Where there's a Will, there's a way

Go ahead and link to it, Will. A-Coult is marginally attractive in a spawn-of-the-devil sort of way.

Sure she's an idiot, but pointing that out is kinda' "picking the low hanging fruit, isn't it?" I'm not so sure it isn't an act to provoke/dupe gullible libs in an attempt to get them to take the bait.....and garner attention. Again, she's an idiot, the Republican version of Jesse Jackson.

Yes, she does it for the publicity. She's selling her book. But the low hanging fruit is still in my local paper every week. I'm still wondering why everyone in the city doesn't get to have a column since that has somehow become a "right."

But I can't compare her to Jackson. Jesse has actually accomplished something productive in his life and has intelligent things to say. He doesn't constantly spew hate, anger and insults for shock value like Coulter does.

AnonCom, I just don't think it would be right to link to anything so grossly, pornographically obscene as that blog. No decent person would laugh hysterically at it like I did.

It looks like you guys have been duped again. Again, let’s be clear: She’s an idiot. However, if you’d done your homework (in the interest of truth, not as a favor to this seahag) you’d of found the whole clip. The whole clip shows that what she was quoting Bill Maher who was talking about Cheney getting killed….making a point about Maher. But the clipster used an ole Mike Moore method of cutting it so it appears to be something it is not. Contest is everything. Sometime Moore will (as he did to Charlton Heston) actually cut up words into pieces and split them back together. Jesse intelligent? Tell that to the Jewish community!

I've seen the clip in context as well and I was expecting Coulter and her defenders to hide behind the "I was just quoting someone else" defense. Its the same lame justification Limbaugh uses for his racist song "Barack the magic negro."

First, what Coulter said is very different than what Maher said. Anyone wondering should check Maher's qoute and his comment about this for themselves. Its a weak comparison.

Second, Coulter needs to take responsibility for her own words. Even if Maher did say it first, no one forced her to repeat her own version. It was her choice. Blaming someone else for the words that come out of her mouth is a cowardly way to avoid responsibility for her own actions. I thought conservatives were supposed to be about personal responsibility.

I decided to ignore your swipe at Jackson but on second thought I want to confront how ridiculous it is to compare one bad comment that Jackson quickly apologized for with the constant hate-mongering and Jew-bashing carried on by the vanguards of American fascism like Ann Coulter and Michael Weiner Savage. No, there's no comparison there at all.

This is why we desperately need the "Fairness Doctrine" which issupported by Kucinich, Pelosi, Kerry, Boxer and Clinton among otherprogressives. We can finally rid the airwaves of people like Limbaughand Coulter and begin to hear from previously silent people like MichaelMoore. The market supports these folks and the market fails to supportpeople like Al Franken, which is why we need all media managed by thegovernment. Regulation would bring about fairness. Contrary to whatformer FCC Chair Mark Fowler said the Fairness Doctrine would bringabout equality in the media. Some curtailing of First Amendment freedomswould be required to achieve parity, because the market isn't supportingprogressive speech. Putting a cap in right wing programming andoffering assistance to fledgling progressive programs, would create alevel playing field and make up for the lack of listeners andadvertisers in progressive programming. This is no different than thegovernment creating a market for other products. If we should be usingethanol, then the government should regulate the price making it say 50cent per gallon and should tax gasoline so that it is 9 dollars pergallon.

If the market is supporting conservatives then why did Rush Limbaugh have to provide his show to stations for free in order to go national?

Also, what is with this trend of conservatives making their "arguments" by pretending to be a liberal? Its both dishonest and slightly annoying at the same time. Do they think it works?