Ann Coulter's Answer to Canada!

[Kalam]

"I haven't forgotten about the lackluster quality of your posts regarding my religion ..."

Ah, now I see.

Actually I don't recall my said arguments, but I certainly can understand you recalling such, and taking it personally.

(But if they were of 'lackluster quality' you wouldn't take them so personally, eh? They must have been pretty good.)

So good, in fact, that you eventually decided to cut your losses and duck out of the thread without responding to my refutations. I believe it was Freud who taught us about our tendency to repress unpleasant memories.

My ability to recall these kinds of things has served me well, PC, here as well as in the parts of my life that matter.

Try to remember, each of us is no more than a collection and assembly of electrons here on the USMB.

Oh, but we're all so much more! Do you not consider yourself a believer?

But, I avoid the vulgar.

That seems to be true in most cases, yes, but you are a fan of Ann Coulter.

 

[del]

You are certainly entitled to your opinion including your objective observation that it is 'various groups of mouth breathers' that think she represents conservative thought. Thank you for including me in that characterization. Very kind of you.

I personally dislike Ann's style of presentation from time to time. I don't always agree with her but thoroughly enjoy her columns as the imagery she uses at times is brilliant and often really funny. And it is there that it is darn near impossible to catch her in an error of fact. At times she does wander into the realm of poor taste and I wish she wouldn't do that, but she has sort of built a 'what can I do to stir up the liberals today' image with that. I think if she weren't a smart, strong, beautiful woman she wouldn't catch so much hell for that.

Look past the abrasive exterior to the content of what she is saying and writing, however, and you don't find either dishonesty or hate speech.

Not liking her or her style of presentation or communication is honest. Accusing her of dishonesty or hatefulness because you dislike her is not honest.

i only dislike her because she's hateful and dishonest.

i'm sorry if you feel offended by my characterization of her followers, but i call them as i see them. the choice to be included in her legion of admirers is yours, not mine, after all.

honest.

That's okay. It is my opinion, those who judge one person based on no more foundation than prejudice are likely to judge others based on no more foundation than prejudice. I figure it is everybody's choice to draw whatever conclusions they do.

So you are perfectly within your right to judge me because I can find things about Ann Coulter to apprecaite.

I am perfectly within my right to judge unjustified prejudice when I think I see it. So far those who hold her in such low esteem haven't been able to come up with much to justify their opinion. You might be the exception but I doubt it.

Doesn't make me a bad person. Doesn't make you a bad person. We are who we are.

(And sighing. No rep from Del for this post. )

i'm not judging you based on one opinion, in fact, i'm not judging you at all.
any generalization, such as the one i've made re: coulter, is by definition inaccurate when considering specifics.

reading your posts, i have no reason to think that you're a bad person, just someone with whom i disagree. i really am sorry if i unintentionally hurt your feelings. i do try to disagree in an agreeable manner most times.

sorry to take so long to reply, but unlike rust, i do sleep on occasion.

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

... any generalization, such as the one i've made re: coulter, is by definition inaccurate when considering specifics. ...

Ya know what's fascinatin' about this, is that such assertions, while commonly advanced; are NEVER advanced with any argument wherein the Coulter opposition demonstrates her position as being inaccurate.

Would you like to be the exception Del? Or just keep the damage down to this little refutation...

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

ROFL...

Well consistency is important to every principle... and thank you for your support.

 

[Foxfyre]

i only dislike her because she's hateful and dishonest.

i'm sorry if you feel offended by my characterization of her followers, but i call them as i see them. the choice to be included in her legion of admirers is yours, not mine, after all.

honest.

That's okay. It is my opinion, those who judge one person based on no more foundation than prejudice are likely to judge others based on no more foundation than prejudice. I figure it is everybody's choice to draw whatever conclusions they do.

So you are perfectly within your right to judge me because I can find things about Ann Coulter to apprecaite.

I am perfectly within my right to judge unjustified prejudice when I think I see it. So far those who hold her in such low esteem haven't been able to come up with much to justify their opinion. You might be the exception but I doubt it.

Doesn't make me a bad person. Doesn't make you a bad person. We are who we are.

(And sighing. No rep from Del for this post. )

i'm not judging you based on one opinion, in fact, i'm not judging you at all.
any generalization, such as the one i've made re: coulter, is by definition inaccurate when considering specifics.

reading your posts, i have no reason to think that you're a bad person, just someone with whom i disagree. i really am sorry if i unintentionally hurt your feelings. i do try to disagree in an agreeable manner most times.

sorry to take so long to reply, but unlike rust, i do sleep on occasion.

Hmmm. Well when you say this. . .:

i'm sorry if you feel offended by my characterization of her followers, but i call them as i see them. the choice to be included in her legion of admirers is yours, not mine, after all.

. . .I suppose that is not the same thing as judging me. I certainly would consider it as a judgment or, in formal debate lingo, ad hominem, but I accept that you don't look at it that way.

Trust me, you have not hurt my feelings. And you weren't really disagreeable. Just wrong. That's not the same thing.

 

[PoliticalChic]

"I haven't forgotten about the lackluster quality of your posts regarding my religion ..."

Ah, now I see.

Actually I don't recall my said arguments, but I certainly can understand you recalling such, and taking it personally.

(But if they were of 'lackluster quality' you wouldn't take them so personally, eh? They must have been pretty good.)

So good, in fact, that you eventually decided to cut your losses and duck out of the thread without responding to my refutations. I believe it was Freud who taught us about our tendency to repress unpleasant memories.

My ability to recall these kinds of things has served me well, PC, here as well as in the parts of my life that matter.

Try to remember, each of us is no more than a collection and assembly of electrons here on the USMB.

Oh, but we're all so much more! Do you not consider yourself a believer?

But, I avoid the vulgar.

That seems to be true in most cases, yes, but you are a fan of Ann Coulter.

"So good, in fact, that you eventually decided to cut your losses and duck out of the thread without responding to my refutations. I believe it was Freud who taught us about our tendency to repress unpleasant memories. "
I believe it was Freud who said 'sometimes a cigar is only a cigar.'
By that token, I'm guessing that if I didn't answer what you call a 'refutation,' it probably was so laughable that it required none.

"My ability to recall these kinds of things has served me well..."
Perhaps you mistake 'recall' for hallucinations.
There are medications you can take for that.
Speak to your doctor to see if they are right for you.


"... the parts of my life that matter."
Because they have weight and take up space?
May be solid,liquid or gas?

"Oh, but we're all so much more!"
Remember, you’re unique like everybody else.
And that includes your delusions of adequacy.

"Do you not consider yourself a believer?"
Well, I don't join dangerous cults: I practice safe sects!

Now you can stop sulking, and try to remember what President Truman
advised: If you can't stand the heat, stay out of the kitchen.

Looking forward to our next meeting: I just can't get enough of portentious
jargon, and senseless prattle.
See ya'

 

[Kalam]

I believe it was Freud who said 'sometimes a cigar is only a cigar.' By that token, I'm guessing that if I didn't answer what you call a 'refutation,' it probably was so laughable that it required none.

If that's what you need to believe to justify your failure to yourself, I don't suppose I see any harm in that. On the other hand, if you'd like to join the rest of us in reality, there's no shame in admitting that you know less about Islam than a Muslim.

"My ability to recall these kinds of things has served me well..." Perhaps you mistake 'recall' for hallucinations.

No, or at least not in this case. I'm sure that you'd be able to find this discussion on your own if you cared enough to do so; it was from 2009.

"... the parts of my life that matter."
Because they have weight and take up space?
May be solid,liquid or gas?

Was English your first language?

And that includes your delusions of adequacy.

What?

Well, I don't join dangerous cults: I practice safe sects!

Feel free to elaborate.

Looking forward to our next meeting:

Are you trying to tell me something?

I just can't get enough of portentious
jargon, and senseless prattle.
See ya'

"Portentious"? I'll confess to not knowing why you'd call my posts portentous. If you meant to call me pretentious, I suppose that makes two of us who fit that description.

 

[sitarro]

Coulter is a funny guy. It would have been funny if she went there and got arrested for her hatefull crap.

Funny dude.

What's really pathetic is that you can't keep up your silly farce for a full three sentences.

 

[sitarro]

The apology should be to the five teachers who the grades of schooling that you completed.

I did only go to 11 years of regular public school.
I was double promoted and did not have to attend one grade.
How about you?

Can't you tell how smart I am from my avatar?

Same thing happened to me. They didnt call it double promoting, it was called getting skipped a grade when they bounced me from the 6th to the 8th grade. I would not allow them to do anything like that to my daughter though. I never really fit in to any class I was in all during high school. In my mind.

That's sad and it explains a lot.

 

[del]

... any generalization, such as the one i've made re: coulter, is by definition inaccurate when considering specifics. ...

Ya know what's fascinatin' about this, is that such assertions, while commonly advanced; are NEVER advanced with any argument wherein the Coulter opposition demonstrates her position as being inaccurate.

Would you like to be the exception Del? Or just keep the damage down to this little refutation...

clearly you're laboring under the misconception that your opinion counts for something to someone.

that may be true, but i'm not the someone.

have a nice day.

preferably somewhere else.

 

[del]

That's okay. It is my opinion, those who judge one person based on no more foundation than prejudice are likely to judge others based on no more foundation than prejudice. I figure it is everybody's choice to draw whatever conclusions they do.

So you are perfectly within your right to judge me because I can find things about Ann Coulter to apprecaite.

I am perfectly within my right to judge unjustified prejudice when I think I see it. So far those who hold her in such low esteem haven't been able to come up with much to justify their opinion. You might be the exception but I doubt it.

Doesn't make me a bad person. Doesn't make you a bad person. We are who we are.

(And sighing. No rep from Del for this post. )

i'm not judging you based on one opinion, in fact, i'm not judging you at all.
any generalization, such as the one i've made re: coulter, is by definition inaccurate when considering specifics.

reading your posts, i have no reason to think that you're a bad person, just someone with whom i disagree. i really am sorry if i unintentionally hurt your feelings. i do try to disagree in an agreeable manner most times.

sorry to take so long to reply, but unlike rust, i do sleep on occasion.

Hmmm. Well when you say this. . .:

i'm sorry if you feel offended by my characterization of her followers, but i call them as i see them. the choice to be included in her legion of admirers is yours, not mine, after all.

. . .I suppose that is not the same thing as judging me. I certainly would consider it as a judgment or, in formal debate lingo, ad hominem, but I accept that you don't look at it that way.

Trust me, you have not hurt my feelings. And you weren't really disagreeable. Just wrong. That's not the same thing.

there's a reason they make chocolate and vanilla.

 

[Foxfyre]

i'm not judging you based on one opinion, in fact, i'm not judging you at all.
any generalization, such as the one i've made re: coulter, is by definition inaccurate when considering specifics.

reading your posts, i have no reason to think that you're a bad person, just someone with whom i disagree. i really am sorry if i unintentionally hurt your feelings. i do try to disagree in an agreeable manner most times.

sorry to take so long to reply, but unlike rust, i do sleep on occasion.

Hmmm. Well when you say this. . .:

i'm sorry if you feel offended by my characterization of her followers, but i call them as i see them. the choice to be included in her legion of admirers is yours, not mine, after all.

. . .I suppose that is not the same thing as judging me. I certainly would consider it as a judgment or, in formal debate lingo, ad hominem, but I accept that you don't look at it that way.

Trust me, you have not hurt my feelings. And you weren't really disagreeable. Just wrong. That's not the same thing.

there's a reason they make chocolate and vanilla.

And there's probably a reason I buy a lot of neopolitan icecream.

 

[sitarro]

I was unable to get an official response to this from Miss Coulter...

But I feel comfortable in advancing the following his as something closely representing of her likely reaction:

If you're able to establish contact with Ms. Coulter, please tell her that although I'm flattered by her advances, I've decided to limit myself to sexual partners who are both human and female.

Isn't that against your religion...... the religion of "men who stare at and have sex with goats"........ excuse me, I meant to say "whimps that stare at and have sex with goats". Hollywood made a movie about it. They had George Clooney play an Arab ass wipe.

 

[sitarro]

Actually Coulter might NOT "be welcome to speak anywhere else in Canada:"




Canadians are such a humorless bunch.

Well that's the nature of your fascists... There's nothing less tolerant on earth than the ideological left... It's the most lethal organism on the planetl; seconded, perhaps... to disease, from time to time. But I think, the left took the title in the 20th century; with 150 million innocent murdered... not 100% positive that disease didn't beat' em... but I think the Left took it.

I don't think Canadians are leathal to anything but Baby Harp Seals.

I would pay serious money to be the person that would pull the trigger on a 50 caliber from about a thousand yards on that piece of shit with the club. Turn him into some red mist.

 

[frazzledgear]

clearly a cry for attention it s not like some government official warned her about hate laws one leftist dean from one university did and no one banned her from speaking...but its a way better story to run away because of a body guards unsubstainated claims than to give her boring speech and get little attention beyond a letter and some lefty protest..universties all across America are full of such people and such incidents there is no real story here

This was never about Coulter engaging in hate speech because she did no such thing and had already spoken at other engagements in Canada -and gee whiz, managed to do so without violating any hate speech laws. Canadian hate speech laws involve encouraging violence against a person or group based on their racial, sexual orientation or ethnic heritage. She has never done that. So warning her about Canada's hate speech laws was just a diversion and publicity stunt perhaps -but had no validity. This never was about any hate speech from Coulter.

This was entirely about leftist students intending to silence her and preventing others from even hearing what she had to say. As if that was actually their right. (The left invariably calls any speech with which they disagree "hate speech" so they will continue to insist Coulter engages in hate speech even when there isn't a single example of her violating Canada's hate speech laws even in THIS country.) THIS is a truly revolting story but just one more example that undeniably PROVES how the left operates and always will. The only "free speech" the left ever believes in and wants protected is their own -they believe they have a "right" to silence all others. The real story here is the belief among liberals that it is appropriate to silence their political opponents entirely, prevent them from speaking -and definitely prevent others from hearing what they might say.

What those students who shouted her down did was shameful and they had NO RIGHT to do it. An audience belongs to whoever created the function that resulted in an audience. The audience belonged to Coulter and did NOT belong to those shouting students who took it over and did this. They violated the rights of EVERYONE in that audience along with Coulter's rights. The other people in her audience came to hear Coulter -they did NOT come to hear people who didn't like her start shouting for the purpose of shutting the entire thing down and making it impossible for her to speak and for her audience to hear her. This one must be really difficult for the left to get but if someone you don't like intends to give a speech and you don't like that person's views -THEN DON'T ATTEND THE SPEECH!. What a truly novel idea, huh? But the left really does believe it is THEIR right to attend such functions NOT for the purpose of listening -but for the purpose of making sure others cannot listen. Preventing political opponents from speaking at all in this manner is a founding principle of fascism -and fascism is born of leftist ideology in the first place. Fascists believe only those with whom they agree should be allowed to speak and claim they have the "right" to silence all others even if it requires intimidation or threats of violence to do so. Coulter was canceled for fear the shouting little fascists would end up starting a riot -NOT because of anything Coulter did or said. The fascists did exactly what they came to do and are undoubtedly still patting themselves on the back for.

Maybe fascism is a celebrated Canadian value -but it sure as hell isn't an American one. If you don't like the political views of a speaker, the proper response is not to try and prevent that person from speaking at all. It is with MORE speech that attempts to address, counter, argue or debate what she said that you disagree with! If your ideas are superior then you should be able to win any debate and withstand any challenge from opposing views. The left has no faith in the ability of their views to withstand a challenge for a very specific reason. They can't. History has repeatedly proven their ideas are utter failures -so they resort to this kind of crap instead.

When I was in college, a neonazi group had been invited to campus to speak. (Nazism is also born of leftist ideology as is any system involving the totalitarian state. Anarchy, no state control at all, is extreme rightwing ideology. One totalitarian state is NOT the opposite of another one.) This was back in the day when it was understood one of the most effective ways to get college students to think about what they really believed was to allow them to hear a wide variety of clashing ideas and views. A group of college students were so offended about the idea of allowing them to speak they went around trying to gather signatures demanding the neonazis be canceled. When I was approached for my signature, refusing to sign was one of the most difficult things I did because I would have loved nothing more than for them to be canceled. But I did refuse -because I had already formed my own principles by then and my principles meant more to me than any particular speech. Then and now. I tried to explain to her that the best and most effective response to speech you found offensive and thoroughly disagreed with was NOT to drive it underground. But to let them speak which would prove to everyone that what they had to say was truly revolting. The girl who had asked me to sign kept insisting that if I didn't sign it meant I WANTED them to speak which was pure bullshit. She couldn't come to grips with the fact that believing in free speech meant NOTHING if it only applied to speech you agreed with. If you applaud what the Canadian students did, it means something really significant. It means I cannot trust people like you to safeguard MY rights and freedoms -because it is ONLY the speech you DON'T like that tests your belief about that. And if you find yourself applauding what these people did, it means you flunked the only test that matters and it probably applies to all the other rights as well. I didn't sign the petition to cancel the neonazi speech. I also didn't attend the speech because whatever they had to say was never worth a minute of MY precious time in the first place. The worst response a neonazi wants to see is total INDIFFERENCE. I am not someone who thinks my own political views are so fragile and delicate that they just cannot tolerate a challenge from those with different views. There is a reason leftist believe the opposite about their own however -and why they so often respond to different views by using intimidation and the threats of violence to try and silence them.

In recent years there have been several conservative speakers on college campuses where some students attempted to disrupt the event in this fashion -including when Coulter was speaking. But in THOSE cases, it was the shouters and disrupters who were removed -not the invited speaker and their audience. See, in THIS country we understand who really has the rights in such situations which is why the fascist hyenas were not rewarded and were the ones who were dragged out when they pulled that crap here. So try coming to this country and pulling that stunt you Canadian fascist little shits.

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

... any generalization, such as the one i've made re: coulter, is by definition inaccurate when considering specifics. ...

Ya know what's fascinatin' about this, is that such assertions, while commonly advanced; are NEVER advanced with any argument wherein the Coulter opposition demonstrates her position as being inaccurate.

Would you like to be the exception Del? Or just keep the damage down to this little refutation...

clearly you're laboring under the misconception that your opinion counts for something to someone.

that may be true, but i'm not the someone.

have a nice day.

preferably somewhere else.

ROFL

Oh OK... So you're claiming then that the opposition isn't worthy of you actually sustaining your argument; thus you're conceding the point.

Fair enough...

And pleasse Sis... don't feel bad... It's not like ya had a shot, now is it?

Again kids... Del here is a Progressive... a long standing advocate of taking a little from the Right ideology and the wrong and finding a happy medium through compromise.

She advanced an assertion; was asked to sustain it; and ran to change the subject... Proving as she always does, that they simply can't compete.

They WANT TO... they really do.

But when the rubber of truth, hits the road of reason... they come up short every single time.

Recognize what's happened here... a Progressive has just demonstrated that when they're encouraged to demonstrate the product of their reasoning; the result is Regression.

WHICH IS THE EXACT SAME THING THAT THE CANUKISTANI ACADEMIC RIOTERS DID... Which is exactly what Miss Coulter's position on the issue is; which means that despite her best efforts to prove otherwise; Del here has proven Miss Coulter's position to be TRUE.

LOL... Now how Cool is that, huh...?

Good job Del... I knew I could count on ya.

 

[Ravi]

Under Canadian law, things Coulter says can probably be construed as violating hate speech laws.

For example.

More than 2,000 students showed up to protest her telling a Muslim student Monday to "take a camel" as an alternative to flying. Security at the University of Ottawa feared students would riot over racist remarks she made to Muslims. Coulter has said all terrorists are Muslims and has suggested all Muslims be barred from airlines and use flying carpets. When the student said she didn't have a flying carpet, Coulter told her to "take a camel."

American Right-Winger Ann Coulter's Speech Cancelled Because of Her Racist Remarks

Again, if you don't want to follow another country's rules, don't be their guest.

And if you are AFRAID of Canadian college students exercising THEIR freedom of speech you look like a coward.

Coulter was both a bad guest and a coward.

That is all.

 

[Samson]

Under Canadian law, things Coulter says can probably be construed as violating hate speech laws.

For example.

More than 2,000 students showed up to protest her telling a Muslim student Monday to "take a camel" as an alternative to flying. Security at the University of Ottawa feared students would riot over racist remarks she made to Muslims. Coulter has said all terrorists are Muslims and has suggested all Muslims be barred from airlines and use flying carpets. When the student said she didn't have a flying carpet, Coulter told her to "take a camel."

American Right-Winger Ann Coulter's Speech Cancelled Because of Her Racist Remarks

Again, if you don't want to follow another country's rules, don't be their guest.

And if you are AFRAID of Canadian college students exercising THEIR freedom of speech you look like a coward.

Coulter was both a bad guest and a coward.

That is all.

I know I'd be pissed off if she told me to "take a sheep."

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

Under Canadian law, things Coulter says can probably be construed as violating hate speech laws.

For example.

More than 2,000 students showed up to protest her telling a Muslim student Monday to "take a camel" as an alternative to flying. Security at the University of Ottawa feared students would riot over racist remarks she made to Muslims. Coulter has said all terrorists are Muslims and has suggested all Muslims be barred from airlines and use flying carpets. When the student said she didn't have a flying carpet, Coulter told her to "take a camel."

American Right-Winger Ann Coulter's Speech Cancelled Because of Her Racist Remarks

Again, if you don't want to follow another country's rules, don't be their guest.

And if you are AFRAID of Canadian college students exercising THEIR freedom of speech you look like a coward.

Coulter was both a bad guest and a coward.

That is all.

"Under Canadian law, things Coulter says can probably be construed as violating hate speech laws."

Indeed... JUST as the existence of Canadian Law is construed to be a valid means to usurp Human Rights... just as the existence of the Jews was construed to be a threat to humanity, by your ideological predecessors... And the way the nation of Israel is construed to be a threat to Middle-east peace... by YOU and your Pro-terrorist comrades... and the way that the US GWOT was construed to be US IMPERIALISM... By you and your pro-terrorist, anti-American comrades.

'Construed' is synonymous with 'rationalization'... and that's what the Left is doing here.

And it's the same sort of rationalization which was used to design the recent illicit parlamentary ruse for the Democrats in Congress to 'pass' a bill which they never voted on; in direct contradiction to the US Constitution...

Humanism... Moral Relativism... deceit... fraud.

Recognize friends that what we're looking at here is a group of people who imparted violence to restrict someone's speech, all under the rationalization that this persons IDEAS may potentially lead to violence...

They imparted an irrationally strong dislike for Miss Coulter; who they claim advocates an irrationally strong dislike for people...

Seeing the pattern here?

As is ALWAYS the case; the left comes to LAMENT; THAT WHICH THEY HAVE PROVEN THEMSELVES TO BE...

 

[Ravi]

Under Canadian law, things Coulter says can probably be construed as violating hate speech laws.

For example.

More than 2,000 students showed up to protest her telling a Muslim student Monday to "take a camel" as an alternative to flying. Security at the University of Ottawa feared students would riot over racist remarks she made to Muslims. Coulter has said all terrorists are Muslims and has suggested all Muslims be barred from airlines and use flying carpets. When the student said she didn't have a flying carpet, Coulter told her to "take a camel."

American Right-Winger Ann Coulter's Speech Cancelled Because of Her Racist Remarks

Again, if you don't want to follow another country's rules, don't be their guest.

And if you are AFRAID of Canadian college students exercising THEIR freedom of speech you look like a coward.

Coulter was both a bad guest and a coward.

That is all.

I know I'd be pissed off if she told me to "take a sheep."

It's easy for her to go to Canada and spout off but notice she is too chicken to go to an actual Islamic country and do the same.