http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/

This Democrat is voting for McCain if she votes for Clinton.

If you vote for McCain, then you must like the job Bush has done. With all due respect, anyone complaining about what Bush and the GOP has done, and then turns around and votes for McCain, is a blooming idiot.

Yeah. I heard about that. As much as I'd like to somehow use this as proof of something that would benefit me, I'd be a complete hypocrite to suddenly give her a bunch of credibility by being glad that she said what she said. ( Who knows if she'd actually DO it. But she said it. That's enough for some people to pretend they have credibility now. Not me. Herb - Christopher Hitchens is on line 3 and would like to speak with you ).

So I will continue to dislike her and distance myself from any appearance that what she says has any effect on me or anyone else. Not because I want to avoid being a hypocrite and am going against how I actually feel. But because I really fucking hate that bitch.

See? I'm not so pious after all.

If you "hate the bitch" then you must hate Democratic principles. Otherwise, I can only assume you are a sexist pig.

And, do you hate Hillary more than you hate Bush?

Disagree. The way she smirk's at other candidate's, her attitude, her as a person, I'm right there with CJ. I believe in Democracy, I don't however believe in her and sure as hell do not trust her with this great nation. I don't trust her and cannot agree with her unyielding plan of a national health care program and some other issues. She just sends shivers up and down my spine.

WAIT WAIT WAIT. I am talking about Ann Coulter. Are you?

Next thing you know Lars Larson will endorse Sam Adams and Victoria Taft will endorse the road tax.

I'm talking about Hillary but couldn't give a rat's ass about what Ann Coulter has to say. Sorry if I got them two witches mixed up.

No problem. But before I try and answer Vitalogy's question - I'd like to know if he thought I was talking about Ann Coulter, Clinton, or if the question still stands no matter whom I was speaking of.

CJ, not sure how Coulter got brought up, I was under the impression you were referring to Hillary.

Now, I'm 100% behind Obama, but I will have to say that recently I've been very impressed with Hillary. If she sends shivers up your spine, DT, it's likely a tremor from your ballsack because you are afraid of a strong woman. Look, we're not looking to elect the hottest chick we'd like to bang, we want someone who is smart and strong. Hillary is going to be a force to reckon with, that's for sure. She has bigger balls than most of the dudes up on stage in either party.

"She has bigger balls..."

Eeeewwww!

Vitalogy is the Anti-Wayne.

I consider that the best compliment I've received here in a long time.

CJ>> I am talking about Ann Coulter. Are you?
Vit>> CJ, not sure how Coulter got brought up

This whole conversation is confusing until you scroll way down the page at that link to find the Coulter article. Apparently several new stories were added after the link was posted.

Coulter is a non-factor beyond her small cult of followers.

Small cult of followers?

Nice try at waving away a phenomenally successful conservative.

From Wikipedia:

"Coulter is the author of six books, all of which have appeared on New York Times Best Seller list.

Her first book, High Crimes and Misdemeanors: The Case Against Bill Clinton (ISBN 0-89526-113-8), was published by Regnery Publishing in 1998. The book details Coulter's case for the impeachment of President Bill Clinton.

Her second book, Slander: Liberal Lies About the American Right (ISBN 1-4000-4661-0), published by Crown Forum in 2002, remained number one on The New York Times Best Seller list for seven weeks. In Slander, Coulter argues that President George W. Bush was given unfairly negative media coverage.

Her third book, Treason: Liberal Treachery from the Cold War to the War on Terrorism (ISBN 1-4000-5030-8), also published by Crown Forum, defends the presidency of Richard M. Nixon and accused Democratic politicians and the "liberal media" of undermining United States foreign policy. She pointed out that Annie Lee Moss, among others, was correctly identified by Joseph McCarthy as a Communist. Treason was published in 2003, and spent 13 weeks on the Best Seller list.[30]

Crown Forum published a collection of Coulter's columns in 2004 as her fourth book, How to Talk to a Liberal (If You Must): The World According to Ann Coulter (ISBN 1-4000-5418-4).

Coulter's fifth book, published by Crown Forum in 2006, is Godless: The Church of Liberalism (ISBN 1-4000-5420-6). Coulter argues, first, that liberalism rejects the idea of God and reviles people of faith, and second, that it bears all the attributes of a religion itself. Godless debuted at number one on The New York Times Best Seller list.

Her most recent book, If Democrats Had Any Brains, They'd Be Republicans, was published in October, 2007."

She'll make a great Chief Justice.

Herb

Coulter is insignificant in the big picture.

Now wait a minute, Chris.

Anyone who has six DIET books on the NY Times Bestseller list isn't insignificant.

Like her or not, Ann Coulter provokes a tremendous amount of thought among the public.

Now the Dixie Chicks, THEY'RE insignificant.

Herb

Comment on the death of 30,000 children who died today from preventable starvation and you might get a different response out of me.

Like them or not, the Dixie Chicks do the same.

Check their Top Ten Singles and music award stats. In their own way, they have made at least the impact on culture and politics that Coulter has.

Yep. I'm there Chris.

We could lose every one of the pundits, actors and other attractive people and the starving kids will remain.

All about perspective.

A lot more people know who the Dixie Chicks are than who that ___________ Mann Coulter is.

If one is curious, all 6 of her "best-sellers", can be bought used, on Amazon, for under $10 since they start at 46 cents.

They're probably right next to the "Dr" Laura close-outs, both listed under "hag".

"I think the government should be spying on all Arabs, engaging in torture as a televised spectator sport, dropping daisy cutters wantonly throughout the Middle East and sending liberals to Guantanamo."

"Not all Muslims may be terrorists, but all terrorists are Muslims."

"These broads are millionaires, lionized on TV and in articles about them, reveling in their status as celebrities and stalked by grief-arazzis... These self-obsessed women seemed genuinely unaware that 9/11 was an attack on our nation and acted as if the terrorist attacks happened only to them... I’ve never seen people enjoying their husbands’ deaths so much."

"I don't know if [former U.S. President Bill Clinton is] gay. But [former U.S. Vice President] Al Gore - total fag."

"Never mind his carbon footprint — have you seen the size of Al Gore's regular footprint lately? It's almost as deep as Janet Reno's."

"We should invade their countries, kill their leaders and convert them to Christianity. We weren't punctilious about locating and punishing only Hitler and his top officers. We carpet-bombed German cities; we killed civilians. That's war. And this is war."

"Bill Clinton "was a very good rapist."

"These people can't even wrap up genocide. We've been hearing about this slaughter in Darfur forever — and they still haven't finished. The aggressors are moving like termites across that country. It's like genocide by committee. Who's running this holocaust in Darfur, FEMA? This is truly a war in which we have absolutely no interest."

"I was going to have a few comments on the other Democratic presidential candidate John Edwards, but it turns out you have to go into rehab if you use the word "faggot", so I — so kind of an impasse, can't really talk about Edwards."

"God gave us the earth. We have dominion over the plants, the animals, the trees. God said, 'Earth is yours. Take it. Rape it. It's yours."

"I think our motto should be, post-9-11, 'raghead talks tough, raghead faces consequences."

"That is what Christians consider themselves: perfected Jews."

"Liberals are driven by Satan and lie constantly."

"My only regret with Timothy McVeigh is he did not go to the New York Times building."

"We need somebody to put rat poisoning in Justice Stevens's creme brulee."

"I think [women] should be armed but should not vote...women have no capacity to understand how money is earned."

"I think there should be a literacy test and a poll tax for people to vote."

-Ann Coulter, a model christian.

"Comment on the death of 30,000 children who died today from preventable starvation.."

What's with the 'either or situation?' That's like saying if you strive to heal sufferers of spinal cord injuries, you're opposed to healing cancer.

Herb

Classic Herb dodge.

God you are so full of it, it's amazing you can even walk.

Careful not to puncture the troll. Imagine the sh*tstorm that would occur. Just ask Paul Linnman what that was like.

The sky actually IS falling! And he's blubbering!

And as usual, he smells real bad...

Heck, even Dr. Zoidberg wouldn't want to eat troll blubber.

Chris, I'm stealing that one. It's a classic.

Hey, remember the dodge list? All of these seen here regularly. Not in order.

1. Subject change (Nixon, Abortion)

2. False comparison (Like computers and cars, only it's politics and sex --or something goofy, that just does not present as goofy at first blush.)

3. Claim of too many opponents

(This one debunked for online venues as participants have all the time they need to research and consider their next point of discussion --they can collude too)

4. Silence (Ignore the impending point to be taken. Essentially, it can be used another day. Acceptance of that loss means loss of that point for a greater discussion in the future. Very potent for online venues)

5. (first seen from Deane) Claim to either be a member of, or opponents of discussion being members of club, with said membership somehow required to complete what is otherwise a non-rational conclusion.

(love that one It's freaking beautiful--Where is Deane anyway?)

6. Claim of overall subject and or implications of subject complexity being greater than scope of discussion; therefore, it's all a waste of time. (Herb and Deane on that one too.)

Both complex and subtle variations on the, "you wouldn't understand" theme.

7. Transformation of rational point at hand to emotional one.

8. The bible, which is a specific manifestation of subject change. Warranted because it's often used in tandem with the transformation bit. The next two on this list seen in this mess often too.

9. Redefinition of common words. This happens either via manipulation of time lines (historical), or via authorities, whose scope is limited to a sub-set of generally accepted authorities. (non peer reviewed, or non common, word use)

10. Personal attack. This varies too. Sometimes it's an attack on an authority. That form is kind of an indirect attack, as in, "you listen to that nutbag?". I'm lumping all of these together in one group. Don't know why, just am.

11. Obsfucation. (however you spell it) This might be redundant, given the word redefinition one above. I see this as half-answers, like if you have the same point of view, the answer is solid, but if you don't, it leads to questions and framing that puts non-aligned beliefs on the defensive.

12. Excess verbosity. (KSKD, CJ, Littlesongs, others) Hammer them really hard, hoping the problem will go away. It's both therapy and a dodge in one fell swoop!

That's it folks. See one of those, and you know the drill.

Well, maybe. Been a long while since I looked back through these. Any new dodges I missed, or might have poorly characterized? If so, let's air them out. I like to collect these out of morbid interest.

For those new to this side of the board, I started this list early on, in an attempt to highlight when things just went bad. Ended up being kind of interesting, watching new forms manifest on tough topics.

Missing_KSKD, I am in awe at the case study you have presented. Wow. Let me rephrase that...

Wow.

I will try to keep it brief, but still cover the bases:

First, low swinging fuzzy pair or not, I do not trust Hillary Clinton with my country. This is not about one gender or another. This is about freeing ourselves from a lawless elite that feels entitled to power. If one were to simply compare the number of people she owes favors to, she is actually evenly matched with McCain. Neither Senator has a record that could be gussied up enough to earn my vote in November.

Second, anyone unfamiliar with the true roots of Ann Coulter should give this a good listen. Let there be no doubt -- as she would say -- the spirit of Mildred Gillars is alive and well in American broadcasting today.

Finally, the Dixie Chicks are one helluvalot more talented than damn near any current female pop stars. Believe it or not, this act was not launched from a sweaty couch. These women play their own instruments, write their own songs, and speak their minds. When the Nashville establishment hid behind their stills and shivered at the mighty power of fearmongering, these girls told the truth. Like them or not, they are quite possibly the only genuine thing to cross over out of main stream country in decades.

These women are all successful -- and they are all talented -- but at what cost? In other words, who do you want your daughter to be when she grows up?

A) Power mad and in hock to the brokers
B) Full of hate, bile and rhetoric
C) Talented, outspoken and self sufficient

If you picked C, you might spin her some Dixie Chicks.

(Vitalogy, that was a most excellent use of the quote bomb. Chris, to call it pith would be unfair, how about brilliant? :0) You all make me laugh -- thank you!)

I'm with you on Hilary. She could be good, or not so good. However, she won't be this bad --of that I am sure. Lots of people wonder about this, which is why I really liked Edwards, and am now hoping for Obama.

My son reminded me he's got good odds on getting shot, so who he picks for VP is important!

(cynical huh? You try growing up in these times and get back to me!)

Littlesongs, that list comes from each point, about to be taken --don't care whose it is, just that it's about to happen! Then, comes the dodge. Acceptance slips away, and those debunked points return another day.

So I'm there, either participating or watching, looking for it, feeling good and *BAM* there it goes! Once in a blue moon, we've a thread that gets the job done, and that's cool. Most of the time, it's on the list.

Every so often, somebody doesn't want acceptance really bad and a new item ends up on the list! Given this pool of interesting people, it's a pretty damn good list so far. We are a rowdy bunch!

Had to clarify why I posted it. Not an attack on anybody. More of a celebration of just how human we all really are.

Edit: Was going from memory as the original dodge list threads have gone where all the old bits go...

Forgot this one!

13. Evoke unreal boundary. Most often seen with indignation. This is a variation on "too complex" and "you wouldn't understand", in that it limits the scope of discussion where it would not otherwise be limited if things continued to be rational. Once this has happened, discussion is no longer rational.

Another Edit: When the Dixie Chicks first made their statement and took the heat, I bought some CD's to show some support. We ended up liking the Dixie Chicks! They've an interesting name, and are very solid entertainers. The fact they started as they did only adds to the whole picture.

Man Coulter (c'mon man, she's gotta be a trannie right? Look at the hands and the Adam's apple!) does nothing but dress it up hot, contribute to the prevailing noise of the time, and make money.

She adds zero value.

I find the use of one's own words to be very powerful sometimes. Ann Coulter has certainly done her part, and I had to pick and choose those quotes because there were TOO MANY!

"She adds zero value."

That's not true. She's less than zero, so she takes away value.

Is Ann Coulter a comedian or a political pundit? The line is kinda grey but no matter how you look at this issue she stinks up the room everytime. Maybe its time that she throws her morals out the door and get a job working a poll versus working the polls.

She did say something I slightly agree with though on her recent appearence on Hannity and Colmbs and that was her feeling that McCain was more liberal than Hillary.

OBAMA OBAMA OBAMA!

It's not a huge deal, but when I clicked that link at the top up there, this is what I saw and was responding to -

(CNN) — In the latest sign that a conservative backlash is starting to build against John McCain, conservative commentator Ann Coulter said Thursday she is prepared to vote for Hillary Clinton over the Arizona senator in a general election match up.

Speaking on Fox's "Hannity and Colmes," Coulter took aim at the GOP frontrunner, and suggested he was little more than a Republican in name only.

"If you are looking at substance rather than if there is an R or a D after his name, manifestly, if he's our candidate, than Hillary is going to be our girl, because she's more conservative than he is," Coulter said. "I think she would be stronger on the war on terrorism."

Coulter took aim at McCain's positions — particularly his fervent anti-torture stance — and said he and Clinton differ little on the issues. Coulter also said she is prepared to campaign on Clinton's behalf should McCain win the party's nomination.

"John McCain is not only bad for Republicanism, which he definitely is — he is bad for the country," she said.

Coulter is the latest high profile conservative to express dismay with McCain's surging candidacy. Talk-radio host Rush Limbaugh said Wednesday McCain's rise was the product of a 'fractured' conservative base and an "uninspiring" GOP presidential field.

"He is not the choice of conservatives, as opposed to the choice of the Republican establishment — and that distinction is key," Limbaugh continued. "The Republican establishment, which has long sought to rid the party of conservative influence since Reagan, is feeling a victory today as well as our friends in the media."

McCain has long been at odds with conservative members of his party. — Exit polls from the early-primary states have shown the he has consistently lost among those primary voters who identify themselves as conservative. But he passed a key test Tuesday in winning Florida's primary, the first early contest that only allowed registered Republicans to participate.

Reacting to criticisms from his party's most conservative quarters, McCain told the San Francisco Gate Thursday, "I'll continue to reach out to all in the party, try to unite the party, until everybody realizes that the only way we're going to defeat the Democratic candidate is through a united party."

– CNN Producer Alexander Mooney

And with her record, I can't help but be a tad suspicious of her motives.

I am more than suspicious of any hardliner who has suddenly "found a heart" and is whipping their poor beast back into Whoville with a sled full of Christmas.

As for Hillary, I cannot possibly top this timeless classic from one of the greatest bards of the twentieth century.

Chickenjuggler writes:

WAIT WAIT WAIT. I am talking about Ann Coulter. Are you?


Ann Coulter is a woman????????????????

Maybe she has the hots for Hillary!!!

Ewwww.

Vit said>>>>
If you vote for McCain, then you must like the job Bush has done. With all due respect, anyone complaining about what Bush and the GOP has done, and then turns around and votes for McCain, is a blooming idiot.

Then I must a GD idiot then. I like the things that McCain is talking about and the things he stands for. As much as I LOATH DUHbya and Co. I wouldn't back McCain on bit if I thought he was the same as DUHbya! Even 99% of EXTREME CONSERVATIVE Right hacks don't like McCain and that means I'm voting for the RIGHT person!!!!!

ABH!
Anyone But Hillary!!!!

McCain = Bush. Continued war, tax cuts for the rich, conservative judges who want to ban abortion, etc. If you vote McCain you are voting to continue your own pain.

A number of Republican Presidential hopefuls were asked one very tough question --

Ann Coulter: Hot or Not?

Mitt Romney seems to have a little twinkle in his eye. Does he want really want to tuck those bony knees under her chin?

I am really sorry. No, if I had known you were eating... geez... I am really... sincerely...