[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
tGunslinger wrote:
That’s exactly why Coulter would ‘win’ internet debates.
In an internet debate she’d get her salad tossed. [/quote]
Wouldn’t doing that to her take your mind off of any debate? Well, whatever floats your boat…
[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
tGunslinger wrote:
That’s exactly why Coulter would ‘win’ internet debates.
In an internet debate she’d get her salad tossed. I could easily fact check any of her references and call her out on them. She usually throws everything out of context and misrepresents the actual facts. In a podium debate that wouldn’t be easy to do.[/quote]
She’s a lawyer and trained in debate. She’s also brilliant. She’d slaughter you.
Ann Coulter is a sensationalist, populistic cunt… 
Her christian fundamentalism is just scary.
[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
thunderbolt23 wrote:
LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
Depends on what we’re debating. I could easily make her look like the fool she is.
Heh.
You laugh but someone that is used to having to be balanced and fair when presenting facts and results and knows how to present evidence would make her look like a partisan, groupie bimbo.[/quote]
That is why i prefer Dershowitz, not Coulter… 
[quote]Headhunter wrote:
LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
tGunslinger wrote:
That’s exactly why Coulter would ‘win’ internet debates.
In an internet debate she’d get her salad tossed. I could easily fact check any of her references and call her out on them. She usually throws everything out of context and misrepresents the actual facts. In a podium debate that wouldn’t be easy to do.
She’s a lawyer and trained in debate. She’s also brilliant. She’d slaughter you.
[/quote]
quit a few thousand people become lawyers each year, that doesen’t say much. Further: she is trained in shit-storm debates, not in rational, serious and mature debates. She is extremely populistic, is sloppy with her sources and she is seldom able to keep her act together when she faces opposition.
And brilliant…?! What earth do you live on…? She is the worst of the worst that the conservatives has to offer. She is an extremist and extremely bad at it.
[quote]Headhunter wrote:
LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
tGunslinger wrote:
That’s exactly why Coulter would ‘win’ internet debates.
In an internet debate she’d get her salad tossed. I could easily fact check any of her references and call her out on them. She usually throws everything out of context and misrepresents the actual facts. In a podium debate that wouldn’t be easy to do.
She’s a lawyer and trained in debate. She’s also brilliant. She’d slaughter you.
[/quote]
HH,
coulter is incredibly hardcore. She goes over the top quite a bit.
However, she does understand the left wing lunacy. Further, she predicts their nonsense before they say it. She does point out many gaping holes in the liberal’s arguments.
I laugh while I’m cringing.
Finally, liftus wouldn’t make it past the first round with her.
He routinely gets pasted by a bunch of amateurs.
She’d destroy him.
He’d be on his way to his basement in under a minute.
JeffR
[quote]Headhunter wrote:
LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
tGunslinger wrote:
That’s exactly why Coulter would ‘win’ internet debates.
In an internet debate she’d get her salad tossed. I could easily fact check any of her references and call her out on them. She usually throws everything out of context and misrepresents the actual facts. In a podium debate that wouldn’t be easy to do.
She’s a lawyer and trained in debate. She’s also brilliant. She’d slaughter you.
[/quote]
Being a lawyer isn’t a be all and end all. You just posted a link about one that is suing a dry cleaner for 65mil, nuff said.
“I think we ought to nuke North Korea right now just to give the rest of the world a warning.”
“These people can’t even wrap up genocide. We’ve been hearing about this slaughter in Darfur forever ? and they still haven’t finished. The aggressors are moving like termites across that country. It’s like genocide by committee. Who’s running this holocaust in Darfur, FEMA? This is truly a war in which we have absolutely no interest.”
“They’re [Democrats] always accusing us of repressing their speech. I say let’s do it. Let’s repress them. Frankly, I’m not a big fan of the First Amendment.”
[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
thunderbolt23 wrote:
LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
Depends on what we’re debating. I could easily make her look like the fool she is.
Heh.
You laugh but someone that is used to having to be balanced and fair when presenting facts and results and knows how to present evidence would make her look like a partisan, groupie bimbo.[/quote]
Are you ‘balanced and fair’ in your assessment of Ann’s work? Or are you a second-hander, letting others determine your opinions for you? I’ve yet to see you refer to her in any other way besides deragatory. You claim she’s some sort of total shill, yet you seem to be the one who is VERY one sided.
[quote]Ren wrote:
Headhunter wrote:
LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
tGunslinger wrote:
That’s exactly why Coulter would ‘win’ internet debates.
In an internet debate she’d get her salad tossed. I could easily fact check any of her references and call her out on them. She usually throws everything out of context and misrepresents the actual facts. In a podium debate that wouldn’t be easy to do.
She’s a lawyer and trained in debate. She’s also brilliant. She’d slaughter you.
Being a lawyer isn’t a be all and end all. You just posted a link about one that is suing a dry cleaner for 65mil, nuff said.[/quote]
You’re an idiot. Do you pass similar judgments on other professionals? Pathetic…
[quote]Adamsson wrote:
“I think we ought to nuke North Korea right now just to give the rest of the world a warning.”
“These people can’t even wrap up genocide. We’ve been hearing about this slaughter in Darfur forever ? and they still haven’t finished. The aggressors are moving like termites across that country. It’s like genocide by committee. Who’s running this holocaust in Darfur, FEMA? This is truly a war in which we have absolutely no interest.”
“They’re [Democrats] always accusing us of repressing their speech. I say let’s do it. Let’s repress them. Frankly, I’m not a big fan of the First Amendment.”[/quote]
Irony is not your strong suit, I see.
[quote]JeffR wrote:
Finally, liftus wouldn’t make it past the first round with her.
He routinely gets pasted by a bunch of amateurs.
She’d destroy him.
He’d be on his way to his basement in under a minute.
JeffR
[/quote]
You assume I take only a “left” stance in real world situations. I am smarter than her (and most people) in that I know how to argue “objectively”.
Coulter…? Give me a break. She loses because she is a partisan hack and I…well, I know better. She pretends to be in the know about any issue while pushing a strictly conservative POV.
How does one “win” in a debate if one doesn’t know how not to be partisan? Not only that she’s too over the top which is a no-no in debate. The majority of people are independent on most issues and relate better to well thought out reasonable responses…even if they disagree with them.
I take very weird stances on many issues (in yours and other’s opinions) but I can back them up both philosophically and with a modicum of “evidence”.
One can argue issues without taking one side of the spectrum over the other and be both logical and coherent. You disagree with my opinions that doesn’t make me an ineffective arguer–it just means you have a different perspective.
[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
You laugh but someone that is used to having to be balanced and fair when presenting facts and results and knows how to present evidence would make her look like a partisan, groupie bimbo.[/quote]
I don’t disagree with any of that - I laughed because that person is not you, your advertisement not withstanding.
[quote]Headhunter wrote:
Are you ‘balanced and fair’ in your assessment of Ann’s work? Or are you a second-hander, letting others determine your opinions for you? I’ve yet to see you refer to her in any other way besides deragatory. You claim she’s some sort of total shill, yet you seem to be the one who is VERY one sided.
[/quote]
Considering I don’t willingly listen to her and my only knowledge of her is from some of the “gems” you’ve posted I assume she is a partisan hack because you are not known for being fair, independent, or objective in regard to “liberal” issues.
I, on the other hand, can and do see some benefit to some of the conservative arguments–regarding free trade, trade deregulation (within reason), strong military defense (which is much different than offense). Where we don’t see eye-to-eye is on social issues and foreign policy.
I argue the liberal side more often because you and other conservatives on this site misconstrue many liberal agendas and I feel they are under-represented in many cases.
[quote]Headhunter wrote:
Ren wrote:
Headhunter wrote:
LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
tGunslinger wrote:
That’s exactly why Coulter would ‘win’ internet debates.
In an internet debate she’d get her salad tossed. I could easily fact check any of her references and call her out on them. She usually throws everything out of context and misrepresents the actual facts. In a podium debate that wouldn’t be easy to do.
She’s a lawyer and trained in debate. She’s also brilliant. She’d slaughter you.
Being a lawyer isn’t a be all and end all. You just posted a link about one that is suing a dry cleaner for 65mil, nuff said.
You’re an idiot. Do you pass similar judgments on other professionals? Pathetic…
[/quote]
My experience with lawyers is that the ones worth a damn are the ones that aren’t loudmouthed assholes.
You are the one that saw fit to point out that she is a lawyer, might I ask why?
[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
Headhunter wrote:
Are you ‘balanced and fair’ in your assessment of Ann’s work? Or are you a second-hander, letting others determine your opinions for you? I’ve yet to see you refer to her in any other way besides deragatory. You claim she’s some sort of total shill, yet you seem to be the one who is VERY one sided.
Considering I don’t willingly listen to her and my only knowledge of her is from some of the “gems” you’ve posted I assume she is a partisan hack because you are not known for being fair, independent, or objective in regard to “liberal” issues.
I, on the other hand, can and do see some benefit to some of the conservative arguments–regarding free trade, trade deregulation (within reason), strong military defense (which is much different than offense). Where we don’t see eye-to-eye is on social issues and foreign policy.
I argue the liberal side more often because you and other conservatives on this site misconstrue many liberal agendas and I feel they are under-represented in many cases.[/quote]
And you do so based on opinions formed by who? You are just like one of my colleagues who hates Limbaugh. “Well, what is it about him you hate?” “I never listen to him?” “Then how did you form your opinion?” “By what I’ve heard others say.”
Parasites, one and all, metaphysical parasites.
[quote]Headhunter wrote:
And you do so based on opinions formed by who? You are just like one of my colleagues who hates Limbaugh. “Well, what is it about him you hate?” “I never listen to him?” “Then how did you form your opinion?” “By what I’ve heard others say.”
Parasites, one and all, metaphysical parasites.
[/quote]
You should learn to read. I said, “I don’t willingly listen to her.” Does this imply that I’ve never heard her speak? You perhaps don’t willingly listen to rosie but you no doubt have an opinion of what she says–does that make it invalid?
I have read every post you have copied and pasted into the forums by her and my opinion stands. I guess that makes it invalid because someone else did the work.
You’re a math “teacher” but don’t understand the basics of logic?!
Completely logical. Keep trying.
[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
In an internet debate she’d get her salad tossed. I could easily fact check any of her references and call her out on them. She usually throws everything out of context and misrepresents the actual facts. In a podium debate that wouldn’t be easy to do.[/quote]
For a rebuttal, I present lixy.
The guy does nothing but take things out of context, and then present half-truths, exaggerations, and the occasional outright lie to “support” his point.
He’s been called out on nearly every statement he makes, and then squirms like a speared fish when he gets painted into a corner.
Yes some on this forum actually think he represents himself well.
lixy is an amateur (I think); Coulter does this stuff for a living. And gets rich doing it for a living.
She would own this forum if she wanted to argue in here.
[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
I am smarter than her (and most people) in that I know how to argue “objectively”. [/quote]
Seriously, Lifticus - you’re reaching.
It’s not that I am in love with Coulter - you just are seriously overestimating yourself.
[quote]tGunslinger wrote:
LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
In an internet debate she’d get her salad tossed. I could easily fact check any of her references and call her out on them. She usually throws everything out of context and misrepresents the actual facts. In a podium debate that wouldn’t be easy to do.
For a rebuttal, I present lixy.
The guy does nothing but take things out of context, and then present half-truths, exaggerations, and the occasional outright lie to “support” his point.
He’s been called out on nearly every statement he makes, and then squirms like a speared fish when he gets painted into a corner.
Yes some on this forum actually think he represents himself well.
lixy is an amateur (I think); Coulter does this stuff for a living. And gets rich doing it for a living.
She would own this forum if she wanted to argue in here. [/quote]
Picking Coulter’s arguments apart both on a factual AND a rethorical basis isn’t very hard. I’m a third year law student, and I think she is an amateur most of the time. She appeals to an audience far from law school I assume, but still… low standards.