(Page 7 of 13)
/p>I don't think you should give up on Ann Coulter, and I know you haven't. Her strength, and yours, is that while you have strong first impressions as you did here, you settled down and gave it a second thought.
You and Ann may both be mistaken in your take on this but you've both given it the extra thought that is generally needed to get to the heart of any matter.
p>It probably took more than a little courage to put this into print! br> -- Cam Lynn br> Brookings, Oregon /p>Mark Gauvreau Judge wrote: "Why did the Jersey Girls describe the deaths of their husbands with such startling precision?"
Answer: Leverage...leverage meant to silence response to their political rants...emotional leverage for political purposes...as Coulter has written.
p>The description of which Judge writes is the "tell" to the political intentions of the Jersey Girls and their DNC handlers. They wish to make unseemly use of their husbands' deaths and then bray about unseemliness when anyone dares question their motivation -- forgetting the entire time that the First Amendment permits both lines of speech. The Jersey Girls would have it that only they may speak. br> -- Reid Bogie br> Waterbury, Connecticut /p>
ADVERTISEMENT
SPONSORED LINKS
The speech our President should make.
A noted economist fires back.
How political can you get?
You might have missed it, but it was boomed in January.
Farcical feminism is a decades-old phenomenon, as George Will's essay from 1970 reminds us.