User login
Recent comments
- Actually, Ryan, the wave seems to have crested
9 hours 16 min ago - Interesting idea. But it
18 hours 47 min ago - Gov. Brewer's pause
5 days 16 hours ago - She probably should have
5 days 19 hours ago - Ground 0
5 days 19 hours ago - four blocks or two?
6 days 9 hours ago - you read more into my comments...
6 days 9 hours ago - A reasonable take on the issue
6 days 20 hours ago - Read Your Post
1 week 10 hours ago - Spam
1 week 12 hours ago
New forum topics
- Congressional Candidates' Views on Clean Energy, Climate Change: OH-15
- Congressional Candidates’ Views on Clean Energy, Climate Change: OH-01
- Show Up and Speak Up for Climate Change Legislation
- Great Boehner ad from Blue America!
- Stop the Senate from Gutting the Clean Air Act!
- Jim Renacci and His Anti-Environmental Buddies
but we're not. She's referencing a quote from bill maher on his HBO show that said that (loosely) Iraq could have been avoided if Dick Cheney was killed in an insurgent attack in (presumably the early days) of Afghanistan.
I am still outraged by both comments. Love both or hate both (or one or the other), they are figure heads (in Edward's case, formerly), and if people can't respect the man, at least respect the office. I am all for free speech (including her (and sadly his) hate-mongering), but it detracts from the office as a whole, which detracts from the process, which detracts from the idea of governance.
Politicians (and pundits) would do well to remember that politic starts with poli, a stem for polishing, to make smooth, or in the adverb... POLITE.
Is it really too much to ask that we can't put our differences aside and have one meaningful discussion?
is a Libertarian. Did you see him suck up to Ron Paul? Plus, he did NOT say he wishes Cheney were assassinated, in spite of everyone saying that he did.
From that clip, Coulter's comment did not sound at ALL like what the Cons try to put into Maher's mouth. I can only assume that you are referencing some backpedaling that Coulter has done since she's made that comment.
"Two wrongs make a right" -Ann Coulter
I'm going to have to agree with RussC - what Maher said and what Coulter said are completely different. For starters, Maher never said that he wished Cheney had died in a terror attack.
Watching Maher's political journey (and his positions <em>have</em> changed some over the years) has been interesting, especially since a decade ago I was a Libertarian (with a liberal bent), and now consider myself a Liberal (with a Libertarian bent). The poor guy has been misinterpreted (probably intentionally by people with agendas) on so many statements that, really, are quite accurate. People just don't want to hear it, so they twist what he actually says (which can times be uncomfortable) into something completely different.
But Coulter knows the implications of invoking these types of statements, even if she's merely referencing something elsewhere. For the past few days she's gone back and forth with the Edwards campaign, even Elizabeth Edwards called in to Chris Matthews show to confront Ann over some of the comments. No matter how you cut it, you can't defend tactics like this.
Let Ann speak!
In fact, she deserves a title:
"Republican Spokesperson Ann Coulter"
Please use it every chance you get.
Ann Coulter tried that and it falls on deaf ears~ Ann Coulter makes tons of money supplying outrageous comments to a hateful mob of malcontents and nitwits.
She is not able to hold her own against an actual, mature, evolved, sensible, decent and compassionate person like Elizabeth Edwards. She can't even stand in the same room as her. Notice how she reacted when she got called out for her shameful demagoguery.
She was outclassed and exposed, and will scurry back under the fridge.
I called someone a communist, hippie, pot-smokin' morally derelict con artist or whatever other nasty slam I can find, I should be entitled to continue the slander as long as they continue pointing out what a brute I am? Is it alright if the Edwards campaign references coulter's comments to reporters and not on finance mailers? How about when they talk with non financial supporters? Or is Edwards just supposed to ignore the hateful attacks and be "the better person?" That worked out really well for John Kerry. I surprised PO, I would think Republicans would encourage others to defend themselves, afterall, that's how the party likes to brand itself.
That's an interesting perspective you got there PO.
Jerid,
I don't have a problem with people defending themselves against what they feel are unfair attacks. But continuing to give those attacks life by using them to raise money reeks of political opportunism.
Call them out if you need to, then move on. And if the attacks that you consider unfair continue, then address those too.
Republican Spokesman Ann Coulter has handed the Edwardses a club. Now they are hitting Republicans over the head with it, AND they're profiting from it (as is their right in this Capitalist society).
The Republicans are the "Heads I win, tails you lose party". If Elizabeth Edwards doesn't speak up, then they will say, "Edwards has no comeback. Our Spokesman must have spoken the truth." When Elizabeth Edwards DOES speak up, then they say, "Elizabeth Edwards is denying our Spokesman the right to free speech."
Thus, those attacks will continue to have "life" no matter what Edwards does. Might as well profit from them, given the chance.
If it is untrue (or out of context) then I feel bad. I didn't see it personally and I should have disclaimed my comment with that. Even if he had said it, and maybe he did (it's hard to tell in the age of the internets what is true anymore), two wrongs don't make a right.
In terms of PO's comment, fundraising is a pain, for anyone that has been there before knows it. If Edwards wants to show people that so and so is calling me a f** and wishing I was assainated, so I need your money so I can counter them, I have no problems with that. And what's wrong with a little political opportunism?.
If John Kerry had fundraised by talking about the swiftboaters (or god forbid, taken less than 21 days to actually respond to them), he might have won. Attacks have a life of their own, acknowledging them isn't necessarily going to provide the only legs the smear has. People are talking about Ann Coulter and the incredibly inflammatory things she says because she's famous herself, not simply because John Edwards is fundraising using her words against her.
If he can make 2 Million Dollars off of her crazy comments, more power to him. Maybe she'll just go away quietly if that happens. But I'll bet when the bean counters at RNC ever figure out she's costing a competitive fundraising advantage to the D's, she'll be relegated to the sidelines.
At least I can hope.
can be found here: http://www.billmaher.com/transcripts/t_hbo_realtime_030207.html
Scroll down to a little less than halfway through. (Recall back in March that Cheney was visiting Afghanistan and shortly after he left there was an explosion close to where he was staying.) The topic starts with this:
MAHER: What about the people who got onto the HuffingtonPost - and these weren't even the bloggers, these were just the "comments" section - who said they - they expressed regret that the attack on Dick Cheney failed. [laughter]
SCARBOROUGH: Right.
RIDLEY: More than regret.
MAHER: Well, what did they say? They said they wished-
RIDLEY: They said, we wish he would die. I mean, they were - it was direct hate language. [voices overlap]
MAHER: Okay, but-
FRANK: [overlapping] They said the bomb was - they said the bomb was wasted. [laughter] [applause]
MAHER: All right, but, seriously, if this isn't China, shouldn't you be able to say that? Why did Arianna have to - my girlfriend, I love her - but why did she take that off right away?
FRANK: [overlapping] Bill, Bill, first of all, you know, it's clearly not China. You shouldn't trivialize democracy. The fact that we are talking about if this was China, we couldn't do it. And I don't think we ought to sort of make this kind of comparison. It's one thing to say that the administration made a stupid and unfair thing with the - with the soldiers. It's another saying that makes us China. That's just not sensible.
As far as the HuffingtonPost is concerned, I gather she decided, as the person who runs this, that she didn't want to be associated with it. I think that's her right. People are free to say whatever they want to say for her. I think the person in charge of the forum can say, "You know what? I don't want to be associated with that. Say it somewhere else."
SCARBOROUGH: Well, and not only that, if she had left it up, she would have opened herself up to attack. She took it down immediately. She was still attacked by people that took the hate language and tried to make it stick to her. And obviously, she's trying to build to site where you can have reasoned debate. And it's probably not in her best interests to allow that to stay there.
MAHER: But-
RIDLEY: Yeah, I don't think it's about having to take it off. It's actually trying to be responsible and say, look, you can have a discourse and dialogue and say - it's one thing to say you hate Dick Cheney-
SCARBOROUGH: Right.
RIDLEY: [overlapping]-which sort of applies to his politics. It's another thing to say, "I'm sorry he didn't die in an explosion." And I think that-
MAHER: But - but, you should be able to say it.