The funny thing is that there are a lot of people who actually listen to what Ann Coulter has to say. I really don't know why I read her tripe. (I must be a glutton for punishment) She really spews out some horrible stuff.
The Americanization of Iraq proceeds at an astonishing pace, the Iraqis are taking to freedom like fish to water, and the possibilities for this nation are endless. It's hard to say who's more upset about these developments: the last vestiges of pro-Hussein Baathist resistance in Iraq or John Kerry's campaign manager.
Once again, Ann does exactly what she rails against the "liberal media" for doing when talking about Iraq. She always complains that the SCLM never talks about the good points, only focuses on the bad stuff. Well, conversely Ann, you never acknowledge anything that goes wrong. Do you think she'll talk about the pipeline that blew up over the weekend, cutting Iraqi oil production in half? I don't either. But if she does, Ann will probably blame it on John Kerry's campaign manager.
The New York Times ran a front-page news story on Sunday about how life was better for Iraqi girls under Saddam Hussein -- living under Saddam, that is, not the girls who were literally under Saddam, Odai and Qusai while they were being raped. The article was titled "For Iraqi Girls, Changing Land Narrows Lives." True, they don't have to run from Odai's rape rooms anymore. But apparently not a single Iraqi female has been admitted to Augusta National Golf Club since the liberation!
The Democrats want Saddam back.
Are you kidding me? I don't think even the most rabid liberal has ever publicly stated that they want Saddam back. So don't lump all Democrats into that camp Ann, because it doesn't exist. And what's with the snide little remark about the Augusta National Golf Club? I'm sure Hootie wouldn't appreciate it.
Of course we can't be sure if their presidential candidate wants Saddam back, inasmuch as John Kerry will be in an undisclosed location until Election Day. As Mickey Kaus has pointed out, every time Kerry starts campaigning, his poll numbers plummet. According to a recent New York Times poll, after $60 million in warm and fuzzy TV ads about Kerry, 40 percent of Americans have no opinion of him. In other words, the ads are working! So Kerry will be sitting out the actual campaign this year.
Hmm, every time Kerry campaigns, his numbers plummet? What an outright bogus lie. And your fellow hack Kaus is no better. How about whenever Bush tries to attach himself to something positive, his approval numbers retreat? Even with Saddam's capture, Bush only saw a short-lived jump in his approval ratings. So let's be honest when we talk about sagging poll numbers, ok Ann?
But he's got a lot of surrogates campaigning for him. There's Michael Moore, who has said he hopes more Americans will die in Iraq. His movie, "Fahrenheit 7/11" as we call it, apparently supports the Times' view that life in Iraq was better, sunnier, happier under Saddam Hussein. Moore has also accused the American people of being the stupidest, most naive people on the face of the Earth. And after last weekend, he's got the box office numbers to prove it!
Fahrenheit 7/11? As "we" call it? I've never heard anyone mumble that moniker before. I think that's just Ann's pathetic attempt to add something to the conservative lexicon. Let's digest one sentence from the last graf.
"His movie...apparently supports the Times' view that life in Iraq was better, sunnier, happier under Saddam Hussein."
First off, you admit that you've never seen the movie, Ann. Not a great way to add anything substantive to the debate. My biggest beef with anyone on the other side of the aisle, vis-à-vis F9/11, is how they just repeat the GOP talking points regarding the film. How in God's name can you say for certain that a movie, which you freely admit never seeing, makes a certain point? You can't, Ann. Two big lies propagated by the right is that Moore says he wants troops to die in Iraq and that he asserts how the Saudis flew out of the country when no one else was flying.
Moore never stated anything remotely close to "wanting more US troops to die in Iraq." Ready for this one? He does not say, or even assert, that the Saudis flew out of the country when everyone else was grounded. I've seen the movie folks. Verbatim, I believe, Moore says "as soon as it was ok to fly, the planes filled with material witnesses left the country." His assertion was how bad the FBI failed in the early stages of investigating the terrorist attacks. So you're incorrectly interpreting the movie.
Once again, for the record, Moore never states that the planes left before the travel ban was up. He stated that as soon as there was a green light, it was like the Road Runner high-tailing it out of sight. So not only do they misstate the first half of the argument, CoulterCo doesn't even pay attention to the second half and ask why weren't possible material witnesses properly interviewed by the FBI. I saw Isikoff repeat this lie again over the weekend. It's just not true people. So if you're going to bitch about a movie, at least see it for yourself.
Ugh.
Oh yeah, don't forget to buy your Ann Coulter Talking Action Figure.