Ann Coulter - How To Talk To A Liberal

VIP免费

2024-12-07 0 0 853.55KB 137 页 5.9玖币

侵权投诉

Also by Ann Coulter

HIGH CRIMES AND MISDEMEANORS The Case Against Bill Clinton

SLANDER Liberal Lies About the American Right

TREASON Liberal Treachery from the Cold War to the War on Terror

HOW to TALK to a LIBERAL

(If You Must)

The World According to

ANN COULTER

CROWN FORUM

NEW YORK

or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without

permission in writing from the publisher.

Published by Crown Forum, New York, New York.

Member of the Crown Publishing Group, a division of Random House, Inc. www.crownpublishing.com

CROWN FORUM and the Crown Forum colophon are trademarks of Random House, Inc.

Portions previously published in slightly different form in Human Events, the Universal Press Syndicate, and

George magazine.

DESIGN BY BARBARA STURMAN

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Coulter, Ann H.

How to talk to a liberal (if you must): the world according to Ann Coulter / Ann Coulter.

1. Liberalism - United States. 2. United States - Politics and government - 1989- 3. Mass media - Political

aspects - United States. I. Title.

JC574.2.U6C67 2004 320.51.'3'0973 - dc22 2004014791

ISBN 1-4000-5418-4

For my mother, Nell Martin Coulter

First Edition

Contents

How to Talk to a Liberal 1

This Is War 19

How 9/11 Happened 19

This Is War 22

The Hun Is at the Gate 25

Attack France! 27

May I Turn Down Your Bed, Mohammad? 30

Build Them Back 32

This Whistle-Blower They Like 34

My Name Is Adolf 36

Beauty Pageants Can Be Murder 39

War-Torn Democrats 41

"Will of Allah" Preempts Iraq Invasion 43

Kissing Cousins: New York Literati and Nazis 45

TheEnemy Within 48

At Least Saddam Wasn't at Tailhook! 50

Liberals Meet Unexpected Resistance 52

We Don't Care 54

Taking Liberties 57

How to Lose a War 59

"The Plan" 61

It's Like Christmas in December! 64

Al Qaeda Barks, the Spanish Fly 66

TitforTet 68

This Is History Calling - Quick, Get Me Rewrite! 70

A Muslim by Any Other Name Blows Up Just the Same 73

John Davis: American Hero 73

Where's Janet Reno When We Need Her? 76

HillaryCare for the Airports 79

The New Roman Arena: Airports 81

Would Mohammed Atta Object to Armed Pilots? 84

Thank You for Choosing United, Mr. Bin Laden 86

Arab Hijackers Now Eligible for Preboarding 88

Even with Hindsight Liberals Can t See Straight 92

At Least They Didn't Run Jimmy Carter This Time 95

American Women to Kerry: We Don't Think You're So Hot Either 95

General Democra 97

The Party of Ideas 100

The Jesus Thing 103

What Happened to Your Queer Party-Friends? 106

Just a Gigolo 108

Boobs in the News 110

In Desperate Move, Kerry Adopts Puppy 112

Barbra Streisand Feels Your Pain (According to Her Publicist) 116

I Like Black People Too, Julia! 116

Dumb Hires Dumber 118

Checks and Balances, but Mostly Checks 121

The Robert C. Byrd Bridge to Poverty 123

Chair-Warmer on the Hot Seat 125

When Bad Ideas (Liberalism) Happen to Good People (You) 128

The New York Times s Crusade Against Capita/ism 128

It's Just About Money 130

This Just In: Price Controls Cause Shortages 132

The Democrats'Laboratory: The Host Organism Dies 134

Nine Out of Ten Caribou Support Drilling 137

All the News We Heard from a Guy at Handgun Control, Inc. 139

More Liberal Ideas! Sex, Segregation, Gay Marriage, and Banning the G-Word (God!) 142

Chicks with D**** 142

Democrats: A Lott of Trouble 145

Ashcroft and the Blowhard Discuss Desegregation 147

Bizarre Political Sect Ousted from Judicial Nomination Process 149

Liberals Shocked - Rush Not Jesus Christ 153

It's the Winter Solstice, Charlie Brown! 156

Massachusetts Supreme Court Abolishes Capitalism! 159

The Passion of the Liberal 161

W.W.J.K.?: Who Would Jesus Kill? 164

Let's Rewrite One for the Gipper! 166

The Battle Flag 170

Give Us Twenty-two Minutes, We'll Give Up the Country 178

Great Gray Lady in Spat with Saloon Hussy 183

How a White Male from Alabama Learned the Craft of Journalism

from a Young Reporter Named Jayson Blair

Here's a Traitor! 190

CBS Could Show Augusta How to Really Discriminate 193

Give Us Twenty-two Minutes, We'll Give Up the Country 195

Journalism: Where Even the Men Are Women 197

I Guess You're Right: There Is No Liberal Media Bias 200

Say, Does Anyone Know If Max Cleland Lost His Limbs in Combat? 206

Cleland Drops a Political Grenade 206

My Readers Respond! 209

File Under: "Omission Accomplished" 210

My Readers Respond! (Part II) 213

The Only Cop the New York Times Likes Is the One in the Village People 219

They Weren't Overzealous This Time 219

Murdering the Bell Curve 221

The New York Times Goes Wilding on the Central Park Jogger 224

DNA Evidence Exonerates Hitler! 226

Media Support Citizenship Awards for Central Park Rapists 229

What the Clintons' Ghostwriters Should Have Written 233

At Least with Monica He Only Bit His Own Lip 233

Hillary: Pro-Dung 235

We're Number Two! 240

TheseChargesAreFalse - ReelNo.857 242

Liberals Shocked: Impeached Felon Took Ottoman 245

Tell Him There's a Stopover in Bangkok 250

True Grit 252

Moby's Dick 254

Elian Gonzalez: The Only Immigrant Liberals Ever Wanted to Deport 257

The Democrats' New Symbol: Two Sets of Standards 273

Elections in Clintonville 281

New Equal Protection Clause: One Man, Several Votes 284

The Liar Next Time 286

This Is What the Electoral College Is Supposed to Prevent 289

The Law, Not the Court, Has the Last Word 291

Certify the Electors, Then the Judges 294

Things Only a Democrat Will Say with a Straight Face 297

National Lampoon's Florida Supreme Court Vacation 299

My Court Is Bigger Than Your Court 301

Hello, Room Service? Send Up a Bottle, a Blonde, and a Gun 304

Ruger Is a Girl's Best Friend 304

I'd Burn My Neighbor's House Down 307

DrugShills 310

Capitol Punishment 313

A Republican Tribute to John 316

What You Could Have Read If You Lived in a Free Country 320

Call Me Ms 324

This Congressman Bought for You by tie New York Times 330

Sally Does Monticello 337

If You Sup with the Devil, Use a Long Spoon 341

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS 345

HOW TO TALK TO A LIBERAL

(If You Must)

How to Talk to a Liberal

Historically, the best way to convert liberals is to have them move out of their parents' home, get a job, and start

paying taxes. But if this doesn't work, you might have to actually argue with a liberal. This is not for the faint of

heart. It is important to remember that when arguing with liberals, you are always within inches of the "Arab street."

Liberals traffic in shouting and demagogy. In a public setting, they will work themselves into a dervish-like trance

and start incanting inanities: "BUSH LIED, KIDS DIED!" "RACIST!" "FASCIST!" "FIRE RUMSFELD!"

"HALLIBURTON!" Fortunately, the street performers usually punch themselves out eventually and are taken back

to their parents' house.

Also resembling the Arab street, liberals are chock-full of conspiracy theories. They invoke weird personal

obsessions like a conversational deus ex machina to trump all facts. You think you're talking about the war in Iraq

and suddenly you start getting a disquisition on Nixon, oil, the neoconservatives, Vietnam (Tom Hayden discusses

gang violence in Los Angeles as it relates to Vietnam), or whether Bill O'Reilly's former show, Inside Edition, won

the Peabody or the Peanuckle Award. This is because liberals, as opposed to sentient creatures, have a finite

number of memorized talking points, which they periodically try to shoehorn into unrelated events, such as when

Nancy Pelosi opposed the first Gulf war in 1991 on the grounds that it would cause environmental damage in

Kuwait. Oddly enough, about half of liberal conspiracy theories involve the Jews. So be prepared for that.

A major impediment to arguing with liberals is: They refuse to argue. Liberals' idea of a battle of wits is to say "Bush

lied!" in front of adoring college audiences and be wildly applauded for their courage. They're like hack road comics

who coax a cheap round of applause out of audiences by declaring, "I just quit smoking!" or "My wife just had a

baby!" Without a Roman Coliseum-style audience to give them standing ovations for every idiotic utterance, you get

the liberal disappearing act.

At a loss whenever anyone argues back, liberals have a number of stratagems to prevent conservatives from

talking. They shout conservatives down; unplug reporters' microphones; edit conservatives' answers in pre-taped

TV shows (Hardball) to make the conservative look like a monkey; burn student newspapers; and heckle

conservative speakers. When John Stossel went to Brown University for a report on "date rape," he was mobbed

by angry protesters chanting, "Rape is not TV hype!" - and then his microphone cord was unplugged by an angry

student. College dropout Michael Moore put a microphone in Republican Congressman Mark Kennedy's face and

asked for his help in getting more members of Congress to send their own family members to fight the war on

terror. Kennedy replied that he would love to and that he already had two nephews in the military, one on his way to

Afghanistan. Moore's documentary shows Kennedy's image - but cuts his answer from the film.

There is probably no conservative student newspaper in the country that has not been trashed or burned by

liberals. Meanwhile, there is no known instance of College Republicans burning or trashing liberal student

newspapers. To the contrary, conservatives get a kick out of watching liberals try to thrash their way to a coherent

argument ("BUSH LIED, KIDS DIED!"). In fact, if it weren't for conservatives with a taste for schadenfreude, literally

no one would be listening to Air America - assuming it's still on the air by the time this book hits the stores.

Life was much better for liberals when there were only three TV stations airing precious little news. Back in the pre-

cable news days, public political debate consisted exclusively of liberal Democrats debating radical Democrats.

Now that conservatives are physically present on cable news, liberals are terrified they might have to respond to a

conservative point, so liberals filibuster and interrupt, hoping to never hear it. Turn on your TV right now and you'll

see a liberal - probably Julian Epstein - trying to filibuster his way out of having to respond to a conservative.

If you can somehow force a liberal into a point-counterpoint argument, his retorts will bear no relation to what you

said - unless you were, in fact, talking about your looks, your age, your weight, your personal obsessions, or

whether you are a fascist. In the famous liberal two-step, they leap from one idiotic point to the next, so you can

never nail them. It's like arguing with someone with Attention Deficit Disorder.

Inasmuch as liberals can only win arguments when no one is allowed to argue back, they enjoy creating fictional

worlds in movies and on TV where liberals finally get to win. Remember the Andy Hardy movies? Mickey Rooney

and Judy Garland would be headed for disaster - until Andy shouted out, "I tell you what! Let's put on a play!" With

liberals, it's "We're losing on the facts! Let's make a movie!"

In movies, liberals are invariably morally and intellectually superior. They are also good-looking, witty,

compassionate, and always right - basically Bob Byrd, Jerry Nadler, Al Franken, and Hillary Clinton rolled into one

adorable bunch. Only in Hollywood is Robert Redford considered a dead ringer for Bob Woodward, Emma

Thompson for Hillary Clinton, Dustin Hoffman for Carl Bernstein, and Andy Garcia for Al Franken. Typically,

Republicans are played by hard-boiled B-list types whose only other roles are as cruel high school football coaches

or rogue army drill instructors. Reflect on the fact that Anthony Hopkins played both Nixon and Hannibal Lecter.

The only policemen in the universe who are not aware that "cop-killer bullets" have never killed a cop are the ones

on Law & Order. Only in liberal fantasy movies like Coming Home is a patriotic hawk the impotent klutz who shoots

himself in the foot, and the liberal dove the sexually potent one. Only in Hollywood could a sitcom that parodies a

U.S. president and is titled There's My Bush be about George Bush rather than Bill Clinton. (The show was

unceremoniously and quietly canceled because of low ratings.) In movies, we always learn that there is NO

REASON, EVER, to fight a war. Unless the Earth is invaded by aliens from outer space with huge scary spaceships

and death rays and men of all races and nationalities can unite against a common enemy - like in Independence

Day. So if the Earth is ever invaded by hostile aliens from outer space, you won't have to ask liberals twice to take

up arms in defense of Planet Earth.

It was inevitable, given what liberals value, that on the popular sitcom Friends beautiful actresses would be

depicted hyperventilating over George Stephanopoulos's fictional manhood when he drops his fictional towel. Only

in the bizarro world of Hollywood can such a harmless little chap as George exude massive sexual potency. On

HGTV, the female host of What Not to Wear leeringly jokes about seeing Bill Clinton in a Speedo. In real life,

Monica Lewinsky can be heard on tape describing Clinton's executive branch thus: "Think of a thumb." No wonder

liberals prefer the world of make-believe.

In addition to all Oliver Stone movies and all Michael Moore documentaries (Oliver Stone Without the Talent!), an

extremely abbreviated list of liberal fantasy movies includes:

The Day After Tomorrow (not to be confused with Next Friday, starring Ice Cube) - message: LIBERALS ARE

RIGHT ABOUT GLOBAL WARMING! The hyper-silly disaster epic is based on a book coauthored by UFO/ black-

helicopter/the-CIA-is-beaming-microwaves-into-my-teeth-fillings guru and late-night AM radio maven Art Bell.

The Cider House Rules - message: LIBERALS ARE RIGHT ABOUT ABORTION! Kindly small-town abortionist

(Michael Caine) just wants to help unwed pregnant girls. Disaster strikes when it turns out the young lad taking over

Caine s practice (Tobey Maguire) is opposed to abortion because it's "wrong." The lad soon learns the error of his

ways after a black teenaged girl from a family of apple pickers is raped and impregnated by her own father and

needs an abortion. (You can't remind people too often that most women having abortions were raped by their own

fathers.) This film was a veritable ode to moral relativism and the hideous notion that there are no rules save the

ones we make up ourselves as we go along. Shockingly, it only won a single Oscar.

The American President - message: DEMOCRATS WILL VOTE THEIR CONSCIENCES EVEN IF IT HURTS

THEM POLITICALLY AND ALL REPUBLICANS EVER DO is CALL PEOPLE NAMES. In this movie, Michael

Douglas plays Bill Clinton as Clinton would like to be - handsome, thin, courageous, liberal, and widowed. The

president's top Republican adversary goes on national TV and calls the president's girlfriend a "whore." So it's a

plausible story.

Dave - message: LIBERALS ARE RIGHT ABOUT FEDERAL SPENDING ON THE HOMELESS! Only the president

can put an end to homelessness, and he's got to cut 1500 million in pork from the discretionary budget to do so. He

finds the money by poring over the entire federal budget (during an "all-nighter") with the help of his tax guy, played

by Charles Grodin. (Of course, to do that, the president would need a line-item veto. Now which party, do you

suppose, supports a line-item veto and which opposes it?)

Of the dozens and dozens of nonfiction books to come out about the Clinton presidency, only one was made into a

movie: The Hunting of the President, by fanatical Clinton apologists Joe Conason and Gene Lyons. (Message:

LIBERALS WERE RIGHT ABOUT CLINTON, EVEN IF THERE ARE ONLY TWO LIBERALS LEFT DEFENDING

HIM!) The intriguing plotline is this: A lot of mean people tried to bring down a great president.

Leaving aside which account most closely resembles the truth, which one of these sounds like a better movie plot:

Movie Plot A: Through the freak accident of a third-party candidacy, a lying, horndog Jimmy Swaggart type

somehow ends up as president of the United States. As his Eva Peron-style wife tries to socialize all industry, the

president gallivants with Hollywood starlets, has repeated affairs, accepts illegal campaign donations from foreign

enemies, and uses the vast powers of the federal government to frighten and intimidate the people who get in his

way. Some end up dead, some have their secret FBI files pored over by a former bar bouncer, some are audited by

the IRS. He is finally brought down when he ejaculates on an intern's dress and lies about it under oath - and it

turns out the intern has kept the dress!

Movie Plot B: For no reason whatsoever, a few oddball private citizens develop a deep personal antipathy for a

"Third Way," moderate Democratic president.

Amazingly, Hollywood actually made a movie, Bob Roberts, in which the slick, cosmetic tricks of the sophisticated

right-wing political machine hoodwink the American people. (So that's why liberals are losing all the arguments in

real life!)

Since cable news has begun forcing liberals to confront opposing points of view in real life rather than movie scripts

where the Republicans' only argument is to call the president's girlfriend a "whore," liberals have been trying to drop

emotionalism as their main argument. Their new posture is mock hardheaded realism. Now they begin sentences

with phrases like, "The fact of the matter is," or "Experts say" - followed by comically false assertions. Liberals flex

their spindly little muscles and announce that everything that used to make them cry - gun ownership, racial

profiling, missile defense, school vouchers, torturing terror suspects - simply "doesn't work." The fact is, it doesn't

work, this is according to several studies, and no, you can't see them, why would you ask?

After nineteen nearly identical-looking Muslim men hijacked four airplanes and murdered 3,000 Americans, people

weren't in much of a mood for liberal preachiness about racial profiling. So instead of crying and trying to make

Americans feel guilty, liberals pretended to be hardheaded realists. Asked if there was anything wrong with ethnic

profiling at airports after 9/11, Harvard Law professor Alan Dershowitz said, "Yes, it doesn't work." Other, better

ideas, he said, were face-recognition technology and national ID cards. These would work great - if only we knew

who the terrorists were. But if we knew who the terrorists were, the only plane they'd be boarding would be headed

to Guantanamo and we wouldn't need to search anyone at all.

On CNN, Juliette Kayyem, from the John F. Kennedy School of Government at Harvard, assured viewers that "no

one is disagreeing" with extra scrutiny for potential terrorists. But profiling, she said, "won't work." It wouldn't work,

allegedly, because al Qaeda "exists in places from Algeria to Zimbabwe." True, but since we're in America, wouldn't

it be a big help if we could screen out most of the Americans? Liberals think "it doesn't work" has such a nice ring to

it that the patent absurdity of what they're saying should not detract from their argument.

After Senator Teddy Kennedy tried to block federal funding for the government's program to fingerprint and

photograph people entering the country from twenty-five Muslim nations, his sleazy back-door maneuver was

defended on Fox News Channel's O'Reilly Factor by Sarah Eltantawi of the objective, nonpartisan, well-groomed

Muslim Public Affairs Council. Eltantawi said it was a "huge mischaracterization" to think she was going to complain

about racial profiling. "That's not the argument I'm here to make." To the contrary, her objection - and Kennedy's

objection - was that fingerprinting immigrants from terrorist-producing countries is "completely inefficient." And we

all know Teddy Kennedy cannot abide inefficiency!

Elizabeth Rindskopf Parker - former legal counsel to the CIA, the National Security Agency, and the State

Department - has been quoted as saying, "We don't use torture because it doesn't work." (And it only took a little

arm-twisting to get her to say that.) Torturing randomly chosen

people on the off chance that they might be up to something - as was routinely done in liberals' favorite country, the

USSR - clearly doesn't work. Torturing the guy you know for a fact is withholding information actually works quite

well. There may be good and sufficient moral reasons for not torturing people for information, but efficacy is not

among them.

After decades of womanly crying about guns, liberals finally admitted their earlier hysteria had been much ado

about nothing. The real problem with guns was that they don't make people any safer. Fox News Channel's Alan

Colmes said to Larry Pratt of Gun Owners of America, "Let's talk about some hard and cold facts, Larry. The fact of

the matter is, Larry" - there's that "the fact of the matter is" qualifier I promised you - "that the odds that a home will

be the scene of a homicide are much greater if there's a gun in the home." Soccer moms across America shot

straight up and said, I did not know that! The study behind this flagrantly dishonest "cold hard fact" assumed that

anyone killed by a gun in the vicinity of a home where anyone owned a gun was killed by "a gun in the home." The

specious study merely attests to the fact that people who live in high-crime neighborhoods tend to own guns. As the

inestimable economist John Lott says, on that theory of causation, hospitals must cause people to die, because lots

of people die after being admitted to a hospital.

It's as if liberals held focus groups on how to best present their ridiculous ideas and were told, Passion you've got.

But what respondents say you lack is intellection, thinking things through, understanding elementary human nature,

and a basic awareness of what people are like. If conservatives have not yet persuaded liberals to give up on

socialism and treason, we have at least gotten them to fake linear thinking.

Liberals' other new hobby is to call people "liars." After years of defending Clinton, they love the piquant irony of

calling Bush a "liar." Bush said he was a "reformer with results" - LIAR! For fifty years liberals have called

Republicans every name in the book - idiots, fascists, anti-Semites, racists, crooks, Constitution shredders, and

masterminds of Salvadoran death squads. Only recently have they added the epithet "liar." Even noted ethicist Al

Franken has switched from calling conservatives "big fat idiots" to calling them "liars." This is virgin territory for

Democrats - they never before viewed lying as a negative. Their last president, Bill Clinton, was called "an

unusually good liar" by a senator in his own party, and their last vice president, Al Gore, couldn't say "pass the salt"

without claiming to have invented salt. Having only recently discovered the intriguing new concept of "lies," the

Democrats are having a jolly old time calling Bush a liar. But they can't quite grasp the concept of a lie as connoting

something that is intentionally untrue - or untrue at all.

About the time Baghdad was erupting in celebrations after receiving the news that Uday and Qusay were dead,

liberals were still hopping mad that in January 2003 President Bush uttered the indisputably true fact that British

intelligence believed Saddam Hussein had tried to acquire uranium from Africa. That was, and still is, believed by

British intelligence. It also was, and still is, the conclusion in our own National Intelligence Estimate. The CIA,

however, discounts this piece of intelligence. The CIA did such a bang-up job predicting 9/11, the Democrats have

decided to put all their faith in it. They believe the nation must not act until absolutely every agency and every

American is convinced we are about to be nuked. (Would that they had such strict standards for worrying about

nuclear power plants at home!)

Sharing a chummy laugh about Republicans on Meet the Press, NBC's Tim Russert asked Senator Joe Biden what

the Republicans would have done if a Democratic president had uttered sixteen mistaken words about national

security in a State of the Union speech. Senator Biden said, "This is going to be counterintuitive for Biden to show

his Irish instinct to restrain myself. You know the answer, I know the answer, the whole world knows the answer.

They would have ripped his skin off." At least Bush put it in his own words - if you know what I mean. (Perhaps

Biden is annoyed that Bush merely cited the head of the British Labor Party rather than plagiarized him.) Back to

Russert's challenge, I shall dispense with Clinton's most renowned lies. (Every Democrat commits adultery and lies

about it - fine, they've convinced me.) Clinton also lied every time he said "God bless America," and I don't recall

any Republican ever ripping his skin off about that.

But how about a lie in a major national speech slandering your own country? In Clintons acceptance speech at the

1996 Democratic National Convention, he said, "We still have too many Americans who give in to their fears of

those who are different from them. Not so long ago, swastikas were painted on the doors of some African-American

members of our Special Forces at Fort Bragg. Folks, for those of you who don't know what they do, the Special

Forces are just what the name says; they are special forces. If I walk off this stage tonight and call them on the

telephone and tell them to go halfway around the world and risk their lives for you and be there by tomorrow at

noon, they will do it. They do not deserve to have swastikas on their doors."

Clinton was referring to an alleged act of racism in which the prime suspect was one of the alleged victims - a black

soldier known for filing repeated complaints of racism. The fact that the leading suspect in an apparently racist

incident was himself black had already been widely reported in the press. The soldier, not a member of the Special

Forces, by the way, was later discharged. And yet Clinton lied about the swastika episode in speech after speech -

including his speech at the Democratic National Convention - publicly citing a phony hate crime in order to accuse

white Special Forces members of racism. (And he used a lot more than sixteen words to do it.)

Democrats didn't mind a president telling lies in order to defame his own country. They reserve their outrage for a

president who defames the name of an honorable statesman like Saddam Hussein. (Note to the Democrats: Just

because you defended Bill Clinton doesn't mean you have to defend every government official credibly accused of

rape.) How dare Bush suggest Saddam was seeking uranium from Africa on the flimsy evidence of: the findings of

British intelligence, the findings of our own NIE, the fact that Israel blew up Saddam's last nuclear reactor in 1981,

and the fact that we learned about Saddam's reconstitution of his nuke program only in 1996, when his son-in-law

briefly defected to Jordan. The Mr. Magoos from the UN Weapons Inspection Team had missed this fact while

scouring the country for five years after Gulf War I. Apparently it's okay to get the facts wrong, but only in the

service of slandering America - the country we're supposed to believe liberals love.

Most of this book will explain how to argue with liberals by example, not exegesis. But there are some useful

pointers. Here are ten simple rules to keep in mind.

First, don't surrender out of the gate. This is a highly controversial approach among Republican politicians,

obviously - otherwise we wouldn't already have a bipartisan consensus for the proposition that you should send half

of what you earn to the government. Liberals always want to shame Republicans into making core concessions

before the debate begins. You raise taxes and then we'll discuss cutting spending. You admit the war in Iraq was a

failure and then we'll argue about how to get out of it. You give us abortion on demand, then we'll discuss parental

notification. Never has any good come out of surrendering before negotiations begin.

Second, unless you were in the Ku Klux Klan like Vanity Fair's "Profiles in Courage" winner Senator Bob Byrd, or

you killed a woman like Senator Ted Kennedy, or you are credibly accused of rape by Juanita Broaddrick on NBC

News within weeks of being impeached like You-Know-Who - you don't need to be defensive. Come to think of it,

since our side does not accept Klansmen, murderers, or rapists, this rule may be simplified to: Don't be defensive.

Third, you must outrage the enemy. If the liberal you're arguing with doesn't become speechless with sputtering,

impotent rage, you're not doing it right. People don't get angry when lies are told about them; they get angry when

the truth is told about them. If you are not being called outrageous by liberals, you're not being outrageous enough.

Start with the maximum assertion about liberals and then push the envelope, because, as we know, their evil is

incalculable. They stand for the godless rule of dictators. They apologize for abortion, adultery, and everything

bestial in society. They support al Qaeda and the Taliban as they once supported Stalin and Mao. They put Stalin

apologist Paul Robeson on a stamp. Robeson is David Duke in blackface: This Stalin Peace Prize winner turned

his back on Jewish refuseniks in the Soviet Union; after Joseph Stalin's death, he wrote a tribute to the dictator

titled "To You Beloved Comrade." Most unforgivable of all, liberals have extended the public career of Martin Sheen

by at least a full decade. The latest fashions dictated from European capitals ensure that Hating America is haute

couture. Gwynnie Paltrow and Madonna - with their European homes, European husbands, and European accents

- are demonstrating the same unblinking devotion to America's enemies that we have seen in the past.

(Interestingly, the fake British accent Madonna uses in real life is better than the one Paltrow uses in her movies.)

This crowd is always in search of approval from people who want to harm America. Nothing too extreme can be

said about liberals, because it's all true. (That's why I almost called this book "You Don't Know the Half of It.")

Fourth, never apologize, at least not for what liberals want you to apologize for. These are the people who think

Linda Tripp should apologize to the nation, but Bill Clinton was a hapless victim. After Dick "I Broke the

HOW TO TALK TO A LIBERAL (if You Must)

News About al Qaeda to Condi" Clarke had the audacity to apologize to the McWidows on behalf of the U.S.

government, liberals started demanding President Bush apologize for 9/11, too. Suddenly public apologies had

become trendy; the thing to do, like getting drunk and having unprotected public sex with Colin Farrell. Instead of

fighting the war on terrorism, liberals would prefer a Cabinet-level Department of Closure to handle issues like

"presidential apologies," with headquarters in a building shaped like a giant hug and Dr. Phil as Secretary of

Closure.

Fifth, never compliment a Democrat. Unfortunately, when dealing with liberals, you have to set aside everything

your mother told you about giving compliments. Mother is wise about many things, and when you go over to Mrs.

Jaworski's house, you should still compliment her on her rosebushes. But that doesn't mean you should ever say

anything nice about a Democrat. For one thing, it's such a colossal waste of time racking your brain trying to think

up nice things to say to a liberal. "Gee, your head doesn't seem quite as large and misshapen as usual today,

Senator Kennedy!" But, more important, compliments to Democrats are always returned with insults.

On any television political roundtable you will see Republican politicians droning on about what a fine human being

some heinous Democrat is and what a pleasure it was to work with him, only to have the heinous Democrat turn

around and accuse the Republicans of near-complicity in genocide.

Consider the first statements out of the mouths of three senators on Larry King Live on May 7,2004:

Senator John Warner (Republican of Virginia): "First, if I may say of my colleagues on the committee, and twenty-

文档加载中……请稍候！
如果长时间未打开，您也可以点击刷新试试。

下载文档到电脑，查找使用更方便

5.9 玖币 0人已下载

立即下载 VIP免费下载

摘要：

AlsobyAnnCoulterHIGHCRIMESANDMISDEMEANORSTheCaseAgainstBillClintonSLANDERLiberalLiesAbouttheAmericanRightTREASONLiberalTreacheryfromtheColdWartotheWaronTerrorHOWtoTALKtoaLIBERAL(IfYouMust)TheWorldAccordingtoANNCOULTERCROWNFORUMNEWYORKCopyright©2004byAnnCoulterAllrightsreserved.Nopartofthisbookmayber...

展开>> 收起<<

Ann Coulter - How To Talk To A Liberal.pdf

共137页,预览7页

还剩页未读，继续阅读

声明：本站为文档C2C交易模式，即用户上传的文档直接被用户下载，本站只是中间服务平台，本站所有文档下载所得的收益归上传人(含作者)所有。玖贝云文库仅提供信息存储空间，仅对用户上传内容的表现方式做保护处理，对上载内容本身不做任何修改或编辑。若文档所含内容侵犯了您的版权或隐私，请立即通知玖贝云文库，我们立即给予删除！

Ann Coulter - How To Talk To A Liberal

相关推荐

开通VIP享超值会员特权

作者详情

相关内容

热门标签

举报选择: