Originally Posted by alias

I never said I find her "more believable"

Originally Posted by aMFliberal

I'm willing to admit that in the sum of Ann Coulter's work there are a few morsels of truth, but the same can be said about Michael Moore.

I don't like either of them but I'm willing to admit that. Obviously Sarge didn't say anything positive about Moore because it probably makes a conservative queasy to even attempt that. You can still muster up the honesty to admit that for the few morsels Coulter has to her name, Moore more or less has the same number of morsels to his name. I don't know why you can not see that. Actually I do, it's because you defend conservatives to the death without even thinking about what they are saying and simply write off anything that comes out of a liberal's mouth as blasphemy.

Originally Posted by sgtdmski

Ann Coulter is the right's Michael Moore!!!! To harp about the mistakes that she has made, and at the same time except all that Michael Moore has to say as fact is ludricuous. What is the problem???? The left accepts Michael Moore why can we not have ours???

Perhaps the problem is the simple fact that ours actually looks better and at times is much more believable. Michael Moore the poor boy from Detroit, oh that's right, he is actually from an upper class all white neighborhood in the suburbs and not actually Detroit.

Ann Coulter is outlandish and often makes wild claims in order to sell books, the same thing Moore does with his docudramas. Part of the reason that Coulter annoys so many is the simple fact that behind some of her most outlandish claims there is a morsel of truth. Case in point, the Jersey Girls, four widows who demanded the 9/11 commission, blame President Bush and Condeleeza Rice for not stopping the attacks, and campaign for John Kerry. She makes an accurate claim that the left embraces spokespersons who make it difficult to challenge. These four women are a prime example, if we challenge their views we are disparaged as being uncaring and unconcerned for these widows who lost their husbands. Their plight all began because they complained that the settlement from the government for the loss of their husbands was not enough.

Or what about Cindy Sheehan. We are to accept her in her grief for the loss of her son. The very son she gave up custody in a divorce, the very son who she has yet taken the time to request or purchase a headstone for his grave, the very son who reenlisted while in Iraq, as the ultimate spokesperson against the War in Iraq. She lost a son, to attack her is to attack her grief.

Of all the groups out there I find it amazing that there is not one single group of bereaved widows from the NY City fire department, 343 brave individuals lost their lives going into buildings everyone else was trying to get out. There were no complaints from the widows that their settlement was not enough, there are no groups that claim the US Foreign Policy is the cause for their husbands and sons deaths. They died doing their jobs, yet many of their settlements are far less than the settlements of the Jersey girls. Go figure.

dmk

Originally Posted by alias

Michael Moore is a manipulator and a liar. He delieberately lies and manipulates his movies to make his point. Ann doesn't do that. She just says it like she likes it and that is that.

Originally Posted by alias

Here is Sarge's entire message and there it is. Now you tell me where I screwed up. Excuse me for saying this but you are the grandest nitpicker I have ever come across.

Originally Posted by foundit66

As Dylan pointed out with proof, a lot of what Ann says is just plain lies as well...



HERE is what you put into a post...
-----------------------------------------
Sarge: "Perhaps the problem is the simple fact that ours actually looks better and at times is much more believable. Michael Moore the poor boy from Detroit, oh that's right, he is actually from an upper class all white neighborhood in the suburbs and not actually Detroit".
OURS looks better and at times is MUCH MORE BELIEVABLE.
-----------------------------------------
The statement in blue comes AFTER the end quotation mark, leaving people to interpret that it is no longer a statement made by Sarge.

And predictably, you avoided answering my question...


Do you find Michael Moore or Ann Coulter more credible?

Originally Posted by alias

Maybe you should read the entire quote again. It is right in there. All I did was print it again outside the quote for emphasis.

Originally Posted by alias

It is there twice, the second time for emphasis.

Originally Posted by foundit66

Do you find Michael Moore or Ann Coulter more credible?

Originally Posted by foundit66

Alias.
When you print something OUTSIDE of quotation marks, you are not "emphasizing" it.
You are demonstrating that it IS NOT A QUOTE.

Please. Learn how the English language works...



Quit with your lying.
HERE is your full post:

Now show me WHERE it is in there twice.

Why oh why do you say things that are so EASILY disproven?