This is topic Michelle Malkin OutCoulters Coulter in forum General Comments at The Ornery American Forum.


To visit this topic, use this URL:
http://www.ornery.org/cgi-bin/ubbcgi/ultimatebb.cgi/topic/6/6993.html

Posted by David Ricardo (Member # 1678) on :
 
Michelle Malkin posts divorce documents regarding Cindy Sheehan as an attempt to smear the new idol/martyr of the pacifistic left:

http://michellemalkin.com/archives/003250.htm

Class, pure class. First, a disclaimer:

Cindy Sheehan’s grandstanding is a very twisted and warped version of the world that only a small fraction of reasonable people (the pacifistic left) recognize, and I fully endorse ridiculing and criticizing those wild statements as outrageous propaganda (which it is). In addition, it is rather despicable and pathetic to see the "anti-war hippie" groups that have conveniently and opportunistically seized upon the tragic death of a brave young man in Iraq and the grief of his mother to launch a media circus in the lazy month of August.

Now to my main point:

Michelle Malkin is a sewer-crawling b**ch for publicly dragging Cindy Sheehan's personal life with her husband and her familyi into the public square, just so Malkin can air Cindy Sheehan's dirty laundry to the world. This is utterly disgusting and should not be tolerated by anyone with any sense of taste or class or shame. This woman's rocky marital standing and her personal relationship with her spouse is no one's business.

And if the Sheehans' potential divorce makes any point at all, it is this -- war sucks, and sometimes war can rip apart families when loved are placed into the hell that is war (there is no coincidence that divorce, domestic abuse, drug/alcohol abuse, depression, and suicide are rampant among veterans who return from war...whether it be Vietnam, Korea, or Iraq).

And top that off, she is an utter hypocrite to boot. Observe what Malkin once posted about journalists checking out Judge John Roberts' adoption records:

http://michellemalkin.com/archives/003184.htm

Or observe what Malkin once, not so long ago, said about liberals who brought up Cheney's lesbian daughter as part of political discussion:

http://michellemalkin.com/archives/000665.htm

quote:
John Kerry stooped to the lowest of the low with the shameless, invasive line that will be played over and over again on the news in the next 24 hours:

quote:
And I think if you were to talk to Dick Cheney's daughter, who is a lesbian, she would tell you that she's being who she was, she's being who she was born as.
Um, has John Kerry talked to Dick Cheney's daughter? Has John Edwards? Has Mary Beth Cahill, who called Mary Cheney "fair game" on Fox News Channel after tonight's debate? If they haven't talked to her, they should shut up, leave her alone, and defend their incoherent position on gay marriage without hiding behind the vice president's daughter.


[ August 15, 2005, 07:34 PM: Message edited by: David Ricardo ]
 
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 99) on :
 
I just love Malkin's "primary" source on this:
http://www.insidebayarea.com/trivalleyherald/localnews/ci_2940382

*shudder* Who wrote that snippet? A grade schooler?
 
Posted by Dagonee (Member # 2212) on :
 
The only way it would be relevant is if the divorce is over the protest. Since she's claimed her immediate family supports her, a divorce caused by her protest would go to her credibility.

These documents give us no information on that point. And without that connection, Malkin appears to be acting wildly inconsistent.
 
Posted by FIJC (Member # 1092) on :
 
I have never been a fan of Michelle Malkin. She has written some pretty out there essays, and taken some positions that I find offensive.
 
Posted by Funean (Member # 2345) on :
 
quote:
Who wrote that snippet? A grade schooler?
Gads. Indeed. And how is that a *primary* source?

I find it hard to read this as anything other than mean-spirited opportunism on Malkin's part. The whole thing diminishes her credibility terribly, or should, to those who thought she had some.
 
Posted by Adam Masterman (Member # 1142) on :
 
quote:
Michelle Malkin is a sewer-crawling b**ch for publicly dragging Cindy Sheehan's personal life with her husband and her familyi into the public square, just so Malkin can air Cindy Sheehan's dirty laundry to the world.
Though I try to avoid eveen implied profanities here on Ornery, this may be the only way to put it. Shame on Malkin and everyone else trying to smear this woman. If you don't agree with Sheehan, ignore her and stop worrying about whether the rest of us do.
Adam
 
Posted by RickyB (Member # 1464) on :
 
Yuck.

And by the way - I have my reservations about Sheehan, but Sheehan at her most confused is preferrable to the malkin c#nt at her least offensive.
 
Posted by Quaestor (Member # 2553) on :
 
I think Malkin is just highlighting what others like Drudge and Smoking Gun have shown- the divide that Sheehan's behaviour is placing in her family. She chose to be a public figure and have her life (and sorrow) pulled out, analysed, and publicized.

How it's published is another matter. Michelle Malken is too out there in her comments on this. There are times that Malkin is far out there (near-Coulterish), and Coulter is just downright scary most of the time (other times very funny with her sarcastic wit). So if there was a choice between the two - and allow me a full on guy moment here - I would have to go for Malkin. She's MUCH prettier [Big Grin]
 
Posted by The Drake (Member # 2128) on :
 
That's a trashy move. Why do people continue to listen to people like her?
 
Posted by Kent (Member # 832) on :
 
Conservatives are hotties.
 
Posted by Wayward Son (Member # 210) on :
 
Only if you discount Liberal entertainers. [Smile]
 
Posted by Kent (Member # 832) on :
 
Barbara Streisand makes you drool, huh?
 
Posted by canadian (Member # 1809) on :
 
It worked for Mandy Patinkin and he thought she was a DUDE!
 
Posted by OpsanusTau (Member # 2350) on :
 
Mmm.
Mandy Patinkin...
 
Posted by Wayward Son (Member # 210) on :
 
Barbara was kinda cute when she was younger, although her nails were always way too long.

I was thinking more along the lines of Janeane Garofalo. She's good looking in a rough way. Remember "The Truth About Cats and Dogs?"
 
Posted by canadian (Member # 1809) on :
 
Clay Pigeons
 
Posted by Daruma28 (Member # 1388) on :
 
Janeane Garofalo is the perfect example of a beautiful women going out of her way to hide, disguise and run away from her natural good looks...maybe it's for the sake of her comedy persona - but based on her political views, I would guess she is one of those feminist minded chicks (derogatory, sexist reference used on purpose... [Razz] ) who purposely dresses down and avoids primping at all costs so that she can think of herself as above the conventional norms of society and be judged for her intellect instead of her appearance.
 
Posted by javelin (Member # 1284) on :
 
I think it's possible that Janeane Garofalo doesn't realize she is pretty.

[ August 16, 2005, 05:50 PM: Message edited by: javelin ]
 
Posted by Wayward Son (Member # 210) on :
 
Or maybe she just likes to dress that way. [Big Grin]
 
Posted by OpsanusTau (Member # 2350) on :
 
I dunno - I dress down and avoid primping at all costs because I like to be comfy and loathe combing my hair and putting yucky chemicals all over my body (and because I like the way I look just fine).

I think Janeane Garofalo is kinda hot. I think she would be less hot if she "primped" more.
 
Posted by Funean (Member # 2345) on :
 
Oh, lord, I HATE to comb my hair! So of course I keep it ridiculously long and scrape it back into a series of buns.

I like secretly gorgeous women. Janeane Garofalo is a fine example.
 
Posted by Daruma28 (Member # 1388) on :
 
But Ops..you are not a media celebrity in Showbiz. Highlighting your looks most likeley would not significantly benefit your career or income.

It's one thing for a comedienne who is fat or basically unattractive to not bother, quite another for someone like her. I think Janeane could actually put on a dress, some contacts and some makeup and actually be on the cover of Cosmo if she wanted. She seems to be consciously avoiding any highlighting of her natural looks...despite the fact that doing so would no doubt enhance her career immensely.
 
Posted by OpsanusTau (Member # 2350) on :
 
I am longing my hair right now, after years of keeping it two inches long so as to look like a dandelion.

I keep mine in nubs, usually. (like buns, you know, but the other way)
 
Posted by RickyB (Member # 1464) on :
 
Yo, Daruma, do you spend more time on your appearance, and use more grooming products, than Janeane Garofalo? As much? Nearly as much? Why do you think that is?

My wife uses little to no makeup and I LOVE that about her. She's more than fine as it is.
 
Posted by FIJC (Member # 1092) on :
 
quote:
"I think Janeane Garofalo is kinda hot. I think she would be less hot if she "primped" more."
Yuck. I don't think that enough women take care of their looks properly, which is a shame. I won't go to work without makeup, styling my hair, a nice pair of heels, and my pearls. Even if I feel like crap on a given day, I'll still go through the routine.
 
Posted by OpsanusTau (Member # 2350) on :
 
Well, maybe Ms Garofalo doesn't want her career to go the direction it would go if she did those things.

Or maybe she wouldn't mind, but that is not a sacrifice she is willing to make (I empathize with that).

And Daruma, you might be surprised at the extent to which looking "better" can/will benefit a girl's career or income.
 
Posted by Daruma28 (Member # 1388) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by RickyB:
Yo, Daruma, do you spend more time on your appearance, and use more grooming products, than Janeane Garofalo? As much? Nearly as much? Why do you think that is?

My wife uses little to no makeup and I LOVE that about her. She's more than fine as it is.

LOL. Not at all. I brush my hair when I get out of the shower, and that's it. I abhor any kind of grooming products like hair gel/spray, etc. In fact, I'm of the same mindset as OT in terms of putting chemicals on my body (Of course, I am pretty fastidious in terms of personal hygiene, but thats different from primping and grooming).

But then, I'm not in showbiz, where your appearance has an enormous impact on your career and income.
 
Posted by Funean (Member # 2345) on :
 
I am incapable of taking a person seriously who has clearly spent more than 30 minutes getting ready for work in the morning. And I say this as a person who is forced, with annoying regularity, to go to work on some days in full drag.
 
Posted by OpsanusTau (Member # 2350) on :
 
quote:
I won't go to work without makeup, styling my hair, a nice pair of heels, and my pearls. Even if I feel like crap on a given day, I'll still go through the routine.
I cannot make myself believe that you are joking.

Uck.

All I can say is (and I mean no offense), I'm glad I'm not you.
 
Posted by Daruma28 (Member # 1388) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by OpsanusTau:


And Daruma, you might be surprised at the extent to which looking "better" can/will benefit a girl's career or income.

I'm perfectly aware of that...I'm just pointing out that it obviously is not that huge of an impact for say your own career (otherwise you would probably have a little bit different attitude about the issue) versus a showbiz career. I did use the term "signifcant" right?

[ August 16, 2005, 06:07 PM: Message edited by: Daruma28 ]
 
Posted by FIJC (Member # 1092) on :
 
quote:
"I cannot make myself believe that you are joking.

Uck.

All I can say is (and I mean no offense), I'm glad I'm not you."

That's cool. I don't mind going through the routine and would be annoyed with myself if I didn't. When I was a kid, my parents sent me good grooming classes and other assorted Emily Post type classes, lol. I don't even own a single pair of jeans.
 
Posted by Everard (Member # 104) on :
 
" I don't even own a single pair of jeans."

Then, truly, you are not alive. EVERYONE needs a good pair of jeans, if for no other reason then they are perfect for a) going berry picking in b) horse riding in c) stomping in puddles in.
 
Posted by Quaestor (Member # 2553) on :
 
There is a difference in women "not properly taking care of their looks" and just not wearing stuff (getting 'dolled up'). The first denotes a slob without regard to herself, and the other is just someone who doesn't feel the need to get "dolled up" everytime to go the store.

Personally, I love a woman that takes care of herself and her appearance. I know a couple of women that say, "well once I have a kid that's it. I'll just let myself go." So sorry - not for me. At the same time, I sure don't want the other extreme - June Cleaver. Give me a woman that doesn't mind having fun and sweating a bit, but also wants to look nice for herself and her man.

Edited to add: Jeans! You MUST own at least one pair of really-broken-into, just-oh-so-comfortable jeans. Pray tell - what DID you wear when you went horseback riding??

[ August 16, 2005, 06:19 PM: Message edited by: Quaestor ]
 
Posted by Funean (Member # 2345) on :
 
<struggles with an urge to send FIJC "loosening up" classes>

Much as I respect your right to self-determination and definition, my mind boggles at "no jeans."

I was actually reared Southrun, wore gloves to church on Sunday, and all of it, but there's a time and a place for that, and a time and a place for JEANS.
 
Posted by Everard (Member # 104) on :
 
I think women look great all dolled up, and I definetely drool over women who primp themselves up. But, I think going for a romp in the hay with a woman is extremely sexy. So if she can't pull off both the "girly girl" and the "tom boy" look, I'm not likely to be too attracted to her.

By the same token, I wouldn't respect a woman who doesn't want me both when I'm wearing tails, and when I'm wearing jeans and flannel.
 
Posted by Daruma28 (Member # 1388) on :
 
lol - talk about WAAAAAYYYYY Off on a tangent here....how did a thread about Michelle Malkin turn into this? LMAO

Cool.
 
Posted by Funean (Member # 2345) on :
 
Kent started it!
 
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 99) on :
 
quote:

Then, truly, you are not alive. EVERYONE needs a good pair of jeans, if for no other reason then they are perfect for a) going berry picking in b) horse riding in c) stomping in puddles in.

I don't own any jeans, either.
 
Posted by Everard (Member # 104) on :
 
Wow. *shakes head in sadness*
 
Posted by Daruma28 (Member # 1388) on :
 
heh. One of the big reasons why I love my job is the fact that I'm allowed to wear Jeans every day to work instead of the standard dress slacks worn by most white collar workers in my field....
 
Posted by Jesse (Member # 1860) on :
 
Why the hell would anyone want a woman so insecure that she's afraid to step outside without a mask?

Reality is a lot more atractive than fantasy.

If you want to see Ms. Garafolo trim and made up, rent match maker...one of her biggest box-office bombs. It does have a few clever lines.
 
Posted by The Drake (Member # 2128) on :
 
I hate jeans. Denim is for menial laborers, who work in fields. It is the stuff of overalls and frayed cutoff shorts with the pockets hanging below the hem. It serves as the frame for plumber's crack, and it took on all manner of tacky embroidery in the 70s.

I'd like to see a return of polished shoes, french cuffs, starched shirts, suspenders, and neckties done in a stiff windsor knot.
 
Posted by Daruma28 (Member # 1388) on :
 
Go be a Butler than. [Smile]
 
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 99) on :
 
quote:
Why the hell would anyone want a woman so insecure that she's afraid to step outside without a mask?
Rebecca -- FIJC -- is hardly insecure. [Smile] She is, however, extremely mannered. I haven't yet decided whether she wears those manners for her protection, or for everyone else's. *grin*
 
Posted by Quaestor (Member # 2553) on :
 
the plot thickens...

[ August 16, 2005, 09:12 PM: Message edited by: Quaestor ]
 
Posted by FIJC (Member # 1092) on :
 
quote:
"Edited to add: Jeans! You MUST own at least one pair of really-broken-into, just-oh-so-comfortable jeans. Pray tell - what DID you wear when you went horseback riding??"
It started when I went off to high school. No jeans allowed...only dress. I haven't bothered to actually buy a pair since then. My roommates want to drag me out shopping just to get a pair sometime, I don't know though. They'd have to have something interesting on them, like embroidery or something. I am happy with a pair of chinos on Saturdays anyway. As for riding, breeches and a t-shirt is fine.

quote:
"I haven't yet decided whether she wears those manners for her protection, or for everyone else's. *grin*"
People tend to bother you less if you're put together and polite. [Smile]
 
Posted by Funean (Member # 2345) on :
 
It is an excellent disguise; one with which I am well familiar. [Smile]

I also enjoy it when people underestimate me, but that's my meanspirited side emerging.
 
Posted by FIJC (Member # 1092) on :
 
Yes, I have been under estimated a great many times...especially when I graduated from college last year and started working full-time. It's actually kind of funny to observe just how many people assume I'll be a push-over with deadlines and various other guidelines I have to adhere to in my work. That is, until I am hounding them on a 24/7 basis on status updates. I'll even email people at 2 or 3 in the morning asking how things are going, lol.
 
Posted by The Drake (Member # 2128) on :
 
If somebody did that to me, I would send them back a text message like this:

Zzzzzzzzzz
 
Posted by javelin (Member # 1284) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by The Drake:
If somebody did that to me, I would send them back a text message like this:

Zzzzzzzzzz

That's very kind. I'd be much less, umm, humorous.
 
Posted by OpsanusTau (Member # 2350) on :
 
(by the way, FIJC - I'm really glad that you didn't take offense, I worried all night (okay, not really) that you would think I was scornful of a well-dressed woman, which I am Not. It's just not for me. I once sat on a Metro-North train behind an exquisitely-dressed and perfectly-coiffed girl and wondered for half an hour what a different kind of girl I might have been if I had small feet and hair that did not defy all attempts to contain it.)
 
Posted by Pete at Home (Member # 429) on :
 
Good night, OT. Why don't you just start your own thread about your looks and what you do with your hair, and see who is interested. [Roll Eyes]
 
Posted by Daruma28 (Member # 1388) on :
 
Sheesh Pete, that was unnecessarily snarky.... [Confused]
 
Posted by Kent (Member # 832) on :
 
I think Anne Coulter is hot.
 
Posted by Kent (Member # 832) on :
 
Would you guys get back on topic?
 
Posted by Wayward Son (Member # 210) on :
 
Personally, the reason I think the conversation has degenerated so much is that Conservatives purposefully use good-looking women to be their spokesmen. That way, sooner or later, the conversation shifts from the political topic to women, which everyone finds far more interesting anyway. It's a nefarious conspiracy, I tell you!

Just because I was the second person to derail the thread has nothing to do with it... [Embarrassed]
 
Posted by Kent (Member # 832) on :
 
Derailing the thread is why you are indeed, Wayward Son. As is the first person to derail it.
 
Posted by flydye45 (Member # 2004) on :
 
quote:
Personally, the reason I think the conversation has degenerated so much is that Conservatives purposefully use good-looking women to be their spokesmen. That way, sooner or later, the conversation shifts from the political topic to women, which everyone finds far more interesting anyway. It's a nefarious conspiracy, I tell you!
I have noticed the same thing. Back in the day, the Left would send out Dowd (back in her hot days) or Vanden Heuval and put her against some 90 year old policy wonk like Kissenger. And then Conservatives wondered why pubescent boys wanted to burn a bra!

We finally got a clue and have such luminaries as Monica Crowley, Juliet Huddy et al to bolster the "babe" gap.
 
Posted by canadian (Member # 1809) on :
 
Pete, that's not a very Christian attitude. Most of us here are enjoying this thread.
 
Posted by Kent (Member # 832) on :
 
Mormons aren't Christians canadian.
 
Posted by Daruma28 (Member # 1388) on :
 
The Church of JESUS CHRIST of Latter Day Saints is not "christian?"

Hoooboy, what a can of worms you opened there Kent....
 
Posted by javelin (Member # 1284) on :
 
And further derailed the thread.

Devious, devious Kent. [Big Grin]
 
Posted by Kent (Member # 832) on :
 
All I'm saying is that Pete doesn't have to be nice because he's a Mormon. Geesh!
 
Posted by Quaestor (Member # 2553) on :
 
quote:
Personally, the reason I think the conversation has degenerated so much is that Conservatives purposefully use good-looking women to be their spokesmen. That way, sooner or later, the conversation shifts from the political topic to women, which everyone finds far more interesting anyway. It's a nefarious conspiracy, I tell you!
Blast! You found us out!! Don't mind the whine of the black helicopters outside or the guys bursting in right now. They're there to help you...yes, help you... [Cool]

And I don't think of it as much as derailing - except for the wierd tangent of FIJC's wardrobe (to which I think we all agree that she needs some jeans) - as it was natural flow from the start. What did y'all think when people started comparing Malkin and Coulter? Throw a couple of guy's opinions in there and of course it will come down to who's better looking... [Wink]
 
Posted by Quaestor (Member # 2553) on :
 
And Christians don't have to be nice either.
But at least Mormons pray for the dead. In most sects of christendom once you're dead that's about it.
 
Posted by Kent (Member # 832) on :
 
I bet Pete has never prayed for the dead, ask him.
 
Posted by canadian (Member # 1809) on :
 
I'm pretty sure Mormons are Christian. Maybe not to other Christians, but to EVERYONE else. Just like Protestants weren't considered Christians by the Roman Catholic Church.

Boy they hated that Martin Luther.

So, I guess my point is: being prissy because you've got the vapors just isn't kosher.

(and I'm almost 100% sure Pete has prayed for the dead...heck, he's probably been baptized as a proxy for the dead)

[ August 17, 2005, 01:51 PM: Message edited by: canadian ]
 
Posted by javelin (Member # 1284) on :
 
I'm trying not to laugh out loud - it might spoil the joke.
 
Posted by Kent (Member # 832) on :
 
Almost "100% positive" canadian?
 
Posted by canadian (Member # 1809) on :
 
Most of the time. I must admit to my off days here and there...
 
Posted by Kent (Member # 832) on :
 
I still don't think Pete prays for the dead . . .
 
Posted by Dave at Work (Member # 1906) on :
 
quote:
Just like Protestants weren't considered Christians by the Roman Catholic Church.
When were Protestants not considered Christians by the Roman Catholic Church? Are we talking modern day or middle ages here? I do not know about ancient times, but I never heard Protestants, whether they were Lutheran, Calvanist, Baptist, or any other sect, called anything but Christians when I was growing up in the Roman Catholic Church. The difference between the Catholic Church and the other Christian sects has to do with specific beliefs such as transsubstantiation, the nature of the trinity, and other theological issues, and not whether they believe in Jesus or not. If the issue was whether they believed in Jesus or not then I could see them not being considered Christians, but that is not the case.
 
Posted by canadian (Member # 1809) on :
 
Older times, of course. It's pretty well documented.
 
Posted by flydye45 (Member # 2004) on :
 
To try to drag the thread back on track, Malkin is being a jerk.
.
.
.
AND right now we all know there are a dozen lawyers all forensiclly dissecting Judge Roberts past in some attempt to derail him! Of course they have the best of reasons at heart...


I assume everyone so high minded about Malkin will show the same outrage over that?
 
Posted by flydye45 (Member # 2004) on :
 
FIJC, get some jeans so these people can move on with their life.
 
Posted by FIJC (Member # 1092) on :
 
I have been working so much that I don't have time to even shop...so I don't forsee jeans coming into my life anytime in the near future. So if you guys want to be buy a pair of jeans, as far as I'm concerned, someone else can then buy them for me and have them shipped to my doorstep. Size 6P.
 
Posted by javelin (Member # 1284) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by FIJC:
I have been working so much that I don't have time to even shop...so I don't forsee jeans coming into my life anytime in the near future. So if you guys want to be buy a pair of jeans, as far as I'm concerned, someone else can then buy them for me and have them shipped to my doorstep. Size 6P.

Email me an address to send em to, I'll have Ops and Funean pick 'em out, and we'll get right on that!
 
Posted by canadian (Member # 1809) on :
 
But part of buying jeans is trying them on...it's all about the ass...
 
Posted by Kent (Member # 832) on :
 
You ever see Anne Coulter in jeans?
 
Posted by RickyB (Member # 1464) on :
 
I for one try not to see Alien Psycho Girl in any clothes or otherwise.
 
Posted by Kent (Member # 832) on :
 
You like her naked, huh? I don't blame you.
 
Posted by Daruma28 (Member # 1388) on :
 
If you're into scarecrow, stick-person physiques I guess....

Ann is not ugly, but she's no knockout that some like to make her out to be.
 
Posted by Kent (Member # 832) on :
 
You're into scarecrows too? Now that is a coincidence!
 
Posted by MoralDK (Member # 2547) on :
 
I like Michelle Malkin. She is hilarious when she's on Fox news and gets too excited and starts stuttering.
 
Posted by RickyB (Member # 1464) on :
 
"in any clothes or otherwise."

What part escaped your ken?
 
Posted by Jesse (Member # 1860) on :
 
Take a good look at Coulters throat the next time you see her on television.

I ain't sure if that's a goiter or an adams apple, but I know which way I'm betting, and I have no interest in seeing that naked.
 
Posted by Funean (Member # 2345) on :
 
<googles for video>

EEW! You're right! I never noticed that before! Probably because I switch away anytime I see her.

I always thought of her as the Barbie-from-Hell, but now...my goodness! Ken's little brother, Brad, the black sheep of the family!
 
Posted by Daruma28 (Member # 1388) on :
 
LOL - It's not THAT bad...is it?

Put that on any other women that you think is extraordinarily attractive (like in my view, Catherine Zeta Jones), and I wouldn't certainly call that a "deal-killer."

Everyone's got there flaws. Her adam's apple is not THAT bad...I just don't like her stick-thin figure. I think my wrists are bigger than her thighs....
 
Posted by Funean (Member # 2345) on :
 
It's pretty bad, Daruma, especially since she's always in uber-femme mode. Adds to the now-unavoidable [Drag Queen!] buzzer ringing in my head.

Though I will say it is refreshing to hear a from a male who does not find women alluring whose knees are the widest point of their legs. [Smile]
 
Posted by FIJC (Member # 1092) on :
 
She's actually smaller in person from her pictures.
 
Posted by Daruma28 (Member # 1388) on :
 
LOL - her common reference on the left wing sphere of messageboards/blogs like DU and Kos is afterall "Mann Coulter."
 
Posted by canadian (Member # 1809) on :
 
Wasn't there a rumour that Anne Coulter was actually Andy Kaufmann? That at some point in the future he is going to reveal himself and stun the world with the greatest spectacle of performance art ever produced!
 
Posted by Daruma28 (Member # 1388) on :
 
Well that would definitely be a spectacle...but I wouldn't call it "great." [Eek!]
 
Posted by canadian (Member # 1809) on :
 
According to Kaufmann it probably would be. And then he'd spit on the reporter or something...
 
Posted by Jesse (Member # 1860) on :
 
In all seriousness, I doubt she's a transexual, but my oh-so-informed Medical Opinion is that she probably IS hyper-thyroid, which is why she is so skinny, so shrill and excitable, and so prone to lose all control of her temper.
 
Posted by Kent (Member # 832) on :
 
My mom is hyper-thyroid and her eyes bug out, Peter Lorrie-like. I doubt Ann has hyper-thyroid, she is most likely just addicted to caffeine.

[ August 19, 2005, 11:17 AM: Message edited by: Kent ]
 
Posted by Quaestor (Member # 2553) on :
 
Coulter is an uber-hyper, shock writer that occasionaly makes some good points. One of my concerns is that other female commentators trying to imitate her "unique" style and making it the trendy way to discuss/debate issues. I see it in Laura Ingraham, Michelle Malkin, and some other minor ones. Please ladies, don't think you have to resort to a low denominator in order to "Speak to a Liberal"...if you must [Wink] ...Thankfully, the ladies of Ornery don't stoop that low - at least that I've seen yet...
 
Posted by Lewkowski (Member # 2028) on :
 
Its funny that theres a thread complaining and whining about an ad hominem attack on a political operative (The women protesting in Crawford), that degenerates into a big group ad hominem attack on another political operative (Ann Coulter). One is a far left liberal, and attacking her is outrageous. One is a far right conservative and attacking her is ok.

Hypocrisy.
 
Posted by Pete at Home (Member # 429) on :
 
Likewise, Canadian, why do manners and niceness only matter when the person who says something abraisive happens to be someone you disagree with politically?

[ August 19, 2005, 04:36 PM: Message edited by: Pete at Home ]
 
Posted by Kent (Member # 832) on :
 
Malkin is definitely out of control here. No excuses for it.
 
Posted by Jesse (Member # 1860) on :
 
Hold on Lewkowski....Coulter has made repeated arrogant public remarks about her appearance...please don't make dig through Politicaly Incorrect transcripts to prove it.

That makes her appearance fair game in my book.

Likewise, if this protester was making grandiose statements about her wonderfull marriage and how it should be seen as an example for all to emulate, the nature of her relationship with her husband would become fair game.
 
Posted by canadian (Member # 1809) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Pete at Home:
Likewise, Canadian, why do manners and niceness only matter when the person who says something abraisive happens to be someone you disagree with politically?

Are you talking about Andy Kaufman?

[Confused]
 
Posted by Dagonee (Member # 2212) on :
 
quote:
Likewise, if this protester was making grandiose statements about her wonderfull marriage and how it should be seen as an example for all to emulate, the nature of her relationship with her husband would become fair game.
Since this protestor has publicly stated that her immediate family agrees with her, then division in her family caused by her actions would become fair game. Where Malkin went too far was in publishing the divorce news before she could prove a link.

If the reason for the divorce is her actions, then it is relevant and fair game for columnists.
 
Posted by Lewkowski (Member # 2028) on :
 
"Hold on Lewkowski....Coulter has made repeated arrogant public remarks about her appearance...please don't make dig through Politicaly Incorrect transcripts to prove it."

Right... [Roll Eyes]

No I'm not questioning if she said it, she probably did. What I'm questioning is how attacking someones apearance or family life is ok sometimes and not ok other times. And how strangly they seem to follow political sides... Frankly if your in the news *everything* is fair game.
 
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 99) on :
 
quote:

Frankly if your in the news *everything* is fair game.

Really? Hm. *puts finger to the side of his mouth*
I'm reasonably sure this has not always been your stated opinion, Lew.
 
Posted by LoverOfJoy (Member # 157) on :
 
In an effort to derail the thread...whenever I see this thread title I momentarily see Macaulay Culkin. Is that what you get when you cross Michelle Malkin and Coulter?

Sorry. Back to your regularly scheduled topic.
 
Posted by Funean (Member # 2345) on :
 
[Big Grin]

I thought I was the only one, LoJ.

I do this all the time with thread titles, too.
 
Posted by Pelegius (Member # 2399) on :
 
TD, it has, however always been my stated opinion. I am afraind I agree with Lew.


God, that's scary.
 
Posted by canadian (Member # 1809) on :
 
LoJ, Fun...me too!!!

"Does every parent of a war casually get to meet the POTUS?"

"Where's the science of fiction comedy?"

etc, etc...

Sometimes I read the topic titles together and try to make a story...
 
Posted by Funean (Member # 2345) on :
 
I read found poetry in concurrent thread titles. It's often hilariously William-Shatner-serious.

(try it! with the voice!)
 
Posted by canadian (Member # 1809) on :
 
Army plans to have current number of troops in Iraq for 4 more years
Was Ayn Rand
a nihilist?

Michelle Malkin
Out
Coulters Coulter

John Boloton's first public criticism since appointment.
Workplace Ethics?
What kind of crap is this?

I just made my own soy milk
and Tofu
was the by-product?

[ August 21, 2005, 05:03 PM: Message edited by: canadian ]
 
Posted by OpsanusTau (Member # 2350) on :
 
Tommorow it begins...
has Kent preyed on the dead?
Cooking catastrophes.

Gaza and sex
Bent Over
The Barrel While
Your Pockets Are Picked

Food for thought:
Gaza Stripped
Is Deporting Jews Acceptable?

In a previous life,
I was a...
brief thesis on religion.
 


Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classic™ 6.7.1