A Dysfunctional Democracy
 

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16815916/site/newsweek/



continued...

And this, ladies and gentlemen, is just another reason I hate america.

Define 'America'.
I am rather unfond of America's government; I love the American people and the American land. Although the American people are capable of rather monumental stupidity (see: America's government).

Gee...you mean that "Bush sucks" doesn't actually rise to the level of either a viable policy or a political philosophy? Quelle surprise!

The problem with not actually having an agreed upon set of values is that when a new situation presents, there may be no agreement on what to do.

Very, very true, both of you. But my point remains, no?

The point, I think, is pretty fucking eroded and now resembles a beach.

Nothing personal, just sandy.

The Democratic Party is trying as hard as it can to lose the war as soon as it can -- failing to plan being planning to fail, and they've never dared to envision winning, the donkeys -- that we may be condemned to fight another war in the region, some years down the line, that will be greater and more ruinous. Ibram, you're of an age to get caught up in that war. Better to get the change we want finished up here and now.

"Let’s face it: when you have to insist so hard that you’re not intimidated, you probably are. All this huffing and puffing about who’s got the guts to challenge a president who’s stuck at 28 percent in the polls! Here’s what was really going on: a group of Democrats supposedly enjoying their newfound majority on Capitol Hill were having a frank discussion, in full view of the world, about whether American government can function properly at all any longer."

For those of you who didn't read the whole article. He actually makes a good point here before going on his Bush bashing rant.

I thought that was fascinating. I really did. I don't see what about it would make you hate America. Representative democracy is not perfect; it's a fairly blunt instrument. If the mechanisms of state are balanced between different parties and different estates, then there will be times when one or the other in each, has ascendancy.

All that's happening now is a shifting of that balance. The people speaking strongly are a part of those shifts. But it's still early in that process.

Or have I misunderstood what it was that had caught your attention about that?

When did I ever say I hated America????? I thought that quote was much more telling and, as you put it, "fascinating"l - that was my point.

“You can always count on Americans to do the right thing - after they've tried everything else.” (Winston Churchill)

yesman, my post was directed at Ibram:P

"When I am abroad, I always make it a rule never to criticize or attack the government of my own country. I make up for lost time when I come home."
Sir Winston Churchill

And this one, especially for Hip.

"A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject."
Sir Winston Churchill

?? Can't t see the relevance, but since we're here, this one's for you:

"Yes, madam, I am drunk. But in the morning I will be sober and you will still be ugly."

I HOPE you're not referring to Brianna! You would lose ALL credibility.

Well, I hardly see what is relevant about what your father said to your mother on the night of your conception. Try to stay on track, will you?

Looking at your response, I'm right on target...

One can be ugly in many ways....

Yes. And you are ugly in all ways.

Beauty is in the eye of the beerholder and God Bless America.

If you two come to blows, I could use one, please and thank you. :blush:

So tawdry when two people resort to personal insults to try and make a point.

Long time, no blow, xxxBruce?

Sorry to be a stickler for typos, but surely you meant to say Republicans, right? The party that was in power at the time that any planning or failure to plan was actually taking place: the Republicans, you knew that, right? I mean, the Democrats have gained a few seats and now everything can be "their fault" again? Wow. I'm sure you'll correct this oversight and set me straight on this confusing issue of chronological order.

Winnie said that to Bessie Braddock.

Flint, I stand by my argument and by my blasting of the Democrats: they have done even less than the Republicans, and their deliberate dereliction is so beyond belief one suspects that everything Ann Coulter says about them is true.

It's history, Flint. Read it.

*speachless* (but not for long)

Rod... where are you Rod?

The Democrats were in power, and are responsible for the lack of planning in Iraq? Which history book are you reading?

Geez dude, don't drink the Kool-aid. :worried:

Edited to change the typo 'kook-aid' to 'kool-aid' but I wonder if I should have left it alone.

Unfortunately, yes...... weeks. :(

:mad: Quote the entire sentence, Shawnee, or you're lying by selective editing. You don't want to be a liar, do you?

This is what I really said and what you didn't:

Good thing we are a Republic and not a Democracy.

UG, so you protest having attributed to you? Really the only possible omission would be the three words preceeding the quote, thus:
and their addition hardly lets you off the hook. You believe Ann Coulter's remarks are true or you suspect Ann Coulter's remarks are true. A difference of degree, not kind.

Calling her a liar because she didn't quote you entirely is completely off base. The rest of your sentence was justification for your position, which she captured succinctly. Methinks the nutjob doth protest too much. There are countless examples where quotes of less than a whole sentence do not constitute lying. This is just another one of them. Quit whining.

I object to the shaving of the context, V. How was that unclear?

Well I think you've cleared it up now UG. It's all semantics anyway, so why not move along?

I mean really, does anyone here care whether you 'suspect' or 'believe' everything Anny Coulter says is true?

Come to that, reckon I would.

It wouldn't be of much moment to anyone outside our borders, though.

How looooooong can we spin this thread out, like so many cyber-Norns? :D

It'll probably die a natural death now that you've reached the limits of banality in this one UG. :)

"It would be a much better country if women did not vote. That is simply a fact. In fact, in every presidential election since 1950 - except Goldwater in '64 - the Republican would have won, if only the men had voted." (A.Coulter 05/17/2003)

You agree with that, Professor UG?

On second thought, please drink the kool-aid.

I hardly ever quote entire posts. I quote the part I'm responding to. Posts can contain more than one point, and I'm keeping the ideas linear by quoting and responding to something specific. It's a courtesy to the reader, preventing them from having to sort through many extraneous lines of text to find the point that is being addressed. It also cleans up the visual appearance of the thread; how many times do we need to read the same post? The excerpt that I quote is sometimes just a cue as to which post I am responding to, maybe a slight reminder of what the content was, a representative part of a larger section. To me, it's all about keeping the thread clean, clear, and no longer than necessary. And, after all, the interested reader need only scroll up to read the whole post, if they are interested. In fact, now our quotes contain a link, so the complete text is only one click away!

My rules for quoting:

The goal should be clear and concise quotes, to facilitate the exchange of ideas. For any ethical questions that may arise, we are on the honor system.

But it's not working! :p

Bear in mind Ann Coulter's style and method is very much that of the AM radio talk show host: devise a thesis phrased to rouse any rousable rabble. This does not of itself determine if the thesis is right or wrong; the point is to be provocative.

Your frustration count, Hipp, will go down dramatically once you quit trying to find evil in a place where there isn't any -- in the heart of Urbane Guerrilla. I know you desperately want to, but you'll have to get in line behind tw and maybe one or two more loonies, and I don't think they'd be disposed to leave any for you.

well stop posting!

Nnnnno!

[Oh fuck, I don't need any smiley!]

No frustration here, Professor, I leave that to you and Coulter. And I'm glad we identified her as a rabble rousing agent provocateur.

What bothers me the most about Ann is that she is an idiot that constantly contradicts herself from one interview to another... that anyone listens to her is a joke.

Nothing really bothers me about Coulter- she's just an attention-seeking nut. What bothers me is that "news" organizations give her the time of day.

Exactly. Well put.

I read her anyway -- the people who cite her style as a reason to dismiss her are merely being defensive at being intellectually caught out.

That and she has the annoying habit of being right at least as often as any other columnist.

She has never caught anybody out intellectually. As you put it, she just says provocative stuff without any regard for whether it's right or wrong.

One day someone's going to have to explain who Anny really is.

Here she is on the site that casts her in as good a light as any site can.

Now if somebody wants to show where Ann Coulter is factually mistaken anywhere in that column, I invite them to try it.

Practically every Ann Coulter detractor can't address what she's asserted as a matter of fact, but instead thinks it's a telling rebuttal to inform us all that the detractor finds her abrasive or perhaps unattractive. You get these vague disparagements, unsupported by anything like proof, that she's not a historian, or she's this, or she's not that... mere third-graders in the bodies of men.

:dunce: :rotflol: :lol2: :lol2: :lol2: :lol2: :lol2:

Some cross dressing guy with a chip on his shoulder. Ignore him.

Goddamnit, I already took that assignment once. Someone else do the next one.

We thought what you said, stayed said.

I'm not up to a UT-quality debunking, but here's a biggie:

I don't necessarily find her unattractive. After all, who can argue with a decent looking blonde woman who will swallow anything?

"Ann honey, that woman you saw me with naked in bed - the president himself is sending me over to look for WMD's and she was just giving me the required physical.";)

Do you think if I wore that diaper, then she would do me? With looks like that and a promise, I could consider it.

I think they prefer to get their political agenda from people like Al Franken (Stuart Smalley anyone?) or ex-sports announcers like that Keith Oberman dude....