Ann Coulter: No Shadow Of A Doubt - Liberal Women Are Worthless

"First of all, how does she know that the women polled are
liberal? Many of the things mentioned in the poll are important to me, too. I just don't
expect the goverment to take care of it."

First, you should be allowed to vote!
smile.gif
Second, if you do not expect the government to take care of it(whatever that IT is) with other peoples money, then by definition you cannot be a liberal.
 
The Coulter article was babble, propaganda from "our side". Basically senseless and I don't understand why she wrote it.

I was referring to the comment made that WE who think correctly can be trusted to vote. Yippee! I'm ecstatic. Oh. Wait a minute. Probably half the male population DOESN'T believe I vote correctly. Hmm..maybe I'm in trouble here.

As far as voting based on emotions, I guess I plead guilty. I don't care to have my children grow up as servents of the state. Is that emotional? Maybe. The practical side of me would see the advantages of having them be provided a free education paid for by someone else. Someone taking care of their needs, from womb to tomb. Not having to raise a child they don't want because it's the right thing to do. Abortion is probably infinately more practical in that case. Surely a lot more cost-effective. Probably prevent that nasty habit of we women taking time off to deliver your children, too.

The thing that ticks me off the most was the idea that liberals shouldn't be allowed to vote. That's complete bull. Of course they should be allowed to vote. There is nothing in our constitution that says you can't be an idiot. When you start taking away one persons ability to vote for what they believe, you place your own ability in danger. Worse yet, you no longer deserve it yourself.

Guess I went off on a rant here. No apologies this time. I'm right.
 
The heart of the matter is that a broad based 'democracy' is doomed if it simply starts pandering to the mob, said mob comprised of people who can't/won't think, assume personal or communal responsibility, and are completely self-centered. If that is the definition of 'liberal women' (or men, or children) recognize it for what it is and where we are headed. If you don't like the way I put it, read De Toqueville's 'Democracy in America', written in the 1830s. Pogo said it as well: 'We have found the enemy and he is us.'

------------------
 
Colombe...
Don't take the the article, in toto, nor some comments in the thread to heart. I don't
smile.gif


Boys tend to be reactionary



------------------
"Quis custodiet ipsos custodes" RKBA!
 
I'd ask my wife her opinion, but it's the wrong time of the month. If I can just figure out which two days of the month are the right days, I will let you know what she thinks about all of this.

------------------
NRA MEMBER? GREAT, NOW JOIN GUN OWNERS OF AMERICA
 
Posted by Colombe: <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>There is nothing in our constitution that says you can't be an idiot.[/quote]AMEN!

That is why I do not support an amendment to the Constitution prohibiting flag-burning, as much as it offends me to see it done. Many of us here, men and women, gave many of our best years to preserve your and my right to act stoopid. Liberals do, of course have the right to vote, they just don't deserve it, IMHO, on the grounds that they repeatedly vote their freedoms away. I would not remove their right to vote, but I will point out their undeservedness and ungratefulness, men and women.

A Shiner Bock to the first person who identifies the (paraphrased) quote, "He who would give up essential freedom for a little temporary safety deserves neither." For example, how the hell did Social Security get to be the national retirement system?
 
Ben Franklin, quoted frequently by T. Jefferson and others. I think. So many people used it, and rightly so.

[This message has been edited by Colombe (edited April 23, 2000).]
 
DC,

YOU are calling the guys reactionary?

I quote Dennis Olson: ... BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!

Colombe, I think you are right. You can collect your Shiner Bock in Springfield, MO, on 12 August, 2000. ... On second thought, I'll wrestle you for it!!

[This message has been edited by sensop (edited April 25, 2000).]
 
THAT's why no one posted it at Ms.--it doesn't make any point good enough to make up for the fact that the posters at Ms. would form a howling mob and rampage through America's cities burning and pillaging as they went.

Her assumptions about "women, as a class" are dead wrong and should never have made it past her rewrite stage. I may be a chauvinist pig but even I know mom contributed. In fact, when dad decided he wanted to try his lifelong dream of opening a gun/tackle shop, it was mom's earnings that kept us fed and put enough money into the shop to keep it functioning. And because of that little interlude, dad still doesn't make as much as mom nor is he as close to retirement as she is. ;)


BUT I missed the part where she said that only people with the right opinions should be allowed to vote. Colombe, can you quote that for us?
 
sensop...
Why, yes I am.

All my responses are carefully measured and logical conclusions based upon well-honed analytical mechanisms. I happen to be able to process data quickly and have extremely rapidly firing synapses. Thus, when all is considered...I merely appear to be reactionary to the untrained eye. :D :D :D :D :D

------------------
"Quis custodiet ipsos custodes" RKBA!
 
Take a look at all the issues that take away our liberties and you will see a majority of women voting for them. ("Majority" meaning that there are exceptions)

IMO, the downfall of America and our freedoms began when they started letting women vote.

Take a look at the record...you may be surprised. Yep, I know that last statement will just piss off a lot of people...but go look at the numbers and see if you still disagree. I could go on and on but everything from the seventies sexual revolution up to today, the degradation of family, the growth of government programs, etc etc etc all stem from the feminist movement and women's voting in the matters. Look at them all and look for the root cause of our society problems today. It all leads back directly to the extremist feminist movement of the last few decades (as opposed to women just fighting for equality, there is a point where it has gone too far).

Of course some women have logic and understand the fight for freedom, but the majority are damaging to the American cause.

Clinton, Gun Control, feel good laws....etc etc...they are all voted in by a majority of women.
Few men voted for Clinton (Women voted Clinton in...twice!).
Few men support gun control. Logic guides men's votes, rather than "feelings" and 30 second soundbites that give women the butterflies, sending them on unsubstantiated crusades.

Lest you think I am a chauvinist pig...I am a woman and this is my opinion. I am NOT for putting women back to the days of long ago where they were property and inferior to men....but I am simply stating that when it comes to voting and governmental issues, most women are just not up to the task of making good decisions.

Flame away, I probably won't respond because I just don't have time. I am an ambitious woman, mid twenties, getting my SECOND bachelors degree and very busy at it. I am not what some people might picture me. I am well educated, all for women's equality etc, but that does not mean that I cannot see that most women just stink at making these kinds of policy decisions.
If the truth be known, when it comes down to it, I would sacrifice my Right to vote if it meant that all the other idiot women out there could not vote either, because there are just too many of them out there.
But, that will never happen and it would mean the loss of other things. So, what is the answer? I don't know. Hopefully the women of this country will get some sense knocked into them some time and start thinking thoroughly about these issues before they start their crusades to give up liberty for a little security.

I think a lot could be said here about the role of men and their natural instinct, but it would be very long. Couter hit on that point shortly in her article. Men are the providers by nature and these things are hardwired into their brains. They must think of long term effects to their family. Men respect liberty more because they understand the direct enemy threat to their family when liberty is given up. Women are nurterers by nature. They can only see what gov't needs to do to nurture society. This could get very deep, but think about it and you will see a difference in how men and women vote. Totally different trains of thought; totally different perceptions of the issues.


Ps- I don't see anywhere that Couter said that Liberals should not be allowed to vote. Maybe Colombe should read that article again and point out where Couter says that?
I do believe that Liberals should be able to vote, but I do wish there was some way to make people be more educated on matters before they have a say.

When it comes down to it, the media is really responsible. The problem being that women (in general) seem to be more influenced by media chatter and 30 second sound bites whereas men (in general) seem to think a little before they take action.

Enough rambling...gotta go study.



[This message has been edited by CassandraComplex (edited April 27, 2000).]
 
While Cassandra makes a valid point about how policies have changed and American government has implemented a lot more socialistic poilcies/programs since women started voting, think about this.... how would you, personally, be living right now if women did not have the right to vote? Do you really think if only men made all the decisions you'd be a college student in her mid-20's....probaly not. I'm thinking a mother of three in her mid-twenties without a whole lot of choices in life. No offense, to the men here, either. Not to say that they would have been cheuvanists, but if women didn't vote, why would politicians have bothered to change anything that didn't direclty affect their chance of winning an election? They would only have focused on issues that their constituents(men) felt were important. Yeah, we can sit back and ridicule the "women's lib" movement, too, but who's reaping the benefits of a lot of hard work? We are! It would be nice, though if more women thought more logically before going to the polls.
And BTW, I kind of read into the article the same thing Columbe did. There's nothing to quote directly saying "(liberal) women shouldn't vote," but it certainly seems implied to me. But I guess that's just me being a "reactionary" and illogical woman! ;)
 
Ok..I'm tired of the argument..but just to clarify..Coulter DID NOT say only women with the right opinions should vote..it was a member on this thread.
 
Columbe,

You are correct that Ann didn't write "liberals shouldn't vote". You are the only member of this thread that wrote "liberals shouldn't vote".
____________________________________________

Everyone,

I have to agree with the fact that women generally vote for the touchy-feely candidate. In order to uphold the true American way we must let everyone vote, but where does that leave our freedoms? Unfortunately they find their way into the ****ter. I think these people (men and women) that vote touchy-feely are going to realize what damage they have done by the time it's too late.

I think the majority of these people only see what's directly in front of their faces and don't look at the long term. Because of the single sided, undigestible slime that the press pumps into these small minded slaves we have liberals. Some of us are more forward thinking and see through this well crafted one-sidedness. We try to point it out to others but are ignored or written off as "extremists".

Until we are all serfs to the govt., most liberals are not going to see the light. They don't realize how important modern weaponry is to the common man and woman. I'm not just talking about crime control and immediate self defense, either.

These people think "it'll never happen here!" and they ignore the history of governments. I was just talking to some people about politics here at work and they all think Bush is a dummy. This is largely due to the fact that the press only shows GW in a "dummy" light because of some things that were (and were not) said. I live in Nebraska and it is a predominately REPUBLICAN state! I pointed out that GW wouldn't be such an effective governor of Texas if he really was a dummy. His state loves him. Texas can't be all wrong! I just got blank stares...and these people consider themselves Republican.

God help us because it's hopeless when our factual communications try to compete with the press.

Joel
 
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Futo Inu:
Uhmmmmm. TFL women, please don't be offended. Suffrage for YOU is a good thing. The article, as defined by its title, is limiting its view to "liberal women".[/quote]
 
Back
Top