GOP Candidates Criticize Coulter for Slur

[Drolefille]

Originally Posted by Kevin

But Coulter exists to sell on TV, not win debates.

I agree, but shinerbock states that she debates and wins...

[shinerbock]

She does debate and win. For liberals to say that all she does is call names is completely moronic. She debates and wins often. Winning a debate means making the best points. Hell, she could debate on Olbermann, completely wax him, yet the comments that the audience would like would be Olbermann shouting t-shirt slogans like "Bush lied, thousands died."

The American public is not very good at determining which argument is the strongest. They like things that are easily digestible and don't require too much thought.

[DSTCHAOS]

Originally Posted by shinerbock

She does debate and win. For liberals to say that all she does is call names is completely moronic. She debates and wins often. Winning a debate means making the best points.

If I yell enough times, call people morons, and sensationalize the REAL issue into a circus act; people will eventually stop talking. Does that mean I won or are people just tired of arguing with an idiot?

(Hey!!! That sounds like Greekchat!!! )

[DSTCHAOS]

So like I previously said, Coulter is a waste of a bad tan and an ugly face. Her "intellect" is centered around being a character. If not for her marketing as a blonde bombshell who happens to know a little about politics, she'd be nothing.

We've come full circle.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by Drolefille

I agree, but shinerbock states that she debates and wins...

I wouldn't know. I don't really watch Fox News.

I've more-less switched back to CNN. Fox has become too much of an Anna Nicole Smith/that girl who disappeared in Aruba type channel. They'd rather make the news up, informing us as to the goings-on of the faux celebrity du jour than to actually broadcast anything substantial. Is Coulter on any network besides Fox?

[shinerbock]

I just find it laughable when people insinuate that Coulter isn't intelligent. The only reasons for this would be that A) like I mentioned, they can't understand the argument or B) the person viewing leans left. People always bitch about her being hateful, when usually she is simply being realistic. She does it in a humorous and rational way, and thats probably why she's so popular.

As for Fox News, it sucks. I have no idea what they report about in the absence of murder trials or celebrity deaths.

CNN is even worse. They give the news, sometimes. If you can handle an hour of Sanjay Gupta talking about some "this will change your life issue", you might get an idea of some things happening in the world. CNN is the cockiest of all of them I think, because you have leftist journalists like Cooper and Blitzer who view themselves as modern Edward R. Murrows. Wow, congrats guys, you devote most of your time to bashing the administration, what cutting edge journalism. Considering the average brain dead college freshman talks about the same things to his hippie friends, I really don't think you're breaking new ground.

And MSNBC, holy crap, where do I start. "Top political team of Chris Mathews and Keith Olbermann", are you kidding? The one advantage to MSNBC is that they don't really try to hide the fact that they're off-the-charts liberal. They also have Imus, and even though he's a Bush-hater too, he's good about bitch-slapping whiny liberals.

I've finally gotten to the point where I watch mostly CNBC. Yeah, its almost entirely financial news, but you'll get the jist of whats going on through programs and commentary which are on a higher intellectual level. Plus, if anything really important happens, they're on it like all the others.

[DSTCHAOS]

Originally Posted by shinerbock

I just find it laughable when people insinuate that Coulter isn't intelligent.

"Intelligent" is an action word so just because someone tells you someone else is intelligent doesn't mean you have to believe it. There are plenty of nonintellects on every side of a debate so it isn't about viewpoint or just about Coulter. She's just who these GC threads keep popping up about. Plus, you can listen to and understand everything someone is saying and still think that person is not only wrong but a complete waste of brain matter.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by shinerbock

I just find it laughable when people insinuate that Coulter isn't intelligent. The only reasons for this would be that A) like I mentioned, they can't understand the argument or B) the person viewing leans left. People always bitch about her being hateful, when usually she is simply being realistic. She does it in a humorous and rational way, and thats probably why she's so popular.

As for Fox News, it sucks. I have no idea what they report about in the absence of murder trials or celebrity deaths.

CNN is even worse. They give the news, sometimes. If you can handle an hour of Sanjay Gupta talking about some "this will change your life issue", you might get an idea of some things happening in the world. CNN is the cockiest of all of them I think, because you have leftist journalists like Cooper and Blitzer who view themselves as modern Edward R. Murrows. Wow, congrats guys, you devote most of your time to bashing the administration, what cutting edge journalism. Considering the average brain dead college freshman talks about the same things to his hippie friends, I really don't think you're breaking new ground.

And MSNBC, holy crap, where do I start. "Top political team of Chris Mathews and Keith Olbermann", are you kidding? The one advantage to MSNBC is that they don't really try to hide the fact that they're off-the-charts liberal. They also have Imus, and even though he's a Bush-hater too, he's good about bitch-slapping whiny liberals.

I've finally gotten to the point where I watch mostly CNBC. Yeah, its almost entirely financial news, but you'll get the jist of whats going on through programs and commentary which are on a higher intellectual level. Plus, if anything really important happens, they're on it like all the others.

Agreed.

"TV News" has become an oxymoron. The media in general is pretty pathetic in general these days.

[RACooper]

Originally Posted by shinerbock

I just find it laughable when people insinuate that Coulter isn't intelligent. The only reasons for this would be that A) like I mentioned, they can't understand the argument or B) the person viewing leans left.

Or said person has watched her debate or discuss a topic that isn't confined to cheap sound-bites... I believe there is still a thread floating around about her making a complete ass of herself on the CBC citing her extensive knowledge of politics and history - and yet claiming that Canada was in Vietnam along side the US

She is a political hack, and dare I say: a bigot (at least when it comes to those who disagree with her politics) - all she is good for nothing more than the cheap one off colour statement, since she can't seem to hold her own in any debate or discussion that goes for longer than 5 minutes - exactly the same as the "slogan shouters" on the left, except that for the most part they tend stay away from hatespeach.

[shinerbock]

Originally Posted by RACooper

Or said person has watched her debate or discuss a topic that isn't confined to cheap sound-bites... I believe there is still a thread floating around about her making a complete ass of herself on the CBC citing her extensive knowledge of politics and history - and yet claiming that Canada was in Vietnam along side the US

She is a political hack, and dare I say: a bigot (at least when it comes to those who disagree with her politics) - all she is good for nothing more than the cheap one off colour statement, since she can't seem to hold her own in any debate or discussion that goes for longer than 5 minutes - exactly the same as the "slogan shouters" on the left, except that for the most part they tend stay away from hatespeach.

You'd fall into category number 2.

[RACooper]

Originally Posted by shinerbock

You'd fall into category number 2.

Why how very Coulter-esque or MSNBC-Like in trying to dismiss the opinion of those who disagree by insisting that because of their political views, real or insinuatued, their opinions or observations are invalid. Why not actually elevate yourself above those hacks and actually debate or discuss the issue at hand without derailing any attempt to do so without using "your a liberal" or "your a conservative" partisan crap?

[Sistermadly]

Originally Posted by RACooper

Why how very Coulter-esque or MSNBC-Like in trying to dismiss the opinion of those who disagree by insisting that because of their political views, real or insinuatued, their opinions or observations are invalid. Why not actually elevate yourself above those hacks and actually debate or discuss the issue at hand without derailing any attempt to do so without using "your a liberal" or "your a conservative" partisan crap?

Because he, like so many GOP "pundits" are incapable of reasoned discourse and analysis. Or rather, they may be capable of it (I've not seen any evidence, but I'm willing to give the benefit of the doubt), but they're only interested in arguing at the level of your run-of-the-mill fourth grade bully. It's their modus operandi, and it has served them well thus far, because rather than dealing with political issues that can bring the country together, they're more interested in setting up (false) divisions between people who think/behave/love/worship "different". They're about dividing the country between "Us" and "Them", and not only are they interested in the division (which is logical), they're interested in playing up hierarchies and supremacies.

So to answer your question about why he can't just debate the issues, he can't help it. He's been bamboozled, hoodwinked, hornswaggled. He's been had. He's been took. And he can't see a way out of it for the blind distrust of anyone who isn't exactly like him.

[shinerbock]

Originally Posted by RACooper

Why how very Coulter-esque or MSNBC-Like in trying to dismiss the opinion of those who disagree by insisting that because of their political views, real or insinuatued, their opinions or observations are invalid. Why not actually elevate yourself above those hacks and actually debate or discuss the issue at hand without derailing any attempt to do so without using "your a liberal" or "your a conservative" partisan crap?

To be fair, "your" a liberal. I do think its a little ridiculous for you to expect me to accept your opinion of Ann Coulter as untainted by your far left viewpoints. This isn't the first time we've talked, so its not like I don't have some idea where you stand.

Ann Coulter is very intelligent. Even you should be able to admit that. As a concession, here are some liberal personalities I disagree with but would admit are intelligent and well-informed...
James Carville, Alan Colmes, the late Molly Ivins, Paul Begala, Chris Matthews...

These are people I consider intelligent, but not as well-informed:
Bill Maher, Jon Stewart, Al Franken (he seems like he might soon bump up to the above group), etc...

The difference is that the people on the left who spout the kind of fringe stuff Coulter does generally aren't at her level. They're either less informed like Bill Maher, or they're less intelligent and informed, like Michael Moore. She's pretty unique in that despite her intelligence and wealth of political knowledge, she's willing to sacrifice her public image to state her views in the manner she sees fit.

There are conservative talk show hosts who I think are full of hot air. Rush and Neal Boortz are two. I think both those guys are intelligent, but they're egomaniacs who win merely by talking over other people. Chris Matthews does this on the left. Thats not what Coulter usually does.