Coulter's comments vs. Maher's comments

[dottedmint]

I'm not sure this is the best place to post this thread....

Ann Coulter made some rather (I would say) stupid comments about John Edwards and all sorts of people have been demanding that Republicans reject what she said.

Alright...fine....

Bill Maher made some rather (I would say) stupid..... no .... scratch that..... OUTRAGEOUS comments about Cheney.

As much as the Republicans should reject what Coulter said Democrats should reject what Maher said about Cheney.

What comment is worse?

Ann Coulter making a stupid joke using a derogatory word.....

"I was going to have a few comments on the other Democratic presidential candidate John Edwards, but it turns out you have to go into rehab if you use the word ‘f@gg*t,’ so I — so kind of an impasse, can’t really talk about Edwards."

or....

Bill Maher saying that things would have been better if Cheney had been killed by the Taliban.....

"But I have zero doubt that if Dick Cheney was not in power, people wouldn't be dying needlessly tomorrow."

"I'm just saying if he did die, other people, more people would live. That's a fact."

I am not defending what Coulter said.

It was childish, stupid and insulting..... Something I would expect to see on SNL.

What Maher said is so much worse..... So much more outrageous......

Yet where is the mainstream media condemning his comments?

I've seen them condemn Coulter......

 

[Just Me 2]

I'm not sure this is the best place to post this thread....

Ann Coulter made some rather (I would say) stupid comments about John Edwards and all sorts of people have been demanding that Republicans reject what she said.

Alright...fine....

Bill Maher made some rather (I would say) stupid..... no .... scratch that..... OUTRAGEOUS comments about Cheney.

As much as the Republicans should reject what Coulter said Democrats should reject what Maher said about Cheney.

What comment is worse?

Ann Coulter making a stupid joke using a derogatory word.....




or....

Bill Maher saying that things would have been better if Cheney had been killed by the Taliban.....





I am not defending what Coulter said.

It was childish, stupid and insulting..... Something I would expect to see on SNL.

What Maher said is so much worse..... So much more outrageous......

Yet where is the mainstream media condemning his comments?

I've seen them condemn Coulter......

I just heard this and was shocked that people are in such and uproar over what Ann said but no one is saying anything about what Bill said. I think the Dems should denounce what he said.

 

[disneydude]

The difference is this:

What Maher said is grounded in logic. You can reject the premise and that's fine...but there is a logical analysis to it if you accept the premise.

What Coulter said is nothing more than a baseless character smear.

That's the difference.

Like I said....you don't have to agree with Maher....I think a lot of people would disagree and even those that agree with the logic might disagree about whether it would be "desireable"....but nevertheless...it is a thought that can be subjected to analytical thought....you can't say the same thing about Coulter.

 

[Doremus Jessup]

I don't know the context of the Maher comment, but it is still bad. All I have heard was something like: "there would be fewer lives lost if Cheney was not in power, but I'm not wishing he was dead." Far worse than what the ***t said? No.

 

[Just Me 2]

This is what he said

Quoting the blog, Maher said, "I have zero doubt that if Dick Cheney was not in power, people wouldn’t be dying needlessly tomorrow."
Asked by Frank if Maher believed that sentiment, the host replied, "I’m just saying if he did die, other people, more people would live. That’s a fact."

 

[Doremus Jessup]

This is what he said

Yeah, what he said is probably true, and it is not worse than what "she" said.

 

[Just Me 2]

Yeah, what he said is probably true, and it is not worse than what "she" said.

:shock: Really you think someone making a joke is worse then someone talking about a person dieing? Wow!

 

[Doremus Jessup]

:shock: Really you think someone making a joke is worse then someone talking about a person dieing? Wow!

Oh that was a joke? :doh I guess I should've known, most of what comes out of "her" mouth is a joke.

 

[Just Me 2]

Oh that was a joke? :doh I guess I should've known, most of what comes out of "her" mouth is a joke.

She was calling him a wuss but used the word ******. It was not meant in the way many think. I'm not defending her I think her choice of words was bad but the intent was nothing to do with sexuality.

 

[jfuh]

She was calling him a wuss but used the word ******. It was not meant in the way many think. I'm not defending her I think her choice of words was bad but the intent was nothing to do with sexuality.

While wishing anyone to die is not a good thing, I can't say from what I've read thus far, that what Maher said was wishing the VP dead. More so analyzing the situation and drawing a conclusion from it - hence with some merit.
What ann said however was undeniably slander for the sole purpose of character smear.

 

[Just Me 2]

While wishing anyone to die is not a good thing, I can't say from what I've read thus far, that what Maher said was wishing the VP dead. More so analyzing the situation and drawing a conclusion from it - hence with some merit.
What ann said however was undeniably slander for the sole purpose of character smear.

Why is is slander? Because she thinks he is a wuss?

 

[jfuh]

Why is is slander? Because she thinks he is a wuss?

1. there's no basis for her claim other than her opinion.
2. The choice of word for the purposeful intent of the worst possible language
3. she's quite well known for slander - recall what she called the widows of 9/11?

 

[Just Me 2]

1. there's no basis for her claim other than her opinion.
2. The choice of word for the purposeful intent of the worst possible language
3. she's quite well known for slander - recall what she called the widows of 9/11?

I agree that she is a B!TCH and I can't really listen to her but how it is any different then when Dems say things about Reps? I mean the Dems had called Bush every name in the book is that slander?

 

[jfuh]

I agree that she is a B!TCH and I can't really listen to her but how it is any different then when Democrats say things about Republicans? I mean the Dems had called Bush every name in the book is that slander?

Coulter speaks only for coulter and what would get her next book sold.
Dems and repubbys speak only what's good for them to get re-elected and stay in power - all masters of slander. Dems call Bush all sorts of things, but eh, Repubby's called Clinton all sorts of things, just the flip side of the same stupid pathetic coin.
As for the slander against Bush though, sorry, you can't get more pitiful than that arrogant bastard, yes that is slander but not without merit.

 

[Just Me 2]

Coulter speaks only for coulter and what would get her next book sold.
Democrats and repubbys speak only what's good for them to get re-elected and stay in power - all masters of slander. Dems call Bush all sorts of things, but eh, Repubby's called Clinton all sorts of things, just the flip side of the same stupid pathetic coin.
As for the slander against Bush though, sorry, you can't get more pitiful than that arrogant bastard, yes that is slander but not without merit.

I agree with it all. My issue is when people come out and demand that a group denounce something someone said when they are no better.

 

[jfuh]

I agree with it all. My issue is when people come out and demand that a group denounce something someone said when they are no better.

:lol: Such is the hypocrisy, and is the basis of finger pointing games our politicians and most political celebrities play for progressing an agenda. Coulter and co. survive only with a radical neocon right.
As for Maher though, he's hardly the extremist such as Coulter. He actively invites guests to provide an equal representation of both sides to produce constructive debates on real issues without the "how did anna nicole smith die" bs but throws in the comical relief.

 

[Just Me 2]

:lol: Such is the hypocrisy, and is the basis of finger pointing games our politicians and most political celebrities play for progressing an agenda. Coulter and co. survive only with a radical neocon right.
As for Maher though, he's hardly the extremist such as Coulter. He actively invites guests to provide an equal representation of both sides to produce constructive debates on real issues without the "how did anna nicole smith die" bs but throws in the comical relief.

I just can't watch him, he seems so condescending and smarmy I just want to smack his little face off. :2razz:

I do agree that Coulter is WAY over the top.

 

[dottedmint]

...it is a thought that can be subjected to analytical thought....you can't say the same thing about Coulter.

So if Ann had only said....

'We would save more lives if we KILLED John Edwards and the rest of the Democrats.'

....that would have been a comment that "can be subjected to analytical thought" and not an OUTRAGEOUS comment that should not be said???

So you think it is more outrageous to call a politician a "f@gg*t" than to suggest it would be a good thing to have that politician killed?

I really HOPE you are kidding.......

 

[dottedmint]

Yeah, what he said is probably true, and it is not worse than what "she" said.

So if Ann had only said....

'We would save more lives if only John Edwards and the rest of the Democrats were killed.'

.....that would have been fine for you???

You think that calling someone a name is no worse than suggesting their death would be a good thing?????

 

[dottedmint]

More so analyzing the situation and drawing a conclusion from it - hence with some merit.
What ann said however was undeniably slander for the sole purpose of character smear.

So if only Ann had said.....

'We would save many lives if only John Edwards and the rest of the Democrats were killed.'

....that would just be her....

analyzing the situation and drawing a conclusion from it

....and that sort of a comment would have some "merit".

You think it is worse for a person to call a politician a name than to suggest their death would be a good thing????

 

[Doremus Jessup]

So if Ann had only said....

'We would save more lives if only John Edwards and the rest of the Democrats were killed.'

.....that would have been fine for you???

You think that calling someone a name is no worse than suggesting their death would be a good thing?????

If "she" had said: "If John Edwards and the rest of the democrats were not in power, there would be fewer lives lost. But I don't wish that they were dead." And the democrats had actually started the war. And John Edwards was the president.

Then there might be some truth to it and it would not be as bad as John Stewart referring to McCain as a f*****.

 

[jallman]

I feel like there is no excuse for either of their comments. Everything spewed by Mahrer is a waste of breath. Most everything spewed by Anne Coulter is nothing more than partisan hackmanship. Neither do any good for productive dialog.

 

[dottedmint]

If "she" had said: "If John Edwards and the rest of the democrats were not in power, there would be fewer lives lost. But I don't wish that they were dead." And the democrats had actually started the war. And John Edwards was the president.

Then there might be some truth to it and it would not be as bad as John Stewart referring to McCain as a f*****.

Except this is what he actually said....

"I'm just saying if he did die, other people, more people would live. That's a fact."

So if she had said....

"I'm just saying that if John Edwards and the Dems did die, other people, more people would live. That's a fact."

that would be the same as what he said.

Would that have been fine???

NOT what you suggested......

Nice try though......

 

[Thelost1]

Neither are good things to say. The differance lies in the following:

1. Maher's statement can be debated, it is possible to make a case that if DC died (or had died) there would be less death, American or otherwise (assuming he means in Iraq).

2. Coulter's statement is a insult, any debate on the subject would sound an awful lot like some drunk college students calling each other gay.

Bottom line is, neither statement has much worth, but at least Maher's can be argued civilly over, and is thus not slander.

 

[dottedmint]

Neither are good things to say. The differance lies in the following:

1. Maher's statement can be debated, it is possible to make a case that if DC died (or had died) there would be less death, American or otherwise (assuming he means in Iraq).

2. Coulter's statement is a insult, any debate on the subject would sound an awful lot like some drunk college students calling each other gay.

Bottom line is, neither statement has much worth, but at least Maher's can be argued civilly over, and is thus not slander.

So it would not have been as bad if Coulter had said,

"I'm just saying if [Edwards] did die, other people, more people would live. That's a fact."

I mean that is what he said.

"I'm just saying if he did die, other people, more people would live. That's a fact."

So saying that things would be better if someone was DEAD isn't all that bad because it can be "argued civilly over"?

When did it become acceptable to say it would be a good thing for an opponent to DIE?

And would you have the same response if in the future a major figure says it would be good if a Democrat leader was killed?