O’Reilly vs. Coulter...the chick wins

I am almost done with Godless, Ann Coulter’s latest sharp satire with the thesis that liberalism is a godless religion. It is a good thesis with a lot of supporting facts and ideas that Coulter slaps down on the table like my daughter slaps down mean Uno cards. “Ha! Draw Four!” I can “feel” Coulter’s sense of intellectual victory in each point she makes. This lady just loves her work. The book shows it.

Argue against her points if you can, but I cannot.

She Argues that Liberals:

• Incorrectly believe everyone can be rehabilitated and too often opt for prisoner paroles
• Believe in abortion and do not want to face the logic or science against it, instead labeling all opposition bible thumpers
• Put up victims in front of them to make their ridiculous liberal points and then cry foul when you challenge the point, claiming you are attacking the victim
• Only use scientific information when it benefits their argument and ignore it when it does not, treating scientific data and tabulations as relative information to apply only when it benefits their cause
• Deeply “believe” in the theory Evolution when it fails every scientific test, and then hypocritically brand those who believe in the theory of Intelligent Design and backwards
  

Anyone attracted to her dry dark humor can also appreciate the well-researched facts she brings to the argument.

However, to be in the argument, people need to know you are arguing, or you are just alone in the room talking to yourself, as Bill O’Reilly often does.

Check out this recent column from Factor-Man.

http://jewishworldreview.com/cols/oreilly061906.asp


If Ann Coulter did not shake people into paying attention by using hard-hitting satire, no one would listen. I love how Bill writes that he has made the same points all along, even on the Letterman show. Really? I do not remember what he said being a big subject of conversation around my water cooler, or on TV (except for his show), or in the papers or anywhere else. How wonderful that you were able to make your points in a polite manner, Bill. I’ll hug the other 3-4 people who got your point later today.

Meanwhile, as Bill lifts up his pinky-finger while sipping tea, Coulter roles up her sleeves and jumps into the pit, fighting to be heard and succeeding. Now she looks like the bad person to some, but how many times will the liberals try to use the victim shield for their ridiculous logic and succeed? SHE DID IT, and Bill failed.

O’Reilly’s argument is stupid. I have a better analogy. Let’s say Bill O’Reilly figured out the cure for cancer, and politely told everyone he did, but those who prefered their treatment for cancer diminished and ignored him. Coulter figured out the same cure for cancer, but jumped into people’s laps on TV shows, called anyone who attempted to argue with her "retarded", made sure her cure was accessible for popular review and even insulted the alternative treatment’s crowd? Well, people would think she was a kook, and then would use her cancer cure and survive.

She is a true believer. True believers are not polite and sacrifice their time, treasure, reputations, and sometimes blood to ensure what is right happens. She is a crusader, with both its positive and negative ramifications.

This guy agrees.

http://www.macleans.ca/culture/books/article.jsp?content=20060626_129699_129699#continue

O’Reilly is slowly becoming what he fought against early on. Truth outweighs civility. Getting out the truth will not wait for the civil.