|
|
Friday, January 02, 2004
|
|
IT NEVER FEELS LIKE NEW YEAR'S WITHOUT ATTACKING SOMEONE
My good friend Dr. Reverend has expounded on his hatred of Ann Coulter at some length on his blog. I should say a few things about the good Doctor. His hatreds are almost always reactionary, designed mostly to get a rise out of me. I'm the center of a lot of people's universe that way. And, no....I haven't taken my medication today.
The Doctor hates Ann for the basic reason that she's stupid. I disagree. I don't think Ann Coulter is stupid. I think that she's batshit INSANE ! Stupid and insane are very different things. Stupid people are usually unable to convince normal people of anything. Crazy people have a history of doing so (see "Hitler, Adolf" and "Manson, Charles".)
Ann Coulter is, nominally, a constitutional lawyer who moonlights as a columnist. Or maybe she's a columnist who moonlights as a constitutional lawyer. It's hard to tell sometimes. In any event, she's on TV a lot.
I should preface the following "essay" by making the following confession: I really liked her first book, "High Crimes And Misdemeanors". It had all the virtriol toward Bill Clinton that Hunter Thompson had for Richard Nixon...back when he wasn't so lazy. Plus, she's hot....okay, as hot as "conservative" chicks get.
I should also describe my own political beliefs to the extent to that they'll explain why I hate people like Ann Coulter and Rush Limbaugh. In terms of foreign and fiscal policy, I could reasonably align myself with the American Republican party. So far as anyting else goes (meaning social policy), I'm a libertarian. If you want to shoot up and marry another man, I usually determine my position by asking a very simple question: "Who gives a fuck?" My positions have managed to alienate me from virtually everyone and destroyed any chances a semi-retarded douchebag like me would ever have of making a living in professional politics....a profession replete with semi-retarded douchebags. Don't believe me?....just look at James Carville.
But Ann Coulter is especially annoying. If I believe in anything, it's the the rule of law. I may disagree with a given law, Hell, if I figure if it hurts no one other than myself, I might even break a few from time to time. Ann's a little....different. Miss Coulter has suggested that murder, in a roundabout way, is acceptable, insofar as "liberal" judges have denigrated the Constitution to the point where it means nothing. Coulter has written about the murder of 7 abortionists as " depending upon your point of view, had a procedure performed on them with a rifle." Wow! Now, as much of a fan of abortion as I am, I think reasonable people can disagree as to it's morality. I do respect the opinion of those who feel abortion is murder. In the interest of reciprocity, however, I do expect that people who disagree with my views on abortion to agree that shooting someone, innocent of any crime, in the head with a high powered rifle is also also wrong.
I also have a bug up my ass about Ann's description of the abortion "holocaust." Using that word is an insult to the intelligence of the living and a defemation to the memory of the dead. Say what you will about abortion. It might be evil, it might well be murder...but it is voluntary. No one has ever argued that Polish mothers ever asked the S.S to pull their children from their arms, gas them and toss them into crematoriums. So let's drop that canard, shall we? Common decency to the dead and the survivors demands it.
I actually didn't mean to get off on an abortion tirade. I realize that 30% of the population will never agree with my views on the issue and 65% of the remainder will be disgusted with my enthusiasm for the proceedure. I only bring the issue up because Ann does...repeatedly. Coulter has managed, as a lawyer, to justify ignoring judicial rulings as somehow politically correct. This is because the liberals do it too. Liberals (as much as I despise them as well), just never use it as a means to justify murder.
I also have a problem with Ann's selectivity of the use of government intrusivness. Ann seems to believe that there is no right to privacy in regards to abortion or political beliefs, but I suspect that, if say......a President Dean (God forbid) started poking around her tax returns, she'd scream unholy hell. Well, Ann there's either a right to privacy or there isn't. How's that for "strict constructionism" for you? Let me put it this way, the same right to privacy that allows abortions and homosexual sodomy is the same right to privacy that keeps your tax returns off the front page of the Washington Post. Oh, by the way Ann....you look to be in your late thirties, you're single and childless which means one of three things; Either you're infertile, a virgin or using some method of birth control (which 40 million "God-Fearing, American Christians", notably Catholics, consider "pre-emtive murder" and take exception to as well.) I seriously doubt that you'd like to read about that in a cover story in "The Nation."
I'm sure that Miss Coulter would describe this missive as "the poiltics of personal destruction" which it seems to be so in vouge to decry these days. And she would be right to so protest. Ordinarily, I'd feel bad about it, too. But I'm stooping to her level. I'm good at that. Coulter described Massachusetts Supreme Court Justice Margreat Marshall thusly
"Marshall, immigrant and wife of New York Times columnist Anthony Lewis, has recently proclaimed a right to gay marriage for all of Massachusetts. She has further demanded that the legislature rewrite the law in accordance with her wishes. One imagines Marshall leaping off the boat at Ellis Island and announcing: "I know just what this country needs! Anthony! Stop defending Pol Pot for five minutes and get me on a court!"
Granted, one can imagine how a woman married to the likes of Anthony Lewis might long for the sanctuary of a same-sex union. But that's no reason to foist it on Massachusetts."
What's fair for Ann is fair for me. I even have a Supreme Court ruling New York Time Co v. Sullivan (which Ann probably also hates) to back me up. I can say whatever I want about Ann, so long as I say it with a reasonable expectation that it's true and that it's not malicious.
On the other hand, I really don't need to say anything at all. A picture's worth a thousand words.
So, is it wrong that I still want to have degrading sex with Ann Coulter? And I should note to my uber-feminist friends that I didn't say who the sex would be degrading for.....
|
|
|
| |
