I have no probelm with Kathy Lee. She isnt a brilliant political
analyst...but i think she is a kind woman. Not everyone can be as
awesome as Ann Coulter.

Michael, I read your post, and I must say it is really pathetic, as I
can expect from any liberal argument.

As Ann cites in her
book, there is no question that Obama was referring to Palin with his
"lipstick on a pig" remark. It was clearly a reference to the fact
that Palin had compared herself to a pitbull, except that she wears
lipstick. What Coulter does in her book is she goes through all the
headlines the next day after Palin's speech that had the same joke
that Obama used. The crowd knew he was referring to Palin, everyone
else did, but liberals want to deny it. Had McCain used the "lipstick
on a pig" line about Hillary, two days after she had said she was a
pitbull in lipstick, I'm sure Democrats would have been all over him
for it, but because it is archangel Obama who is incapable of doing
wrong, everyone denies it. Why am I not surprised...

Obama
was discussing the McCain/Palin ticket and policies at the time he
said the "lipstick on a pig" line, so for one to say the context had
nothing to do with Palin, like so many liberal liars, oops...I mean
"commentators" have said, is absolutely preposterous.
/>Conservatives didn't get the substance wrong, liberals are trying to
deny a clearly mean spirited and quite frankly repulsively sexist
comment made by "Archangel" Hussein.

What Ms. Coulter fails to mention above, however, is that
conservatives (Ann included) also rant "about language and tone to
obfuscate their inability to launch an academic counterargument."/>
Perfect example of conservatives doing this, which Ann takes
part in as well: the very common "lipstick on a pig" expression said
by Obama, which McCain even used in the past to describe Hillary's
healthcare plan. At that time, no one was asinine enough to say that
McCain was referring to Hillary Clinton personally.

Using
the entire quote, Obama was very clearly referring to McCain now
parading himself as an agent of change when he has voted with George
W. Bush more than 90% of the time (something he was proud of back in
2003 when Bush was still popular), to which Obama said "You can put
lipstick on a pig, it's still a pig. You can wrap an old fish in a
piece of paper called change. It's still gonna stink."
/>Republicans and Ann said the lipstick comment was a slam on Sarah
Palin. I'm actually surprised Ann didn't surmise that Obama's old fish
comment was referring to Sarah Palin's genitalia.

All that
"obfuscation", but not one conservative counterargued the actual true
substance of Obama's argument. Ann, not only did you get the tone and
language wrong, you got the substance wrong too. It was much easier
for conservatives to divert and argue that it was attacking Palin
personally, knowing full well what the substance of Obama's argument
really was. Oh well, conservatives have never been adept at arguing
facts. Everyone knows reality always has a liberal bias.

Ann Coulter is a sad excuse of a representative of the conservative
side. Her abrasive style does nothing for the message. People that
listen to that kind of noise are missing to kindness and love in their
lives. She my be selling book, but not for a good reason. Putting
others down, even whole groups of people does not solve anything. But
maybe that's the point; she doesn't want to really solve the issues.
Than she could sell all of the nasty books. hmmmm

Ann wiped the floor with these two idiots. They need to be commenting
on red carpet outfits instead of complex political issues! WAY TO GO
ANN!!!!

I will not even watch the Today Show ever since Kathy Lee G was hired.
My Goodness, What a Joke. Don't insult me anymore please

thelaloser,

Of course liberals attack "tone" over
"substance!" Their "substance" doesn't exist!
/>ConservativeC,

You expect in-depth discussion from that
bubble-headed Kathie Lee Gifford?? Next to Katie Couric, she is the
MOST bubble-headed female "journalist" ever!

I love it when liberals attack "tone" as opposed to "substance"....
How is it that liberals get away with being the intellectuals when
they base arguments on such superficial terms?
/>www.thelaloser.com

They purposefully avoided any in-depth discussion of the issues
here.

Why is there more discussion about "tone and
language" than there is about the valid points Coulter makes
THROUGHOUT her new book?

What happened to intellectual
debate in America? What happened to people reading a book, finding
accurate quotes and launching a counterargument based on other
evidence? No, all we see is Liberals ranting about language and tone
to obfuscate their inability to launch an academic counterargument.