He got out of serving in VietNam because of a cyst on his ass.
His radio style of berating the callers & not listening turned out to be because he had a hearing loss.
His own statements of what they should do to prosperous white male drug users are quite delicious in the light of his admitted "addiction to pain killers" (Notice, on the side, whenever a prominent person is addicted to drugs it was "accidental, because of prescription pain killers". Is this anything like getting VD off a toilet seat?)
He managed to become a major news story by allegedly trying to hide that he was taking Viagra. (Or is the doctor covering). In other words, he can't get it up, and was dumb enough to not just get the prescription under his name, but get caught with it illegally (or clever enough to make it a big news story).
How can one person be SO absurd without trying? Maybe he IS trying and the conservatives just don't get the joke.
I'm horrified. I find myself in agreement with the woman. I too consider Bill Clinton a rapist and sexual harrasser and have been furious with the women's movement for supporting this man.
As for the rest? She needs a life. Better, she--and she alone--needs to live in the world she wants to create: the one where she's a second-class citizen by virtue of being female, and the First Amendment she's "not too fond of" is gone.
Well, I truly disagree with that assessment -- but that wasn't the point: She said that he was a closeted gay. That's the WTF? part of the whole equation. Decades of aggressive heterosexual activity equal gayness. I guess I'm pretty gay as well. Wish I'd known. :)
Erk! Then in that case, by Coulter's standards, now that I'm out of the closet after so many years and am now aggressively pursuing homosexual activity that I'm really a closet straight now? I'm so confused. ;)
Okay, I'm not all that aggressive in the pursuit, but I am pursuing those activities. :)
And I've heard it before, that rampant promiscuity is a way of proving one's "straightness" and thus staying in denial of ne's homosexuality. It's long-since been discredited as junk science.
Doesn't even surprise me she would still subscribe to it. My opinion: (http://photobucket.com)
I popped around a little bit on Media Matters, came across the write-up of her referring to Al Gore as a "total fag" (http://mediamatters.org/items/200607280001) and then using the "just joking" defense. Good lords, I loathe that woman. And Chris Matthews. "Loathe" isn't a strong enough word.
I liked this gem:
COULTER For any feminist with the benefit of something beyond a community-college education, this is standard --
Here's the rest; it was sliced by a comment from Matthews:
COULTER -- feminist doctrine that wild promiscuity shows a fear-hostility of women.
Basically, she was saying that any feminist who has gone beyond community college will agree with her, because any feminist who has gone beyond community college believes that being a male slut = fearing and hating women, which = latent homosexuality.
I think Coulter may consider herself the only "real" feminist on the planet.
I thought she was getting desperate lately, but with her new book slamming 9/11 widows and now this, it looks like she's become an attention junkie. She has to say more outragious things to keep that spotlight on herself (notice this comes _immediately_ after newspapers started dropping her columns). If history is any indication, she should start to say more and more insane things, until even Fox stops having her on, and will have a total meltdown in a few months (here's hoping ;-)
Haven't you seen all the people defending her attack on the 9/11 widows? (http://mediamatters.org/items/200606090015) It was sick, really. I wish I could find all the individiual editorials and articles I read at the time of the brouhaha; they were just...oy. I recall one saying that what Coulter had said was okay because in the rebuttal from the Jersey Widows, they used the phrase "our husbands burned alive" (or nearly...it was "husbands" and "burned alive," but I may have the grammar and/or order wrong), and this article used that as proof that the Jersey Widows deserved Coulter's statements, because no grieving person talks about their loved one's deaths in such a gruesome manner.
I don't ordinarily believe in stooping to her level. But this (http://www.wonkette.com/politics/ann-coulter/the-coulter-doth-protest-too-much-190331.php) did make me chuckle in a pot-and-kettle kind of way.
Something just occurred to me while in the shower. According to Ann Coulter, Bill Clinton is boinking every woman who can't actually run away to cover up for the fact that he's really a closeted gay, right?
It sounds to me as though she's saying that he has these physical urges driving him towards men -- urges that he didn't choose, doesn't want, and is trying to suppress by forcing himself into hetero love affair after hetero love affair. It's almost as if she was saying that homosexuality was hard-wired into Clinton somehow, as though he was born with it.
So what Ann Coulter is *really* saying is that God makes queers.
(no subject)
Date: 2006-07-29 01:24 pm (UTC)No, that's Rush.
Date: 2006-07-29 02:33 pm (UTC)He got out of serving in VietNam because of a cyst on his ass.
His radio style of berating the callers & not listening turned out to be because he had a hearing loss.
His own statements of what they should do to prosperous white male drug users are quite delicious in the light of his admitted "addiction to pain killers" (Notice, on the side, whenever a prominent person is addicted to drugs it was "accidental, because of prescription pain killers". Is this anything like getting VD off a toilet seat?)
He managed to become a major news story by allegedly trying to hide that he was taking Viagra. (Or is the doctor covering). In other words, he can't get it up, and was dumb enough to not just get the prescription under his name, but get caught with it illegally (or clever enough to make it a big news story).
How can one person be SO absurd without trying? Maybe he IS trying and the conservatives just don't get the joke.
(no subject)
Date: 2006-07-29 01:52 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2006-07-29 09:33 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2006-07-31 01:53 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2006-07-29 02:34 pm (UTC)As for the rest? She needs a life. Better, she--and she alone--needs to live in the world she wants to create: the one where she's a second-class citizen by virtue of being female, and the First Amendment she's "not too fond of" is gone.
(no subject)
Date: 2006-07-29 02:54 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2006-07-29 03:07 pm (UTC)Okay, I'm not all that aggressive in the pursuit, but I am pursuing those activities. :)
(no subject)
Date: 2006-07-29 03:34 pm (UTC)And I've heard it before, that rampant promiscuity is a way of proving one's "straightness" and thus staying in denial of ne's homosexuality. It's long-since been discredited as junk science.
Doesn't even surprise me she would still subscribe to it.
My opinion:
(no subject)
Date: 2006-07-29 03:36 pm (UTC)Logic (?)
Date: 2006-07-29 05:01 pm (UTC)Ben
(no subject)
Date: 2006-07-29 04:08 pm (UTC)I liked this gem:
COULTER For any feminist with the benefit of something beyond a community-college education, this is standard --
Yet somehow, Liberals are elitists. *headscratch*
(no subject)
Date: 2006-07-30 01:03 am (UTC)Pardon me, but isn't that rather like, oh, Colin Powell telling Rosa Parks to shut up and sit in the back?
(no subject)
Date: 2006-07-30 01:22 am (UTC)COULTER -- feminist doctrine that wild promiscuity shows a fear-hostility of women.
Basically, she was saying that any feminist who has gone beyond community college will agree with her, because any feminist who has gone beyond community college believes that being a male slut = fearing and hating women, which = latent homosexuality.
I think Coulter may consider herself the only "real" feminist on the planet.
(no subject)
Date: 2006-07-30 03:51 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2006-07-29 06:47 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2006-07-30 01:38 am (UTC)It's Official...
Date: 2006-07-29 09:31 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2006-07-29 10:00 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2006-07-30 01:42 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2006-07-30 01:54 am (UTC)Hold on a second...
Date: 2006-08-03 12:39 am (UTC)It sounds to me as though she's saying that he has these physical urges driving him towards men -- urges that he didn't choose, doesn't want, and is trying to suppress by forcing himself into hetero love affair after hetero love affair. It's almost as if she was saying that homosexuality was hard-wired into Clinton somehow, as though he was born with it.
So what Ann Coulter is *really* saying is that God makes queers.
... or am I talking crazy?