Tase him, bro!

Democrats should run Mahmoud Ahmadinejad for president. He's more coherent than Dennis Kucinich, he dresses like their base, he's more macho than John Edwards, and he's willing to show up at a forum where he might get one hostile question -- unlike the current Democratic candidates for president who won't debate on Fox News Channel. He's not married to an impeached president, and the name "Mahmoud Ahmadinejad" is surely no more frightening than "B. Hussein Obama."

And liberals agree with Ahmadinejad on the issues! We know that because he was invited by an American university to speak on campus.

Contrary to all the blather about "free speech" surrounding Ahmadinejad's appearance at Columbia, universities in America do not invite speakers who do not perfectly mirror the political views of their America-hating faculties. Rather, they aggressively censor differing viewpoints and permit only a narrow category of speech on their campuses. Ask Larry Summers.

If a university invites someone to speak, you know the faculty agrees with the speaker. Maybe not the entire faculty. Some Columbia professors probably consider Ahmadinejad too moderate on Israel.

Columbia president Lee Bollinger claimed the Ahmadinejad invitation is in keeping with "Columbia's long-standing tradition of serving as a major forum for robust debate."

Except Columbia doesn't have that tradition. This is worse than saying "the dog ate my homework." It's like saying "the dog ate my homework" when you're Michael Vick and everyone knows you've killed your dog.

Columbia's "tradition" is to shut down any speakers who fall outside the teeny, tiny seditious perspective of its professors.

When Minutemen leader Jim Gilchrist and his black colleague Marvin Stewart were invited by the College Republicans to speak at Columbia last year, the tolerant, free-speech-loving Columbia students violently attacked them, shutting down the speech.

Imbued with Bollinger's commitment to free speech, Columbia junior Ryan Fukumori said of the Minutemen: "They have no right to be able to speak here."

Needless to say -- unlike Ahmadinejad -- the university had not invited the Minutemen. Most colleges and universities wouldn't buy a cup of coffee for a conservative speaker.

Fees for speakers who do not hate America are raised from College Republican fundraisers and contributions from patriotic alumni and locals who think students ought to hear at least one alternative viewpoint in four years of college.

And then college administrators turn a blind eye when liberal apple-polishers and suck-ups shut down the speech or physically attack the speaker.

Bollinger refused to punish the students who stormed the stage and violently ended the Minutemen's speech.

So the one thing we know absolutely is that Bollinger did not allow Ahmadinejad to speak out of respect for "free speech" because Bollinger does not respect free speech.

Only because normal, patriotic Americans were appalled by Columbia's invitation of Ahmadinejad to speak was Bollinger forced into the ridiculous position of denouncing Ahmadinejad when introducing him.

Then why did you invite him?

And by the way, I'll take a denunciation if college presidents would show up at my speeches and drone on for 10 minutes about "free speech" before I begin.

At Syracuse University last year, when liberal hecklers tried to shut down a speech by a popular conservative author of (almost!) six books, College Republicans began to remove the hecklers. But Dean of Students Roy Baker blocked them from removing students disrupting the speech on the grounds that removing students screaming during a speech would violate the hecklers' "free speech." They had a "free speech" right to prevent anyone from hearing a conservative's free speech.

That's what colleges mean by "free speech." (And by the way, my fingers are getting exhausted from making air quotes every time I use the expression "free speech" in relation to a college campus.)

"Tolerance of opposing views" means we have to listen to their anti-American views, but they don't have to hear our pro-American views. (In Washington, they call this "the Fairness Doctrine.")

Liberals are never called upon to tolerate anything they don't already adore, such as treason, pornography and heresy. In fact, those will often get you course credit.

At Ahmadinejad's speech, every vicious anti-Western civilization remark was cheered wildly. It was like watching an episode of HBO'S "Real Time With Bill Maher."

Ahmadinejad complained that the U.S. and a few other "monopolistic powers, selfish powers" were trying to deny Iranians their "right" to develop nukes.

Wild applause.

Ahmadinejad repeatedly refused to answer whether he seeks the destruction of the state of Israel.

Wild applause.

He accused the U.S. of supporting terrorism.

Wild applause.

Only when Ahmadinejad failed to endorse sodomy did he receive the single incident of booing throughout his speech.

Responding to a question about Iran's execution of homosexuals, Ahmadinejad said there are no homosexuals in Iran: "In Iran we don't have homosexuals, like in your country. In Iran we do not have this phenomenon. I don't know who's told you that we have it."

I already knew that from looking at his outfit. If liberals want to run this guy for president, they better get him to "Queer Eye for the Islamofascist Guy."

I just want,have, need to say...

Submitted by TonyF on Tue, 10/09/2007 - 8:33am.

ANN COULTER IS HOTT! Oops, was that out loud? Sorry, can't help it, she is smokin'.

"The memories of a man in his old age, are the deeds of a man in his prime.You shuffle in the gloom of the sick room,and talk to yourself as you die."
(R. Waters)

login to post comments

Ann Coulter... Hot??

Submitted by DragNet on Thu, 10/11/2007 - 8:40pm.

You got to be kidding! She looks like a white ape. You either need to see the eye doctor ASAP or are a hopeless decrepit old man. The photo of her in this website is retouched. In fact, I think it is her sister's.

-----------------------------------
Making you think twice......

login to post comments

Dragnet, there is a reason she is 40something and single

Submitted by AF A-10 on Thu, 10/11/2007 - 8:59pm.

and I don't think it has to do with hottness or her adam's apple

Kevin "Hack" King

login to post comments

AF A-10 "Hack" -- Hateful?

Submitted by Denise Conner on Fri, 10/12/2007 - 6:51am.

Have you been reading the Daily Kos where bloggers frequently make such "transphobic comments" about Ann looking “like a skinny guy with a big Adam's Apple” or "a male drag queen or male to female transsexual"?

(There's also a "doctored" picture that does look like she's a drag queen. Wouldn't you like being a public figure with photographers catching unbecoming poses and then changing them to look even worse?)

In fact, this is a favorite topic at a lot of liberal blogs.

Rage Against The Right

CoulterPoint: Ann Coulter: Most likely Not a Man

"Probably the most persistent attacks aimed at Ann Coulter by her political opponents have contended that she is a post operative transexual who was born as a man."

AC's lack of marriage/serious relationships:

"Seriously, who would want to date her? And I don't just mean because of her looks and personality; but I think dating Ms Coulter would be extremely dangerous. I wouldn't be at all surprised if AC's name was high-up on a lot of seriously disturbed people's hitlists and if explosives were used by just one of the millions of Arabs she's insulted then her dating partner would be almost inevitable collateral damage."

Red Ted’s “The Politics of Personal Appearance”

“What struck me by this was the way that people who disagree with her politics do not just attack her ideas and methodology, they attack the person as well. Unlike common Type-M arguments that focus on the motives of their opponent, this argument goes for her gender, suggesting that Coulter is transgendered and then using this supposition to justify ignoring her positions and arguments. It is ad-hominem: because she has a nonstandard gender history, her critics suggest, we need not take her seriously.”

"At that point you are reaching towards character destruction, you are making a Limbaughesque argument based on derision and not content."

“I make this connection because Ann Coulter is a particularly competitive and aggressive woman. She competes with words and ideas, not with physical strength, but she competes in the realm of politics and ideas - a historically male realm - and she displays ‘masculine’ aggressiveness as she does so. One way of coming to terms with a woman who displays ‘masculine’ attitudes is to suggest that she is not really a woman. One way of putting down someone you dislike is to mock their sexuality and, especially against women, to mock their secondary sexual characteristics.”

“What part of 'all people are created equal' don't you understand?"

Attacking someone's personal appearance is so gauche. Is this anything like "shovel nose"?

It seems as if you have a lot more in common with Ann than you'd like to admit:
"AF A-10 'Hack' -- Weenies & Larry Craig"

login to post comments

POOR ANN

Submitted by teetaw on Sun, 10/14/2007 - 4:52pm.

If she can say what she does, then so can we, so stop complaining.

login to post comments

Ann, you da man! Love ya!

Submitted by mudcat on Fri, 09/28/2007 - 7:06pm.

Tell it sister. You have got it exactly right!

login to post comments

mudcat

Submitted by teetaw on Tue, 10/09/2007 - 9:39am.

You're a fool if you think that Ann Coulter's side of the story is an accurate depiction. But feel free to continue brainlessly cheer leading the GOP mascot, you do ignorant Americans a great service in representing them.

login to post comments