Ann Coulter, in her current column, is using the bizarre comparison of how many people have been murdered in DC to how many troops have been killed in Iraq.
"So far, fewer troops have been killed by hostile fire since the end of major combat in Iraq than civilians were murdered in Washington, D.C., last year (239 deaths in Iraq compared to 262 murders in D.C.). How many years has it been since we declared the end of major U.S. combat operations against Marion Barry's regime? How long before we just give up and pull out of that hellish quagmire known as Washington, D.C.?"
Full column here:
http://www.uexpress.com/anncoulter/
Do NeoCon columnists not understand the speciousness of this argument or are they deliberately trying to mislead their gullible fans?
Two hundred and sixty two murdered in DC last year? I have an idea. Let's spend eighty seven billion dollars every year to stop that from happening. Hire more cops. Build more schools. Create more jobs. If we did that then intellectual cripples like Coulter wouldn't even be able to use that lame argument anymore. Since it's one of the few they have I say let's take it away from them.