The IUSB Vision Weblog

The way to crush the middle class is to grind them between the millstones of taxation and inflation. – Vladimir Lenin

Ann Coulter on Couric & Biden

Posted by iusbvision on October 1, 2008

We do not quote Ann Coulter very often, Ann is often cryptic and uses a great deal if literary device that is designed to make a point that isn’t clear in the plain text. Quite frankly, most people are not smart enough to understand the nuanced reasoning in her work so quoting it doesn’t often relay the entire point she is making.

This column by Ann Coulter is plain English and a devastatingly accurate analysis. This article’s factual sting outshines Ann’s usual rhetorical sting.  

I tried to just find an excerpt but each paragraph hits like a Mac truck on I-5. HERE is the link to her site.

Ann Coulter: 

While Gov. Sarah Palin is being grilled on her position on mark-to-market accounting rules, the press can’t bother to ask Joe Biden if he could give us a ballpark estimate on when Franklin D. Roosevelt was president — or maybe take a stab at guessing the decade when televisions were first available to the public.

Being interviewed by Katie Couric on the “CBS Evening News,” Biden said: “When the stock market crashed, Franklin D. Roosevelt got on the television and didn’t just talk about the, you know, the princes of greed. He said, ‘Look, here’s what happened.'”

For those of you who aren’t hard-core history buffs, Biden not only named the wrong president during the 1929 stock market crash, he also claimed a president who wasn’t president during the stock market crash went on TV before Americans had TVs.

Other than that, the statement holds up pretty well. At least Biden managed to avoid mentioning any “clean” Negroes he had met.

Couric was nearly moved to tears by the brilliance of Biden’s brain-damaged remark. She was especially intrigued by Biden’s claim that FDR had said the new iPhone was the bomb!

Here is Couric’s full response to Biden’s bizarre outburst about FDR (a) being president and (b) going on TV in 1929: “Relating to the fears of the average American is one of Biden’s strong suits.”

But when our beauteous Sarah said that John McCain was a better leader on the economy than Barack Obama, Couric relentlessly badgered her for evidence. “Why do you say that?” Couric demanded. “Why are they waiting for John McCain and not Barack Obama? … Can you give us any more examples of his leading the charge for more oversight?”

The beauteous Sarah had cited McCain’s prescient warnings about Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. But Couric, the crackerjack journalist who didn’t know FDR wasn’t president in 1929, demanded more examples from Palin.

We are currently in the middle of a massive financial crisis brought on by Fannie Mae. McCain was right on Fannie Mae; Obama was wrong. That’s not enough?

Not for the affable Eva Braun of evening TV! “I’m just going to ask you one more time,” Couric snipped, “not to belabor the point. Specific examples in his 26 years of pushing for more regulation?”

This would be like responding to someone who predicted the 9/11 attacks by saying: OK, you got one thing right. Not to belabor the point, but what else?

Obama was not merely wrong on Fannie Mae: He is owned by Fannie Mae. Somehow Obama managed to become the second biggest all-time recipient of Fannie Mae political money after only three years in the Senate. The biggest beneficiary, Democratic Sen. Chris Dodd, had a 30-year head start on receiving loot from Fannie Mae — the government-backed institution behind our current crisis.

How does the Democratic ticket stack up on other major issues facing the nation, say, gas prices?

Shockingly, Sen. Joe Biden was one of only five senators to vote against the first Alaskan pipeline bill in 1973. This is like having been a Nazi sympathizer during World War II. If Sarah Palin does nothing else, she has got to tie that idiotic pipeline vote around Biden’s neck.

The Senate passed the 1973 Alaskan pipeline bill by an overwhelming 80-5 vote. Only five senators voted against the pipeline on final passage. Sen. Biden is the only one who is still in the Senate — the other four having been confined to mental institutions long ago.

The stakes were clear: This was in the midst of the first Arab oil embargo. Liberal Democrats, such as senators Robert Byrd, Mike Mansfield, Frank Church and Hubert Humphrey, all voted for the pipeline.

But Biden cast one of only five votes against the pipeline that has produced more than 15 billion barrels of oil, supplied nearly 20 percent of this nation’s oil, created tens of thousands of jobs, added hundreds of billions of dollars to the U.S. economy and reduced money transfers to the nation’s enemies by about the same amount.

The only argument against the pipeline was that it would harm the caribou, an argument that was both trivial and wrong. The caribou population near the pipeline increased from 5,000 in the 1970s to 32,000 by 2002.

It would have been bad enough to vote against the pipeline bill even if it had hurt the caribou. A sane person would still say: Our enemies have us in a vice grip. Sorry, caribou, you’ve got to take one for the team. But when the pipeline goes through and the caribou population sextuples in the next 20 years, you really look like a moron.

We couldn’t possibly expect Couric to ask Biden about a vote that is the equivalent of voting against the invention of the wheel. But couldn’t she have come up with just one follow-up question for Biden on FDR’s magnificent handling of the 1929 stock market crash?

Or here’s a question the public is dying to know: “If Obama wanted a historically delusional vice president, why not Lyndon LaRouche?” At least LaRouche didn’t vote against the Alaskan pipeline.

Awesome work Ann, you hit a mega home run with this one.

One Response to “Ann Coulter on Couric & Biden”

  1. Rob said

    Hey, if you are going to quote Ann Coulter, at least you could find one without a glaring misquote or flat out lie. Oops, that is right. In her incredibly intelligent manipulation of the English language that is too sophisticated to be truly understood in print, as often happens with the Bible, it may be impossible to find a quote that didn’t also manipulate the truth.

    Just face the facts. You are addicted to the fodder on fox news the same way a twisted trekky catelogues every appearance of Captain Kirk, and somehow believes it is truly the captain pushing price line. Ann Coulter is at best a pervert seeking fame, similar to S. Freud, and found the easiest target the whipped cream of grey matter republicans call their brain.

    If you are curious about the lies, consider that most of the money Obama was donated came from employees of Fannie and Freddie, not from PAC money like everyone else… Obama only received 6k of PAC money.

    Feel stupid yet? Wait until you are 55 and dying of ALS by choking on your own vomit and spittle, and think about how the republicans took away your right to die with dignity.

    Find something better to do with your time like helping those less fortunate.

    I have a Palin to go watch go up in flames. Nice choice McCain- couldn’t have done better myself. Then again, maybe I could have.

    With all respect and sincerity for the truth,


    [Hey Rob,

    Let’s talk about the facts shall we? Why do you think that it is that donations from employees of companies count as donations from that company? When you look at even’s definition of corporate donations, they include donations from that companies employees.

    The reason they do that is because when the BCRA restricted soft money donations and limited the amount of money that corporations could give, those companies would engage in employee bundling to get around the law. Employees would get a little bonus and they would in turn give money to a campaign that a company likes. America is a divided country almost 50/50 politically, so when the employees in a company give a single candidate or party over 80% of their so called “individual donations” since BCRA you know someone is gaming the system. That is why the Center for Responsive Politics, and most newspapers include these donations as corporate donations. Corporate employees did not give maxed donations in such uniformity untill this law was made.

    Nice try but you just tried to pull a fast one on someone who understands campaign finance. Any solid Poli Sci student can see through your argument. – Editor]

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: