Quote:

Wonder Boy said:
The full 8 and a half minutes can be viewed :





You obviously didn't watch the full 8 and 1/2 minutes, M E M.

Or simply chose to omit the part that proves false your assertion.

Coulter does literally say the wives "enjoy" their husbands' deaths on 9-11.

But expands, both in the book and in the Leno interview, to explain precisely how they enjoy their husbands' deaths, in their actions after 9-11, where they have exploited their husbands' deaths in pursuit of their own liberal/anti-Bush agenda.


I stand by what I said before:


Quote:

Wonder Boy said:
Quote:

Matter-eater Man said:
Quote:

wannabuyamonkey said:
That's funny because all I've heard anyone do is trash Ann w/out actually debating the points she makes.


So her saying 9/11 widows are enjoying their husbands' deaths is OK in your book because you feel that she's been trashed?

I guess I don't understand.



That's a deliberate misrepresentation, or at the very least a distorted narrowing of what Coulter said.

Coulter said the 9-11 wives are part of a class of sacrificial cows of the Democrat viewpoint. (John Murtha, Cindy Sheehan, Joseph Wilson/Valerie Plame...) Where they are used by Democrats to accuse Bush of things, and because they are a widow/goldstar-mom/Veteran/CIA-agent, etc., they have a status that liberals maintain protects them from scrutiny, and we should all just shut up and accept their views, unexamined for credibility flaws, just because of who they are.

In the specific case of the 9-11 widows (who attacked Bush, demanded an independent investigation into 9-11, and publicly used their celebrity status to endorse Kerry's 2004 campaign, by the way), Ann Coulter asserts that they got rich off their husbands' deaths, and after exploited and enjoyed the celebrity status that they chose to cultivate after husbands died on 9-11.

That doesn't say that they enjoyed their husbands' deaths.

Only that they exploited and cheapened their husbands' deaths with their own actions after the fact.
And certainly enjoyed the celebrity status of that exploitation.



Quote:

Matter-eater Man said:
Here's what she said in her book...
Quote:

...
Coulter writes in a new book, Godless: The Church of Liberalism, that a group of New Jersey widows whose husbands perished in the World Trade Center "as if the terrorist attacks happened only to them."

She also wrote, "I've never seen people enjoying their husbands' deaths so much."



For those that are rationalizing Coulter's cheap shot, exactly what would be crossing the line into unacceptable? Is this how you would like to be treated if somebody doesn't agree with you? CBSNews



Again, that's the shorthand of what Coulter said, ignoring the full context of precisely what she meant and expanded on that initial sentence to say.
How the Widows' Club exploited their husbands' deaths in pursuit of fame, fortune and partisan liberal advocacy, using their dead husbands unfairly as a shield against any criticism of their very public remarks.

A shorthand that deliberately narrows and misrepresents the full context and insight of what Coulter said about the 9-11 widows who criticized Bush, who publicly demanded an independent 9-11 investigation, and who publicly advocated Kerry's 2004 candidacy.




I think WBAM summed it up very well:


Quote:

wannabuyamonkey said:
Quote:

r3x29yz4a and M E M both said:

bla bla bla ...



Funny that neither of you read the book in question and even know what point was being made, you just jump on something you don't like and sounds nasty, but in actuality you're making her point for her. Her point was that the left puts up human shields of suffering, that people who have suffered can say what ever they want in the public sphere and we can't quetion it or challenge them.

If people choose to enter the public debate then they can be challenged. Suffering does not give you a "get out of debate free card"


  • from Do Racists have lower IQ's...

    Liberals who bemoan discrimination, intolerance, restraint of Constitutional freedoms, and promotion of hatred toward various abberant minorities, have absolutely no problem with discriminating against, being intolerant of, restricting Constitutional freedoms of, and directing hate-filled scapegoat rhetoric against conservatives.

    EXACTLY what they accuse Republicans/conservatives of doing, is EXACTLY what liberals/Democrats do themselves, to those who oppose their beliefs.