Ann Coulter Says Jews, Unlike Christians, are Not “Perfected.”

 

During a recent appearance on CNBC’s “Big Ideas,” right-wing media darling Ann Coulter said a bunch of really ignorant stuff to host Donny Deutsch. But perhaps, none of her utterances was worse than this one:

“We [Christians] just want Jews to be perfected.”

A stunned Donny Deutch, himself a Jew, tried to give Coulter a way out by saying “Wow, you don’t really believe that, do you?” But the Aryan ice queen would not relent, stating that where getting to heaven is concerned, Christianity is “more like Federal Express.”

Well thank you, Ann, for pointing out the futility of my existence. I mean, since I’m not Christian, I guess I might as well come to terms with the fact that there’s no guarantee I’ll wind up in heaven. After all, if Christianity is like FedEx, non-Christianity must be like the regular postal service. Man, it looks like I’m doomed to take the long and circuitous route to heaven—assuming I don’t end up in an altogether different place. Everyone knows how unreliable the regular postal service is.

Boy, Christians are so lucky! I mean, they know they’re going to end up in heaven, unlike the rest of us poor souls who have no idea where we’ll end up. I guess because Christians like Ann Coulter are so certain they’re going to heaven, they don’t even need to be decent people here on earth. That probably explains why she recently had this to say about four women whose husbands had died in the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks: “I’ve never seen people enjoying their husbands’ deaths so much.” Come to think of it, this knowledge that Christians are ensured a place in heaven explains why so many of them don’t even bother living by the “Christian” principles they themselves so loudly proclaim. Take, for example, the virulently anti-gay Rev. Ted Haggard, who enjoyed performing oral sex on a male escort. And let’s not forget the pro–family values Senator from Idaho, Larry Craig, who was arrested in a men’s bathroom in the Minneapolis airport for soliciting sex from an undercover police officer.

Ann Coulter has really earned my gratitude for showing me the light. I generally wouldn’t trust a woman whose adam’s apple is bigger than mine but, since she makes such a compelling argument, I have to make an exception for her. I will run, not walk, to the nearest house of Christian worship to accept Jesus Christ as my lord and savior.

Then again, if that means ending up in the same afterlife as Ann Coulter, I think I’ll take my chances with the other place.

Update on West Virginia Kidnap-Torture-Rape Case.

ABC has reported that new details have emerged in the case of Megan Williams, who was kidnapped and subjected to various acts of torture, sexual abuse, and humiliation by Karen Burton (top center) and fellow defendants.

According to statements read out during the defendants’ preliminary court hearings, the victim told police she had had hot wax and hot water poured on her, and that she was forced to drink a cup of two male defendants’ urine. All six defendants now face charges of kidnapping, which carry a maximum life sentence. Incidentally, no hate crime charges have as yet been filed—the victim is Black and was called “nigger” during some of the assaults—because, prosecutors say, hate crime convictions carry a maximum penalty of only 10 years.

While I am often critical of local law enforcement officials for failing to investigate possible hate crime cases, this time I would rather the six accused get the maximum penalty than a hate crime conviction.

Speaking of Hatred . . ..

I’m feeling slightly nauseated after reading an article that opened with this paragraph:

A woman was sexually abused, beaten and humiliated while being held captive in a home for at least a week, sheriff’s officials said Monday after making six arrests and calling the FBI to investigate it as a possible hate crime.”

Read the rest of the article here and here.

Thanks to The Smoking Gun for the arrest records and mugshots.

Five Easy Ways to Turn Your Man On.

Are you sick and tired of magazines like Cosmopolitan promising to show women what men crave in bed? Are you at the point where the mere sight of a magazine cover claiming to know men’s deepest, darkest desires makes you want to kick a passerby? Well I am! Generations of women have been fooled into believing that the key to finding a life partner lies between the covers of a glossy magazine. These rags make readers think that finding a partner for life is as easy as getting men to go to bed with them, but it’s all nothing more than a marketing gimmick that lets them to sell their trash to thousands of unsuspecting women. I, for one, can no longer sit idly by while this travesty continues.

Every issue of Cosmo—and other magazines of that ilk—claims on the cover that it can show women how to drive their men wild in bed. Or how to turn them on. But it’s all a load of baloney. First of all, these articles are clearly not having the desired effect of turning men into drooling sex addicts who worship the very ground on which Cosmo readers walk. If they were, fewer and fewer women would, after having landed the man of their choice, need to buy this garbage, resulting in the ultimate—and long overdue—collapse of this particular branch of the publishing industry. Since Cosmo continues to roll out a new issue every week, I can only assume business is good.

Ladies, don’t waste any more of your money on Cosmo or any other publication that promises to show you how turn your man on. While it is indeed very easy to get your man—or any man for that matter—hot for you, generations of Cosmo writers don’t seem to know how to. You want to know how to turn your man on? Forget Cosmo’s 20 “Sexifiers!” I can give you five easy ways to turn your man on? Ready? Here you go:

1. Take
2. Your
3. F*cking
4. Clothes
5. Off!!!!!!!!!

There you have it! It’s bloody simple! If you want your man to spring a boner for you, get out of those f*cking clothes. Don’t go wasting your money on Cosmo? All that “literature” you devour about lingerie and massage and oils and candles is nothing more than a steaming heap of bull manure. Men don’t care that you maxed out your credit card at Victoria’s Secret, or that you spent the past three hours soaking in a tub full of honey-milk-vanilla-soybean bubble bath! When it comes to sex, only the actual act of intercourse excites a man more than the sight of the naked woman with whom he’s about to have sex. In fact, men get excited just seeing any woman naked. Why do you think the average man—over the course of his life—will spend the equivalent of Botswana’s GDP at strip clubs? Because naked women are hot, that’s why! So ladies, the faster you get out of your clothes, the faster your man will be turned on. Now I know you’re thinking, “What if he thinks I’m a slut?” I say, “Good for you!” Why? Because men love women who love to have sex, especially with them. They love them so much they’re willing to pay women to pretend to be sexually interested in them. This is what keeps prostitution alive. At the end of the day, nothing makes a man happier than a woman who is willing to engage in sexual intimacy with him. With the possible exception of the sight of said woman without her clothes, of course.

Now, once you’ve driven him wild with the sight of you naked, you must make sure to keep him coming back for more. How do you do this? Simple. By being a total freak in the sack. I know Cosmo authors claim to have 101 ways to make your man think you’re a wild woman in bed but trust me, they’ve got nothing on the internet. If you want to know what your man wants—nay, yearns for—in bed, check out some internet porn. Don’t worry, internet porn is very easy to find. In fact, it’s the easiest thing to find on the internet. It doesn’t matter what you’re looking for, you will always end up at a porn site. Spend a couple of hours a day looking at online porn and pretty soon, you’ll be rocking your man’s world. And the best part is, internet porn is free. No need to spend the equivalent of a day’s lunch every week on some silly magazine.

“But,” I hear some of you doubters ask, “What if I don’t have a perfect body?” Well, I’ve got good news for you. Most men don’t have perfect bodies either. Your man doesn’t have a perfect body but it’s not keeping you from wanting to drive him wild in bed. And you know what? Your imperfect body won’t keep him from wanting you to drive him wild in bed. Why? Because, as I’ve already stated, men are seldom happier than when someone wants to have sex with them. It doesn’t matter who it is or how they look. Even the slightest hint of sexual interest from a woman is enough to preoccupy a guy’s mind for days. Sure, most guys think they can go out and have sex with someone really fit but, at the end of the day, most of them are too lazy to bother and too insecure to try. Like toads, they tend to sit around hoping a tasty fly will come within range of their tongues. Trust me on this one.

By now, I’m sure you’re wondering how I can be so sure of what I’ve just written. It’s quite simple, really. Ladies, if what you want is a guy to be hot for you, there’s no need for fancy magazines. It’s a pretty simple process. Higher brain functions like reading—which I presume even Cosmo readers possess—are regulated by the larger, newer and more sophisticated part of the human brain, the Cerebral Cortex. Sex, on the other hand, is a pretty basic function for humans. It is regulated by the limbic system, also known as the “primitive brain.” This is the part of the brain that regulates such functions as sleeping, breathing, and blinking. It’s the oldest and most primitive part of the brain, and it is also the part of the brain we share with reptiles and other animals that have—without any help from Cosmo—been doing “it” for millions of years. A heterosexual man can no more resist getting wood at the sight of a naked woman than he can keep from blinking.

At the end of the day, I suspect getting a man into bed isn’t so hard for women that Cosmo has to devote part of every issue to this topic. And, I’m certain that’s not what Cosmo readers are really after. The majority, I suspect, are hoping to find a nice, handsome, well-educated, emotionally and financially stable guy to raise a family and grow old with. The trouble is, magazines like Cosmo trick their readers into thinking that getting a man to be sexually interested is the same as getting him to commit to a lifetime together. It’s not, and you don’t need a Cerebrum to know that. Sex is a basic, primal impulse in humans—as it is in all animals—whereas commitment, raising families, and growing old together are learned behaviors reinforced through social convention.

Ladies, next time you’re interested in getting a guy into bed, appeal to his primitive brain and take your clothes off. Getting him to marry you, though, will be a little more complicated.

Republicans Gone Wild!! or, Why is the Republican Party Home to So Many Sexual Deviants?

I have a theory.

I believe that many (if not most) male right-wing politicians are hypocrites. They rail against homesexuality and infidelity while, at the same time, they fight the urge to give in to their “immoral” or “indecent” desires. And, as recent sex scandals prove, they don’t always win.

Take, for example, the cases of abstinence-only campaigner Randall Tobias, gay-bashing reverend Ted Haggard, and family values champion Senator David Vitter? All these men publicly promoted such “family values” as marital fidelity, heterosexuality, and other manifestations of moral fortitude and Christian values. Yet Tobias and Vitter were both exposed as clients of the DC Madame, who ran an escort service specializing in sexual fantasy and roleplay. It turns out Ambassador Tobias likes to have sex with women who are not his wife while Senator Vitter enjoys being diapered by them. For his part, Reverend Haggard, a relentless anti-gay campaigner, was outed by a male prostitute who revealed that he had received money and oral sex from Haggard.

More recently, Florida State Representative Bob Allen (R-Merritt Island)—sponsor of legislation against “Lewd or Lascivous Exhibitionism,” “Sexual Solicitation,” and “Lewdness and Indecent Exposure”—was arrested in a public men’s restroom after offering to pay an undercover cop $20 for the pleasure of performing oral sex on him. To clarify, Allen offered the cop $20 if he (the cop) would let Allen fellate him. Allen later told a news conference that he was so intimidated by the cop (who was Black) that he offered to suck him off just so he could walk out of the public bathroom alive. At least Representative Allen is well-rounded in his bigotry.

But if these conservatives like to blow men and/or cheat on their wives, why can’t they just be honest about who they are? I mean, although they still face a lot of bigotry—most of it coming from people like Haggard and co.—millions of gay men and women live honest lives outside the closet. And while there is nothing commendable about marital infedility, many swinging and swapping couples manage to work out arrangements that work to the detriment of none. While I know Democrats and liberals cheat on their wives and engage in other “immoral” behavior as well, it seems like the conservative ranks—home to those who most vociferously denounce anyone who doesn’t conform to their idea of decency and morality—produce the most sexually deviant and hypocritical public figures.

As I see it, people like Allen, Haggard, Tobias, and Vitter affiliate themselves with the conservative party and adopt the most anti-gay and moralistic stances in an attempt to distance themselves from who they really are. I think they do it to avoid suspicion. After all, who would suspect a leading gay-basher like Haggard of wanting to suck another man off ? Who would suspect that a family-values politician like Vitter enjoyed cavorting with hookers while wearing diapers? Who would suspect that Randall Tobias, a champion of abstinence and fidelity, enjoyed paying for extramarital sex? By denouncing the people who openly do the things they themselves secretly do or would like to do, these conservative hypocrites hope nobody will ever question their moral fortitude or discover that they are not 100% morally upstanding.

And it usually works.

Not on me, though. By now, whenever I hear a conservative ranting and raving against homosexuals, I think to myself, “Somebody stick a c*ck in this dude’s mouth already so he’ll shut the f*ck up.”

Islam, as Seen from a Muslim Woman’s Point of View.

I have always been annoyed that many non-Muslim Westerners, who know not even the first thing about Islam, vociferously proclaim the religion to be misogynistic, oppressive of women, and generally anti-woman.

Now I’m no expert on Koranic laws vis-a-vis women but I agree with Unique Muslimah that a lot of the misogyny in Muslim societies is more the result of ethnic and cultural traditions than of religious obligation.

Read the full post here.

Ocean City Fetus Case Revisited.

So, I just found out that Christy Freeman, the Ocean City, Maryland, woman who is being charged with murder for what looks to me like a self-performed—or at the very least self-induced—abortion may, if convicted, be sentenced to death!

I know that in reality, the chances of Christy Freeman actually being executed are pretty slim but I think it’s outrageous that the judge would even tell her that she might be. I mean, all this woman did was abort a fetus, for crying out loud!! Have we gone so crazy that we would kill a living, adult woman who supports four children because she decided, 26 weeks into her pregnancy, that she didn’t need any more children? Have we really reached the point where we demonstrate that the potential life of an unborn fetus is more valuable than the actual life of the living human being in whose womb that fetus grows? This is madness!!!

What this case proves is that, regardless of societal or legal restrictions on abortion, the need will always remain. The fact that some people think women shouldn’t be allowed to have abortions does not mean that every woman who gets impregnated will want to give birth. The law may take away the choice but it can never take away the need. But the whole point of choice is that women should choose whether, when, and under what conditions to have children.

When the anti-abortion wackos figure out a way to spontaneously generate children without the need for living women, they can dictate whether, when, and under what conditions children should be born. Until they can find a way to produce children without using women’s wombs, I maintain that the rights of the woman always supercede those of the fetus growing in her uterus.

Ninety hours of sex work would have been more fitting.

A judge in Painesville, Ohio, has sentenced three men to 30 days of standing outside the courthouse in a chicken costume, holding a sign that says “No Chicken Ranch in Painesville.” The men were arrested after they solicited sex from an undercover police officer. “Chicken Ranch” is a reference to a brothel in Nevada, where commercial sex work is legal.

Judge Michael Cicconetti, famous for his unusual sentences, once ordered a man who called a policeman a pig to stand next to a live pig in a pen and hold a sign that read “This Is Not a Police Officer.” A couple who stole a baby Jesus statue from a manger were sentenced to dress as Mary and Joseph and walk with a donkey.

But wearing a chicken costume three hours a day for 30 days doesn’t seem stiff enough a penalty for taking advantage of women who—through no fault of their own—are forced to sell sex. For these men to really understand what it’s like for these women, three hours a day in a chicken suit just won’t do. They should have been ordered to dress in drag and stand on a street corner while sleezy men drove by and offered to pay them for sex.

In the meantime, wouldn’t it be great if we lived in a society where women wouldn’t have to choose this demeaning line of work?

Dubyu Tee Eff????!!!!

I’m frustrated by the media’s coverage of the case of an Ocean City, Maryland, woman who has been arrested and charged with first degree murder in the death of her unborn child. I feel like the media’s coverage of this story is leaving a lot of questions un-asked and unaswered. As far as I’m concerned, this case is more about abortion and abortion rights than it is about murder. For me, the possibility raised by this case that abortion is being driven back underground through legislation and social convention is far more troubling than the gruesome details of the investigation.

Christy Freeman, a local businesswoman and mother of four, was admitted to hospital after her live-in boyfriend found her in the bathroom, unconscious and bleeding. Hospital staff then discovered that Freeman’s uterus contained a 36-week-old placenta, but no fetus. Freeman initially denied having been pregnant or knowing she had been pregnant, but she later confessed to police that she had given birth to a “gloopity glop,” which she flushed down the toilet. Police searched her home anyway and found a fetus wrapped in a towel and hidden under the sink in the bathroom vanity. Police also found the remains of three other fetuses in the home Freeman shared with her boyfriend and in an RV parked on their property.

It’s as yet unclear how the other fetal remains ended up in the Freeman home and how old they were at the time of death but I assume they, like the most recent fetus, were all delivered premature and stillborn by Freeman, who has been charged with murder only in the case of the most recent fetus. She is being charged under a 2005 state law that makes it illegal to kill a viable fetus. The viability of the fetus found under the sink has yet to be establised, however, as it was only 26 weeks old and appeared to have been stillborn. But according to State’s Attorney Joel Todd, Freeman admitted to having done something to terminate the pregnancy and, while her exact words were not released or quoted, they were enough to earn her a first-degree murder charge.

Because of the media’s coverage of this story, I don’t know enough about the issue or the law to comment on the merits of the state’s case. This makes no difference to me since I am more interested in this woman’s background, where she was raised, what she believed, etc. because I believe that information would shed a lot more light on this case than police reports and quotes from neighbors and prosecutors.

There’s a strong possibility that Christy Freeman is a crazy person. I mean, she lists her four children on her website among her hobbies. But she is also someone who definitely needs sex ed and contraception counseling. After all, this woman had already delivered four children and the four fetal remains clearly indicate that she didn’t want to raise any more kids. But why didn’t she get on the pill, use condoms, a sponge, a diaphragm, spermicidal gel, an IUD or any of the host of other contraceptive combinations available? Did she not know of these things? Or was she just morally opposed to contraception? And, after she got pregnant each of those four times, why didn’t she just pay a visit to the local Planned Parenthood? I know abortion is never an easy choice but it sure beats the hell out of delivering a dead baby in your bathtub, wrapping it in a towel, stashing it under the sink, and waiting for the profuse bleeding to stop. And, it’s a thousand times more disturbing if it turns out that the four fetal remains—essentially multiple miscarriages—were the result of her performing abortions on herself.

Since the media isn’t asking the really important questions in this case, I’m going to speculate on what went down. It’s possible Christy Freeman is completely ignorant of contraceptive methods, but this is unlikely because even in backwards Ocean City, you can find condoms in every gas station and convenience store. More likely, she was raised in a conservative environment where there was little talk of sex or contraception, and where abortion was the ultimate taboo. Why else would this owner of a popular and successful taxicab company endure the horrific ordeal of giving birth to dead or dying babies and then hide the remains in her home? Besides the aforementioned possibility that she’s crazy, of course. Christy Freeman probably did not want anyone to know she had had an abortion because she did not want to be stigmatized. And why would the state’s attorney charge her with first-degree murder? Because the state has decreed that killing a viable fetus (read having an abortion) is tantamount to murder. It seems that Christy Freeman, having found herself trapped between state law and social stigma, had more than enough reason to not seek a safe and professional—but perhaps not 100% secret—abortion.

So what we have is a woman living in a conservative county, in a state that has decided some abortions are murders, who would rather give birth in her bathroom and stash fetal remains around her home than go to Planned Parenthood for an abortion. And, to make matters worse, she is now being charged with murder!

Like Majikthise, we should all be completely outraged! How much longer before we find ourselves back in the bad old days of wire hangers and back alley abortions?

War on Menstruation Enters Latest Phase.

We’ve all heard of premenstrual syndrome (PMS) and it’s many negative effects on women’s moods and whatnot but now, it seems menstruation itself is being targeted as a medical condition; and of course, the pharmaceutical companies are lining up with their version of “the cure.”

Read on . . ..