Ann Coulter

[Guest hardyz1]

AH HAHAHAHAHAHAHA -- you live in State College, which is the closest thing to hell I've ever experienced. That paper is such a friggin' rag. I understand why Coulter got canned -- all the pseudo hippies and pinhead PSU profs. probably gathered together to get her booted because they love the freedom of speech as long as the person using this freedom agrees with them.

 

Oh God I hated that place. (No offense of course)

 

None taken. You'll get no argument at all from me. And I don't actually live in State College, I just go to school there (not Penn State). I will be glad when I never have to go there again.

 

UPDATE: Apparently this story is catching on worldwide. There have been a bunch of articles on various right wing sites and sites like Salon.

 

Bob Unger is a cock.

[Guest B-X]

here is the offending column in full:

 

The URL is here: http://www.townhall.com/columnists/anncoul...c20020902.shtml

 

-------------------------------------------------

Ann Coulter

September 2, 2002

 

Battered Republican syndrome

 

For my escapist summer reading at the beach this week, I've been flipping through Sean Hannity's fabulous new book, "Let Freedom Ring." It's a fine book, with many excellent illustrations of how consistently wrong liberals have been for half a century, give or take a few years. But I must take issue with Sean on one point.

 

Perplexingly, he writes: "The vast majority of liberals are good, sincere, well-meaning people." This cheery bonhomie is beginning to sound like the mantra about the "vast majority" of Muslims being peaceful and has produced the same good results. I think it's time to drop the infernal nonsense about liberals being well-intentioned but misguided. In the spirit of Hannityesque magnanimity, I will say that there is only one thing wrong with liberals: They're no good.

 

As Hannity notes, liberals never reciprocate the love conservatives keep sending their way. They don't like us. They don't even think we're human. Of this, I am eternally grateful.

 

Some of the other things liberals believe are:

 

- to move beyond discrimination, we must discriminate;

 

- girls would make excellent Marines;

 

- running gay marriage announcements in the wedding pages will lead to greater acceptance of homosexuality.

 

They are wrong about everything. Why would anyone want to be liked by these people?

 

It's sort of cute when Sean's hail-fellow-well-met approach toward liberals is greeted with dismissive grunts. For one thing, I think well enough of Sean to believe he doesn't really mean it. But how many times must we endure a Republican politician droning on about what a fine human being some heinous Democrat is and what a pleasure it was to work with him, only to have the heinous Democrat grudgingly issue some backhanded compliment about the Republican finally seeing the light on this "one issue"?

 

In the 1996 vice presidential debates, for example, Al Gore said of his opponent Jack Kemp: "Now I want to congratulate Mr. Kemp for being a lonely voice in the Republican Party over the years on this question" of racism and affirmative action. Kemp responded to this demagogic and baseless slander of the Republican Party by saying: "Affirmative action should be predicated upon need, not equality of reward, blah, blah, blah." Gee, thanks, Jack.

 

President Bush, too, has repeatedly set himself up as the test case of what happens when you try to play nice with a Democrat. After the dignified staff of the dignified former president trashed the White House on their dignified exit, Bush downplayed the property damage, saying: "There might have been a prank or two. Maybe somebody put a cartoon on the wall, but that's OK."

 

Anyone who knew anyone moving into the Bush White House knew that it was more than a "prank or two." But instead of stopping while they were ahead, pocketing Bush's gracefulness and moving on, the Democrats aggressively attacked Republicans for having falsely accused the Clinton staff of trashing the White House. They cited Bush's magnanimity as evidence that this was a lie. Rep. Anthony Weiner, D-N.Y., demanded an apology from the White House. USA Today ran a snippy article titled "Ex-Clinton staffers on vandalism: Got proof?" Former Clinton press secretary Jake Siewert insinuatingly asked why there were no records of the alleged damage.

 

And then the full GAO report came back: The Party of the People had done $15,000 worth of property damage to the People's House. Extend an olive branch to Democrats and they bite your hand off.

 

Bush has invited Sen. Teddy Kennedy to the White House for movie night (to watch the Kennedy hagiography "Thirteen Days"), brought him over to discuss education several times, named a federal building after one brother and gushingly praised the other.

 

The adulterous drunk who cheated at Harvard and killed a girl at Chappaquiddick responded to these overtures by attacking Bush. "It takes more than good intentions to make a difference," Kennedy said. Asked about Bush's intelligence (a meaningless concept in college admissions but a scientifically provable quality in the cases of Republican presidents and death-row inmates), Kennedy pointedly said only that he found Bush, "engaging and personable."

 

Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., dismissed Bush's overtures toward Kennedy as calculated political gamesmanship.

 

(Pop quiz: Did a Republican or Democrat say this about a member of the opposing party – "Your thoughtfulness truly amazes me. ... Thank you, my friend, for your many courtesies. If the world only knew." Answer: That was Sen. Trent Lott on Teddy Kennedy.)

 

When Bush named the Department of Justice building after Robert Kennedy, Kerry Kennedy Cuomo displayed the renowned Kennedy graciousness by viciously attacking the Bush administration at a pre-dedication ceremony. Noting that her daughter was in the audience, Kennedy Cuomo said: "Kara, if anyone tries to tell you this is the type of justice system your grandpa embraced, you just don't believe it."

 

This is as we have come to expect from a family of heroin addicts, statutory rapists, convicted and unconvicted female-killers, cheaters, bootleggers and dissolute drunks known as "Camelot." Why would anyone want such people as their "good friends"?

[Guest Cancer Marney]

What's funny is that pretty much everything she said in that particular column is not only true but independently verifiable fact.

[Guest B-X]

I will say that there is only one thing wrong with liberals: They're no good.

 

How the fuck could that be interpeted as a fact?

[Guest Cancer Marney]

Notice that I qualified "everything" with "pretty much." She voices the same opinions she always does, but in this column, everything with which she backs up those opinions is, as I said, independently verifiable fact.

[Guest B-X]

But wouldn't you agree that the contents of that column are quite hateful in spirit?

[Guest Cancer Marney]

Of course. And I'd add that hate, when directed at the evil, the ignorant, and the just plain annoying isn't necessarily a vice. It can be a virtue.

 

"Surely thou wilt slay the wicked, O God: depart from me therefore, ye bloody men.

For they speak against thee wickedly, and thine enemies take thy name in vain.

Do not I hate them, O Lord, that hate thee? and am not I grieved with those that rise up against thee?

I hate them with perfect hatred: I count them mine enemies."

- Psalms 139:19-22

[Guest EricMM]

liberals never reciprocate the love conservatives keep sending their way. They don't like us. They don't even think we're human. Of this, I am eternally grateful.

 

If what I've read is and indicator, this sentiment goes BOTH ways...

 

I mean she isn't excatly sending love liberal's way in this column...

[Guest Olympic Slam]

Most of her article was pretty true when it comes to mainstream Liberal politicians and that is you just can't play nice with them.

[Guest Some Guy]

This is as we have come to expect from a family of heroin addicts, statutory rapists, convicted and unconvicted female-killers, cheaters, bootleggers and dissolute drunks known as "Camelot." Why would anyone want such people as their "good friends"?

She forgot about the Mob ties and their subsequent betrayal of the Mob causing both JFK and RFK's death. The Kennedy's are the most crooked family in the history of American politics and yet they are still revered by the unenlightened left. I have to live with this shit everyday in MA where JFK and Teddy are heroes. And when I have to hear "Still the One" at Teddy's next victory party on the news I think I'll puke.

 

What's so offesnsive about Coulter's article? I guess the left doesn;t like it when a conservative actually fights back at their slanderous and often baseless accusations (Bush, HW Bush, Reagan are stupid, Newt wants to kill children, GOP is against education, GOP hates the poor, GOP is all racist, etc...).

[Guest hardyz1]

FURTHER UPDATE: This story has been posted on the best site on the net, Fark. Yesterday actually.

 

On a totally unrelated note, am I the only one that thinks these new emoticons are freaking queer? I really pity someone who posts or and actually thinks they're being witty or clever.

[Guest B-X]

HYPOCRITE, n.

One who, professing virtues that he does not respect, secures the advantage of seeming to be what he depises.

[Guest hardyz1]

HYPOCRITE, n.

One who, professing virtues that he does not respect, secures the advantage of seeming to be what he depises.

 

I hope you were addressing that to Coulter and not me (regarding my last post).