Being Ann means never having to say you’re sorry

Ann Coulter, February 11, 2004:

There was no bravery [for Max Cleland] involved in dropping a grenade on himself with no enemy troops in sight. [Emphasis added]

Ann Coulter, February 18, 2004:

LIBERALS are hopping mad about last week’s column. Amid angry insinuations that I “lied” about Sen. Max Cleland[.] … Liberals are not angry because I “lied”; they’re angry because I told the truth.

Sadly, No!

In fact, Cleland was wounded picking up a grenade that someone else dropped, during what he says was a combat mission.

“I volunteered for a combat mission with the 1st Air Calvary division going into break the siege at Khe Sahn, and if that isn’t a combat mission, you ought to ask some of the people that were there and the 200 guys that were killed in that mission.”

 

Thanks, but we’re pretty happy with our Talking Ann Coulter Doll

robopic.jpg

The internet brings us news a cool and exciting allegedly new kind of robot is about to be released. We’ve looked at the features and discovered that they essentially match those of our own very special Ann Coulter doll. In fact, it appears to be nothing more than the doll in a new casing. To wit:

the RoboSapien features…

  • 67 pre-programmed functions including pick-up, throw, kick, sweep, dance, fart, beltch, rap, and half-a-dozen different kung-fu moves.
    coulter.jpg

  • Speaks fluent international “caveman”.
  • Three demonstration modes: Disco dance, Rude behavior, and Kung Fu kata.
  • Simple enough for kids, advanced enough for adults
  • Real multi-speed fast dynamic walking, running, and turning.
  • Fast, full function arms with two types of grippers.
  • The similarities are uncanny.

     

    The Safire Clinton Obsession Watch?

    Always on the cutting edge of imagination free gimmicks, Sadly, No! Enterprises brings you another exclusive feature: the William Safire Hillary/Clinton Obsession Watch?. Every week, we will review Bill’s work in order to determine how preoccupied he has been with the Clintons of late. Using a closely guarded formula, every column will yield a ClintonScore, on a scale of 0 to 5:

  • 0: Who’s Clinton? I may look like an old man but I work in the Nixon White House you know.
  • 1: Don’t bother me about those two hillbillies, I am a language maven with the ability to channel the spirit of Richard Nixon.
  • 2: I’ve been having a lot of Clinton-related hunches lately.
  • 3: Am I the only one who finds Hillary kind of hot?
  • 4: Sometimes I close the door to my office and masturbate to pictures of Hillary.
  • 5: The Clintons are Satan’s representatives on earth.

    Because this is our first week, we’ve scored a few of his earlier columns. Ready?






    Date Words in column How many words before a Clinton mention? How many mentions? Bonus Points Final Score
    February 18, 20046925612Hillary in 20082
    February 4, 20047112541Tries to look smart by using a French word, but misspells it.1
    January 28, 20047146961Sadly, No!1
    January 26, 20046981872Al Gore is mentioned2
    January 21, 2004709643Al Gore is mentioned3
    December 29, 20037101493Sadly, No!2

     
  • Why does Mel Gibson hate the Catholic Church?

    The Crockmeister had posted earlier that Mel Gibson was singing a different redemption tune last night on ABC. Was he? Oh yes:

    DIANE SAWYER:
    (Voice Over) So when we talked with Gibson and his actors, we wondered, does his traditionalist view bar the door to Heaven for Jews, Protestants, Muslims?

    MEL GIBSON: That’s not the case at all. Absolutely not. It is possible for people who are not even Christian to get into the Kingdom of Heaven. It’s just easier for -and I have to say that because that’s what I believe.

    DIANE SAWYER: (Off Camera) You have the nonstop ticket?

    MEL GIBSON: Well, yeah, I’m saying it’s an easier ride where I am because it’s like -I have to believe that.

    Oh Mel, what are you doing to yourself?

    I told Gibson that I am a Protestant, and asked whether his pre-Vatican II world view disqualified me from eternal salvation. He paused. “There is no salvation for those outside the Church,” he said. “I believe it.”

    and:

    “There is no salvation for those outside the (Catholic) church,” Gibson replied. “I believe it…”

    We’re no experts on all matters religious here, but we’re pretty sure that liars don’t get to go to heaven.

     

    Well, that was kind of kind of close

    The Koufax Awards results are in… and Sadly, No! is way out.

    Congratulations to all the winners.

     

    Why do Federal Prosecutors hate America?

    Mr. Convertino tells Mr. Ashcroft FU, FU and FU:

    WASHINGTON (AP) – A federal prosecutor in a major terrorism case in Detroit has taken the rare step of suing Attorney General John Ashcroft, alleging the Justice Department interfered with the case, compromised a confidential informant and exaggerated results in the war on terrorism.

    Assistant U.S. Attorney Richard Convertino of Detroit accused the Justice
    Department of “gross mismanagement” of the war on terrorism in a
    whistleblower lawsuit filed late Friday in federal court in Washington.

    Justice officials said Tuesday they had not seen the suit and had no
    comment.

    Officials did remark that the weather is lovely at Guantanamo Bay this time of the year, making it an ideal place to spend an indefinite period of time “relaxing.”

    Convertino came under internal investigation last fall after providing information to a Senate committee about his concerns about the war on terror. His testimony came just months after he helped convict some members of an alleged terrorism cell in Detroit.

    The government now admits it failed to turn over evidence during the trial
    that might have assisted the defense, including an allegation from an
    imprisoned drug gang leader who claimed the government’s key witness made up his story.

    Passez le popcorn svp. [Thanks to Blair for the link.]

     

    A Sadly, No! Exclusive: Inside Mel Gibson’s wedding

    Dearly beloved, we are gathered here today before these friends and family, to join together this man and this woman in Holy Matrimony. Mel, will you have Robyn to be your wedded wife, to live together in the holy estate of matrimony? Will you love her, comfort her, honour, and keep her in sickness and in health, and, forsaking all others, keep thee only unto her, until she is cast off into the pits of hell for all of eternity along with her hell-spawn?

    Mel Gibson, it would appear, has answered yes:

    Gibson, interviewed by the Herald Sun in Australia, was asked if Protestants are denied eternal salvation. “There is no salvation for those outside the (Catholic) church,” Gibson replied. “I believe it… Put it this way. My wife is a saint. She’s a much better person than I am. Honestly. She’s, like, Episcopalian, Church of England. She prays, she believes in God, she knows Jesus, she believes in that stuff. And it’s just not fair if she doesn’t make it; she’s better than I am. But that is a pronouncement from the chair. I go with it.”

    Not only has Mel said yes, but apparently he’s got that whole speech memorized. From the December September 15 issue of The New Yorker (as posted by the Freepers):

    I told Gibson that I am a Protestant, and asked whether his pre-Vatican II world view disqualified me from eternal salvation. He paused. “There is no salvation for those outside the Church,” he said. “I believe it.” He explained, “Put it this way. My wife is a saint. She’s a much better person than I am. Honestly. She’s, like, Episcopalian, Church of England. She prays, she believes in God, she knows Jesus, she believes in that stuff. And it’s just not fair if she doesn’t make it, she’s better than I am. But that is a pronouncement from the chair. I go with it.”

    First link via Norbizness. Thanks to Blair for the idea, the punch line, and The New Yorker quote. [Sadly, No!: We steal our friends’ ideas, you pretend we’re the funny ones.]

    [Corrected the date of the New Yorker article, added link.]

    Added: The CrockMeister writes that Mel sang a different tune last night on ABC.

     

    More predictable than Rush Limbaugh at an Oxycontin Sales Pitch

    David Frum weighs in on the whole Triumph the Insult Comic Dog controversy. (Except that he refers to Triumph as a talking dog puppet.) Frum has a very special angle though (though it doesn’t involve Weapons of Mass Destruction.) And what is his very special contribution?

    French Quebeckers and Quebec suck. (And they steal!)

    We wish we could say that we are making this up, but… sadly, no! Indeed, Frum goes so far as to lie which, granted, is par for the course we guess:

    It is illegal to post an English-language sign in the province of Quebec.

    No, it is not:

    Reacting to these events, Bourassa, in 1993, introduced Bill 86, which allowed English on outdoor commercial signs only if the French lettering was at least twice as large as the English.

    The use of english on outdoor commercial signs is highly regulated, but it is not “illegal to post an English-language sign in the province of Quebec.” So can someone please email Mr. Frum? To be so clueless (and Canadian) should be a crime.

    Yet Frum continues:

    A Quebecker has held the prime ministership of Canada for all but 18 months of the past 36 years. And over those same 36 years, Quebec has received C$201 billion more from the federal Treasury than it has paid in. (Over those same years, the province of Alberta paid in $167 billion more than it received back.)

    Frum knows, but most of his readers likely don’t, that the only thing keeping the liberals in power of late is (or rather was) the division of the conservative vote between the Conservatives and the Alliance. Frum is pissed off about Quebec’s influence in Canadian politics, but his annoyance is misplaced:

    The Quebec-based Liberals have held power in Canada for all but 31 of the past 108 years ? a better record than either Mexico’s Institutional Revolution Party or the Communist Party of the Soviet Union.

    You might think (and again, his readers are unlikely to know better,) that the Liberals remain in power only because of their support in Quebec. Oh really? Sadly, No!

    Election Liberal Member of Parliament (MPs) Liberal MPs from Quebec Non-liberal MPs from Quebec Total MPs
    1968 155 56 18 264
    1972 109 56 18 264
    1974 141 60 14 264
    1979 114 67 8 282
    1980 147 74 1 282
    1984 40 17 58 282
    1988 83 12 63 295
    1993 177 19 55 294
    1997 155 26 49 301
    2000 172 36 39 301

    We report, you comment. We should add that Frum’s comments are also a reaction to a developing scandal of kickbacks and funding for Canada’s Liberal Party. As for the Liberals’ dominance (and the presence of a Quebecker in the PM’s office,) we don’t think it should be too much of a mystery to wonder why French speakers in Quebec are unenthusiastic about electing a PM that doesn’t speak their language (Jean Chretien being a notable exception of course.) You may not like it David, but the blame doesn’t lie along the St-Lawrence river.

     

    I know all there is to know about the Dennis Game

    Dennis Prager, fresh from his obsession with profanity, joins many of his contemporaries in being extremely preoccupied with women exposing themselves.

    Even if one welcomes this development — and for the record, as a male I am turned on, while as a man I am turned off — it begs for explanation.

    Oh, this is going to be so good. Oh yes!

    Thanks to feminist doctrines that pervade education from kindergarten through graduate school, men and women increasingly believe that the sexes are largely identical. Therefore, the arenas wherein women can feel and demonstrate their feminine distinctiveness have narrowed appreciably.

    By showing more of their bodies, women can announce that they are women. There are other ways young women can publicly demonstrate their distinct female identity — for example, by wearing feminine clothing and other feminine behavior, being a wife, being pregnant and being a mother. [Emphasis added]

    So there you go — the reason women are exposing themselves is that if they didn’t, you couldn’t tell most of them apart from men. Sure, a woman can do woman-things like get pregnant. But even a pregnant woman won’t be visibly so for more than a few months out of the year, and what woman wants to spend only half a year being one?

    because of the movement for gay equality, mothers have been declared unnecessary — two fathers, most well educated people now contend, are every bit as good for a child as a mother and a father.

    Is Dennis blaming Queer Eye for the Straight guy for Britney Spears and Christina Aguilera? We kind of lost him on that one.

    But in the name of equality and comfort, distinctive female dress — such as dresses and skirts — has been largely abandoned. A young woman who wore a dress or even a skirt and blouse to a college, let alone high school, class would probably be considered stranger by her peers than one who wore a see-through top.

    Well, at least we know what keeps Dennis up at night: see-through tops.

    The idea that a man made great efforts to be allowed sexual contact with a woman rendered women feminine in men’s eyes. They are different from us — they are feminine. Women who act as sexually available as a man — through their behavior or their dress — are not perceived as feminine, since they are perceived as being male-like.

    So basically, when he was in college Dennis didn’t get any and now guys in college get way more and that is just so totally unfair you know. Dennis’ philosophy appears to be: men like and want sex and unless women do the opposite of what men do they’re not being women so that means they must neither want nor seek sex. Do you think we’re simplifying just a bit too much? Sadly, No!:

    Likewise, the myriad ways in which men treated women as women — such as opening doors for them — all declared that women were feminine, i.e., different from masculine.

    So women of America, we ask of you this: if you see a man doing something, please do the opposite. Do it for us. Do it for Dennis. Do it for America.

     

    Shorter Wall Street Journal Editorial

    Abdul Qadeer Khan

    You know what, with all of this giving of nuclear technology to the bad guys, maybe Pakistan isn’t that great of a friend after all.

    Shorter concept inspired by busy, busy, busy from an idea by D-Squared.