Ann Coulter's Answer to Canada!

[PubliusInfinitum]

Ya know what's fascinatin' about this, is that such assertions, while commonly advanced; are NEVER advanced with any argument wherein the Coulter opposition demonstrates her position as being inaccurate.

Would you like to be the exception Del? Or just keep the damage down to this little refutation...

clearly you're laboring under the misconception that your opinion counts for something to someone.

that may be true, but i'm not the someone.

have a nice day.

preferably somewhere else.

ROFL

Oh OK... So you're claiming then that the opposition isn't worthy of you actually sustaining your argument; thus you're conceding the point.

Fair enough...

And pleasse Sis... don't feel bad... It's not like ya had a shot, now is it?

Again kids... Del here is a Progressive... a long standing advocate of taking a little from the Right ideology and the wrong and finding a happy medium through compromise.

She advanced an assertion; was asked to sustain it; and ran to change the subject... Proving as she always does, that they simply can't compete.

They WANT TO... they really do.

But when the rubber of truth, hits the road of reason... they come up short every single time.

Recognize what's happened here... a Progressive has just demonstrated that when they're encouraged to demonstrate the product of their reasoning; the result is Regression.

WHICH IS THE EXACT SAME THING THAT THE CANUKISTANI ACADEMIC RIOTERS DID... Which is exactly what Miss Coulter's position on the issue is; which means that despite her best efforts to prove otherwise; Del here has proven Miss Coulter's position to be TRUE.

LOL... Now how Cool is that, huh...?

Good job Del... I knew I could count on ya.

neg-rep for hatin' on women

Now THAT is a Sweet Irony... This cow has been in here HATIN' ON A WOMAN FOR TWO DAYS... and wants to neg-rep ME for pointing out the feminized quality inherent in Leftist Males.

Clearly, another CLASSIC example of a Left-think Construing to an invalid conclusion; just as Ravi construed to such directly above.

 

[Ravi]

awww...I thought you turned off your rep because it was meaningless to you.

Tissue?

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

Under Canadian law, things Coulter says can probably be construed as violating hate speech laws.

For example.
American Right-Winger Ann Coulter's Speech Cancelled Because of Her Racist Remarks

Again, if you don't want to follow another country's rules, don't be their guest.

And if you are AFRAID of Canadian college students exercising THEIR freedom of speech you look like a coward.

Coulter was both a bad guest and a coward.

That is all.

I know I'd be pissed off if she told me to "take a sheep."

It's easy for her to go to Canada and spout off but notice she is too chicken to go to an actual Islamic country and do the same.

ROFL... So Coulter is a COWARD?

Now is Ann Coulter a woman? Why I believe she is...

And did Miss Coulter not accept an invitation to debate an entire student body which she readily understands vehemently disagrees with her own ideas? And is such behavior NOT an indisputable sign of moral fortitude?

So would NOT the conclusion which determines that an indisputable act of sound moral fortitude, is a sign of a lack of fortitude... be an IRRATIONAL CONCLUSION?

And is denigrating a person's moral fortitude not indicative of a STRONG DISLIKE OF SOMEONE? And where one demonstrates a STRONG DISLIKE FOR SOMEONE, based upon an irrational species of reasoning; is not such a response exemplifying an IRRATIONAL DISLIKE that person? And is not Hate defined as an intense, or irrational dislike for someone?

And where that someone is a WOMAN... Would that NOT BE AN INCONTROVERTIBLE EXAMPLE OF "HATIN' ON WOMEN?"

So is Ravi not HATING on WOMEN?

.

.

.

.


And has Ravi not repeatedly demanded that her chronic misuse of the Rep-system is justified because of what SHE CONSTRUES as my having 'hated on women?'

And did I not JUST say that Leftists; with Ravi being pointed out as a classic example; ARE CHRONICALLY GUILTY OF EXACTLY THAT WHICH THEY CHRONICALLY LAMENT?

ROFL...

Yes, kids... I am THAT GOOD... It's what I do.

Now I would ask that those of you who feel that Ravi deserves a Neg-rep based upon HER BEING PROVEN TO BE IN VIOLATION OF HER OWN PERSONAL POLICY... I'd ask that ya give the cow a pos-rep instead. We want to encourage these people to be who they are.

The November elections are coming... and we want to tie THEIR behaviorial traits; the deciet, the fraud, the hypocrisy... to their elected representatives... We want as many people as POSSIBLE, within our limited means to see the Progressives on this board, behaving as the Congress, Senate, and Executive Progressives are behaving.

I doubt we'll influence more than 40 or 50 people directly in that time... but they'll influence those in their orb, through the education inherent in the experience and that provides an exponential force multiplier.

We want to encourage Leftists to be LEFTIST! When they are themselves... THEY LOSE. It's ONLY when they try to be US, that the a-political respond in support of them.

 

[Ravi]

Yes, Coulter is a coward. She hides behind Canadian college students and is afraid to stand up for her principles by going to an Islamic country and making the same remarks.

Oh, wait...she has no principles. My bad.

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

Under Canadian law, things Coulter says can probably be construed as violating hate speech laws.

For example.
American Right-Winger Ann Coulter's Speech Cancelled Because of Her Racist Remarks

Again, if you don't want to follow another country's rules, don't be their guest.

And if you are AFRAID of Canadian college students exercising THEIR freedom of speech you look like a coward.

Coulter was both a bad guest and a coward.

That is all.

I know I'd be pissed off if she told me to "take a sheep."

It's easy for her to go to Canada and spout off but notice she is too chicken to go to an actual Islamic country and do the same.

ROFL... So Coulter is a COWARD?

Now is Ann Coulter a woman? Why I believe she is...

And did Miss Coulter not accept an invitation to debate an entire student body which she readily understands vehemently disagrees with her own ideas? And is such behavior NOT an indisputable sign of moral fortitude?

So would NOT the conclusion which determines that an indisputable act of sound moral fortitude, is a sign of a lack of fortitude... be an IRRATIONAL CONCLUSION?

And is denigrating a person's moral fortitude not indicative of a STRONG DISLIKE OF SOMEONE? And where one demonstrates a STRONG DISLIKE FOR SOMEONE, based upon an irrational species of reasoning; is not such a response exemplifying an IRRATIONAL DISLIKE that person? And is not Hate defined as an intense, or irrational dislike for someone?

And where that someone is a WOMAN... Would that NOT BE AN INCONTROVERTIBLE EXAMPLE OF "HATIN' ON WOMEN?"

So is Ravi not HATING on WOMEN?

.

.

.

.


And has Ravi not repeatedly demanded that her chronic misuse of the Rep-system is justified because of what SHE CONSTRUES as my having 'hated on women?'

And did I not JUST say that Leftists; with Ravi being pointed out as a classic example; ARE CHRONICALLY GUILTY OF EXACTLY THAT WHICH THEY CHRONICALLY LAMENT?

ROFL...

Yes, kids... I am THAT GOOD... It's what I do.

Now I would ask that those of you who feel that Ravi deserves a Neg-rep based upon HER BEING PROVEN TO BE IN VIOLATION OF HER OWN PERSONAL POLICY... I'd ask that ya give the cow a pos-rep instead. We want to encourage these people to be who they are.

The November elections are coming... and we want to tie THEIR behaviorial traits; the deciet, the fraud, the hypocrisy... to their elected representatives... We want as many people as POSSIBLE, within our limited means to see the Progressives on this board, behaving as the Congress, Senate, and Executive Progressives are behaving.

I doubt we'll influence more than 40 or 50 people directly in that time... but they'll influence those in their orb, through the education inherent in the experience and that provides an exponential force multiplier.

We want to encourage Leftists to be LEFTIST! When they are themselves... THEY LOSE. It's ONLY when they try to be US, that the a-political respond in support of them.

Yes, Coulter is a coward. She hides behind Canadian college students and is afraid to stand up for her principles by going to an Islamic country and making the same remarks.

Oh, wait...she has no principles. My bad.

BRAVO!

So Ravi RETURNS to AGAIN HATE ON WOMEN... To denigrate the strong moral fiber of someone who accepted an inviation to debate an entire student body who she know vehemently disagrees with her; and only canceled the debate; when those leftist turned to violence.

Ya see kids... Ravi "Construed" from Miss Coulter; a petite blonde woman's acceptance of the invitation to debate... That such was an agreement to participate in a fight to the death... mortal combat...

ROFLMNAO...















LEFTISTS...

 

[Sofus]

ROFL... So Coulter is a COWARD?

Now is Ann Coulter a woman? Why I believe she is...

And did Miss Coulter not accept an invitation to debate an entire student body which she readily understands vehemently disagrees with her own ideas? And is such behavior NOT an indisputable sign of moral fortitude?

So would NOT the conclusion which determines that an indisputable act of sound moral fortitude, is a sign of a lack of fortitude... be an IRRATIONAL CONCLUSION?

And is denigrating a person's moral fortitude not indicative of a STRONG DISLIKE OF SOMEONE? And where one demonstrates a STRONG DISLIKE FOR SOMEONE, based upon an irrational species of reasoning; is not such a response exemplifying an IRRATIONAL DISLIKE that person? And is not Hate defined as an intense, or irrational dislike for someone?

And where that someone is a WOMAN... Would that NOT BE AN INCONTROVERTIBLE EXAMPLE OF "HATIN' ON WOMEN?"

So is Ravi not HATING on WOMEN?

.

.

.

.


And has Ravi not repeatedly demanded that her chronic misuse of the Rep-system is justified because of what SHE CONSTRUES as my having 'hated on women?'

And did I not JUST say that Leftists; with Ravi being pointed out as a classic example; ARE CHRONICALLY GUILTY OF EXACTLY THAT WHICH THEY CHRONICALLY LAMENT?

ROFL...

Yes, kids... I am THAT GOOD... It's what I do.

Now I would ask that those of you who feel that Ravi deserves a Neg-rep based upon HER BEING PROVEN TO BE IN VIOLATION OF HER OWN PERSONAL POLICY... I'd ask that ya give the cow a pos-rep instead. We want to encourage these people to be who they are.

The November elections are coming... and we want to tie THEIR behaviorial traits; the deciet, the fraud, the hypocrisy... to their elected representatives... We want as many people as POSSIBLE, within our limited means to see the Progressives on this board, behaving as the Congress, Senate, and Executive Progressives are behaving.

I doubt we'll influence more than 40 or 50 people directly in that time... but they'll influence those in their orb, through the education inherent in the experience and that provides an exponential force multiplier.

We want to encourage Leftists to be LEFTIST! When they are themselves... THEY LOSE. It's ONLY when they try to be US, that the a-political respond in support of them.

Yes, Coulter is a coward. She hides behind Canadian college students and is afraid to stand up for her principles by going to an Islamic country and making the same remarks.

Oh, wait...she has no principles. My bad.

BRAVO!

So Ravi RETURNS to AGAIN HATE ON WOMEN... To denigrate the strong moral fiber of someone who accepted an inviation to debate an entire student body who she know vehemently disagrees with her; and only canceled the debate; when those leftist turned to violence.

Ya see kids... Ravi "Construed" from Miss Coulter; a petite blonde woman's acceptance of the invitation to debate... That such was an agreement to participate in a fight to the death... mortal combat...

ROFLMNAO...















LEFTISTS...

What I call into question is that notion that Ms. Coulter can debate!

 

[Sofus]

Here's the problem you share with that guy Coulter PC...Canada is a sovereign nation, it is not an annex of the United States.

University of Ottawa Academic Vice President and Provost Francois Houle e-mailed Coulter prior to his visit. He wrote:

"Our domestic laws, both provincial and federal, delineate freedom of expression (or "free speech") in a manner that is somewhat different than the approach taken in the United States. I therefore encourage you to educate yourself, if need be, as to what is acceptable in Canada and to do so before your planned visit here."

He continued, "Promoting hatred against any identifiable group would not only be considered inappropriate, but could in fact lead to criminal charges."

Houle also reminded Coulter of the strong Canadian tradition of "restraint, respect and consideration."

Sure SOUNDS like what used to be defined as conservative ideals...before incendiary and hate-filled goons like Coulter and Limbaugh started spreading their hate, disrespect and lack of ANY consideration for anyone that doesn't share their hate...

Your feeling toward Queen Ann clouds your understanding of the fundemental question involved.

Allow me to redirect you concentration: "Our domestic laws, both provincial and federal, delineate freedom of expression (or "free speech") in a manner that is somewhat different than the approach taken in the United States."
If one were to research 'oxymoron' in a dictionary, that sentence would be an example of same.

Either there is free speech, or there is censorship.

The CYA terminology "Promoting hatred" should appeal to you, since a hallmark of the liberal is 'feeling is as good as knowing.'

And, of course, you are identifiable as a liberal by you as hominum attack on the Queen with the less-than-witty "that guy Coulter." I guess that makes you an "incendiary and hate-filled goon..."

In what frame of reference is restricting free speech considered "as conservative ideals.'?

And for the purposes of reviewing the OP and this thread, and to show how you have again veered off the path, your phrase "Canada is a sovereign nation..."
1. No one has claimed otherwise.
2. No one thinks that this is particularly clever.
3. No one has insisted that Canada change its speech policy.
4. Most thinking folks believe that free speech is a higher value than restricted speech.

Except Progressives, and you...I don't wish to insult Progressives, by seeming to include you in their group: they don't want any BoringFriendlessGuys.

And now, I'd like to invite our Canadian friends to join in celebrating the Seattle Metropolitans, who, on this day (March 27) of 1917, defeated the Montreal Canadians to become the first US team to win the Stanley Cup!
Hip hip hooray!

And a big cheer for Ann Coulter, as well!

No, huh? OK, be like that.

Coulter loves the controversy, it is what sells her books, those nasty liberals denying her her rights!

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

Yes, Coulter is a coward. She hides behind Canadian college students and is afraid to stand up for her principles by going to an Islamic country and making the same remarks.

Oh, wait...she has no principles. My bad.

BRAVO!

So Ravi RETURNS to AGAIN HATE ON WOMEN... To denigrate the strong moral fiber of someone who accepted an inviation to debate an entire student body who she know vehemently disagrees with her; and only canceled the debate; when those leftist turned to violence.

Ya see kids... Ravi "Construed" from Miss Coulter; a petite blonde woman's acceptance of the invitation to debate... That such was an agreement to participate in a fight to the death... mortal combat...

ROFLMNAO...















LEFTISTS...

What I call into question is that notion that Ms. Coulter can debate!

Well Sis... all that position does is to call into question your own cognitive means... suggesting that you've either no knowledge of Miss Coulter's considerable experience; her remarkable record in debate and the simple fact that the Left's HATRED for Miss Coulter rests upon THEIR resentment for her having kicked their collective asses around the field with their being helpless to do a damn thing about it, for these last 20 odd years; or you're simply an imbecile.

Take your pick...

Of course ya COULD actually offer a substantive argument... in support of you failing assertion... but to do THAT, you'd actually have to be something other than an imbecile.

So given the evidence thus far... THAT's not lookin' too good.

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

Here's the problem you share with that guy Coulter PC...Canada is a sovereign nation, it is not an annex of the United States.

University of Ottawa Academic Vice President and Provost Francois Houle e-mailed Coulter prior to his visit. He wrote:

"Our domestic laws, both provincial and federal, delineate freedom of expression (or "free speech") in a manner that is somewhat different than the approach taken in the United States. I therefore encourage you to educate yourself, if need be, as to what is acceptable in Canada and to do so before your planned visit here."

He continued, "Promoting hatred against any identifiable group would not only be considered inappropriate, but could in fact lead to criminal charges."

Houle also reminded Coulter of the strong Canadian tradition of "restraint, respect and consideration."

Sure SOUNDS like what used to be defined as conservative ideals...before incendiary and hate-filled goons like Coulter and Limbaugh started spreading their hate, disrespect and lack of ANY consideration for anyone that doesn't share their hate...

Your feeling toward Queen Ann clouds your understanding of the fundemental question involved.

Allow me to redirect you concentration: "Our domestic laws, both provincial and federal, delineate freedom of expression (or "free speech") in a manner that is somewhat different than the approach taken in the United States."
If one were to research 'oxymoron' in a dictionary, that sentence would be an example of same.

Either there is free speech, or there is censorship.

The CYA terminology "Promoting hatred" should appeal to you, since a hallmark of the liberal is 'feeling is as good as knowing.'

And, of course, you are identifiable as a liberal by you as hominum attack on the Queen with the less-than-witty "that guy Coulter." I guess that makes you an "incendiary and hate-filled goon..."

In what frame of reference is restricting free speech considered "as conservative ideals.'?

And for the purposes of reviewing the OP and this thread, and to show how you have again veered off the path, your phrase "Canada is a sovereign nation..."
1. No one has claimed otherwise.
2. No one thinks that this is particularly clever.
3. No one has insisted that Canada change its speech policy.
4. Most thinking folks believe that free speech is a higher value than restricted speech.

Except Progressives, and you...I don't wish to insult Progressives, by seeming to include you in their group: they don't want any BoringFriendlessGuys.

And now, I'd like to invite our Canadian friends to join in celebrating the Seattle Metropolitans, who, on this day (March 27) of 1917, defeated the Montreal Canadians to become the first US team to win the Stanley Cup!
Hip hip hooray!

And a big cheer for Ann Coulter, as well!

No, huh? OK, be like that.

Coulter loves the controversy, it is what sells her books, those nasty liberals denying her her rights!

Hmmm... So we're back to the 'chicken and the egg'... Which came first, the Left's failure to rebut her argument or the "Controversy"?

I'm thinkin' the the Left's failure to sustain a defense... IS the controversy...

So, ya may want to trot out something else.

Not to worry... I'll be here for ya.

 

[Sofus]

Which one do you want me to refute? the only point the little lady has is at the top of her head...

 

[Ravi]

ROFL... So Coulter is a COWARD?

Now is Ann Coulter a woman? Why I believe she is...

And did Miss Coulter not accept an invitation to debate an entire student body which she readily understands vehemently disagrees with her own ideas? And is such behavior NOT an indisputable sign of moral fortitude?

So would NOT the conclusion which determines that an indisputable act of sound moral fortitude, is a sign of a lack of fortitude... be an IRRATIONAL CONCLUSION?

And is denigrating a person's moral fortitude not indicative of a STRONG DISLIKE OF SOMEONE? And where one demonstrates a STRONG DISLIKE FOR SOMEONE, based upon an irrational species of reasoning; is not such a response exemplifying an IRRATIONAL DISLIKE that person? And is not Hate defined as an intense, or irrational dislike for someone?

And where that someone is a WOMAN... Would that NOT BE AN INCONTROVERTIBLE EXAMPLE OF "HATIN' ON WOMEN?"

So is Ravi not HATING on WOMEN?

.

.

.

.


And has Ravi not repeatedly demanded that her chronic misuse of the Rep-system is justified because of what SHE CONSTRUES as my having 'hated on women?'

And did I not JUST say that Leftists; with Ravi being pointed out as a classic example; ARE CHRONICALLY GUILTY OF EXACTLY THAT WHICH THEY CHRONICALLY LAMENT?

ROFL...

Yes, kids... I am THAT GOOD... It's what I do.

Now I would ask that those of you who feel that Ravi deserves a Neg-rep based upon HER BEING PROVEN TO BE IN VIOLATION OF HER OWN PERSONAL POLICY... I'd ask that ya give the cow a pos-rep instead. We want to encourage these people to be who they are.

The November elections are coming... and we want to tie THEIR behaviorial traits; the deciet, the fraud, the hypocrisy... to their elected representatives... We want as many people as POSSIBLE, within our limited means to see the Progressives on this board, behaving as the Congress, Senate, and Executive Progressives are behaving.

I doubt we'll influence more than 40 or 50 people directly in that time... but they'll influence those in their orb, through the education inherent in the experience and that provides an exponential force multiplier.

We want to encourage Leftists to be LEFTIST! When they are themselves... THEY LOSE. It's ONLY when they try to be US, that the a-political respond in support of them.

Yes, Coulter is a coward. She hides behind Canadian college students and is afraid to stand up for her principles by going to an Islamic country and making the same remarks.

Oh, wait...she has no principles. My bad.

BRAVO!

So Ravi RETURNS to AGAIN HATE ON WOMEN... To denigrate the strong moral fiber of someone who accepted an inviation to debate an entire student body who she know vehemently disagrees with her; and only canceled the debate; when those leftist turned to violence.

Ya see kids... Ravi "Construed" from Miss Coulter; a petite blonde woman's acceptance of the invitation to debate... That such was an agreement to participate in a fight to the death... mortal combat...

ROFLMNAO...















LEFTISTS...

I don't excuse or condemn people because of their gender. Coulter isn't a coward because she's a woman, she's simply a coward.

Kind of like you...when's the last time you went to an Islamic country and told them to ride camels?

 

[Sofus]

Your feeling toward Queen Ann clouds your understanding of the fundemental question involved.

Allow me to redirect you concentration: "Our domestic laws, both provincial and federal, delineate freedom of expression (or "free speech") in a manner that is somewhat different than the approach taken in the United States."
If one were to research 'oxymoron' in a dictionary, that sentence would be an example of same.

Either there is free speech, or there is censorship.

The CYA terminology "Promoting hatred" should appeal to you, since a hallmark of the liberal is 'feeling is as good as knowing.'

And, of course, you are identifiable as a liberal by you as hominum attack on the Queen with the less-than-witty "that guy Coulter." I guess that makes you an "incendiary and hate-filled goon..."

In what frame of reference is restricting free speech considered "as conservative ideals.'?

And for the purposes of reviewing the OP and this thread, and to show how you have again veered off the path, your phrase "Canada is a sovereign nation..."
1. No one has claimed otherwise.
2. No one thinks that this is particularly clever.
3. No one has insisted that Canada change its speech policy.
4. Most thinking folks believe that free speech is a higher value than restricted speech.

Except Progressives, and you...I don't wish to insult Progressives, by seeming to include you in their group: they don't want any BoringFriendlessGuys.

And now, I'd like to invite our Canadian friends to join in celebrating the Seattle Metropolitans, who, on this day (March 27) of 1917, defeated the Montreal Canadians to become the first US team to win the Stanley Cup!
Hip hip hooray!

And a big cheer for Ann Coulter, as well!

No, huh? OK, be like that.

Coulter loves the controversy, it is what sells her books, those nasty liberals denying her her rights!

Hmmm... So we're back to the 'chicken and the egg'... Which came first, the Left's failure to rebut her argument or the "Controversy"?

I'm thinkin' the the Left's failure to sustain a defense... IS the controversy...

So, ya may want to trot out something else.

Not to worry... I'll be here for ya.

"They have the right to protest," Rebick said. "She's the one who made the decision not to speak.

Sounds like a personal call. There were no arrests made, I think she over reacted, for the sake of her book sales!

 

[Samson]

]I don't excuse or condemn people because of their gender. Coulter isn't a coward because she's a woman, she's simply a coward.

Kind of like you...when's the last time you went to an Islamic country and told them to ride camels?

I'd think they'd find it funny

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

Which one do you want me to refute? the only point the little lady has is at the top of her head...

ROFL... Isn't it cool how of the ENTIRE HISTORY OF Miss Coulter... where the implication is that 'she's GOT NOTHIN'!'

When challenged to simply sustain the assertion... THEY'VE GOT NOTHIN'!

Again... not 10 minutes ago I stated, AS FACT that the ideological Left will inevitably lament THAT OF WHICH THEY ARE GUILTY. They come to criticize WHAT THEY ARE.

This crank wants simply to PRETEND that she's an argument... It's all they've GOT!

And the delusion is sufficiently thick, that there is NO AMOUNT of refutation which will convince 'em otherwise.

20 or so pages on Ann Coulter and NOT A SINGLE POST which provides anything approaching a valid contest of a damn thing she's ever said.

And yet here they are, 20 pages later STILL every BIT as convinced that they know something about Coulter which discredits who she is or what she says...

It's DELUSION ON PARADE!

 

[Sofus]

Which one do you want me to refute? the only point the little lady has is at the top of her head...

ROFL... Isn't it cool how of the ENTIRE HISTORY OF Miss Coulter... where the implication is that 'she's GOT NOTHIN'!'

When challenged to simply sustain the assertion... THEY'VE GOT NOTHIN'!

Again... not 10 minutes ago I stated, AS FACT that the ideological Left will inevitably lament THAT OF WHICH THEY ARE GUILTY. They come to criticize WHAT THEY ARE.

This crank wants simply to PRETEND that she's an argument... It's all they've GOT!

And the delusion is sufficiently thick, that there is NO AMOUNT of refutation which will convince 'em otherwise.

20 or so pages on Ann Coulter and NOT A SINGLE POST which provides anything approaching a valid contest of a damn thing she's ever said.

And yet here they are, 20 pages later STILL every BIT as convinced that they know something about Coulter which discredits who she is or what she says...

It's DELUSION ON PARADE!

So, you have nothing and won't give me something to show you that she has nothing. She discredits herself everytime she opens her mouth. She doesn't need anyone help. So, how about the camel comment, was she on spot with that one? just an example of her rapier wit!

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

Coulter loves the controversy, it is what sells her books, those nasty liberals denying her her rights!

Hmmm... So we're back to the 'chicken and the egg'... Which came first, the Left's failure to rebut her argument or the "Controversy"?

I'm thinkin' the the Left's failure to sustain a defense... IS the controversy...

So, ya may want to trot out something else.

Not to worry... I'll be here for ya.

"They have the right to protest," Rebick said. "She's the one who made the decision not to speak.

Sounds like a personal call. There were no arrests made, I think she over reacted, for the sake of her book sales!

AGAIN... Humanist, Relativism... DECEIT... Fraud.

Ya see kids.. Coulter cancelled because the kids were protestin'...

Not because of RIOTS... Not because of the death threats... No NO! The Left needs to project a deceit, they need to perpetrate a FRAUD.

Deem and Pass... Vote to pass a senate bill YA NEVER VOTED ON...

See how it all ties together? It's all the same species of reasoning... Means/End... fraud, deceit, moral relativism... Humanism... Left-think.

 

[del]

Ya know what's fascinatin' about this, is that such assertions, while commonly advanced; are NEVER advanced with any argument wherein the Coulter opposition demonstrates her position as being inaccurate.

Would you like to be the exception Del? Or just keep the damage down to this little refutation...

clearly you're laboring under the misconception that your opinion counts for something to someone.

that may be true, but i'm not the someone.

have a nice day.

preferably somewhere else.

ROFL

Oh OK... So you're claiming then that the opposition isn't worthy of you actually sustaining your argument; thus you're conceding the point.

Fair enough...

And pleasse Sis... don't feel bad... It's not like ya had a shot, now is it?

Again kids... Del here is a Progressive... a long standing advocate of taking a little from the Right ideology and the wrong and finding a happy medium through compromise.

She advanced an assertion; was asked to sustain it; and ran to change the subject... Proving as she always does, that they simply can't compete.

They WANT TO... they really do.

But when the rubber of truth, hits the road of reason... they come up short every single time.

Recognize what's happened here... a Progressive has just demonstrated that when they're encouraged to demonstrate the product of their reasoning; the result is Regression.

WHICH IS THE EXACT SAME THING THAT THE CANUKISTANI ACADEMIC RIOTERS DID... Which is exactly what Miss Coulter's position on the issue is; which means that despite her best efforts to prove otherwise; Del here has proven Miss Coulter's position to be TRUE.

LOL... Now how Cool is that, huh...?

Good job Del... I knew I could count on ya.

let me put this in simple terms that even an intellectual giant such as yourself should be able to pick up after reading it through fifteen or sixteen times.

i don't care what you think.

it's a very simple concept; perhaps if you write it backwards on your forehead, you'll be able to remember it.

use multiple colors and large fonts if that aids in what passes for your cognitive processes.

o-tay, spanky?

 

[Sofus]

Chasing of the tail.

 

[del]

ROFL

Oh OK... So you're claiming then that the opposition isn't worthy of you actually sustaining your argument; thus you're conceding the point.

Fair enough...

And pleasse Sis... don't feel bad... It's not like ya had a shot, now is it?

Again kids... Del here is a Progressive... a long standing advocate of taking a little from the Right ideology and the wrong and finding a happy medium through compromise.

She advanced an assertion; was asked to sustain it; and ran to change the subject... Proving as she always does, that they simply can't compete.

They WANT TO... they really do.

But when the rubber of truth, hits the road of reason... they come up short every single time.

Recognize what's happened here... a Progressive has just demonstrated that when they're encouraged to demonstrate the product of their reasoning; the result is Regression.

WHICH IS THE EXACT SAME THING THAT THE CANUKISTANI ACADEMIC RIOTERS DID... Which is exactly what Miss Coulter's position on the issue is; which means that despite her best efforts to prove otherwise; Del here has proven Miss Coulter's position to be TRUE.

LOL... Now how Cool is that, huh...?

Good job Del... I knew I could count on ya.

neg-rep for hatin' on women

Now THAT is a Sweet Irony... This cow has been in here HATIN' ON A WOMAN FOR TWO DAYS... and wants to neg-rep ME for pointing out the feminized quality inherent in Leftist Males.

Clearly, another CLASSIC example of a Left-think Construing to an invalid conclusion; just as Ravi construed to such directly above.

do you ever stop whining, nancy boy?

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

Which one do you want me to refute? the only point the little lady has is at the top of her head...

ROFL... Isn't it cool how of the ENTIRE HISTORY OF Miss Coulter... where the implication is that 'she's GOT NOTHIN'!'

When challenged to simply sustain the assertion... THEY'VE GOT NOTHIN'!

Again... not 10 minutes ago I stated, AS FACT that the ideological Left will inevitably lament THAT OF WHICH THEY ARE GUILTY. They come to criticize WHAT THEY ARE.

This crank wants simply to PRETEND that she's an argument... It's all they've GOT!

And the delusion is sufficiently thick, that there is NO AMOUNT of refutation which will convince 'em otherwise.

20 or so pages on Ann Coulter and NOT A SINGLE POST which provides anything approaching a valid contest of a damn thing she's ever said.

And yet here they are, 20 pages later STILL every BIT as convinced that they know something about Coulter which discredits who she is or what she says...

It's DELUSION ON PARADE!

So, you have nothing and won't give me something to show you that she has nothing. She discredits herself everytime she opens her mouth. She doesn't need anyone help. So, how about the camel comment, was she on spot with that one? just an example of her rapier wit!

ROFLMNAO...

SWEET MOTHER! Someone tackle this poor woman.

Understand what she just did here...

She's IMPLIED, and rather emphatically that she has first hand and direct knowledge of Ann Coulter... She's a substantial command of the facts regarding Miss Coulter; and in particular, Miss Coulter's failure in debate.

So I simply challenge the moron to support the implication...

She returns, unable to do so... So I point out the failure... and what's she do? Does she admit that she's full of crap? Does she advance an intellectually virtuous admission that she's prone to dislike Miss Coulter, but this is a result of an emotional response spurred mostly by what she perceives as a popular concensus?

Nope...

She's a humanist... a Progressive... A liar; a deluded fool...

So SHE DOUBLES DOWN!

"So, you have nothing and won't give me something to show you that she has nothing."

What I have is your implication that Coulter can't debate and a direct and unambiguous challenge for you to support that implication.

"She discredits herself everytime she opens her mouth."

Yeah see... that's your problem... Miss Coulter opens her mouth A LOT!

You've stated that you have first hand knowledge of her discrediting herself everytime she does so... and yet here ya are needing ME to provide ya with an example...

Like I mentioned earlier... It's lookin' like you're an imbecile. So ya might want to cut your losses here; and go find something discuss in the craft threads.