Thursday, January 16, 2014

Schultz -vs- Coulter... Maybe a Possibility?

by: Les Carpenter
Rational Nation USA
Purveyor of Truth


Perhaps we'll get to see a debate between two primo dunderhead loudmouths. On the left Ed Schultz and on the right Ann Coulter. Should this become a reality platitudes, hyperbole, and a health dose of personal attacks are likely to be commonplace.

From NewsBusters - Conservative author Ann Coulter threw down quite the gauntlet Wednesday.

After MSNBC's Ed Schultz said on his show, "Republicans, they’re afraid of me. They don’t want to talk to me," Coulter responded via Twitter, "Invite me on your show, you lying p--sy"

Later Coulter went on to say via e-mail:

These MSNBC hosts like Rachel and Ed love posing as macho Republican-slayers, with Rachel repeatedly begging Republican senators to please, please, please come on her show (because she's such a formidable debater, you see), and now Schultz boasting that Republicans are terrified of him! We quake in our boots!

I've been begging to come on their shows for years now, but they're all apparently too afraid of a 99 lb girl. (Or any conservative who can put 2 sentences together -- Hey! Somebody get Todd Harris on the line!)

Moreover, I don't care that they're all a bunch of pussies at MSNBC, but cut the B.S. posturing when you won't allow any non-retarded conservative on your airwaves.

Schultz is a babbling blowhard for the progressives and Coulter is a shrill whining screecher for the righties. it should, if it comes to pass make for entertaining comedy if nothing else.

More below the fold.

41 comments:

  1. Do people still pay attention to these butt heads?





    ReplyDelete
  2. I'm guessing the MSNBC and FOX addicts do. Certainly the looniest of their viewers do. Like I said, makes for second rate comedy.

    ReplyDelete
  3. That would be a complete train-wreck and I would have to be totally inebriated to watch it (would probably make a great SNL skit, though).

    ReplyDelete
  4. False equivalency, Les. You have Schultz pegged all right, but Ann Coulter, a powerful Force to be Reckoned With, has something like eight to ten bestsellers to her credit. Both may be putting on an act, but there is no substance to Schultz; he's all hot air. Ann on the other hand is well-educated, well-informed, and has the colossal effrontery to tell the TRUTH about "liberals," which can't help but be unflattering.

    I would agree that Ann's style is abrasive. When she first arrived on the scene, I found her television presence annoying -- to put it mildly (no pun intended), HOWEVER, after I'd read two or three of her articles I realized she was making a valuable contribution to the then-growing movement to equalize the odds between "liberal" and conservative thinking.

    Have you forgotten, or are you still, perhaps, a little too young to remember that Leftist Thought once so dominated the News and Information establishment it completely eclipsed the conservative point of view?

    it took Bill Buckley, who, as it turned out, was frankly trying to make a name for himself rather than turn things around, to awaken anything like a vital Conservative Presence in public fora. Buckley was too high flown, too erudite, and too supercilious to attract rank and file conservatives who had quietly endured decades of subtle insolence from the enemedia. The left had gotten away with simply IGNORING conservatives, and never deigned even to RECOGNIZE the existence of libertarianism -- a SMOTHERING approach that worked very well for a long time.

    The tactic of simply IGNORING potential opposition into compliance with the liberal agenda had worked splendidly for several decades, until Buckley began the renascence, and then Rush Limbaugh -- a Buckley protegé uncommonly gifted with "The Common Touch" -- established himself as a forceful, highly effective, anti-Establshment voice, who awakened The Silent Majority, gave them hpe and and stirred them to action. The host of imitators soon followed, and then FOX News was born, and Aunt Jemima made the best pancaked the world has ever known.

    What you've done here, Les, is tantamount to comparing MSNBC to FOX News -- something leftists try to do all the time. There simply IS no comparison. MSNBC is a pathetic, quasi-farcical, caricature of leftist thinking that no one pays attention to other than dyed-in-the-wool leftist ideologues -- hardcore Commies at heart. FOX on the other hand is far and away THE most popular News Organization on Cable TV, and stands as proof that a large, formerly unrepresented constituency is most grateful to have found a champion, however flawed, at last.

    The leftist-corporatist deathgrip on formulating public opinion by promoting one Big Lie after another was finally broken, because of the courage, colossal effrontery, and highly ASTUTE rhetoric of such as Rush and Ann Coulter.

    Their style may not be your cup of tea -- or mine -- but nevertheless I'm most grateful for their ground breaking achievements.

    In truth it's the David and Goliath story all over again, only this time "Goliath" is the Leftist-Corporatist Megalithic Media Establishment, and "David" is a tiny group of brilliant, courageous, determined individuals with incredible CHUTZPAH, and I say God bless 'em.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Well, no FT IMNHO it is NOT A false equivalency at all. Both are equally abrasisve, agenda driven, preaching to their choir, and neither appears to have the ability or desire (whichever the case may be) to SERIOUSLY consider anything outside of the boxes either they or their handlers have created for them. In other words theeir respective scripts are just that SCRIPT.

    Coulter may indeed be more intelligent, However intelligence poorly used is about equal to having very limited intelligence. Coulter, like Shultz, is as much about duping the less inclined to think for themselves into thinking exactly as the extreme right (remember both extremes are wrong most of the time) would have them think.

    As to Blowhard Rushbo. When he FIRST hit the scene I was impressed, listened to him daily, read is books, and believed he was actually on the right road headed in the right direction. That was then. Now? He has become THE REPUBLICAN ESTABLISMET. Nuff said?

    If by being old enough to remember Barry Goldwater (a man I admired then and still do) and his presidential campaign, along with W.F. Buckley the answer is yes. I also admired Buckley and had respect for both. They were ethical and had substance. Something IMNHO Coulter, Beck, Hannity, et all are sorely lacking in.

    Ayn Rand had it right, but that is a subject for a different day. Suffice to say she was the ultimate Classical Liberal, consumate CAPITALIST in the true pure sense of the word, With respect to ethics, you might want to read her Objectivism and The Virtue of Selfisness non fiction books. What is interesting is the right (especially libertarians) have championed her yet she was not a conservative or a libertarian. She would not have agreed with nor approved of Coulter or Schultz.

    That's the nice thing about having NO party affiliation, one can be truly independent. Free to consider alternative thought, think outside the box(es), and look to solutions to modern issues based on modern realities.

    FT - "What you've done here, Les, is tantamount to comparing MSNBC to FOX News -- something leftists try to do all the time. There simply IS no comparison. MSNBC is a pathetic, quasi-farcical, caricature of leftist thinking..."

    Yep, I guess in this specific situation with these two highly partisan windbags it is exactly what I am doing.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. RN: Ayn Rand had it right...

      You are of course entitled to your positive Objectivist opinion on the former Ms. Rosenbaum, the sociopathic hypocrite. Even if it is incredibly, unbelievably wrong.

      Delete
    2. Of course you are entitled to your incredibly uninformed opinion based solely on a incredibly deep hatred for objective thought based in Aristotelian logic and Classical Liberalism.

      Delete
  6. While I am not a regular viewer of Mr. Ed Schultz, from what I've see and heard it seems to me like he is a fine and decent man... as well as a champion of working class values. A man of the people who sides with the 99 percent and opposes the plutocrats. We need more like Mr. Schultz. As for Coulter, she lies constantly about Liberals and is, IMO, "all hot air". I doubt even she believes most of her own lies.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You are of course entitled to your positive progression opinion on Schlutzy the blowhard. Even if it is wrong.

      Delete
    2. I'd watch Coulter is she appeared on the Colbert Report.

      Delete
  7. "I've been begging to come on their shows for years now, but they're all apparently too afraid of a 99 lb girl."

    "...afraid of a 99 lb girl..."

    LOL! She was born in 1961, which puts her in the "grandmother" range. She considers herself a "girl?"

    Maybe she's talking about her psychological age, which of course would be correct. She's about as mature and as smart as a 10-year old mean-girl.

    99 pounds? Is she that heavy?

    Ann Coulter makes her living acting like a screeching harridan. She's a very good actress who sucks the righties and the lefties into thinking she cares one whit about what she $ay$. Oh, and why does she never answer questions about her "relationship" with Bill Maher. He has admitted dating her. She demures whenever anyone asks. Wonder why.


    Her "best seller" books are all in the remainder bins at the local discount bookstores. Her trashy scribblings are best read with a vat of anti-vomit pills nearby.

    Never watch Ed Shultz. He sounds vaguely familiar. I thought he was fired from MSNBC. They are NOT, however, in the same league. I've NEVER seen Shultz on left-leaning shows. OTOH, Coulter is like polluted air, she's everywhere.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Shaw:

    1) She was talking about here intellect... Please the hyperbole! She is smarter than Schulz IMNHO.

    2) Grandmother range? Well yeah bordering, but then again a lot of girls do get pregnant at 15, 16, 17 , so yeah, I guess you're right.

    3) Coulter is not dumb, just a lot too conservative for your liking.

    4) Yeah, se does look kinda anorexic. Does she have boobs? Not that I'm interested.

    5) Yep, she is good at what she does and has a banl account to prove it I'm sure.

    6) Read one of her books I did.It was the first and last time...

    7) Schultz is such polluted air no one other than MSNBC will have him on.

    Will probably has it right. Together on a show would likely be a train wreck. But hey, given America's apparent love for train wrecks (the national debt and the ACA come to mind immediately) the network could probably sell tickets and make millions if not billions.

    Maybe a reality show?!?!?!

    ReplyDelete
  9. RN: You are right. A train wreck...loudmouth dunderheads...like the TV equivalent of a blog co hosted by Radical Redneck and Dervish Sanders. We need something more like Free Thinke vs Shaw...or Leticia vs Dave Miller.

    -----
    By the way, Shaw, you nailed it with the harridan description...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "All ad hominem, all the time" clearly is Dennis Marks' new shtick. At least when it comes to comments directed at me. It only reflects badly on him, IMO. If I did the same RN would likely issue me a warning.

      In regards to RN's claim that I have an "incredibly deep hatred for objective thought"... no, RN. My dislike for the ideology is based on the hate Rand expressed for virtually everyone else. It's like Phil Robertson of Duck Dynasty (and similar minded conservatives) believing their intolerance should be tolerated or they are being discriminated against. I have no tolerance for the hate and condescension expressed by Rand.

      Delete
    2. As you perceive oh shallow one. As you wish so shall you receive.

      Delete
    3. Cry cry, whine whine. Like Dervish Sanders who chose the previous post to whine that Octo had been picking on him.

      He would do well to follow the example of the think skinned Jersey/JMJ.

      Delete
    4. Think skinned? :-) It's not like I don't do that from time to time. That paragon of proper grammar and spelling, Mr. Sanders calls me the "word salady guy." Or something like that.

      Delete
    5. Yes, I meant thin skinned, and was complimenting Jersey on one of his fine qualities. I do let auto-correct get away with things too much .Mr. Sanders, the "Shallow One" even has problems spelling "Dennis" and "wang" (two of his favorite words), but what is more important here is the cerebral salad behind all that.

      Delete
  10. Ed Schultz - P.P. - permanently pissed. Ann Coulter - P.O.T.T. - permanently over the top (not to mention, virulently anti-Mexican).

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yep, Coulter certainly is a piece of work. As she continues to play the base like a fiddle.

      Delete
    2. ...which, if heard in speech, is a great mixed metaphor.

      Delete
  11. Well.its difficult to even consider a man who was accused of hitting his wife with a closed fist any sort of champion of the underdog,no matter how loud he may yell.

    As for Ms.Coulter,her act has worn thin.At one time she was a respected conservative voice.Now she is a cartoon.

    A real debate would be Rachel Maddow and Ana Navarro......I would buy a ticket to that one.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Rusty: I guess to some is is fine if Schultz beat up and got rid of his previous wife as long as he loves the current one.

      Delete
  12. Rusty: closed fist assault, and advocating for more power for the powerful. He's about anything but the underdog.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This wife beating that Rusty and Dennis allege... I've never seen any credible evidence of it. I asked Rusty for some (in a prior discussion), but he failed to produce any. Mr. Schultz is clearly very much in love with his current wife and treats her well. Which, IMO, is further proof that the accusations concerning wife 1 are probably lies (or lies based on half truths). Obviously Rusty and Dennis believe the allegations because Schultz has a "D" after his name (figuratively speaking).

      And Mr. Schultz argues AGAINST the power of the plutocrats and FOR more power to the people. Dennis confuses "rulers" and "representatives" as usual. What Dennis describes as "more power for the powerful" is actually democracy in action and equals more power for the people. Dennis wants to keep the power of the people (the average person) in check so the plutocrats can rule.

      Delete
  13. Schultzy certainly needs cheer leaders and Mr. Sanders springs to the cause. Keeping it "fair and balanced."

    As to wife beating, Possible, Schultzy can be pretty aggressive, even out of control at times.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. He's also a corporate Democrat, for sure. His yearly salary when I last checked was $4 million from a Fortune 500 corporation, and he is a multi millionairre. Aside from his own personal involvement as a wealthy corporate Democrat, he also favors corrupt "crony capitalism" of the government handing out billions to corporations as political favors. He has gotten aggressive in his defense of this, too.

      Delete
    2. Stopped by to see if there was anything new. Not really... just more SSDD as exemplified by the two comments above (the one by RN and the one by Dennis).

      I've been over this before with Dennis, and I know he will never get it through his thick skull what the term means, but, for the record a Corporate Democrat is someone who supports corporations by voting (or arguing for) legislation favoring corporations. Or accepts "campaign contributions" (AKA bribes) or other money (also bribes) from corporations to do their their bidding. Ed Schultz argues in favor of working people and opposes the government handing out billions to corporations as political favors (which makes him a Progressive).

      Delete
  14. Well then Mr.Sanders, feel free.to NOT stop by again if you prefer. Your choice. You might just be ignored however.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. No need to be so touchy, RN. I don't fly off the handle and start issuing threats when you disparage me on my own blog, do I?

      Delete
    2. Licking your wounds are ya Mr. Sanders. Hmm...

      Delete
  15. Schultz's shameless support for those overpaid and overpowerful state workers in Wisconsin at the expense of the hard-working and constantly getting reamed up the shoot tax-payers was disgusting, in my opinion....And this whole notion that bureaucrats have as their primary mission the betterment of the people is as idiotic a thought as I can think of.

    ReplyDelete
  16. He gets lonely being wrong all the time at his own blog, so he comes here to be wrong as well.

    ReplyDelete
  17. I can’t imagine why any of you would find this entertaining. You do realize, I hope, that there is an element of shameless self-promotion as two blowhards exploit their public platforms to market themselves. Partisan persuasion, notwithstanding, this is what Schultz and Counter-Coulter share in common.

    Whether you like my next statement, or not, these hypothetical match-ups say something more about YOU than THEM. I can understand self-promotion; what mystifies me is the allure in how people allow themselves to be suckered into mindless stuff.

    Perhaps, there is something primitive in the human psyche that lusts for gladiatorial combat, what the Romans called ‘panem et circenses’ -- jousting, sword play, the Jerry Springer Show, screaming tabloids, tilting pinball machines … the adrenaline rush.

    To repeat what I said last week on Shaw’s blog: “Every partisan controversy degenerates into spin and mutual finger pointing - turning fractious with no consensus or resolution in sight.

    Partisan blogging has devolved into just one more form of panem et circenses … gratuitous, ritualistic, and pointless head-bashing rife with sneer and jeer just for the sheer hell of it. Is it possible for any of you to do better than this?

    ReplyDelete
  18. Hmm. Well stated Master Mollusc. I was able to recognize this in Crossfire and come to hate such programs.

    ReplyDelete
  19. Octo gets it. The person actually imagining threats limps off without a clue.

    ReplyDelete
  20. (0)CT(O)PUS you win the prize of the day! Finally someone identified the purpose of this comedic exercise. For some reason I do NOT find myself at all surprised that it was you (O)CT(O)PUS that did so.

    For the rest of you note that I filed this post under COMEDY. There was a reason why. My friend Octo took no time in identifying this.

    Case Closed.

    ReplyDelete
  21. Meanwhile, the Trans Pacific Partnership is moving through Congress and the American suckers have no clue.

    They are checking the odds on the Schultz/Coulter bout.

    We are a sorry people.

    ReplyDelete
  22. Well Ducky, even the ill informed must have their fun eh?

    No link? Damn, now I'll have to google :-)

    ReplyDelete

As this site encourages free speech and expression any and all honest political commentary is acceptable. Comments with cursing or vulgar language will not be posted.

Effective 8/12/13 Anonymous commenting has been disabled. This unfortunate action was made necessary due to the volume of Anonymous comments that are either off topic or serve only to disrupt honest discourse..

I apologizes for any inconvenience this necessary action may cause the honest Anonymous who would comment here, respect proper decorum and leave comments of value. However, The multitude of trollish attack comments from both the left and right has necessitated this action.

Thank you for your understanding... The management.