This just showed up on HotAir, and Erika is right: this is like a cage match where you want to root for both combatants.
I come down more on the Coulter side of things, but I need to highlight one important point about the Libertarian youngsters in attendance. They are vastly different from your usual college-aged attendees in such a setting, in that for the most part they are very polite. Compare that to the majority of Planned Parenthood or Global Warming confabs at your local University, where the sights and sounds are NSFW, …at best.
Even though she’s outnumbered approximately 1,000-to-1, Coulter responds extremely well throughout (no surprise there). She’s a bomb-thrower, and doesn’t disappoint here; heck, that’s her career. However, she seems to relish these opportunities, and it would behoove the Republican Party to engage with Libertarians more often in this manner. At their heart, there are more similarities than differences between the two camps, and the sooner they both recognize that, the better.
Ann’s best rejoinder, which she uses twice, is many (not all) Libertarians’ continual harping on the legalization of pot & gay marriage being in reality a sop to the Left, and I never heard anything from either Stossel or the audience that would dissuade me from that contention. Our nation needs to prioritize our problems, biggest to smallest, since we’re currently faced with so many truly intolerable issues. And I agree with Annie: neither of those two topics are among the thirty “most pressing” right now.
Heck, they probably aren’t in the top three-hundred and thirty.
But, make up your own mind. Stossel is always fun to watch, Coulter does what she always does, and it seems that everyone walked away from this with a better understanding of what they other is all about.
That counts as a ‘win’, for everybody.
Two Heads are Better Than One 
This was very good. Enjoyed it! Did you see her on The View? I respect that couragous and spitfire character she has.
But I wonder how Ann feels about Chris Christy right now…😱
She refers to that period as when she had a “crush” on Christie. Yeah, I guess I understand that.
And no, I never watch The View, unless they strap me down and pry my eyes open while it’s on.
But if you say it was good, I’ll go find a recording of it online.
Thanks, tannngl!
LOL There’s not enough toothpicks to prop my eyes open for The View.
I never watch it either!!! Someone showed a clip of it, probably on youtube. LOL She truly had the courage of her convictions on that show against all those liberal prog women!
I vehemently disagree with you on all levels of your assessment. Ann Coulter is the wicked witch from everywhere, she absolutely did not answer any of the questions instead she stammers thru the whole thing.
I, as a Libertarian, don’t subscribe to the assessment you’ve given the Liberatarians. LIberatarians believe that the govt does not have the Constitutional right to dictate what we do from cradle to the grave. I guarantee that we are much more concerned with the way the country is headed than we are about legalizing pot. We believe that both major parties are worthless, tyrannical a*******.
As far as gay marriage, I, personally, don’t think the govt belongs in marriage of any kind and have done numerous posts on the subject. Marriage is between 2 consenting adults and should be a private contract between them, the only role govt should have is in the courts when contracts are disputed. That being said, I don’t condone gay marriage but I also don’t interfere, what they do is their own business and govt should stay out of it, as should I.
Coulter stated that Iraq was a good thing and spurted on about deposing dictators, we have no constitutional authority to depose governments, if we did, how about we start with out own.
Hi, Phoebes! –
It’s great to see you!
Always happy to have you disagree – I’ve even been known to be wrong before (though my memory of it has faded, over time).
😉
I’m friends with many Libertarians, and agree with them on a wide range of topics. When a topic comes up where we disagree, we discuss.
But I always find that my views and theirs fit anywhere from 70-85% of the time.
That’s a heck of a lot better than with my Liberal friends, where we agree politically about 5-10% of the time.
In my comments above, I didn’t ascribe anything to Libertarians – I was simply agreeing with AC that far too many (and certainly too many of that audience) put too much focus on some issues (pot, etc…) which are not priorities today. She even admitted to Stossel that, if we could just handle the things that are going to KILL us, the other things that are less important would be far easier to deal with, and that she “wouldn’t care”.
And I agree.
As for Ann, Coulter is a bomb thrower, a pot-stirrer; it’s her schtick. I know you don’t like her, and that’s cool. But when she shows up, she’s doing what she’s supposed to do: challenge people who don’t agree with her, in her trademark way. It’s why they ask her back on.
Personally, I’d like to see a return to Federalism, make almost everything a States issue, and be done with it. The Federal Government does far too much, and poorly.
And that’s my point.
I’m not a Republican, or Libertarian, really; I’m Conservative.
BUT, I very much believe in your right to be left alone, as well as my own.
And right now, our government is doing a whole BUNCH of things, and “leaving us alone” ain’t one of ’em.
As always, Phoebes, it’s wonderful to see you stop by!
Thx…
🙂
Thanx, I stop by more often than you think, just don’t always announce myself. 😀 But when I do……….lol
So it’s ascribe, not subscribe? I learn something new every day, glad you’re my teacher today.
LOL, is right!
I’ve said that my prayers go to MrG before.
Tonight he gets more…
I’m also glad to hear you stop by more than I see you. Thanks much – you know how much we appreciate both of you guys!
***BTW: ascribe is to attribute or credit, and subscribe is agree with.
Thus, we both used the words properly. 😉
I’ve obviously been strongly influenced by libertarian philosophers, but I can’t quite embrace it fully. I don’t consider abortion to be a libertarian principle (that’s just murder) and pot is one of the last things I’m concerned about these days (maybe when we get a balanced budget again and cut back the nanny state that’s a discussion to resume).
The only other big issue is gay marriage which I will never accept as legitimate. The strongest case I’ve heard is what the one guy in the video said…that government shouldn’t be involved in marriage at all. That’s at least something to consider. Marriage isn’t a license any more than education is a college degree. Marriage is based on vows before God and people did that for thousands of years before there was such a thing as a “marriage license.”
Thanks for the video!
Great to see you, DD!
Your presence is missed when you’re away, partner.
Glad you enjoyed the video – I felt largely the same way.
But I keep going back to that one word: PRIORITIES.
It’s as if we are on the Titanic, and some of the guests are going to argue over who gets the better seat, top side.
Libertarians and Republicans need a merger: heck, change the name to Liberlicans, or Republitarians.
Whatever.
But we agree on more than we don’t, so everyone needs to be rowing together if we’re all gonna make it.
Thanks for being here, DD.
We’re not going to make it but there’s less stress being positive and hopeful, or is there?
I’m an eternal optimist, Phoebes.
I’d be the guy in the life raft saying, after 16 days at sea, “…just 1 more hour, and we’ll be safe”.
Can’t help it.
On the bright side, if we ARE all doomed, I’ll do my best to make you guys laugh as we hurtle towards are imminent destruction.
😉
There’s room in this world for optimists and realists, of course the realists are always right.
As far as “1 more hour and we’ll be safe”, I skipped school one day with a couple of friends, we walked to the next town about 13 miles away. I kept saying to my friends, we’re almost there, up over another long hill, we’re almost there, over another long hill, we’re almost there, it took us 6 hours.
Government marriage was only instituted in the United States in the early 1900’s to keep whites from marrying blacks, then it became a monetary investment for government. It should be noted, however, that Massachusetts required a marriage license in the 1600’s. In some states, mine included, common law marriages are accepted but the Federal govt doesn’t recognize them, which brings me to the point of why gays want to have the right to government sanctioned marriage, for govt benefits, if they didn’t have the entitlement mindset it wouldn’t be an issue. You don’t need to be married or have govt permission to love someone or share your life with them.
Reblogged this on Political Musings-At the Sunset of My Life.
Ann Coulter Rocks!