Honestly, I never knew who this woman was until I just googled her after reading this post. Without having read anything else, and only looking at google images, I think I understand now...She's semiattactive. That's it. Otherwise, she wouldn't have a shot at offending anyone on national TV. That last image is taken directly from anncoulter.org
from wiki: Shiksa (Yiddish: שיקסע) or "Shikse," is a Yiddish word that has moved into English usage, mostly in North American Jewish culture and is sometimes used as a pejorative or mock-pejorative term for a Gentile (or non-Jewish) woman. Discretion in use of the term is called for, as it is still regarded as offensive by some. However, as the many examples from popular culture below show, it is generally used in a humorous way.
The word could be derived from the Hebrew term sheketz, which means either "abomination"[1], "detestable", "loathed" or "blemish," "insect", "subhuman", depending on the translator. It can be used to refer to any female gentile.
The term shiksa, despite its etymology, is a derogatory term that is widely used and accepted in the United States.
Is there a right-wing firebrand ever more outspoken than Coulter? I feel like she makes Buchanan look like Nader.
Malkin's kinda gunning for it. The main difference, though, is that not even Ann Coulter takes Ann Coulter all that seriously. She's just trying to stir shit up for the sake of stirring shit up, and at the end of the day, she considers herself an entertainer much more than some sort of well-grounded commentator. She's definitely a wingnut, but most of what she does is just schtick.
Malkin, on the other hand, actually considers herself a serious journalist doing serious journalistic things. She takes herself utterly seriously, which is part of why her latest episode (stalking the family of the 12-year-old kid who gave the Democrats' statement regarding Bush's S-CHIP veto, insinuating that the family is a bunch of rich-ass freeloaders based on partially on--I shit you not--the [utterly false] notion that the family has granite countertops in their kitchen, then, after being roundly humiliated, chickening out of actually debating her point) so funny. She wants so desperately to be taken seriously, but she's repeatedly undone by her own wingnuttery and incompetence.
PS, that doctored Jesus Camp clip cracked me the fuck up.
I don't think it's possible for that graemlin to be used more ironically.
Hmm, you seem to be taking issue with my posts in this thread -- but in a vague way that doesn't let me know what, if anything, is our point of disagreement.
Is there a right-wing firebrand ever more outspoken than Coulter? I feel like she makes Buchanan look like Nader.
She's a left wing plant......a Deadhead in disguise.....a surreal stereotype of what every liberal would like to think represents the right.
Bizarre female Colbert action.
I have never met a single person, even here in Texas, who supports anything this wench has to say.
And of course Dick Cheney is a lizard as proven in the earlier "Cheney Church" video clip.
She has figured out in a completely obvious way how to push the buttons of the NPR-centric left-leaning yuppies of the USA. It's pretty comical that anyone takes her seriously or sees her as being some sort of 'threat'. It's showbiz and it sells books and she will keep doing it as long as people keep acting horrified.
For the record, I don't think people are stupid, I think they are lazy and stubborn and mostly mean-spirited, but not as stupid as the people who program and produce a lot television want them to be.
For the record, I don't think people are stupid, I think they are lazy and stubborn and mostly mean-spirited, but not as stupid as the people who program and produce a lot television want them to be.
Maybe we're saying the same thing... I mean people usually live vacant lives of consumerism and generally either don't bother to try to change the world, or do bother and change it for the worse (i.e. with the people they elect, the wars they support, their attitudes towards sex and drugs, their views on religion and morality, etc).
I don't really blame people for living these empty, sad lives. At least in the US, their chances of getting a solid education -- let alone a dynamic, inspiring one -- are next to nil. That, coupled with the pressure from the media and corporations to consume and conform, creates a climate in which the average American will crack open a beer and a bag of Cheez Whiz and hoot and holler while Coulter spits hate.
Is there a right-wing firebrand ever more outspoken than Coulter? I feel like she makes Buchanan look like Nader.
Malkin's kinda gunning for it. The main difference, though, is that not even Ann Coulter takes Ann Coulter all that seriously. She's just trying to stir shit up for the sake of stirring shit up, and at the end of the day, she considers herself an entertainer much more than some sort of well-grounded commentator. She's definitely a wingnut, but most of what she does is just schtick.
Malkin, on the other hand, actually considers herself a serious journalist doing serious journalistic things. She takes herself utterly seriously, which is part of why her latest episode (stalking the family of the 12-year-old kid who gave the Democrats' statement regarding Bush's S-CHIP veto, insinuating that the family is a bunch of rich-ass freeloaders based on partially on--I shit you not--the [utterly false] notion that the family has granite countertops in their kitchen, then, after being roundly humiliated, chickening out of actually debating her point) so funny. She wants so desperately to be taken seriously, but she's repeatedly undone by her own wingnuttery and incompetence.
yes, Malkin takes the cake. i watched Olberman's piece on her last night and the one thing you forgot to mention was that she published the family's address on her website!! as if supporting bush's veto isn't evil enough...
Is there a right-wing firebrand ever more outspoken than Coulter? I feel like she makes Buchanan look like Nader.
Malkin's kinda gunning for it. The main difference, though, is that not even Ann Coulter takes Ann Coulter all that seriously. She's just trying to stir shit up for the sake of stirring shit up, and at the end of the day, she considers herself an entertainer much more than some sort of well-grounded commentator. She's definitely a wingnut, but most of what she does is just schtick.
Malkin, on the other hand, actually considers herself a serious journalist doing serious journalistic things. She takes herself utterly seriously, which is part of why her latest episode (stalking the family of the 12-year-old kid who gave the Democrats' statement regarding Bush's S-CHIP veto, insinuating that the family is a bunch of rich-ass freeloaders based on partially on--I shit you not--the [utterly false] notion that the family has granite countertops in their kitchen, then, after being roundly humiliated, chickening out of actually debating her point) so funny. She wants so desperately to be taken seriously, but she's repeatedly undone by her own wingnuttery and incompetence.
PS, that doctored Jesus Camp clip cracked me the fuck up.
That's the nutroot version of the story, which is entirely cracked. Said Baltimore family had like 300,000 in assets and would allegedly qualify under the S-chip program for aid meant for far poorer people. Conservatives were making a case that a program initially meant to help poor kids, through Democratic mission creep, was just a subsidy that could be had by fairly well off families. And Ezra Klein is the last dude in the world to talk about good faith arguments, his stock and trade is ad hominum, tendentious blather.
I have my own probs with Coulter and even at times with Malkin, but there is a kind of group think quality of how the politically left blogs approach the two of them, as if on cue from mediamatters.
Is there a right-wing firebrand ever more outspoken than Coulter? I feel like she makes Buchanan look like Nader.
Malkin's kinda gunning for it. The main difference, though, is that not even Ann Coulter takes Ann Coulter all that seriously. She's just trying to stir shit up for the sake of stirring shit up, and at the end of the day, she considers herself an entertainer much more than some sort of well-grounded commentator. She's definitely a wingnut, but most of what she does is just schtick.
Malkin, on the other hand, actually considers herself a serious journalist doing serious journalistic things. She takes herself utterly seriously, which is part of why her latest episode (stalking the family of the 12-year-old kid who gave the Democrats' statement regarding Bush's S-CHIP veto, insinuating that the family is a bunch of rich-ass freeloaders based on partially on--I shit you not--the [utterly false] notion that the family has granite countertops in their kitchen, then, after being roundly humiliated, chickening out of actually debating her point) so funny. She wants so desperately to be taken seriously, but she's repeatedly undone by her own wingnuttery and incompetence.
PS, that doctored Jesus Camp clip cracked me the fuck up.
That's the nutroot version of the story, which is entirely cracked. Said Baltimore family had like 300,000 in assets and would allegedly qualify under the S-chip program for aid meant for far poorer people. Conservatives were making a case that a program initially meant to help poor kids, through Democratic mission creep, was just a subsidy that could be had by fairly well off families. And Ezra Klein is the last dude in the world to talk about good faith arguments, his stock and trade is ad hominum, tendentious blather.
I have my own probs with Coulter and even at times with Malkin, but there is a kind of group think quality of how the politically left blogs approach the two of them, as if on cue from mediamatters.
Dude, please don't tell me you actually buy Malkin's argument. You're way too smart for that.
That "$300,000" in assets? That's primarily their house (bought for $55K many years ago, now appraised at a little over $260K). Are you saying they should have to choose between shelter and medical care? They make $45K-$50K a year as a family of six. They are not "fairly well off." They are well within the guidelines for S-CHIP qualifications. This pissed Malkin off, so she went off on a half-cocked mission in which she got all of her "facts" wrong. Then, a la Brave Sir Robin, she pussied out of a neutral-ground, facts-only debate. Because she knows she can't win it. And it hurts her because, like I said, she really wants to be taken seriously as a journalist despite having none of the qualifications of a journalist.
It's also worth noting that she did all of this in order to oppose to a bill that has overwhelming public support as well as very strong bipartisan legislative support.
COULTER: No. In fact, there was an entire Seinfeld episode about Elaine and her boyfriend dating because they wanted to be a mixed-race couple, so you're lying.
Comments
BAN.
Just on taste, alone.
woah! what is that?
Shiksa (Yiddish: שיקסע) or "Shikse," is a Yiddish word that has moved into English usage, mostly in North American Jewish culture and is sometimes used as a pejorative or mock-pejorative term for a Gentile (or non-Jewish) woman. Discretion in use of the term is called for, as it is still regarded as offensive by some. However, as the many examples from popular culture below show, it is generally used in a humorous way.
The word could be derived from the Hebrew term sheketz, which means either "abomination"[1], "detestable", "loathed" or "blemish," "insect", "subhuman", depending on the translator. It can be used to refer to any female gentile.
The term shiksa, despite its etymology, is a derogatory term that is widely used and accepted in the United States.
Archaics wife revealed?
yea, she's a horse-face-killah.
i would hate smash though if i wasn't engaged.
I think you may have watched too much TV.
Her arms are fascinating - they are just so long!
She's a left wing plant......a Deadhead in disguise.....a surreal stereotype of what every liberal would like to think represents the right.
Bizarre female Colbert action.
I have never met a single person, even here in Texas, who supports anything this wench has to say.
And of course Dick Cheney is a lizard as proven in the earlier "Cheney Church" video clip.
Grew up in a household w/o one.
I don't think it's possible for that graemlin to be used more ironically.
if she was getting gangbanged by some chosen folks I'd pony up 24.95 for the DVD
Malkin's kinda gunning for it. The main difference, though, is that not even Ann Coulter takes Ann Coulter all that seriously. She's just trying to stir shit up for the sake of stirring shit up, and at the end of the day, she considers herself an entertainer much more than some sort of well-grounded commentator. She's definitely a wingnut, but most of what she does is just schtick.
Malkin, on the other hand, actually considers herself a serious journalist doing serious journalistic things. She takes herself utterly seriously, which is part of why her latest episode (stalking the family of the 12-year-old kid who gave the Democrats' statement regarding Bush's S-CHIP veto, insinuating that the family is a bunch of rich-ass freeloaders based on partially on--I shit you not--the [utterly false] notion that the family has granite countertops in their kitchen, then, after being roundly humiliated, chickening out of actually debating her point) so funny. She wants so desperately to be taken seriously, but she's repeatedly undone by her own wingnuttery and incompetence.
PS, that doctored Jesus Camp clip cracked me the fuck up.
Maybe it's best not to take a thread about the evils of anti-Semitism and use it to celebrate misogyny.
Hmm, you seem to be taking issue with my posts in this thread -- but in a vague way that doesn't let me know what, if anything, is our point of disagreement.
Yeah, I'm down for some freaky schitt, but that even blew my mind a little.
She has figured out in a completely obvious way how to push the buttons of the NPR-centric left-leaning yuppies of the USA. It's pretty comical that anyone takes her seriously or sees her as being some sort of 'threat'. It's showbiz and it sells books and she will keep doing it as long as people keep acting horrified.
For the record, I don't think people are stupid, I think they are lazy and stubborn and mostly mean-spirited, but not as stupid as the people who program and produce a lot television want them to be.
Saying I'd love to someone as vile as Ann Coulter literally fucked by those she insults makes you want to throw out the sexism card?
If thats how you see it, I ain't going to argue.
but still I'd love to see someone who sees my people as "imperfect" get her just desserts
Maybe we're saying the same thing... I mean people usually live vacant lives of consumerism and generally either don't bother to try to change the world, or do bother and change it for the worse (i.e. with the people they elect, the wars they support, their attitudes towards sex and drugs, their views on religion and morality, etc).
I don't really blame people for living these empty, sad lives. At least in the US, their chances of getting a solid education -- let alone a dynamic, inspiring one -- are next to nil. That, coupled with the pressure from the media and corporations to consume and conform, creates a climate in which the average American will crack open a beer and a bag of Cheez Whiz and hoot and holler while Coulter spits hate.
yes, Malkin takes the cake. i watched Olberman's piece on her last night and the one thing you forgot to mention was that she published the family's address on her website!! as if supporting bush's veto isn't evil enough...
That's the nutroot version of the story, which is entirely cracked. Said Baltimore family had like 300,000 in assets and would allegedly qualify under the S-chip program for aid meant for far poorer people. Conservatives were making a case that a program initially meant to help poor kids, through Democratic mission creep, was just a subsidy that could be had by fairly well off families. And Ezra Klein is the last dude in the world to talk about good faith arguments, his stock and trade is ad hominum, tendentious blather.
I have my own probs with Coulter and even at times with Malkin, but there is a kind of group think quality of how the politically left blogs approach the two of them, as if on cue from mediamatters.
Dude, please don't tell me you actually buy Malkin's argument. You're way too smart for that.
That "$300,000" in assets? That's primarily their house (bought for $55K many years ago, now appraised at a little over $260K). Are you saying they should have to choose between shelter and medical care? They make $45K-$50K a year as a family of six. They are not "fairly well off." They are well within the guidelines for S-CHIP qualifications. This pissed Malkin off, so she went off on a half-cocked mission in which she got all of her "facts" wrong. Then, a la Brave Sir Robin, she pussied out of a neutral-ground, facts-only debate. Because she knows she can't win it. And it hurts her because, like I said, she really wants to be taken seriously as a journalist despite having none of the qualifications of a journalist.
It's also worth noting that she did all of this in order to oppose to a bill that has overwhelming public support as well as very strong bipartisan legislative support.
my birthday is in 10 days, folls.