Results 1 to 4 of 4

Thread: Ann Coulter's weekly loony op-ed

  1. #1
    Elite Member Laurent's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Out There
    Posts
    38,650

    Default Ann Coulter's weekly loony op-ed

    FRANK RICH DECLARES IRAQ 'BOX OFFICE POISON!'
    By Ann Coulter

    Last year, Osama bin Laden's deputy, Ayman al-Zawahri, wrote to the head of al-Qaida in Iraq, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, telling him to "be ready starting now" for America to run from Iraq, reminding him how America cut and ran from Vietnam and the "aftermath of the collapse of American power in Vietnam, and how they ran and left their agents."

    Alas, Zarqawi never got to implement his Iraq takeover plan because the same troops that are allegedly losing the war right now killed him in June.

    But al-Qaida in America isn't ready to quit, yet!

    New York Times theater critic Frank Rich made headlines on the Drudge Report last week by announcing: "We have lost in Iraq." Of course, Rich was saying we had lost in Iraq more than six months before we went into Iraq.

    In August 2002, he wrote that Bush did not have the support of the American people for war in Iraq and without that he would "mimic another hubristic Texan president who took a backdoor route into pre-emptive warfare."

    In April 2003, one month after we invaded, Rich said the looting of Iraqi museums by Iraqis showed "our worst instincts at the very dawn of our grandiose project to bring democratic values to the Middle East."

    About six months into the war he wrote a column about Iraq titled: "Why Are We Back in Vietnam?" You can imagine how writing those words must have brought back memories of Frank Rich's own valiant service in Vietnam.

    In January 2004, less than a year after the invasion, he wrote: "The greater debate has been over the degree to which the follies of Vietnam are now being re-enacted in Iraq." Historians noted that this is the first time Rich ever panned something containing the word "follies."

    A month later, he was again comparing Iraq to Vietnam, saying Bush had forced the comparison "by wearing the fly boy uniform of his own disputed guard duty" when he landed on the aircraft carrier. Did Frank Rich win three purple hearts in combat, or was it four? I always forget.

    In May 2004, Rich accused Bush of throwing "underprepared and underprotected" American troops in harm's way in Iraq. OK, I was kidding before. The closest Frank Rich has come to serving in the military was reviewing a revival of "The Caine Mutiny." Though he does know the words to "In the Navy" by heart.

    Even after transitioning from musical reviewer to hard-bitten military analyst, Rich couldn't resist tossing in a quick dance review. He gleefully described "pictures of Marines retreating from Fallujah and of that city's citizens dancing in the streets to celebrate their victory over the American liberators."

    This too, reminded Rich of Vietnam. Right now I'm trying to think of something that doesn't remind liberals of Vietnam ... hmmm ... drawing a blank.

    In September 2005, Rich wrote that the war in Iraq "resembles its Southeast Asian predecessor in its unpopularity, its fictional provocation and its unknown exit strategy" -- interestingly, the exact same words he used years ago in his review of "Miss Saigon." He leeringly anticipated "a Tet offensive, Sunni-style" to tilt the election in Kerry's direction.

    In October 2004, Rich said Bush had "bungled the war in Iraq and, in doing so, may be losing the war against radical Islamic terrorism as well." He didn't explain how killing tens of thousands of Islamic terrorists constituted "bungling" a war against them. Then again, what do I know about military analysis? I thought "The Goat, or Who Is Sylvia?" was atrocious.

    In May of this year, he said that "the public has turned on the war in Iraq" -- the very war that he said the public opposed long before we ever went in.

    And in June he said the public knows "defeat when they see it, no matter how many new plans for victory are trotted out to obscure that reality" -- though I might be confusing this statement with Rich's comments on the Times' plan to charge readers for his column.

    Liberals are like people with stale breath talking into your face at a party. You try backing away from them or offering them gum, but then they just start whimpering. They've been using the exact same talking points about how we're losing in Iraq since before we invaded.

    It seems they've finally succeeded in exhausting Americans and, thereby, handing a victory to al-Qaida.

    The weakest members of the herd are rapidly capitulating, trying to preserve a modicum of honor by prattling about how if their plans had been implemented, Iraq would be in tip-top shape and our troops would be home for Christmas.

    Well, if my plans had been implemented, the anti-war crowd would be weeping about Iraqi civilian deaths so much they wouldn't have time to pretend they gave a damn about the loss of American lives.

    But the plans that were implemented have deposed a monster, put him on trial -- which resulted in his conviction and death sentence -- killed rape hobbyists Uday and Qusay, presided over three democratic elections, killed al-Zarqawi and scores of other al-Qaida leaders fighting Americans in Iraq, and kept the U.S. safe from Islamic terrorist attacks for five years now. The least I can do is not capitulate to the left's endless nagging.
    http://p238.news.mud.yahoo.com/s/uca...oxofficepoison
    “What are you looking at, sugar-tits?” - Mel Gibson

  2. #2
    Elite Member Grimmlok's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    In WhoreLand fucking your MOM
    Posts
    55,372

    Default

    FRANK RICH DECLARES IRAQ 'BOX OFFICE POISON!'
    By Ann Coulter

    Last year, Osama bin Laden's deputy, Ayman al-Zawahri, wrote to the head of al-Qaida in Iraq, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, telling him to "be ready starting now" for America to run from Iraq, reminding him how America cut and ran from Vietnam and the "aftermath of the collapse of American power in Vietnam, and how they ran and left their agents."

    Alas, Zarqawi never got to implement his Iraq takeover plan because the same troops that are allegedly losing the war right now killed him in June.
    And if i recall, took out a house filled about 20 women and children to do it.

    But al-Qaida in America isn't ready to quit, yet!
    That's right, I almost forgot the childish tactic of labelling anybody who disagrees with you a terrorist. It only took a neocon to remind me, since they're so intellectually bankrupt.

    New York Times theater critic Frank Rich made headlines on the Drudge Report last week by announcing: "We have lost in Iraq." Of course, Rich was saying we had lost in Iraq more than six months before we went into Iraq.
    That's a fair assessment, hell Carrot Top could have come to the same conclusion if he had looked in the "PLAN FOR IRAQ" folder and found nothing but moths like Frank did.

    In August 2002, he wrote that Bush did not have the support of the American people for war in Iraq and without that he would "mimic another hubristic Texan president who took a backdoor route into pre-emptive warfare."
    Fast forward to 2006 and it appears he's right. Which part of this are you arguing?

    In April 2003, one month after we invaded, Rich said the looting of Iraqi museums by Iraqis showed "our worst instincts at the very dawn of our grandiose project to bring democratic values to the Middle East."
    Again, he was right. US soldiers were too busy securing oilfields and paving over the ancient city of Babylon's archeological site to bother with small things like priceless historical items.

    About six months into the war he wrote a column about Iraq titled: "Why Are We Back in Vietnam?" You can imagine how writing those words must have brought back memories of Frank Rich's own valiant service in Vietnam.
    .. and your own, and George Bush's, and any other neocon's. Since you're so taken with pointing the finger in order to deflect blame, I think I'll try it too.

    In January 2004, less than a year after the invasion, he wrote: "The greater debate has been over the degree to which the follies of Vietnam are now being re-enacted in Iraq." Historians noted that this is the first time Rich ever panned something containing the word "follies."
    See, she can't argue what he said so she just makes fun of him.

    A month later, he was again comparing Iraq to Vietnam, saying Bush had forced the comparison "by wearing the fly boy uniform of his own disputed guard duty" when he landed on the aircraft carrier. Did Frank Rich win three purple hearts in combat, or was it four? I always forget.
    Did Bush? Did you? DId any neocon? On that note, why isn't your tranny ass in Iraq right now? Don't ask, Don't tell?

    In May 2004, Rich accused Bush of throwing "underprepared and underprotected" American troops in harm's way in Iraq. OK, I was kidding before. The closest Frank Rich has come to serving in the military was reviewing a revival of "The Caine Mutiny." Though he does know the words to "In the Navy" by heart.
    Again, he was right AGAIN.

    Even after transitioning from musical reviewer to hard-bitten military analyst, Rich couldn't resist tossing in a quick dance review. He gleefully described "pictures of Marines retreating from Fallujah and of that city's citizens dancing in the streets to celebrate their victory over the American liberators."
    Mostly irrelevant, but she needed filler since her article is so obviously short on critical analysis.

    This too, reminded Rich of Vietnam. Right now I'm trying to think of something that doesn't remind liberals of Vietnam ... hmmm ... drawing a blank.
    How about the word 'competence'.

    In September 2005, Rich wrote that the war in Iraq "resembles its Southeast Asian predecessor in its unpopularity, its fictional provocation and its unknown exit strategy" -- interestingly, the exact same words he used years ago in his review of "Miss Saigon." He leeringly anticipated "a Tet offensive, Sunni-style" to tilt the election in Kerry's direction.
    Well he was right about the first item, wrong on the second (only cuz W stole the election with Diebold machines and lack of papertrail.. oh right, and signing up the dead, voter intimidation, fraud..)

    In October 2004, Rich said Bush had "bungled the war in Iraq and, in doing so, may be losing the war against radical Islamic terrorism as well." He didn't explain how killing tens of thousands of Islamic terrorists constituted "bungling" a war against them. Then again, what do I know about military analysis? I thought "The Goat, or Who Is Sylvia?" was atrocious.
    Well, how about murdering 100,000 iraqi civilians, turning Iraq into a terrorist recruitement center who's enrollment numbers eclipse your unsubstantiated claim of 'tens of thousands of terrorists killed', and generally formenting increased hatred and ideological opposition to the US and its interests on top of destablizing the entire middle east?

    See, I'm not even a politician and I can connect the dots.

    In May of this year, he said that "the public has turned on the war in Iraq" -- the very war that he said the public opposed long before we ever went in.
    Um, he meant over 50% dear.

    And in June he said the public knows "defeat when they see it, no matter how many new plans for victory are trotted out to obscure that reality" -- though I might be confusing this statement with Rich's comments on the Times' plan to charge readers for his column.
    .. and still no plan for victory (or exit) has been formulated, it's still "stay the course.."

    Liberals are like people with stale breath talking into your face at a party. You try backing away from them or offering them gum, but then they just start whimpering.
    This analogy (or metaphor?) doesn't even make sense.

    They've been using the exact same talking points about how we're losing in Iraq since before we invaded.
    That's because, without a plan, you have effectively lost before you enter. Jesus that's fucking basic. Stupid twat.

    It seems they've finally succeeded in exhausting Americans and, thereby, handing a victory to al-Qaida.
    1) No, Americans are exhausted by the lies told by Bush and his cronies.

    2) They're exhausted from throwing soldiers into a meatgrinder with no plan on how to win or leave.

    3) They're exhausted from constant fearmongering by Bush and his cronies

    4) Al Qaeda wasn't even IN iraq until you and your stupid ilk hung out the welcome mat for them under a veil of lies. That's your fault.

    The weakest members of the herd are rapidly capitulating, trying to preserve a modicum of honor by prattling about how if their plans had been implemented, Iraq would be in tip-top shape and our troops would be home for Christmas.
    The weakest members of the herd are the ones with an actual PLAN, whereas the stronger members, sans plan, are the apex of competency?

    Well, if my plans had been implemented, the anti-war crowd would be weeping about Iraqi civilian deaths so much they wouldn't have time to pretend they gave a damn about the loss of American lives.
    You can tell that to the families of the 3000 dead US soldiers, and then you can tell that to the families of the 100,000 dead Iraqi civilians... but i guess they dont count, because they're brown camel-jockeys, eh. Not quite your brand of human?

    But the plans that were implemented have deposed a monster, put him on trial -- which resulted in his conviction and death sentence -- killed rape hobbyists Uday and Qusay, presided over three democratic elections, killed al-Zarqawi and scores of other al-Qaida leaders fighting Americans in Iraq, and kept the U.S. safe from Islamic terrorist attacks for five years now.
    Deposing a monster was a happy benefit of trying to secure the 2nd largest oil reserves on the planet, that was not the rationale behind the invasion.

    Secondly, your concern over women is a bit hollow, considering you let the Taliban stuff women into burqa's for a decade and didn't give 2 shits until 9/11.. then all of a sudden it became a HUGE concern..

    The least I can do is not capitulate to the left's endless nagging.
    No the least you could do is keep your mannish head buried firmly up your ass and ignore the fact that Iraq has turned out exactly as the 'weak' left has said: a disaster.
    I am from the American CIA and I have a radio in my head. I am going to kill you.

  3. #3
    Elite Member Laurent's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Out There
    Posts
    38,650

    Default

    ROFL.

    Your counterpoint should be published every week everywhere her column is printed to thoroughly highlight her retardation and dismantle her neocon bullshit!
    “What are you looking at, sugar-tits?” - Mel Gibson

  4. #4
    Elite Member Sojiita's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Central Duh-hio
    Posts
    22,811

    Default

    [1) No, Americans are exhausted by the lies told by Bush and his cronies.

    2) They're exhausted from throwing soldiers into a meatgrinder with no plan on how to win or leave.

    3) They're exhausted from constant fearmongering by Bush and his cronies

    4) Al Qaeda wasn't even IN iraq until you and your stupid ilk hung out the welcome mat for them under a veil of lies. That's your fault.


    boy aint this the truth Grimm. Coulter is such a stupid bitch.
    Don't slap me, cause I'm not in the mood!

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Ann Coulter's weekly dose of whacko
    By Laurent in forum U.S. Politics and Issues
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: December 14th, 2006, 02:55 PM
  2. The Preposterousness Report! *weekly*
    By Grimmlok in forum U.S. Politics and Issues
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: June 16th, 2006, 03:50 PM
  3. Replies: 13
    Last Post: June 8th, 2006, 03:00 PM
  4. Entertainment Weekly Top 10 Gross Moments on TV
    By mia981 in forum Gossip Archive
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: December 24th, 2005, 09:17 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •