# Want to see Ann Coulter get fucking OWNED on Canadian TV? **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [February 2, 2005, 6:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/want-to-see-ann-coulter-get-fucking-owned-on-canadian-tv/287956 "2005-02-02T06:25:13Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 13
**Author:** ![calm\_kiwi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/9fc348/32.png) [@calm\_kiwi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/calm_kiwi)\ **Post date:** [February 5, 2005, 5:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/want-to-see-ann-coulter-get-fucking-owned-on-canadian-tv/287956/241 "2005-02-05T05:05:58Z")
> [@Rodd Hill](#): > > And as a small point of accuracy, I have to point out that New Zealand _did_ send troops–and combat ones, at that–to Vietnam. The official Kiwi Army page says this: ([http://www.army.mil.nz/?CHANNEL=OPERATIONS&PAGE=Overseas+Missions](http://www.army.mil.nz/?CHANNEL=OPERATIONS&PAGE=Overseas+Missions)) > > NZ had some 40 casualties in Vietnam (including one female nurse, and one Kiwi serving with the USMC) Sorry I was talking about Iraq. My uncle is a Kiwi SAS Veitnam vet, infact they had a conference/reunion last weekend. I apologise for any confusion. ---
**Author:** ![Talon\_Karrde](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/c5a1d2/32.png) [@Talon\_Karrde](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Talon_Karrde)\ **Post date:** [February 5, 2005, 7:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/want-to-see-ann-coulter-get-fucking-owned-on-canadian-tv/287956/242 "2005-02-05T07:04:10Z")
> [@Desmostylus](#): > > Including me, back on the first two pages, dipstick. :rolleyes: Yeah, well I never said you didn’t. Try reading more carefully next time. My dipstickery or lack therof has nothing to do with it. > [@Liberal](#): > > Unfortunately, he kept what he meant in his head, leaving people to interpret his multiple categorical denials in any way they please. As I said early on, he should have said something like this: “Canada did not send troops in the sense that you seem to be implying, Ms. Coulter. There were two small peacekeeping missions, one in 1954 long before the US got involved, and the other during the cease-fire in 1973. The Canadians who actually fought in Vietnam were mercenaries.” And what I’m trying to say is that the first sentence of what you think he should say is what he meant by the entire thing. In the context of the conversation, “Canada did not send troops” has the “in the sense that you seem to be implying, Ms. Coulter.” implied. The rest isn’t really relevant to the argument, because they were talking about Canada going with the US. Yes, it would have been more informative if he said the rest, but providing additional information like that is what Cecil’s job would be, not someone who is arguing. He might technically have been wrong, but for the purposes of the debate he was entirely right. > [@](#): > > Nah. It just proves that leftists like to fight in packs like jackals. You surely know that that is a stupid generalization, so then why do you keep saying shit like that? ---
**Author:** ![Liberal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/848f3c/32.png) [@Liberal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Liberal)\ **Post date:** [February 5, 2005, 10:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/want-to-see-ann-coulter-get-fucking-owned-on-canadian-tv/287956/243 "2005-02-05T10:32:56Z")
> [@pokey](#): > > You don’t need to be one of the most informed journalists on Earth to know Canada wasn’t in Vietnam! But Canada was in Vietnam. Twice. ---
**Author:** ![Liberal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/848f3c/32.png) [@Liberal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Liberal)\ **Post date:** [February 5, 2005, 10:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/want-to-see-ann-coulter-get-fucking-owned-on-canadian-tv/287956/244 "2005-02-05T10:38:12Z")
> [@Tool](#): > > Liberal, > > What the hell is wrong with you? I mostly end up agreeing with you. Not this time. The odd time i’ve noticed you argue for no other point but to argue. This is one of those times. Why do you do that? If you disagree that Coulter was wrong by implying that Canada sent combat troops to Vietnam or that McKeown was wrong by stating categorically that Canada sent no troops — period, then kindly provide evidence either that Canada sent battalions or that Canada sent no one. Otherwise, why are you disagreeing other than to disagree? ---
**Author:** ![Liberal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/848f3c/32.png) [@Liberal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Liberal)\ **Post date:** [February 5, 2005, 11:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/want-to-see-ann-coulter-get-fucking-owned-on-canadian-tv/287956/245 "2005-02-05T11:04:08Z")
> [@Talon Karrde](#): > > And what I’m trying to say is that the first sentence of what you think he should say is what he meant by the entire thing I will concede (and have conceded) that that is a metaphysical possibilty — but only one among many. Owing to his decision to evoke an intellectual superiority rather than inform, we will never know. > [@](#): > > In the context of the conversation, “Canada did not send troops” has the “in the sense that you seem to be implying, Ms. Coulter.” implied. Every implication requires an inference. Whenever an assertion is ambiguous, people may infer whatever they wish. But in this case, the assertion **S** were not ambiguous at all. They were categorical. And repeated: “Canada didn’t send troops to Vietnam.” “Canada did not send troops to Vietnam.” “Uh no. Canada. Second World War, of course. Korea, yes. Vietnam, no.” “No, took a pass on Vietnam.” “No, Australia was there, not Canada.” “No.” > [@](#): > > The rest isn’t really relevant to the argument, because they were talking about Canada going with the US. Yes, it would have been more informative if he said the rest, but providing additional information like that is what Cecil’s job would be, not someone who is arguing. > He might technically have been wrong, but for the purposes of the debate he was entirely right. Were this Geraldo Rivera, I could understand your point. We would have two muckraking gossip editorialists posing as journalists for the purpose of intertainment. But this man is billed by his own employer as Canada’s premier award winning journalist, host of its flagship investigative news program. He has a massively credentialed vitae, and he has forgotten more than Coulter ever knew. He is educated and intelligent enough to know that he was using a litotes: a _Catcher in the Rye_ rhetorical technique — “It isn’t very serious. I have this tiny little tumor on the brain”. His job is not to entertain, but to inform. If you insist that it was the former, then this whole thread is pointless since it is not a matter of Coulter being wrong but of McKeown being more entertaining. If it is the latter, then he deliberately wasted six opportunities to inform according to the facts. > [@](#): > > You surely know that that is a stupid generalization, so then why do you keep saying shit like that? Well, because here you all are. None of you is giving any consideration whatsoever to what I’m saying. The attack guns are on automatic. Cites given are ignored. I’ve been called everything from obtuse to a lunatic. And I have demanded nothing more to change my mind than a set of inferences drawn from true premises. Come sit in this chair, and tell me what your perception is. ---
**Author:** ![Harborwolf](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/c89c15/32.png) [@Harborwolf](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Harborwolf)\ **Post date:** [February 5, 2005, 11:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/want-to-see-ann-coulter-get-fucking-owned-on-canadian-tv/287956/246 "2005-02-05T11:47:28Z")
**Liberal** , I’m going to post this again in the hopes of getting a clear answer. I’m really not trying to be obtuse, but the super-flu I have right now seems to be eating large portions of my brain. 😕 Anne Coulter is wrong in her assertion that combat troops were sent into Vietnam despite never specifying “combat” troops vs. peacekeepers or canadian people serving with americans unofficially. The CBC reporter is wrong about Canada not sending troops because he never specified combat troops vs. peacekeepers/canadians serving unofficially. If this is the case, why can’t you make the same stretch for the goose as for the gander. If not, let me know where I am mistaken. ---
**Author:** ![Liberal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/848f3c/32.png) [@Liberal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Liberal)\ **Post date:** [February 5, 2005, 12:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/want-to-see-ann-coulter-get-fucking-owned-on-canadian-tv/287956/247 "2005-02-05T12:02:03Z")
I agree with both your assertions. They are plainly true, though the contexts in which the two people are wrong are different. Coulter is wrong because she is ignorant; McKeown is wrong despite that he is not. In other words, Coulter mistakenly misstated the facts, but McKeown deliberately misstated them. Ordinarily, that might give Coulter at least the moral highground, but since her intention was to impugn, she forfeited that. They are two farts that smell different, but both stink. I wish you a speedy recovery, Harborwolf. ---
**Author:** ![Harborwolf](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/c89c15/32.png) [@Harborwolf](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Harborwolf)\ **Post date:** [February 5, 2005, 12:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/want-to-see-ann-coulter-get-fucking-owned-on-canadian-tv/287956/248 "2005-02-05T12:11:56Z")
Thanks for the well wishes and the reply. I can kind of see your point, but I disagree with the motives you are assigning them. What I guess I’m trying to say is that I think you are looking too hard and reading too much into the statements made. It seems far more logical to hold both statements to the same implications. They were both talking about combat troops. I do think that he would’ve been better off stating how any troops were involved either to Anne in comparison to Iraq (peacekeepers in both cases) or in the voice over afterwards. ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [February 5, 2005, 1:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/want-to-see-ann-coulter-get-fucking-owned-on-canadian-tv/287956/249 "2005-02-05T13:05:57Z")
I suppose by such a generous reading of the word “troops”, to mean _any_ involvement in _any_ capacity by _any_ members of a nation’s armed forces, the United States was involved in the Falklands War, if it can be shown that there were USMC Embassy guards in London or Buenos Aires. Heck, that’d show the Americans were supporting _both_ sides! Shocking! And in any case, such a generous reading is clearly not what McKeon or Coulter had in mind, so it’s irrelevant and best left to the anal-retentive who just don’t want to admit their argument is pointless. ---
**Author:** ![Desmostylus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/c57346/32.png) [@Desmostylus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Desmostylus)\ **Post date:** [February 5, 2005, 1:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/want-to-see-ann-coulter-get-fucking-owned-on-canadian-tv/287956/250 "2005-02-05T13:07:41Z")
> [@Liberal](#): > > [Ordinarily, I prefer to take a devil’s advocate position when there is an overwhelming consensus and the opposing position is tenable.](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?p=5802704#post5802704) So it comes down to this. It’s just arguing for the sake of arguing, and not even on the side he claims to believe in. I think there’s a clear difference between playing devil’s advocate, and hijacking threads to Pluto with silly arguments that fit **Liberal** ’s obsession _du jour_. ---
**Author:** ![Liberal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/848f3c/32.png) [@Liberal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Liberal)\ **Post date:** [February 5, 2005, 1:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/want-to-see-ann-coulter-get-fucking-owned-on-canadian-tv/287956/251 "2005-02-05T13:10:43Z")
> [@Harborwolf](#): > > Thanks for the well wishes and the reply. > > I can kind of see your point, but I disagree with the motives you are assigning them. What I guess I’m trying to say is that I think you are looking too hard and reading too much into the statements made. It seems far more logical to hold both statements to the same implications. They were both talking about combat troops. Possibly. But quite often, people talk past each other, one going on about one thing, and the other another. > [@](#): > > I do think that he would’ve been better off stating how any troops were involved either to Anne in comparison to Iraq (peacekeepers in both cases) or in the voice over afterwards. I agree. Especially since, in the voiceover, he sank to her level of impugning. ---
**Author:** ![Liberal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/848f3c/32.png) [@Liberal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Liberal)\ **Post date:** [February 5, 2005, 1:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/want-to-see-ann-coulter-get-fucking-owned-on-canadian-tv/287956/252 "2005-02-05T13:12:00Z")
> [@Bryan Ekers](#): > > I suppose by such a generous reading of the word “troops”, to mean _any_ involvement in _any_ capacity by _any_ members of a nation’s armed forces, the United States was involved in the Falklands War, if it can be shown that there were USMC Embassy guards in London or Buenos Aires. > > Heck, that’d show the Americans were supporting _both_ sides! Shocking! > > And in any case, such a generous reading is clearly not what McKeon or Coulter had in mind, so it’s irrelevant and best left to the anal-retentive who just don’t want to admit their argument is pointless. In the midst of your hysteria, there would be a small point were the US in the Falklands to secure a ceasefire or otherwise participate in the war itself. ---
**Author:** ![Liberal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/848f3c/32.png) [@Liberal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Liberal)\ **Post date:** [February 5, 2005, 1:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/want-to-see-ann-coulter-get-fucking-owned-on-canadian-tv/287956/253 "2005-02-05T13:13:27Z")
> [@Desmostylus](#): > > So it comes down to this. It’s just arguing for the sake of arguing, and not even on the side he claims to believe in. > > I think there’s a clear difference between playing devil’s advocate, and hijacking threads to Pluto with silly arguments that fit **Liberal** ’s obsession _du jour_. Speaking of hijacking threads, why don’t you start your own thread to pit me, rather than constantly pissing all over everyone else’s with your one-note crusade? ---
**Author:** ![Desmostylus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/c57346/32.png) [@Desmostylus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Desmostylus)\ **Post date:** [February 5, 2005, 1:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/want-to-see-ann-coulter-get-fucking-owned-on-canadian-tv/287956/254 "2005-02-05T13:16:28Z")
> [@Liberal](#): > > Speaking of hijacking threads, why don’t you start your own thread to pit me, rather than constantly pissing all over everyone else’s with your one-note crusade? Whiny little bitch, aren’t you? ---
**Author:** ![Desmostylus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/c57346/32.png) [@Desmostylus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Desmostylus)\ **Post date:** [February 5, 2005, 1:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/want-to-see-ann-coulter-get-fucking-owned-on-canadian-tv/287956/255 "2005-02-05T13:24:28Z")
No, no, sorry, I must have misunderstood. You were just taking the devil’s advocate position. Lots of people think you’re crazy, so you naturally have to assume a contrary position. Even though you admitted in the other thread that you do, in fact, have the affective disorder that lots of people thougth that you must have. ---
**Author:** ![Sevastopol](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/cdc98d/32.png) [@Sevastopol](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sevastopol)\ **Post date:** [February 5, 2005, 1:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/want-to-see-ann-coulter-get-fucking-owned-on-canadian-tv/287956/256 "2005-02-05T13:58:15Z")
> [@Liberal](#): > > Speaking of hijacking threads, why don’t you start your own thread … rather than constantly pissing all over everyone else’s with your one-note crusade? Now there’s a straight line going begging. ---
**Author:** ![Liberal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/848f3c/32.png) [@Liberal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Liberal)\ **Post date:** [February 5, 2005, 3:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/want-to-see-ann-coulter-get-fucking-owned-on-canadian-tv/287956/257 "2005-02-05T15:35:12Z")
> [@Talon Karrde (from the previous page)](#): > > You surely know that that [leftists like to fight in packs like jackals] is a stupid generalization, so then why do you keep saying shit like that? You were saying?.. ---
**Author:** ![Harborwolf](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/c89c15/32.png) [@Harborwolf](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Harborwolf)\ **Post date:** [February 5, 2005, 4:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/want-to-see-ann-coulter-get-fucking-owned-on-canadian-tv/287956/258 "2005-02-05T16:03:41Z")
> [@Liberal](#): > > Speaking of hijacking threads, why don’t you start your own thread to pit me, rather than constantly pissing all over everyone else’s with your one-note crusade? **Desmo** and others, I’ve done the work for you. Please take your problems with Liberal [here](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=300811) and let the rest of us have a discussion. Of course **Liberal** , you are invited also. ---
**Author:** ![FinnAgain](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/finnagain/32/12500_2.png) [@FinnAgain](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FinnAgain)\ **Post date:** [February 5, 2005, 4:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/want-to-see-ann-coulter-get-fucking-owned-on-canadian-tv/287956/259 "2005-02-05T16:09:43Z")
By the way, totally off topic **Harborwolf** , but I’ve also had a nasty flu since thursday night. I’m taking something called oscillococcinum, a sub lingual over the counter medicine. And although I am not a doctor and am not suggesting that you use this product, I’ve found that it’s worked very well for me. The only catch is that you need to start taking it within 48 hours of when you first get sick. I now return you to your regularly scheduled nitpick. ---
**Author:** ![Kaspar\_Hauser](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/b3f665/32.png) [@Kaspar\_Hauser](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kaspar_Hauser)\ **Post date:** [February 5, 2005, 4:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/want-to-see-ann-coulter-get-fucking-owned-on-canadian-tv/287956/260 "2005-02-05T16:20:07Z")
Isn’t the fact that he said: “Second World War, of course. Korea, yes.” imply that he was talking about combat troops and only combat troops? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/want-to-see-ann-coulter-get-fucking-owned-on-canadian-tv/287956.md?page=12) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/want-to-see-ann-coulter-get-fucking-owned-on-canadian-tv/287956.md?page=14)