www.byzcath.org Forums General Discussions Town Hall The "Real" Anti-Americans

Zenovia,

"Whatever the problem, at least Pres. Bush is going to try to make some changes. They are sorely needed. Somehow though, I feel the accountants that are so dependant on making money figuring out all those loop holes for their clients, will put up a big propaganda fight...and they are bound to have the Democrat support."

I raised this issue with out accountant. He said don't worry about us. Even if they eliminate the Income Tax there will always be a job for us.

Dan L

Dear Dan,

Ha! That's what they say now.

Zenovia

Many, many Republicans are not on the side of these pundits. Yet party affilitation and the "blue-state/red-state" dichotomy has colored our thinking. We are being divided by the lies of the right-wing pundits.

Oh come on...you mean people can't think for themselves. Do you really believe that? "Blue state/red state" America spoke. Middle America said loud and clear, enough is enough!

That article definately lays out the far lefts agenda, you got that right.

Pani Rose

Pani,

I agree with you. It will be nice to have that "right wing" pundit, Dan Rather, off the TV screen. Such an honest man. :rolleyes:

Dan L

[/b][/QUOTE]I hate to disappoint you, Dan, but it seems you did not fully comprehend what the Democratic Party is all about! [/QB][/QUOTE]

Logos Teen -

I recently read Coulter's book entitled "Treason". After reading it, I felt that I was the one who had not fully comprehended what the Democratic party was all about! She certainly makes a compelling historical case, although the leftward leaning members of this forum on any blood pressure meds should not read her text.

Two links of interest:

http://www.townhall.com/bookclub/coulter.html

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=33645

As to Newt, I certainly don't find him appealing as a candidate either. Keyes strikes me as too much of a hot head, although I am sympathetic to many of his views.

Pray for me and forgive me for I am a sinner!

Gordo

A Catholic King, mmmmmm. as long as he is Eastern Catholic.
Much Love,
Jonn

Rather like reading Jack Chick to find out about the Cathiolic Church. :rolleyes:

It seems to me that the Jack Chick analogy is better suited to the article that Moe linked when he started this thread. I think that Maureen Dowd would be the liberal counterpart to Ann Coulter. The analogy is not exact, I admit, but certainly closer than Jack Chick. :p

The article that Moe linked reduces the conservative arguments to incorrect one-liners and then attacks them. Surely there is some false accusation in that?

Another problem it has is that it advocates special rights for homosexuals. As Christians we are obligated to reject that position in favor of the teaching of the Church.

One of my major problems with the more extreme liberal and conservative pundits is that they seem to forget that both sides share many of the same goals: a good economy with lots of jobs, health care, civil rights, helping those in need, quality education, an equitable tax system and etc. The differences on these issues are in how to secure these goals.

After reading the article twice I concluded that the author was successful only in showing himself to be the flip side (the liberal counterpart) of everything he accuses the conservatives of.

Well as I mentioned before, I am unfamiliar with Dowd's writings. Does she realy charge Republicans with treason and such crimes? I will have to read her, then.

Coulter is probably as anti-Democrat as Chick is anti-Catholic. And a quick tour of the net reveals many errors of fact (legion compared, e.g. to Rather). Not unlike Chick. My suspicion: with both it's all schtick; there's good money to made in such enterprises. So maybe Dan Brown is a better comparison.

More irenicism! Unfortunately, it's far easier to "win" by demonizing opponents, than to demonstrate the better merits of one's arguments. And it works!

Maureen Dowd writes a weekly column in the New York Times. Yes, her style is similar to Ann Coulter�s, but Coulter is much more organized and Dowd seems to float from one subject to another. She writes mostly stuff accusing the president of wanting to put old people on the street to die and how Christians are stupid for not accepting �reproductive rights� and homosexual marriage, as well as yearning for the �free love� lifestyle of the 1960s.

There is much to be learned from the Jack Chicks of the world. As a Byzantine Catholic I know that he misrepresents the Catholic Faith. I can learn from that the need to always strive to present the Gospel in terms that those who hate us can understand. Most won�t agree or accept, but occasionally you�ll find someone who will first respect what you say and then accept it.

I haven�t read The Da Vinci Code (and don�t plan to) so I can�t comment on Dan Brown. The type of fiction I prefer is mysteries, and I like my fictional characters to have names like Sherlock Holmes, Hercule Poirot, Miss Marple, Thomas and Charlotte Pitt, Jim Chee and Joe Leaphorn, or Jim Qwilleran.

One of the many, many, differences between Maureen Dowd and Ann Coulter is that Dowd dumps on everybody, not just one side.

After the first presidential debate between George W. Bush and Al Gore, she described it as "the tantric debate between the Insufferable and the Insufficient," which is as equal-opportunity an insult as you can make.

She got much criticism on the leftward side of the political spectrum for what some saw as her obsession with the Monica Lewinsky mess.

I wouldn't be surprised if she's personally more liberal than conservative, but her writing is mean to pretty much anybody in power.

You can check out Coulter yourself at http://www.anncoulter.org/

And Dowd's column, which runs Wednesdays and Sundays in The New York Times, can be found here

http://www.nytimes.com/top/opinion/editorialsandoped/oped/columnists/maureendowd/index.html

But you have to register.

--tim

Dear Gordo,

I haven't read Ann Coulter's book, but I love her. She is certainly a fighter.

As for Newt, they say he is absolutely brilliant, but I doubt that he could become president. He tends to lack leadership qualities.

He had problems in Congress, and removed from his leadership position by the Dems. because of some previous action on his part towards a (dishonest though likable) Dem. congressional leader. It was pay back time.

As for Alan Keyes, I consider him the most brilliant man in our nation today. I personally adore him, but he doesn't stand a chance because he is (I believe) a Minister, and highly devout....and worse, he doesn't hide it.

Zenovia

I spent about 5 seconds on the Coulter site before sighing: more geese than swans now live, ...
Is there anything cogent there? What some people will do for a living.

Go to her interview here for better fun.
http://www.cbc.ca/fifth/sticksandstones.html

(Transcipt and comment here:
http://www.commondreams.org/views05/0206-23.htm )

Wow! I guess she got her facts wrong in an interview about Canadian foreign policy. I didn't even know Canada had a foreign policy, beyond enjoying the protection of a stronger neighbor to the South. If they do, does anyone really care? She must have spent 5 seconds reading their Foreign Policy website too. :p

As to the Jack Chick comparison, I find the comparison itself to be typical of liberal bias. Throw out a familiar, emotionally loaded label and you are never forced to understand the contentions of others who hold views opposite to your own. Coulter's assertions are well researched and worth exploring (for more than 5 seconds). Anyone who has even a basic interest in the country's past and future should seek to understand where the Democratic party's loyalties lie, and I think she has asked very challenging questions that need to be explored further, not superficially dismissed with labels.

Many years -

Gordo

I have less respect for Dr. Keyes after his concession to his party to become an obvious carpetbagger candidate for the state of Illinois. It was an ineffectual move which if anything may have hurt his career.

I would have respected him far more had he taken a stance as an independent candidate for President instead of bowing to the wishes of a party who has such pro-choice luminaries as Schwartzenegger, Specter and McCain in its ranks.