As the copy says,
Viva la Revolución! So maybe you can't take up arms and join the resistance right now. In the meantime, keeping these guys handy will remind you of your revolutionary roots and let everyone else know that you don't roll with The Man.
As a commenter said, does it come with its own concentration camp playhouse or what?
Naturally Keith Olbermann or Michael Moore would NEVER get such intros or questions; but neither can they handle criticism - Ann doesn't give a shit. It's a badge of honor for the left to not understand her humor or her point. This "reporter"? That's what happens to people whose first memory is their mother holding them underwater.
On a sad note, I had the rare PERFECT opportunity, a clear set-up, to say "There is no spoon" and MISSED IT! I suck at internet! Dammit.
And since Ann had SUCH a busy week, let's see her PWN Joy Bitch-har! Sweet!
...When people knew veganism was extreme. When even vegetarianism was a kook fringe.
Or month!
Ann Coulter has apparently temporarily relinquished her title to "Most Dangerous Psychopath in the World" and become more popular with the media, who even go so far as to call her SMART! (We've been hearing what an idiot she is for over a decade, but now she's smart, people! Ask the press!)
But Ann doesn't suck up to her hypocritical friends (I'm no longer thinking of it as hypocrisy but as abject dread and terror) - she keeps sticking it to them and sticking it to them. Which is good practice for when they start lobbing bombs (and pies) at her again.
PIERS MORGAN, HOST: Where is the similar mob to Mussolini’s and Hitler’s in the modern democratic era?
ANN COULTER: Well, I would say that there are a lot of similarities. The French Revolution.
MORGAN: Tea Party?
COULTER: No. No, no, no.
MORGAN: Nearest thing to it?
COULTER: No, they're much closer to the original Tea Party, which, and actually not as, not as much of a rabble as the original Tea Party, which as I point out, the Founding Fathers weren't wild about the original Tea Party curiously enough because they were so against mobs.
MORGAN: Are you wild about them?
COULTER: About who?
MORGAN: The Tea Party.
MORGAN: Yeah.
COULTER: Oh yeah, I love them.
MORGAN: See I don’t really get that. COULTER: I speak to them.
MORGAN: I don’t get that because you’re a smart cookie.
COULTER: So are the Tea Partiers!
MORGAN: What do people think about you? You're intelligent. You live a provocative life.
COULTER: I believe you're insulting the Tea Partiers.
MORGAN: Well, they're not among the brightest of spellers (?), are they?
COULTER: They're smarter than any liberal.
MORGAN: Do you think so?
COULTER: Yeah.
MORGAN: You really think that?
COULTER: Yes, I do.
MORGAN: In your heart?
COULTER: I meet them and speak to them and they get my jokes which already makes them smarter than the average liberal.
MORGAN: Is that why you think they’re so smart?
COULTER: It makes them smarter than the average liberal. I'm always having to explain, map out how the joke works here.
MORGAN: The way you talk as your publisher does here, “Liberals use mobs to seize power and impose their theories on the populace for the good of humanity.” I think Sarah Palin would have written that, who whether you like it or not is irrelevant, is a brilliant rouser of the populous, like nothing else in politics right now. After Obama himself and his last election, she is doing an incredible job marshaling her base. But she also comes out with some pretty inflammatory stuff and that surely arouses a mob mentality. You wouldn't dispute that.
Oh, wouldn't she???
COULTER: I don't think she's inflammatory. I think she's a great speaker. What do you think she said that is inflammatory? MORGAN: Putting crosshairs on people's heads.
COULTER: Oh, come on. I talk about that in the book, too.
MORGAN: Is that inflammatory?
COULTER: That was invented by Democratic strategist Bob Beckel as he admitted on TV.
MORGAN: And once again, you go back to the Democrats. I'm asking you about Sarah Palin.
COULTER: I go back - where is the camera? I'm going back to the book because I talk about -- let me answer this one. It is a beautiful example of something in the question.
MORGAN: Your default process throughout this so far is fascinating. Every single time I ask you a question, rather than answer about Sarah Palin and crosshairs, you instinctively go, “What about Democrats?"
COULTER: Piers, darling, if I were selling you a book, if I were talking about a book that I had just written about dogs, and you ask me, “What comforts old people,” I would say, “Why, Piers, dogs do. In fact, I talk about it in my book.” My book is called "How the Liberal Mob is Endangering America," and I talk about the crosshairs issue, and if I could answer the question on the crosshairs issue.
MORGAN: You may.
COULTER: It is a perfect example of totally contradictory thinking by the Left in America, an example of the mob where they go around hysterical at Sarah Palin putting these crosshairs on Congressional districts. It was done by the Democratic National Committee. It was invented by a liberal. It’s a classic thing in politics. And it wasn’t on her face. It was a district. These are the ones…
MORGAN: Was it a sensible thing to do (?)?
COULTER: Yes, it is fine for both the Democrats and the Republicans to do it.
MORGAN: Would you encourage them to carry on doing it?
COULTER: Yes. That isn't what caused Jared [Loughner] to shoot up a shopping mall.
MORGAN: How do you know? How do you know? COULTER: Because we know that he’s out of his mind. MORGAN: Mentally unstable guy. As it turns out, it didn't have any connection, it would appear.
COULTER: As it turns out, he was a liberal.
MORGAN: How would you have felt if actually he was mentally unstable, he had seen the website, he misunderstood the instruction from the crosshair, and he went and did the same thing? Then what would you think?
COULTER: Well…
MORGAN: Would you care?
COULTER: …what if I walk out of this studio tonight, and someone who has seen you accusing me of being mean to liberals is so ginned up, he shoots me? Would you not ask any of the questions you're asking?
Well, that's how you answer a stupid "what if" question. Presented without further comment, because I don't need to point out the obvious to YOU. However, I'd be interested in hearing how hard you laughed or how happy it made you feel - made my whole day, and not many people can do that. Thanks, Ann. Thanks, sincerely.
http://www.blogger.com/img/blank.gif
Or, MONSTER JEWISH MOHELS WHO EAT FORESKINS. This is NOT A JOKE - LINK.
Holy HELL! I'm literally dumbfounded, and that never happens. What the HELL are they DOING?!?! You know, had this been a legitimate movement to ban circumcision in San Francisco because it is a misguided medical procedure done on people too young to know better, WITH a religious exemption for Jews and others whose religion decrees it, and WITH medical exemptions when it actually is called for, that would be one thing. But THIS ISN'T THAT. They kept saying over and over again that they weren't anti-Semitic, that this wasn't ABOUT Judaism but was rather about saving innocent children, blahdeblah-shit. Then why is the pamphlet and the collector card straight-up Nazi propaganda? And I don't mean figuratively, I mean LITERALLY. Evil monster Jews fighting off good Nordic blond-haired saviors. Seriously. I...do they not understand that "never again" MEANS "NEVER AGAIN"?? I'm going to show you this stuff as well as linking it because I can't BELIEVE this is going on. FYI the artist's name is HESS.
http://pajamasmedia.com/tatler/files/2011/06/monstermohelcard.jpg
Can you spot the ORIGINAL Nazi propaganda? I admit it's hardly distinguishable (actually, it isn't at all) - but it's the last two. My reaction was OH MY GO...WHAT THE FU...HOLY SHIT! Talk about monsters.
Just let that sink in a minute. When you're done banging your head on your desk, here's some news.
Palin was again RIGHT. See, I remember when they mocked her for the misunderestimate/refudiate bullshit, and the thing is, they're pretty good words. Hell, the dictionary people agreed refudiate carried a unique meaning and actually made sense. But when mocked by the media, Palin pointed to Shakespeare, and noted that Shakespeare made up words all the time. They howled in laughter and derision. Except what the HELL were they laughing about? See, anyone who knows anything DOES know that Shakespeare made words up ALL THE TIME; hell, half the shit he wrote he MADE UP. He invented the language as he went. Go to one of the Shakespearean Insulter Generators, and tell me you actually believe all those hyphenated words were really just obscure English and we just don't know it now. If you believe that, I have a bridge to sell you. In fact, Shakespeare made shit up. So what were they laughing at? I don't know, but I hope it echoed back to them; stupid dipshits.
In this case, the newest alleged insanity, Palin said that Paul Revere was in part warning the British that we were here, that we were armed, and that they were in trouble. The media howled again. (You know, they really should stop howling.) Well I thought maybe she misspoke, and I have a lot of faith in her intelligence and her being to handle on-the-spot impromptu speaking from a place of being extremely well-read and intelligent. Well, she DEFENDED her remark, and if I had known that I would have realized she probably knew what the hell she was talking about. As a matter of fact, it turns out she ABSOLUTELY DID.
Boston University history professor Brendan McConville said, “Basically when Paul Revere was stopped by the British, he did say to them, ‘Look, there is a mobilization going on that you’ll be confronting,’ and the British are aware as they’re marching down the countryside, they hear church bells ringing — she was right about that — and warning shots being fired. That’s accurate.”
“I would call her lucky in her comments,” McConville said.Yes, I'm sure you would, arrogant prick. Except considering that she stuck to her guns and DEFENDED her remark, there was nothing lucky about it - had it been a slip of the tongue, she could just have said, "Naturally I meant warn the colonists - I was rushed." It wouldn't have been any worse than the "57 states" remark. But she didn't; she stuck to it- if she hadn't known it was true, that would have been a very dumb thing to do. But she's NOT dumb and she KNEW what she was saying, and she IS VINDICATED yet again. So, Mr. McCONville, what's that about the alleged idiot "getting lucky" exactly? You FOOL. Let me tell you, these kind of things - it's GOOD the media blares them left and right, because it only demonstrates to us on the ground that this woman is *truly* educated, is *genuinely* intelligent, and will live to laugh in the faces of her critics yet again. Party like it's 1773, Gwen Ifill and MarKOS!
In other news, HOLY SHIT. Economic Fools Again Are these people mentally ill or what?? What "economists" are these morons listening to?? Oh. Krugman. Not that he's an economist. But holy hell, it's UNREAL what they're saying. Let's shred it.
Is this kind of a wake-up call, do you think, to shift the political debate from what's been all about debt reduction and shift it back to job creation? I mean, is this an opportunity, for instance, to try to talk about creating jobs, and adding, maybe, another stimulus?YES, you idiots, more of what got us INTO this mess is the answer. It'll...create jobs. Or something. (You know, these people don't seem to know what job creation means.)
"We really need a new stimulus" said Krugman.Yes, and you fools will listen to KRUGMAN, a leftist POLITICAL COMMENTATOR and believe he has a fucking clue what he's talking about. HE'S NOT AN ECONOMIST, PEOPLE! Dr. William Anderson explains it in plain English Krugman The Keynesian. Uh, yeah. Fucking Krugman. But the idiocy continues and it's enough to make you pull your hair out!
JOHN BERMAN: But now it [the economy] may have to mend on its own (Note: IF ONLY THEY'D LET IT DO SO!!!), because, practically speaking, there isn't much left the President can do. With the political wars over the debt, there is no chance for another stimulus, no more bank bailouts, there are no federal jobs to offer. And with interest rates at or near zero, the Fed can't do anything to lower them. The President might just have to watch and hope that the American road to recovery, is merely a bumpy road and not a road to nowhere.
Oh FFS!! How many times can we break this down? First of all, the GOVERNMENT DOESN'T AND CAN'T CREATE JOBS. How could they? All they can do is GET OUT OF THE WAY so the REST of us can engage in industry and commerce. But it's worse than that - this fool actually seems to believe (I have my doubts as to whether he REALLY believes it, it's so stupid) - that OFFERING FEDERAL JOBS ALLEVIATES UNEMPLOYMENT. WTF???!!! ARE YOU SHITTING ME? Just think about that logically for a minute, before I shred it on another level. Let's think - WHO PAYS FOR FEDERAL EMPLOYMENT? Ding! Ding! Ding! I heard you thinking "The taxpayers." Correct. WE pay for it. And if WE'RE THE ONES IN TROUBLE and WE DON'T HAVE ANYTHING BECAUSE WE HAVE NO WORK, WHO THE HELL IS SUPPOSED TO PAY TENS OF MILLIONS OF NEW FEDERAL EMPLOYEES?? **Crickets.**
But let's think of it at another level for a moment. You've got 9.1 percent unemployment, and that is only counting the people who qualify for benefits. So you've got some 37 million people right off the bat. But with so many people having had their benefits already end, the REAL rate is estimated at more approaching 20%. So NOW you're talking about 75 million people out of work and hurting. They are scattered to the four winds, all over the country, and they have endless varying levels of education and capability. So what kind of program, using non-existent money, does this dipshit think can be created to employ nearly a hundred MILLION people all over the country with all sorts of varying levels of capability and education at a federal level? Have they done some sort of study to assess the capabilities of the unemployed and to map their locations so that there would be a dozen or so employment centers in every state that take into account these people's needs and skills, and then employ them in some sort of make-busy federal work? The screening alone would take a year, opening these employment centers would...well it would never happen. You could pour a trillion non-existent dollars into that, and it would STILL never work - of course, you could temporarily employ the unemployed to BUILD the buildings (if, that is, you had union builders on unemployment who were available for the job - I mean, and of course you have to get permits and contracts and all the endless red tape of BUILDING things anymore) and they'd never be finished because there isn't enough money in the world. We'd have hundreds of half-finished or never-started buildings all over the country. Of course, it would be a sweet deal for Uncle Sam, as he'd own all that extra land when the dust died down, right? Why not? You might be able to fool the people into buying this, and Bernanke can do some "quantitative easing" (i.e. print fake money; inflation) to pretend the money is there, and you could trump the project from the rooftops and garner reelection, right? Are the American people still this stupid?
They listen to Krugman, don't they?
Remember Princess boy in his tutu with the exploitative mom? Or the pink nailpolish boy whose mom used him for an ad spread? WELL NEXT TIME DON'T BE SO QUICK TO FUCKING DOUBT ME - I told you the left had an AGENDA with that shit, and with pooh-poohing people like me who pointed it out. Observe.
http://www.mrctv.org/videos/transgender-education-goes-elementary (that's a video; if the link doesn't work, cut and paste it into your browser address bar.) And watch it. Continue to observe.
