(Page 5 of 13)
C) The widows acknowledged that their husbands burned to death.
Therefore, the widows are out for political gain.
As you can see, there is no actual connection between A, B, and C. There is no logical connection, but there is a strong insinuation.
p>As for this gem: br> /p>Curse me, I know I'm going to hell for this: Why did the Jersey Girls describe the deaths of their husbands with such startling precision? "Men that we loved burned alive."br> I think it would be a natural reaction that if a crazy woman accused you of enjoying your husband's death on the national stage, it would be proper to say, "No, I did not enjoy watching my husband burn to death. It was very painful for me and my family. It is not enjoyable. And besides, you're the one making a profit with your accusations." p>This is the first article I have ever read in the American Spectator . I am 21, white, middle class, liberal, and don't know if I'm part of your demographic. However, Mr. Judge managed to make it a horrible first impression. I am not swayed or amused by his pathetic arguments which make a pitiful, emotional, and cowardly attempt to support Ms. Coulter in her crusade against widows who would like to use their husband's deaths to protect civil liberties and force the president to act on his words and keep America safe. br> -- Jim Fay /p> p> People with rational minds are able to describe horrible events, even those which strike families, with candor; they have done so since the ancient Greeks. And people with rational minds in the face of disasters call for investigations into the reasons for disasters and urge preventative measures for the future. Now what has Ann Coulter done in the face of 9/11? She slanders, twists facts and lives as a hypocrite who talks about God, but belongs to no church nor attends one regularly. As a libertarian who believes in individual strength and rational choice, I'll take the Jersey Girls anytime over this political performance artist in a cocktail dress at 7 a.m. -- give me a break.