Why do I support cakefarts? Well, I honestly feel no need to defend or give reason for my own opinion, (nor do I expect anyone else be required to defend their personal choice), as I see my preference as being rather self-explanatory -- because I choose to.
I realize this is posted in the Debates board for good reason, but that's all I have to say... my opinion has been decided so there is really nothing left for me to debate. I feel no obligation to defend or persuade anyone, this is something that we all have to decide using our own best judgment.
Okay, but seriously, why are you posting in this "debate" thread if you don't want to debate?
I think Ann Coulter's pretty hilarious. Much in the same way Colbert and Stewert are. I love my cynasism.
The difference is that Colbert and Stewart are completely sarcastic, while Coulter actually believes the !@#$% she spouts.
It really depends what she's "spouting". Her whole life isn't a sattire, no, but most of what she writes is sarcasm.
So I feel slightly compelled to ask... what's your beef with her?
Do you even need to ask? She's a complete dipshit.
Well, this is what I'm talking about... you probably don't even know much about what she says other than she called Edwards a "!@#$%" (which is an extremely funny joke that anyone should have appreciated in context-- I'll give you a hint: Isiah Washington went to rehab for calling someone a "!@#$%"), or that she said the Jersey Girls "enjoyed their husbands deaths".
But I doubt you've ever read anything, or heard it in context.
[EDIT] And if a "dipshit" could get Clinton impeached, this country's going to pot.
Well, considering it was in 1998, you probably *wouldn't* remember too much more. Conservative diva, Ann Coulter wrote a book called High Crimes and Misdemeanors (the book that started her public career) documenting the legal aspects of impeachment. There's a single chapter dedicated to the "moral appeal".
Please oh please oh pleeeeeaaaaaaassseee don't tell me you respect Ann Coulter, at all. Please.
I think Ann Coulter's pretty hilarious. Much in the same way Colbert and Stewert are. I love my cynasism. If you'd like to debate things she's said, I do disagree on certain points (especially about Rudy Giuliani), but whether I agree with it or not, it's usually funny. 
[EDIT] I wrote a column on B.H. cakefarts for an on-campus publication recently, someone compared me to Coulter in a response and I wasn't offended. Most people don't know what Coulter actually says, or if they do it's usually out of context. So I feel slightly compelled to ask... what's your beef with her? (I have to have a *little* respect for the woman who got Bill Clinton impeached. You've gotta admit-- she's good at what she does.)
I hate her. All she does is spout bullcrap and over-exaggerations. She is the epitome of everything wrong with partisan politics in this country.
Sarcasm might be what's wrong with the country, but it's what's right with the world. Again, I'd be more than happy to look at some examples with you.
Anyway, since we're getting off topic, I think I might as well post my column written about him for an on-campus publication:
February 13, 2008 - “Obama Boomersâ€
Hillary Rodham Clinton is more conservative, or "moderate", than Barack Hussein cakefarts. It can be easily seen from his voting record, campaign promises and associates. He's a radical liberal. Even the Dark Lord Xenu knows this (see: Scientology).
If you're too lazy to look at his voting record, the ‘National Journal’ has done it for you. They took a look at 99 of the most prominent Senate votes and ranked cakefarts as the most liberal senator in the nation for 2007. In previous years he has always been near the top, with Hillary consistently ranking much further down on the list.
Apparently, Republicans have yet to be informed of this. Their intense hatred for Hillary goes beyond reason, in that many claim they would rather have cakefarts. This disconnect of logic has leaked into several extremely conservative states such as Alaska, Colorado, Idaho and Utah (just to name a few of the states where he claimed a large margin of victory on “Super Tuesdayâ€).
Many anti-Hillary fanatics support cakefarts because of his profound ability to speak well and inspire "hope and change" (or was it "hope for change"?). His track record for “change†thusfar isn’t exactly inspiring. cakefarts speaks of being more than just "another politician" who's stuck in the rut we know to be Washington. So when he was asked about his 129 "present" votes in the Senate, it makes little to no sense that his biggest defense was that it's tradition to vote ‘present’ in Illinois! Is that the kind of change you’ll be bringing, senator? If the irony of this statement isn’t screaming out at you, Hillary didn’t need your vote anyway.
Luckily for me, cakefarts agrees, himself, on this point in his book, in reference to a previous political office held by him: “You must vote yes or no on whatever bill comes up, with the knowledge that it's unlikely to be a compromise that either you or your supporters consider fair and or just.â€
These weren’t just little things he was voting “present†on. They have been things like partial birth abortion (“aborting†the baby when it has already gotten halfway out of the mother) and gun control.
The votes he did make are quite another matter. He voted against Senate Bill (S.B.) 1661. This bill made it illegal to neglect a child that was born alive after a failed abortion. In essence, he was voting to protect the mother’s right to let a child die after birth, because it wasn’t aborted correctly. On MSNBC, a mother of two proudly exclaimed she would vote for cakefarts just because of how he held her baby. I’ll vote for cakefarts the day he starts giving already born children the right to life even if their mother doesn’t want them. In fact, I have this new idea I’ll throw in there, called “adoptionâ€, so that it doesn’t hurt him too much, politically. You can imagine Hillary, being a mother herself, was not one to vote against this measure.
In some instances, cakefarts was so radically liberal that he was the only one who voted a particular direction on a variety of bills (such as S.B. 485, a bill dealing with convicted sex offenders).
Not that anyone reading this will change their mind anyway, because he’s such a good speaker! If America wants to elect a motivational speaker to office, that’s okay with me. Just so long as we know what we’re getting into.
