Ann Coulter simply does not believe in being Politically Correct. She says what she thinks and is therefore an equal opportunity offender. PC in this country is way over the top, it is even worse in Canada and the UK. (Except when it comes to America bashing) Ms Coulter, a very well educated attorney and writer, may well be a little "rich" at times but it sure beats listening to Cindy Sheehan and such pawns of the far left receiving the constant media adoration/attention of the MSM.

Channing 100 proof:
As a famous Russian comedian once said "What a country!" opinions are like belly buttons, we all have one. Your opinion of Ann Coulter being a hatemonger or evildoer differs from mine. "What a country!"

Ann Coulter has exposed these New Jersey hypocrites for grandstanding and using their media time to further their political bias. They endorsed John Kerry and have been in the Liberal limelight post 9/11 using their grief to further their political stand against George Bush. You can't get much lower.

If these Jersey widows truly studied the government's mistakes before 9/11, as they claim they did, then they would have recommended Dumb & Dumber, Bill Clinton and Al Gore, go on trial for terminal incompetence. These geniuses had them and let them go, idiots!

You all are correct. Everyone has a right to have an opinion, but evil is evil, and being over the top is being over the top, and stupid is as stupid does. Ann Coulter is a hatemonger, and over the top with it. She is also a liar. She claims to be a christian, but that is a obviously lie, when you spew the type of hatred she spews out of her mouth. She has benefitted from the tragedy of 911. It put her on the map, as a so-called pro-war staunch conservative, which I am not so sure she is, at least the conservative part. She is a tragedy gold digger/opportunist, and gets no respect from me. She is just hyper B.S. Those women want to know how something of the magnitude of 911 could happen, and what is being done to prevent it in the future. They have a right to know, just as we all do, and Ann Coulter should have no problem with anyone wanting to know. That is, if she really loves this country. Which I doubt.

Channing,

Have you actually sat down and read what Ms Coulter wrote? Or, are you just a mindless liberal parrot?

You sound like a liberal parrot to me. There are worse things in the book regarding liberal democrats but you only state what some talking head tells you. The funny thing is that he didnt bother to read before he spoke either.

Sorry if the truth hurts. You need to engage brain before posting. Nevermind..If you actually engaged your brain you would become as "anti liberal" as the rest of us. ( we couldnt have that now could we )

Ann Coulter is a two faced hypocrite that has no problem whatsoever invoking 9/11 when it suits her agenda. In fact the administration that she is so fond of has invoked 9/11 for everything from justification for an unprovoked war against a sovereign nation to usurping the rights of all of us that are guaranteed by the constitution.

And Miss Ann herself had no problem using 9/11 when she was crying for weeks over her fellow blonde and conservative cohort Barbara Olson who was onboard one of the planes that crashed into the WTC. She wanted Afghanistan bombed into oblivion.

I have to wonder how the widows of 9/11 feel about our never getting the people that are responsible for 9/11 while we have tried our best to make it look like Saddam Hussein was a satisfactory replacement when it has been shown time and time again that Hussein had nothing to do with 9/11 whatsoever.
It would pay us all to remember that the war in Iraq was both unjust and illegal. We launched a war of aggression against a country that was not attacking us, did not have the means to attack us, and had never expressed any intention of attacking us.

Thus, America's attack against Iraq is the same as Japan's attack against the U.S. in 1941 and Germany's attack against Poland in 1939. We were the aggressor, pure and simple, and for whatever real reason we attacked Iraq, it was not to save America from any danger, imminent or otherwise.

You can believe the two whitewash jobs blaming everything on intelligence if you wish to do so. I don't believe them. Our intelligence agencies make plenty of mistakes, but I don't believe that the information they provided the Bush administration was as clear-cut as the Bush people claimed. In other words, I think the Bush administration lied to the American people about weapons of mass destruction.

This illegal, unjust and unprovoked war against a sovereign country is what has alienated the rest of the world. This alienation runs deep and will have very long-term implications. The whole push of the best people in the bloody 20th century was an attempt to find ways to avert wars of aggression. The U.S. was one of the leaders in that drive. All of that was chucked on the ash heap of history by George W. Bush's decision to invade Iraq and overthrow its government.

No sane leader of any nation in the world can trust America anymore. We have demonstrated that if we desire to attack a nation, we will fabricate the excuse and attack it, despite international law and international opinion. We have demonstrated that a nation need not provoke us or threaten us to become a victim of our aggression. We have said to the world that the only law we respect is the law of the jungle, and that might makes right. That's why so many people consider us to be a rogue nation and a threat to world peace.

The sad part is that the American people have been so sheeplike. They believed the blarney about weapons of mass destruction, even the stupid parts such as Bush claiming Iraq's tiny little drone airplanes could attack the U.S. When those lies were exposed, they believed that the war was justified by Saddam Hussein's cruelty. We've slept with many bloody dictators, including Saddam. Now they believe that we went there to spread democracy.

That's a bunch of hooey. The present interim government is corrupt to the core. The British Broadcasting Corp. did a lot of interviews with Iraqis, and not one of them mentioned wanting democracy or freedom. They all said they want a strong government that can provide security and end corruption.

Given the world's distrust and alienation, how do you think the Bush administration is going to garner support to stop the proliferation of nuclear weapons? Do you think Russia, China, India and other countries love us? Do you think even the Europeans will not try to weaken our global monopoly on the use of force?

There is a great irony here. Imperialism produces exactly the effects that the critics of isolation claim it produces. Imperialism isolates America. An American policy of noninterference and cooperation would produce allies.

I don't intend to blame the Bush administration entirely. Both the Republicans and the Democrats are committed to an imperialistic policy. Nor was the war against Iraq the first instance of unprovoked and illegal acts of aggression. We invaded Grenada and Panama, and launched aerial attacks against Libya and Serbia, although they don't compare in magnitude to what we did in Iraq.

Don't take too much comfort in the fact that we are, at the moment, the 800-pound gorilla. Everybody hates the gorilla and will try to do everything to weaken it. Given the venality and incompetence of our government, the shaky state of our economy, the apathy of our people and the decadence of our culture, I don't think we'll be king of the jungle for very much longer.

Well mydtwc, sounds like you’re full of the liberal propaganda that is spewing forth on the television and in the news papers. If you read Ann’s book you will find that she is only talking about four of the 9/11 widows. They are the ones that are most vocal for the leftist views that the media inundates us with on a daily basis. They blame the current administration for their husbands’ deaths. If I am not mistaken, and I am usually not, Bush had only been in office less than 9 months when September 11th happened. So in my mind the blame for 9/11 lies with the Clinton administration.

I do not understand why all the liberals are yelling that this war is illegal and unjust. This is nothing but propaganda to take the peoples minds off all the short comings of the Democratic Party in the past. I feel this way because of several reasons. Is it not Clinton who down sized our military and made it now where it is overextended? Is it not Clinton who had the opportunity to kill Bin Laden, but chose not to?

The problem, I feel is, that most people do not see they war for what it really is. Firstly, we got rid of a horrible dictator. Secondly, the Jihadist are now going to Iraq and Afghanistan to fight our military, not flying planes into buildings in the United States. That is a very good thing don’t you think?

There is no way that this war can be compared to World War II. Firstly, our grandfathers signed up to defend our country by the hundreds of thousands. No one sat back and debated if we needed to got to war because we were attacked. Didn’t these Islamic terrorists attack us first? Secondly, they WWII generation did not care about the enemies civilians dying. I can say this by the way we carpet bombed Germany and then nuked Japan. They just let the military do its job. What ever the reason that we went to war it is keeping these crazies out of the U.S. and I am happy about that. (And before someone says I am not PC by calling them “Islamic” terrorist, they are Muslims and they are killing people. If they were Baptists and killing people then they would be Baptist terrorist.)

In my opinion, who cares what the world thinks about the United States. I could care less if Russia, China, and India look down on our war on terror. Those counties have problems of their own and need to fix them before they tell us how to do ours. For example, China is one of the worst examples that could be used…don’t they have human right issues? This is just a question for everyone to ponder. Isn’t Russia fighting their own Islamic terrorists, but no one really knows really what they are doing, do they? I won’t even really get into India….they need to curb their spread of AIDS and the fights with Pakistan over Kashmir.

I think the United States should become an isolationist country and only worry about what is going on with in our own hemisphere. That means let Europe handle Europe. Quit sending aid to all these countries after every little natural disaster. Because as you stated in you blog, they look down on us, but not our money.

I am a Southern, born and raised, and like most Southerns I am very patriotic. I also hold a Bachelors in Political Science and I am working on a Masters in Foreign Affairs. The problem is that Yankee Liberalism has invaded the south. I am not a Conservative nor am I a Liberal, like most American I am mixture of both. The sooner our elected officials and Liberal Media learn that, the better we will be.

I will end with this, I read Ann Coulters book and she just pointed out the four. They are using their husbands’ deaths to talk about their political views and that is wrong. It is just like Cindy Sheehan (Or however you spell it) and her crock or crap. No mother asked President Roosevelt to explain why their son died to free a ungrateful country like France. It is a shame.

She is the female version of Pat Robertson. They both need to be shot out of cannon.

I watched the video, read the comments then watched the video again. Boy she is deadly accurate. Calling the women broads? Well, she could have selected better words. Saying they are enjoying their husbands deaths is over the top but when have the democrats not been over the top in attacking republicans with lies. Karl Rove's name was cleared yesterday because they investigators could find no wrong doing yet the liberal democrats painted him as one of the worst men in America. The democratic response to the report is silence.

Saddam Hussein put women and children in front of his mansion several times to protect himself from bombing and Americans were outraged. Ann Coulter's comments were directed to the democratic party and the liberal media who used the women much like Saddam did for their own political gain. Ann understands that politicans will not attack the women or what they say out of respect for husbands and what their families have been through. Where is the outrage about using these women for political gain that cannot be questioned? Ann Coulter was voicing the unfairness of that. Wrong words; right thoughts.

Another liberal blathering on and on, your pathetic. I'm glad there are people like Ann Coulter around to say what needs to be said. You and your ilk want this country to fail, hate our President (no matter what he does), are completely unpatriotic. Godless? Yep I'd say that's an acruate representation, but I would also throw in evil.

Just making an observation that political discourse as shown in the reponses to C's original blog shows that the level of discourse in this country has reached the level of throwing rocks at one another in the school yard.

It doesn't win people to your argument, which I believe is what you should do. Instead, it polarizes, and doesn't bring people over from one side to another in massive numbers. It also serves as affirmation to people who already hold such beliefs, rather than convincing others to their side. It also sells books, which is why Ann says what she says.

Props to people on both sides of the debate to are attacking ideas, not people.

It would be far better to attack ideas than it would be to attack people with name-calling, like "you're pathetic."

Sorry, I was responding to the first thread. In ref: "Just because someone doesn't agree with the president doesn't mean that they hate our country or that they are unpatriotic," I agree.

However, I do not characterize it as "caring" when most liberals in this country denigrate President Bush at any opportunity in hopes of somehow weakening the Republican Party. Liberals in this country care far more about the pursuit of power (regaining their lost status) than they do about the health of this country. If you want to see the true result of liberal policies just have a look at New Orleans. Liberal policies in this country do but one thing: keep people from reaching their potential and ensure dependence upon the very policies that keep people down (not to mention cost lives).

I don't blindly follow anyone or anything but I also don't blindly criticize anything and everything that can be criticized in hopes of damaging this country.

Direction!!! By direction do you mean the fact that joblessness is at an all time low in this country, and the economy is absolutely roaring? Or... do you mean that we have lost 2500 brave souls in IRAQ? 2500 men in 4 years. As tragic as even one "American" life is, please compare this number with other conflicts. The liberals in this country have no stomach for war unless it somehow redirects attention away from their hypocrisy, lechery, and corruption, and they love to tout this 2500 number. I'm convinced if they had their way the number would be 10,000. If 10,000 dead Americans meant that they would regain power the democrats would be even more thrilled and sing the number from the roof tops.

Do I agree with Bush at every turn, of course not? I disagree with Mr. Bush on many points... after all he is a politician and I often wretch at his courtesy towards sniveling, cowardly liberals. I often wonder does he really believe that these liberal politicians are actually his friend. But there is one thing about Bush I love. In the last 12 months he has KILLED more terrorists than anyone I can think off. For those of you that whine about the cost of the war... why don't you ever mention what it has cost the terrorists?

Democrats... sickening... hypocritical... cowardly... opportunistic... UNPATRIOTIC... Godless... throw stones... you bet!!!!!

Sorry, I was responding to the first thread. In ref: "Just because someone doesn't agree with the president doesn't mean that they hate our country or that they are unpatriotic," I agree.

However, I do not characterize it as "caring" when most liberals in this country denigrate President Bush at any opportunity in hopes of somehow weakening the Republican Party. Liberals in this country care far more about the pursuit of power (regaining their lost status) than they do about the health of this country. If you want to see the true result of liberal policies just have a look at New Orleans. Liberal policies in this country do but one thing: keep people from reaching their potential and ensure dependence upon the very policies that keep people down (not to mention cost lives).

I don't blindly follow anyone or anything but I also don't blindly criticize anything and everything that can be criticized in hopes of damaging this country.

Direction!!! By direction do you mean the fact that joblessness is at an all time low in this country, and the economy is absolutely roaring? Or... do you mean that we have lost 2500 brave souls in IRAQ? 2500 men in 4 years. As tragic as even one "American" life is, please compare this number with other conflicts. The liberals in this country have no stomach for war unless it somehow redirects attention away from their hypocrisy, lechery, and corruption, and they love to tout this 2500 number. I'm convinced if they had their way the number would be 10,000. If 10,000 dead Americans meant that they would regain power the democrats would be even more thrilled and sing the number from the roof tops.

Do I agree with Bush at every turn, of course not? I disagree with Mr. Bush on many points... after all he is a politician and I often wretch at his courtesy towards sniveling, cowardly liberals. I often wonder does he really believe that these liberal politicians are actually his friend. But there is one thing about Bush I love. In the last 12 months he has KILLED more terrorists than anyone I can think off. For those of you that whine about the cost of the war... why don't you ever mention what it has cost the terrorists?

Democrats... sickening... hypocritical... cowardly... opportunistic... UNPATRIOTIC... Godless... throw stones... you bet!!!!!

dsevier I could not agree more.