Anne Coulter = Owned

[Razor]

as I've ****ing said, no one can really claim "I'm right" in this one. You're all being guided by your own political partisanships

Sorry for letting my extremely right wing American political partisanship get in the way .

She was wrong, but she wasn't as wrong as the interviewer and Michael Moore were saying she was.

 

[CptStern]

I dont agree

she was more wrong than they were!

 

[mortiz]

She does seem to be quite anti-Canadian over Iraq though, jingoistic too!

 

[No Limit]

Sorry for letting my extremely right wing American political partisanship get in the way .

She was wrong, but she wasn't as wrong as the interviewer and Michael Moore were saying she was.

Ok, so by your reasoning did Canada send troops to Iraq?

You guys are amazing and can find a way to spin anything. I honestly don't understand how anyone could defend Ann Coulter:

http://mediamatters.org/archives/search.html?string=Ann+Coulter

She is a liar and a bigot:

http://mediamatters.org/items/search/200502030008

http://mediamatters.org/items/search/200502080002

the best one:

http://mediamatters.org/items/200409240001

So now let me ask you, do you still think Coulter is that great? Because if anyone here does be prepared to defend the statements she has made (you won't be able to).

 

[GhostFox]

Ok, so by your reasoning did Canada send troops to Iraq?

HMCS Winnipeg, Montreal, Iroquois all patrolled the gulf. Canadian operated AWACS assisted US forces. US ships were escorted into Iraqi waters by Canadian vessels. I can go on. The NDP furiously attacked the Liberals over Canada's involvement in the war.

So you tell me.

 

[CptStern]

HMCS Winnipeg, Montreal, Iroquois all patrolled the gulf. Canadian operated AWACS assisted US forces. US ships were escorted into Iraqi waters by Canadian vessels. I can go on. The NDP furiously attacked the Liberals over Canada's involvement in the war.

So you tell me.

inaccurate and misleading:

"Task Force 50 enforcing UN shipping sanctions on Iraq: frigates HMCS Montreal, HMCS Winnipeg, HMCS Regina, HMCS Fredericton and destroyer"

source

 

[No Limit]

HMCS Winnipeg, Montreal, Iroquois all patrolled the gulf. Canadian operated AWACS assisted US forces. US ships were escorted into Iraqi waters by Canadian vessels. I can go on. The NDP furiously attacked the Liberals over Canada's involvement in the war.

So you tell me.

I don't like to ask for sources but can you provide one in this case? I don't know too much about Canadian politics so I would need a little more information on this.

 

[No Limit]

Ok, never mind, as I suspected Stern pointed out how misleading that was.

 

[GhostFox]

inaccurate and misleading

It is neither inaccurare or misleading. Your information is old, before the start of the war.

After it they were on "terrorist support duties".

Now I am not saying they were involved in the war effort, but the information is there for people to decide from. Maybe they were on the level, and maybe they were secretly supporting US forces. You are welcome to your opinion. Ask the NDP about theirs.

 

[GhostFox]

Ok, never mind, as I suspected Stern pointed out how misleading that was.

Stern was incorrect as usual.

http://www.libbydavies.ca/mpupdate/waroniraq.html

There is one source for you. Google will give you many more if you would like them.

 

[CptStern]

It is neither inaccurare or misleading. Your information is old, before the start of the war.

you really should look at the link before shooting your mouth off:

date: February 17, 2005

Military presence in Bahrain as of Mar 18, 2003

 

[CptStern]

PM Chretien: "Mr Speaker we have stated clearly that the ships operating in this part of the world have been there over a year. They are there to help the people who are fighting terrorism in afghanistan"

minister of defense:

motion by the house: ..consequently the government [of canada] repatriate all soldiers and military material in the region that could be used in a war effort in the conflict in iraq

 

[gh0st]

Christ...

I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force, if necessary, to disarm Saddam Hussein, because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security.

- Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002

Did any righties around here make a thread about it? No, of course not. We would have recognized how stupid we'd look if we bitched about every mistake a politician made. I can see what went through the thread starters mind:

"Haha! OMG a conservative made a mistake! What a dumbass, I'll ignore the countless mistakes that everyone else including myself at times has made and make a POST about it! HAHAH SHE GOT OWNED"

I dont know about you all but I'm damned glad canada didnt fight in vietnam, and I'm damn glad they dont fight in our other wars. I just dont give a shit, sorry. Coulter messed up, like we all do at times, but we dont expect michael moore to put it on his site. Quit this absurdity about fighting over the nuances of something that nobody in reality cares about.

 

[DarkStar]

I think Ann Coulter may be my least favorite person on Earth.

 

[Tr0n]

I think Ann Coulter may be my least favorite person on Earth.

Well...I still think shes hot.

 

[gh0st]

Well...I still think shes hot.

Yeah shes a babe.

 

[Korgoth]

Whoa, anne coulter looks like a man, she even has a freakin adams apple... eeeeew, you guys think she's hot? How sad.

 

[Tr0n]

Whoa, anne coulter looks like a man, she even has a freakin adams apple... eeeeew, you guys think she's hot? How sad.

No you just don't know what hot is.

Each his own my friend....each his own.

 

[GhostFox]

before the start of the war.

My Quote: Cost $0

you really should look at the link before shooting your mouth off:
Military presence in Bahrain as of Mar 18, 2003

Stern's Rebuttal: Cost $0


Stern not knowing actual start day of War in Iraq as March 19/20th 2003, therefore proving me right and making himself look foolish: Priceless.


Just kidding Sterny

 

[CptStern]

My Quote: Cost $0



Stern's Rebuttal: Cost $0


Stern not knowing actual start day of War in Iraq as March 19/20th 2003, therefore proving me right and making himself look foolish: Priceless.


Just kidding Sterny

APRIL 7 th 2003

PM Chretien: "Mr Speaker we have stated clearly that the ships operating in this part of the world have been there over a year.



zing!

 

[K e r b e r o s]

Sprafa said it best:

no one can really claim "I'm right" in this one. You're all being guided by your own political partisanships

... wow. I'm silent folks. This just took the cake right out of the Birthday Party.

 

[GhostFox]

PM Chretien: "Mr Speaker we have stated clearly that the ships operating in this part of the world have been there over a year.

I don't understand your point. I already said that the were there before the war. After the war started they switched to "terrorist support". All I am reporting is that many have found this suspicious and have paralled it exactly to the Vietnam issue. I haven't even condoned that position, only shown that it clearly exists and is a reasonable theory, though not nessicarily true. I'm sorry Stern, half the time I don't get what you are trying to say.

 

[Razor]

APRIL 7 th 2003

PM Chretien: "Mr Speaker we have stated clearly that the ships operating in this part of the world have been there over a year.



zing!

It just proves to the world Stern, that the Canadian government knew about the upcoming Iraq war so they could use that argument :rolling:.

And Anne Coulter is quite the hotty.

 

[CptStern]

I don't understand your point. I already said that the were there before the war. After the war started they switched to "terrorist support". All I am reporting is that many have found this suspicious and have paralled it exactly to the Vietnam issue. I haven't even condoned that position, only shown that it clearly exists and is a reasonable theory, though not nessicarily true. I'm sorry Stern, half the time I don't get what you are trying to say.

:upstare: dont get all sanctimonious on me ghost, your attempt at rediculing me backfired on you



Razor: that proves nothing! in fact this proves everything :E

 

[K e r b e r o s]

dont get all sanctimonious on me ghost, your attempt at rediculing me backfired on you

Now, Ghost, it only backfired on you because Stern said it did. If he had'nt have said a word -- he would be wallowing in what I call, "Forumitus". Peace man, peace.

 

[GhostFox]

I'm still trying to figure out what his point was. :?

 

[diluted]

Ann Coulter used to be a man. It's obvious.

 

[No Limit]

I'm still trying to figure out what his point was. :?

Canada was there long before the US went in not to help the Us but to enforce UN sanctions on Iraq. Canada does not currently provide any combat support to the US military in Iraq nor did it provide any military support in Vietnam. Why are you people still trying to spin this? It's amazing what the Republican spin machine can do.

Do you people understand who you are trying to defend here? have a little decency, that Ann Coulter bitch is crazy; you shouldn't look past that simply because she is a conservative. I am a hardcore liberal but I have criticized Moore on a number of occasions; in this case you should be doing this to Coulter who obviously proved she didn't know anything about Canda yet continues to say outrageous statements about them.

 

[Razor]

Ann Coulter used to be a man. It's obvious.

#

Your just jealous as you couldn't get a babe like Anne Coulter. :angry:

 

[GhostFox]

Canada was there long before the US went in not to help the Us but to enforce UN sanctions on Iraq.

Only before the war. After the war started, they were there supposedly there for "terrorist suppression measures" or something like that, as a continuation of Op. Enduring Freedom. Whether or not you belive that they were secretly helping the US war effort is one thing, but they were not there to enforce sanctions after the war was going on. Canada still has vessels there. And Iraq has no sanctions and hasn't since 2003.

Canada does not currently provide any combat support to the US military in Iraq nor did it provide any military support in Vietnam.

What do you consider combat support? Is operating AWACS and alerting US forces of enemy aircraft combat support? Is escorting US ships through hostile waters combat support? etc.

I think it all comes down to perception. As to Vietnam, Canada definitely did provide support in the way of diplomatic efforts, war material, and support personel. I would think that counts as "millitary support".

 

[GhostFox]

in this case you should be doing this to Coulter who obviously proved she didn't know anything about Canda yet continues to say outrageous statements about them.

This is the problem. I wouldn't jump all over anyone for such a small mistake as this. It was a minor error. Yes she was wrong. But to make a big deal out of it makes you look foolish.

 

[No Limit]

This is the problem. I wouldn't jump all over anyone for such a small mistake as this. It was a minor error. Yes she was wrong. But to make a big deal out of it makes you look foolish.

I'm not going to go in to the whole Canada support thing anymore as you guys won't stop spinning this; it doesn't really matter.

However, do you udnerstand who you are defending? This is not a small mistake; she clearly meant that Canada sent troops to Vietnam OFFICIALLY, no they didn't. Now, this proves she knows nothing about Canada politics; all she knows is that they disagree with Bush on the war so she will say outrageous things about them based only on that partisan crap. Here is a quote from her:

Canada is "lucky we allow them to exist on the same continent"; Carlson: "Without the U.S., Canada is essentially Honduras"

http://mediamatters.org/items/200412010011

She has no right to say anything like that since she proved she doesn't know anything about Canada. So let me ask you again, why are you defending her? Like I said, I regularly criticize Moore and other democracts when they say stupid things; it's about time you put this partisan crap aside and do the same to Coulter who has said many equally stupid comments.

 

[GhostFox]

I am not defending her. I think she is a big-mouthed idiot much of the time.

However I do defend her right to make a simple, minor mistake that anyone could make, without her being jumped all over on by partisans.

Let's be honest. If it was John Kerry who said it, no one would care. Even if it was Colon Powell, no one would have said a word.

But becuase of who it was, people want to crucify her. That is what I am defending. The right not to be attacked simply becuase of your political persuasion. If it was Michael Moore who said it, and conservatives jumped all over him about it, I would defend him the same way.

Be honest with yourselves. If you jumped onto the "Anne Coulter is a moron" bandwagon because of this silly mistake, it has nothing to do with her words, and everything to do with your political agenda.

 

[GhostFox]

it's about time you put this partisan crap aside and do the same to Coulter who has said many equally stupid comments.

I'm not even a conservative. In fact in many ways I am quite liberal.

 

[No Limit]

I am not defending her. I think she is a big-mouthed idiot much of the time.

However I do defend her right to make a simple, minor mistake that anyone could make, without her being jumped all over on by partisans.

Let's be honest. If it was John Kerry who said it, no one would care. Even if it was Colon Powell, no one would have said a word.

But becuase of who it was, people want to crucify her. That is what I am defending. The right not to be attacked simply becuase of your political persuasion. If it was Michael Moore who said it, and conservatives jumped all over him about it, I would defend him the same way.

Be honest with yourselves. If you jumped onto the "Anne Coulter is a moron" bandwagon because of this silly mistake, it has nothing to do with her words, and everything to do with your political agenda.

It has everything to do with the political agenda as she has a huge influance in politics; if you support her or don't support her it always falls back on politics.

This would have been a simple mistake if she didn't say the things she said about Canada. However, what she said proved she didn't know anything abou Canada so she has no right in making the comments she does about Canada. This is why it is such a huge deal. If Michael Moore said it it would also be a huge deal as he regularly defends Canada. On the other hand if we were having a discussion and you said what she said then it could be considered a minor mistake as I don't recall you bad mouthing Canada on a regular basis.

If you think she is an idiot great; however, you will be amazed at how many conservatives think she is a God despite the idiotic statements she makes. This is no different on the liberal side when they defend idiotic statements by Moore.

 

[Absinthe]

Let's be honest. If it was John Kerry who said it, no one would care.

Are you sure about that? There was a topic not too long ago where people jumped all over something Kerry said.

 

[K e r b e r o s]

... :d

 

[GhostFox]

Are you sure about that?

I meant Dems/Liberals. My point was that the anger was clear based on partisianship, and not the validity of her comment.

 

[No Limit]

I meant Dems/Liberals. My point was that the anger was clear based on partisianship, and not the validity of her comment.

As I pointed out that's not really the case.

If I say France is an evil country and then claim that France was neutral in WWII will you take anything I say about France seriously?