Do you know ann coulter

[Albert Schweitzer 10]

Today is Monday, and on Monday I get my DER SPIEGEL, in other words my weekly media input (besides Longinius brain wash ). And this week I found an article about a famous American lady called Ann Coulter. She is 40, conservative lawyer, TV Moderator and author and she gathers more and more people around her because of her extreme views. Let me just state a few of em!

To a hanidcaped Vietnam Veteran in a wheelchair she said: People like you are to blame that we lost the war"

She proposed the US government to conquer muslimic nations and "kill their leaders" and to convert their population to christianity.

And on her homepage you see her with a big gun in her arms! LOL! Actually she is getting pretty famous and she allready has several Fan-CLub pages in the US. If you know any more stories about her, post them here.

And for all you morons that intend to ruin my thread with US-Bashing: "stay out or I send you purple Anthrax by Air-mail!"

[bn880 5]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Albert Schweizer @ July 29 2002,11:56)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">And for all you morons that intend to ruin my thread with US-Bashing: "stay out or I send you purple Anthrax by Air-mail!"<span id='postcolor'>

Calling yourself a moron already?

If what you say is true, she needs a good beating! Maybe go to a work camp in Syberia.

[Placebo 29]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">"The good part of being a Democrat is that you can commit crimes, sell out your base, bomb foreigners, and rape women, and the Democratic faithful will still think you're the greatest." <span id='postcolor'>

[Tex -USMC- 0]

Okay, heres the scoop on Ann Coulter:

Shes a middle age conservative pundit who made her name on Beltway lecture circuits, network news talkshows, and other forms of news analysis. She is known for her extremely conservative views, especially when it comes to her views on liberals. She recently wrote a book called 'Slander: Liberal Lies About the American Right', in which she rails against the 'entrenched liberal bias' in network news reporting. She digs deep to find every single wrong done against conservatives in the reporting of news, from the blatant to the less obvious.

Among her arguments are this: "One exhibition of the bias against the Right is the way moderates are viewed on each side. Moderate liberals are called "conservative liberals", but republicans in the middle are called "moderate republicans", suggesting that all other republicans are not". On top of this, she rationalizes the faults of the CONSERVATIVE media outlets *cough* Rush, *cough*. In other words, ultra sensitive, hypocritical bullshit arguments that compliment her ultra conservative views.

She was born to a rich family in a rich neighborhood, and has generally led a silver spoon life, yet constantly trumpets how 'out of touch' Democrats are with the regular American citizen. Some find her attractive, but every time I look at her I feel like Im staring right into the face of ignorance and hate. No wonder shes so popular with people.

[Guest]

Some quotes from her site:

(On Afganistan)

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">We should invade their countries, kill their leaders and convert them to Christianity. We weren't punctilious about locating and punishing only Hitler and his top officers. We carpet-bombed German cities; we killed civilians. That's war. And this is war.

<span id='postcolor'>

(On war on terror)

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">

AS PUNDITS MULL whether America's next target in the war on terrorism should be Iraq or a smaller quarry first – such as the Sudan or Somalia – it's time to consider another petri dish of ferocious anti-American hatred and terrorist activity. The Bush doctrine is: We are at war not only with the terrorists, but also with those who harbor them.

We've got to attack France.

Having exhausted itself in a spirited fight with the Nazis in the last war, France cannot work up the energy to oppose terrorism. For decades now, France has nurtured, coddled and funded Islamic terrorists. (Moreover, the Great Satan is getting a little sick of our McDonald's franchises being attacked on behalf of notoriously inefficient French dairy farmers.)

<....>

If this is a war against terrorism and not a Eurocentric war against Islam, the conclusion is ineluctable: We must attack France. What are they going to do? Fight us?

<span id='postcolor'>

(on the role of the military)

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">For eight years, Clinton caused America to retreat in the face of terrorism. He used the best fighting force on the globe to build urinals in Bosnia. Eventually, he lobbed a few cruise missiles in the general vicinity of Islamic terrorists – but only in a desperate attempt to distract from his impeachment.

Members of the Clinton Legacy Project at the Washington Post and New York Times are trying to blame Clinton-haters (normal people) for Clinton's appalling negligence. But if it weren't for us, he never would have bombed anything. Also, we didn't make him meet with Monica Lewinsky more often than he met with his first CIA director. (Wayne Newton is probably a perfectly nice fellow. I take it back.)

At least our Northern Alliance allies understand that the point

of the Pentagon is not to build urinals in the Third World.

<span id='postcolor'>

Well, what can one say? I think that Tex described the phenomenon very good. I still cannot help but to wonder: Is she really serious or is she just being provocative?

[Paratrooper 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (denoir @ July 29 2002,19:07)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Some quotes from her site:

(On Afganistan)

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">We should invade their countries, kill their leaders and convert them to Christianity. We weren't punctilious about locating and punishing only Hitler and his top officers. We carpet-bombed German cities; we killed civilians. That's war. And this is war.

<span id='postcolor'>

(On war on terror)

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">

AS PUNDITS MULL whether America's next target in the war on terrorism should be Iraq or a smaller quarry first – such as the Sudan or Somalia – it's time to consider another petri dish of ferocious anti-American hatred and terrorist activity. The Bush doctrine is: We are at war not only with the terrorists, but also with those who harbor them.

We've got to attack France.

Having exhausted itself in a spirited fight with the Nazis in the last war, France cannot work up the energy to oppose terrorism. For decades now, France has nurtured, coddled and funded Islamic terrorists. (Moreover, the Great Satan is getting a little sick of our McDonald's franchises being attacked on behalf of notoriously inefficient French dairy farmers.)

<....>

If this is a war against terrorism and not a Eurocentric war against Islam, the conclusion is ineluctable: We must attack France. What are they going to do? Fight us?

<span id='postcolor'>

(on the role of the military)

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">For eight years, Clinton caused America to retreat in the face of terrorism. He used the best fighting force on the globe to build urinals in Bosnia. Eventually, he lobbed a few cruise missiles in the general vicinity of Islamic terrorists – but only in a desperate attempt to distract from his impeachment.

Members of the Clinton Legacy Project at the Washington Post and New York Times are trying to blame Clinton-haters (normal people) for Clinton's appalling negligence. But if it weren't for us, he never would have bombed anything. Also, we didn't make him meet with Monica Lewinsky more often than he met with his first CIA director. (Wayne Newton is probably a perfectly nice fellow. I take it back.)

At least our Northern Alliance allies understand that the point

of the Pentagon is not to build urinals in the Third World.

<span id='postcolor'>

Well, what can one say? I think that Tex described the phenomenon very good. I still cannot help but to wonder: Is she really serious or is she just being provocative?<span id='postcolor'>

If those are her words then she strikes me as monstrously ill-informed and stupid.

[Tex -USMC- 0]

I really dont know what makes her tick Denoir. Ive watched her on all manner of network news shows, including Fox News, which has turned into her backyard.

You just cant really tell whether she truly believes what she says, because she has the goddam crocodile smile on at all times, and you never really see her in an actual debate. Mostly she is just one on one with an anchor, or giving a lecture. She never seems to be around when people who want to argue with her are on. Strange, considering that you'd think that the liberal networks would send waves of their best liberal pundits against her. Or just take her off the air, which I cant say I would mind too much.

Whether she truly believes in it or not, she is continuously obtuse, biting, inflammatory, insensitive, and ill informed when she is speaking or writing- Whenever I watch her I cant help but thinking that she is exactly what a love-child between Rush Limbaugh and Joseph Goebbels would resemble, if given a nice body and a serious case of PMS.

Go on Amazon.com, type up her book's title, and read a few excerpts. She has a (very) few valid points, but they are completely drowned inside her blind hatred and bias against anyone who would stand up and disagree with her.

[Albert Schweitzer 10]

Well first of all she earns her money with that so this is motivation N°1 or N°2. Secondly she is some kind of parasite that always come up when countries face difficult times. She knows that people are now open to extreme perceptions and Easy Solutions. And I guess she makes money out of that! Well I guess

But it is a phenomenon that Conservative Republican voters are very touchy when you talk about democrats. I remember my oncle who 1/2 Irish and 1/2 american, damm he hates when I tell him I like the democrats.

[ralphwiggum 6]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Hotel Bellhop @ July 29 2002,17:56)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">She proposed the US government to conquer muslimic nations and "kill their leaders" and to convert their population to christianity.

<span id='postcolor'>

ahh...yes...that reminds me....idiots are born every minute, and she is the proof.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Evil Verwalter @ July 29 2002,18:30)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (the supreme bitch @ July 29 2002,00:10)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">"The good part of being a Democrat is that you can commit crimes, sell out your base, bomb foreigners, and rape women, and the Democratic faithful will still think you're the greatest." <span id='postcolor'>

<span id='postcolor'>

well, she has a good body curve for a rightwing extremist. but since she is an extreme rightwing, she should cover her shoulders, legs and arms, otherwise it would be her fault if she gets sexually assaulted since rightwings think it's women's fault that she got assualted.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (my evil swedish nemesis @ July 29 2002,19:10)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (the supreme bitch @ July 29 2002,00:10)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">We must attack France. What are they going to do? Fight us?<span id='postcolor'> <span id='postcolor'>

LOL! French fight?  j/k(don't get me wrong ran and jawk  )

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Tex[uSMC] @ July 29 2002,19:47)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Whenever I watch her I cant help but thinking that she is exactly what a love-child between Rush Limbaugh and Joseph Goebbels would resemble, if given a nice body and a serious case of PMS.<span id='postcolor'>

ROFL LOL!!!    

I don't know who that bitch is, but I wouldn't mind if she ends up in a psychiatric ward sooner or later.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (the supreme bitch @ July 29 2002,00:10)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">But if it weren't for us, he never would have bombed anything<span id='postcolor'>

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (the supreme bitch @ July 29 2002,00:10)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">"The good part of being a Democrat is that you can commit crimes, sell out your base, bomb foreigners, and rape women, and the Democratic faithful will still think you're the greatest." <span id='postcolor'>

ok..so she's taking credits for bombing, yet she says bombing foreigners is Democrat's action, thus evil. This is first time I see such a contradicting argument in short time!  

[Duke_of_Ray 0]

I would sya something, but I wan't.

[Tex -USMC- 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Duke_of_Ray @ July 29 2002,20:33)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I would sya something, but I wan't. <span id='postcolor'>

Please do. I know you probably think that she is a lone voice in the wilderness, crying out against the liberal menace.

But I want to hear you say it yourself

[Albert Schweitzer 10]

Hey, this wasnt meant to be an US-bashing thread so dont get anoyed. We are making fun of that lady thats all.

Any you must admit her point of view is alittle simple-minded.

But did you know Collin Powell might end up resigning. He is over-voted too many times and that anoys him. I like him though!

[Tovarish 0]

Goddam, Einstein was right. there IS no limit to human stupidity

[MDRZulu 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">For eight years, Clinton caused America to retreat in the face of terrorism. He used the best fighting force on the globe to build urinals in Bosnia. Eventually, he lobbed a few cruise missiles in the general vicinity of Islamic terrorists – but only in a desperate attempt to distract from his impeachment. <span id='postcolor'>

I agree that Clinton retreated to terrorism. He was a pussy who shot like 5 missles at terrorist camps which I'm sure pissed them off more then ever. Then he didn't bother to finish them off just like he did in Somalia, leaving them pissed off and probably gaining support for future terrorist attacks. I dont think he did it to save himself from being impeached though. Building urinals in Bosnia? I dont get it but I dont really understand all that happened there so its over my head.

This could be a little prejudice but what does a middle aged airhead richy rich blonde know about war? Shoulda sent that bitch to vietnam and she wouldnt have come home in a wheelchair she woulda came home in a box.

[USSoldier11B 0]

One question, is she single?

[Duke_of_Ray 0]

I know better than to do this but ohwell. We should only invade their countires if they are a threat to the U.S. only. We can give em food but no reason to invade....yet. As for the converting to Christianity, each missonary takes his own risk when going over there nad my prayers will be iwth them. If the U.S. was to conquer Islamic countries then yes misionarys should be able to go preach and spread the gospel, but force no one onto believing. Well as for ataking France that may be a little bit to far, but if terriost where to go and take refuge there then the U.S. could send some Special Fprces over there, but not yet. There I said it, it is not too bad is it?

[Tex -USMC- 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (USSoldier11B @ July 30 2002,04:29)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">One question, is she single?<span id='postcolor'>

I wouldnt touch her. Im into beautiful women as much as the next guy, but she carries waaayyy too much baggage for me.

[ralphwiggum 6]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Tex [uSMC] @ July 30 2002,05:57)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (USSoldier11B @ July 30 2002,04:29)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">One question, is she single?<span id='postcolor'>

I wouldnt touch her. Im into beautiful women as much as the next guy, but she carries waaayyy too much baggage for me.<span id='postcolor'>

so how fat is she? 200lbs?

[Tex -USMC- 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Duke_of_Ray @ July 30 2002,04:36)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I know better than to do this but ohwell.  We should only invade their countires if they are a threat to the U.S. only. We can give em food but no reason to invade....yet. As for the converting to Christianity, each missonary takes his own risk when going over there nad my prayers will be iwth them. If the U.S. was to conquer Islamic countries then yes misionarys should be able to go preach and spread the gospel, but force no one onto believing. Well as for ataking France that may be a little bit to far, but if terriost where to go and take refuge there then the U.S. could send some Special Fprces over there, but not yet. There I said it, it is not too bad is it? <span id='postcolor'>

Not as bad as I was expecting. Those missionaries would definitely need your prayers, although you might want to address them directly to St Peter, because by the time your divine appeals get upstairs, thats who the missionaries would be talking to. Pop Quiz- Ever heard of the Boxer Rebellion? Nuff said. And we hadnt even occupied China for that to happen.

And also, you realize that her allegations against France are a crock of horseshit? They have as many terrorists in their jails as anyone else. And also, if we DID send military operatives into France, we will have the NATO mutual protection clause used on our ass SO fast, that Dubya's poor little head will spin. He may want a war with Iraq, but I bet he will never have had all of Western Europe pissed at him- wait, never mind.

So really, that idea is crazy to the Nth degree... Did I mention that they gave us the Statue of Liberty? If we invade, they might ask for it back  

One last thing- if we invade France, Germany- Under NATO - will come to France's defense. And THAT will probably violate some universal dogmatic law, and cause all of existence to unmake itself  

[Duke_of_Ray 0]

Oh no not again. God hears your prayers imeaditily, so that is awnsered. As for the Statue of Liberty, hasn't it just bnrought use troubdle, i.e. the mob.

[USSoldier11B 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">One last thing- if we invade France, Germany- Under NATO - will come to France's defense. And THAT will probably violate some universal dogmatic law, and cause all of existence to unmake itself <span id='postcolor'>

ROFL!

[Warin 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Duke_of_Ray @ July 30 2002,06:18)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">As for the Statue of Liberty, hasn't it just bnrought use troubdle, i.e. the mob. <span id='postcolor'>

Wow.

That is the most incomprehensible leap in logic that I have ever read.

I am assuming you are referring to the large number of Italian immigrants to the US, some of whom are involved in organised crime?

And then I am supposing that you are making some Ellis Island reference and linking that with the Statue of Liberty.

Or you are just being totally incomprehensible

[Tex -USMC- 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Duke_of_Ray @ July 30 2002,06:18)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Oh no not again.  God hears your prayers imeaditily, so that is awnsered.  As for the Statue of Liberty, hasn't it just bnrought use troubdle, i.e. the mob. <span id='postcolor'>

Ooh, nice. Anti immigration now

[Tovarish 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Duke_of_Ray @ July 30 2002,06:18)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Oh no not again.  God hears your prayers imeaditily, so that is awnsered.  As for the Statue of Liberty, hasn't it just bnrought use troubdle, i.e. the mob. <span id='postcolor'>

*drum roll* Ladies and Gentlemen....I present to you....Wobble Junior!

I had a feeling the void would be filled up somehow

[JustinCase 0]

I was just browsing through the images on her website when I saw this:

Look at the hands! they're huge! I wonder what that means...