The Democrat Party: A vast sleeper cell (Ann Coulter)

Little-Acorn

Gold Member
Joined
Jun 20, 2006
Messages
10,025
Reaction score
2,404
Points
290
Location
San Diego, CA
This one's quite a fire-breather, even for Coulter. But the problem is, it's hard to find misstatements, except maybe about Britney or misspelling Minutemen.

----------------------------

http://www.anncoulter.com/cgi-local/welcome.cgi

THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY: A VAST SLEEPER CELL

by Ann Coulter
January 3, 2007

Fortunately for liberals, the Iraqis executed Saddam Hussein the exact same week that former President Ford died, so it didn't seem strange that Nancy Pelosi's flag was at half-staff. Also, Saddam's death made it less of a snub when Harry Reid skipped Ford's funeral.

The passing of Gerald Ford should remind Americans that Democrats are always lying in wait, ready to force a humiliating defeat on America.

More troops, fewer troops, different troops, "redeployment" — all the Democrats' peculiar little talking points are just a way of sounding busy. Who are they kidding? Democrats want to cut and run as fast as possible from Iraq, betraying the Iraqis who supported us and rewarding our enemies — exactly as they did to the South Vietnamese under Ford.

Liberals spent the Vietnam War rooting for the enemy and clamoring for America's defeat, a tradition they have brought back for the Iraq war.

They insisted on calling the Soviet-backed Vietcong "the National Liberation Front of Vietnam," just as they call Islamic fascists killing Americans in Iraq "insurgents." Ho Chi Minh was hailed as a "Jeffersonian Democrat," just as Michael Moore compares the Islamic fascists in Iraq to the Minute Men.

During the Vietnam War, New York Times scion Arthur "Pinch" Sulzberger told his father that if an American soldier ran into a North Vietnamese soldier, he would prefer for the American to get shot. "It's the other guy's country," he explained.

Now, as publisher of the Times, Pinch does all he can to help the enemy currently shooting at American soldiers.

After a half-dozen years of Democrat presidents creating a looming disaster in Vietnam — with Kennedy ordering the assassination of our own ally in the middle of the war and Johnson ham-handedly choosing bombing targets from the Oval Office — in 1969, Nixon became president and the world was safe again.

Nixon began a phased withdrawal of American ground troops, while protecting the South Vietnamese by increasing the bombings of the North, mining North Vietnamese harbors and attacking North Vietnamese military supplies in Cambodia — all actions hysterically denounced by American liberals, eager for the communists to defeat America.

Despite the massive anti-war protests staged by the Worst Generation, their takeovers of university buildings and their bombings of federal property to protest the bombing of North Vietnamese property, Nixon's Vietnam policy was apparently popular with normal Americans. In 1972, he won re-election against "peace" candidate George McGovern in a 49-state landslide.

In January 1973, the United States signed the Paris Peace accords, which would have ended the war with honor. In order to achieve a ceasefire, Nixon jammed lousy terms down South Vietnam's throat, such as allowing Vietcong troops to remain in the South. But in return, we promised South Vietnam that we would resume bombing missions and provide military aid if the North attacked.

It would have worked, but the Democrats were desperate for America to lose. They invented "Watergate," the corpus delicti of which wouldn't have merited three column-inches during the Clinton years, and hounded Nixon out of office. (How's Sandy Berger weathering that tough wrist-slap?)

Three months after Nixon was gone, we got the Watergate Congress and with it, the new Democratic Party. In lieu of the old Democratic Party, which lost wars out of incompetence and naivete, the new Democratic Party would lose wars on purpose.

Just one month after the Watergate Congress was elected, North Vietnam attacked the South.

Even milquetoast, pro-abortion, detente-loving Gerald R. Ford knew America had to defend South Vietnam or America's word would be worth nothing. As Ford said, "American unwillingness to provide adequate assistance to allies fighting for their lives could seriously affect our credibility throughout the world as an ally." He pleaded repeatedly with the Democratic Congress simply to authorize aid to South Vietnam — no troops, just money.

But the Democrats turned their backs on South Vietnam, betrayed an ally and trashed America's word. Within a month of Ford's last appeal to Congress to help South Vietnam, Saigon fell.

The entire world watched as American personnel desperately scrambled into helicopters from embassy rooftops in Saigon while beating back our own allies, to whom we could offer no means of escape. It was the most demeaning image of America ever witnessed, until Britney Spears came along.

Southeast Asia was promptly consumed in a maelstrom of violence that seems to occur whenever these "Jeffersonian Democrats" come to power. Communist totalitarians swept through Laos, Cambodia and all of Vietnam. They staged gruesome massacres so vast that none other than Sen. George McGovern called for military intervention to stop a "clear case of genocide" in Cambodia.

Five years after that, Islamic lunatics in Iran felt no compunction about storming the embassy of what was once the greatest superpower on Earth and taking American citizens hostage for 14 months. To this day, al-Qaida boosts the flagging morale of its jihadists by reminding them of America's humiliating retreat from Vietnam.

In addition to being wrong about Ford's pardon of Nixon, liberals were wrong about a few other things from that era. Democrats haven't admitted error in rejecting Ford's pleas on behalf of South Vietnam because there are still dangerous foreigners trying to kill Americans. Nixon is safely interred in the ground, but the enemies of America continue to need the Democrats' help.
 

Kagom

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 16, 2006
Messages
2,161
Reaction score
141
Points
48
Location
Vicksburg, MS
Ann Coulter: The Right's Michael Moore, only female and more attractive.
 

Kagom

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 16, 2006
Messages
2,161
Reaction score
141
Points
48
Location
Vicksburg, MS
Nah, more like Andrew Sullivan...
I don't know who Andrew Sullivan is. >_>

But I find MM and AC to both be boisterous, annoying, and often missinig the point or elaborating things wildly.

But tell me who Sullivan is, please.
 
OP
Little-Acorn

Little-Acorn

Gold Member
Joined
Jun 20, 2006
Messages
10,025
Reaction score
2,404
Points
290
Location
San Diego, CA
See?

Three replies so far, and not a single misstatement found in Coulter's article.

Keep trying, folks.....! :clap2:
 

jillian

Princess
Joined
Apr 4, 2006
Messages
84,493
Reaction score
16,384
Points
2,220
Location
The Other Side of Paradise
See?

Three replies so far, and not a single misstatement found in Coulter's article.

Keep trying, folks.....! :clap2:
How 'bout this one? It's a bunch of crap.

Liberals spent the Vietnam War rooting for the enemy and clamoring for America's defeat, a tradition they have brought back for the Iraq war

How sick does this bitch have to be before she's too sick for you guys?
 

Annie

Diamond Member
Joined
Nov 22, 2003
Messages
50,848
Reaction score
4,826
Points
1,790
How 'bout this one? It's a bunch of crap.

Liberals spent the Vietnam War rooting for the enemy and clamoring for America's defeat, a tradition they have brought back for the Iraq war

How sick does this bitch have to be before she's too sick for you guys?
Jillian, they did root for the Viet Cong, how old are you anyways?
 

jillian

Princess
Joined
Apr 4, 2006
Messages
84,493
Reaction score
16,384
Points
2,220
Location
The Other Side of Paradise
Jillian, they did root for the Viet Cong, how old are you anyways?
They did *not* root for the Viet Cong, except for certain extremists. Nor are liberals "rooting" for our failure in Iraq. That has already happened. The only one who won't acknowledge it is your guy in the white house and a very small percentage of the population. That's why Abizaid quit in case you haven't noticed.

Coulter is a mean-spirited ugly troll. But the people who actually read her are either just dupes or they want to believe the garbage and venim she spews. Either way, it's destroying debate in this country because instead of actually solving problems, we have sickos like Annie fanning the flames and using divisiveness and people's hatred and fear to their own financial gain.

Out now... the kiddle has homework to do.
 

Annie

Diamond Member
Joined
Nov 22, 2003
Messages
50,848
Reaction score
4,826
Points
1,790
They did *not* root for the Viet Cong, except for certain extremists. Nor are liberals "rooting" for our failure in Iraq. That has already happened. The only one who won't acknowledge it is your guy in the white house and a very small percentage of the population. That's why Abizaid quit in case you haven't noticed.

Coulter is a mean-spirited ugly troll. But the people who actually read her are either just dupes or they want to believe the garbage and venim she spews. Either way, it's destroying debate in this country because instead of actually solving problems, we have sickos like Annie fanning the flames and using divisiveness and people's hatred and fear to their own financial gain.

Out now... the kiddle has homework to do.
Abizaid was fired, read the NY Times. Jillian you really have too much of the war wrong.
 

Gunny

Gold Member
Joined
Dec 27, 2004
Messages
44,689
Reaction score
6,852
Points
198
Location
The Republic of Texas
See?

Three replies so far, and not a single misstatement found in Coulter's article.

Keep trying, folks.....! :clap2:
President Kennedy did not order Diem's being forcibly removed from office, much less his murder. They were the results of actions by the S Vietnamese military and its intolerance for Diem's domestic policies that alienated more S Vietnamese than Ho CHi Minh did.

He was a piece of shit, his wife, Madame Ngo was worse, and her brother the head the of S Vietnamese Secret Police would have made Himmler proud.
 

Dirt McGirt

Bad Mother****er
Joined
Dec 19, 2006
Messages
1,773
Reaction score
504
Points
48
I'm not a big Coulter fan either but this part had me ROFL:
Fortunately for liberals, the Iraqis executed Saddam Hussein the exact same week that former President Ford died, so it didn't seem strange that Nancy Pelosi's flag was at half-staff.
 
OP
Little-Acorn

Little-Acorn

Gold Member
Joined
Jun 20, 2006
Messages
10,025
Reaction score
2,404
Points
290
Location
San Diego, CA
Now that's more like it. Two misstatements found so far.

1.) No evidence to prove Kennedy ordered the Vietnamese president killed.

2.) Liberals didn't root for the Viet Cong, except for the few liberals who did. Most of the rest simply rooted for the U.S. to lose, and were indifferent to the effects of their actions on the welfare of either the Vietnamese people or the U.S. A distinction without a difference. Still, a distinction.

So, it looks like we can conclude that people here have no objection to the rest of the points Coulter made?
 

SpidermanTuba

Rookie
Joined
May 7, 2004
Messages
6,101
Reaction score
259
Points
0
Location
New Orleans, Louisiana
This one's quite a fire-breather, even for Coulter. But the problem is, it's hard to find misstatements, except maybe about Britney or misspelling Minutemen.

----------------------------

http://www.anncoulter.com/cgi-local/welcome.cgi

THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY: A VAST SLEEPER CELL

by Ann Coulter
January 3, 2007

Fortunately for liberals, the Iraqis executed Saddam Hussein the exact same week that former President Ford died, so it didn't seem strange that Nancy Pelosi's flag was at half-staff. Also, Saddam's death made it less of a snub when Harry Reid skipped Ford's funeral.

The passing of Gerald Ford should remind Americans that Democrats are always lying in wait, ready to force a humiliating defeat on America.

More troops, fewer troops, different troops, "redeployment" — all the Democrats' peculiar little talking points are just a way of sounding busy. Who are they kidding? Democrats want to cut and run as fast as possible from Iraq, betraying the Iraqis who supported us and rewarding our enemies — exactly as they did to the South Vietnamese under Ford.

Liberals spent the Vietnam War rooting for the enemy and clamoring for America's defeat, a tradition they have brought back for the Iraq war.

They insisted on calling the Soviet-backed Vietcong "the National Liberation Front of Vietnam," just as they call Islamic fascists killing Americans in Iraq "insurgents." Ho Chi Minh was hailed as a "Jeffersonian Democrat," just as Michael Moore compares the Islamic fascists in Iraq to the Minute Men.

During the Vietnam War, New York Times scion Arthur "Pinch" Sulzberger told his father that if an American soldier ran into a North Vietnamese soldier, he would prefer for the American to get shot. "It's the other guy's country," he explained.

Now, as publisher of the Times, Pinch does all he can to help the enemy currently shooting at American soldiers.

After a half-dozen years of Democrat presidents creating a looming disaster in Vietnam — with Kennedy ordering the assassination of our own ally in the middle of the war and Johnson ham-handedly choosing bombing targets from the Oval Office — in 1969, Nixon became president and the world was safe again.

Nixon began a phased withdrawal of American ground troops, while protecting the South Vietnamese by increasing the bombings of the North, mining North Vietnamese harbors and attacking North Vietnamese military supplies in Cambodia — all actions hysterically denounced by American liberals, eager for the communists to defeat America.

Despite the massive anti-war protests staged by the Worst Generation, their takeovers of university buildings and their bombings of federal property to protest the bombing of North Vietnamese property, Nixon's Vietnam policy was apparently popular with normal Americans. In 1972, he won re-election against "peace" candidate George McGovern in a 49-state landslide.

In January 1973, the United States signed the Paris Peace accords, which would have ended the war with honor. In order to achieve a ceasefire, Nixon jammed lousy terms down South Vietnam's throat, such as allowing Vietcong troops to remain in the South. But in return, we promised South Vietnam that we would resume bombing missions and provide military aid if the North attacked.

It would have worked, but the Democrats were desperate for America to lose. They invented "Watergate," the corpus delicti of which wouldn't have merited three column-inches during the Clinton years, and hounded Nixon out of office. (How's Sandy Berger weathering that tough wrist-slap?)

Three months after Nixon was gone, we got the Watergate Congress and with it, the new Democratic Party. In lieu of the old Democratic Party, which lost wars out of incompetence and naivete, the new Democratic Party would lose wars on purpose.

Just one month after the Watergate Congress was elected, North Vietnam attacked the South.

Even milquetoast, pro-abortion, detente-loving Gerald R. Ford knew America had to defend South Vietnam or America's word would be worth nothing. As Ford said, "American unwillingness to provide adequate assistance to allies fighting for their lives could seriously affect our credibility throughout the world as an ally." He pleaded repeatedly with the Democratic Congress simply to authorize aid to South Vietnam — no troops, just money.

But the Democrats turned their backs on South Vietnam, betrayed an ally and trashed America's word. Within a month of Ford's last appeal to Congress to help South Vietnam, Saigon fell.

The entire world watched as American personnel desperately scrambled into helicopters from embassy rooftops in Saigon while beating back our own allies, to whom we could offer no means of escape. It was the most demeaning image of America ever witnessed, until Britney Spears came along.

Southeast Asia was promptly consumed in a maelstrom of violence that seems to occur whenever these "Jeffersonian Democrats" come to power. Communist totalitarians swept through Laos, Cambodia and all of Vietnam. They staged gruesome massacres so vast that none other than Sen. George McGovern called for military intervention to stop a "clear case of genocide" in Cambodia.

Five years after that, Islamic lunatics in Iran felt no compunction about storming the embassy of what was once the greatest superpower on Earth and taking American citizens hostage for 14 months. To this day, al-Qaida boosts the flagging morale of its jihadists by reminding them of America's humiliating retreat from Vietnam.

In addition to being wrong about Ford's pardon of Nixon, liberals were wrong about a few other things from that era. Democrats haven't admitted error in rejecting Ford's pleas on behalf of South Vietnam because there are still dangerous foreigners trying to kill Americans. Nixon is safely interred in the ground, but the enemies of America continue to need the Democrats' help.
Why does anyone care what this dumb bitch has to say? She's the one that wants to execute newspaper editors for the beliefs.
 

Bullypulpit

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 7, 2004
Messages
5,849
Reaction score
382
Points
48
Location
Columbus, OH
Ann Coulter: The Right's Michael Moore, only female and more attractive.

I wouldn't be too sure about the female part...Have you seen her Adam's Apple? As for being the the right's Michael Moore, Moore provides documentation to support his allegations, or pretends to at least. Coulter avoids the pretense entirely and just spews her (his?) BS without out regard to factual content.
 

New Topics

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top