Jump to content

Ann Coulter at it again


Recommended Posts

maybe a collapse of conservatism in american is absolutely necessary if politics are to get back to actual conservative values. not the springboard for the corruptive absolute control of the most powerful country in the world which is what ann's remarks provide for.

any 'conservative' who justifies ann's remarks is either a freak who supports every word or someone attempting to support conservatism by looking for that grain of true conservative value. its the true conservatives who should be upset by people like ann affiliating themselves with that thought.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 221
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

any 'conservative' who justifies ann's remarks is either a freak who supports every word or someone attempting to support conservatism by looking for that grain of true conservative value. its the true conservatives who should be upset by people like ann affiliating themselves with that thought.

Any leftie who cannot put capital letters at the beginning of sentences...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is a certain degree of substance to her approach, not in what she says, but how she represents the the tone and strategy of contemporary mainstream american conservativism. Unfortunately this approach is unlikely to expand its base any further--I think it winds up alienating rather than motivating people, and is a sign that the conservative movement is well on its way to complete collapse.

Which is unfortunate.

It's interesting how there are so many angry voices on the right - Coulter, Limbaugh, Hannity....

Then there are their low-profile supporters too, they used to scream at the top of their lungs about "libs" destroying the US - ironically while they themselves were in power with all three branches of government. Never seen such an angry bunch of winners. :huh:

On this forum too, there's a difference between the tone of the right and the left.... I've wondered whether or not it's my own personal bias which seems to notice more anger directed at POV similar to mine, but I don't think so, I think there really is a difference. For example, ever notice that the people who are predominantly right-leaning also get attacked from certain righties when their opinions differ on a specific issue? That's something I've never seen happen between lefties (attacking each other for disagreeing on a specific issue).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's interesting how there are so many angry voices on the right - Coulter, Limbaugh, Hannity....

Then there are their low-profile supporters too, they used to scream at the top of their lungs about "libs"

destroying the US - ironically while they themselves were in power with all three branches of government. Never seen such an angry bunch of winners. :huh:

On this forum too, there's a difference between the tone of the right and the left.... I've wondered whether or not it's my own personal bias which seems to notice more anger directed at POV similar to mine, but I don't think so, I think there really is a difference. For example, ever notice that the people who are predominantly right-leaning also get attacked from certain righties when their opinions differ on a specific issue? That's something I've never seen happen between lefties (attacking each other for disagreeing on a specific issue).

There is talk radio in Canada but some of times it has gone overboard such as in Quebec and in Winnipeg, they have had their people suspended or their license pulled.

Politics in both Canada and the U.S. has become more of a bloodsport in recent years. Subsequently, the popularity of politicians and politics in general have dropped.

I think Elizabeth Edwards would have probably more success going after Coulter's publisher than Coulter itself. It worked for those who were angry at Don Imus. CBS felt the heat and the man was gone.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So maybe it is my bias when it comes to high-profile conservative supporters.... but have you noticed what I meant in my last paragaph about how certain posters who are non-party-hack conservatives have been attacked for saying something bad about Harper, while there is a wide variety of opinions about Dion on this board from traditional LPC supporters and nobody gets worked up over it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So maybe it is my bias when it comes to high-profile conservative supporters.... but have you noticed what I meant in my last paragaph about how certain posters who are non-party-hack conservatives have been attacked for saying something bad about Harper, while there is a wide variety of opinions about Dion on this board from traditional LPC supporters and nobody gets worked up over it?

Psychologically speaking, it has been shown that conservatives are more prone to authoritarianism. It provides comfort and consistency. Dissent challenges that stability and must be stamped down, regardless of the source of dissent, particularly if it's one of your own.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Psychologically speaking, it has been shown that conservatives are more prone to authoritarianism. It provides comfort and consistency. Dissent challenges that stability and must be stamped down, regardless of the source of dissent, particularly if it's one of your own.

Got a citation for this assertion? I think liberals just practice their own form of "authoritarianism", from hate speech laws to abortion on demand. Liberals are famous for attempts at squelching dissent...see "Pelosi - Fairness Doctrine - Talk Radio".

It just depends on whose ox gets gored.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Psychologically speaking, it has been shown that conservatives are more prone to authoritarianism. It provides comfort and consistency. Dissent challenges that stability and must be stamped down, regardless of the source of dissent, particularly if it's one of your own.

Got a citation for this assertion?

Right-wing Authoritarianism (RWA) is a psychological personality variable or "ideological attitude".

It is defined as the convergence of three attitudinal clusters in an individual:

Authoritarian submission — a high degree of submission to the authorities who are perceived to be established and legitimate in the society in which one lives. "It is good to have a strong authoritarian leader."

Authoritarian aggression — a general aggressiveness, directed against various persons, that is perceived to be sanctioned by established authorities. "It is acceptable to be cruel to those who do not follow the rules."

Conventionalism — a high degree of adherence to the social conventions that are perceived to be endorsed by society and its established authorities. "Traditional ways are best."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right_Wing_Authoritarianism

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Psychologically speaking, it has been shown that conservatives are more prone to authoritarianism. It provides comfort and consistency. Dissent challenges that stability and must be stamped down, regardless of the source of dissent, particularly if it's one of your own.

Got a citation for this assertion?

Right-wing Authoritarianism (RWA) is a psychological personality variable or "ideological attitude".

It is defined as the convergence of three attitudinal clusters in an individual:

Authoritarian submission — a high degree of submission to the authorities who are perceived to be established and legitimate in the society in which one lives. "It is good to have a strong authoritarian leader."

Authoritarian aggression — a general aggressiveness, directed against various persons, that is perceived to be sanctioned by established authorities. "It is acceptable to be cruel to those who do not follow the rules."

Conventionalism — a high degree of adherence to the social conventions that are perceived to be endorsed by society and its established authorities. "Traditional ways are best."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right_Wing_Authoritarianism

As nice as it is to see a 911 conspiracy thread turned into something slightly less foolish than 911 conspiracy, this is a close second.

"Rightwing" is a label assigned completely arbitrarly to authoritarianism for Christ's sake. Stalin was right wing? Pol Pot? Mao? Not even Hitler was rightwing, if one were to judge him by economic policy, collectivist impulse or any other measure of the political scale. Libertarianism doesn't sit at the far right of the political scale for nothing. I had no idea this leftwing fixation with sullying the name of the right with sheer nonsense had reached these heights. And Liam's complete befuddling of "conservative," and his trotting out of "psychological studies have shown,' is such tepid hogwash it's not even worth commenting on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Psychologically speaking, it has been shown that conservatives are more prone to authoritarianism. It provides comfort and consistency. Dissent challenges that stability and must be stamped down, regardless of the source of dissent, particularly if it's one of your own.

Got a citation for this assertion?

Right-wing Authoritarianism (RWA) is a psychological personality variable or "ideological attitude".

It is defined as the convergence of three attitudinal clusters in an individual:

Authoritarian submission — a high degree of submission to the authorities who are perceived to be established and legitimate in the society in which one lives. "It is good to have a strong authoritarian leader."

Authoritarian aggression — a general aggressiveness, directed against various persons, that is perceived to be sanctioned by established authorities. "It is acceptable to be cruel to those who do not follow the rules."

Conventionalism — a high degree of adherence to the social conventions that are perceived to be endorsed by society and its established authorities. "Traditional ways are best."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right_Wing_Authoritarianism

As nice as it is to see a 911 conspiracy thread turned into something slightly less foolish than 911 conspiracy, this is a close second.

"Rightwing" is a label assigned completely arbitrarly to authoritarianism for Christ's sake. Stalin was right wing? Pol Pot? Mao? Not even Hitler was rightwing, if one were to judge him by economic policy, collectivist impulse or any other measure of the political scale. Libertarianism doesn't sit at the far right of the political scale for nothing. I had no idea this leftwing fixation with sullying the name of the right with sheer nonsense had reached these heights. And Liam's complete befuddling of "conservative," and his trotting out of "psychological studies have shown,' is such tepid hogwash it's not even worth commenting on.

Stalin was a left wing authoritarian......Hitler was decidedly rightwing if one were to judge him by the definition of rightwing....reactionary and conservative.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ann Coulter is good looking?? Man, it would take at least a good six pack and some seriously dim lighting before she'd even look average, IMO.

She is fairly tall, well educated, blond with long stright hair, thin, sharp featured. What is your definition of good looking? Flat nose, big lips, big ass, kinky hair.....

Well educated? Is that included in the ft.niagara book of beauty along side being white? Coulter is also skeletal with a crazed look in her eye. She harbours some deep psychopathology.

Do you like beer or wine? Beauty is not absolute. It is, indeed, in the eye of the beholder.

Edited by Xman
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Beauty is not absolute. It is, indeed, in the eye of the beholder.

Coulter is hot. That's an absolute truth, not an opinion. Plato even had a form for Coulter.

SA's opinion is an absolute truth as declared here on Maple Leaf Web.

SA must also be desparate. An absolute truth?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Beauty is not absolute. It is, indeed, in the eye of the beholder.

Coulter is hot. That's an absolute truth, not an opinion. Plato even had a form for Coulter.

LOL...Are you from Rygel 7???? Or are you in prison somewhere? :)

No. He's desparate.

Hey, at least I'm not hysterical about GW...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      10,753
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    Matthew
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

    • paradox34 went up a rank
      Explorer
    • Venandi earned a badge
      Very Popular
    • CrazyCanuck89 earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • CDN1 went up a rank
      Apprentice
    • DUI_Offender went up a rank
      Proficient
  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...