.
You're implying Ann Coulter actually had a mind in the first place to lose. . .
by Credence2 5 years ago
Bill O'Reilly, Fox News Conservative Commentator, penned the term.Greetings and Happy Independence Day to one and all.Bill says traditional Americans are 'threatened' by a left wing domination of the internet.Bill says that traditional Americans abhor the SC for its recent decision regarding same...
by Ralph Schwartz 3 years ago
What are your thoughts on Bill O'Reilly leaving FOX?The O'Reilly Factor, a long running conservative talk show, is being pulled off of the air on allegations that host Bill O'Reilly harassed former employees (FOX has already paid a settlement of $13 million in lieu of a trial and the possible...
by leeberttea 10 years ago
http://dailycaller.com/2010/08/06/ann-c … ervatives/Who says conservatives are against homosexuals?
by PJ Jones 10 years ago
Tonight toward the end of his show Keith host of Countdown on MSNBC announced that this would be his last segment. I was Shocked. He didn't explain why, or if he would be on another channel. He calmly read Thurber, which he does every Friday. At the end he asked the cameras...
by Shadesbreath 12 years ago
Still don't know who I'm voting for for sure, but that woman gave a great speech imo.
by Susan Keeping 9 years ago
Sometimes he makes sense http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qHEVu64pZsAI forget what the 1st time was but I was impressed then too.
Copyright © 2021 HubPages Inc. and respective owners. Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners. HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc. HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.
HubPages Inc, a part of Maven Inc.
|HubPages Device ID||This is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.|
|Login||This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.|
|HubPages Traffic Pixel||This is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.|
|Remarketing Pixels||We may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.|
|Conversion Tracking Pixels||We may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.|