If I Were a Liberal …

Pages: 1 2

Darryl Kemp was sentenced to death in California in 1960 for the rape and murder of Marjorie Hipperson and also convicted for raping two other women. But he sat on death row long enough — 12 years — for the death penalty to be declared unconstitutional. He was paroled five years later and, within four months, had raped and murdered Armida Wiltsey, a 40-year-old wife and mother.

Kemp wasn’t caught at the time, so he spent the next quarter-century raping (and probably murdering) a string of women. In 2002, his DNA was matched to blood found on the fingernails of Wiltsey’s dead body. Although Kemp was serving a “life sentence” for rape in a Texas prison, he was months away from being paroled when he was brought back to California for the murder of Wiltsey.

His attorney argued that he was too old for the death penalty. He lost that argument, and in 2009, Kemp was again given a capital sentence. He now sits on death row, perhaps long enough for the death penalty to be declared unconstitutional again, so he can be released to commit more rapes and murders.

Dozens and dozens of prisoners released from death row have gone on to murder again. No one knows exactly how many, but it’s a lot more than the number of innocent men who have been executed in America, which, at least since 1950, is zero.

What is liberals’ evidence that there will be more rapes and murders if Obama’s jobs bill doesn’t pass? Biden claims that, without it, there won’t be enough cops to interrupt a woman being raped in her own home — which would be an amazing bit of police work/psychic talent, if it had ever happened. (That’s why Americans like guns, liberals.)

Obama’s jobs bill tackles the problem of rape and murder by giving the states $30 billion … for public school teachers.

Only $5 billion is even allotted to the police, but all we keep hearing about are the rapes and murders that Democrats are suddenly against (as long as being “against” rape and murder means funding public school teachers and not imprisoning or executing rapists and murderers).

Finally, did Flint use any money from Obama’s last trillion-dollar stimulus bill to hire more police in order to prevent rape and murder? No, Flint spent its $2.2 million from the first stimulus bill on buying two electric buses.

Even if what Flint really needed was buses and not cops, for $2.2 million, the city could have bought seven brand-new diesel buses and had $100,000 left over for streetlights.

Rather than reducing the rate of rape and murder, blowing money on “green” buses is likely to increase crime, since people will be forced to spend a lot more time waiting at bus stops for those two buses.

It’s going to be a long wait: The “green” buses were never delivered because the company went out of business — despite a $1.6 million loan from the American taxpayer.

But if I were a liberal, I wouldn’t acknowledge these facts, or any facts. I would close my eyes, cover my ears, demand that MSNBC fire Pat Buchanan and the FCC pull the plug on Fox, and pretend to believe that taxpayer-funded “green” projects and an ever-increasing supply of public school teachers were the only things that separated us from Armageddon.

Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle. Click here.

Pages: 1 2

  • BS77

    Read Ann Coulter's latest book, Demonic…..get educated!!!

    • Herman Caintonette

      You can't do both. At best, Coulter is a comedienne.

      • tagalog

        I don't think she's all that funny. More sarcastic.

        • mrbean

          I don't think will suffice inyou case.

      • mrbean

        Can't stand strong independent thinking women eh Herman? I guess you prefer someone more like Rachel Maddow who talks (barks) out of the side of her mouth with a sneer. Don't let her breathe on you though, she has the tuna fish breath. heh heh heh heh

        • Herman Caintonette

          I married one, beano.

          Maddow is a Rhodes Scholar, and has a first-rate research team supporting her. She may be as gay as Ken Mehlman, Larry Craig, and possibly Lindsey Graham, but if your wife smells like tuna-fish, that would not surprise me.

  • PatriotX

    Liberalism, the epitimy of hypocrisy and backwards logic.

    Called soldiers “baby killers” after a horrific one year tour in Vietnam but yet have no problem themselves killing unborn children. EMPOWERMENT FOR WOMEN through murder. YEAAAAYYYY!!!!

    One of liberalism’s main themes today is “elimination of Chrisitianity…eh….uh….separation of church and state” yet have no problems with shariah.

    Proposed suspending the constitution yet all you heard in the streets was how executing, Troy Davis, a cop killer, was unconstitutional.

    ACLU was all over protecting the rights of Westboro’s baptists(I’m in no way a fan) to free speech and to protest at the memorials of fallen soldiers yet In the case of a kid who was suspended for saying “homosexuality is immoral” at school in Texas, TOTAL SILENCE. In the case of a child being suspended for saying “God bless you” in a California public school, TOTAL SILENCE, in the case of an employee being fired off for his comments against the LBGT community on a facebook page, TOTAL SILENCE. In the case of Terry Jones (I’m in no way a fan) constutiional rights to protest and was arrested for protesting in front of an Islamic facility, TOTAL SILENCE.

    Democratic-liberals are forever 24/7, night and day, 365 days out of the year accusing the conservative-republican of racism and hatred yet they are the epitimy of all it and their actions and they support says it all. I mean, really, “Jewish bankers need to be kicked out of the country”, “re-elect Obama because he’s black”, the OWS rally backed by the American Nazi party, the KKK a terror group created by the democratic party…the list goes on.

    Had no problem with Iran burning bibles or people burning our flag, to include U.S. citizens, but was in an uproar when Terry Jones burned the Koran.

    Save America and think rationally.

    • Herman Caintonette

      It seems, XPat, that you love democracy if and ONLY if it precipitates the results you like. At the heart of the Troy Davis controversy was process — he didn't receive a fair trial, and there was substantial evidence arguing for his innocence.

      Since when do liberals embrace Shari'a? I don't think that we should be imposing our worldview on other countries, but that is the libertarian in me.

      You go on to whine that "In the case of a kid who was suspended for saying "homosexuality is immoral" at school in Texas [there was] TOTAL SILENCE" from the ACLU. Why did they need to speak? The mother already had local representation, and the school was plainly in the wrong.

      Liberals are your Juden.

      • PatriotX

        So, that’s it. That’s all you can come up with in your reply about what I said.

        The ACLU selectively chooses what to be outraged at while protecting the very ones that attack our Constitution and way of life.

        Liberals right now as we speak are comtemplating letting Muslims in some of our communities be tried in shariah courts. Wrong answer. This is the United States of America, where the Constitution of United States is the law of the land. Shariah violates many of the individual rights granted to the citizens of this country by the Constitution. Many men and women died defending it and many died to in order for it to be written. If Muslims want to be tried in Shariah courts their are plenty of Islamic nations that would let them. Of course, the ACLU’s backing those who want to implement these courts. Why am I not shocked?

        Seriously, I just finished reading an article where Muslims are trying to get crosses removed while they pray at a Catholic university. The more people we have with your mindset office, the more the faster we are pushed into oblivion by these imperialists. I’m sure that the ACLU have smoke coming from their brains in an effort to think of a way to sue the school. What a pathetic joke!!!!

        Troy Davis did receive a fair trial. Troy Davis did receive an execution 20 years too late, plain and simple. Nowadays, you stand a better chance of dying from old age than you would from an execution on death row.

        I guess next you’ll say that Barack Obama does not associate himself with the New Black Panther party and one of the members of that organization ordered the murders of two Atlanta police officers. I guess next you’ll say that Barack didn’t endorse the OWS gaggle in New York. I guess next you’ll say that liberals didn’t throw eggs at Bush when we invaded Iraq but cheered Barack aiding in overthrowing the Libyan government. Oh, but wait, Ghadaffi was a bad man. Yea, right and Saddam wasn’t.

        “Liberals are your Juden.” No, mindsets like yours open the gateway for the destruction of our nation and our allies by our enemies.

    • America

      I totally agree with you, PatriotX

  • theleastthreat

    If I were a lib, (and I used to be a Marxist) I would have stopped reading this article somewhere in the middle of the first paragraph, went right to the comments section, and started hurling epithets at Coulter and then at conservatives in general. Please note I said "if I were a lib".

    • mrbean

      Advertizing your former intellectual shortcomings is not a virtue if you do not state what you think now.

      • theleastthreat

        I didn't say it was a virtue, under any circumstances. Anyway, feel free to resume whatever it is you are trying to do.

  • greatj

    Joe ROBINETTE Biden is incompetent and emotionally disturbed. The media has always covered up his mindless rants.WHY?????

    • PatriotX

      Our lame stream media are mainly left leaning.

      • Herman Caintonette

        Ever been beyond our shores? Our corporate media is either center-right or three sheets to the wind reactionary (Fox), when compared with that of the rest of the world.

        • fiddler

          So you don't deny that MSMBC, CBS, ABC, CNN are left-leaning by your statement. Are you complainng by stating this? Would you rather move "beyond our shores" so you could have less "center-right" media. Where is your "center" anyway?

          • fiddler

            You appear to be complaining that our media is "center-right". You have a lot to explain. If our "main-stream" media fails to report something because it is politically incorrect, or because it might cast a negative light on a certain president, or conversely a positive light on "the opposition", what do you call that; "center right", "center", or "center-left"? If you were honest, don't you think the people deserve to know "what happened" regardless if it fit a "desirable ideology". When does a news media have the right to decide what is worthy of print, worthy of embellishment, or not at all?

          • Beth

            "You appear to be complaining that our media is "center-right". You have a lot to explain"

            That's an understatement.

    • BS77

      Because, as Michael Savage said, "Liberalism is a mental disorder."

      • Herman Caintonette

        I listen to Michael "born a Weiner, will die a Whiner" Savage for the possibility that he will finally have that nervous breakdown live on the air. He makes Glenn Beck almost sound sane — which is no mean feat.

        • BS77

          Hey Herman, take a long walk on a short pier.

    • Martel64

      Birds of a feather, conspiring together.

    • America

      Because if they don't, and the truth is actually reported, then they'd have to admit they were wrong to support this ticket in 2008. They will NEVER admit being wrong.

  • StephenD

    When you are an enemy of the American way of life, the enemy of your enemy…is your friend. THAT explains why folks on the Left do what they do.

    They are not "Liberal." vying for a few elites to be in control of a totalitarian system of governance has nothing Liberal about it.

    • Herman Caintonette

      What is the American way of life? The plutocrats are our common enemy, as they have smothered the American Dream. OWS is our friend.

      • Chris Nichols

        They're looters. Tell me what is the American way of life, that you are entitled to someone else's wealth because you don't think you have gotten a fair shake. How have the plutocrats smothered the American dream? Is it because they have provided investment and employment? Let's start with something simple, do you even know what money is?

        • Herman Caintonette

          By what right do you even have wealth, Chris? You can either defend your cave or go out and forage for woolly mammoth, but you can't do both.

          When the spoils of society go to the few, while the many bear the burdens, that society is unstable. The French and Russian Revolutions, the rise of the Nazis, and the Arab Spring are as predictable as the sunrise. Keep going the way that we are going, http://www.businessinsider.com/15-charts-about-we… , and you will see it here.

          • fiddler

            I can hear it now: "From each according to his ability; to each according to his need".

            By what "right" do you even have life? Heck, some children are encouraged to sue their parents for wrongful life! Tell you what, change the laws so that Congress and the President have to have the same health care that the rest of us do. Put a restriction on terms, so that as the framers envisioned, the SERVE people (ooooh what a concept!) the people instead of thinking that they have "arrived" and suddenly are the elite among us all. Then have them re-enter society to live under the laws they created.

            Part of the problem is seeing these people for the inflated egos they possess. Time for political "servants" to be just that. There are too many lazy voters who elect "sugar daddies" instead of real leaders.

          • Herman Caintonette

            Your problem is that you can only think in black-and-white. No economy is purely capitalist; nor are any purely collectivist. Most are mixed economies, embracing aspects of both in prudent measure. Every advanced country but our own has a national health-care system and old-age pensions of some sort. Most have progressive systems of income taxation, and ours is among the First World's flattest. Roads, bridges, and parks are part of the public commons, and a court and policing system is an essential prerequisite for capitalism.

            I would heartily agree w/r/t term limits, and require Congress to be subject to the same laws they impose on others. I've suggested that we limit the size of House districts to 30,000 constituents, which would take a lot of power out of being a Congressman. And yes, we need a more graduated tax system, as our plutocratic freeloaders have been mooching off laborers for too long.

          • wdwrkr

            Herman,

            I've seen on news videos that some (many?) of the OWS'ers have cell phones. I don't have a cell phone. By what right do THEY have cell phones when I don't have one?

            I have a collection of antique woodworking tools. By what right do I have that collection if no others in my community have a similar collection?

            Etc…

      • PatriotX

        With that statement you’ve just vaporized what little credibility you had to begin with.

  • Herman Caintonette

    FPM: "If I Were a Liberal … I wouldn't acknowledge facts?"

    In her trademark unhinged screed, Coulter screeches that "Republicans believe the death penalty prevents murders!" She goes on to speak in anecdotal terms, refusing to acknowledge that states without the death penalty actually have consistently lower murder rates. http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/deterrence-states

    I was surprised by that statistic myself, but it took all of a ten-second Google search to find compelling evidence that debunks Coulter's entire premise. This is what I mean when I say that Coulter is incompetent as a researcher: Whenever I check those of her claims which don't scan (I'm actually a proponent of the death penalty, but don't believe that it is a deterrent; my concern is that we get it wrong too often), I invariably find that she is a bumbling bimbette who hasn't done her homework.

    If Screamboat Annie were a liberal, she would have bothered to find out the facts she chose not to acknowledge, which is far better than Screamboat Annie the pig-ignorant conservative.

    • fiddler

      So it's okay to let out some who murdered, to murder again right? Is that not what you are saying? Who speaks for the victims? What inference can you draw from her examples? The death penality ensures that at least one murderer will not murder again.

      Perhaps fear of incarceration (with bleeding hearts waiting in the wings) should take a back seat to fear of the hereafter; the perpetrator may not be aware of THAT possibility.

      • Herman Caintonette

        If the primary purpose of incarceration and/or execution is deterrence, one could argue that life imprisonment without the possibility of parole is a more effective deterrent than execution. After all, that is what the statistics show.

        Anglo-American law has created several degrees of homicide, from involuntary manslaughter to premeditated murder. Like it or not, we vary the punishment to fit the presumed severity of the crime, which makes it possible for a killer to get out and do it again.

        Take this guy, for instance: http://pysih.com/2009/08/12/cameron-john-brown/ He was a baggage-handler at LAX, who was charged with Murder One for allegedly throwing his illegitimate four-year-old daughter off a cliff. Two juries have hung (this IS California; Texans would have hung him by now). The State could have gone for the death penalty, but they chose life without parole. But what if he was only convicted of a lesser-included? He's already served enough time awaiting trial to be eligible for parole (again, this IS California). You have to let him out, as that is what our law holds. And yes, he could kill after he is released. But that is the deal we make when we pass laws.

        Under Swedish law, murderers can be sentenced to as little as ten years' imprisonment; the maximum punishment for any crime in Iceland is 16 years. Yet, the murder rate in Sweden is about a fourth of ours, and Iceland's is barely a quarter of theirs. Could we be doing it wrong?

        • Chris Nichols

          'Yet, the murder rate in Sweden is about a fourth of ours, and Iceland's is barely a quarter of theirs."

          So. You are confusing cause and effect. What is the recidivism rate of the paroled murders? You see, people don't commit murders because of lax punishments for murder, people commit murders largely in the heat of passion, under the influence of alcohol or drugs, or because they are mentally ill, giving little or no thought to the possible consequences of their acts. Those that do think of the consequences, pre-meditated murder convicts, think they are smart enough not to get caught.

          "If the primary purpose of incarceration and/or execution is deterrence, one could argue that life imprisonment without the possibility of parole is a more effective deterrent than execution."

          What? You don't seem to be very good at math. I'll make it simple for you, there is a %100 chance that an executed murder will not get parole and murder again.

          • Herman Caintonette

            But yet, for some reason, people in non-death-penalty states commit far fewer murders. This works out to your having less of a chance of being murdered in the states which don't, as opposed to those that do. Math so simple, even you should be able to do it.

            Think about it. Would you rather be executed, or spend the next fifty years in a cage? I would argue that life imprisonment is more of a deterrent.

          • fiddler

            Have you seen some of the "cages"? Video games, TV, sports, good lighting.

            Let's say that it is NOT murder for a moment. What if it is instead rape or human trafficing, or making a young girl a s_x slave for drugs. If you are really that concerned about a life-time of remorse, consider that. Consider a young woman's life ruined in exchange for life (and yes it's often with parole as Coulter's post says).

            I wonder how Charlie Manson feels right now. Do you think he has remorse?

          • Herman Caintonette

            Is Manson even sane? Kind-of a bad example.

            I've been told that European prison conditions are far better than our own. See e.g., http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19638219/ns/us_news-c… (which is a compelling reason not to outsource this function), http://www.ktla.com/news/extras/ktla-story-3000-b… , http://www.aclu.org/prisoners-rights/los-angeles-… , http://www.nativenewsnetwork.com/amnesty-internat… . Granted, criminals in the plutocrat class are sent to country-club prisons, but for the average man, life in the stir is decidedly unpleasant. Even the Russians are laughing their arses off at us. http://english.pravda.ru/news/russia/07-03-2001/3

          • Chris Nichols

            You're not listening, I nor Ann made the case for deterrence, we made the case for punishment. You are intentionally avoiding that. As I said before, people don't consider the punishment before they do their crime. They either don't think about the consequences because of their impulsive nature of the crime or they think they won't get caught. Another point you are avoiding is the fact that these vermin are not getting life sentences. Ann's point is that they are being paroled, and are murdering again. Take a look at that graph at the bottom of the page again. The percentages are skewed because of one state, Louisiana, particularly New Orleans, which normally has the highest murder rate in the world. There are also more states with the death penalty, so there are more states to average. There are still 26 death penalty states that fall below the average of the two leading non-death penalty states, and 12 dp states with lower percentages that the top 3 non-dp states, and the rest of the states on both sides have roughly the same average. So, no, you really don't have less of a chance of being murdered in a non dp state.

          • Ozzy

            No, Herman
            People in states with low murder rates don't see a need for the death penalty.
            You have it backwards, which is understandable.
            The real question is: would you be for the death penalty in any case?

          • fiddler

            I really didn't answer your question. If you believe in the possibility in a hereafter, then life in prison with time to think about it and make peace with God is better then eliminating that option. If you believe in eternal nothingness then what really is the difference? When you die in that arena there is nothing and it eventually comes. Ah, but if you consider consciousness following death and a judgment with all opportunities at redemption lost due to a swiftly executed sentence, that might give you pause.

            "It is appointed unto man once to die, and after that comes judgment" and again, "it is a terrible thing to fall into the hands of the living God".

            If you want to call that "Bible-babble", be my guest. But, God is "long-suffering, not willing that any should perish but that a should come to repentance". Yes, even murderers as unlikely as it seems.

            Perhaps your confidence in iron-clad. If not, better to be sure.

          • fiddler

            Spelling corrections: "better than eliminating that option"., "but that all should come to repentance".

            Just in case you are the kind that skip content for menial spelling/grammatical errors.

          • fiddler

            I really didn't answer your question. If you believe in the possibility in a hereafter, then life in prison with time to think about it and make peace with God is better than eliminating that option. If you believe in eternal nothingness then what really is the difference? When you die in that arena there is nothing and it eventually comes. Ah, but if you consider consciousness following death and a judgment with all opportunities at redemption lost due to a swiftly executed sentence, that might give you pause.

            "It is appointed unto man once to die, and after that comes judgment" and again, "it is a terrible thing to fall into the hands of the living God".

            If you want to call that "Bible-babble", be my guest. But, God is "long-suffering, not willing that any should perish but that all should come to repentance". Yes, even murderers as unlikely as it seems.

            Perhaps your confidence is iron-clad. If not, better to be sure.

          • Beth

            Sweden's population: a little over 9 million
            America's population: well over 300 million

            Herman Caintonette: …."Yet, the murder rate in Sweden is about a fourth of ours"

            I would say (after considering a couple of facts) – that Sweden's murder rate is terrifying! – if what you have claimed is true, Herman Caintonette.

          • Herman Caintonette

            The rate is per 100,000 resident/years. Like, DUH!

    • Chris Nichols

      (I'm actually a proponent of the death penalty, but don't believe that it is a deterrent; my concern is that we get it wrong too often)" Do you have proof of this? By the way, it's not called crime and deterrence, it's referred to crime and punishment. If you murder someone, you punishment should be death. Also, she is a pig-ignorant conservative with a law degree. Where did you get yours again?

      • Herman Caintonette

        At a first-tier law school. Et tu, Chris?

        See e.g., The Innocence Project. We get it wrong a lot.

        • Chris Nichols

          Really, which one. And do you practice?

    • Chris Nichols

      It only took you 10 seconds because you cherry picked a site that manipulated statistics in a way you liked. Your argument is fallacious, because as I mentioned before, people commit murders for other reasons, psychological problems, impulsiveness, or because they think they are smart enough not to get caught – not whether or not the state has a death penalty. Ann's argument is, does the death penalty save lives, and it does, an average of 18 fewer murders per execution.

      • Herman Caintonette

        The numbers speak for themselves, even when you don't like what they say. You claim that the death penalty is a more effective deterrent, but have no evidence to back it up. Ann can pull her meaningless Ann-ecdotes out of her snatch all day, but you torpedoed your own argument. If the percentage of people who "commit murders for other reasons, psychological problems, impulsiveness, or because they think they are smart enough not to get caught" is consistent — and you can never hope to reduce the homicide rate below that point — then the difference between the homicide rates in death penalty and non-penalty states is a direct function of the deterrent effect of each approach. To put it in mathematical terms, if U is the number of unavoidable homicides and X is the number of discretionary ones, the number of homicides in non-death penalty states is

        Murders = U + (NDP*X), where NDP = 1.

        Logically, assuming all other variables to be equal (it costs more to execute a prisoner, but let's ignore that), you would only adopt the death penalty if DP < NDP, meaning that the net number of murders would fall.

        Now, let us assume that 50% of homicides are unavoidable, which means that the murder rate in NDP states is

        Murders = 2.06 + (1 * 2.06) = 4.12 per 100,000 (averaged over the past ten years)

        If we adopt the death penalty, the equation changes to

        5.76 = 2.06 + (1.80 * 2.06), which means that abolition of the death penalty results in an increase in the discretionary murder rate of 80%. So, why would I want to do this? Because I am an illogical, rabid right-wing Republican?

        • Chris Nichols

          You are lying, I nor Ann never made the case for deterrence, you did. We are making the case for the punishment fitting the crime, and the hypocrisy of Democrats who want to spend more money or police, which doesn't deter the amount of crime, while appointing liberal judges who send murders back out on the street. Second, why does it cost more to execute a prisoner than to keep him incarcerated for life? And does it really:
          "There is no question that the up front costs of the death penalty are significantly higher than for equivalent LWOP cases. There also appears to be no question that, over time, equivalent LWOP cases are much more expensive – from $1.2 to $3.6 million – than death penalty cases. Opponents ludicrously claim that the death penalty costs, over time, 3-10 times more than LWOP." http://www.prodeathpenalty.com/dp.html
          D. THE COST OF LIFE WITHOUT PAROLE VS THE DEATH PENALTY
          Oh, and it is a deterrent, and as I mentioned before reduces the amount of murders:
          "Using a panel data set of over 3,000 counties from 1977 to 1996, Professors Hashem Dezhbakhsh [and] Shepherd of Emory University found that each execution, on average, results in 18 fewer murders: http://ideas.repec.org/p/emo/wp2003/0314.html.
          more: http://www.hoshuha.com/resources/deteff.htm
          Now, where did you get that ridiculous formula, and the numbers? Since you are going to calculate by state, how does a constant of 1, whether you call it NDP or change it to DP due to a change of law turn from 1 to 1.8?

  • Amused

    you make me laugh Coulter ….look who's calling the kettle black , regarding not acknowledging the facts …oh wait ! Anne you don't deal in facts ! A prtetty face is about all you got going for you , for you are certainly not a journalist , nor an honest researcher . Fear mongering fiction novels is what you excell at . Oh yes , you do talk over people in live debates on tv , a female O'Reilly as it were .

    • Herman Caintonette

      I remember Ann when she actually was pretty. She's 50 now, and officially qualifies as a harridan. Even Bill Maher would think twice about hitting her now.

  • theleastthreat

    Since I made my original assertion, several posters have made my point for me.(Judge for yourselves.) I suppose I should thank them. In any event, I rest my case.

    • Herman Caintonette

      It took me three paragraphs to get to Ann's first demonstrably ridiculous claim, which is about par for the course.

      • theleastthreat

        And the evidence continues to mount in favor of my point. Maybe I should post my comments in stone from here on out. Thank you for your help. I don't think anyone else could have done as much.

        • Herman Caintonette

          I read the whole thing, but outing Coulter as a sloppy researcher is easier than shooting fish in a barrel.

          • theleastthreat

            And the river of evidence continues to pour in.

          • Herman Caintonette

            But only Rightard Republicans like you have the capacity to completely ignore it on the way to your immaculate misconceptions.

          • theleastthreat

            …ever wider, ever deeper and ever more forcefull does that river flow.

            You know, it's getting to the point where I lterally can not thank you enough.

          • Amused

            HC , it's called "The Memory Hole " ..that's where the facts go ,and the delusions begin . "theleastthreat " is well on his way .
            lol….lockstep and straight ahead , the way of the lackey .

          • theleastthreat

            What I have mistaken for a river has taken on all the aspects of a deluge. How can I ever hope to express my gratitude for such generosity on both your parts?

          • Beth

            l.m.a.o. with thelasthreat (thumbs up!)

            "What I have mistaken for a river has taken on all the aspects of a deluge" I bust out laughing – that's Funny!!! and not on its own – but with the lead up to it. rofl.

            great posts – thumbs up thelastthreat

          • theleastthreat

            Thanks, it was my pleasure. What's really funny is they went out of their way to prove my point and it may not be over yet. We'll see.

          • Amused

            lol…you have a fan , who's atleast as astute as you in denial . And your equal in ignorance . Pat each other on the back , you truly deserve each other . Oh and do buy another of Ann's books , she's laughing all the way to the bank ….and well she should , she finds an endless supply of suckers here .

          • theleastthreat

            If it gets any wetter, I think even the ducks will complain of arthritis. Maybe I should moisture proof any fiurther comments. (moisture being a euphemism for fool)

          • Beth

            "they went out of their way to prove my point and it may not be over yet. We'll see"

            (just got this in my e-mail)

            I'm dying ROFL LMAO!!!!!!!! that is sooooo funny! (and it turns out – you were right – which makes it even funnier lols lols lols)

  • mrbean

    This Herman guy, along with amused, scum, and trickybrain are not the sharpest knives in the drawer for sure. The are obviously not familar for Rustin's famous saying "Punishment must be certain for it to be a deterent." Take murder for example. There are between 15,000 and 20,000 murders per year on average over the last 40 years with the largest > 20,000 per year occurring in the 1970's and 1980's when there was a Supreme Court moratorium on the death penalty. No if we were to convict 50% of these murders and execute 50% of the convictions as 1st degree or during a felony within one year of conviction, that would make the death penalty a definite deterrent.

    • Herman Caintonette

      RefriedBeano is obviously so stupid, he is still stuck on the skillet.

      Murders have been on the decline since 1990. http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/deterrence-states… But don't let mere facts get in the way of your own staggering stupidity….

      • Chris Nichols

        Who is calling who stupid. Did you read that post, the largest numbers came during the years before 1990, when there was a moratorium on the death penalty. There have been more states with the death penalty since then.

  • Amused

    Mr.Bean , execution is by all means JUSTICE for Murder One , but it has long been established , that it is NOT a deterrent .The reason for the long dragged out process from conviction to execution , is because innocent persons have in fact been executed .The solution is rather simple , but surely beyond the grasp of Coulter . Life means prison until you die .PERIOD . I dont agree but understand the position of those who are against the death penalty , in fact many a time it is the family of the victim that prefers that . Unfortunately in this country "life ' could be ,and has been mitigated to as little as SEVEN YEARS GOOD TIME . The death penalty " deters " only the particular convicted murderer that is executed .
    And that brings us full circle back to taxes , repeat violent offenders are released early ,due to budget issues ,which bwe call "overcrowding " . So they go through the swinging door justice system until the eventually commit murder .And even then stand a chance to get out and do it again .

  • don

    How did that 60s song go?
    If I was a liberal, I'd lie in the morning.
    I'd lie in the evening,
    all over this land.
    I'd lie about the danger
    I'd lie about the warnings
    I'd lie about the love between my brothers and sisters
    all over this land.

    • America

      Very good Don! I like it :)

    • Amused

      Keep your day job don . you're a good parrot though .

    • Beth

      If that weren't so true Don – it would be funny (thumbs up)

  • Herman Caintonette

    PatriotX: "So, that's it. That's all you can come up with in your reply about what I said.

    The ACLU selectively chooses what to be outraged at while protecting the very ones that attack our Constitution and way of life."

    I didn't have time for a seriatim refutation, but let's get to this one. Selective outrage has become pandemic on both sides of the ideological divide, but I know of no case where the ACLU has taken on a case which is totally frivolous. Those of you who want to shove your Bible-babble down defenseless and impressionable children's throats ought to be opposed; I can still remember when Jewish kids were asked to go into the hall while the Christians prayed.

    I'm not going to suggest that the ACLU doesn't always get it right, but they did defend the Neo-Nazis' right to march through Skokie, IL, and their right was vindicated by a Jewish lawyer. You don't need a First Amendment to protect your right to say that kittens are cute; it must defend speech you positively loathe, or it serves no useful purpose. In the grand scheme of things, the ACLU has been a force for good.

    Pat: "Liberals right now as we speak are comtemplating letting Muslims in some of our communities be tried in shariah courts."

    You must have been listening to the certifiable nut-job Glenn Beck again. Get your head out of right-wing crazy sites, and get the answer from the horse's mouth, instead of the horses' asses on the Right: http://www.aclu.org/blog/religion-belief/debunkin

    Pat: "I guess next you'll say that Barack Obama does not associate himself with the New Black Panther party and one of the members of that organization ordered the murders of two Atlanta police officers."

    Don't have any evidence that he does. However, I did disapprove of Holder's refusal to prosecute in the Philly voter-intimidation case. But on the other side of the ledger, Tim Griffin should have been prosecuted for vote-caging.

    Pat: "I guess next you'll say that Barack didn't endorse the OWS gaggle in New York."

    I endorse OWS. I am a part of it. And I wish BO would either grow a pair, or borrow Hillary's for the night. Obama was what precipitated OWS: He promised change, but reneged on his promise.

    Pat: "I guess next you'll say that liberals didn't throw eggs at Bush when we invaded Iraq but cheered Barack aiding in overthrowing the Libyan government."

    We know why BushCo invaded Iraq — oil, Israel, and domestic politics — and that he had no casus belli. Here, I relied on the CATO Institute and both Gen. Powell and Condi, who insisted that Saddam was contained and that there was no need for war. We were told that the war would pay for itself — a red flag, and a vindication of the warning President Reagan gave us. RR was no economist — he got us into the mess we find ourselves in — but on matters of war and peace, he had a wealth of common sense.

    Contrast that to the situation in Libya. NATO voted to go in, and prevention of impending genocide against defenseless citizens is widely considered a casus belli. Unlike the $4 trillion price tag, this adventure only cost us a stray billion — far less than the pallets of cash that "just disappeared" `in Iraq. By any objective measure, it is an easier adventure to defend.

    Pat: "Oh, but wait, Ghadaffi was a bad man. Yea, right and Saddam wasn't."

    There are a lot of bad men out there, and you can't always use force to remove them. RR picked his spots; so should we.

    As for Troy Davis, I am not convinced. Amnesty International summarizes:

    "The case against him consisted entirely of witness testimony which contained inconsistencies even at the time of the trial. Since then, all but two of the state's non-police witnesses from the trial have recanted or contradicted their testimony.

    Many of these witnesses have stated in sworn affidavits that they were pressured or coerced by police into testifying or signing statements against Troy Davis.

    One of the two witnesses who has not recanted his testimony is Sylvester "Red" Coles — the principle alternative suspect, according to the defense, against whom there is new evidence implicating him as the gunman. Nine individuals have signed affidavits implicating Sylvester Coles."
    http://www.amnestyusa.org/our-work/cases/usa-troy

    Pat: "mindsets like yours open the gateway for the destruction of our nation and our allies by our enemies."

    I don't trust my government; it is our job as citizens to keep it in line. How is this in any way unhealthy?

    • PatriotX

      I didn’t have much time to put together a respons to your earlier comments either

      “Those of you who want to shove your Bible-babble down defenseless and impressionable children’s throats ought to be opposed; I can still remember when Jewish kids were asked to go into the hall while the Christians prayed.”

      I don’t know when or where you went to school but I remember no such thing, in fact I can’t remember prayer in school, period. As far as “my Bible-babble” goes you don’t have to worry about that nowadays. I’m sure if the ACLU had it’s way it would be outlawed as hate speech. Of course with them, anything you say against them, Muslims or homosexuals nowadays is construed as “hate speech”. You would have to be blind and deaf to NOT see how pathetically PC everything has become.

      “In the grand scheme of things, the ACLU has been a force for good.”

      Good for who? I’ll tell you, anyone who hates Christians or this country.

      Let me fill you in on what I know about this “force for good”. You’re right, at one time it was. However, it’s been hijacked by people who have hated this country since day one. In fact it shouldn’t take any reasearch to tell you. Take a look at who they defend and look at who they slam, that should say it all. The ACLU was originally an organization that protected the labor rights of employees from corrupt employers early in the 1900′s and it was much needed because of the dangerous work conditions and corrupt employers. They also protected their civil rights under the constitution. Their policy during that time was to not let anyone place membership who was in allegiance to any nation that had an oppressive form of government, particularly a communist one. It only made sense since one of their functions were to protect the constitution. In 1967 they rescinded that policy and let an individual, who they refused before, join them. Ever since then they’ve waged war against anything and everything traditionally Christian or American. The main tool they’ve used is “separation of church and state”. In no part of the constitution will you find this. They took this phrase from one of Thomas Jefferson’s letters, twisted out of context and used it remove any form of Christianity anywhere they could. This same concept is being taught to kids in our indoctrination centers/schools, or at least in the few schools where they still teach the Constitution.

      “…know of no case where the ACLU has taken on a case which is totally frivolous.”

      Then obviously you can’t know too much about the ACLU at all. The ACLU has sued, as of earlier this year, a total of four states for over $570,000 over “separation of church and state” issues. They’ve sued Alabama, Georgia, Kentucky and Tennesee courts for having some displays of the Ten Commandments in their courtrooms or on the municipal property grounds. The blame isn’t entirely on them. We let it happen and those in our justice department, who could have done something, let it happen. Those of us with Christian beliefs, however silly that might seem to you, also let it happen.

      “We know why BushCo invaded Iraq — oil, Israel, and domestic politics — and that he had no casus belli. Here, I relied on the CATO Institute and both Gen. Powell and Condi, who insisted that Saddam was contained and that there was no need for war.”

      We still don’t know why Bush invaded Iraq and I’ll give you that one because I still can’t figure this out. Leaving it in this unstable state and open for Iran to annex it, isn’t the answer either, I can assure you. If it was for oil, it couldn’t have been for the working man’s benefit because we are paying more for gas now than ever.

      “You must have been listening to the certifiable nut-job Glenn Beck again. Get your head out of right-wing crazy sites, and get the answer from the horse’s mouth, instead of the horses’ asses”

      First off, you don’t know what I listen too, and, no, the horses behind would be main stream liberal-leftist media.

      “President Reagan gave us. RR was no economist — he got us into the mess we find ourselves in — but on matters of war and peace, he had a wealth of common sense.” I would agree RR wasn’t much of an economist. It isn’t up to the President of the United States to run our economy, that’s mainly the private sector however over the decades particularly since FDR that’s changed and it’s been gradually changing into more of a socialist republic to where the state has it’s fingers into alot of things it has no buisiness. RR can’t remotely be blamed for this disaster we have now. This has been going on for quite a while. The one positve thing he did do, whether he knew it or not, was to LEAVE IT ALONE.

      So, don’t have any evidence of Barack having any association with the New Black Panther Party, eh?

      He marched with them back during March 2007 during his presidential campaign and the man who ordered the murders of those police officers was Najee Muhammed, minister of war. Some reported later that they mocked the widows of those officers. Truly detestable. I can’t really fault you with this one because, I honestly hadn’t heard Barack before the 2008 elections.

      This country is going through a serious identity crisis right now and entities the ACLU and the OWS movement are driving it deeper into the abyss. The reason why I don’t like lame stream media anymore is because they have a habbit of not necessarily telling OUTRIGHT lies they just conveniently leave out parts of the truth.

      The whole “progressive”-liberal mindset has done just that in the media and schools.

  • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wlvEptmF434 Tom Allan

    Do you know what else liberals are in denial about?
    The long form birth certificate is 100% counterfeit.
    Presenting a counterfeit birth certificate is a federal felony.
    If we were a nation of laws he would not even be considered for reelection. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wlvEptmF434

  • Amused

    There's PROOF for you , mr. theleastthreat -ther idiot above chimes in clinging to a toatlly disproven lie , a picture of the type of denial that is imbedded in people like you , Coulter and her ilk . This can only be accomplished through IGNORANCE and DENIAL .
    Take a bow Tom Allan ! You prove the point of the critics here . The only difference in the utter ignorance expressed between Trufers and Birthers is the subject matter of the lie they have swallowed .And this transcends societasl staus , as the Donald so obviously proved , after making an utter fool of himself on the same matter . But hey man , "water off a ducks back " just throw the facts down thed memory hole and move on to the next lie .
    Pathetic .

  • Amused

    This is just another example of the weakness of the Republican Party .Afraid to alienate any of it's potential voting base , letting truth take a back seat to accumulating votes . A great example of the sickening cowardice , displayed by politicians . The Left is no better , and you are no better than the Left .

  • Ben

    The leftist ideology`s gregarious totalitarian component effect shamefully on great number of its followers as it happens with quite deserving Democrats. In Soviet Union communist followers and even foreign famouse people supported the most inhuman actions of the authorities and lied for its justifications.

    • Amused

      Yea , and I'm sure they were willing , knowing Uncle Joe made 20 million of them disappear . And Ben , what a croc of B.S. your alleged theory on the Left is , in fact just as idiotic as the Lefts twisted view of their opponents on the right . And I guess I shouldn't expect you to have been studious enough to put things in their historical perspective .You "attach the tag " of communists in the same way Coulter uses the tag "demonic " . Of course the allegedly educated Coulter makes a fool of herself ,but atleaste she pocketing money and getting paid for it ….you're not .

  • Flowerknife_us

    We sure do need more Teachers. Especially liberal female ones. Why should only Football Players benefit from a Profesionally administered, well rounded Education? It is a true comfort for Parents knowing their children are handled so well.

    This may cause come conflict with the Gay-Transgendered agenda. Needing, of course, any number of new Administrators to diologe these conflicts to resolution. Opting, naturally, for inclusion and diversity by declairing both a healthy experience needed to be shared by the whole student body.

    Think of all the crimes those un-hired Cops will never find.

  • GLM

    the crazy thing about the whole Obama Birth Certificate thing is that it took almost 3 years to produce…3 years. Really? I could create some amazing counterfeit documents in 3 years time.

    Truly, Liberals support all the wrong things.

    - You hate Jewish businessmen who have prospered b/c of Capitolism; Yet you have no problem supporting Arab capitolists who are making BILLIONS and BILLIONS from Oil.

    - You hate war, and in no way condone killing innocent kids; Yet you have no problem murdering children through Abortion.

    - You hate "Religion" and those who believe that "their way is the only way…Labeling them as "intolerant""; Yet you teach our children to believe in a Scientific/Humanist ideology and ironically, if they disagree in anyway, you are completely intolerant of them.

    - You claim that all of you are aimed at helping everyone progress and give everyone a chance to succeed; Yet all of your social programs have yet to do anything but facilitate slothfulness and a generation who doesn't want to progress but are rather complacent and happy being so.

    - You despise the Constitution; Yet you don't mind trying to use it when it suits you.

    You all are complete hypocrites, and the nation has been on the decline since the Hippie Movement. Whether in Europe, USSR, or Latin America, you're social programs and ideologies DONT WORK. The world's most Liberal societies have always collapsed b/c they are unsustainable. We will be no different.

    • PatriotX

      “You despise the Constitution; Yet you don’t mind trying to use it when it suits you”

      It would be impossible for me to agree with you more.

    • Beth

      "- You despise the Constitution; Yet you don't mind trying to use it when it suits you"

      EXACTLY!!!!!!

  • Amused

    Uh ……3 years ? Sorry chump , that's part of the first lie .The State of Hawaii stopped any further "proof " when the demand became ridiculous …long ago . A testament to the thousands of idiotsd living in this country . I guess you choose NOT to remember that way back when it was produced , these same idiots claimed it to be forged , and YOU are one of them . Take a bow GLM .
    As for your hatefull diatribe , you have just described the TEABAGGERS &REPO/CONS who are sucking up to them out of fear of losing their votes ….and behind are the christian fundies , a true example of religious intolerance .Nice try at the game of turnaround -the only onesa you convince are fellow fools like yourself .
    Yea musta been them hippies that got us into the position we're in ! You keep believing that , like the good little sycophant parrot that you are .

    • fiddler

      You haven't really addressed the other things. By the way, why all the sealed transcripts from Columbia Universery and the other things. Why is this all shielded from public view. Too much of a red flag.

  • crypticguise

    Ann Coulter is GREAT! Thanks also for the many excellent comments. We need to KILL more killers.