Ann Coulter's Weekly Column
Now open for public comments.
All Opinions welcome but please keep it clean and respectful.
If you want to enjoy more of what the ACOC forum has to offer, please register.
Forum Moderator
Posts: 10366
Joined: Wed Mar 24, 2010 11:28 am



#1 Post by kermit » Wed Oct 12, 2016 6:38 pm


October 12, 2016

*Please note graphic language throughout the column.*

Donald Trump is the only hope to save America, so the media have gone to war to stop him.

They don't care about being exposed as lying, hypocritical swine -- I'd describe them more fully, but it would require locker room talk. They'll win the public back later. Right now, all that matters is stopping Trump.

The same media that are pretending to consider the use of a bad word equivalent to rape don't give a fig about real rape, real sexual assault, real whoring, even real homicide, depending on who did it.

JFK was an STD-infected drug addict who cavorted with whores at the White House, but the media ferociously hid all this from the public, publishing fairy-tale versions of his presidency as "Camelot.”

And what happened to the 11-year rule? Trump said the word "p*ssy" 11 years ago, in a secretly recorded conversation. Eleven years before Sen. Teddy Kennedy ran for president, he killed a girl -- but he ran, not only without apology, but, indeed, as the Conscience of the Democratic Party.

Throughout 2009, good, decent Americans who happened to oppose Obamacare were called the name of a gay sex act hundreds of times on TV -- and that was just on MSNBC. CNN's Anderson Cooper made the reference explicit when he giggled, "It's hard to talk when you're tea-bagging.”

Among the people using this sexual slur were distinguished members of Congress such as U.S. Sen. Robert Menendez and Rep. Barney Frank. Were they fit to hold office?

Going way, way, way back to a few weeks ago, the same media gasping in horror at "p*ssy" sure didn't mind my being called a c*nt repeatedly on a Comedy Central broadcast. And when I say "didn't mind," I mean they thought it was awesome.

But saying "p*ssy" 11 years ago is over the line.

Cut the crap, media.

A few years ago, Sen. Al Franken joked on a Comedy Central roast about producer Rob Reiner butt-f*cking his children. Does Hillary think he's fit to be a U.S. senator? Is he fit enough for the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works, but not the Senate Finance Committee?

None of these were leaks of secretly recorded conversations -- considered a hanging offense in the Clinton years. These vulgarities were intentionally, publicly broadcast by the same media that, today, pretend to need smelling salts after hearing "p*ssy."

At least this new puritanical standard explains why rappers like Jay Z are banned from the White House. Wait — what?

Perhaps realizing their Victorian virgin act wasn't cutting it, the media turned to their Pretend We Don't Understand English method of argument, and claimed that Trump was confessing to having committed a "sexual assault”!

Trump said: "When you're a star, they let you do it. You can do anything. Grab 'em by the pussy. You can do any of that. (Laughter.)" Journalists turned this into "sexual assault" by being literal on the "grab" part, non-figurative on the "you" part -- and on the "they let you do it" part? Stone, cold deaf.

If "they let you do it," it's not an assault.

Like most of Trump's bragging, his loutish boast was not intended to be taken seriously, nor was it. Far from whipping out his pencil and carefully taking notes, "Access Hollywood"'s Billy Bush laughed. The gist of what Trump was saying is that -- hold onto your hats! -- women like to sleep with celebrities! I don't know if you've heard that before.

At least we're back to the media pretending to care about sexual assault -- until further notice.

This is the same media that ran interference for an actual sexual predator in the White House, ignoring Bill Clinton's serial pants-dropping, groping and raping for nearly a decade, while gleefully vilifying his accusers, and would have been happy to continue if Bill Richardson had become president. Clinton talking about p*ssy was one of his more dignified moments, proudly attested to by his friend Vernon Jordan in a nationally broadcast interview with Mike Wallace.

In the pages of The New York Times, feminist icon Gloria Steinem announced the "one-free grope" rule, specially developed for the Clinton era.

Former Time magazine correspondent Nina Burleigh said of Clinton, "I would be happy to give him a bl*w job just to thank him for keeping abortion legal.”

Time magazine's Margaret Carlson said Linda Tripp had "lost membership in the family of man" for secretly tape-recording Monica Lewinsky. Tripp kept the recordings not for something so exalted as stopping Trump, but to protect herself from a charge of perjury.

Even when the law began to close in on the horny hick -- midway through the second term he won because of the media's heroic self-censorship -- the rest of us had to spend a year listening to liberals say “Guys like bl*w jobs,” “Everybody does it" and "Let's move on.”

When Clinton was credibly accused of rape by Juanita Broaddrick, NBC strategically held the story -- until a week after the Senate had voted in the rapist's impeachment trial. All the public could do was helplessly sport "Free Lisa Myers" buttons, referring to the investigative reporter who got the interview.

Explaining NBC's incomprehensible decision to hold its own investigative report, Myers told Broaddrick: "The good news is you're credible. The bad news is that you're very credible.”

At least NBC ran the story eventually. The name "Juanita Broaddrick" never crossed the lips of "CBS Evening News" anchor Dan Rather.

Asked by FNC's Bill O'Reilly why he never got around to mentioning that the commander in chief was, more likely than not, a rapist, Rather said, "When the charge has something to do with somebody's private sex life, I would prefer not to run any of it.”

So according to our media, committing a rape is "somebody's private sex life," but using a bad word is rape.

Poor Billy Bush has to be fired from NBC's "Today" show so the media can pretend that Trump's using bawdy language is a very, very serious offense.

Meanwhile, Billy's ex-president uncle and cousin openly fraternize with the rapist. The second President Bush calls Bill Clinton his "brother from another mother" and praises Clinton's "character" -- something even Clinton's defenders never did with a straight face.

Now the networks are holding casting calls for some loon willing to falsely accuse Trump of sexual assault, so they can hype it like the Duke lacrosse case, Mattress Girl and Rolling Stone's fraternity rape. Unfortunately -- for us, fortunately for the media -- by the time the truth comes out, the election will be over.






#2 Post by Sarah » Wed Oct 12, 2016 10:04 pm

Ann made her points with pinpoint precision as usual. Excellent. In one paragraph, though, it reads "Trump" where it should read "Clinton"--something I had hoped to bring to her attention as I'm assuming she'd want it corrected.

Time magazine’s Margaret Carlson said Linda Tripp had “lost membership in the family of man” for secretly tape-recording Monica Lewinsky. Tripp kept the recordings not for something so exalted as stopping Trump [CLINTON] but to protect herself from a charge of perjury.




#3 Post by Guest » Wed Oct 12, 2016 11:09 pm

Roiphe: Why did the public opinion overwhelmingly support Anita Hill, whereas Monica Lewinsky nobody has any sympathy for?

Prose: Because none of it’s clean.

I mean, I wanted Clarence Thomas out of there.

You know, so I was willing to go with Anita Hill.

Even though I thought, you know, What’s the big deal about someone making a joke about pubic hair on your Coke can … who cares about that?

Whereas I don’t want Clinton out of there.

--- New York Supergals Love That Naughty Prez By Francine Prose • 02/09/98 ---

Okay, class, let’s review: The man in question has been sued for sexual harassment over an episode that allegedly included dropping his trousers to waggle his erect penis at a woman who held a $6.35-an-hour clerical job in the state government over which he presided.

Another woman has charged that when she asked him for a job he invited her into his private office, fondled her breasts, and placed her hand on his crotch.

A third woman confided to friends that when she was a 21-year-old intern she began an affair with the man—much older, married, and the head of the organization whose lowliest employee she was.

Actually, it was less an affair than a service contract, in which she allegedly dashed into his office, when summoned, to perform oral sex on him.

After their liaison was revealed, he denied everything, leaving her to be portrayed as a tramp and a liar.

Or, in his own words, “that woman.”

Let us not even mention the former lover who was steered to a state job;

or the law-enforcement officers who say the man used them to solicit sexual partners for him;

or his routine use of staff members, lawyers, and private investigators to tar the reputation of any woman who tries to call him to account for his actions.

Can you find the problems with his behavior?

Take your time: these problems are apparently of an order so subtle as to escape the notice of many of the smartest women in America—the writers, lawyers, activists, officeholders, and academics who call themselves feminists

--- Lowering The Bar: "Clinton and Women" Marjorie Williams Vanity Fair May 1998 ---

Hillary flipped on the TV on Monday, January 27, and caught the end of Gennifer Flowers on CNN

playing tapes

of her phone conversations with the governor.

They were devastating.

“Let’s get Bill on the phone,” Hillary coolly directed her campaign manager, Mintz, who was himself fighting back tears.

According to Hillary, Clinton told his wife he wasn’t concerned—

after all, who was going to believe this woman?

“Everybody knows you can be paid to do anything,” the governor said.

“Everybody doesn’t know that,” she insisted.


On the tiny plane, Hillary focused on the problem at hand.

“I’m just not going to sit by anymore and say, ‘Well, it’s the press’s responsibility.’

If we can destroy people with paid stories, what’s next? . . .

I don’t think Bill appreciates how TV really doesn’t give the other side.

It’s like negative advertising.”

A light bulb switched on behind her eyes.

“That’s what I should have told him.

In 1980 the Republicans started the negative advertising;

in 1992 we have paid political character assassination.

What Bill doesn’t understand is you’ve gotta do the same thing

in response as you do with negative advertising

—Dukakis didn’t understand that.”

Suddenly, a brainstorm.

“This is the daughter of Willie Horton!”

Now she had the outlines of a proactive, not reactive, strategy:

pound the “Republican attack machine”

and run against the press.

Just before landing, she recited a prayer she says often: Dear Lord, be good to me. The sea is so wide and my boat is so small.

Thump, bump, the plane skated through the blackness toward a shack with the sign RAPID CITY. Within minutes, Hillary was clicking across the concrete airfield, coatless,

eager to coach her husband and rev up the campaign staff on a conference call.

“Who’s getting information on the Star?” she demanded. “Who’s tracking down all the research on Gennifer?

-- "Hillary Clinton: The Second Candidate in Bill’s Presidency" by GAIL SHEEHY Vanity Fair 1992 may issue---

Dan Austin



#4 Post by Dan Austin » Thu Oct 13, 2016 9:12 pm

Ann is right about the hypocrisy and double standard of the media, but I think it's simply too big and powerful for Trump or anyone else to overcome. If someone else had been nominated as the republican presidential candidate, the democrat/media establishment would have found other 'gotchas' to win against them.

Much of this is simply due to human nature. High minded rebels may develop a document like the US Constitution and start a new country, but eventually 'career politicians' take over. They become increasingly unprincipled and corrupt over time, using lies and power to stay in control, until they are little more than criminals running the country for themselves and the connected.

That transition to corruption is facilitated by voter indifference and tolerance. The current level of corruption could not exist under a vigilant and educated population. Even that is part of human nature.

All of this points to the fact that this is basically impossible to change. It's just an inevitable consequence of trends that started when the country was founded.

In all probability. November 8th will seal the deal, making the US a fully corrupt banana republic.




#5 Post by Guest » Fri Oct 21, 2016 11:02 am

Plymouth State University in NH has sent a hateful, irresponsible, and harmful message to the world. That sexual assaults against women are without consequence and not taken seriously. This message is putting women everywhere at risk! Please help hold Plymouth State University accountable and reverse this negative message. Here are links to the news stories so you can see how dangerous this message is.

http://www.unionleader.com/Plymouth-Sta ... minal-past

http://www.unionleader.com/education/ps ... n-20161004

How does a man who sexually assaulted a 19 year old college girl in a dorm room get a job teaching 19 year old college girls?

How does a man who conceals his criminal record of sex crimes against young women keep his job teaching young women when he is finally exposed by the local paper?

How does this incident not get the attention it deserves at a time when women all over the country are running for office and women's issues are a popular topic?

Anything you can do to expose and eliminate Plymouth State University's message will help! The school is not letting the school paper, The Clock at PSU, report about the incident. School administrators have even been intimidating students who express concerns about this matter. The New Hampshire coalition of women against violence and sexual violence has turned a blind eye. We have nobody to turn to for help and must remain anonymous because we fear retaliation from PSU. Please help and share our story/situation with anyone else who can help.

Forever grateful for your assistance,
Students at PSU

Posts: 12
Joined: Thu Nov 03, 2016 12:34 am



#6 Post by chulcoop » Mon Nov 07, 2016 12:33 pm

Regarding the words Donald used, to some they were not sure if he meant people can do things to women because they are celebrities AND THE WOMEN WANT THAT or if he meant people can do things to women and they are too scared to complain for fear of losing their jobs.

It was not clear what he meant.

There are some people who do grope employees and know they will get away with it because the employee may be scared of losing their job and having no income. They know even if they report it and get fired for reporting it, they may get a lot in compensation then struggle to get another job.

Sometimes the employer may pay over the going rate for the job and she is expected to put up with his advances, etc, her knowing she won't earn as much elsewhere.

Different work cultures have different rules of what is and is not considered acceptable.

In the past if a woman walked onto a building site then men would whistle at her, and she was expected to take it is as a complement, often while she blushed.

These days a lot of women will complain to the management and ask him to have a word with the workers and ask them not to do it again.

In the past on TV, presenters would hug contestants on game shows etc. Nowadays that might be seen as unwanted physical contact.

Donald is from a time when things went on. Nowadays we have a culture when men and women are too scared to touch each other and the man is too scared for asking a woman out at work in case he gets fired for doing so.

If Donald meant that women throw themselves at celebrities that is OK.

If he meant that celebrities can get away with doing things to women which they did not want or ask for or suggest they wanted then that is wrong.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest