Wednesday, April 26, 2017

Ann Coulter Does Not Understand Big Words

The first five words of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution are as follows
"Congress shall make no law..."
However Ann Coulter --  who scammed a J.D. from the University of Michigan Law School in 1988 -- believes the First Amendment to the United States Constitution was created so that she could vomit her vile crap on Berkeley's dime:


Congress shall make no law.

When the Congress passes a law snuffing out this loathsome gorgon's right to free speech, get back to me.  Until then the fate of this loathsome gorgon is irrelevant to me.  She is a human disease vector and anyone who giver her career oxygen is complicit in killing our country.

Because Ann Coulter is not stupid.

Ann Coulter is evil.  She's been evil for decades.  She is a 100% known quantity.

And people with power who know better keep giving this loathsome gorgon a platform, because it draws a mob, which is what they want.

We should know who these people are.

We should know their names.

We should know how to get in touch with them should we wish to register our displeasure.


Jimbo said...

Skeletor has a J.D.? Well, the law seems to have escaped her and her lunatic rantings simply show her self-indulgent narcissism like her hero Trump.

Grung_e_Gene said...

Free Speech is reserved for conservatives. Anything which interferes with the ceaseless spreading of right wing propaganda is tyranny.

dinthebeast said...

(I cross-posted this comment elsewhere, but don't feel like raising my blood pressure again by writing a new one, so here it is:)

So Ann Coulter has given up on pissing off the liberals in Berkeley this time. If seeing her speak at a college was the only way to hear what she has to say, I'd say her argument about getting to speak there had some merit, but last I checked that gorgon's vicious drivel is everywhere you look. It's not that we don't want to allow ourselves to be exposed to her, uh, ideas, it's that we've heard them already and decided that they suck donkey balls, and have no interest in being insulted and browbeaten by them again. And what's more, she knows that, but is in the business of pissing off liberals for money, and UC Berkeley is legendary for it's liberals to piss off.
So go fuck yourself, Ann, and I hope you catch something when you do.

-Doug in Oakland

Anonymous said...

What is a J.D.?

Her use of the words 'thuggish' and 'snuff' disconcert me. These are not idle words.
Ideas have been forming in my liberal brain that I can hardly wait to be able to express.

Donald Walsh said...

J.D.= juris doctorate; a law degree.

Good point DG, she's selling victim hood for the benefit of Fox and the right wing interwebs. She's the Kim Kardashian of wingnuttery, constantly selling her life for another 15 minutes of fame.

Dave McCarthy said...

"We should know who these people are.

We should know their names.

We should know how to get in touch with them should we wish to register our displeasure."


lostnacfgop said...

Oh, but the best part of the story is the insistence - by Coulter and her handful of "promoters" in Berkeley that the U warn attendees that hecklers would be ejected. . . ! The shame shrewish carping about her free speech rights to throw rhetorical rat feces into an ether she helped for decades to toxify wants a comfy rule and safe place for her where it won't be tossed back? What an abject fraud. Another grifter trolling on manufactured notoriety. Hey Cons - you hate Al Shaprton and other figures you say create or take advantage of controversy for personal gain? I give you Zombie Coulter . . . ,

Fritz Strand said...

Cenk of tyt fame, completely unmasked her in an interview. Her sole purpose in life is to humor her drooling idiot followers by convincing them she is pissing off liberals.

Jonny Scrum-half said...

I love the posts here, but the mockery of Coulter in this post is wrong. The Supreme Court has ruled that the First Amendment prohibits state infringement on free speech, so Cal Berkeley (as a state school) is governed by the First Amendment.

Anonymous said...

We, are not wrong. It's called sardonicism.
She, is evil.
We, are right to call it what it is.

proverbialleadballoon said...

@Jonny Scrum-half: You may be correct, which is all the more reason this is win-win for Coulter and her ilk. Pisses off liberals, and get to say 'see, the liberals are the real authoritarians.' It's a grey area in the law, the First Amendment doesn't protect yelling fire in a crowded theater. But what about if a state-funded school knows that someone is going to yell fire on campus and incite whatever fallout? Does a 'reasonable person' think that curtailing any possible/probable fallout from occurring is within the law? This reasonable person has problems with any pre-emptive curtailing of free speech, even though I can plainly see what Coulter is doing is coming in and goading liberals, because who knows what slippery slope of legal precedence that leads down. I'd think that Berkeley is acting within the law when it comes to not allowing her to speak as an invited speaker, the First Amendment doesn't protect your ability to collect a paycheck for speaking. But as for allowing her on campus, I'd think that she's within her rights to be allowed to go on campus, and do whatever she likes ... as long as it doesn't cause anyone else harm. Does knowing that she will cause harm give the school legal cause to disallow her from campus? ehh, grey area, you're probably right, and it's a win for Coulter and her ilk. Does the cost of whatever security that the school would need to provide in order to allow Coulter on campus, is that an undue cost? I dunno, I'm no lawyer. The cost of security being an undue burden on the school, I would think that would be a winner for Berkeley in a court of law, if it even went there. But Coulter gets to play the victim in the court of public opinion.
@driftglass: chuffed about your appropriation of gorgon when speaking about Coulter. She is a miserable, terrible creature. When Perseus lopped off her head, Poseidon's children Pegasus and [a golden warrior] popped out, so there's that I guess.

John said...

I'm a Berkeley alum. I know the place pretty well. I'm fairly certain that the reason she is having difficulties is the expense involved in providing security for an event like this. That could lead to expenses in the six figures, easily. Moreover, what if someone gets hurt? I actually think that the Berkeley admin doesn't want to exclude her from speaking. It's just that the expense and potential liablilities are too great.

And Coulter has no reason to complain that her speech is stifled. Sadly, she is an omnipresent and unavoidable fixture in our discourse.

Rusty White said...

Bill Maher is one of her biggest supporters who continually has her on his show in some lame attempt to show a "balance of ideas" even though her ideas are easy disprovable hunks of sh*t. I stopped watching long ago when his producers felt the need to book her, Jeffrey Lord, Milo, Jack Kingston, Grover Norquist and other craven media wh*res. I still believe that she is pulling an Andy Kaufmann on everyone for that continual 15 mins. of fame and notoriety.

John said...

Oh, and I should add, the violence at these events... I have no idea where it comes from, but I suspect it's all or almost all from elements that are not affiliated in any way with the University.

dinthebeast said...

UC didn't stop her from speaking, she decided not to do it because she got better anti-liberal PR by doing so.

"Ann Coulter said Wednesday that she is canceling her planned speech at the University of California, Berkeley, because she had lost the backing of conservative groups that had initially sponsored her appearance."

Too bad she will never come to Oakland.

-Doug in Oakland

Mark Dobrowolski said...

Haven't you heard our president, the Constitution I'd sooo last century

Lit3Bolt said...

Berkeley has been getting beat up in the news because this is part of a concerted, Frank Luntz organized act of conservative protest art that LIBERALS are the real racists.

I noticed it when Ann Coulter was scheduled to give a speech, Berkeley was having trouble organizing security, and EVERY SINGLE CONSERVATIVE I ever read chirped their displeasure at this, like mechanical clockwork. James Joyner. David Frum. Redstate. Fox News. Bill Kristol. Krauthammer. Brit Hume. Rich Lowry. Hume even sniffed in displeasure that liberals were daring to protest conservative think tanks, like the Heritage Foundation, which is merely a a grassroots effort of millionaires and billionaires to control this country.

It's all a nationwide plan to delegitimize colleges, young people, California, liberals, minorities, women, you name it.

And the brain-dead conservative voters of this country will squirrel-dive into the TRUMP! Soylent Green Food Processor because Frank Luntz told them to, screaming "Conservatives are the REAL VICTIIMMMMMS!!!" as their last words in the universe.

Robt said...

Where was Coulter? Why did she remain silent? Or has she supported exclusion on free speech? You think Ann Coulter would stand with an abortion supporter to speak at the CPAC and be paid for it by funding via GOP and their donors?

Early in Obama's first year in the White House. University of Nebraska Lincoln invited Bill Ayers (of weather underground fame) to speak.

The vile angry and violence threatening was bright blowing red.

The university cancelled speaking gig because the right wing on the AM dial and the FOX railed heavily and riled the conservative listeners up to a frothy foam, "git yu'r guns militia" out of the paint ball gun training camps. To show up for the cause.
Bill Ayers could have taken the speaking fee by contract but did not. Even though he was cancelled and the contract expressed payment in the event.

I am not speaking up for dial Bill Ayers behalf. I have never met the man and have little assertions of his past (mistakes or achievements).
I do recall the Coulter on the Hannity (If I recall correctly), spitting verbal venom that Bill Ayers should never speak at any of this sort of setting. Because conservatism and American values.

moeman said...

How about a small word, like say, cunt.

Dean C. Rowan said...

Coulter is way off base for many reasons, one of which is that the campus student organization that invited her to speak failed to do its basic bureaucratic duty and confirm a reservation for a venue. But the 1A restriction to "Congress" doesn't tell the whole story. The 1A does apply to UC actions, because SCOTUS has held that 1A applies to state actions. UC, obviously, is a state agency.

RUKidding said...

Eh - I'd avoid the "c" word myself. Not really appropriate, IMO.

The vile, media whore Gorgon is using this event, per usual, to amp her "brand," while using the megaphone to shout her vile and nasty fascist hate speech.

My understanding (take with bag of salt) is that UC Berkeley is rightfully concerned about violence at this event. I believe it's happened now at least 3 times recently, possibly more. There is some speculation that the balaclava-wearing "protestors" who incite most of the violence are outside agitators. Wouldn't suprise me.

My understanding is that UC Berkeley Admin did set certain specifications for how/when Coulter's "talk" would happen, but I think (not sure) they wanted to reschedule. They did NOT prohibit her from speaking. They just wanted her to come at another time. The Admin claimed they were concerned about more violence. Well... should they NOT be concerned about that? What? Are they supposed to let Berkeley burn to the ground just in order to let his vile parasite spew forth her fugly hate-speech? If things really went south at this "speech" - which is possible - would not UC Berkeley then be in the frying pan for not doing a better job??

In this instance, then, it seems to me that there was no trampling of the Shrew's First Amend rights, but I think it would be true that her rights would have been trampled but ONLY IF UC Berkeley refused to let her on campus to speak at all.

IMO, flawed as it is, I don't believe UC Berkeley abrogated her First Amend rights. Rather this despicable Gorgon chose to use the scheduling of her "talk" to withdraw and then declare that she's going to sue. Of course, this gets huge media attention, and all the usual rightwing suspects jump into action shrieking their butt-hurt horror at the so-called perfidy and hypocrisy of Libtarded Berkeley. Works like charm - eh??

What I've read is that UC Berkeley students, while mostly NOT wanting to be in the same room as this disgusting specimen, DO support her First Amend rights to speak there. But they express justified concern at the potential for violence. UC Berkeley is supposed to protect these students, after all.

It appears that there's some organization that is booking all of these "speeches" from these super vile low-lifes, like this harridan and that previous Milo pederast. For me, it seems that the intention IS to rile things up, while then - as usual - whining and crying the usual rightwing victimizing blues. It's all too set and pat not to speculate that's the main aim and goal of these "talks."

And then finally, one can hardly AVOID this demon's disgusting brand of Hate speech no matter how hard one tries to do so. So it's not like no one "gets" what she's selling/shilling.

But I dispute that, in fact, this sh*thead's First Amend rights were abrograted. They weren't. She can talk at UC Berkeley, but she has to do so on their terms and when they chose to schedule her. Too bad, so sad, get used to it.

Neo Tuxedo said...

moeman, she lacks both the depth and the warmth.

ziply said...

I wouldn't pee to put her out if she were on fire, but a school that receives federal funding has obligations that a private school doesn't. She hasn't been convicted --yet-- of incitement to violence. She should be allowed to speak, and protesters should demonstrate and hold teach-ins debunking her hatespew. The more we stop them from showing their hideousness to the world, the more they get to play the victim for our disgusting, eager, slavish mainstream media.

ziply said...

Thanks for this clarification. I took others' word that she'd had been refused.

driftglass said...

I have the best commenters anywhere :-)

Robt said...

Just saying,

Coulter has the right to register for classes at UC. She can then go on campus at any time and stand under a tree and her soap box (full of her books).

Annie can go on Breitbart, hannity Bill maher any time and speak.

Let her sell herself to CPAC as the conservative voice the left shuns. Good for her brand (of nuts)

The Alternative fact of the matter is,

Annie and Kellyanne had that battle of the witches. Right down to their black cats. It was Hag Kellyanne who obliterated CWutch Coulter, with her Broom. This fihg tdid take place during the presidential campaign.

Now Coulter has no Cred with the right wing order or REpublican Brotherhood.

dinthebeast said...

...Aaaand it looks like Berkeley got wise and didn't take the bait when the protesters met the counter protesters this time.
Lately, whenever some scumbags pull some right-wing media stunt there, fights break out and video gets posted of "violent, anarchic, leftists assaulting people for expressing their first amendment rights in the heart of the free speech movement", and other such horse shit, which is taken and used as right wing propaganda to rile up the pig people.
Add to that the way these "events" get covered in the media, who breathlessly play them up to be something they're not in order to get ratings and clicks, and for someone who lives around here, it just gets sickening.
I happened to drive past the place where the last big "skirmish" went down the next day and you couldn't tell anything had happened.
But I live in Oakland where we have a higher standard for rioting, in that we seem to do it all the damn time and for the stupidest of reasons, so perhaps that may be why I'm not impressed with Berkeley lately.
Perhaps Ms. Coulter could book one of the lovely parks in East Oakland for her talk. I bet we could treat her fairly.

-Doug in Oakland