Mahar and Coulter jockey for media attention
I have just spent the last 45 minutes going over the transcripts from the ridiculous comments that both Bill Mahar and Ann Coulter made yesterday. The Right was in a tizzy over Mahar's transparent and carefully crafted statement that the U.S. would be better off if the Taliban assassination attempt on the V.P.'s life was successful.
Mahar then continued to stick his foot further down his throat with this comment:
It's fact? Just like that, because Mahar says so? Don't forget that this is the same guy who calls the jihadists who ran airplanes into buildings on September 11 warriors and the U.S. military cowards because we lob tommy rockets into Iraq. I wonder if he feels the same way about the American Indians who fired at the British formations from behind trees. It's called reducing your losses (aka bringing a gun to a knife fight), asshat. So we are cowards for using technology in our favor while we kill people from afar with missiles, but Bush is a shitty leader because he sent ground troops into Iraq to fight the enemy? Make up your mind, Mahar.
Ann Coulter was also in the spotlight for inferring that John Edwards is a faggot. Advertisers have dropped from her website but I have yet to see anything done by HBO for Mahar's comments. Both Mahar and Coulter have one thing in common and that is to stir things up, needlessly mind you, with remarks that are better left unsaid. Mahar tries to disguise his insults as witty, intellectually driven commentary while Coulter tries to play hers off as playground humor designed to get people to think or become involved in an issue.
Both of them need to shampoo my crotch. The only thing Coulter has going for her that allows me to drum up any empathy (albeit slight) is that she is a lot easier on the eyes than Mahar's slathered on make up job.
But I have zero doubt that if Cheney were not in power, people wouldn't be dying needlessly tomorrow/Lemmings applause on que.
Mahar then continued to stick his foot further down his throat with this comment:
I'm just saying, that if he did die, other people, more people would live. That's a fact.
It's fact? Just like that, because Mahar says so? Don't forget that this is the same guy who calls the jihadists who ran airplanes into buildings on September 11 warriors and the U.S. military cowards because we lob tommy rockets into Iraq. I wonder if he feels the same way about the American Indians who fired at the British formations from behind trees. It's called reducing your losses (aka bringing a gun to a knife fight), asshat. So we are cowards for using technology in our favor while we kill people from afar with missiles, but Bush is a shitty leader because he sent ground troops into Iraq to fight the enemy? Make up your mind, Mahar.
Ann Coulter was also in the spotlight for inferring that John Edwards is a faggot. Advertisers have dropped from her website but I have yet to see anything done by HBO for Mahar's comments. Both Mahar and Coulter have one thing in common and that is to stir things up, needlessly mind you, with remarks that are better left unsaid. Mahar tries to disguise his insults as witty, intellectually driven commentary while Coulter tries to play hers off as playground humor designed to get people to think or become involved in an issue.
Both of them need to shampoo my crotch. The only thing Coulter has going for her that allows me to drum up any empathy (albeit slight) is that she is a lot easier on the eyes than Mahar's slathered on make up job.
Probably more bloody Taliban and head-choppin' Jihadists would live, a possibility Maher seems to enjoy. What a crumbly little man.
ReplyDeleteRight on Knave. Coulter really disapointed me with that gratuitous slur. Whereas John Edwards is clearly a sissy, a lightweight, an idiot and a fool, he is not a faggot.
ReplyDeleteIf you are going to insult the man, say something that is true.