Republicus

"Give me your tired, your poor, Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, The wretched refuse of your teeming shore. Send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed to me. I lift my lamp beside the golden door." The Statue of Liberty (P.S. Please be so kind as to enter through the proper channels and in an orderly fashion)

Name:
Location: Arlington, Virginia, United States

Tuesday, June 13, 2006

In Praise Of Ann


The mighty Greek Olympian goddess Pallas Athena sprang--fully armed-- from the very mind of Zeus.

She is the goddess of the Arts & Crafts.

And of Wisdom.

Yet she is also the warrior goddess, and could best her male counterpart--Ares, the very god of war himself-- in a fight, any day and anywhere, sending him off defeated and howling in short order.

She had no husband, yet stood tall, proud, and undaunted in the "Man's World" of Olympus, and won her own city in a contest of practical ingenuity against the mighty sea-god.

That is Ann Coulter, a women who--by her brains-- went to law school in the days when the field was very much dominated by males.

Standing on her own, she is a woman who intrepidly spoke Truth to vicious political power, unveiling the character of a sitting, liberal president known for his far-reaching, destructive vindictiveness--especially towards "trouble-making" women.

She is a woman who--on her own-- detoxified and refreshed an entire culture poisoned by liberalism, herself resetting the record straight by boldly slashing and overwriting decades of revisionism, as scribbled by entire armies of liberal liars.

She is a woman who, by reading books, by empirical observation, by her own busy hands and keystroking fingers, by her own talent, by the fire of her own creativity--again, by her brains-- became a self-made millionaire.

She is a woman who fearlessly speaks her mind.

She is a woman who emasculates men who try to bully her.

She chides other women for forsaking their femininity and betraying their womanhood.

She is a strong woman who fights back like a valkyrie against the seething, wailing hordes of liberal demons and harpies, who claw and gnash their teeth at her, trying to discredit and silence her, and destroy her.

And all along she is a woman who is unafraid, and laughs, because she knows.

She knows.

She dances in a ring of fire
and throws off the challenge with a shrug.


Jim Morrison

And the liberal feminists hate such a woman.

Go figure...

60 Comments:

Blogger Kelly said...

:)

11:05 PM  
Blogger Jeff Bargholz said...

She's one of the greatest assets conservatives have. When she rips a moonbat, it stays ripped. She ridicules those who desperately need to be ridiculed. I've never seen her come out behind in a debate.

Her effectiveness is precisely why the left hates her so pasionately. The hypocitical bleats about civility are just more moonbat guano.

2:47 PM  
Anonymous houstonmod said...

hahah it all makes sense now Angry John. You don't like facts, Ann Coulter doesn't like facts. I think calling Ann a deleterious bigot is factually correct. I don't think you could win a slander suit on that. Truth is a defense.
A central component of Ann's (and Angry John's)conservative hate speech is to make paranoid accusations based on their own neurotic impulses, such as calling Democrats angry, hate-filled, and mean. Hardly an artform.

Ann is always accusing us of repressing her speech. (referrred to a college student who threw a shaving cream pie at her, "a terrorist") I say let's do it. Let's repress her ... Frankly, I'm not a big fan of the First Amendment when it comes to Ann. Although I'm against the death penalty, we need to execute people like Ann Coulter in order to physically intimidate right wingers by making them realize that they can be killed, too. How's that sound?

Nice to see the blatant bigotry seems to be over on this site and is replaced by civilized yet apparently not very popular posts.

3:14 PM  
Blogger Kelly said...

Frankly, I'm not a big fan of the First Amendment when it comes to Ann.

Talk about showing houstonmod's liberal double standard...

John, did you set that trap for him or did he just walk in with that?

3:24 PM  
Blogger Kelly said...

Houstonmod just proved what you just said...about how much they hate her and why.

3:27 PM  
Anonymous houstonmod said...

do you guys have a problem with what I said? what's wrong with it?

3:56 PM  
Blogger John said...

Jeff said: "The hypocitical bleats about civility are just more moonbat guano."

Then Houston confessed: "Frankly, I'm not a big fan of the First Amendment when it comes to Ann. Although I'm against the death penalty, we need to execute people like Ann Coulter in order to physically intimidate right wingers by making them realize that they can be killed, too. How's that sound?"

Sounds like you're a true-blue fascist.

"Nice to see the blatant bigotry seems to be over on this site and is replaced by civilized yet apparently not very popular posts."

Guano.

Houston, you're an idiot.

The "blatant bigotry" he's whining about were the posts on violent Islam, the blatantly uncivilized aspects of it.

He then implies that I was "uncivilized" for pointing that out.

Then he calls for the stripping of Free Speech from Ann and her execution, AFTER saying "Ann is always accusing us of repressing her speech."

That from the Scoutmaster of Civility.

She's right. There's something wrong with liberals' wiring.

Lee Harvey liked to say (particularly during the insane "Spygate"): "Drip by drip, it's all coming out."

Yes. Drip by drip, liberalism is being exposed for what is.

Thank you, Houston, you're making our job a lot easier. Just keep talking, you drip.

4:03 PM  
Anonymous houstonmod said...

uh Kelly? Angry John?? let me see how to say this. I got it "physician, heal thyself".

Kelly, I found it interesting you found my quotes to be offensive. I guess you'll find Ann's comments to be offensive as well?

Being called an idiot by Angry John is nearly as priceless as being called unethical by Abramoff.

You might want to look at some quotes before you go over the edge. I just would have thought that Angry John might have caught on considering his dog like loyalty to this hag. Sorry Angry John, she apparently only dates classy guys like Bob Guccione Jr..
BTW, I loved the comment about how in 1988 law school was so male dominated!! lol... She's like the Jackie Robinson of law!!

"I think [calling Clinton a scumbag] is factually correct. ... I don't think you could win a slander suit on that. Truth is a defense."

"A central component of liberal hate speech is to make paranoid accusations based on their own neurotic impulses, such as calling Republicans angry, hate-filled, and mean."

"[Liberals] are always accusing us of repressing their speech. I say let's do it. Let's repress them. ... Frankly, I'm not a big fan of the First Amendment."

"When contemplating college liberals, you really regret once again that John Walker is not getting the death penalty. We need to execute people like John Walker in order to physically intimidate liberals, by making them realize that they can be killed, too. Otherwise, they will turn out to be outright traitors."

4:11 PM  
Blogger Phelonius said...

Houstonmod? What gives with that?

The other day I heard that there are politicians in Pennsylvania that actually want to *ban* selling her book. Are we in Nazi Germany? Next we are going to burn books? I have friends all across the political spectrum, but none of them have suggested official censorship or actually *killing* an author.

I have seen 'documentaries' and read books that have made my blood boil, but never in my wildest dreams did I think I would prefer banning books or movies or web-sites.

You talk about Anne and her anger at being repressed. Fine. The Dixie Chicks did the same thing when they went public and found out that their audience did not agree with their politics. They are currently facing closed venues because their ticket sales are down. If Anne's book is not popular with the market, then she will not sell that many books. If it is popular, well, it is popular. Anne's language can be inflammatory because she is passionate about what she believes. I do not think that warrants a death penalty.

Even as a Libertarian, I have to say that the right wing seems quite aware of mortality. They have been fighting terrorism 'tooth and nail.' What I find amusing is that while there is a right-wing religious community, what Anne brings to the table is that there is a left-wing religious community as well. I am well aware of secular humanism, and while her criticisms are biting, so has the secular humanist reaction to her criticisms been equally biting. Secular Humanism is a religion, regardless of what they will tell you, and a natural reaction to having your base beliefs challenged is the emotion of anger. So, be angry, Houstonmod, that is fine, but don't be crazy and call for people to be killed and for books to be banned. That is Nazi crap. You argue better than that.

4:12 PM  
Anonymous houstonmod said...

So John...I guess this means that Ann is a "true blue fascist"?? I guess it's either that or you can go on with your hypocritical ways and ignore that the quote was really from Ann Coulter and not from me.


I guess you'll have to admit that there is something wrong with Ann and your "wiring"? Or do we ignore that quote from Ann as well?

Boy, this is barely fun.

4:15 PM  
Anonymous houstonmod said...

Phelonius, you might want to go back and re-read this thread. You apparently didn't get I was doing nothing but re-phrasing quotes from Ann Coulter.

4:18 PM  
Blogger Phelonius said...

Houstonmod,

I realize that. I am saying that you normally do not use that kind of approach.

When I was talking about the politicians in Pennsylvania, I was talking about a reaction that astounded me. People were angry with the Dixie Chicks for their political viewpoint, but it seems to me that they got a wash from the media in general, while Anne does not get that same treatment.

I already acknowledged that Anne's speech can be impassioned, and your response is impassioned. As my old mentor told me back in the college days, "so, write a book in response, and then you can be famous as well."

4:29 PM  
Blogger John said...

Factmaster":

You're comparing an American writer--Anne Coulter-- to traitor John Walker, who picked up arms against his country and consorted with the enemy during wartime?

Yes you are. You're making them analogous or morally equivalent in your argument.

Oh, I know you hate that descriptive, Houston (i.e. moral equivalence), but what gives here?

At the same time, you blockhead, by making that analogy, you're positioning Walker to liberalism as Coulter is to conservatism.

You're an idiot.

4:39 PM  
Blogger John said...

Well, that wasn't very nice. What I meant to say is that when liberalism re-wires someone's brain, that otherwise intelligent someone becomes an idiot.

4:43 PM  
Blogger John said...

Liberalism is a cult.

4:44 PM  
Blogger John said...

...that's grown to the size of a religion.

4:46 PM  
Anonymous houstonmod said...

Phelonious,
The point of my post was not by any means to put forth my opinions. Clearly I am a staunch supporter of the 1st Amendment and even hate it when college kids boo-out Ann when she is talking.
I'm just having fun watching the backpedalling of Kelly and Angry John (who seems very very angry right now).
Ann Coulter has a perfect right to say whatever she wants. Her books (which I have two of at home) are simply filled with innacuracies and flat out lies. My favorite is her Republicus logic. "Alger Hiss was a spy and therefore Bill Clinton it is rapist".

John, just so you don't have a stroke, the comparison was full comments, not between Ann and John Walker. I was more impressed with the intimidation and showing liberals (or conservatives) they could be killed as well.
I guess Angry John wants to ignore why Ann Coulter wanted to kill John Walker. As she puts it, to intimadate liberals. I agree with you Angry John, she is a true-blue fascist.

Phelonious, I appreciate you need something was amiss reading my post. I find it comical that Angry John and Kelly did not. Kind of makes my point about blind hatred.

Since we are bring up Ann Coulter, is this thread going to turn into killing all "ragheads"? Are the words "Dune Niggers" going to come back?

4:49 PM  
Blogger Phelonius said...

Hey John. I am interested in your opinion here. I do not think that Liberalism can be termed a religion, as that is a political term. I do not think, for example, that conservatism can be termed a religion because there were people like Jefferson and Franklin that had not-so-religious an outlook. Conservatism, liberalism, and Communism, for example, are ism's that are in the strict political nomenclature. There are others, of course.

I propose that there are religions behind liberalism, and some of them are as varied as christianity (whatever flavor), buddhism and so forth. As a Roman Catholic we have had to deal with things like "Liberation Theology," which was a thin veil over overt socialism. Then there are those nuts out of Kansas that are protesting at soldier's funerals because "God hates fags."

I think that if we start labeling political movements as necessarily religious in nature, are we not doing the same thing as the Islamo-fascists and declaring a (forgive the use here) jihad? I am in favor of the seperation of church and state for that reason. Ideas? Thoughts?

4:57 PM  
Blogger Phelonius said...

Houstonmod,

There ya go. I thought there was something amiss when you started in on the ammendments. Not your style.

I sincerely hope that we do not go back into the "raghead" dialogues. I had my ass handed to me on a plate for even suggesting that there were muslims out there that were not fanatical. Just because I know some that are not was not nearly good enough.

As much as I disliked Clinton, when they bad-mouthed him when I was in England I nearly had to go to jail because while I did not like Clinton personally, he was "our son-of-a-bitch" and I will not put up with the Brits talking shit about our government. We *are* americans here dammit.

5:08 PM  
Blogger John said...

Houstonmod misread:

"BTW, I loved the comment about how in 1988 law school was so male dominated!! lol... She's like the Jackie Robinson of law!!"

In FACT, "Factmaster," I said:

"That is Ann Coulter, a women who--by her brains-- went to law school in the days when the field was very much dominated by males."

You don't the legal field was a Boy's Club of sorts when Miss Coulter applied for law school?

Houston tries to "bust":

A.C. said:

"I think [calling Clinton a scumbag] is factually correct. ... I don't think you could win a slander suit on that. Truth is a defense."

She's right. Clinton's a low-life. He's a shallow, conceited, covetuous liar and rapist.

A.C. said:

"A central component of liberal hate speech is to make paranoid accusations based on their own neurotic impulses, such as calling Republicans angry, hate-filled, and mean."

Houston is utterly oblivious to the FACT that he's proving her point WHILE he's trying to discredit her!

Behold the whining, nit-picking neurotic:

"uh...Angry John??...Being called an idiot by Angry John...Sorry Angry John..."

He also called me, in this very commentary section, "blatantly bigoted" and implied that I was "uncivilized" before he shamelessly posted, once again, this:

"A central component of liberal hate speech is to make paranoid accusations based on their own neurotic impulses, such as calling Republicans angry, hate-filled, and mean."


"[Liberals] are always accusing us of repressing their speech. I say let's do it. Let's repress them. ... Frankly, I'm not a big fan of the First Amendment."

It's illegal to yell "Fire!" in a crowded movie theater.

And as far as I'm concerned it's treasonous to call the Commander-in-Chief a "Lying, murderous fascist" in the midst of war against a lying, murderous, fascist enemy.

Yes, you all should SHUT UP.

"When contemplating college liberals, you really regret once again that John Walker is not getting the death penalty. We need to execute people like John Walker in order to physically intimidate liberals, by making them realize that they can be killed, too. Otherwise, they will turn out to be outright traitors."

She's right in the sense that you scoundrels hide behind the First Amendment and think it entitles you to treasonous tirades.

What, you think liberals are champions of the First Amendment, Houston, with all that PC crap you lizards invented for the purpose of controlling speech AND thought?

Like attackinmg someone as being "bigoted" because he pulled open the curtains on Islam?

As Ann would say, the only use you have for the First Amendment is allowing you to spew the very venom that would poison it.

5:16 PM  
Blogger John said...

Houston said:

"I'm just having fun watching the backpedalling of Kelly and Angry John."

Who's backpedalling? I wouldn't be at all surprised if you truly do harbor those notions.

5:21 PM  
Blogger John said...

Phelonius: It has all the trappings of a religion and the parishioners demonstrate all the characteristics of brainwashed cult-members.

5:23 PM  
Blogger Phelonius said...

With all due respect, what are your feelings about the right-wing nuts that are protesting the burials of our soldiers because they feel that God has commanded them to do so?

They claim conservatism. I say bullshit. Those soldiers deserve a respectfull burial. I say that is an example of politicising a religious idealism. I hate it that they claim to be conservative christians.

5:26 PM  
Blogger John said...

lol Then he calls me "Angry John" FOUR more times before I posted!

And there's nothing wrong with a righteous anger, Houstonmod.

It's the petty, vindictive and envious anger of sore-losers that is to be condemned.

5:27 PM  
Blogger John said...

What do you think I think of them, James?

Have I given any indication, in any of my arguments, that I would applaud that sort of demonstration?

5:30 PM  
Blogger John said...

BTW, Houston:

Merry Fitzmas. :)

5:32 PM  
Anonymous houstonmod said...

"Who's backpedalling? I wouldn't be at all surprised if you truly do harbor those notions. "

lol lol yeah AJ, I'm defeated and I'm a closet Ann Coulter fan. Yep...that's me. Is that your idea of a sharp rhetort? How about "I know you are but what am I". Pick it up AJ, that was lame.

Too funny. I'll give you some time to lick your wounds and come up with some more nonsense.
Hey, can we talk some more about Ann Coulter? How about why she is still single? Well on that one, I'm solidly in Dick Cheney's corner. How about why she illegally (felony no less) voted in the wrong district in Florida?
Plagiarism? Bigotted race baiting? Oh well, this has been fun. Got to get home. Feel free to apologize AJ. Remember,it's "envious anger of sore-losers that is to be condemned."

5:44 PM  
Blogger Phelonius said...

No, John. You have not commended them at all. But they are some of the ammunition that the left can use and say: "see, they are fanatics too!" That is why I think we should stay away from describing political movements with religious tags.

Moreover, I think that Houstonmod does himself a disservice when he uses tags on you like Angry John. I have not thought of you that way. Name calling is never going to be a solution to *ANYTHING.* As far as you and I go, you tend to the Republican Party and I am a proponent of the Libertarian Party. So be it. We are closer than we are apart. We can debate on the differences anytime.

Those losers that claim a conservative viewpoint and do things like the Right Reverend from Kansas are doing nothing but fueling the fire that should not be there. My point was more philisophical than it was political. If we start labeling a political term as a religious term then we deserve what we get when the other side does the same thing, no?

The Rev. Robertson has said some things from time to time that also gives fuel to the opposition. That was really my only point.

5:48 PM  
Blogger Phelonius said...

B-T-W, there is an article on this topic that I found interesting. Apparently, the feminists on the left are losing ground.

http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1203281,00.html

There are women's groups that are looking to Anne as something of a model. My wife has been angry about the left's claims to her allegience as a woman for many years because they do NOT represent what she believes. As a man, I cannot fault her for that, as I have always said that one's political beliefs have nothing to do with one's sex, per se.

6:22 PM  
Blogger Phelonius said...

http://www.time.com/time/
/nation/article/0,8599,1203281,00.html

maybe that is better?

6:24 PM  
Blogger Jeff Bargholz said...

HoustonRod,

thanks for arguing the conservative side so well. Your comment was calm, filled with love and nice.

Right, and the Democrat party is famed for its civility, altruism and rational discourse. Your angry, hate-filled and mean comment proved the point you tried to disprove.

I think I just saw a pig fly. Oh, wait. That was just Cindy Sheehan falling off her pedestal.

You don't need to repress Coulter. The left tries continuously and continuously fails.

Who are these "right-wingers" you're raving about and who have they killed?

8:20 PM  
Blogger Jeff Bargholz said...

HoustonRod,

your original comment was juvenile enough but your follow up was even worse.

John and Kelly thought you were being honest because you always spew vitriol in your comments. You showed them, didn't you? Those tolerant suckers! You're incapable of honesty.

Kelly never said your phony comments were offensive, she identified you as a typical leftist hate-monger who employs typical leftist double standards.

You didn't even set your little "trap" correctly.
Coulter is not a "deleterious bigot" (sic,) but Clinton is definitely a scumbag.

Hate-speech is a leftist standard, not a moderate or conservative one.

Leftists repress the speech of others daily, yet scream bloody murder when someone suggests turning the tables.

The fact that John Walker-Lindh (what kind of pussy has his cunt mommy's hyphenated name?) is still alive is an obscenity. If the death penalty for treason were enforced, traitorous college students wouldn't be able to practice their sedition with impunity. Ann is right.

You equate all moderates and conservatives with Jack Abramoff and have the cheek to complain because John noted your idiocy? You compare John to a dog unfavorably and slander Coulter as a pampered, trashy hag in an attempt to prove how stupid and hateful conservatives are?

Are you bi-polar?

If you love the 1st amendment that means you're in favor of school prayer. Either that or your a lying moron. (Can anyone guess which one he is?)

Don't read selective quotes from Coulter's books and use words like "fascist" if you don't understand them.

Do yourself a favor and wipe the snot out of your nose. You shouldn't be so smug about your stupidity.

9:05 PM  
Blogger John said...

lol

I heart Bargholz. :)

10:22 PM  
Blogger Kelly said...

Houston said, I'm just having fun watching the backpedalling of Kelly and Angry John (who seems very very angry right now).


huh??

I am just now getting back to this blog after taking care of family all evening...you call that backpedalling??



Bargholz...you're alright!

12:17 AM  
Blogger Kelly said...

Phelonius said...

Hey John. I am interested in your opinion here. I do not think that Liberalism can be termed a religion, as that is a political term. .


Previously John had said,

"
Liberalism is a cult.

...that's grown to the size of a religion."


A cult is generally a small group that goes against the norms of society. But liberalism has grown beyond those borders to claim large numbers of devout followers. It is no longer a "cult", but , in a sense, it's own religion...most "members" follow the liberal propoganda so staunchly that to say they follow blindly is a huge understatement.


Houston calls John 'angry'. I think it is more of an indignation than outright anger.

1:06 AM  
Anonymous douglass said...

'factmaster' Hustonmod:

Proverbs 26:27 Whoso diggeth a pit shall fall therein: and he that rolleth a stone, it will return upon him.

7:45 AM  
Anonymous houstonmod said...

wow...we have a winner. Jeff B!! Not an ounce of civility, not even the pretense of reason. I can see why you love Ann Coulter and think "She's one of the greatest assets conservatives have".
She's right down your lane!!

I have to love how on this one thread, I"ve been called "an idiot", a "true-blue fascist", a "drip" (that one really hurt), a "blockhead", yet some clown comes in and quotes Proverbs to me? Get my point?

I am almost tempted to think that Jeff B is not a real person but a characterization of a stereotype. Can anybody really lack that much sense? I love the facts. "Clinton is in fact a Scumbag", "coulter is not a bigot". Nice guys. I can see college paid of big for you two.

BTW AJ, I received my JD in 1994. If you think that law school was that dominated by males, you really are clueless. Again, stop simply making things up.

I always wondered who actually bought Coulter's books, but now it is perfectly clear. Apologists who think it's ok to get rid of the First Amendment, people who don't understand the Establishment Clause in the First Amendment, people who are afraid of facts. People who feel spewing bigotted vitriolic lies is in fact, discourse. I guess though, reading and listening to Ann Coulter is far easier than thinking for yourselves.

8:13 AM  
Blogger John said...

"BTW AJ, I received my JD in 1994."

Oo.

"If you think that law school was that dominated by males, you really are clueless."

Your informing of your educational level is gratuitous and characteristic of the liberal who waves a piece paper when arguing to "prove" something or give him some credentials, e.g. "I have a PhD from Bard College on Social Theory and a law degree which means I'm smarter than you and an authority on everything!"

Of course it was gratuitous, because the gender make-up of law school in the early 1994 was most certainly not the same a decade before--which is when Ann attended.

Furthermore, for the THIRD time, I said the legal FIELD was male-dominated when Ann went to law school.

It may not appear that way ten years later when you attended, because Ann's generation had already graduated and reading your *curriculum vitae.*

I would still say that the field is dominated by males, however, by statistical breakdown, so your informing me of your creds to make your case is an irrelevant non sequiter to the argument.

But then you snipe:

"I can see college paid of big for you two."

lol

But WAIT! Since you obviously saw fit to inform me of your J.D. just for the sake of informing me of your J.D. (since it was irrelevant to my statement that when Ann attended law school a decade before you did the legal FIELD was even more dominated by males than it is today), then I'll inform you that Ann received her undergrad from an Ivy League school (Cornell) and received her own J.D. (University of Michigan Law School), so if you want to use degrees as relevant to the authority of your argument, I'm damn sure Ann has you beat by institutional prestige, Bar Exam scores, LSAT scores, SAT scores, and I.Q. score to boot.

"again, stop simply making things up."

I'm going to devote a post just for you, Houston.

This is why liberalism is a FAILED ideology, because you clowns ARE INTELLECTUALLY RETARDED.

10:15 AM  
Blogger John said...

"In the history of the nation, there has never been a political party so ridiculous as today's Democrats. It's as if all the brain-damaged people in America got together and formed a voting bloc."

Ann Coulter

10:24 AM  
Blogger Kelly said...

"I'm going to devote a post just for you, Houston."

...replies John.


I guess houston is good for business, just like Lee Harvey ;)

10:51 AM  
Anonymous douglass said...

Well well well.

Look at who is angry now, Hustonmod.

I will be direct:

You fell into the jaws of your own trap.

I hope you don't do that in court, factmaster.

3:22 PM  
Blogger John said...

Kelly, like Lee Harvey, Houston is NOT "good for business."

Public floggings of liberals are always fun to watch, but the business of Republicus is production, and the Leftist succeeds in only quagmiring me in the commentary sections.

It's fun to dissect them, and a nice little mental exercize, kind of like doing a crossword puzzle--or more like a word jumble-- and a confirmation of many things, but ultimately a waste of time.

As long as their politically marginalized and confined to one of Dante's circles of hell (a choir section in the blogosphere echoing and amen-ing the priests of Daily Kos), condemned to eternally plead their sorry cases in meaningless gibberish (which is poetic justice), I'm fine with that (though occasionally annoyed by the noise pollution reverberating from beneath the surface of the earth, an annoyance Houstonrod interprets as "Anger").

But God help us all if these idiots get real political power.

5:54 PM  
Blogger Jeff Bargholz said...

HoustonRod,

the more you write the more you make my point for me. All you've managed to do is demonstrate what an irrational liar you are. Facts and logic mean nothing to you. You use the same trite leftist tactic over and over again. "Attack, lie, deny and obfuscate. Use ad hominems and Freudian projection at every opportunity." This is straight out of the "Little Red Book Of Leftism."

You're incapable of original thought. All you're capable of is regurgitating twitchy leftist dogma.

You didn't even try to refute what I wrote. (Another leftist standard.)

Even your juvenile ploy of distorting Coulter's words was plagiarized.

Yes, Coulter is right down my lane. We both flay moonbats regularly. The fact that you morons all share the same feeble brain and use the same ineffective arguments every time you open your mouths makes it easy. You never spend time with people who think differently (rationally,) than you do. You aren't equipped to debate an informed or skilled opponent.

You come in here squeaking with furious hatred and have the brass-bound marbles to whine about the big conservative meanies in all of your comments. Do you remember what I taught you about hypocrisy?

You accuse me of being a dishonest, senseless stereotype, then lie about having received a JD in 1994. Tell it to the judge, Perry Mason. Even a first year law student can present a case better than you do. Four year olds lie better.

You claim you own two of Coulter's books and then you express mock puzzlement over who would buy them. Just admit you don't own any of her books. Is that so hard? Spare me any B.S. about gifts, etc.

Nobody but the left tramples the first amendment and you don't understand the "establishment clause." The left attacks any expression of free speech it dislikes and the first amendment clearly and unequivocally grants the free exercise of religion. There is no federally mandated religion in America.

Your use of Freudian projection doesn't work on adults. Try to exhale, retard.

7:44 PM  
Blogger nanc said...

j.b. said, "Your use of Freudian projection doesn't work on adults. Try to exhale, retard."

that may come at a cost - imagine heads caving in...

our family LOVES ann, and i, nanc, have the smirk downpat. imagine ann ten years older with silver hair - yeah, that's what i'm talking about.

hey john, kelly, bargholz!

10:01 PM  
Blogger Kelly said...

Hey, Nanc!

"imagine heads caving in..."

LOL

John, did you not see my ";)" ?

-------------
Jeff said,

"the first amendment clearly and unequivocally grants the free exercise of religion. "


This means that we have the right to practice our religion...it does not say...except in schools. It is the FREE excercise of that religion.

We have the right to pray when we want, to pledge allegiance to the flag of this 'nation under God', to prohibit immoral practices within its [a religion's] members, to speak out (if we so choose) against pornography, homosexuality, fornication, and on and on.

It is interesting that the words, "or abridging the freedom of speech" comes RIGHT after the free excercise [of Religion].

Sorry for getting off on a tangent.

But this is what the left wants to prevent. It's not that they want to believe what they will believe...they think we ALL have to think and believe that way.

RESISTANCE IS FUTILE!! You will be assimilated! Give UP!!

NOT!

11:19 PM  
Blogger John said...

They need us to "think that way." "Discrediting" and inverting all pre-conceived knowledge--or just common sense--of what is right and wrong, what is beautiful and what is ugly, and indeed what is good and what is evil has to be attempted so that their wrong, ugly, and evil ideologies can be acceptable with the least resistance (i.e. genocide).

7:30 AM  
Blogger John said...

The 20th Century was not the bloodiest because of the United States.

It was because of Leftists (e.g. the Soviets, the Nazis,* the Red Chinese, the Khmer Rhouge, etc.).

(*The Nazi Party was a socialist one. You don't hear about that too much.)

Presidents McKinley and Kennedy were assassinated by Leftists.

Our erstwhile resident troll Lee Harvey wished the same upon Bush.

Leftists have no qualms about aborting gestating humans (by the millions) if they're "inconvenient."

They call it "A choice" that is morally equivalent with the choice to let the human fetus live.

If that's how they treat the most helpless and dependent among us, I strongly suggest not to depend on them for anything.

They think the preservation of a reindeer's, a rare bird's, an amphibian's, or even an insect's natural habitat is more important than jobs and industrial progress for humanity.

And then they turn around and say "We're the humanitarian ones! We're for human interests!"

Of course, they "prove" that by fighting for leniency on behalf of murderers and foreign tyrants.

Liberals/Leftists are fucked up.

(for lack of a better term)

8:10 AM  
Anonymous houstonmod said...

this is too comical although I think I've figured it out. I did not bring up my JD for any other reason except to once again mock your common practice of making crap up. I started in 1991, 3 years after Ann graduated yet you pretend it was a decade. Your point about her being some kind of trail blazer or women is too stupid to be taken seriously. (also, you would lose your bet if you think Michigan Law and Cornell undergrad would beat me)
I think what I've found reading your and Jeff Bargholz's response is that neither of you has much of an education and therefore find education to be threatening. I really am sorry that it scares you and you may even feel a bit inadequate because of it. You should not. There are plenty of people who have done very well with only a high school degree (Rush Limbaugh, Carl Rove, Sean Hannity...)
Is labeling me as "factmaster" supposed to be an insult? Maybe conservatives should counter the "war on Christmas" with "the war against facts".

Again, I always wondered who took Ann Coulter seriously, and now I know. It all seems to fall into place.

9:18 AM  
Blogger John said...

I started in 1991, 3 years after Ann graduated yet you pretend it was a decade."

Imbecile: The year Ann entered law school as a freshman was a decade from when you graduated.

The FIELD as it was when she went for it as a freshman was far more dominated by males than by the time you graduated.

How many times do I have to repeat myself?

Do you need me to draw you a picture?

And I don't care what school you went to. I'm well aware of the state the institutions for higher learning are in.

But I'm damn sure she has you beat on Bar, LSAT and I.Q. scores.

"I think what I've found reading your and Jeff Bargholz's response is that neither of you has much of an education and therefore find education to be threatening."

Yeah. You "think."

"I really am sorry that it scares you and you may even feel a bit inadequate because of it."

What a snake. He pulls the same sleaze Lee Harvey does.

He's not only "sorry," he's "*really* sorry" that I'm afraid of intelligence and am insecure about my own learning.

It's a low-level rhetorical tactic trying to come off as some "caring" nice guy who feels "pity" while slipping in a dagger of slander into my character.

Liberals do that all the time.

Lee Harvey used to say stuff like: "I'm just really worried about my dear old friend John because he's spiraling downwards into a bigotted Christo-fascist."

Ann Coulter herself identifies that, when lefty politicians take the "high road" by saying stuff like: "I won't stoop and talk about my opponent's racism."

And now Houstonmod: "I'm really sorry that you feel intimidated by my elite, superior learning because you're uneducated. Don't feel bad. It'th okay! I won't try to assassinate your character on the world wide web!"

It's preterition.

Why can't you just shoot straight and say: "I think you're intimidated by my superior intelligence, and that makes me feel smug."

Or why don't you say what you *really* think, which is the projected inversion of what you said?

lol You can't do that. So you have to lie, and engage in petty sarcasm and inverted projection and lower the discussion to the level of petty, schoolyard sniping to distract the from THE FACT that you're just sniveling, whining punk.

Actually, that is a subject of the discussion, isn't it?

Coulter's diagramming of liberals?

And you PROVE HER.

Like Bargholz said: "This is straight out of the "Little Red Book Of Leftism."

You're incapable of original thought. All you're capable of is regurgitating twitchy leftist dogma."

Yes indeed. It falls into place --and no "seeming" about it, "Factmaster."

You're a disgrace to your "higher education"....

...if not a confirmation of it.

Liar.

10:06 AM  
Anonymous Professor Ramsay Octavius Wellington IV, PHD PHD PHD PHD. said...

Some US imperialists are intimidated by comrade Hustonmod's political sophistication (John)

Don’t fret comrade Huston. Bourgeoisie swine like Bargholz and John will be liquidated after the revolution.

11:10 AM  
Anonymous houstonmod said...

AJ, is your point that Ann went to law school in the 80's and I went in the 90's and therefore there is a "decade" difference? Otherwise, you need to check your math. Just to throw out one of those "pesky facts", in 1985 women made up 40% of law school students. Wow, what trailblazer that Ann Coulter is.
Honestly, do you just make this stuff up?
http://www.princetonreview.com/law/research/articles/career/catalyst.asp

The idea that this whole thread is about Ann Coulter and Jeff is talking about original thought is kind of ironic, don't you think?

You guys actually believe Ann Coulter and has the audacity to question my intellect? hahahahaha

I guess reading her senseless diatribes are better than thinking on your own though.

Jeff, you may want to switch to decaffeinated. It's become quite apparent that the whole purpose of this blog is to create a bogeyman for the right wing moonbats. With the fall of communism, (which btw, was the Nazi's chief enemy, not capitalism) I guess the paranoid amongst our country need to create a strawman to give them purpose. I guess trying to make them villians somehow makes certain people feel better about their lot in life.
Jeff, I know this is going to take some thinking, but I do in fact have a copy of Treason right here with me. But, I didn't buy it. I know that is going to be hard for you to understand, but think about it for a little while.

Just for the sake of clarity, AJ's paranoid attack on my education was completely unwarranted. I mentioned law school because it was apparent to me that AJ has never stepped near a lawschool if he thought law schools were some bastion of testosterone. Once that fact came out, AJ's insecurity came spewing out railing against the elitism of people who went to school so they would have a good job. That apparently is very un-American.


Hey Jeff, are you for or against the first amendment? You keep changing your stand on it.

12:50 PM  
Blogger nanc said...

john and kelly - some of us have had to turn on comment moderation as we had the most vile troll who spammed our boards with the same comment over 200 times each, so some of our comments do not post right away. the one to watch out for is called "john brown".

what i stopped by for was to tell you that there will be an interview of jeff bargholz at:

http://thebeakspeaks.blogspot.com/

perhaps later this evening or sometime this weekend. beak is one who had to turn his comment moderation on so if you post, it will not show until after he reads them.

this is a must see interview. jeff is a great guy and i know you wouldn't want to miss this one.

1:22 PM  
Blogger John said...

I will most certainly check it out, Nanc. Thanks.

Houstonmod, can you read?

I never said that "lawschools were some bastion of testosterone."

That's mischaracterizing what I said and then hyperbolically exaggerating it to make it sound ridiculous.

I stand by what triggered another round of your neurotic nitpicking:

"That is Ann Coulter, a women who--by her brains-- went to law school in the days when the field was very much dominated by males."

FIELD. Got it?

And yet "Factmaster" here said:

"AJ...thought law schools were some bastion of testosterone" AFTER I had already corrected him several times.

Then, paranoid, he "clarified":

"Just for the sake of clarity, AJ's paranoid attack on my education was completely unwarranted."

Yes. Not just "not warranted," but "COMPLETELY unwarranted!"

What's "paranoid" about me pointing out the typical liberal characteristic of flashing educational creds to bolster the "authority" of gibberish?

"I mentioned law school because it was apparent to me that AJ has never stepped near a lawschool..."

He's lying. He mentioned he went to law school precisely for the reason I pointed out.

What, "No! I mentioned it to substantiate my having 'been there,' and so saying with some authority that I know it's 'not a bastion of testorone?'"

lol You got that right.

But again, I never said it was when Miss Coulter attended--and you yourself were most certainly "nowhere near" either law school or the legal field--the profession-- in 1985, so--by your own "logic"-- you wouldn't know a damn thing about the male/female ratio in law schools...unless, of course, you get that information online from: "http://www.princetonreview.com/law/research/articles"

So why did you then feel the compulsion to announce that you're a lawyer?

And what the hell does that have to do with THE FACT Ann Coulter--by her brains-- went to law school in the days when the field was very much dominated by males?

Do you know what "the field" means? You're a "lawyer," right?

Or are you just a "fact-checking" law clerk?

Dismissed.

3:19 PM  
Anonymous Rizvi said...

John... completely unrelated to this article, I came across your page with an article on me "Heart of Glory" Part Two, thanks for the praise, its an honor to serve

4:14 PM  
Blogger John said...

I'm honored, sir. Thank you for your service.

4:47 PM  
Blogger Jeff Bargholz said...

UselessRod,

that ridiculous ploy of trying to use Coulter's words against her has been making the rounds on the geekosphere for a long time now. I called you on it and you've been whining like a baby ever since. There's not in original bone in your flabby leftist body.

Even lying about earning a Juris Doctor was unoriginal. Lying about academic credentials is as common as bragging about them on the left. You losers always try to assuage your fragile egos with pretensions to elitism.

Higher education has been a joke in this country since political correctness took hold in the 1980s. Nobody is more incompetent and unhinged than academics.

Law degrees are singularly unimpressive and most lawyers are lower than snake shit. They don't give JDs for Jerking Dicks, so good luck with your legal career.

For someone who doesn't take Ann Coulter seriously, you sure waste a lot of time trying to discredit her. Her latest book is #1 (just like her other books were,) so you aren't the only one who takes her seriously.

You cry so loudly because you're exactly the type of fanatic Coulter described. Leftism is your religion. The body of its institutionalized expressions of sacred beliefs, observances and social practices are well documented. Conservatives have been studying you social primitives for more than a hundred years. You dorks are our anthropology project.

The zealous devotion and conscientious maintenance you moonbats show your faith is rivalled only by that of the flea-bitten islamofascists. Predictably, the tenets of both discredited religions are equally intolerant, irrational, intemperate and inane.

Your comments here are a case in point, counselor.

Your rhetoric about communism being dead, Nazi right-wingers and conservative straw-men is stock leftist bullshit. Along with your ad hominem attacks and Freudian projection, these are all institutionalized sacred beliefs and practices of your religion. You're a typical leftist fanatic.

I firmly believe that stupidity is a defining principle of your faith. Case in point: What did I tell you about bullshitting me about getting Coulter's books as gifts, etc? "I know that is going to be hard for you to understand, but think about it for a little while."

You're a coffee-house fraud. You drive an old beater with "impeach Bush" bumper-stickers and don't have any money of your own. If you ever get near a JD, it'll be the one on your public defender's wall. Child molesting is a crime in this country, Ironside.

If stupidity is a crime, you're serving a life sentence.

9:17 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Well! What a bunch of hot tempers!

I enjoyed the poetic quality of what you said, and at the same time do not know who this woman is. Call me a newbie to the political realm. I can see why people just don't bother voting. What a waste of time and energy to be so angry all the time.

Perhaps there are rational solutions that can serve everyone.

I was just looking for warrior woman info.

One thing I did find was beautifulwarriorwomen.com.

Just pics. No politics. I think I enjoy that more! It's definatly more inspiring!!!

Well, I hope ya'll can work your issues out and get rational about stuff.

It's hard though I guess. People's issues really do effect their politics it looks like.

Sad....

10:23 PM  
Blogger John said...

Anon (Houston, presumably) said:

"Well! What a bunch of hot tempers!
What a waste of time and energy to be so angry all the time..."

Coulter:

"A central component of liberal hate speech is to make paranoid accusations based on their own neurotic impulses, such as calling Republicans angry, hate-filled, and mean."

Incredible. Pinned and labeled by Genus and Species like an insect.

6:05 AM  
Blogger Kelly said...

nanc,

I will have to check that out on http://thebeakspeaks.blogspot.com/.

John said,

"They need us to "think that way." "Discrediting" and inverting all pre-conceived knowledge--or just common sense--of what is right and wrong, what is beautiful and what is ugly, and indeed what is good and what is evil has to be attempted so that their wrong, ugly, and evil ideologies can be acceptable with the least resistance (i.e. genocide).



Isaiah 5: 20

"20 Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!"

Notice that Houston doesn't come in to reply to your posting about abortion "rights" and the leftist's interpretation of "humanity".

11:41 AM  
Anonymous ihavebecomedeath said...

A Valkyrie with lots of "Mystic Blode" hair dye, I think.

... Every now and again, when I'm forced to grit my teeth through another interview with this diet pill tweaker, I start to think it might be seeping into her brain.

The True Right has far more proud and articulate female champions than Ann Coulter. Not to mention far, far more accomplished ones.

Just another Frat Mattress with delusions of grandeur, I'm afraid.

... and that's coming from a cradle Republican.

7:57 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home