I don't hate many people in this world. There are people I dislike, such as the smoker next door who wakes me up several times a night with her foul cancer-stench filling the bedroom after several requests to stop. I ain't mad. You're getting evicted. And when you do, I plan on doing a dance.
But there is one person whom I loathe to the point of shame. Ann Coulter. I get that you are ultra-conservative, that's fine. But you are hateful, don't listen to the opposing arguments, and well... a bitch. Among her quotes include the fact that no normal looking americans should be checked at airports, only muslims. College liberals are traitors who deserve the DEATH PENALTY. And my favorite, that God gave us the planet to "rape." I'm not making any of these up. Refer to exhibition C for all her best quotes and references.
Exhibit A
Exhibit B
Exhibit C
The most recent comment being exhibit B; "I was going to have a few comments about the other Democratic nominee, John Edwards, but it turns out that you have to go into rehab if you use the word 'faggot.'"
Wow. You need to get hit by a fucking TRUCK so I can send you hate mail while you cry yourself to sleep in physical therapy. (This is where the shame part comes in to play. Its seriously not healty for your soul to hate someone that much. But you wouldn't know about a soul, would you Ann.) Okay, lets not sink to her Junior High stereotypical I'm-pretty-so-I-can-be-as-mean-as-I-want-and-people-will-still-like-me level. Lets do this the adult way...
Is this the only defense you have against your critics and enemies? Attack their sexuality? Could you BE more juvenile? Just because you do it with multi-syllable words and a thesaurus doesn't make you any more credible. Do you have any actual evidence for ANY of the gay-slams you make? I'm guessing no, or you would have brought them up. My professional opinion (no less professional than hers, she's not a fucking shrink either) is that she is the one with questionable sexual orientation. A few too many homosexual jabs at her opponents show classic signs of projection. Plus, could you be any more butch? You're petite and blonde guise only holds up until you open your dominating, over-aggressive, hateful mouth. I'd rather become intimate with an open flame than you. (I know, I know, this means I'm obviously gay.) Keep talking, Ann. One of these days you're going to talk your way into a court room. And go look 'tact' up in a dictionary.
You're not a human. You're a sound-byte. At best. The only hope I have is that if I lead a good life and make it to the pearly gates, you sure as hell won't be there.
8 comments:
this post demonstrates one of the things you do best: intelligent attacks on deserving political figures. kudos :)
while you are quite right about ann and her sound bite status, isn't this true about most people of her ilk? look at the people she faces on "news" talk shows - are they listening? while most do not sink to her insults some do. point - its everywhere, not just conservatives.
"Where'd all the good people go?
I've been changing channels
I don't see them on the TV shows
Where'd all the good people go?"
jack johnson
this woman is simply a clown. she says small-minded, unbased, intolerant and ignorant comments to inflame and get her sound bites in the news.
i wouldn't waste my time to talke to her or give her the time of day if we met on the street, which would of course mean i am gay.
I never said it was just conservatives. There's jabs coming from both sides, I'll concede. But not like hers. I doubt the John Stewarts of the world ever suggested that ALL college conservatives deserved the death penalty. I've got no problem with anybody who wants to add to the political process or debate. Dems, Republicans, Greens, etc... She's not adding to the debate. How do you debate that? "Uh, no. YOU'RE gay." She's a bigot and a clown.
God forbid anyone talk politics anymore. This is why America is dying. When did this 'oh man, don't bring up politics' shit get started? Fine then. We need a new word for it then, because its not politics anymore. POLITICS is the interaction between people and the exchanging and voicing of contrasting ideas in a public space (Hannah Arendt/Roman Senate/Thomas Jefferson). I'm sick of hearing people say that they're displeased with the state of the world then refuse to talk politics. We'll just call it, "taking it from The Man" from now on. Its called discourse, people. Its why there's free speech and the right to congregate. Nowdays theres only Factions shouting at one another. Both sides are guilty. Why can't most people stand to talk politics without getting pissed off? (Lehrer, this isn't pointed at you, I had a woman at work attempt to "talk" politics with me until she found out I disagreed with her, and it ended with her screaming at me. ) People can't stand to hear their point of view rebutted anymore. Ironically, they get MORE pissed if you make sense. People hate being wrong, or admitting that the other side does have credit. I love a Republican who can calmly debate their side. (Stoppable/Lehrer/Wes from work) I learn from them. I'll even adopt a few of their points. What scares me is how afraid of that discourse people are. Its the 'telltale sign of a waning democracy.' The first thing a facist government does is stop the free press and ban public congregation. End discourse. Here in America, we're doing it to ourselves.
I agree w/your comment more than the original post, Caboose; well stated -- the *real* danger isn't that the gov't does things you/I disagree with, it's that your/my ability to make our opinion heard.
Without disagreement how do opposing opinions find consensus?
As for Ann Coulter: I have read/listened to at least 3 of her books over the past year or so. I loved them. She's over-the-top, abrasive and cutting. She is ALSO very critical of anyone who tries to debate/rebut using character attacks and remarks off-topic... Exactly what she did to Edwards. I was completely stunned to read her remarks. Not only for their bigotry, but for the complete hypocrisy.
Disgusting.
it is unfortunate that your work lady could not discuss without screaming. the work place is not the only place where people get edgy when disagreed with. in class last night a few people disagreed with one girl in particular who became quietly incensed. she is one of those people who just can't let it go. we were debating the different reasons why thomas jefferson continued to hold slaves and yet wrote the declaration of ind. you are right caboose, let's not call it politics, let's call it debate. debate is brilliant, and difficult (unless we do this over the internet, and then well it's quite easy - no interruptions etc)and people don't like to be wrong. i think that is the ultimate sticking point for any discussion of "politics" people want to be right and marne (angry grad girl) is a prime example (as is your work lady). I do have to disagree with your assessment of america dying. quite the contrary - people are still free to debate, discuss, and disagree! it's brilliant! i generally don't do politics on my blog but i am glad you do on yours, because you have good opinions which you write clearly, although i have to cover my eyes when the f word comes along :)...last point- i don't think the roman senate would be a good example of politics at its best...unless you are speaking specifically about the roman senate in the republic not the empire. a better example would be the Athenian ecclesia.
Dang! Check out the history knowledge this girl just dropped! Yes, the Republic, which was one of the major inspirations of our founding fathers. The roman empire was definately a different story. Maybe 'dying' IS a bit drastic, but its definately troublesome that lots of people are starting to shy away from one of the building blocks of our republic (yes, our republic. NOT our democracy, which it is not). Democracy was too easily swayed by 'mob mentality' for the founding fathers. Thats why we employ a representative democracy with two branches of congress, one to give strenth to the masses (The House) and one to give strenth to the older and presumably wiser (The senate).
Lehrer also makes another great point; writing makes a much different forum for the discussion of ideas. No interuptions, the author has more time to better formulate his/her ideas before airing them, and a record of what was said is always available. However, Hannah Arendt, and TJ for sure would NOT advocate switching to all-text debate process. The public space is one of the most important factors in true politiking. The spontenaiety of the public forum is a must. The 'artful politician' thrives in that environment and true 'politics' requires the hecklers and the interuptions. A recent phenomenon is what's known as the 'pseudo-event.' Rallies which the dissentors are kept outside and staged media events are not half as 'political' as the politician who stands on a streetcorner accepting points and rebuttals from all who wish to pose them.
-btw, I love you guys. Thanks for indulging me. Especially when we don't agree. I'd rather come away disgruntled but aware than blissfully ignorant.
Post a Comment