Coulter: Women object to TSA adopting full-body scans because Bill Clinton might become an airport screener
January 05, 2010 9:40 pm ET
From the January 5 edition of Fox News The O'Reilly Factor:
Please upgrade your flash player. The video for this item requires a newer version of Flash Player. If you are unable to install flash you can download a QuickTime version of the video.
















How is joking about Bill Clinton's past affairs (although this is not mentioned, it is surely implied) any different from calling a woman by any other name, and you know which ones I mean. I believe Alan Grayson got in trouble for using it...
What is even more interesting is that the right, which claims to be the keeper of morality likes to point fingers and insult other people's flaws and shortcomings...
---------------------------------
The Midnight Review
Am I missing something?
gosh, Ann, you kep at it and one day you will be as funny as that masculine bump on your throat (you know, right below your horseface).
(See, we on the Left can also resort to stupid attacks on people to appear that we are actually making a point.)
ɥɔʇıq
"The list of Women I'd Love to Scan
Doesn't include Ms. Ann"
(apologies to Mr. News)
I do agree, though I hate to admit it, with her; it is ridiculous; since the shoe bomber we have had to take off our shoes, does this mean we will now have to take off our undies?
FIXED
Ahh! The Coultergeist! Scaring TV screens again! This is the same woman(????)who said that women should not be allowed to vote because they tend to vote democratic!
SMH!
If Coulter ever gets a full-body scan, they need to wear protective googles, or they will go insane - like that episode in star trek.
Here's a link to the episode, if you want to view it:
http://www.cbs.com/classics/star_trek/video/video.php?pid=gQ_yg0O8qR5i2QquJSkjDKD21pULIZUh&play=true
We're to ALL THROW AWAY OUR VALUES for security, but, when it comes to them having to be seen slightly naked, it becomes wrong. Bull!
I'm sorry, this is ridiculous, I don't care who sees me, are we living in the 16th century?
On top of that, the fact of the matters is - If someone wants to give their life to take yours, or others - They probably will.