679
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 39:
Line 39: + + + + + + + + + +
Talk:Godless: The Church of Liberalism (view source)
Revision as of 19:04, May 17, 2007
, 19:04, May 17, 2007no edit summary
::What, Ed, would you define as a "controversy" if not a passage in a book that arouses a high level of heated debate? And yes, it does deserve mention in the article. You'd just like it removed because that passage is embarrassing to Ann Coulter and well nigh impossible to defend. --[[User:PF Fox|PF Fox]] 14:53, 17 May 2007 (EDT)
::What, Ed, would you define as a "controversy" if not a passage in a book that arouses a high level of heated debate? And yes, it does deserve mention in the article. You'd just like it removed because that passage is embarrassing to Ann Coulter and well nigh impossible to defend. --[[User:PF Fox|PF Fox]] 14:53, 17 May 2007 (EDT)
From Ed Poor "Rather than answering any of her criticisms of liberal ideology substantively, critics made ad hominem attacks. "Ad hominem" means "against the man", rather than against what the man is saying (or in Coulter's case, against the woman).
::This is your lucky day Ed! I'd be \DELIGHTED to answer her criticism of the Jersey girls, and I have no doubt you'll be just as DELIGHTED to defend those remarks of her's! Let's have at it! My criticism is as follows:
::Ann Coulter is in absolutely no position, and has absolutely no business announcing in a book that some of the women widowed by 9/11 are "enjoying" their husbands deaths. She has even less business referring to them as "harpies" and saying that they had better hurry up and pose for PLAYBOY and speculating that their husbands may have wanted to divorce them anyway.
::Plainly you disagree with this criticism of mine. Let's hear your arguments.
::Look forward to seeing them. --[[User:PF Fox|PF Fox]] 15:04, 17 May 2007 (EDT)