About us Login Get email updates
Quick Clip
Print

Coulter: "Boxer sees a black testifying before her, and she thinks it's appropriate to cite other blacks" 

July 17, 2009 7:11 pm ET

From the July 17 edition of Fox News' Glenn Beck:

Please upgrade your flash player. The video for this item requires a newer version of Flash Player. If you are unable to install flash you can download a QuickTime version of the video.

EMBED

As Think Progress has documented, Sen. Barbara Boxer introduced the NAACP's Joint Resolution on Climate Change into the record following National Black Chamber of Commerce CEO Harry Alford's testimony, in which he described the purportedly negative effects of cap-and-trade legislation "on small and minority-owned businesses, their ability to create jobs and the impact on the communities that they serve" and said that the negative impacts "would differ across regions, across industries and across income levels depending on changes in local energy costs and on allocation formulas for permits. And that worries me and my members because the black community suffers mightily when the economy goes south." 

Expand All Expand 1st Level Collapse All Add Comment
    • Author by richardsimones (July 17, 2009 7:36 pm ET)
      4 21
      She has a point.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by pete592 (July 17, 2009 7:54 pm ET)
        12 3
        No she doesn't.

        Boxer saw someone who heads an organization that represents blacks and cited another organization that also represents blacks.

        As usual, Skeletor is oblivious to this, so she has nothing interesting or insightful to add aside from a cheap smear.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by JamesCraven8209 (July 17, 2009 8:10 pm ET)
          7 2
          Annie, are you watching? Are you watching Annie?

          It's so obviously clear that you are a race mongerer like others of your ilk, the WeinerSavages, the Magalgang Malkins, the Skezzixes, the Proffessor Harold Hills, I could go on, but I have space to make for others to comment... the point is this. You're the kettle, there's the pot, say hello to Mr. Black if you will.
          Report Abuse
        • Author by richardsimones (July 17, 2009 8:22 pm ET)
          3 11
          What does the NAACP have to do with cap and trade? The BCC was there to talk about the impact of the policy on black businesses, she used the NAACP to make it seem as if he did not have the best interest of the race at heart.
          Report Abuse
          • Author by solon (July 17, 2009 8:31 pm ET)
            8 3
            The NAACP obviously think they have a stake in Climate Change. Therefore it is a reasonable counterpoint to a group giving the BUSINESS side of the issue.
            Report Abuse
            • Author by richardsimones (July 17, 2009 10:12 pm ET)
              2 9
              Thinking they do and actually having one are two very different concepts.
              Report Abuse
              • Author by solon (July 17, 2009 11:47 pm ET)
                7 3
                Hey the weasel from the Black Chamber of Commerce wasnt giving us tablets from GOD he was giving HIS opinion. There is no QUESTION there is FAR more evidence about Global Warming than the BCC's opinion about what WILL happen in the future.
                Report Abuse
                • Author by proudconservative (July 18, 2009 12:11 am ET)
                  3 10
                  The thread is about how Boxer treated the man, not the fallicy of global warming. There are plenty of opportunities on the media matters (for very little) website to combat that.

                  Remember, it is verbotten to go off topic. Bad solon, bad solon.
                  Report Abuse
                  • Author by solon (July 18, 2009 12:21 am ET)
                    8 3
                    This thread is about whether the NAACP being used to rebut the Black Chamber of Commerce guy WITH THEIR GLOBAL WARMING RESOLUTION is reasonable. Try to keep up Proudtobestupid. The Global Warming resolution is referenced IN the article. My GOODNESS you are dumb.
                    Report Abuse
                  • Author by TheKidFromKountyMeath (July 18, 2009 10:40 am ET)
                    1  
                    Remember, it is verbotten [sic]

                    ANNNND Godwin violation.
                    Report Abuse
                  • Author by jonwisby (July 18, 2009 3:22 pm ET)
                    2 2
                    HIS TREATMENT OF HER WAS REPREHENSIBLE AND SELF SERVING.
                    Report Abuse
              • Author by jonwisby (July 18, 2009 3:20 pm ET)
                2 1
                Are you saying there are no reasons the naacp would have an interest in energy policy and that there are no business interests represented by the naacp?
                Report Abuse
            • Author by blk-in-alabam (July 17, 2009 11:23 pm ET)
              4 2
              Most industry in the United States support climate regulation.It appears that he is putting forth an image that black business is not,cannot,and will not be ready for the 21st century and climate regulation.I feel he should be addressing how black business will deal with climate regulation.Instead of crying about something that is going to be and getting prepared.This is where Senator Boxer should have kept the discussion.
              Report Abuse
              • Author by richardsimones (July 18, 2009 12:06 am ET)
                2 6
                Or we could not destroy the economy? You know do what China and India are doing and grow?
                Report Abuse
                • Author by blk-in-alabam (July 18, 2009 12:16 am ET)
                  6  
                  There is not suppose to be an automobile industry in the US.Catalytic convertors were supposed to have killed it.
                  Report Abuse
                • Author by a perfect circle (July 19, 2009 8:38 am ET)
                  1  
                  Sure we can emulate China. How do you take your milk and baby formula--with a little melamine, or a lot?
                  Report Abuse
                  • Author by richardsimones (July 20, 2009 3:30 am ET)
                       
                    Isn't that an issue a market could easily weed out? Yes!
                    Report Abuse
                    • Author by Scotty Johnson Sr. (July 20, 2009 12:55 pm ET)
                         
                      Isn't that an issue a market could easily weed out? Yes!
                      No.
                      Report Abuse
                    • Author by vysotsky (July 20, 2009 5:36 pm ET)
                         
                      Just like the free market did a great job weeding the carcinogens out of cigarettes. (Yes!)
                      Report Abuse
      • Author by juliajayne1 (July 17, 2009 8:09 pm ET)
        6 2
        She might have a point when she's flying on her broom, but other than that, I'm not seeing it.
        Report Abuse
      • Author by vysotsky (July 18, 2009 10:34 am ET)
        3 2
        Yes, she has a point. It's on her head.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by juliajayne1 (July 18, 2009 1:02 pm ET)
          6 1
          Yes, fits the pointy witches hat she wears when on her broom. ;-)
          Report Abuse
      • Author by mari2jj2970 (July 18, 2009 10:30 pm ET)
        5 2
        Nah, she is just announcing her racism for all the world to hear. It is so unGodly and I trust she will have to pay for this unGodly behavior either in this life or the next. But in many ways, she is so pitiful. Her reasoning is so generally warped and her ability to enjoy the wide diversity in our country seems stifled by such racism, Now after discussing this, I really pity the poor thing. She just seems incapable of carrying out God's commands to treat all with dignity. She seems unable to enjoy the great diversity that has made our country strong and beautiful besides she seems to have totally missed God's rule that we must treat all with dignity. Poor, poor thing. She truly is to be pitied.
        Report Abuse
    • Author by zamfir273114 (July 17, 2009 8:20 pm ET)
      4 16
      I think Coulter is onto something.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by MickD (July 17, 2009 8:22 pm ET)
        5 2
        On what planet? Obviously the one you live on as well, far far away from reality.

        Report Abuse
      • Author by overmars jr. (July 17, 2009 8:53 pm ET)
        12 2
        I think Coulter is onto something.


        I think you meant "on something".
        Report Abuse
      • Author by vysotsky (July 18, 2009 10:38 am ET)
        4 1
        And pray tell, whatever might that something be, zamfir273114? The suspense is torturous.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by Easy to refute wingnuts (July 19, 2009 11:03 am ET)
          3  
          And his explanation will be tortuous.
          Report Abuse
          • Author by vysotsky (July 19, 2009 11:11 am ET)
            1  
            I fear that zamfir273114 is sheltered from reason by a shell of ignorance, as hard as that of a tortoise.
            Report Abuse
      • Author by jonwisby (July 18, 2009 3:25 pm ET)
        4 1
        It was a typo, supposed to read, "I think Coulter is on something".
        Report Abuse
    • Author by dusaa1975 (July 17, 2009 8:24 pm ET)
        1
      i think Mr Alford was way out of line.Boxer may have talked down and belittled him, she may have insulted his integrity and tried to play the race card on him. But she is a liberal. She knows best.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by LIBERTY OR DEATH (July 17, 2009 8:34 pm ET)
        1
      Good for Mr. Alford for standing up for himself
      Report Abuse
      • Author by TheKidFromKountyMeath (July 19, 2009 5:26 pm ET)
        1  
        Again, if he were talking that way to a Republican, your response would be something along the lines of "Why are You People so ungrateful?"
        Report Abuse
    • Author by proudconservative (July 17, 2009 8:42 pm ET)
      4 13
      The video showed clearly that Boxer was making the racial issue to invalidate what the gentleman was arguing. He was rightly offended. I see the left viewing the classes/races as foremost in indentifying who a person is or what they should believe. She was ill-eqipped to handle his response because she found it unfathomable that she could be a racist. Condecension is racism, in other words, you couldn't be where you are without my special help because you must not be capable to make it on your own.

      The video shows how insidious the racism of the left actually is, how dehumanizing and demeaning. That's the left's view of race and personal ability, not the conservative view.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by Victor Colorado (July 17, 2009 9:03 pm ET)
        7 2
        I find it refreshing that you've able to support a black man's cries of "racism".*













        *provided that the black man conforms to your political ideology.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by proudconservative (July 17, 2009 9:12 pm ET)
          2 6
          I don't know what his political stance is, do you?
          Report Abuse
          • Author by Victor Colorado (July 17, 2009 9:23 pm ET)
            4 2
            Oh, you don't know? How cute.
            Report Abuse
            • Author by proudconservative (July 17, 2009 10:44 pm ET)
              3 10
              If you listen to his comments and demostrate some initiative you will also find that detail. Also, what does he have to say about health care? Just make a guess instead.
              Report Abuse
              • Author by mary59 (July 18, 2009 8:21 pm ET)
                6 2
                Boy when you're on the wrong track you just keep going and going. Obviously if the chamber of commerce is a wholly owned subsidiary of big bidness, which is what it has become, it behooves Boxer to invite someone to rebut the disinformation.
                Too bad you don't like it. And just the fact that you think Ann Coulter actually has a point about anything shows just how far you'll go to stretch yours.
                Report Abuse
                • Author by juliajayne1 (July 18, 2009 8:38 pm ET)
                  5 1
                  bidness

                  Shades of Molly Ivins, GF. ;-)
                  Report Abuse
                  • Author by mary59 (July 18, 2009 10:46 pm ET)
                    5 2
                    Definitely. Stole it from her, but she's gracious enough not to mind...love that lady. You too!
                    Report Abuse
          • Author by Easy to refute wingnuts (July 19, 2009 11:04 am ET)
            3  
            I don't know what his political stance is, do you?
            Is yours like Larry Craig's?
            Report Abuse
      • Author by solon (July 17, 2009 9:27 pm ET)
        8 3
        Your post shows how insidiously stupid and brainwashed the right is. You LOVE to tell the left what WE think. That is because you are a moron
        Report Abuse
        • Author by Victor Colorado (July 17, 2009 9:32 pm ET)
          4  
          Why must you tarnish PC's Al Sharpton moment?
          Report Abuse
        • Author by proudconservative (July 17, 2009 9:36 pm ET)
          3 8
          Watch her and decide.

          Listen to his interview and hear what he has to say.

          After that, then talk about brainwashing.
          Report Abuse
          • Author by TheKidFromKountyMeath (July 17, 2009 10:02 pm ET)
            1  
            Linking to things makes me Teh Smart.
            Report Abuse
          • Author by solon (July 17, 2009 10:06 pm ET)
            6 3
            Talk about brainwashing all you want. You SHOULD be an expert as brainwashed as you are. It also serves your troll purpose of changing the subject.
            Report Abuse
          • Author by Victor Colorado (July 17, 2009 10:15 pm ET)
            6 2
            Rise up all you conservative obstructionists and protectors of oil companies! Fight the power!
            Report Abuse
            • Author by proudconservative (July 17, 2009 10:35 pm ET)
              4 11
              I'm not changing the subject. Do you defend Boxer? Are you commenting without listening or watching? Do you have a thought about the comparative content of what Boxer said versus Coulter? Were his comments out of line? Why did he call her ma'am and not be chastised like the general was when he testified before the committee?

              There has to be a least a couple of firing synapses between the two of you to actually form a thought. Please, share, won't you?
              Report Abuse
              • Author by Victor Colorado (July 17, 2009 10:42 pm ET)
                4 1
                I listened and watched before commenting. I feel much the way this guy does about the exchange:

                http://www.ourfuture.org/blog-entry/2009072916/harry-alfords-condescension
                Report Abuse
                • Author by proudconservative (July 17, 2009 10:53 pm ET)
                  3 11
                  Good boy vic, ya did some research. So, tell me what does this have to do with the comments of Boxer or Coulter? What is your blogger saying about Mr. Alfords? And how does that change how he was treated by Boxer?

                  Man up! Let's get it on!!
                  Report Abuse
                  • Author by Victor Colorado (July 17, 2009 11:02 pm ET)
                    5 2
                    I don't have a problem with "how he was treated by Boxer". Should I?
                    Report Abuse
                    • Author by proudconservative (July 17, 2009 11:21 pm ET)
                      2 9
                      Your blogger friend pretty much called Mr. Alfords an uncle tom? Is it your contention that his treatment was fair because of this or that Mrs. Boxer's response to him was fair?

                      What made him wrong by reacting the way he did?
                      Report Abuse
                      • Author by Victor Colorado (July 17, 2009 11:29 pm ET)
                        5 4
                        He was being disingenuous. He wanted to gain an edge in the cap and trade debate, so he went to race. What I find interesting, is that you're OK with it. Wonders never cease.
                        Report Abuse
                        • Author by proudconservative (July 17, 2009 11:43 pm ET)
                          3 9
                          When does HE go to race? Does he bring it up when the Pew study, one done by scientists, is mentioned by Boxer? No it is when she includes a 'resolution' (nothing to do with science or a particular study), from the NAACP and comments from the CEO of 100 black men from atlanta, again not a scientist, to refute his comments. Why them and not the national organization of women, or gay pride? She did it because he was black, she said as much and that this only represented diversity. He is there with his science and she says that he should be proud that she is commenting on a black man's diverse opinion.

                          She did it that way because lefties believe true members of a minority group should understand that there is a correct way to think to get ahead and that she could put him in his place by attacking science with 'black resolutions'.
                          Report Abuse
                          • Author by blk-in-alabam (July 18, 2009 12:41 am ET)
                            3 1
                            So you feel black business should stay in the 20th century and not prepare for now and the future.It looks like the gentalman from BCC has found the correct way to get ahead.Campaign for lax or no enviromental regulation.Let the destruction of the air,land water,illness,and death continue in poor and minority comunities continue.Many black business he claims to represent,operate in such enviroments.He gets paid by big poluters,not black business.
                            Report Abuse
                          • Author by Victor Colorado (July 18, 2009 9:21 am ET)
                            3 1
                            When does HE go to race?


                            OK....so...you've posted about 86 or so requests and demands that other people here WATCH and LISTEN to this man and YOU don't even know when he brings plays the race card in this exchange with Boxer??? Really???
                            Report Abuse
                          • Author by Brabantio (July 18, 2009 10:15 am ET)
                            6 2
                            When does HE go to race?


                            I come to you, not as an economist, but with a deep understanding of small and minority-owned businesses...


                            The thing that concerns me and many of the 95,000 business members of the National Black Chamber is that any legislation Congress enacts must consider the impact that costs will have on small and minority-owned businesses,


                            And that worries me and my members because the black community suffers mightily when the economy goes south.


                            These are from the opening statement. Boxer was simply pointing out that the "black community" doesn't necessarily end at Alford's fingertips. Why this is an outrage, I have no idea.
                            Report Abuse
                          • Author by vysotsky (July 18, 2009 10:57 am ET)
                            5 1
                            "When does HE go to race?"


                            Oh, I don't know... in the first line of his testimony? "I come to you, not as an economist, but with a deep understanding of small and minority-owned businesses and as someone who has experience with consumer behavior."

                            Yeah, I know, he's just talking about his experience with minority-owned businesses. That's not necessarily racial. Though, come to think of it, he offered is testimony in his capacity as the CEO of the National Black Chamber of Commerce. I'm not saying he's playing "the race card" -- indeed, I don't think he is -- but race is on the table from the moment the conversation began.

                            Report Abuse
                        • Author by pete592 (July 18, 2009 1:02 am ET)
                          7 4
                          Damn straight, Vic. Accusations of racism conveniently fall on a sensitive ear when it's in response to one of the right wing's favorite targets. In this case, Barbara Boxer. Suddenly, the right-wing professional liars are the black man's best friend.

                          Interesting, indeed.
                          Report Abuse
        • Author by richardsimones (July 17, 2009 10:15 pm ET)
          3 11
          You probably called Bush a fascist didn't you?
          Report Abuse
          • Author by TheKidFromKountyMeath (July 17, 2009 10:20 pm ET)
            1  
            What does that have to do with ANYTHING?
            Report Abuse
          • Author by solon (July 17, 2009 11:50 pm ET)
            8 2
            Ah another con with amazing mind reading powers. No. I DID call him a moron but that was demostrably so.
            Report Abuse
            • Author by richardsimones (July 18, 2009 12:09 am ET)
              3 9
              I am a conservative. I could argue Mr. Barry-O is a moron. I'd rather just prove that Keynesian theory is incorrect.
              Report Abuse
              • Author by solon (July 18, 2009 12:28 am ET)
                6 2
                You could TRY to argue that the man who was editor of Harvard Law review is a moron but that would only show that you arent very bright and wouldnt really say anything about Obama. Using a derisive nickname for him outs you as another brainwashed member of the Limborg hivemind. Try thinking for yourself someday. You are NEVER going to PROVE Keynes wrong but I am not taking the theories of an anonymous poster on a website as seriously as one of the most respected economists of all times. Economics isnt physics. All you would do is give me your OPINIONS. No way are you ever going to PROVE Keynes wrong.
                Report Abuse
                • Author by richardsimones (July 18, 2009 2:15 am ET)
                  2 6
                  Just pay attention Chief Executive Obama will prove Keynes wrong, if you don't want to listen to an economics major.
                  Report Abuse
                  • Author by solon (July 18, 2009 3:30 am ET)
                    4 3
                    You mean someone who CLAIMS to be an economics major should carry more weight than one of the most influential economists of the 20th Century? One who claims that economic theories can be PROVEN? Rather than conditional? You arent serious are you? Would one test in specific conditions REALLY prove anything? Well Roosevelt used Keynes theories to take the unemployment rate from above 30% and drop it to under 15%. The man who just won the most recent Nobel Prize for economics Paul Krugman says his criticism of the stimulus is it wasnt big enough then again I guess as an economics major, alledgedly, you know more than the current Nobel Prize winner too. Then again maybe I dont take you very seriously.
                    Report Abuse
                    • Author by richardsimones (July 19, 2009 4:09 am ET)
                      2 3
                      Everyone in the USSR was employed, yet somehow the whole enterprise went belly up. Because it was communist everything they did required government spending. You must also look at output numbers. Private sector employment is far more important than general employment for the private sector is where we get the output. If you pay a man to dig a ditch and then pay another to fill it back in, what has been created? Keynesianism is merely moving wealth around. The pie is not any bigger just sliced differently. Government cannot advantage one aspect of the economy without harming another part.
                      Report Abuse
                      • Author by vysotsky (July 19, 2009 7:24 am ET)
                        2  
                        "Everyone in the USSR was employed, yet somehow the whole enterprise went belly up."


                        Not exactly. The Soviet government certainly propagandized the claim that unemployment had been "liquidated" in the 30s, but no scholar I know has actually found evidence to support this. (A nice read of this is J. L. Porket's Work, Employment, and Unemployment in the Soviet Union (1988).) By the end of the 1980s, the official journal of the Communist Party was reporting on domestic unemployment statistics (Коммунист, #14, 1989, p 40).

                        But setting that factual problem aside for the moment: citing the Soviet Union's collapse doesn't do much to invalidate Keynesian economics: Keynes didn't advocate communism.

                        As for the supposed futility of "moving wealth around": someone with money is more likely to purchase goods and services than a person without money who can't find a job. In fact, I'm unaware of any contemporary economist who actually argues that moving wealth around has no effect at all on the size of "the pie". If you know of one, by all means, provide a citation or a summary of the argument.
                        Report Abuse
                        • Author by vysotsky (July 19, 2009 7:27 am ET)
                          2  
                          (The citation that didn't survive the journey from Cyrillic to the MMFA forum was "Kommunist, #14, 1989, p 40")
                          Report Abuse
                    • Author by richardsimones (July 19, 2009 4:11 am ET)
                        4
                      My two majors are actually quite official Political Science and Economics.
                      Report Abuse
                      • Author by Easy to refute wingnuts (July 19, 2009 11:29 am ET)
                        2  
                        They may well be, but you post like someone who is in the bottom percentile of their class.

                        Just because you major in a subject doesn't mean you've learned anything about it. So far you've been 100% wrong about everything.
                        Report Abuse
                    • Author by richardsimones (July 19, 2009 4:28 am ET)
                      1 6
                      Does the Nobel Prize have any credibility left? Al Gore won the peace prize for God sakes. What does calling humans evil have to do with peace.
                      Report Abuse
                      • Author by vysotsky (July 19, 2009 11:41 am ET)
                        1  
                        "What does calling humans evil have to do with peace."


                        Please cite Gore's unqualified statement that humans are evil.
                        Report Abuse
                      • Author by mjh (July 19, 2009 11:41 am ET)
                        2  
                        "What does calling humans evil have to do with peace." - richardsimmons


                        Ask George W. -- he's the one who placed three whole countries in an "Axis of Evil" . . .
                        Report Abuse
                  • Author by vysotsky (July 18, 2009 11:14 am ET)
                    6 2
                    Thanks, but I'd rather listen to an actual economist or a professor of economics than an economics major who visits a media criticism website, comments on a thread about Ann Coulter's charge of racism, suggests that he could prove that the president is a moron and that Keynesian theory is incorrect, but offers not one shred of an argument or proof of any kind about anything.
                    Report Abuse
                • Author by richardsimones (July 18, 2009 2:39 am ET)
                  3 6
                  What is that word "Limborg?" Using a derisive nickname for me outs you as another brainwashed member of the Olberborg hivemind. HA see what I did there?
                  Report Abuse
                  • Author by solon (July 18, 2009 3:31 am ET)
                    4 3
                    Yeah something stupid. I dont watch TV news but tell me do people run around repeating what he says verbatim on websites? Do they CALL themselves dittobots? Did you really think that was clever instead of stupid?
                    Report Abuse
                    • Author by richardsimones (July 19, 2009 4:13 am ET)
                      2 2
                      Not clever in the least. I did it to illustrate a point not get a laugh.
                      Report Abuse
                      • Author by Easy to refute wingnuts (July 19, 2009 11:32 am ET)
                        3  
                        Unfortunately for you, you did not illustrate a point, and you are now a laughing stock.

                        Keep posting, you're quite funny, although I don't think that was your paid mission when you started here.
                        Report Abuse
                      • Author by Scotty Johnson Sr. (July 20, 2009 3:02 am ET)
                           
                        I did it to illustrate a point not get a laugh.
                        Didn't you mean:
                        I did it to illustrate a point, not get a laugh.
                        Haven't you taken any English classes yet, or are you sticking to econ?
                        Report Abuse
                • Author by carbona (July 19, 2009 6:41 am ET)
                    1
                  You could TRY to argue that the man who was President of the United States and Governor of the State of Texas is a moron but that would only show that you aren't very bright and wouldn't really say anything about Bush. Using a derisive nickname for him outs you as another brainwashed member of the Garafolian hivemind. Try thinking for yourself someday.
                  Report Abuse
                  • Author by mjh (July 19, 2009 3:45 pm ET)
                    2  
                    "You could TRY to argue that the man who was President of the United States and Governor of the State of Texas is a moron but that would only show that you aren't very bright and wouldn't really say anything about Bush." - carbona


                    Well, its not as though being Governor of Texas and being a moron are mutually exclusive -- hell, it almost seems to be a requirement. :)

                    Anyway, it wasn't simply serving as president and governor that rendered Bush a moron -- though neither did much to dissuade the designation -- it was things like barbecuing when warned of an attack, reading to kids during the attack, playing air guitar while a city floods, butchering the English language, starting 2 preemptive wars . . .
                    Report Abuse
                  • Author by TheKidFromKountyMeath (July 19, 2009 5:29 pm ET)
                       
                    Whoever told you Janeane Garofalo was some bigwig in the Democratic Party was playing a prank of some kind on you. And it's hilarious.
                    Report Abuse
                  • Author by Scotty Johnson Sr. (July 20, 2009 3:04 am ET)
                       
                    Bush couldn't carry Obama's jock, when it comes to intellect. This is demonstrably true.
                    Report Abuse
              • Author by mjh (July 19, 2009 11:38 am ET)
                3  
                "I could argue Mr. Barry-O is a moron."- richardsimmons


                You're right -- you could. However, seeing as Obama has degrees from TWO Ivy-league universities -- and didn't rely on daddy's help to get in, unlike Dubya -- the only one who'd wind up looking like a moron would be you . . .

                Report Abuse
                • Author by TheKidFromKountyMeath (July 19, 2009 5:30 pm ET)
                  1  
                  But he has degrees in Smart People Studies from Because I Said So University! And I'm sure he claims to have mastered several martial arts as well. Anger not the Internet Tough Guy.
                  Report Abuse
        • Author by svs22422 (July 18, 2009 10:05 pm ET)
             
          not impressed!
          Report Abuse
      • Author by jjamele2880 (July 17, 2009 10:38 pm ET)
        5 2
        I've noticed that you use a lot of words to make the simple point "I am a clueless idiot." Why don't you save your fingers some time and just type the shorter phrase?

        Seriously, we on the left don't need to be told by dunces like you how we feel about race. We know how we feel about race. We've shown our "condescension" by fighting for civil rights for all. The Republicans got out of the Civil Rights business somewhere around 1964- which is why right-wingers have to reach back to blathering "Al Gore's father was a racist" and "Robert Byrd was in the Klan" to make some kind of "Republicans are better on Civil Rights than Democrats" nonsensical, logic-spinning argument. Give it a rest, ProudtobeanignorantConservative.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by proudconservative (July 17, 2009 11:15 pm ET)
          3 7
          stutteringjafemale,

          The video of Boxer shows how incredulous she is at being called on the carpet about the racial tone. I see other leftist progressives do this by first identifying individuals by race and procede to make them something less than capable to do things of their own voulition.

          As far as my comments, have you seen me attack via the Gore/Byrd stuff? No, that's old news anyway. The progressives of today are still waging a battle to make certain that class conflicts continue and allow for the proletariat to rise up and bring about socialist utopia. This incident demonstrates Boxer's ingnorance and insensitivity but the issue goes much further in demonstrating the condescention by lefties to minorities and their hatred of those members of minorities that stray from the plantation.

          In the future debate on the merits of what I have posted and not gripe about what others have said. And please, the students that you teach at that capitalistic elitest private school, hope for stronger arguements than the 'clueless idiot' tack. ;(
          Report Abuse
          • Author by jjamele2880 (July 17, 2009 11:21 pm ET)
            6 3
            zzzzz.... sorry, I only have time to slap you around like a cat with a ball of yarn once a day, and I've already filled my quota with you today.

            Oh, and I love the way your feelings are sooooo hurt by my calling you names, while you keep referring to me as "stutteringjamele," as if that's any more clever now than it's been the last fifty times you've used it.

            I'd be happy to debate your posts on the merits. As soon as you post something that has any, I'll start.
            Report Abuse
            • Author by proudconservative (July 17, 2009 11:54 pm ET)
              3 6
              Okee-doekey,

              I'll try an offer something for you to tear into.....

              Cut and pasted from above......
              The video showed clearly that Boxer was making the racial issue to invalidate what the gentleman was arguing. He was rightly offended. I see the left viewing the classes/races as foremost in indentifying who a person is or what they should believe. She was ill-eqipped to handle his response because she found it unfathomable that she could be a racist. Condecension is racism, in other words, you couldn't be where you are without my special help because you must not be capable to make it on your own.

              The video shows how insidious the racism of the left actually is, how dehumanizing and demeaning. That's the left's view of race and personal ability, not the conservative view.



              Do you have a comment on the video, what coulter said, what alfords said? Please, beat me till I beg for more! Come on, there has to be something here to nail me with!

              And when have I ever complained about people calling me names? It doesn't bother me a bit. Now on the other hand, I like to jest at people's monikers here. Like jj male, what the heck does that mean? I usually stop when folks ask me nicely to refrain. I take your plea as such a request.
              Report Abuse
              • Author by solon (July 17, 2009 11:59 pm ET)
                5 2
                I have seen you not stop when asked. You are of the Limborg. You are brainwashed and think that it is clever when RUSH uses these derisive nicknames so YOU do it. It is part of your programming. That and you are a troll.
                Report Abuse
                • Author by proudconservative (July 18, 2009 12:07 am ET)
                  2 7
                  Oh boo-hoo, grow some please and actually debate. But, I'll stop now and make nice.

                  But be careful, you're just about at the troll & brainwashed usage limit for the day. You'll have to come up with some other term to fully demonstrate the depth of your wit as well.
                  Report Abuse
                  • Author by solon (July 18, 2009 12:30 am ET)
                    5 2
                    Language has uses words have meanings when discussing a clear brainwashed troll the words have a use. And YOU are a brainwashed troll. You dont come here to debate. You come here to insult liberals. Its all you do. Even when you make an argument its just a way to insult liberals
                    Report Abuse
                    • Author by hisroyalmattness (July 18, 2009 3:55 pm ET)
                      1  
                      Salon
                      To people, like proudconservative, who do not have facts to back up their opinions name calling is their only form of debate. They state their opinion and without facts to make their opinions legitimate they resort to trying to demean the other side. It is too draw the focus away from how weak their argument is. Having him rely on the using facts to back up his claims is not fair, for everyone knows facts have a liberal bias.
                      If proudconservative is really an economist he would know the Keynesian theory is sound and helped get us out of the great depression. He would also know the little spike in higher unemployment the late 30’s was caused by FDR listening to some conservative and cutting back on government spending.
                      Report Abuse
              • Author by jjamele2880 (July 18, 2009 12:05 am ET)
                4 3
                I've explained this to you before, but I'm not surprised that you are so clueless as to require it to be explained to you again: I'm not interested in "debating" people who are so thick that nothing can get through.

                So AGAIN- believe what you want. Barbara Boxer is a racist. The Democratic Party's fight for Civil Rights is based on it's own latent Racism. Up is Down. Black is White. WHATEVER. It's not my job to rescue you from your pathetic little world. You are somebody's sadly ignorant child, but not mine.

                You want to live there- so LIVE THERE. I'll stay here with the sane people who can read and think. Please feel free to declare "victory" and do your little dance. Whatever gets you through another day.
                Report Abuse
                • Author by proudconservative (July 18, 2009 12:16 am ET)
                  3 7
                  Well, thanks for the attempt anyway.

                  Agreed it is not your job to rescue me but it should be your job to be able to defend your opinions. Maybe start with identifying what you believe, how you arrived at that belief, are there differing viewpoints that I need to face in order to validate my own and then how can I share that with my fellow man. I call it teaching.
                  Report Abuse
                  • Author by mary59 (July 18, 2009 8:33 pm ET)
                    6 2
                    You are being beyond obtuse. I notice that you stopped posting above when the remarks by your chamber of commerce man were highlighted as including numerous "minority businesses" references. Even in his opening remarks.

                    So it was perfectly logical for Sen. Boxer to offer another view of the situation to show that his view was not representative.
                    Report Abuse
              • Author by Tbone Slickens (July 18, 2009 9:23 am ET)
                2 7
                No. They don't have a comment other than an off handed, unoriginal, weak attempt at a put down. They will NEVER, debate you on the merit of the points you brought up, Boxer making racist overtones, Coulter or Alfords.

                They will try and change the subject, call you a dittoborg or some such blather, but never look in the mirror and see that one of their own could make insensitive remarks. As someone posted he MARCHED, so he CAN'T be racist or insensitive.

                You knew this though.
                Report Abuse
                • Author by Victor Colorado (July 18, 2009 11:25 am ET)
                  5 2
                  Alford testified that he was speaking on behalf of the black community. What on earth is wrong with Boxer's pointing to the black community that speaks in opposition to his view? PC has not offered anything that shows how Boxer was off base. What specifically was wrong with what Boxer said?
                  Report Abuse
                  • Author by Easy to refute wingnuts (July 19, 2009 12:16 pm ET)
                    1  
                    (crickets)
                    Report Abuse
                    • Author by Victor Colorado (July 19, 2009 12:51 pm ET)
                      2  
                      Amazing stuff, huh? The three blind ambulance chasers posting here simply have NO CLUE which of Boxer's comments or even why Boxer's comments are supposedly "racist". Part of there problem is the fact that nothing Boxer said was racist, the other part of the problem is that they've never sided with someone who's yelled "Racist!" before, so they know not how to explain it.
                      Report Abuse
                • Author by solon (July 18, 2009 12:12 pm ET)
                  6 2
                  WWWAAAAAAHHHHHHHH. I knew you couldnt read. The substance HAS been addressed. The man spoke as from the black community about cap and trade. The NAACPs take on global climate change is obviously relevant. The guy doesnt speak for the entire black community. I know you wingnuts LOVE to do YOUR insulting then snivel like little girlscouts that WE have the temerity to treat you the way you treat us. You snivel CONSTANTLY that we dont just act like punching bags and TAKE your petty contempt without returning serve. In your world of complete delusion we have some obligation to stick to the issues and treat you cons with respect while you pillory us. I dont like that idea.
                  Report Abuse
                  • Author by NdlovukaziThor (July 19, 2009 1:31 am ET)
                    5 1
                    Hey, now, leave the Girl Scouts out of this, please! It takes guts to go door-to-door with a wagon-full of cookies. :)

                    However, it takes absolutely no ______ to be a troll / princess / hypocrite / screech monkey / Republicandidiasis.
                    Report Abuse
                • Author by vysotsky (July 18, 2009 3:59 pm ET)
                  7 1
                  Hi Tbone,

                  Was there a substantial point you wanted to raise that has not been discussed already here? If so, by all means, put it on the table.

                  But if you're complaining that no one has seriously debated the substance of PC's position, this simply isn't true. PC seems to think that Boxer cited the NAACP for no reason other than to "dehumanize" and "demean" a Alford as an African American. As many have pointed out, there are very good reasons why this is less than a strong argument. Alford's testimony was given as the CEO of the National Black Chamber of Commerce, and he spoke not as a scientific expert but as someone familiar with minority-owned businesses and concerns about the impact of the bill. Boxer cited the NAACP's statement for the exact same reason.

                  If you and PC are serious about having a serious discussion and you really aren't satisfied with the answer that's been given, then might want to go to the trouble of seriously explaining why.
                  Report Abuse
                  • Author by mary59 (July 18, 2009 10:52 pm ET)
                    5 1
                    Looks like whoever gave the thumbs down doesn't have a defensible reason for doing so, since there's no rebuttal posted. Just another person with reading comprehension problems.
                    Report Abuse
          • Author by Easy to refute wingnuts (July 19, 2009 11:34 am ET)
            2  
            stutteringjafemale
            PC, do you think it's an insult to call someone "female?"

            We knew you were a racist moron, but now you prove yourself a sexist moron as well.
            Report Abuse
        • Author by carbona (July 19, 2009 6:47 am ET)
            2
          Actually, it was those on the 'right' who did most of the heavy lifting in the Civil Rights movement. Charlton Heston marched right alongside Martin Luther King Jr. MLK and his father were both Republicans. Republicans, not Democrats, passed the Civil Rights Act - Democrats fought it tooth and nail. The Republican Party was FOUNDED on the concept of individual liberty for all, which is why it started the war to end slavery .. Senator Boxer would like nothing more than to set us back to a time when we did not think in terms of individuals but of races and groups.
          Report Abuse
          • Author by mjh (July 19, 2009 4:29 pm ET)
            1  
            Ah, wingnut revisionist history. You gotta love it.


            "The Republican Party was FOUNDED on the concept of individual liberty for all, which is why it started the war to end slavery"

            Actually, the GOP was founded on the concept of economic lassiez-faire, which is why they started a war to MAINTAIN their slave economy . . .

            "Charlton Heston marched right alongside Martin Luther King Jr."

            Big WHOOP -- he also praised the "white guys" who wrote the Declaration . . .

            "MLK and his father were both Republicans."

            Um, I suppose you have PROOF of this -- MLK always struck me more as politically independent {NOT of the Bill O'Reilly type} . . .

            Republicans, not Democrats, passed the Civil Rights Act - Democrats fought it tooth and nail.

            WOW -- I never knew LBJ was a Repub . . .

            "Senator Boxer would like nothing more than to set us back to a time when we did not think in terms of individuals but of races and groups."

            Yeah, sure sounds like it:

            "We are all different. Yet we are all God's children. We are all united behind this country and the common cause of freedom, justice, fairness, and equality. That is what unites us." - Sen. Barbara Boxer

            Wow, sounds horrible . . .

            Report Abuse
      • Author by mari2jj2970 (July 18, 2009 10:35 pm ET)
        4 1
        You truly made as leap when you came u with this one. Coulter has made absolutely irrefutabloe racist remarks, not one, cut often. She is free to do so, but she also has to take what she ahs coming when she does. True, she is not alone, but she has made them. But it is what we expect out of her. My point is that it is unGodly and she will have to aswnwer to God for her hate filled rhetoric.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by carbona (July 19, 2009 6:52 am ET)
            2
          Anne Coulter can be accused of many things, but making racist remarks is not one of them. That would be the one thing that would keep her off the talk shows, so is not going to make that mistake.

          Bob in DC
          Report Abuse
          • Author by Brabantio (July 19, 2009 11:43 pm ET)
            1  
            Unless it's defending the CCC, right?

            Or:
            "Press passes can't be that hard to come by if the White House allows that old Arab Helen Thomas to sit within yards of the president."

            Meaning that Arabs are violent, obviously.
            Wasn't Bobby [Jindal] great in "Slumdog Millionaire"?

            All Indian people look alike, right.
            If I were the czar of the universe [private institutions could discriminate] … I think a teacher or a school ought to be able to … on the basis of gender, race, the color of their hair. As long as it’s not the government’s, I think a private university ought to be able to do whatever it wants to.

            Post-9/11 our philosophy should be: Raghead talks tough? Raghead faces consequences.
            Report Abuse
    • Author by Lane (July 17, 2009 8:48 pm ET)
         
      Coulter gives me chills.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by proudconservative (July 17, 2009 9:06 pm ET)
      3 8
      Why don't we look at it and see what Boxer's treatment of this man was like. I believe his reaction is appropriate.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by TheKidFromKountyMeath (July 17, 2009 9:57 pm ET)
        1  
        If he was reacting to a Republican senator, you'd think he was "uppity".
        Report Abuse
      • Author by loonz (July 17, 2009 10:52 pm ET)
        9 3
        The guy is the one who made it racial. He said in his opening statement that he was speaking on behalf black business owners and the Black community in general and Boxer called him on his BS.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by proudconservative (July 17, 2009 11:34 pm ET)
          2 9
          In the video I watched, he said nothing about what she was putting in the record until about 1 minute into the video. He said nothing about the Pew study. It was when she said that she was putting on the record the 'resolution' by the NAACP and comments by the CEO of 100 black men. He said he had documentation from experts but her racially oriented statements were just because they were black. Sorry he never mentioned who he represented until several minutes later. In the video she so demeans by saying he should be proud that this black man was being quoted and that the black man would be proud of him too. Sure sounds like she's trying to rub his head and give him that'll do boy.

          So please give the time in the video, or the video you reviewed, to show where Boxer called him on his BS or of his openning and explanation of who he represented.
          Report Abuse
          • Author by blk-in-alabam (July 18, 2009 1:13 am ET)
            5 2
            He has been well trained.He never denied he was bringing a bunch of bs.He got upset because Senator Boxer tried to use info from groups representing black people interest.Although he claims to represent black business,only information from non-whites should be used to dispute him.I won't say what he looks like,funded by a major polluter of black communities,while claiming to represent black business.It is too obvious. ps Do you think you think you can ger to speak to congress and noboby know anything about you and who you represent.
            Report Abuse
    • Author by mjh (July 17, 2009 9:21 pm ET)
      8  



      Well, what a coincedence . . .

      Sen. Tom Coburn {R-OK} saw a Hispanic, Judge Sonia Sotomayor, testifying before him, and thought it was appropriate to cite another Hispanic ... albeit a fictional one on TV, who wasn't even the same nationality as the nominee.


      You know what they say: what's good enough for the goose . . .
      Report Abuse
      • Author by proudconservative (July 17, 2009 9:31 pm ET)
        1 9
        Wait! Hold on now. The media matters (for very little) site and the thought czars there say that you should not veer from the topic.

        tsk, tsk.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by solon (July 17, 2009 10:04 pm ET)
          5 2
          ProudMorons posts always matter not at ALL. He is pure troll.
          Report Abuse
          • Author by richardsimones (July 17, 2009 10:11 pm ET)
            2 9
            Are you able to debate in a civil manner?
            Report Abuse
            • Author by mr. l (July 17, 2009 10:35 pm ET)
              8 2
              Yes, he can, but believe me, after reading procon's threads for a couple of days, you will understand that solon's label of troll is correct.
              Report Abuse
              • Author by proudconservative (July 17, 2009 10:41 pm ET)
                2 10
                If kicking the intellectual snot out of leftists here is trolling, then I guess I would agree.

                But look at the content of the postings above and show how solon or any other leftist here are masters of their domain.
                Report Abuse
                • Author by solon (July 17, 2009 11:52 pm ET)
                  6 1
                  HA you are delusional as well as brainwashed. You get your head handed to you day in and day out then do the con version of a victory dance. You are brainwashed loser. You will never be very bright but you make up for it in clulessness
                  Report Abuse
                  • Author by proudconservative (July 18, 2009 12:02 am ET)
                    2 6
                    Where did you up me? On which of the many clear points that you have made here this evening am I found wanting?

                    Was it the 7th time you called me a brainwashed loser, or the umptenth mention of the trolling, or the venomous moron attack?

                    No, it had to be when you said Boxer....no never mentioned her. It must of been when broach the subject of racial tension in the committee meeting, wait don't see that either. Man there has to be something....let's look shall we so that I can see how adroitly you gutted my every arguement with insight and keen intellect......
                    Report Abuse
                    • Author by solon (July 18, 2009 12:40 am ET)
                      7 2
                      I havent been debating the issue. I have been slapping your trolling. Your idiocy about the cars citing coulters so you can call the left racist. Those werent making points. Those were you being YOU a brainwashed troll who only comes here to insult liberals and act the jerk calling MMFA and everybody your derisive nicknames because you are a brainwashed Limbaugh worshipper who tries to emulate the guy who does your thinking for you. You have been a troll since the first post of yours I ever read and you havent changed a bit. Try having a discussion WITH us. One that doesnt entail your constant derisive contempt for us or insulting liberals and we will see a debate until then I dont see you as worth my time to actually make an argument
                      Report Abuse
                    • Author by mari2jj2970 (July 18, 2009 10:43 pm ET)
                      4 1
                      This is not a debate club. It is a place to post one's opinion and then try to back it up if soneone tries to throw that opinion out. I think you misjudge the purpose of this discussion place. Everyone is free to post an opinion. So try to be a little decent at least.Mean hateful responses are just juvenile. And believe me, that is how it sounds.
                      Report Abuse
                • Author by snoopy (July 18, 2009 12:19 am ET)
                  7 2
                  Let us know when you start, cause all I hear is a barking yappy dog, and we ain't talkin' about me.

                  And I'm still hurt you don't want to be friends anymore. But I'm not surprised. You can't recognize a racist statement when a rightwinger utters it, but are all over supposed racist statements when a democrat says something. Here, let me post an example of a racist who makes similar generalities about what constitutes racism:

                  In a story that has become so common that it is almost passé, yet another conservative official has been busted sending racist e-mails. This time, the culprit is Atwater, CA Councilman Gary Frago, who sent at least half-a-dozen racist, anti-Obama e-mails to Atwater staff and community members:

                  Some compared Obama to O.J. Simpson while others suggested that "n[*****] rigs" should now be called "presidential solutions."

                  Perhaps the most overboard e-mail was sent on Jan. 15. It read: "Breaking News Playboy just offered Sarah Palin $1 million to pose nude in the January issue. Michelle Obama got the same offer from National Geographic."

                  Frago admitted sending the e-mails, but showed no regret. "If they're from me, then I sent them," he said. "I have no disrespect for the president or anybody, they weren’t meant in any bad way or harm."


                  Noooo disrespect or harm! What a hoot!
                  Report Abuse
                • Author by pete592 (July 18, 2009 1:09 am ET)
                  8 2
                  "kicking the intellectual snot out of leftists"

                  HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
                  Report Abuse
                  • Author by TheKidFromKountyMeath (July 18, 2009 3:22 pm ET)
                    2  
                    Because intellect and references to "kicking the snot out of leftists" go hand-in-hand, don'tcha know. ProudFoot has a degree from the Joe the Plumber Institute of Edumacation.
                    Report Abuse
                  • Author by mari2jj2970 (July 18, 2009 10:46 pm ET)
                    1 3
                    I have my grandchild sitting nest to me and she is wondering why you are giggling so silly. Nice dodge instead of speaking on the issues. Oh never mind!!!!
                    Report Abuse
            • Author by solon (July 17, 2009 11:55 pm ET)
              4 2
              Yeah I can when THAT is what is called for. I notice you cons never seem to notice the rudeness of other cons. You dont seem to mind much about ProudTrolls derisive nicknames of people or him talking about Boxers ignorance or the insidious racism of the left but MY incivility oh that is just so unacceptable. Why is it you cons just think God gave you the exclusive franchise on insults and when they come from the left THEN it must be called out and when they come from the right well thats is just fine?
              Report Abuse
            • Author by vysotsky (July 18, 2009 11:37 am ET)
              4 1
              Are you able to debate in a civil manner? - richardsimones


              I believe you meant to address this comment to the person who wrote the following: "Wait! Hold on now. The media matters (for very little) site and the thought czars there say that you should not veer from the topic. tsk, tsk"
              Report Abuse
          • Author by proudconservative (July 17, 2009 10:28 pm ET)
            2 8
            solon, are you going to listen or watch? Or is this all you have to debate with?
            Report Abuse
            • Author by solon (July 18, 2009 12:18 am ET)
              8 2
              I dont do requests. You dont tell me what to do or what to comment on. You have yet to make any sort of comment worth debating and the issue is what COULTER SAID. I already made a point about why her comment is plain stupid. You are being a jerk. Regurgitating what you were programmed with by the screechmonkeys that do your thinking for you as usual. How many times do you think I have heard the old when you try to help reverse the lingering effects of institutional racism you are being racist by saying blacks cant make it on their own argument. It is stupid it is cliched. It doesnt take into effect the fact that helping get a foot in the door doesnt get you the grades doesnt get you the evaluations doesnt help you do the job. I dont see you cons attacking legacies. Affirmative action for stupid rich white kids like George Bush. Coulter is being a jerk this is the same argument as telling us we are hurting hungry children when we feed them. It is an excuse to NOT do what is right. You repeated it just to slur lefties. It is the only reason you COME to this site
              Report Abuse
        • Author by richardsimones (July 17, 2009 10:23 pm ET)
          2 8
          It's nice to see an ally on here. haha
          Report Abuse
          • Author by TheKidFromKountyMeath (July 17, 2009 10:25 pm ET)
            1  
            It's almost like an actual friend!
            Report Abuse
          • Author by mjh (July 18, 2009 3:57 am ET)
            4 1
            "It's nice to see an ally on here. haha" - richardsimmons


            TRANSLATION: with a second computer, I can generate as many sockpuppets as I want!
            Report Abuse
            • Author by juliajayne1 (July 18, 2009 1:11 pm ET)
              4  
              Actually you don't need a second computer to make another moniker for MMFA. Sorry to say, really.
              Report Abuse
              • Author by snoopy (July 18, 2009 8:37 pm ET)
                4 1
                Shhhhh! richard doesn't know that!
                Report Abuse
                • Author by richardsimones (July 20, 2009 3:29 am ET)
                    1
                  I may be having fun at the expense of my time, but I do not wish to waste it to that extent.
                  Report Abuse
                  • Author by Scotty Johnson Sr. (July 20, 2009 12:58 pm ET)
                       
                    I may be having fun at the expense of my time, but I do not wish to waste it to that extent.
                    Obviously your schooling is a big waste of time, as you seem to have learned nothing of substance.
                    Report Abuse
          • Author by eweston8542983 (July 18, 2009 11:48 pm ET)
            2 1
            Wingnuts exist here. Conservatives also. We have a few long term trolls as well, PC is one of them. If you stick arround a bit you can meet a few more.
            Unlike wingnut blogs, you can't get banned from MMfa for merely having an opinion.
            Report Abuse
      • Author by carbona (July 19, 2009 6:54 am ET)
          1
        Two wrongs don't make a right .. both Senators were out of line. However the fact that you see what is wrong with Sen Coburn's statement means that you really do see the offensiveness of Sen Boxer.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by mjh (July 19, 2009 4:39 pm ET)
          2  
          "However the fact that you see what is wrong with Sen Coburn's statement means that you really do see the offensiveness of Sen Boxer." - carbona


          As Think Progress has documented, Sen. Barbara Boxer introduced the NAACP's Joint Resolution on Climate Change into the record following National Black Chamber of Commerce CEO Harry Alford's testimony, in which he described the purportedly negative effects of cap-and-trade legislation "on small and minority-owned businesses, their ability to create jobs and the impact on the communities that they serve"

          Well now -- unless the NAACP's Joint Resolution contains a reference to Fred Sanford, I don't see how . . .
          Report Abuse
        • Author by TheKidFromKountyMeath (July 19, 2009 5:37 pm ET)
          1  
          Whereas you probably think what Coburn said was hilarious, and anyone who disagrees is "too politically correct".
          Report Abuse
    • Author by IRONY 101 (July 17, 2009 9:54 pm ET)
      4 1
      Ann Coulter could say that the sky is blue and I wouldn't believe her.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by richardsimones (July 17, 2009 11:03 pm ET)
        1 8
        Which is ironic, why believe an honest person?
        Report Abuse
        • Author by TheKidFromKountyMeath (July 17, 2009 11:19 pm ET)
          1  
          Which is ironic

          You keep using that word... I do not think it means what you think it means.
          Report Abuse
        • Author by mr. l (July 17, 2009 11:32 pm ET)
          5 1
          No- ironic for Ann 'I shall have the Dali Lama's head on a platter by nightfall' Coulter is professing a belief in Christainity and then advocating invading other countries, killing their leaders, and converting all the inhabitants into Christains, which, if you've read the bible, is the EXACT opposite of how Christ acted.
          Report Abuse
        • Author by snoopy (July 18, 2009 2:32 am ET)
          3 1
          Actually, Ann would argue that the sky is fucia after watching thousands of pictures of blue skies.
          Report Abuse
          • Author by mjh (July 18, 2009 4:00 am ET)
            2 1
            I'm thinking Crazy Annie would argue the sky is rose from looking thru rose-colored neoKKKon glasses . . .
            Report Abuse
            • Author by Easy to refute wingnuts (July 19, 2009 12:25 pm ET)
              1  
              She would say the sky is black because nothing gets through her blinders.
              Report Abuse
              • Author by mjh (July 19, 2009 3:56 pm ET)
                1  
                Whenever she walks outside, the sky likely turns black . . .
                Report Abuse
        • Author by vysotsky (July 18, 2009 11:56 am ET)
          3  
          You know, I'm not sure honesty has much to do with it. Coulter may very well be an honest person when it comes to representing her opinions, values and views of the world. It's just that I tend to disagree completely with those opinions, values, views of the world, and with the manner in which she expresses them. She also has a hard time admitting when she's simply wrong on matters of fact (i.e. Slander's completely false claim that the New York Times first ignored and later used as a basis for condescending southerners Dale Earnhardt Jr.'s death).

          There is also the matter of Coulter's aversion to civil debate, which you've suggested is of value to you.
          Report Abuse
          • Author by solon (July 18, 2009 12:16 pm ET)
            6 2
            Apparantly since he has addressed his complaints of a lack of civility exclusively to us lefties while ignoring the contempt from ProudCon and Coulter I think he values US remaining civil and doesnt hold the right to the same standard
            Report Abuse
            • Author by juliajayne1 (July 18, 2009 1:16 pm ET)
              7 2
              Dichotomous thinking really. It's only liberals who are supposed to be civil. Cons can be as disingenuous, snotty, nasty and horrible as they wish. Some strange double standard going on with this crowd to be sure.




              Report Abuse
              • Author by solon (July 18, 2009 2:18 pm ET)
                3 1
                Good to see you juliajane. I've been missing you around here.
                Report Abuse
                • Author by juliajayne1 (July 18, 2009 8:42 pm ET)
                  3 1
                  Thanks, I've been doing some travelling.
                  Report Abuse
                  • Author by Easy to refute wingnuts (July 19, 2009 12:45 pm ET)
                    2  
                    Hey, the drive-by coward gave a thumbs-down to traveling!

                    I guess one has to stay cloistered to maintain the conservative's ignorance. Learning about the world challenges their moronic view of it.
                    Report Abuse
                    • Author by vysotsky (July 19, 2009 1:11 pm ET)
                      1  
                      Oh that was me. I hate people who travel. Hate hate hate 'em.

                      (No, not really. In all seriousness, our dear Mystery Thumb Downer, what the heck were you thinking? I'd really love to know. If what you were thinking was "I don't read comments, I just give rate them down because I'm bitter" then give this comment a thumb down. If what you were thinking was "I'm just bitter in general and can't stand to hear that people might be traveling and enjoying life", you can register this opinion as well by giving this comment a thumb down. A thumb up will be registered as "all of the above".)
                      Report Abuse
              • Author by mjh (July 18, 2009 2:35 pm ET)
                5 1
                Right you are, JJ.

                It's funny how the right wing talking heads DEMANDED civility concerning Sarah Palin's family . . . while complaining about Michelle Obama's "proud" comments, her arms, etc. . .
                Report Abuse
                • Author by vysotsky (July 18, 2009 3:04 pm ET)
                  4 1
                  "It's funny how the right wing talking heads DEMANDED civility concerning Sarah Palin's family . . . while complaining about Michelle Obama's "proud" comments, her arms, etc. . ."


                  ...or the video in which Michelle Obama talks about "whitey"... you know, the video that doesn't exist...
                  Report Abuse
                  • Author by solon (July 18, 2009 5:04 pm ET)
                    5 1
                    Well to be honest those do seem to be the kind hardest to make a point by point rebuttal to
                    Report Abuse
          • Author by richardsimones (July 19, 2009 3:59 am ET)
            1 3
            That is your folly.
            Report Abuse
            • Author by vysotsky (July 19, 2009 6:07 am ET)
              3  
              Hi Richard,

              Now, please, let's be civil, shall we? To recap: in the course of responding to your comment about Coulter as an honest person, I tried to explain my reasoning, offered opinions, and cited a specific example. But in response to me, you simply dismissed my comments in four words without explanation or even reasoned opinion.

              If you feel like talking about this in a civil manner, you're always welcome to do so.

              Best,
              -Vysotsky
              Report Abuse
    • Author by bmassey189810 (July 17, 2009 10:24 pm ET)
      1  
      How can the black, brown and poor people suffer anymore than they have. This is the worse economy in the anals of history under the bush administrative
      Report Abuse
    • Author by seroquel (July 19, 2009 10:44 am ET)
      3  
      Just based on what I saw, I got nothing but the screechmonkey Coulter giving an unhinged viewpoint that, of course, showed her SPEAKING for Boxer.
      On top of that, since when is Glenn Beck's show considered journalism? And why is it that Coulter only seems to be on his show? Is it because she's about as valued as the Enquirer?
      The only point she has is that if it's Boxer, she just has to disagree everytime. Folks, this is truly a comedy network.
      Report Abuse