Ann Coulter's Cunt Saves America:
Ann Coulter's cunt is a fabulous cunt, all stretched-out and pretty on the cover of Time. A cunt such as Ann's is a rare thing for the right, so used to Phyllis Schlafly's cunt, so closed off, so filled with reproach for those who would dare to approach. No, Ann Coulter's cunt is inviting; its labial lips, the minor ones, you know, whisper invitations, coo to conservatives, "We're wet, oh, so wet, and lubricated, ready for you."

Yes, Time magazine, that fine magazine, can't get enough of Ann Coulter's cunt. Just a week or two ago, Ann Coulter's cunt was declared one of the most influential cunts in all of the world. In the entire world, where tribes in Cambodia and Ecuador and Zambia have built idols of Ann Coulter's cunt, worshipping it like they do mad, ancient phallic gods, all of whom would be conquered, overwhelmed by its clitoral hood.

Ann Coulter's cunt is so misunderstood: it's all jokes, not cruel invective it spouts. Ann Coulter's cunt declares that because rapist Brian Nichols escaped in Atlanta because he was able to get a gun from a female cop, "How many people have to die before the country stops humoring feminists?" Oh-ho, oh-ho, oh-ho-ho-ho, what a glorious sense of irony has Ann Coulter's cunt. If by "irony," you mean "saying exactly what you mean in the most vicious way possible," which Ann Coulter's cunt does endlessly, wonderfully; it's so fine to watch a cunt spout and spit like Ann Coulter's cunt does.

But Time magazine, dear Time magazine, makes sure we know that Ann Coulter's cunt is a hot, lovin' cunt, that goes to church, loves its mama cunt, and teaches small children wearing thigh-high dresses and calf-high boots. Sure, to be "balanced," John Cloud says that Ann Coulter's cunt is sloppy sometimes. Sure, sure, sure, facts are malleable things: only Internet freaks and worthless liberals would dare call attention to the lies of Ann Coulter's cunt. But Cloud calls it all, sweetly, the cunt's "feline aggression."

Ann Coulter's cunt is delightfully iconoclastic, so primped and polished and Ivy-League educated. How, shocking, says John Cloud, to discover Ann Coulter's cunt dislikes pornography, as it wrote while at Cornell, in sweet Ithaca. Why it's Andrea Dworkin's twin, don't you see? Ann Coulter's cunt goes to the best parties, with the elitest of the elite, all delighting in the charm of Ann Coulter's cunt. It lives in blue Manhattan, in a gigantic apartment, and has stalkers, the mark of real celebrity. The Aryan cunt scoffs at the idea that it's racist for it to suggest that all people of a certain shade of tan be separated for extra searching at the airports. When Ann Coulter's cunt says, "We'd be searching, you know, Italians, Spanish, Jews, males," it's irony, c'mon, not hate, for how could a cunt as beautiful as Ann Coulter's be taken seriously?

Ann Coulter's cunt has so many friends, all those other cunts and pricks who think Ann Coulter's cunt is just lovely. It's friends with Miguel Estrada's prick, Ron Silver's prick and Matt Drudge's cunt, all on crusades, don't you know? They'll change the world if given the chance, to one where liberals are put into camps, purged, and forced to wear dunce caps and march through the streets. Oh-ho, oh-ho, oh-ho-ho-ho, or is that more irony, to ask if liberals "love America as much as they love bin Laden and Castro?"

Ann Coulter's cunt perhaps does not see the irony in the fact that the triumphs of those bitchy feminists allow it to parade around so freely, that the world Ann Coulter's cunt hopes to create would have little use for Ann Coulter's cunt. But such self-awareness is for a whole person, and not just a cunt.

Whenever the powerful need to do some fucking or the disempowered need to be fucked, they can all count on Ann Coulter's cunt.

Why Ann Coulter Is a Cunt (Assassination Edition):
The great thing about attacking Ann Coulter is that you're free to say anything you want about her, no matter how dark, twisted, or violent. Because, you know, if you've constantly called on public figures to be murdered, well, shit, you kind of don't have a twiggy long leg to stand on. So the Rude Pundit can say that he wouldn't care if Ann Coulter was sliced from kooz to sternum and then fucked simultaneously in her bleeding, viscera-spilling gut by three raging rhinos until the force of their cum popped her eyeballs out. He can say that and still respect himself in the morning.

'Cause, see, the Rude Pundit still has the moral high ground, even if we discover Ann Coulter was killed by raping rhinos with stiletto horns. You could be standing neck deep in a shit filled sewer, covered with syphilis sores and shoving a crucifix up your ass, and you'd still have the moral high ground over Ann Coulter.

Here, in context (because she whines like a golden retriever hit by a car whenever she perceives she's being decontextualized), is what Coulter said Monday on Good Morning America about presidential candidate John Edwards, after bland automaton Chris Cuomo brought up her inference that Edwards was a "faggot" a couple of months ago: "[A]bout the same time, you know, Bill Maher was not joking and saying he wished Dick Cheney had been killed in a terrorist attack. So I've learned my lesson. If I'm gonna say anything about John Edwards in the future, I'll just wish he had been killed in a terrorist assassination plot."

Taking Maher out of context, Coulter misses that he had asked if the world would be a better place if Cheney had been killed, not that he "wished" it had happened - a fine line that Coulter is more than willing to ask everyone to apply to her constant hopes for violence against Edwards, the New York Times, Justice Stevens, etc.

Then, deliciously, while Coulter was devouring the entire hour live on My Balls Are Hard with Chris "Where's Your Fucking Lips?" Matthews, with a fairly sympathetic crowd behind her in Herald Square, Manhattan, Elizabeth Edwards called in. Edwards was asking that Coulter stop the personal attacks on her husband, which is a little like asking a crack whore to stop blowing hobos for quarters. Coulter's tell, when you know she's been cornered, which is just about any time she's interviewed by someone who's not Sean Hannity (who must fingerfuck her under the desk), is that she pushes her long bottle-blonde hair to one side then the other, which she did almost constantly while Edwards was on the phone.

Edwards was not only confronting Coulter on her assassination wish, but because, as Edwards said, "You had a column a couple of years ago which -- which made fun of the moment of Charlie Dean's death, and suggested that my husband had a bumper sticker on the back of his car that said, 'Ask me about my dead son.'" Responding to a mother who had lost a son like Joan Crawford to wire hangers, Coulter attacked John Edwards' manhood ("Why isn't John Edwards making this call?") and instead accused Elizabeth Edwards of impinging on her freedom to speak. Then, since there's no hominem like an ad hominem, Coulter didn't answer Edwards (or Matthews) on the issue of personal attacks, using the opportunity to call John Edwards a "shyster" lawyer who ripped off doctors.

Another point here is not just that Coulter is a nasty, savage cunt-beast. It's that she's just fucking stupid. Here she is talking about killing civilians in our current war(s): "[Y]ou are destroying the society that has produced these monsters. And you win by killing the other side and not allowing your side to be killed. Withdrawal would be the worst thing we could do. We could definitely fight it a little bit harder. I mean, I understand why Rumsfeld wanted to have a small footprint. It is a little bit different since it wasn't a country attacking us, it is this ideology that has spread throughout the Middle East. Yes, that makes it a lot trickier. But the small footprint didn't really work. Americans are getting fed up. Democracies don't like to go to war, so we're going to have to wrap it up quickly and destroy the fighting spirit of the fanatics." Can you understand a goddamn thing in there? The Rude Pundit's argued with drunks at bars who've been more coherent just before they passed out.

But, hey, chances are Ann Coulter's anorexic or, at the very least, bulimic, considering the number of times she referred to Monica Lewinsky and Hillary Clinton as "chubby." And in that case, we can expect a peaking of madness as her weight drops, followed, perhaps, by a brain hemorrhage that keeps her in a coma until she finally dies under the burden of her own rot.

The one good line Chris Matthews got in: Referring to the cheering pro-Coulter crowd, he said, "My God, is this Deliverance?" No, but there was ass-fucking going on.

(Back to the motherfuckering tomorrow.)

Why Ann Coulter Is a Cunt, Part 1856 - The Plagiarism Edition:
Sometimes beating up on Ann Coulter is about as easy as making a nervous little dog piss itself. One tiny "boo" in the right direction and that bitch is swimming in her own fluids. For surely, in her latest "column" (if by "column," you mean, "a stomach-churning, cringe-inducing, bowel-releasing journey into the dark, dank, garbage-stinking recesses of a deranged demi-brain"), Coulter sets herself upon a Tower of Babble teetering so badly that a flea flick would send her screaming, such sweet screaming, plunging onto the rocky ground below.

Coulter uses the recent, narrow (and wimpy and confusing) Supreme Court decision, that displays of the Ten Commandments outside of a larger historical context are overtly religious and are forbidden in courthouses, and attempts to say something about what taxpayers have "paid" for, going into a mad, ranting litany of examples, all of which combined cost your average taxpayer less than a nickel.

What's fun, so incredibly fuckin' fun about this kind of Coulter "logic" is how many different ways you can take it down. Over at Pandagon, Amanda goes to town with the sarcasm. Another approach would be to point out how some of the things she cites as outrageous opinion making are actually true. Check out her statements that she says are quotes from exhibits at the Smithsonian. Or one could make the case that nearly all of her examples are over a fuckin' decade old, at least.

But instead, how about this: Ann Coulter appears to have plagiarized a section of her column by not citing the December 1993 edition of The Flummery Digest. In this edition, the digest is devoted to calling out what it says is "offensive" art that receives public funding. One of its sections in December 1993 lists a bunch of NEA grant recipients, which, on first glance and, hell, even on second, look like Coulter lifted without attribution from this site or from what is apparently Alice Goldfarb Marquis' Heritage Foundation work Art Lessons (perhaps the work became her book of the same title in 1995), which Flummery actually cites as its source (click on the cross in the lower left hand corner of the NEA entry to see the citation).

Here's a couple of examples:
From Ann Coulter, talking about what taxpayers have funded: "A photo of a newborn infant with its mouth open titled to suggest the infant was available for oral sex."
From The Flummery Digest: "The title of a photo of a newborn infant with its mouth open suggested that the infant was available for oral sex."

From Ann Coulter: "A photo of a woman breastfeeding an infant, titled 'Jesus Sucks.'"
From The Flummery Digest: "One otherwise tame photograph of a woman breastfeeding an infant was titled 'Jesus Sucks.'"

From Ann Coulter: "A show titled 'DEGENERATE WITH A CAPITAL D' featuring a display of the remains of the artist's own aborted baby."
From The Flummery Digest: "'Degenerate with a Capital D'...included 'Alchemy Cabinet' by Shawn Eichman, featuring the remains of the artist's own aborted baby."

From Ann Coulter: "Performance of giant bloody tampons, satanic bunnies, three-foot feces and vibrators."
From The Flummery Digest: "[T]he performance art of Johanna Went...relies upon props such as giant body tampons, satanic bunnies, three-foot turds, and dildos." (Hey, Coulter's got a mainstream audience.)

Is this plagiarism? Coincidence? A work by the "American Life League" describes Eichman's work as "her own dismembered second-trimester aborted baby next to the obligatory twisted wire coat hanger," so, you know, there's other ways to state it. Minor shit? Perhaps, but, remember, as Coulter told us we should believe about Bill Clinton (in her first "book"), seemingly minor transgressions point to larger patterns of deception.

Like the Rude Pundit said, like makin' a chihuahua piss, like stealin' candy from a baby, like settin' a passed-out hobo on fire, it's just way too easy to take Coulter apart. But, my, oh, my, what fun bloodsport it is.

Addendum (With an Emphasis on the "Dum"): The Flummery Digest was an online journal that sought to document the "extremes" of political correctness in America. It is now defunct.

Note: We are sooo fucked.

Why Ann Coulter Is a Cunt, Part 2609 of an Endless Series (More Plagiarism? Edition):
It is a sad truism in the business of whoredom that someone younger, hotter, more hardcore is gonna come along and take away half the johns that the older skanks used to pleasure. One day, you can be blow job queen of the Strip; the next day, a 19 year-old with DSLs that'll suck a cock clean in three minutes or less is gonna have 'em linin' up like free burger day at the drive-through. So you gotta get crazier. Show that these little slits with tits are nothin' compared to you. Pretty soon, you're not only walkin' around in nothin' but a g-string and tube top, you're promisin' you'll go places no other hooker in Vegas'll go: "Yeah, sure, you can shit on my twat and then fuck me through the shit." "Yeah, you can bloody my asshole with a bottle and then fuck me through the blood." "Yeah, you can get ten of your friends to run a train on me while you stand on the side and jack off on a little boy holding a kitten before you make me eat the kitten." Then you can head back to the corner, hold your head up, spit out kitten hair, and show all the little slutettes who the nastiest cunt is.

There's so much that's fucked up about Ann Coulter and her latest "book" (if by "book," you mean, "Extended projectile vomiting retched out by a pencil-legged harridan scratching semi-words in her own puke") that it's hard to know where to start. There's the title of the "book," Godless, which quite intentionally must exist to make you think, as you walk into your local Barnes and Noble and glance over at the shrieking, howling display of volumes with Ann Coulter's picture on them, "Goddess." One might think no human being could be that needy, but, then again, Coulter's gotta compete with your Malkins and your Ingrahams and other conservative fuck dream demi-babes.

And the Rude Pundit's not gonna get into the whole "oh, Ann Coulter's wrong about this" argument, 'cause that would mean what she says merits any response other than: Are you really that fucking crazy? No, seriously, are you that...fucking...crazy? What else would you ask someone who writes, as Coulter does in the first chapter, freely available, regarding "fears" of water shortages: "Liberals are worried we’re going to run out of something that literally falls from the sky. Here’s an idea: Just wait. It will rain." Beyond the fact that most of Coulter's arguments seem to stem from understanding liberalism from 20 or 30 years ago, the sentence is breathtakingly, self-evidently stupid.

Then there's Coulter's comments about the 9/11 widows in the book and during her strange, defensive interview on Today. The problem that the Rude Pundit has with so many in our mighty right wing commentariat is that they like to beat up on disempowered people - the poor, immigrants, mothers who've lost children in war. You know, if you walk into a bunny hutch and just start ripping the heads off rabbits because how dare they look so fuckin' cute, you really can't walk out with your head held high, thinking you're some great warrior.

But what really pisses the Rude Pundit off is that not only is Coulter a shitty writer and a bugfuck crazed presence any time she is remotely challenged, but she has a bad habit. And that habit, as mentioned before by the Rude Pundit (followed up by Raw Story), is that she appears to like to copy whole sentences from other sources without putting them in as quotes or even citing where she might have "paraphrased" from. You judge for yourself:

Here's Coulter from Chapter 1 of Godless: The massive Dickey-Lincoln Dam, a $227 million hydroelectric project proposed on upper St. John River in Maine, was halted by the discovery of the Furbish lousewort, a plant previously believed to be extinct.

Here's the Portland Press Herald, from the year 2000, in its list of the "Maine Stories of the Century": The massive Dickey-Lincoln Dam, a $227 million hydroelectric project proposed on upper St. John River, is halted by the discovery of the Furbish lousewort, a plant believed to be extinct.

Strangely similar, no? By the way, that's a story from 1976. Coulter doesn't tell you that little tidbit, making you think it happened last week. The next one's from 1977:

Here's Coulter writing about an attack on the Alaska pipeline: A few years after oil drilling began in Prudhoe Bay, Alaska, a saboteur set off an explosion blowing a hole in the pipeline and releasing an estimated 550,000 gallons of oil.

Here's something from the History Channel: The only major oil spill on land occurred when an unknown saboteur blew a hole in the pipe near Fairbanks, and 550,000 gallons of oil spilled onto the ground.

Why, in this age of the "terrorist," would Coulter use "saboteur," a quaint term, to be sure? Could it be a cut and paste job with a couple of words changed, like a good college freshman?

So you judge. Sure, it's just two incidents in a single chapter. But does it speak to other potential strange similarities throughout the book? Is it plagiarism? The Rude Pundit's not saying it is plagiarism, but he's not saying it's not. How harshly would Coulter judge a liberal writer for doing the same? Or would she have to be silent?

The Rude Pundit could end on a high note here. A note where he demonstrates how he's above it all. Fuck that. Sometimes you gotta jump in the gutter and have the slap fight with the whores. Coulter is fond of saying that feminists are ugly, describing one as "physically repulsive." Has Coulter taken a look in the mirror lately? She looks like the crazed lingerer at a bar at 3 a.m., desperate for some fat fuck to take her home, beat her, and fuck her face. Bitch has been ridden hard and put away spooge covered, taken out the next day, stiff and sticky, and spit on to be cleaned up for her interviews before using her to wipe Republican asses. Goddamn, time does not treat the nutzoid well. The Rude Pundit wouldn't fuck her if he was given Rush Limbaugh's tiny, diseased prick to fuck her with.

Why Ann Coulter Is a Cunt, Part 3121 of an Endless Series:
Some days life hands you lemons. Yeah, you're supposed to make lemonade, but what if you've got no water or sugar? Then all you're left with are those sour fuckers with their skin shrivelling and tightening over the next couple of weeks. That's the kind of mood the Rude Pundit's in today. And when he's in that kind of mood and it's still too early to hit the bar for the pretend comforts of faux companionship, he just feels like beating the shit out of something. Or someone. And today, that's gotta be Ann Coulter.

For in her latest "column" (if by "column," you mean, "the half-witted demi-scrawls of a hunched she-beast yowling from her dank cave where she feeds on the corpses of small Muslim children and uses their blood to ink her hooked claws"), Coulter once again props up fake liberal beliefs and humps those fuckers like they're diamond-studded gold dildos. This time around, she distills all the nutzoid bullshit tossed around by the right-wing media about how Democrats are allegedly "opposed" to fighting terrorists because they oppose some of the strategies.

One of the purest idiocies of Coulter's fans, including the begging-to-be face-fucked Sean Hannity, is that people attack Coulter personally (or point out her plagiarism) because they can't possibly have the rhetorical and intellectual acumen to actually take down her arguments. It's a little like saying Ann Coulter's male fans have to jack off to downloaded fake porn pics of Coulter because they can't get laid by real humans. So let the Rude Pundit address this well-worn comment thread that inevitably appears whenever anyone deigns to say something like "Attempting to find logic in Ann Coulter's writing is not unakin to trying to finger fuck a porcupine's asshole."

This week, Coulter says that Democrats "oppose the National Security Agency listening to people who are calling specific phone numbers found on al-Qaida cell phones and computers. Spying on al-Qaida terrorists is hampering our ability to fight the global war on terror!" Leaving aside the fact that exclamation points are pretty much the rhetorical equivalent of a backwards baseball cap, could Coulter or her supporters actually cite a single Democrat who believes that? 'Cause, see, "nuance" is to Coulter conservatives as germs are to the OCD sufferer. Let's say it again: most non-Lieberman Democrats believe that the FISA court should issue warrants, even retroactively, on domestic phone surveillance. It's not as fancy as "Democrats want Allah el-Omar to rape your daughters," but it's a great deal more accurate.

So that's why when, say, a blogger repeatedly calls Ann Coulter a "cunt," it's not because he doesn't want to "engage" with her "arguments." No, it's because there is no argument to engage with. Coulter is a messianic figure in this way: reality for her followers exists because she creates it for them. She writes, "The Guantanamo detainees are not innocent insurance salesmen imprisoned in some horrible mix-up like something out of a Perry Mason movie. The detainees were captured on the battlefield in Afghanistan." Now, say you point out that, for example, Sami al Hajj was a cameraman working with Al-Jazeera and was "captured" in Pakistan and then sent to Gitmo. No matter what al Hajj is accused of (mostly just being Sudanese at the wrong place at the wrong time), ya gotta admit: the man wasn't captured firing guns at Americans on a "battlefield in Afghanistan."

No, it's just a waste of fucking time and energy to argue with Coulter. Like trying to keep a four-year old boy from yanking his crank constantly. Instead what we're left with is the image of Coulter's minions standing below her gigantic pussy while she laughingly pisses down on them as they gratefully lap it up, drinking it in, using it to lubricate themselves as they jack off and finger themselves madly, closing their eyes and nodding in an orgy of hateful glee as she says things like "the U.S. military is killing thousands upon thousands of terrorists (described in the media as 'Iraqi civilians'...)"

Goddamnit, what scorn, what self-aggrandizement, what waste.

Ann Coulter Is Called a Bad Word Regarding Her Views on Our Neverending Abortion Battle

In the old days, the Rude Pundit would have just titled this "Why Ann Coulter Is a Cunt (Part 120,749)" and been done with it. But since the title of these here posts appear on people's home pages on their work computers, well, perhaps a bit of decorum is called for. "Cunt" is still "The Word That Dare Not Be Spoken or Seen Unless You're from Great Britain or Ireland, Where Everyone Calls Everyone Else 'Cunt' and No One Cares." For what it's worth, the following people are total cunts: Cliven Bundy, Donald Sterling, the entire prime time line-up of Fox "news," and Ted Cruz. That is not a complete list.

But Ann Coulter is a cunt because in her latest "column" (if by "column," you mean, "rabbit hole of razor blades"), she says something so easily disproven that it took the Rude Pundit about one second to do so. She stays obsessed with the way that death penalty opponents are making a legitimate big deal about the bad execution of Clayton Lockett. As the Rude Pundit pointed out last week, she seems to use the description of Lockett's terrible crimes as foreplay for a savage self-pleasuring. Then she goes off on how perhaps "liberals" (quotation marks since Coulter's fantasy liberals have as much to do with real liberals as Mickey Mouse has to do with real rodents) would be cool if prisoners on death row were executed by the same methods used for abortion.

Oh, ho, she's challenging us there, saying, "Maybe they -- and MSNBC's similarly high-minded Rachel Maddow -- should comfort themselves by thinking of Lockett's execution as a very, very, very late-term abortion. You know, the kind that liberal darling Wendy Davis filibustered for 11 hours to keep legal."

Then she asks, "Would the Times ever give as detailed a description of an abortion as it does for the execution of a remorseless killer?"

And that took about one second to answer in about ten different ways.

Here's the New York Times in 1995, describing so-called "partial-birth abortion": "[A] fetus at 20 weeks of gestation or more is partly delivered, feet first, and then to make it easier for the fetus to pass through the birth canal, the skull is collapsed." Talking about a bill banning the practice, the article says that it doesn't define "the specifics of inserting scissors into the neck to create a hole through which the brains can be suctioned out to collapse the skull."

Not graphic enough? Then check out this 2000 article by Linda Greenhouse on the debate over dilation and evacuation (D&E) and dilation and extraction (D&X) methods of late-term abortion: "In a D & E, the fetus is dismembered before being removed. By contrast, the 'intact D & X' collapses the fetal skull, minimizing possible damage to the woman's uterus and cervix." Oh, sorry. Does that one not work because it cares too much about the health of the woman?

How about we go Gosnell? In the Times' much-maligned-by-the-right coverage of the trial of killer Kermit Gosnell last year, his crime was described as "the murder of a baby born alive in a botched abortion, who prosecutors said would have survived if the doctor had not 'snipped' its neck with scissors."

What makes this notable cuntistry for Coulter is that she asks her question rhetorically, with the same dismissive rage with which she always writes, attitude that is a beard for ignorance. She pretends to be an expert. She pretends to have knowledge. Lots of people hear her and parrot what she says, and thus, once again, a lie becomes the truth no matter how many facts you throw in its path. (Oh, and, obviously, despite the best efforts of some of us, Coulter ain't going away).

There's this attitude towards pro-choice supporters and towards women who have decided to get abortions that we just don't understand what's happening. Missouri's legislature just passed a 72-hour waiting period on abortions. That means an adult woman, making a perfectly legal decision on her pregnancy and her body, has to go home or, if the clinic isn't in her hometown, go to another person's house or a motel, and wait three fucking days because...why? Because she hasn't thought about it? How patronizing can our legislatures get?

But the right wants us to focus on the gory details. For the vast majority of women ending pregnancies in clinics, they're not using third trimester or even late second trimester methods. They are using methods that don't have scissors or forceps or anything. After family planning counselor Emily Letts filmed her abortion, which showed Letts from the waist up and, yes, her smile during the procedure, conservatives were blowing up with rage. Christine Sisto at the National Review said that Letts didn't show us an "abortion." Some don't believe she actually had the procedure.

Sorry, anti-abortion activists, but unless what you wanted to see was a small metal tube inserted in Letts's vagina, most abortion procedures are clean and easy and safe. They don't involve dismembered body parts. They don't involve induced delivery. Most abortion is as simple as a quick procedure or a pill, with perhaps some residual bleeding after.

There's a sick desire from anti-abortion forces to make something grotesque out of something that isn't. It's to add to make women feel shame and stigmatizing them. They so desire to force women back to the era of abortion in the shadows.

Oh, by the way, the New York Times also described those procedures, too.

Why Ann Coulter Is a Cunt (Part 10,725 of a Neverending Series):
Because in her latest "column" (if by "column," you mean, "a collection of words spun from the salty tears of Indian orphans, the shiny blood of dead soldiers, and Sean Hannity's semen"), it isn't that Coulter makes a Slumdog Millionaire reference related to Bobby Jindal. (It's an easy and obvious joke that the Rude Pundit considered for yesterday, but quickly tossed aside as too easy and obvious.) It's not because she calls Nancy Pelosi "mentally retarded." It's not in the way she mocks the media's obsession with Barack Obama's race. No, it's because, in her increasingly crazed and desperate attempt to keep her demihuman cuntbeast readers salivating, she once again decides to beat up on those who are just doing their fuckin' jobs trying to make the world a better place.

Talking about Obama's praise for schoolteachers and their inclusion in the stimulus bill, Coulter squeals snatchishly, "Because nothing says 'economic stimulus' better than saving the jobs of lethargic incompetents who kick off at 2 p.m. every day and get summers off. Actually, that's not fair: Some teachers spend long hours after school having sex with their students." In some hellish dictionary, that line ought to be an example of the definition of "cunt."

As the Rude Pundit's said many a time, arguing with Ann Coulter is useless. It's like attempting to explain morality and ethics to a a child rapist/murderer while he's balls deep in the head of a dead boy. Even if he was paying attention, the action he's taking kind of makes the whole effort a sad waste of time.

Coulter loves to beat up on public schoolteachers. One might ask why pick on people who, with some terrible exceptions, yes, put in roughly ten hours a day between the actual schoolday, preparation, grading, and meetings, putting up with fucktard parents and apathetic kids, often in shitty, underfunded schools while being forced by conservatives to teach to tests that are mandated and that have virtually nothing to do with what and how one actually learns, people who are excoriated by the right for asking for a little job security and fair wages. Yeah, one might ask that. But, really, it's like asking why Coulter likes to use ribbed dildos made of puppy spines in a vain attempt to get some feeling in her calloused clit.

Yeah, Coulter spent a great deal of her book Godless attacking teachers. In fact, she loved what she wrote back in 2006 so very much, that she fucking quotes it extensively in this week's "column." No, one can't plagiarize oneself. But perhaps one ought to honestly present the source of statistic and facts and say they're a couple of years old:

For instance, in this, her February 26, 2009 scribbles, she says, "While 80 percent of the employees of private schools are teachers, only half the employees of public schools are."

In 2006's Godless, page 152, she wrote, "At private schools, 80 percent of the personnel are teachers. By contrast, at public schools, only 50 percent of the personnel are actual teachers." This statistic is from a 2005 New York Sun article, itself quoting a 1999 study. So Coulter is presenting information that's a decade old as new.

She also writes this week that, in fourth grade, "American students outperform most other countries in reading, math and science. Fourth-graders score in the 92nd percentile in science, the 58th percentile in math and the 70th percentile in reading, where they beat 26 of 35 countries, including Germany, France and Italy." This is verbatim, a cut and paste job from page 151 of Godless, not even her most recent goddamn book. And it's drawn from stats from 2000-2003.

Who's her fucking editors? It's one thing to make the same point over and over. It shows you have no other points to make. But to present information that's over 5 years old as new? That's just fucking lying. Then again, why just be a cunt when you can be a lying cunt?

Why Ann Coulter Is a Cunt (Dictator-Humping Edition):
Imagine for a moment what it must be like for Ann Coulter each week as she sits down to write her "column." You sift through the various cocktail napkins, toilet paper squares, and Prada receipts on which you scrawled the different bon mots about those silly Democrats, cutting little lines you conjured during the week and just had to scribble before you lost them. You look at the pile of shredded paper and get depressed, so you burn your left tit with your lit cigarette to inspire you. You take a gander at your recent columns to see just how bugfuck insane you actually got, not really remembering exactly what you wrote since it all gets dumped in a scotch haze, like all those cocks you have to keep on sucking - how can one keep track of which one belongs to which Murdoch or Ailes? Christ, you sigh, seeing how you recently wrote about what a great man Joseph McCarthy was, how you actually rewrote the poignant anti-Holocaust statement to make it refer to the alleged silencing of right-wing voices, saying, "First they came for Rush Limbaugh, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't Rush Limbaugh..."

Truly, and, indeed, it gets wearying, having to think about how to top yourself each and every week. You get frustrated and cut your thighs with a razor, frantically lubricating your twat with the blood so you can attempt a rough fingering of your calloused clit until suddenly inspiration strikes.

If anyone can point out any other way that Ann Coulter writes her columns, the Rude Pundit would be glad to hear it. For, logically, how else could she actually type (or dictate to a cowering assistant who has watched Coulter do all of the above) the following: "If Republicans end up with a divided convention between Mitt Romney and Rudy Giuliani, I say we pick Gen. Pervez Musharraf." What follows is a series of statements about Musharraf, praising him for imposing emergency rule, for shutting down the Supreme Court of Pakistan, and for ordering the police to beat rioting lawyers. And then, without any sense of irony, she says how great it is that Musharraf wants to make Pakistan a more democratic place. (Along with mocking Pakistani bathing habits.)

The Rude Pundit's not going to argue with Coulter's "points," because it is futile beyond futility to say that Coulter is wrong that the mainstream media hasn't criticized Benazir Bhutto, or that to compare Pervez Musharraf to Turkey's Mustafa Kemal Ataturk ("Pakistan's Ataturk is Gen. Musharraf") is like comparing Ann Coulter to Mark Twain. Coulter doesn't give a fuck about logic, facts, history, or truth. It is agitation for agitation's sake. And for profit's sake. If she doesn't slake her drooling fans' thirst for outrage, then she's just another used-up bimbo with Australian cum in her long blonde hair.

By the way, for a more realistic view of Musharraf, check out Ali Eteraz in The Guardian: "The current tyrant, meanwhile, is not only less popular than Bin Laden, but he is completely inept in counteracting terrorism. He has: failed to reform the madrassas; cultivated a Kangaroo Sharia court in his backyard for six months which he could use for political benefit; killed those that kept the Taliban at bay; considered appeasing the militants by letting them implement Sharia; turned Pakistan into a state sponsor of terrorism; made alliances with pro-Taliban parties; and even engaged in what are being called crimes against humanity. My editor at Jewcy reminded me that Musharraf is so frightening to terrorists that al-Qaida mastermind Khaled Sheikh Mohammad literally lived within 10 miles of him. This is the man that John Negroponte at the State Department considers 'indispensable.'"

The man whose stubby leg Coulter humps like a bitch in heat.

Why Ann Coulter Is a Cunt, Part 3507:
When the Rude Pundit was a freshman in college, he had a roommate who was an asshole frat guy and the kind of Deadhead who loved the band for the drugs, but was hard-pressed to name a real album by Jerry and the boys beyond Greatest Hits. The Rude Pundit had one request, a simple one, he felt: no dope smoking in the dorm room. It wasn't for any bullshit reasons of morality or fear of the Man; the Rude Pundit, who was not lackin' fer mind-alteration, just didn't want his clothes to smell like pot smoke all day long. The roommate, who regularly dropped acid and snorted coke sittin' on his loft bed or at his desk, though he never attained the state of overdose that would have given the Rude Pundit a private room, could not abide this simple request. Each time it happened, the Rude Pundit would tell him again, a little more angrily, "Dude, c'mon."

Then one day the Rude Pundit walked in after a particularly hard Statistics exam to find the stoned roomie laying on the floor and ashes and roaches all over the Rude Pundit's bed. The Rude Pundit snapped, and he dragged the roommate up and started beating the fuck out of him, tossin' him around like a rag doll, slappin' him in his mohawked head. He was a limp, babbling noodle, tryin' to explain why he'd fucked up the Rude Pundit's bed, but the explanations didn't matter as foot was put to ass: the bed was fucked up and the clothes stunk. It was a pathetic fight, not much of one at all, with the roomie barely able to put up his hands to stop the blows, but you know what? It felt soooo fuckin' good, man, like the first cold beer in a bar in Little Five Points after walkin' through the hot streets of Atlanta on an August day. And it was easy. Just like, well, shit, just like critiquing an Ann Coulter "column." So, c'mon over to the barrel and let's start shootin'.

For in her latest "column" (if by "column," you mean "the blood blots of self-mutilated flesh from a loathsome, foamingly rabid she-wolf on shredded toilet paper"), Coulter packs in so much bullshit about Iraq that you can see the turds slipping through the cracks. It's useless to take on her "argument" that much good has been done through the war because one can't see where the spin and lies stop and the delusion begins.

She even drags out the corpse of the dead connection between Iraq and al-Qaeda and Niger uranium: "As we now know, Saddam Hussein was working with al-Qaida and was trying to acquire long-range missiles from North Korea and enriched uranium from Niger." You may do a double take and think, "Um, forged documents? No real contact?" But you'd be caught then in the web of inference and bugfuck nuttery that is the cuntistry of Ann Coulter. However, shit, since Coulter is the same kind of whoredog for the Bush administration as Bob Woodward and Judith Miller (it's a question of presentation, not degree), here's Donald Rumsfeld to Wolf Blitzer's question about the alleged nexus of swarthy eeevil: "Zarqawi was physically in Baghdad." It's like saying that because you have a toothbrush at your girlfriend's place, you wanna move in. In other words, really, and, c'mon, is that the best you got?

But Coulter's bizarre rah-rahing, like the cheerleader of the damned, continues. She shakes her little pom-poms for all the elections and, in general, behaves as if Iraq is just a car bomb or two away from gettin' all that nasty resistance out of its lil' ol' system.

Then she gets to the real blood and meat of her "argument," that those who advocate for withdrawal, immediate or otherwise, are traitors: "It is simply a fact that Democrats like Murtha are encouraging the Iraqi insurgents when they say the war is going badly and it's time to bring the troops home." So, like, these'd be the same insurgents that Iraqi leaders just declared a legitmate resistance and that U.S. soldiers are legitimate targets? Fuck, encouragement is havin' something to shoot at and blow up. And how does Coulter know that dissent in America gives comfort to the enemy? Why, 'cause former North Vietnamese soldiers, who, you know, would have no reason to sow conflict in the U.S., said that war protesters during the Vietnam War gave them the warm fuzzies.

But once Ann Coulter gets somethin' in her craw, she ain't done with it until she's masticated that fucker with all ten sets of her viperous teeth: "The Democrats are giving aid and comfort to the enemy for no purpose other than giving aid and comfort to the enemy. There is no plausible explanation for the Democrats' behavior other than that they long to see U.S. troops shot, humiliated, and driven from the field of battle." And, most bizarre, she holds Democrats in contempt for voting down the un-debated House Republican stunt bill on immediate withdrawal from Iraq: "They fill the airwaves with treason, but when called to vote on withdrawing troops, disavow their own public statements. These people are not only traitors, they are gutless traitors." Well, fuck it. Take it to its logical conclusion. Round us up and waterboard us, bitch, 'cause we're part of this country, too.

You can dismiss Coulter's mad brain as a belfry filled with those flying rats, but she is the seething evil id of the right, daring others to cross her line. It's sad, too, really, how hard she works to show she's got the biggest balls in the room. For the only thing that pleases the monsters in Ann Coulter's brain, the ones that press her to go further, be more wicked, press more buttons, is more dead, more blood, more bodies, and it doesn't matter whose they are as long as they provide sweet sustenance.

A Nasty Word Is Used About Ann Coulter When You Click

Ann Coulter Is Still a Cunt (Historical Revisionism Edition):
(Note: Yes, "cunt." Now let's move along here...)

One may wonder why, oh, why, in the long sunset of her career of befouling the airwaves with the wretched perfume of racism, fascism, semen breath, and cigarettes, it's even relevant to take down Ann Coulter, the once-proud banner waver of complete bugfuckery on the right. Wielding her fake intellect like a blunt dildo that she writhes on until she's rendered her clit numb, Coulter is not only long past her due date, she's been dropping into the bottomless pit of irrelevancy for a few years as she sees herself eclipsed by the Cupps and Loesches and whatever other shiny dipshits they can shove in front of a camera to say vile things.

Here's the deal, sweet liberals: What she says is still often a bellwether for the blathering you'll hear from the nutzoid mutants running around in Congress now.

So, in her latest "column" (if by "column," you mean, "An unending stream of vomit fed into the mouths of insatiable idiots"), Coulter revises the last 50 or 60 years of American history in order to blame Democrats and/or liberals for every bad foreign policy decision the country has bumblefucked into. Now, the Rude Pundit could go through it and offer factual rebuttals or nuance to her dull cudgel of cherry-picked information. Like, say, when Coulter offers, "Nixon came in and honorably ended the Democrats' disastrous handling of the Vietnam War by signing the Paris Peace Accords in January 1973." Now, one might ask, "If Nixon was so hot to end the war, why did it take him four years to do it?" Or perhaps one might mention that the protests against the war had a mighty effect. Or maybe one could bring up the illegal attack on Cambodia.

But that's playing on her field. And you're never gonna win when you've got an opponent who lives on gin and chewing gum.

Instead, let's use a picture to show what a fucking liar this fucking cunt is. Coulter scrawls about Iran, "By giving Islamic fanatics their first nation-state, [Jimmy] Carter produced the global Islamofascist movement we're still dealing with today." And then she blows Reagan's corpse because he "destroyed the Soviet Union."

To that, the Rude Pundit offers this:

That's Saint Reagan meeting with what he and the right wingers referred to as Afghan "freedom fighters," the Mujahideen. Jimmy Carter used the CIA to help arm them just before their war with the Soviet Union started in 1979. Then Reagan upped the amount of aid for a proxy war with the Soviets, all part of the "Reagan Doctrine" of hating on the USSR.

Oh, the Mujahideen? After the war was over, some of them became terrorists known as "al-Qaeda." And, boy, did they have some cool weapons to play with. The kindest interpretation you can give is that Reagan used Afghanistan in order to bankrupt the Soviet Union. But even under that fantasy, you'd be hard-pressed to deny that 9/11 happened because of Ronald Reagan.

Coulter wants history to be so fucking easy. Attack Clinton over Somalia but leave out Kosovo. Say that Obama withdrew the troops from Iraq on his own when, really, the Iraqi government kicked us out. We on the left read Coulter and scoff and humph and wonder who the fuck could be so fucking stupid as to believe this bullshit that's as obvious as actual shit from a bull in the middle of your dining room.

But the truth is that too many Americans want to walk up to Coulter and take a deep whiff of her ass leavings because, really, if they don't, then they'd have to face reality, that their deepest held beliefs about the innate evil of the left and the innate greatness of the right are just the greatest joke ever played on them.

(Note again: If any of you poor, poor dears are offended by the use of the word "cunt," here is how Coulter concludes about the Iraq war: "The Iraq War turned every Middle Eastern despot into President Bush's bitch. But now Obama is their bitch. " What word would you use for her?)

Why Ann Coulter Is a Cunt, Final Edition(?):
Recently, cars in the Rude Pundit's neighborhood were papered with flyers from a white supremacist group, protesting the "Jewish control" of the media and President Bush's "policies" toward illegal immigrants, as well as asking the confusing question of why no one cares about a crime when black men rape and murder. The flyers were idiotic, soon to be airplanes and garbage, and one quick glance at the website of the group demonstrated that it was, indeed, a racist, Aryan movement-aligned, sub-KKK bunch of poor white dumbfucks easily manipulated by the one of 'em that had a thought one day.

The Rude Pundit didn't discuss it when it happened, and he won't mention the name of the "organization" (which is a loose term, at best, since this could be a pair of assholes who know how to use office technology) because, simply, why fuckin' bother? Sure, sure, we can make a case to say that, sociologically, this is so interesting, and that, politically, this represents a surfacing of what many on the right actually think. But, really, and c'mon, why give 'em any fuckin' credit? If some nutzoid on the corner wants to scream, "Niggerspickikeniggerspickike," well, he's really got no actual point, does he?

In her latest "column" (if by "column," you mean, "Tourette's-like outbursts of deranged diarrhea emanating from the sphincter of a nicotine-stained conservative meat puppet"), Ann Coulter may as well be that nutzoid on the corner. The blonde dye chemicals and hair straightener must have finally eaten their way to her brain, for Coulter just goes completely Nazi on the Muslim world. "The 'offense to Islam' ruse is merely an excuse for Muslims to revert to their default mode: rioting and setting things on fire," Coulter coughs up like a rancid hairball.

Later she says, "[O]ur motto should be after 9/11: Jihad monkey talks tough; jihad monkey takes the consequences." (It's actually a kinder, gentler variation on her speech at the Conservative Political Action Conference, which was "Raghead talks tough...") And after the pure, unironic racism of the remark, Coulter reverts to the oh-so-coy-jokey-c'mon-we-can-all-say-racist-shit mode she uses, like a seductive toss of her hair or well-timed re-cross of her (disturbingly twig-like) legs: "Sorry, I realize that's offensive. How about 'camel jockey'? What? Now what'd I say? Boy, you tent merchants sure are touchy. Grow up, would you?"

That's the default setting for conservatives: see, they're the grown-ups. Those who would believe that they are racist, despicable wads of fuck whose policies have succeeded in dragging the entire world into a cesspool of violence and hatred are mere children compared to the adult way of viewing the world, which seems to be the very mature and nuanced "We good; they bad; good hate bad; good kill bad; Bush smash."

Coulter's become pathetic. It's been that way for a while. You ever see her in interviews? If the host goes off into a topic that wasn't discussed before airtime (in other words, one she didn't practice for) she looks confused and addled, like she's been hit in the head with a crowbar and is sitting there, bleeding, wondering where the blood is coming from as it cakes in her hair. Coulter's like Jennifer Connelly's character towards the end of Requiem for a Dream. Connelly's fallen drug addict, Marion, desperate for some smack, goes to see a dealer to offer him sex in exchange for dope. The dealer, Big Tim, offers her wine, compliments her looks, gets her to relax, before taking out his dick and saying, "I know it's purty, baby, but I didn't take it out for air." It's sad, but you just shake your head at the fallen, wasted humanity.

Now that Coulter has decided to embrace open racism, she's worthless, just another cocksucker, and why should we even bother paying attention. Sure, she had a prime spot at the CPAC, talking to the frothing crowd, but, really, they'd've been just as happy seeing Coulter and Michelle Malkin goin' ass to ass on a double-headed dildo.

Why Ann Coulter Is a Cunt, Part 45,307 (with a Note on Fox "news" Biases):
You know how you know you've become completely and utterly irrelevant as a writer? When you're still arguing a twenty year-old point. For in her latest "column" (if by "column," you mean, "a neo-Norma Desmond's diary of utter madness"), Ann Coulter re-re-re-re-argues the Willie Horton ad from the Bush the Less Stupid vs. Dukakis campaign of 1988. Why? Because Keith Olbermann and Chris Matthews said it first. No, seriously, Coulter, who is at this point just a twig-shaped dildo specially designed to fit Sean Hannity's ass, spends half her weekly column on her spin on the "facts" of the Horton case only because Olbermann and Matthews mentioned it in passing while discussing Fox "news" and its anti-Obama bias.

The Rude Pundit won't waste time and space to dispute Coulter's ranting except to say this: At this point, twenty years on, at least be honest about it. Coulter says, "The Bush campaign commercial about Dukakis' furlough program never showed a picture of Horton. In fact, the actors playing 'criminals' passing through a revolving door in the ad were all white" (screeching emphasis is all Ann). The problem is that when people say, "Willie Horton ad," as Olbermann and Matthews did, they're not referring to the Bush campaign's revolving door ad, which doesn't mention Willie Horton. No, they're more than likely referring to the Willie Horton ad, the ad that's about Willie Horton, that features two pictures of Willie Horton. (If she were a real writer or if her syndicate gave a shit about anything but the meager bit of cash she still brings them, it's really the kind of factual error that demands a correction.)

But it's pathetic, really, truly, in a "Look at the rabbits, Lenny" kind of way, how now, with Ted Kennedy dead and the Chappaquiddick arrows gone, Coulter's quiver of reference points is getting emptier and emptier. All she's really got left is passive aggressive Bill Clinton sex remarks. Reading her columns these days, now that she's been out-batshitted by Glenn Beck and out-babed by Sarah Palin, is not unlike listening to a toothless meth addicted woman at a bar tell you how hot she used to be and won't you please let her suck your dick for a dollar.

Coulter was ostensibly writing about how Fox "news" is not really biased against the Obama administration. She says, "The Obama administration has attacked Fox News in order to prevent government corruption stories broken on Fox from bleeding into the other media, which are all-consumed with daily updates on Levi Johnston's Playgirl spread and Carrie Prejean's breast implants." It's almost depressingly obvious to say that, according to Nexis, while CNN actually did have stories air repeatedly (mostly the same report) on those topics, MSNBC and Fox had the same amount on Johnston, and Fox had more stories than MSNBC on Prejean's tits.

Regarding this whole kerfuffle over whether the White House saying that Fox "news" isn't really a news outlet, but a propaganda wing of the Republican Party, was this up for discussion? Considering what whiny little bitches Fox people have been about the whole thing, it's pretty damn hilarious that what the Obama administration ended up revealing is not that the President has thin skin. No, it showed that Fox and its hosts and reporters and, by extension, Rupert Murdoch are faux bullies: one little nudge and these pussies go running around telling everyone that they were pushed down.

By the way, the fucking strangest thing in Coulter's column? This description of Daily Kos's founder: "Frito Bandito-accented Markos Moulitsas." Not even remotely true. Criticize away on Markos. Hell, have at it as racist as you like, if that's your thing. But at least pretend like you're actually listening. Oh, wait, that's right. Facts are to Ann Coulter as coyote piss is to deer.

Why Ann Coulter Is a Cunt, Part 385 (With a Side Note on the Right Wing Disarray Over Gannon/Guckert):
In her latest "column" (if by "column," you mean "the crayon-scratched doodles and scrawls of a conservative meat puppet"), Ann Coulter goes after the bad, bad liberals who demand answers over why the fuck an assfucker for hire with an assumed name was given a neverending series of day press passes to the White House despite having, first, no press background, no job with a press organization, and no discernible experience other than fucking men in the ass for money, and, later, shillling for a right wing news site fronting for GOPUSA.

Ann's in a tizzy, barely able to vomit out the first retch of hate before the second is choking her. Let's do away with this quickly before they become talking points for Scarborough, O'Reilly, and, later, the so-called "mainstream" media. Coulter defends Gannyguck by saying that "Gannon didn't write about gays." Well, no, actually, Gannyguck "wrote" quite a bit about gays, including an article saying that John Kerry might be considered "the first gay president" because of Kerry's support of gay rights. Not to mention the anti-gay marriage articles he compiled from press releases and such.

Coulter says that "liberals expressed shock and dismay that Gannon's real name is 'James Guckert.'" And, since Coulter never met a hyperbole that she wouldn't hump like it was Joe McCarthy's Commie-slammin' microphone and never met a fact that she couldn't manipulate, she compares Gannon getting into the White House under a fake name with this: "How did Gary Hartpence, Billy Blythe and John Kohn (Gary Hart, Bill Clinton and John Kerry) run for president under invented names?" Christ, this is so tedious, like trying to give an unlubricated Coulter head for hours without stabbing yourself on her hip bones.

Here we go: Gary Hart and Bill Clinton legally changed their names, Clinton doing it for his mother's sake after she re-married while he was still very young. John Kerry's grandfather changed his name from Kohn to Kerry to avoid anti-semitism in turn-of-the-century Austria. (The Rude Pundit uses Encarta's website here to demonstrate that even a fucking idiot could get the story straight.) So if Hart, Clinton, and Kerry had to show their driver's licenses, they would show their legal names. Please, don't let the right attempt to conflate this with having a fake name and access to power that so few others are allowed.

The right-wing media, though, doesn't know what the fuck to do with Gannyguck. They're stuck trying to downplay the prostitution angle by saying that it's Gannyguck's "private life." Fox "News" runs an editorial that calls Gannyguck's whoring "sexual peculiarities" and saying that it proves the left's intolerance. That's a fuckin' bizarro way to spin this: that liberals hate gay prostitutes. But over at the generally insane conservative World Net Daily, Joseph Farah is pissed about the White House's degradation of the press through the free admittance of a fake reporter to the press pool. (All this and more is available through your source for all things Gannyguck, AMERICAblog.)

Speaking of batshit insanity, the kind that stretches its spine trying to lick its own taint, rude Australian reader Wal C. wrote to that eminent right wing blog, Powerline, about Gannyguck. After quoting a Rude Pundit post on why Gannyguck matters, Wal C. wrote, "They've turned the White House into a whorehouse, and your incomprehensible defense of Guckert and the sleazy administration who utilized him is almost as despicable as the pathetic, moral-less morons you're defending."

The Powerline people are notoriously thin-skinned, especially considering that they proudly gave themselves the gayest pseudonyms in all of political blogdom: the Hindrocket and the Big Trunk, with handy phallic pictures of a thrusting rocket and an elephant holding his trunk erect. This is not to mention the demonic owl with its legs spread wide (the symbol of the writer known as the "Deacon"), as if saying, "Suck my wise owlish cock, fuckers. Please?"

The Hindrocket (which the Rude Pundit cannot type without giggling) wrote back to Wal C.: "Wal, you are so fucking stupid you don't even qualify as spam. Never try to communicate with us again. You are too dumb to participate in a rational conversation. You are a stupid fucking lefty; that's your problem, not ours. Get lost." It was signed "John H." (Frankly, this seems like Powerline's form letter to liberals, which is a charming notion.)

Yep, combativeness, defensiveness, and lashing out are sure signs that the adherents to an ideology are filled with doubt, self-loathing, and Nixonian paranoia, afraid of a time when their brand of hate doesn't rule the land.

Why Ann Coulter Is a Cunt, Part 1,390,873: Hackdom Edition:
Let us take a break from protest violence and health care reform stupidity and blizzards and typhoons to enjoy the exquisite thrill of kicking someone when she's down:

How awful it must be to be Ann Coulter, especially right now. On that horrible precipice that, to the disgrace of our sexist society at large, many women face of having to choose between aging gracefully and openly or becoming a Joan Rivers-esque plastic surgery gargoyle. Looking around as she sees that her brand of crazy has been co-opted from her by younger, hotter, and dumber upstarts or one-upped by the even crazier, like Glenn Beck and his conspiracy theories so barking-at-one's-own-shit insane that UFO conspiracy theorists say, "Whoa, motherfucker, that's nuts." Yeah, one might feel pity for Ann Coulter if she didn't have a long, long history of being such a cunt.

For, indeed, in her latest "column" (if by "column," you mean, "the mangled blood coughs of a rhetorical emphysemic on her last bits of lung"), Coulter, who, as the Rude Pundit demonstrated a few years ago, likes to plagiarize the fuck out of people in order to avoid doing any work, cuts and pastes a large section of one of her "books," which itself was a cut-and-paste job of a column. No, let's put that more clearly: the vast majority of her new column is merely shit she published three years ago.

From her new bit of sputum: "In a comprehensive study of all public, multiple-shooting incidents in America between 1977 and 1999, the highly regarded economists John Lott and Bill Landes found that concealed-carry laws were the only laws that had any beneficial effect." She then goes on to list various incidents, including "In 1998, two students in Craighead County, Arkansas, killed five people, including four little girls, before the killers decided to stop and attempt an escape." Her subject for the piece? How wimpy liberals don't understand the need for high-capacity magazines for guns, even if Jared Loughner used one in Tucson.

From her 2008 tome If Democrats Had Any Brains, They'd Be Republicans, page 123-124: "In a comprehensive study of all public, multiple-shooting incidents in America between 1977 and 1999, the highly regarded economists John Lott and Bill Landes found that concealed-carry laws were the only laws that had any beneficial effect on saving lives." She then goes on to list various incidents, including "In 1998, two students in Craighead County, Arkansas, killed five people, including four little girls, before deciding to attempt an escape." Her subject for the chapter? Concealed carry laws.

Again, this ain't about a single line. It's about the majority of the new column.

Oh, wait, speaking of a single line, there's also this from a 2009 piece titled "Liberal Victimhood: A Game You Can Play at Home": "In a comprehensive study of all public multiple shooting incidents in America between 1977 and 1999, economists John Lott and Bill Landes found that the only public policy that reduced both the incidence and casualties of such shootings were concealed-carry laws." The subject of the piece? Oh, who the fuck knows.

And the origin of the whole thing? A 2007 column on gun-free zones around schools, where Coulter "wrote," surprisingly, "In a comprehensive study of all public, multiple-shooting incidents in America between 1977 and 1999, the inestimable economists John Lott and Bill Landes found that concealed-carry laws were the only laws that had any beneficial effect." (By the way, this study has been mostly discredited.)

Gotta say, when this she-beast gets her teeth into a piece of information, she not only doesn't let it go, but she repeats it in the exact same way every goddamn time she uses it. If Coulter were to be held to even the lowest expectations for a supposedly syndicated writer (although, seriously, does anyone's newspaper carry her? Last the Rude Pundit heard, she was in two), she would still be called "a hack." Yeah, you can quote yourself. Yeah, it's might or might not be technically plagiarism. But it's unethical as hell to pass off old work as new, to not even mention that you're just pasting previously published shit and go fuck yourself if you care (which most of her remaining readers won't).

So, one could ask, and one should, "Why the fuck bother? If Coulter's way past her expiration date and getting lumpy and stinky, why not just walk away?" And the answer is simple: because fuck her. Because she's responsible in no small part for our current disgusting state of political argument. Because you don't get a free pass. Even if, sometimes, the only way to get revenge on the monsters in this world is to piss into their graves.

Why Ann Coulter Is a Cunt, Part 20,122 (Murder Advocacy Edition):
Here's how the Rude Pundit pictures evenings at Ann Coulter's home: Coulter, wearing only a spiked dog collar and a leather bustier with swastikas on the nipples, watches Tivo'd interviews of herself on Fox "news," the only place that'll have her anymore, photo of Joe McCarthy gazing at her from the mantle, a dildo made of her father's femur next to it, her laptop on the glass coffee table in front of her on a bookmarked Amazon page of her latest "book," the better to keep hitting "refresh" so she can manically see the rise and fall of her rankings, sucking down straight scotch from a tumbler, snorting coke off a copy of Godless. She's rubbing her pussy with a riding crop until she's gotten herself good and soppy, and that just sets something off, triggers some impulse in her brain, and she fuckin' loses it. She turns up the volume all the way and she wails like a banshee in the fog at the ceilling. She slams her glass against the table, shattering the top, she grabs one of the larger shards, and she goes to work on her thighs. Fuck, yeah, over just-scarred-over previous wounds, she cuts with one hand and fucks herself with the handle of the riding crop, sometimes taking it out to slap her ass, eventually shoving it in her asshole until she comes and shits and bleeds all over her leather sofa, yelping and barking the entire time, and then laying there in her shit and blood, she grabs the scotch and pours it over her legs, the burn giving her one more sphincter-puckering orgasm. And then she picks up her laptop, brushes the splinters and pieces off it, and gets to work writing.

For in her latest "column" (if by "column," you mean, "see the above"), Coulter doesn't "imply" that doctors who do abortions should. She pretty much says they should be: "If you don't believe in shooting abortionists, then don't shoot one." See? Isn't Coulter's cuntistry clever? She's turning around a pro-choice motto to say that shooting abortion providers should be legal and safe.

As ever, it's useless to argue with Coulter, who in most of the column repeats everything we've heard before, about how recently murdered Dr. George Tiller contributed money to Democrats (which apparently is wrong to Coulter, although we wouldn't want any rules on campaign funding, would we?), and speaks of Tiller as running an "abattoir" to murder babies. For how do you argue with someone who makes this logical leap:

"For years, we've had to hear about the grave threat that Americans might overreact to a terrorist attack committed by 19 Muslims shouting 'Allahu akbar' as they flew commercial jets into American skyscrapers. That would be the equivalent of 19 pro-lifers shouting 'Abortion kills a beating heart!' as they gunned down thousands of innocent citizens in Wichita, Kan."

The levels of the piquant mixture of hate and crazy there are off the chart.

And correcting Coulter is like correcting a cat. Cat don't care, man, cat don't care, and cat owners just think that's endearing, like Coulter's readers. So when Coulter says of Tiller's church (where he was, you know, shot), "The official Web page of the ELCA instructs: 'A developing life in the womb does not have an absolute right to be born,'" you can try. You can say, "Well, actually, the context of the quote is a discussion of rights, and the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America website makes this morally complex statement:

"The language used in discussing abortion should ignore neither the value of unborn life nor the value of the woman and her other relationships. It should neither obscure the moral seriousness of the decision faced by the woman nor hide the moral value of the newly conceived life. Nor is it helpful to use the language of 'rights' in absolute ways that imply that no other significant moral claims intrude. A developing life in the womb does not have an absolute right to be born, nor does a pregnant woman have an absolute right to terminate a pregnancy. The concern for both the life of the woman and the developing life in her womb expresses a common commitment to life. This requires that we move beyond the usual 'pro-life' versus 'pro-choice' language in discussing abortion."

(The whole page is actually a pretty amazing discussion of abortion within a fairly conservative Christian church.)

No, no, all of this is rather useless, other than to say that at some point, someone is responsible for Scott Roeder's act beyond the simple savagery of an individual. Hell, if not O'Reilly, why not Coulter? Especially when she says, "As long as we're deciding who does and doesn't have an 'absolute right to be born,' who's to say late-term abortionists have an 'absolute right' to live?"

Let's end this with a letter from rude reader JC, who is from Wichita, Kansas:
"For some few years I volunteered as an escort at Dr. Tiller’s and several other clinics. I didn’t know the good doctor well, but met with him on several occasions and was impressed with his kindness and the care he obviously felt for the women who needed his services.

"Of course I have been heartbroken by his assassination, but I’m not so full of hate towards his killer. I’ve seen too many of his kind on the lines; in fact I remember seeing him. We knew Mr. Roeder as 'Prom Queen' from the flowers he usually carried there, and the screaming fits he would throw when approached by escorts. He was one of many not-too-bright mentally ill recruited by various self-appointed fundie leaders who groomed them to scream the threats they themselves were so careful not to utter aloud.

"I’m pretty sure that he has been exploited again to shoot Dr. Tiller. I don’t know who is using him this time- when I saw him, he was in Troy Newman’s stable of nuts, but the fundie leaders are an incestuous bunch who tend to swap followers as needed.

"According to papers Roeder filed today, his possessions amount to a 16yr.-old Taurus and $10, and he only works occasionally at minimum-wage jobs. Yet he managed to finance several 400-mile round trips to Wichita from the KC area in the last month to case the church and know Dr. Tiller by sight, bought a handgun, gas and meals etc. Also, he asked- begged- for bail to be set today, despite his total lack of assets. Obviously, the poor bastard expects someone to post it, all of which leads me to believe that he is not the solitary nutcase the fundies claim he is.

"Somebody had to put him up to it, help him plan it and pay his expenses, and will now feed him to the sharks. Hopefully, and maybe with a bit of psych help, he will realize how he was used and name names."

Why Ann Coulter Is Still a Cunt, Part 6:
Because at the end of her recent "column" (and that would be assuming a lot, since an editorial column is, right or wrong, usually a well-reasoned, rational attempt at some kind of point of view, not simply the mad rantings of someone who, by all rights, should be getting sodomized regularly by the underpaid orderlies at a mental ward) Coulter calls for violence against the Democrats. Yep, that's right kids. This is after a long, fart-filled shit of a column where she reduces every Democratic candidate for President to his or her grotesque caricature, including a section we'll just call "Fun With Jews."

In this part, Coulter cites the ways that several candidates assert Jewish street cred: "There's Joe Lieberman: Always Jewish. Wesley Clark: Found Out His Father Was Jewish in College. John Kerry: Jewish Since He Began Presidential Fund-Raising. Howard Dean: Married to a Jew. Al Sharpton: Circumcised." Now, leaving out the obvious question of why skinny white Ann Coulter is thinking about the shape of Al Sharpton's black cock, one has to ask if she (or any conservative columnist, for that matter) would ever make a list of Republicans and cite how they scramble to out-Christian each other to the point where you think they wanna take the nails out of Jesus and lick his wounds. One might want to ask that, but, then again, one would have to be dealing with a sane person, not a woman who is so batshit out of her mind and full of said batshit that she lumps Israel-loving Lieberman in with those who want "to disguise the fact that the Democrats would allow the state of Israel to perish as Palestinian suicide bombers slaughter Jewish women and children." 'Cause, you know, you always want Ann Coulter on your side to give your movement credibility.

Which brings us to the last line that this odious whore writes: "If the Democrats start extolling you – get a gun." The assumption here, of course, is that it's okay to kill Democrats (which is just logical in Coulterworld, since Treason was the title of her last "book," and it's a crime punishable by death in America). So, like, if someone, say, like, drags Coulter by her blonde roots out into an alley and puts three bullets in the back of her skull, that'd be just jim-fucking-dandy and hunky-goddamn-dory by the parameters she has set. And while blood soaks her designer clothes, the gunperson can just look at Coulter and say, "Oh, I'm sorry, was that whole killing thing a joke?"

Why Ann Coulter Is a Cunt, Part 2156 of an Endless Series:
Because in her latest "column" (if by "column," you mean, "the deranged yowls of a ranting banshee driven mad by the seepage of blonde-dye chemicals into her brain"), Coulter essentially calls for Jeb Bush to use the "military" to keep Terri Schiavo alive. Did you really not expect it to come to this?

In much the same way that the Republicans keep claiming they, the party of Bush, are the party of Lincoln, as if the calculated Republican effort to drive a wedge between red and blue states wouldn't make Lincoln shoot himself before Booth got the chance, Coulter compares Dixiecrat Orval Faubus to Bill Clinton in degrading all Democrats. Here's Coulter weaving her magic in equating the National Guard called in to prevent black children from attending school in Little Rock in 1957 and the INS taking Elian Gonzales back to his father: "Democratic Gov. Orval Faubus called out the Arkansas National Guard expressly for purposes of defying rulings of the U.S. Supreme Court and lower federal courts. The decadent buffoon Bill Clinton sent armed agents from the INS to seize a small boy from an American family – despite rulings by the majestic and infallible Florida courts granting custody of the boy to that very family." Of course, Coulter, in mythologizing the Gonzalez debacle, leaves out that the INS took the boy because he was an illegal alien taken away from his father and that every federal court upheld the Clinton administration on the issue.

But, oh, how Coulter likes Ike. She is practically creaming in her Gucci jeans at the thought of brave Ike, sending in the 101st Airborne to enforce the Supreme Court's Brown v. Board of Education decision. Ike, who said in 1956, "The peace we seek and need means much more than mere absence of war. It means the acceptance of law, and the fostering of justice, in all the world," would have bitch-slapped every single Republican (and a number of Democrats) on Capitol Hill for the war in Iraq, not to mention the Schiavo bill. Coulter loves to conflate, so conflate away: "Minutes later, Democrats pronounced the Arkansas public schools a 'hopeless quagmire' and demanded to know what Ike's exit strategy was." Jesus, sometimes Coulter's subtle, dry sense of humor makes the Rude Pundit wanna vomit in her Prada purse.

After blathering some nonsense about the left's new "embrace" of federalism and dissing the judiciary as some outlaw radical regime living in the heart of our beautiful culture-of-life-infused nation, Coulter gets to the real point: calling for armed intervention. "President Andrew Jackson is supposed to have said of a Supreme Court ruling he opposed: 'Well, John Marshall has made his decision, now let him enforce it.' The court's ruling was ignored. And yet, somehow, the republic survived," she belches forth. That decision, Worcester v. Georgia, which Jackson ignored, said that the Georgia state government did not have authority over Native American lands, that only the federal government did. Jackson, the old Injun killer, didn't give a rat's ass about the rights of the Cherokee when whites wanted to take their good farm land. He let the state remove the Indians and take their land and send them on their Trail of Tears to Oklahoma.

But Coulter won't let something like "facts" and "history" fuck up a good analogy: "If Gov. Jeb Bush doesn't say something similar to the Florida courts that have ordered Terri Schiavo to die, he'll be the second Republican governor disgraced by the illiterate ramblings of a state judiciary." In Coulter's bizarro world of civics, Jeb Bush would be like Jackson or Ike in his actions, not like, say, another governor, Orval Faubus.

Coulter is clearly implying Jeb should amp this up a few dozen notches: The only action that Jeb could take if he says what Jackson says is to send in some troops to enforce his words, to confront the police, who are, in essence, an arm of the judiciary. The money part of this would be if Jeb Bush did order in the National Guard soldiers and then discovered they were all in Iraq. Or maybe they could just send in a bunch of paid Republican operatives with a feeding tube.

So, in brief, in the course of a single column, Coulter puts the powers of governors and presidents on an equal plain; supports the Florida courts (in Gonzalez) before degrading them (in Schiavo); says force is good to uphold the law and force is good to defy the law; says force is bad to uphold the law and force is bad to defy the law; and shits herself with glee at her own power to string together a barely cogent thought. Somewhere, William F. Buckley is rolling over in his grave (yes, the Rude Pundit knows).

Oh, that other Republican governor Coulter was referring to? Here's Ann: "Gov. Mitt Romney will never recover from his acquiescence to the Massachusetts Supreme Court's miraculous discovery of a right to gay marriage." Coulter would have wildly fingered herself if she could have seen Romney standing in front of the Boston courthouse, surrounded by the National Guard, refusing to allow two men or two women to simply get a marriage license.

Why Ann Coulter Is Still a Cunt, Part 37:
Oh, shit, Ann Coulter wants to fuck Ronnie's corpse. She wants to drag him out of his California resting place, prop up his dick like a tomato vine, tying it to a stick, and fuck, fuck, fuck away until she's bleeding, screaming with pain and orgasm, and she can say, "Look, Gipper, my blood is now a part of you for eternity. Dontcha just love me, Gipper?" And if she has to, she'll break his bones so she can move his arm to gently pull aside her sweaty blonde locks, as if the 40th President is telling her, "There you go again, Ann." Oh, how Coulter will smile, weak from her still bleeding pussy. She wants to rub that hand all over her, take the thumb and forefinger to pinch her cold nipples. God, how she'll shiver, how she'll shake, how she'll sob that she didn't get him in his last days so he could plant his seed into her fallow womb.

It's because of that whore Nancy, you know. Or at least Coulter seems to think so in her latest "column" where she attacks Nancy Reagan for her support of federal funding for stem cell research. But, then again, Coulter says, "Someone persuaded poor, dear Nancy Reagan that research on human embryos might have saved her Ronnie from Alzheimer's. Now the rest of us are supposed to shut up because the wife of America's greatest president (oh, save your breath, girls!) supports stem-cell research . . . She'd probably support harvesting full-grown, living humans if it would bring back Ronnie."

Now the Rude Pundit is no fan of Nancy Reagan, and he loves a good catfight. And, in fact, Coulter makes a point (oh, save your breath, girls) when she takes moderate commentators (she calls them "liberal," but, really, no) to task for lionizing Reagan for "reaching out" to Democrats. Coulter even offers examples that, in another context, could come from a left-wing commentary on el Gippo.

But let us not drag out Ronnie's corpse to smack around one last time. Let us instead talk about Ann Coulter, single, praising Jesus whenever she gets her Dom to whip her into breathy ecstasy. And her presumption that she has any idea of what the relationship between two people is in private - a presumption about the Clintons that provides extra stink to the pile of shit that is her first "book." And her patronizing attitude towards Nancy Reagan, who was a tough bitch before Ann Coulter ever masturbated with her Joe McCarthy dildo, is rife with sexism and ageism, patting the "poor, dear", little old lady on the head and telling her to not be manipulated by those nasty liberals (much like Rush "E-Mail Me at Phatphallus77 For Heavy Love" Limbaugh did earlier).

Maybe Nancy just makes Coulter think about her own mortality, her own imminent descent into the withering effects of age, when maybe spider-veined legs won't get booked on so many talk shows, when one too many facelifts leaves her the emotionless, cold, hate-spewing automaton that she aspires to be.

Why Ann Coulter Is a Cunt, Part 439,803 (Violence Equivalency Edition):
These days, it's almost sad to see and read Ann Coulter. So long the standard bearer of right-wing ignorance expressed with a savagery that is mistaken as "wit," now, in the wake of the heights of bugfuck insanity that Glenn Beck reaches every time his spike-topped bloated head of doom appears on TV, Coulter's brand of cuntistry seems quaint or used up. She's essentially the oldest whore in the brothel, cooz and asshole so worn out from use that fucking her is like tossing a roll of pennies down a wishing well. Oh, sure, sure, the occasional regular like Sean Hannity will show up at the joint in order to give her a charity screw. But mostly, she's just sadly tramped-up eye candy, which, pathetically, is all she ever was.

However, often her writing contains nice, nutzoid summaries of the memes that make the email rounds and get teabaggers all hetted up. It's one-stop shopping to get a sense of the conservative zeitgeist, like signs with better spelling. In her latest "column" (if by "column," you mean, "a moldy piece of bread found under the refrigerator"), Coulter attempts to make the case that liberals are violent "treasonous" thugs who routinely physically attack conservatives while the Tea Party members and other right-wingers are peacefully and non-racist-ly exercising their First Amendment rights. You hear this all the time from Limbaugh and Beck and Hannity and Ingraham and the rest of 'em. "No video exists proving that black congressmen were spat on by protesters" or "Mean looking black people in Black Panther drag made white people unhappy" or "Tea Partiers ain't racist. It's just a few bad apples that bring the racist signs or say racist things. By the way, that MoveOn ad sent in by a single individual to an open contest that compared George W. Bush to Hitler proves all liberals are crazy. But, hey, isn't Obama just like Hitler?"

Let's do this the easy way:

Coulter says, "Last fall, a conservative had his finger bitten off by a man from a MoveOn.org crowd in Thousand Oaks, Calif."
The Rude Pundit says, "James W. von Brunn."

Coulter says, "In the fall of 2008, Obama supporters Mace'd elderly volunteers in a McCain campaign office in Galax, Va."
The Rude Pundit says, "Jim David Adkisson."

Coulter says, "One Obama supporter broke a McCain sign being held by a small middle-aged woman in midtown Manhattan before hitting her in the face with the stick."
The Rude Pundit says, "Scott Roeder."

Coulter says, "In separate attacks, a half-dozen liberals threw Molotov cocktails at McCain signs on families' front yards in and around Portland, Ore."
The Rude Pundit says, "Joseph Andrew Stack. And Byron Williams. And Richard Poplawski." Murder and mayhem after murder and mayhem, real and wannabe.

Let's just say that the scales weighing recent political violence are tilted quite a bit to the right, which perhaps gives us a reason to fear groups of armed, agitated conservatives gathering to vent.

And when Coulter asserts that she's listing only "a few acts of violence from the left too numerous to catalog," the only thing to say, the "Shut the fuck up" to her is one word, repeated as a chant, "McVeigh, McVeigh, McVeigh."

Why Ann Coulter Is a Cunt, Part 102,025 (Christian Redemption Edition):
Little-known rumor: Ann Coulter has had the image of dead Jesus Christ from the Shroud of Turin printed onto a latex blow-up doll and given it a hard, rubber dildo. See, in the same moment, she can fuck herself with both the dead and resurrected Christian savior. She's been known to entertain guests by hanging the doll on a cross in her dining room, next to her chair, so that the cock is right at head level. That way, during wine and dinner conversation, she can turn, look lovingly up at the Lord's son, and then lap on his dick like Lolita with a lollipop. She says it's so Jesus knows he's always welcome. When she gets really drunk, she tells her guests that there's only one way to redeem herself for her sins, and she deep throats Christ's dildo. She doesn't care if Christ can't come. She believes that what she's doing is banking her sins and that when she gets to heaven, Jesus will be there, and she'll take his holy peter in her mouth so Jesus can jizz down her throat for every transgression she has asked him to forgive. Buckets of Christ cum: the price of entering the pearly gates.

The Rude Pundit believes the rumor to be true because he's read Coulter's latest "column" (if by "column," you mean, "Sub-street corner Jesus ranting that'd make Jack Chick go atheist"), where she defends Brit Hume's Christ-can-save-Tigers-Woods remarks on Fox "news." Coulter agrees, like a whore whose pimp is God. In one of the great reductionist arguments in the history of arguments, the kind of thing that’d make Plato stop buggering a boy for a moment and say “What the fuck?” Coulter asserts, “God sent his only son to get the crap beaten out of him, die for our sins and rise from the dead. If you believe that, you're in. Your sins are washed away from you -- sins even worse than adultery! -- because of the cross.” Wow, Christianity sure seems like the McDonald’s of religions.

In fact, the entire "column" could be viewed as a sarcastic take on the bullshit version of redemption offered by some interpretations of Christianity. Rape a newborn and drink its blood? Just confess, and it's heaven for you. That's actually not much of an overstatement. Coulter quotes Romans 10:9 on confession and adds, "If you do that, every rotten, sinful thing you've ever done is gone from you. You're every bit as much a Christian as the pope or Billy Graham." Seriously, that looks like a sentence the Rude Pundit could have written facetiously.

It hardly needs to be said that if some broadcaster at a "news" network had said that Islam is the only path to redemption, he would be hounded out of his job. The second you say that your sky wizard is so very much bigger than other sky wizards, you have entered the realm of absurd. In fact, the only rational reaction one can have to Coulter or Hume is, "Hey, if Tiger Woods doesn't want to have to worry about anything, he should become an atheist and party on."

(Note: The link to Coulter's scribbles is from the Jewish World Review - motto: "Self-hating to oblivion.")