T Nation

Where is the Conservatives Spine?


#1

Like her or not, Ms. Coulter is spot on with this article.

-----------------------------------

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2006/05/conservatives_need_12step_prog.html

May 11, 2006
Conservatives Need to Grow Some Spine
By Ann Coulter

It's pretty pathetic when a Kennedy is too drunk to drive into the Potomac. After the visibly intoxicated Rep. Patrick Kennedy crashed his car into a police barrier near the Capitol just before 3 a.m. last Thursday morning, he explained to the police he was hurrying back to the Capitol for a vote, a procedure known on the Hill as "last call." It could have been a lot worse: Patrick's designated driver that night was Ted Kennedy.

At some point in his scrolling list of excuses, Kennedy eventually claimed he was addicted to prescription drugs and checked himself into the newly opened Kennedy Wing of the Mayo Clinic. He explained he had been "sleep driving." If people fall for his story, his father, Ted, plans to attribute his last immigration bill to "sleep legislating."

Coming right on the heels of a three-year witch-hunt directed at Rush Limbaugh for an addiction to prescription drugs because of his politics -- as well as the continuing threat to put Tom DeLay in prison because of his politics -- you would think there would be at least some serious discussion of prosecuting the young Kennedy for his addiction to prescription drugs, too.

Perhaps the Republican attorney general in Washington needs to interview Democratic Palm Beach prosecutor Barry Krischer, who wasted three years and untold taxpayer dollars trying to frame Limbaugh, about the danger to society of prescription drug addiction.

Baseball has a system to protect batters from being hit: If your pitcher hits one of our guys, our pitcher will hit one of your guys. This is also the only argument that ever works with Democrats.

Democrats adored the independent counsel statute -- until it was used to catch an actual felon in the Oval Office. Then they noticed all sorts of problems with the law. Democrats swore up and down that women never lie about rape -- until that same felon was credibly accused of rape by Juanita Broaddrick on "NBC News," not to mention the four other card-carrying Democratic women who described being raped by Bill Clinton in eerily similar detail in Christopher Hitchens' book "No One Left to Lie To."

Conservatives will continue to be threatened with prison on trumped-up charges until Democrats start having to worry about being prosecuted for minor offenses, too -- though, in Kennedy's case, not as minor as Rush Limbaugh's offense, which never involved smashing his car into a police barrier. (In Rep. Kennedy's defense, at least he didn't drown the woman in his car and then disappear for nine hours.)

Democrats have declared war against Republicans, and Republicans are wandering around like a bunch of ninny Neville Chamberlains, congratulating themselves on their excellent behavior. They'll have some terrific stories about their Gandhi-like passivity to share while sitting in cells at Guantanamo after Hillary is elected.

For a political party that grasps the concept of victory against foreign enemies, Republicans can't seem to grasp that concept when it comes to domestic enemies. Instead of taking a page from Sun-tzu's "Art of War," when it comes to fighting liberals, American conservatives prefer the Jimmy Carter unconditional surrender strategy.

Patriotic Americans don't have to become dangerous psychotics like liberals, but they could at least act like men.

Why hasn't the former spokesman for the Taliban matriculating at Yale been beaten even more senseless than he already is? According to Hollywood, this nation is a cauldron of ethnic hatreds positively brimming with violent skinheads. Where are the skinheads when you need them? What does a girl have to do to get an angry, club- and torch-wielding mob on its feet?

There is not the remotest possibility that a man who was recently defending shooting women in the head for wearing nail polish will so much as be snubbed on the Yale campus.

The only violence on college campuses these days occurs when people like David Horowitz, Michelle Malkin and me show up to give a speech in defense of America. Then we need bomb-sniffing dogs and a lecture hall lined with armed police. But a Talibanist goes about his day at Yale unmolested.

Conservatives may shrink from confrontation with howling, violent liberals, but as General "Buck" Turgidson in "Dr. Strangelove" informed the milquetoast president still hoping to avert a nuclear confrontation with the Russkies: "Well, Mr. President, I would say that General Ripper has already invalidated that policy."

Well, conservatives, I would say liberals have already invalidated your "Let's all just get along" policy.

The violence and threats of imprisonment have started. Now the only question is whether conservatives will choose victory.


#2

Nope, she's still a stupid cunt.


#3

Ann is usually spot on, much to the chagrin of the libs.

I DO wish the republicans appealed to their base with at least half the energy as the dems do. Instead, they've blown so many opportunities to change this country for the better -- remember the Contract with America? Remember term limits? Another chance like this won't come around for another half-century. By then, the dollar will be almost worthless and we'll be a shell of our former selves.

We're trading our freedom for 'free' prescription drugs, excessive retirement benefits, and a war which we probably should have best avoided.


#4

Excessive retirement benefits? This is a new one to me... how extravagant a retirement plan is the government providing?

Should I move back and just quit working or what?


#5

Thanks for reading the article and responding intelligently to the observations contained within.

your usual contributions to the forum..........snore.


#6

The Republicans know they cannot get away with those tactics in todays media environment.

I am sure they play dirty behind the scenes while pretending to take the high road.


#7

Estimates are that people who are now retired are getting about 10 times back what they paid in. This was very excessive and is disasterous down the road. My generation then gets back about what we paid in. The younger folks get less. The older generation set it up to fuck over the young people of today. The huge deficit caused by this will eventually bankrupt the country. The system is mathematically impossible to keep up.

We are and will be so encumbered by the debt this all causes that the currency will basically have to become worthless to pay it all off.


#8

I did read the article, and my response is completely commensurate with the article you posted.

Like it or not, she's nothing more than a loud, shrill, stupid cunt.


#9

It is not just the government that is doing this. Private industries as well as other institutions are shortchanging younger workers in order to payoff the older established and retired workers.

Tenure has forced a number of colleges to change their ways.

Many colleges now turn over their workforces to avoid giving tenure.

Many private companies do whatever they can, such as outsourcing domestically and overseas because they want to reduce their workforce and avoid paying recurring benefits.

Of course I don't know what this has to do with the conservatives' spine.


#10

Their spine is in the same place as the democrats spine, sold to the highest bidder.

They can't really say anything about this because after so much time trying to prove that they are the morally superior party, they have been caught doing the same things that they accused their opponents of doing. They are suffering from pot and kettle syndrome. However, I am sure that they are just waiting for the public's well known short attention span to kick in before they make any moves.

At this point, most people, other than the most fanatical ones, are disgusted with both parties. A viable third, or maybe third and fourth parties, are sorely needed.


#11

It should have been setup to get out only what you put in.


#12

Roosevelt's original plan would have created a HUGE pool of wealth and added untold billions to our economy. Imagine money put into stocks since 1940, compounding and growing businesses! We'd probably all be at least twice as well off as we are now.
Fucking crime when they took out his plan to let us invest...


#13

Unless a great depression comes along and wipes it out completely... there are always risks in the markets... and then we'd be back where we are today, with the public holding the bag.

I'm not arguing against the investment plan, but when it comes to retirement and so on, you can't screw around with risk, because old people who aren't rich don't have much ability to react if things don't go according to plan.

Honestly, if the country wasn't blowing all kinds of dough like there was no tomorrow, it could probably afford to simply keep it afloat, through the crisis years, as long as it's cost stays a reasonble percentage of the GDP.

Remember, I'm the guy that argues for a slight deindexing so that the program is slowly less and less of a burden over time without a significant shock to any one generation.

Don't forget, we don't have a problem going into debt for "other reasons" when we feel the need to...


#14

Isn't that President Bush's plan? The one liberals went absolutely bat-shit over? Hummm...Roodevelt was a Dem, right?

Ann is a little extreme, but I like her.


#15

Classic. There's the liberal world view in a nut-shell: YOU can not be trusted with your own money. The government needs to step in and take control. That's socialism, my friend.


#16

First of all, I think that word is disgusting, filthy, and should never be used directly at a woman. It is derrogatory and usually totally unneceessary. Accuse me of snobbery or sexism all you want, but I categorize men by the way they speak to (and about) women, and language like that is deplorable in any circumstance.

All that aside, I went back and actually READ this article as objectively as humanly possible, to try and ascertain what you could possibly mean by "loud, shrill and stupid." Perhaps you don't agree with what she's said in previous TV appearances, but whats with your tone about THIS particular article???

Do me a favor... replace the words "by Ann Coulter" with "by Jane Doe" and see if you find the same terminology appropriate. All things aside, I don't see anything shrill or stupid about this article.


#17

I don't see anything wrong with this article, but I like the word "cunt." It's a funny word, like "quark." I like "quark."


#18

Absolutely.

If I had posted this article under a different name, it would have been recieved much differently. I think it's their attraction to her shining through ;-]


#19

She's so overwhelming biased and ridiculous that it discounts everything she says. She's little more than a right wing hack who likes causing trouble. Harmless.

And she is still fucking ugly, I don't care what you fellas think.


#20

The reason social security should never be put into the hands of mom and pop to invest is because MOM AND POP DON'T KNOW WHAT THEY ARE DOING.

90% of people know nothing about the stock market. They buy high and sell low.

The only people that would be helped by privatizing social security are working on Wall Street.