I especially like the bluster against the idea of criminal trials for "terrorists". It appears that Anne genuinely is either too dim to perceive that if you can't establish that someone is a terrorist by the socially-accepted means - a trial, then you can't even call them a terrorist; or alternatively she simply doesn't accept the notion of innocent until proven guilty.
Almost certainly both of course. That is to say, too dim to comprehend the concept of innocent until proved guilty, too thick to grasp why it has been adopted as a social norm.
Some people are enraged by this kind of anti-social drivel and upset by the frailty of human intelligence that her shallow thinking reveals. But even crass stupidity can have redeeming features, admittedly in a minority of instances. This seems to be one of those rare instance.
Most morons of course are at least dimly aware of their own inadequacies. Most allow their intellectual deficits to hold them back. But not Anne Coulter. She has risen above her intellectual disability, indeed she has actually harnessed it to her advantage! Slotting in to a career in which this so-called disability is actually a plus, that of a right-wing shill. Perhaps she can't understand anything about the world about her, but that doesn't hold her back.
What a wonderful place America is, what a land of opportunity, where even the intellectually retarded can rise to the very top of intellectual circles! This is a society that will be celebrated and cherished, long after its inevitable decline.
Bill Bartlett Bracknell tas
At 10:35 PM -0500 23/1/08, Doug Henwood wrote:
><http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=24635>
>'Straight Talk' Express Takes Scenic Route to Truth
>by Ann Coulter
>Posted: 01/23/2008
>
>John McCain is Bob Dole minus the charm, conservatism and youth. Like
>McCain, pollsters assured us that Dole was the most "electable"
>Republican. Unlike McCain, Dole didn't lie all the time while
>claiming to engage in Straight Talk.
>
>Of course, I might lie constantly too, if I were seeking the
>Republican presidential nomination after enthusiastically promoting
>amnesty for illegal aliens, Social Security credit for illegal
>aliens, criminal trials for terrorists, stem-cell research on human
>embryos, crackpot global warming legislation and free speech-crushing
>campaign-finance laws.
>
>I might lie too, if I had opposed the Bush tax cuts, a marriage
>amendment to the Constitution, waterboarding terrorists and drilling
>in Alaska.
>
>And I might lie if I had called the ads of the Swift Boat Veterans
>for Truth "dishonest and dishonorable."
>
>McCain angrily denounces the suggestion that his "comprehensive
>immigration reform" constituted "amnesty" -- on the ludicrous grounds
>that it included a small fine. Even the guy who graduated fifth from
>the bottom of his class at the U.S. Naval Academy didn't fall for
>this a few years ago.
>
>In 2003, McCain told The Tucson Citizen that "amnesty has to be an
>important part" of any immigration reform. He also rolled out the old
>chestnut about America's need for illegals, who do "jobs that
>American workers simply won't do."
>
>McCain's amnesty bill would have immediately granted millions of
>newly legalized immigrants Social Security benefits. He even
>supported allowing work performed as an illegal to count toward
>Social Security benefits as recently as a vote in 2006 -- now
>adamantly denied by Mr. Straight Talk.
>
>McCain keeps boasting that he was "the only one" of the Republican
>presidential candidates who supported the surge in Iraq.
>
>What is he talking about? All Republicans supported the surge --
>including Mitt Romney and Rudy Giuliani. The only ones who didn't
>support it were McCain pals like Sen. Chuck Hagel. Indeed, the surge
>is the first part of the war on terrorism that caused McCain to break
>from Hagel in order to support the president.
>
>True, McCain voted for the war. So did Hillary Clinton. Like her, he
>then immediately started attacking every other aspect of the war on
>terrorism. (The only difference was, he threw in frequent references
>to his experience as a POW, which currently outnumber John Kerry's
>references to being a Vietnam vet.)
>
>Thus, McCain joined with the Democrats in demanding O.J. trials for
>terrorists at Guantanamo, including his demand that the terrorists
>have full access to the intelligence files being used to prosecute them.
>
>These days, McCain gives swashbuckling speeches about the terrorists
>who "will follow us home." But he still opposes dripping water down
>their noses. He was a POW, you know. Also a member of the Keating 5
>scandal, which you probably don't know, and won't -- until he becomes
>the Republican nominee.
>
>Though McCain was far from the only Republican to support the surge,
>he does have the distinction of being the only Republican who voted
>against the Bush tax cuts. (Also the little lamented Sen. Lincoln
>Chafee, who later left the Republican Party.) Now McCain claims he
>opposed the tax cuts because they didn't include enough spending
>cuts. But that wasn't what he said at the time.
>
>To the contrary, in 2001, McCain said he was voting against Bush's
>tax cuts based on the idiotic talking point of the Democrats. "I
>cannot in good conscience," McCain said, "support a tax cut in which
>so many of the benefits go to the most fortunate among us at the
>expense of middle-class Americans who need tax relief."
>
>McCain started and fanned the vicious anti-Bush myth that, before the
>2000 South Carolina primary, the Bush campaign made phone calls to
>voters calling McCain a "liar, cheat and a fraud" and accusing him of
>having an illegitimate black child.
>
>On the thin reed of a hearsay account, McCain immediately blamed the
>calls on Bush. "I'm calling on my good friend George Bush," McCain
>said, "to stop this now. He comes from a better family. He knows
>better than this."
>
>Bush denied that his campaign had anything to do with the alleged
>calls and, in a stunningly magnanimous act, ordered his campaign to
>release the script of the calls being made in South Carolina.
>
>Bush asked McCain to do the same for his calls implying that Bush was
>an anti-Catholic bigot, but McCain refused. Instead, McCain responded
>with a campaign commercial calling Bush a liar on the order of Bill
>Clinton:
>
>MCCAIN: His ad twists the truth like Clinton. We're all pretty tired
>of that.
>
>ANNOUNCER: Do we really want another politician in the White House
>America can't trust?
>
>After massive investigations by the Los Angeles Times and
>investigative reporter Byron York, among others, it turned out that
>neither of the alleged calls had ever been made by the Bush campaign
>-- nor, it appeared, by anyone else. There was no evidence that any
>such calls had ever been made, which is unheard of when hundreds of
>thousands of "robo-calls" are being left on answering machines across
>the state.
>
>And yet, to this day, the media weep with McCain over Bush's
>underhanded tactics in the 2000 South Carolina primary.
>
>In fact, the most vicious attack in the 2000 South Carolina primary
>came from McCain -- and not against his opponent.
>
>Seeking even more favorable press from The New York Times, McCain
>launched an unprovoked attack against the Rev. Jerry Falwell and Pat
>Robertson, calling them "agents of intolerance." Unlike the phantom
>"black love child" calls, there's documentary evidence of this smear
>campaign.
>
>To ensure he would get full media coverage for that little gem,
>McCain alerted the networks in advance that he planned to attack
>their favorite whipping boys. Newspaper editors across the country
>stood in awe of McCain's raw bravery. The New York Times praised him
>in an editorial that said the Republican Party "has for too long been
>tied to the cramped ideology of the Falwells and the Robertsons."
>
>Though McCain generally votes pro-life -- as his Arizona constituency
>requires -- he embraces the loony lingo of the pro-abortion set,
>repeatedly assuring his pals in the media that he opposes the repeal
>of Roe v. Wade because it would force women to undergo "illegal and
>dangerous operations."
>
>Come to think of it, Dole is a million times better than McCain. Why
>not run him again?
>___________________________________
>http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk