Coulter: 'Idiots' Who Vote Libertarian Will Cost GOP The Senate

[Drummond]

Drummond probably the place where we differ most is on WAR and the connected civil liberties.

That may be a fair assessment. Yes.

When i was young Conservatives talked about the constitution and founding fathers the bill of rights and the need to adhere to those principals. As ORIGINALLY defined.
Frankly there was also some blind patriotism and chest thumpin' militarism too.

Naughty .. eh, Revelarts ?

I know from my neck of the woods that Lefties hate overt displays of patriotism. Militarism, even more. 'Jingoism' is what it's thought of as being.

I haven't really moved from that position

Here's where you're beginning to contradict yourself. If you ever did occupy that position .... by being against the Iraq War, you DID move from that position, and you've been light years from it ever since !

while the neo-cons and moderates now claim that the constitution is a suicide pack and we have to chuck it all in trash for faux security.
And if you repeat the line from Franklin "those that would give up liberty for security will have neither" these so-called conservatives will get mad at ya and say your "weak on terror".

... which seems reasonable to me. I say: WHY GIVE TERRORISTS EVEN THE SLIGHTEST ADVANTAGE ?

If I infer correctly, from the above .. it seems to me that you WOULD. Which, Revelarts, is hardly consistent with Conservative thinking.

My retort is your weak on the constitution and liberty and human rights and morals.

Weak on the US Constitution ? Guilty as charged ! Where I am, we have no equivalent of it, so it's hardly surprising, is it ? BUT .. as for weak on liberty, human rights, morals ... OK, ask yourself this. Give terrorists ANY advantage, even only a small one, and that may translate into needless deaths. I ask: WHAT HAPPENS TO THE LIBERTY ENJOYED BY THE DEAD ??

Human rights. Does being weak on terrorists do anything other than work AGAINST the human rights of their victims ? I would not argue for anything that eroded such human rights. But soft-pedalling on terrorists, even if indirectly, does just such a thing.

Oh, and if you want to start arguing about the human rights OF TERRORISTS, then I suggest you will have further outed yourself as a Left-winger, maybe of the Jimmy Carter type ....

Plus as a Christian I don't get to leave my faith at the door when it comes to war

Do you know, Revelarts, that we have Christians over here (I've seen them peddle their arguments on BBC discussion programmes) who argue that to ever pick up a gun with the intent to harm is OF ITSELF an anti-Christian act !

Do you agree with them ?

Because, if all Christians did, then they might as well just surrender to Islamic terrorists and be done with it.

and "do everything the terrorist does because if you don't we're all gonna die."
to me that's BS thinking, fear mongering over some highly overrated thugs.

The Left must be delighted with you, Revelarts.

This is bog standard 'Let's forget about threats and just stick our heads in the sand' stuff.

While you're busily hand-wringing in the face of national security concerns, your 'overrated thugs' may well be working to get, and deploy, their first WMD's. Tell me, BY WHAT RIGHT DO YOU PLAY RUSSIAN ROULETTE WITH PEOPLES' WELLBEING, AND JUST ARBITRARILY DECIDE TO DISCOUNT THE LIKELIHOOD OF FUTURE DANGER ?

But i'm sure i qualify as conservative on
Abortion
Marriage
Smaller gov't ... military is part of the gov't btw, and as a matter a fact the founders were against standing armies. does that make them liberals?
Free Markets --but i'm anti monopoly---
free enterprise
gun rights
100% pro bill of rights
Constitution
low taxes across the board
others i've mentioned in other post here

Then, if true, there is some hope for you. Well done !

But Drummond frankly you seem to define a good conservative as anyone who gungho to kill terrorist by any means necessary. All other issues, laws, treaties, morals be hanged.

Said like a good Leftie ! Really, Revelarts, if you're not one, you must be auditioning for an acting role as one.

Revelarts ... there are various aspects to being a good Conservative. But if you let the basics 'go hang', then what use is the rest of it ?

Try debating the ills of abortion, Revelarts, with a radioactive crater --where a city full of people, yes, unborn babies too, used to live. USED TO, because - just maybe - terrorists were sufficiently empowered to make use of Leftie-led complacency, to succeed in being the threat YOU refuse to accept them to be !!

And liberals as anyone who's not on board with that program, and they are therefore closet communist and trick'sy appeasers trying to weaken the conservative vote to our ultimate caliphate doom.

Is my assessment of your view very far off?

Well, the Left DO have quite a track record of being soft on trash !! Carter wanted to consider terrorists' 'human rights' ... on behalf of beings devoid of humanity !! Obama wanted to close GITMO !! And do you recall the marches across the world, where great numbers of Lefties marched to try and stop the likelihood of an Iraq invasion ?

Considering your own thoughts on Iraq, did YOU go on any of those marches ?? To help protect the tyrant Saddam from harm ?

If not, why not ?

I believe that the one seen in London had an especially strong representation from the Socialist Workers' Party (Marxists) .....

[BoogyMan]

lol...
seriously?
Newt Gingrich has the credibility of an alien abductee to you? lol. that's pretty funny.
But you still would have voted for him if he'd won the nomination, because any ol republican will do.

Anyone that keeps a communist out of office is better than letting one in. Sad you can't seem to figure that one out. Your ilk's purity testing will ensure that electoral losses continue ad-infinitum.

The point of the comparison is you can find anyone who will say anything on the net.

[revelarts]

Anyone that keeps a communist out of office is better than letting one in. Sad you can't seem to figure that one out.

And if they do the same things as communist but say they are freedom lovin' captiplist.
Are we suppose to just swallow that or ignore it?

that's what i don't get.
from 1982 to 2004 i voted republican faithfully and watched them turn farther and farther away from the principals they claimed. And put people of principal in the GOP at the kiddie table. you can stick with them if you want to and imagine they are actually stopping communism rather than working towards it just at 3/4 speed..
Ds and Rs, 6 or half a dozen.
left boots kicking your rights away or right boots kicking your rights away
makes little difference in the end you still end up a slave either way.

[aboutime]

And if they do the same things as communist but say they are freedom lovin' captiplist.
Are we suppose to just swallow that or ignore it?

that's what i don't get.
from 1982 to 2004 i voted republican faithfully and watched them turn farther and farther away from the principals they claimed. And put people of principal in the GOP at the kiddie table. you can stick with them if you want to and imagine they are actually stopping communism rather than working towards it just at 3/4 speed..
Ds and Rs, 6 or half a dozen.
left boots kicking your rights away or right boots kicking your rights away
makes little difference in the end you still end up a slave either way.

No rev. Those who claim to believe they will end up as slaves...need to be perpetual victims in order to have others feel sorry for them.
You and others NEED to use the SLAVERY threats to get the approval of others who also need to find excuses for FAILURE.
(a quote from aboutime)

[BoogyMan]

And if they do the same things as communist but say they are freedom lovin' captiplist.
Are we suppose to just swallow that or ignore it?

that's what i don't get.
from 1982 to 2004 i voted republican faithfully and watched them turn farther and farther away from the principals they claimed. And put people of principal in the GOP at the kiddie table. you can stick with them if you want to and imagine they are actually stopping communism rather than working towards it just at 3/4 speed..
Ds and Rs, 6 or half a dozen.
left boots kicking your rights away or right boots kicking your rights away
makes little difference in the end you still end up a slave either way.

And yet since you ham handedly continue to try and make sure there is no opportunity for a conservative candidate to prove you wrong. You sit back and happily toss away your vote thinking yourself superior while make sure you don't participate one whit in any kind of effort to push for smaller government, liberty, and our constitution inside a framework where such things could actually come about.

Supporting conservatives at least there is a chance to make things better. Your way there is guaranteed failure, less freedom, and more of our constitution mangled.

The indication of cuckoo-pants crazy is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results.....

Just sayin.

[fj1200]

2006 - 2014 Republicans look more like Democrats to me.

Well, on a left to right scale I'd put...

2000-2006 R Congress - 2006-2014 R Congress - 1994-2000 R Congress

All things being relative.

[jimnyc]

Well, on a left to right scale I'd put...

2000-2006 R Congress - 2006-2014 R Congress - 1994-2000 R Congress

All things being relative.

** Damn, hate to go off topic...

Where the F you been since last week, ya filthy heaven?

[fj1200]

Oh, this is great stuff ! Many thanks, FJ, you made my day ...

I'm sure there are many ways I could counter you on this. But for now, I'll limit myself to just referring you to Revelarts' OWN WORDS ...

I'm sure I can give you other examples, should you require them. Let me know if you do.

I'm sure you can provide me with plenty of words that you can take out of context but it comes down to it the positions he has, and espouses, are conservative principals and he is consistent. You are unable to find him posting any "leftie" position (see below)... and no, his war stance is not a leftie position; it may be counter to the current Republican stance but those are two different things.

But I will say this, in the world of internet posters you and he are very much the same. You are both doggedly committed but he to positions tied to conservative ideology whereas you to a party. I'd rather count on ideology, I know what to expect.

But i'm sure i qualify as conservative on
Abortion
Marriage
Smaller gov't ... military is part of the gov't btw, and as a matter a fact the founders were against standing armies. does that make them liberals?
Free Markets --but i'm anti monopoly---
free enterprise
gun rights
100% pro bill of rights
Constitution
low taxes across the board
others i've mentioned in other post here

But Drummond frankly you seem to define a good conservative as anyone who's gungho to kill terrorist by any means necessary. All other issues, laws, treaties, morals be hanged.

And liberals as anyone who's not on board with that program, and they are therefore closet communist and trick'sy appeasers trying to weaken the conservative vote to our ultimate caliphate doom.

Is my assessment of your view very far off?

Pretty dead on IMHO. Nothing "leftie" there.

[fj1200]

** Damn, hate to go off topic...

Where the F you been since last week, ya filthy heaven?

Filthy heaven? I'll take that.

I was enjoying the sites in our nation's capitol. But I was not jumping the fence at the White House and you can't prove otherwise.

[revelarts]

And yet since you ham handedly continue to try and make sure there is no opportunity for a conservative candidate to prove you wrong. You sit back and happily toss away your vote thinking yourself superior while make sure you don't participate one whit in any kind of effort to push for smaller government, liberty, and our constitution inside a framework where such things could actually come about.

Supporting conservatives at least there is a chance to make things better. Your way there is guaranteed failure, less freedom, and more of our constitution mangled.

The indication of cuckoo-pants crazy is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results.....

Just sayin.

Boogy, it looks like we disagree.

[revelarts]

...
Here's where you're beginning to contradict yourself. If you ever did occupy that position .... by being against the Iraq War, you DID move from that position, and you've been light years from it ever since !

... which seems reasonable to me. I say: WHY GIVE TERRORISTS EVEN THE SLIGHTEST ADVANTAGE ?

If I infer correctly, from the above .. it seems to me that you WOULD. Which, Revelarts, is hardly consistent with Conservative thinking.

Weak on the US Constitution ? Guilty as charged ! Where I am, we have no equivalent of it, so it's hardly surprising, is it ? BUT .. as for weak on liberty, human rights, morals ... OK, ask yourself this. Give terrorists ANY advantage, even only a small one, and that may translate into needless deaths. I ask: WHAT HAPPENS TO THE LIBERTY ENJOYED BY THE DEAD ??

Human rights. Does being weak on terrorists do anything other than work AGAINST the human rights of their victims ? I would not argue for anything that eroded such human rights. But soft-pedalling on terrorists, even if indirectly, does just such a thing.

Oh, and if you want to start arguing about the human rights OF TERRORISTS, then I suggest you will have further outed yourself as a Left-winger, maybe of the Jimmy Carter type ....

Do you know, Revelarts, that we have Christians over here (I've seen them peddle their arguments on BBC discussion programmes) who argue that to ever pick up a gun with the intent to harm is OF ITSELF an anti-Christian act !

Do you agree with them ?

Because, if all Christians did, then they might as well just surrender to Islamic terrorists and be done with it.

The Left must be delighted with you, Revelarts.

This is bog standard 'Let's forget about threats and just stick our heads in the sand' stuff.

While you're busily hand-wringing in the face of national security concerns, your 'overrated thugs' may well be working to get, and deploy, their first WMD's. Tell me, BY WHAT RIGHT DO YOU PLAY RUSSIAN ROULETTE WITH PEOPLES' WELLBEING, AND JUST ARBITRARILY DECIDE TO DISCOUNT THE LIKELIHOOD OF FUTURE DANGER ?

Then, if true, there is some hope for you. Well done !

Said like a good Leftie ! Really, Revelarts, if you're not one, you must be auditioning for an acting role as one.

Revelarts ... there are various aspects to being a good Conservative. But if you let the basics 'go hang', then what use is the rest of it ?

Try debating the ills of abortion, Revelarts, with a radioactive crater --where a city full of people, yes, unborn babies too, used to live. USED TO, because - just maybe - terrorists were sufficiently empowered to make use of Leftie-led complacency, to succeed in being the threat YOU refuse to accept them to be !!

Well, the Left DO have quite a track record of being soft on trash !! Carter wanted to consider terrorists' 'human rights' ... on behalf of beings devoid of humanity !! Obama wanted to close GITMO !! And do you recall the marches across the world, where great numbers of Lefties marched to try and stop the likelihood of an Iraq invasion ?

Considering your own thoughts on Iraq, did YOU go on any of those marches ?? To help protect the tyrant Saddam from harm ?

If not, why not ?

I believe that the one seen in London had an especially strong representation from the Socialist Workers' Party (Marxists) .....

Concerning my joining Anti Iraq war marches to...
protect our non aggressor stance in the world,
to protect us from getting into a quagmire as Cheney said,
to protect us from wasting billions in the Iraq,
to focus on AQ terrorist,
to protect us from killing U.S troops and Iraqis needlessly,
to align with the even then known intel of no WMD threat,
no I didn't go on the marches, it never fit my schedule.
i just called my congressmen and the white house for all the good that did.


But to your general reply it seems As i said Drummond
".. frankly you seem to define a good conservative as anyone who's gungho to kill terrorist by any means necessary. All other issues, laws, treaties, morals be hanged.

And liberals as anyone who's not on board with that program, and they are therefore closet communist and trick'sy appeasers trying to weaken the conservative vote to our ultimate caliphate doom!!"

[Drummond]

I'm sure you can provide me with plenty of words that you can take out of context but it comes down to it the positions he has, and espouses, are conservative principals and he is consistent. You are unable to find him posting any "leftie" position (see below)... and no, his war stance is not a leftie position; it may be counter to the current Republican stance but those are two different things.

I enjoy seeing you try to argue your corner, by first doing a bit of goalpost-shifting. It means, of course, that you already know your argument is a weak one.

You have asserted, have you not, that Revelarts consistently sticks to Conservative positions ? Well, regardless of what you claim, Revelarts' 'war stance' VERY FIRMLY puts him on the side of the Left ... this blowing your claim for him completely out of the water !

Let me show you (.. as if you really need me to do so !!!) just how provably pro-Left this is .. how totally associated with Leftie thinking this is ...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stop_the_War_Coalition

The 'Stop the War Coalition' was an organiser of the London anti-2003 Iraq invasion march, a short time before it actually happened. Now, as you'll see from the link, 'Stop the War' are dominated by the Left .. indeed, its main people are prominent British Leftie figures (... except for one, because he's dead ..).

The Stop the War Coalition (StWC; informally just Stop the War) is a United Kingdom group established on 21 September 2001 to campaign against what it believes are unjust wars.

The coalition has opposed the wars that are part of the so-called "War on Terror" of the Western nations. It has campaigned against the war in Afghanistan and the Iraq War. The demonstration against the latter on 15 February 2003, which it organised in association with Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament (CND) and the Muslim Association of Britain (MAB), is claimed to be the largest public demonstration in British history.

The impetus to form the Stop the War Coalition came following the 11 September 2001 attacks in the United States. The Coalition was launched at a public meeting of over 2,000 people at Friends House in London, which was chaired by Lindsey German, then active in the Socialist Workers Party. German argued that the action in Afghanistan, then threatened unless the Taliban government extradited Osama bin Laden, would lead to that country's "destruction", and "possibly a wider conflagration in the Indian subcontinent, Iran and the Middle East." Other speakers at the meeting included Jeremy Corbyn (Labour Member of Parliament (MP) for Islington North), and Bruce Kent (of CND).


German became Convenor of the Coalition and a meeting on 28 October settled the Coalition's official aims. This meeting also elected a Steering Committee which consisted of a spectrum of left-wingers including representatives of Labour Left Briefingand the Communist Party of Britain.The Communist Party of Great Britain (Provisional Central Committee) and Alliance for Workers' Liberty failed to get elected, although both became members of the Coalition and participated in its activities.

So there you have it. Such activities, sympathies, viewpoints, come FROM THE LEFT and are led BY THE LEFT. By adopting his 'war stance', FJ, Revelarts is very provably siding with all manner of LEFT wing opinion .. even that of Communists ...

By the way, take a look at the link in detail. On the page, on its right hand side, you'll see a handful of people named as 'Key People'. Let me list them ..

ANDREW MURRAY: Journalist for the Morning Star newspaper, Britain's one COMMUNIST newspaper. Also once worked for the Soviet 'Novosti' news agency.

LINDSEY GERMAN: Former Central Committee member of the Socialist Workers Party (Marxist). Left-wing candidate, standing twice for election, to the Mayor for London position. Once a member of the International Socialists Movement.

TONY BENN: Now dead. Formerly on the Left wing of the British Labour Party, and once a Cabinet Minister during the Wilson and Callaghan Governments.

GEORGE GALLOWAY: Also from the Left wing of the Labour Party .. he quit the Party because he regarded it as too Right wing ! Now prominent in the further-Left 'Respect Party'. Known for his meetings with Saddam Hussein and a cringeworthy fawning speech delivered directly to Saddam, one singing his praises.

Recently declared Bradford, in Yorkshire, England, to be an 'Israel Free Zone' .. this causing him to be interviewed by police as a possible candidate for prosecution because of 'hatespeech'.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...free-zone.html

.. so, FJ. Would you like to accuse ALL of these Lefties, as well as the Stop the War Coalition, of somehow adopting RIGHT WING THINKING, BY MISTAKE ??

Because if Revelarts is being true to so-called Right wing thinking by taking his 'war stance', then HE must be right, and ALL of these people must be WRONG !!

So, OK. Now blithely refute all of this as relevant !! It'll make not the slightest sense for you to do so. But I'm sure you'll want to try ... overwhelming evidence, or otherwise !

You have a comrade to support, after all.

... Eh, FJ .. ??

[Drummond]

Concerning my joining Anti Iraq war marches to...
protect our non aggressor stance in the world,
to protect us from getting into a quagmire as Cheney said,
to protect us from wasting billions in the Iraq,
to focus on AQ terrorist,
to protect us from killing U.S troops and Iraqis needlessly,
to align with the even then known intel of no WMD threat,
no I didn't go on the marches, it never fit my schedule.
i just called my congressmen and the white house for all the good that did.


But to your general reply it seems As i said Drummond
".. frankly you seem to define a good conservative as anyone who's gungho to kill terrorist by any means necessary. All other issues, laws, treaties, morals be hanged.

And liberals as anyone who's not on board with that program, and they are therefore closet communist and trick'sy appeasers trying to weaken the conservative vote to our ultimate caliphate doom!!"

Thanks for this .. although I've actually no need to answer you in detail, as it turns out. Observe the reply I've posted to your comrade FJ, and the mountain of evidence I've provided proving your 'war stance' is one which is identified with prominent LEFT wingers (.. indeed, it'd be difficult to find a bunch of Lefties who've been active in public life who are any further to the Left than this lot are !!).

I look forward to your telling me that your stance is definitely Right wing, and that a substantial percentage of the LEFT wing, here in the UK, have, ahem, 'all got that wrong'.

You're right. They are wrong .. every last one of them. Correct ??

[Gunny]

Filthy heaven? I'll take that.

I was enjoying the sites in our nation's capitol. But I was not jumping the fence at the White House and you can't prove otherwise.

So THAT's what you look like, huh? If you'd slim down some sport you could've gotten past the door.

[Drummond]

So THAT's what you look like, huh? If you'd slim down some sport you could've gotten past the door.

... and been given a warm welcome .. ?