Comments on: Ann Coulter On The Culture of Corruption

By: Mark J

Mark J — Wed, 05 Oct 2005 23:10:51 +0000

Oliver… you went on a date with Coulter?

“I took her out”

Yes, I took you out of context, but you did say this.

By: Semanticleo

Semanticleo — Wed, 05 Oct 2005 16:10:53 +0000

Be afraid. Verrrrrrrrrrrry…….afraid.

By: Frank_D

Frank_D — Wed, 05 Oct 2005 13:10:42 +0000

Wilbur: I am intelligent, and you, indeed, are … whatever it is you are.

Leo: Who said I didn’t understand you? You really should what I write before you answer.

OK, fine: Fire Earle for corruption; dismiss the charges against Delay due to lack of evidence.

Don’t worry about Condi — you’re the only one who has mentioned her name in any of this.

Are you jealous, or afraid?

By: Wilbur

Wilbur — Wed, 05 Oct 2005 02:10:55 +0000

That’s right, Frank. I am rubber, and you, indeed, are glue.

By: Semanticleo

Semanticleo — Wed, 05 Oct 2005 00:10:14 +0000

I say if it s shit; get rid of it.

What part of the above statement needs explanation? Why are you so tone deaf to simple sentences, Frank?

By: Frank_D

Frank_D — Wed, 05 Oct 2005 00:10:13 +0000

Wilbur: You didn’t “re – write” my post — you did an “I’m rubber — you’re glue” job on it.

Cleo: So you’re opposed to corruption — but whose? Earle’s or Delay’s?

By: Semanticleo

Semanticleo — Tue, 04 Oct 2005 22:10:18 +0000

Frank;

So?

I say if it’s shit; get rid of it. It don’t make no nevermind to me what party scum comes from. If a court convicts ‘em. Let ‘em swing. ‘Nuff said.

(Frank; you better hope Condi doesn’t get some of this shit on her Ferrogamos)

By: Wilbur

Wilbur — Tue, 04 Oct 2005 19:10:02 +0000

I’ve done a tiny bit of re-writing of Frank’s purple prose and come up with something that could easily have been penned any time during the decade or so leading up to -oh- about 2003. Payback’s a bitch, ain’t it, Frank. But of course it’s all different and so totally unfair, since your guys are completely innocent.

She s referring to the idea that conservatives insist that the Democrats are corrupt, even without evidence. If they re not indicted for what the conservatives accuse them of, then the powers that be are corrupt. If tney re indicted, but found innocent, then there s corruption in the judicial process.

When they win elections, there s corruption in the electoral process; but never when they lose elections (see Florida, State of 2000 presidential election)

When legislation passes that favors a (conservative -described) Democratic interest group , no account is given to the idea that others might be helped nope, you guessed it corruption!

Is it any wonder the stench of corruption surrounds Democrats whenever they re in power? That stench is the hot panting of conservatives.

By: Frank_D

Frank_D — Tue, 04 Oct 2005 17:10:55 +0000

re: the stench of corruption

from the NY Daily News, via GOP Bloggers:

Hil’s lawyers try to quash old report

BY JAMES GORDON MEEK
DAILY NEWS WASHINGTON BUREAU

WASHINGTON – The independent counsel investigation that led to the conviction of a former Clinton administration housing chief could come back to haunt Sen. Hillary Clinton.

The Daily News has learned that lawyers are fighting to suppress a potentially embarrassing final report from the probe that found Housing Secretary Henry Cisneros lied to the FBI about paying $250,000 in hush money to his ex-mistress.

GOP Bloggers comment:

At first glance, it’s not readily apparent what could be harmful to Hillary. So what is it that she’s trying to hide?

By: Frank_D

Frank_D — Tue, 04 Oct 2005 17:10:49 +0000

By: Semanticleo

Semanticleo — Tue, 04 Oct 2005 15:10:30 +0000

Enough with the addled hominy attacks!

By: Frank_D

Frank_D — Tue, 04 Oct 2005 15:10:09 +0000

Stung, eh, Leo?

By: Frank_D

Frank_D — Tue, 04 Oct 2005 14:10:19 +0000

It came from — where else? — here.

[First, he links himself; then he links his employer -- a little lazy today, eh, Oliver]

If you haven’t guessed by now, the “context” is no surprise: She’s referring to the idea that liberals insist that the Republicans are corrupt, even without evidence. If they’re not indicted for what the liberals accuse them of, then the powers that be are corrupt. If tney’re indicted, but found innocent, then there’s corruption in the judicial process.

When they win elections, there’s corruption in the electoral process; but never when they lose elections (see Washington, State of — Gubernatorial election)

When legislation passes that favors a (liberal -described) Republican “interest group”, no account is given to the idea that others might be helped — nope, you guessed it — corruption!

Is it any wonder the “stench of corruption” surrounds Republicans whenever they’re in power? That stench is the hot panting of liberals.

By: Teddy Feces

Teddy Feces — Tue, 04 Oct 2005 13:10:49 +0000

Her Adams Apple is bigger then a basketball. Shave her head, I swear she is my old soccer coach.

By: dugger1

dugger1 — Tue, 04 Oct 2005 13:10:42 +0000

Neither Bill Bennett nor Ann Coulter are in any elected offcie or political appointed position. Like Mike Moore or Maureen Dowd, they can say a lot of stupid things (or smart things) and its just that – them talking. However, people like Mayor Nagins, flooded buses in the parking lot -10,000 dead, who Louis F says told him white people blew the levees or sweet Cynthia McKinney, Bush had prior knowlwedge of 9-11), are elected Democrats IN POWER. I worry more about the people in power.

Dugger

By: Wilbur

Wilbur — Tue, 04 Oct 2005 12:10:35 +0000

Dude – she’s a dude!

By: Zappa

Zappa — Tue, 04 Oct 2005 06:10:42 +0000

Dude – she’s hot.

By: Semanticleo

Semanticleo — Tue, 04 Oct 2005 06:10:07 +0000

JD;

Why don’t you do your own research, I’m sure you can come up with many positive spins on the charming little vamp.

By: JD

JD — Tue, 04 Oct 2005 05:10:41 +0000

At least you had enough sack to admit you deliberately took her out of context. Now, how about supplying the context ?

By: Oliver

Oliver — Tue, 04 Oct 2005 04:10:58 +0000

Ann Coulter is not marginalized. She is part of the Republican mainstream.