That's the usual insulting talk that you have to expect from Ann. Most neocons don't like having to actually talk about issues. Most reacent case in point:

This is the transcript of a John Kerry Speech in front of the Non-Partisan think tank, the Council of Foreign Relations.
http://www.cfr.org/publication.html?id=6576

This is a transcript of a George Bush speech in front of the same group yesterday:

http://www.cfr.org/publication/9355/

One glaring difference between the two transcripts is that Kerry's speech included a question and answer period, Bush's did not, dispite a CFR tradition of speakers doing a Q&A with the brilliant and well informed members of the Council. Why? Bush refused to appear if he had to answer questions. He just wanted to preach. That is nothing more than Propoganda. Its also cowardly as he would have been asked very pointed about his war policy.

What Necons like AC and GWB are good at is one-way-communication that cheerleads for what they want Americans to believe and then attack people, rather than the ideas that they hold. Read Ann's stuff and there is no substance to it. Like Bush, Roy Moore, Pat Robertson, Rush Limbaugh, etc she is used to simply preaching to the choir and heaping ridcule on her opponents. She certainly isn't used to someone answering her back or shouting her down for her bigoted views. Her "smarter than you" Q & A session consisted of nothing more than smart-assed remarks like Ted Kennedy not being able to be middle of the road because he can't even stay on the road when he is driving or that she would tell a child that he was adopted if he came to her and announced that he was gay. If there is anything intelligent in those comments, or somthing that actually contributes something to the national debate, I fail to see it.

A recent Bernie Sanders interview sums up what I believe all of the GOP talking head pundits are all about with their stategy of ridiculing and personally attacking opponents instead of debating real issues:

"Their weakness is they have nothing to say. What are they going to say about the economy? What are they going to say about tax policy when they give tax breaks to billionaires and inadequately fund veterans’ benefits? What do they say about the environment when they are among the few remaining people on Earth who do not believe in global warming and have just passed a disastrous energy bill that has almost no energy conservation or sustainable energy? What can they say about Social Security when the vast majority of the people don’t want to privatize it?

On issue after issue they are bankrupt. The only thing they can do is try to destroy the character and the integrity of their opponent. That’s all that they have left."

KeithS

There is another glaring difference between Bush and Kerry. One is a sitting president and the other is a junior senator, a failed candidate scrambling for any kind of political relevance.

Is Ann Coulter's style any different than Al Franken's? Should Franken or Coulter be heard, especially in an academic setting? What ever happened to free speech? Does that only apply to liberals?

The next time you quote please make sure that is someone that has a clue what is going on. Let's just take his first point as an example.

"What are they going to say about the economy?"

I give you two links about the economy.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/bw/b3963075;_ylt=AsBXRXMlmu5yO6i7mvLL3Cy4v0gC;_ylu=X3oDMTBidHQxYjh2BHNlYwN5bnN0b3J5

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/12/08/politics/08poll.html?ei=5065&en=85f087479060c4ec&ex=1134709200&adxnnl=1&partner=MYWAY&adxnnlx=1134047737-fP0gMrYB6rSSAs0331sgsg&pagewanted=print

His other questions are just as easily answered.