"Most important, Democrats resolutely refuse to tell the poor the secret to not being poor: Keep your knees together until marriage.
That's it. Not class size, not preschool, not even vouchers, though vouchers would obviously improve the education of all students. You could have lunatics running the schools — and often do — and if the kids live with married parents, they will end up at good colleges and will lead happy, productive lives 99 percent of the time."
111 comments
99%? Now I know Ann doesn't believe everything she says.
I've never met any of these lunatics running the schools. But then maybe Canada has less lunatics (I bet she disagrees though). More over though I bet she's trying to scare her more gullible followers.
The only thing that fails to make me ill in that quote is the vouchers thing, and even that isn't "obvious" or "all".
Ann Coulter, please stop.
Oh, read the whole article. She talks about how horrid the public education system is, and in doing so, actually says that increasing the salary of teachers is a horrible idea. At the same time. Y'know, as though the concept of "you get what you pay for" doesn't apply to her.
"Keep your knees together until marriage."
She should know. No one wants to marry her. And goes through her day with her legs in a knot.
And everyone knows she's full of shit. Except her.
Actually, no, Ann Coulter.
The marital status of the parents involved really has no bearing on the total income involved. Unless there's a space on a job application that says
[ ] Single - $12,000 / year
Which it very well might at the factories, gas stations, carry outs, and other working class locations where you've had employment.
Eric - at no point does she mention the age of the parents. It is a single-handed assault on single parents in general, and for that, she is despicable. Well, for a lot of things, really, but this takes it.
Aaarrgh. Once again, context makes a fool of me. (Still not as big a fool as the Coultergeist, though.)
Oyvind - are you paying attention?
That's all it takes really. It does not matter what kind of relationship they have with each other, with you, how much money you have for education, how far you can travel to seek oppportunities, or your individual character and abilities.
And really, it is so much easier to convince people not to have sex than it is to teach them how to have sex in an easy, inexpensive way that prevents pregnancy and disease.
I can almost see Ann Coulter typing that at her desk going "Oh shit, said something that disagreed with the president. Better tack something on the end of that sentence"
No. Unless someone is willing to give prize money to the person who manages to stay a virgin until his/her marriage. I can see it now, "The Ann Coulter Virginity Fund".
Anyway there was this interesting article a few weeks back where it argued the faith-based abstinance programs supported by Bush & Co. are failing. In fact, teen sexuality increased during Bush's time, although it has been decreasing during Clinton's era.
I was wondering if it was truly possible for someone to believe something this stupid, and looking at the author of this absurdity, I have even more doubts. Does she really believe the idiocy she speaks?
Yeah Ann, let's see some facts to back that up. The secret to not being poor is (what the GOP won't tell you) being born with rich parents with good political connections. You don't even have to be bright or work in college, or even hold a real job, to be elected President or Governor(or rip-off the taxpayers for BILLIONS of dollars if your father is President, right Neil). Or you can be a female sell-out prostituting yourself by shilling for the most anti-female, anti-education administration in the White House in the last 75 years instead of admitting the failure of policies based on profits for influential friends and supporters driving all decisions.
Because clearly, colleges, especially the good ones, don't care about academic performance or creativity, just that that your parents are married and that you are a virgin. I suppose that MIT must be overflowing with accepted students, then.
I'm no fan of either the DC school system or the hypocrisy of rich liberals, this just goes to show that even on those rare occasions when conservatives can spot the problem, they don't have a solution.
Oh i *almost* cannot help but love ann coulter. If you ever feel that your contempt for the religious nuts is a bit unfair, just read something - anything - that she has written.
It will put your worries to rest.
I find it ironic that Ann can take pot shots at the other side, but she just ignores the fact that her side is just as bad
yes ann because magically when you keep your legs closed you become smart, beautiful, rich, and can save the world!
Congratulations, you are wrong. I know plenty of kids who were born to single parents, and they've always been better off than me, the daughter of MARRIED PARENTS.
Okay, that doesn't really count... cause there's a lot of people better off than me...
Ah. So, if they, say, get married, and have a kid, but then the kid had more problems than what was planned for and they go broke because of it, it's their own fault for not staying a virgin? Nice.
By the way, if kids who live with their parents end up leading happy lives, how about letting gays, lesbians, and bis adopt and get married, so that kids in the adoption centers can get the goods on this?
How does abstinence help pay for college when you don't have enough money to do that?
Oh, just saw this was Ann Coulter. Logic will not be heeded. Move along.
"I would ask for statistics but... you know..." ?
but you know I am too stupid to understand them? but you know it doesn't matter because I won't believe them anyway. I would ask for statistics but you know I am a moron and what I really want is a source?
Come on stop being so vague.
Ann Coulter is either a nasty, spiteful, vitrolic bitch, or she's kidding.
I really, really hope it's the latter. I don't want to believe anyone could be this stupid.
The reason poor young women have children out of wedlock isn't because they aren't smart enough to wait to get married but because they don't lose anything by getting knocked up.
Read the book "Promises to Keep" which talks about all of this topic. Young, poor, women know that they aren't going to ever rise above minimum wage jobs and they can reach that goal with or without a kid. The opportunity cost is so low that it doesn't make a difference to these girls and they have no reason to try and prevent pregnancy. In fact, they get a social boost by having a child because it often gives them a higher purpose wht they know they can't find in work.
You won't stop the problem of poor single mothers until you are able to give them a reason to not get pregnant. Put them on the road to a better life and they will wait until they get there to have kids and get married.
Funny thing, I see Ryan sending us to a "clasp org." site. It kind of looks to me like Ann Coulter stole Christina Ooms of clasp's facts(but the 99%"happiness factor?" is some kind of coulter's typical GOP propaganda bullshit) and then drew some right-wing friendly conclusions not in the report to fit her own fundie ass-lick agenda.PS Any report like the one in the "economist" based on Manhattan Institute data is a joke to me. Our state almost enacted a Manhattan Institute privatization scheme that have saved 10% on vehicles the first year. And increased our costs for vehicles 400% every year afterwards. That's all I need to know!
@ryan: no the fact is ann believes marriage has a magical affect on poverty, so you should not have sex untill you are married
oh and she is bashing single mothers for not keep their legs closed
It's the question everyone asks ann, sophie.. is she a poe?
i feel pity for ann coulter, that she has such a negative outlook on life
if the kids live with married parents, they will end up at good colleges and will lead happy, productive lives 99 percent of the time
The 99% is pure self-invented baloney. Besides, correlation doesn't prove cause so the whole argument is nonsense. Statistics I've seen indicate that half of the children raised by one parent start out with married parents who later were separated by divorce, death or desertion, so the "keeping your knees together until marriage" would have had no effect.
There's no question that children raised in stable two parent families do better. Whether this is because successful marriages make people better parents or because people who are better parents also tend to have more successful marriages is something Ms Coulter neither knows nor especially cares about.
I'm sorry ryan, were we not reading through the GOP (FOXGOPNEWS and Rush Dimbulb approved) rose-colored glasses? Let's face the facts, Ann's "knees together" nonsense is nowhere in the report(and really hypocritical if you read her slutty sounding essays from the Democratic Convention in 2004), the "99% happiness figure"(?) is ridiculous dribble obviously pulled out her ass, the vouchers' plug is unproven propaganda, and she has reduced multiple causes of poverty and misfortune to one thing to fit her agenda of neo-con fundie politics.
Bah, abstinence is far from necessary. That's why they invented buttsex.
But more to to the point: I got along just fine being raised by a single mom and my grandparents. I'm even ending up at a "good" college and paving my way toward a happy, productive life.
Typical right-wing neo-con speak, if you can't attack the facts, attack the person. Those of us who don't look throught the GOP blinders always question right-winger's ability to think for themselves(we don't need Ann, Rush, or FOXGOPNEWS to tell us what to think, we prefer to think for ourselves), so I have no problem if you can't comprehend another's comprehension!
flipper, seriously wtf? You mis-identify authors and sources of statistics all in an effort to dismiss them. You seem to enjoy dumping on the fact that Coulter implies that children born into two parent households enjoy better life outcomes while failing to address the fact that it is true.
Your last three posts have contained ad-hominem attacks and now you get on your high horse to denounce them.
Your hypocrisy is mind blowing. Can't comprehend another's comprehension what the fuck? Seriously, you cite Christina Ooms, as the author of an article written by Mary Parke, and dismiss the Economist as a joke because an article of theirs ,mentions the Manhattan Institute, never mind that the stats in question were not produced by said Manhattan institute.
If you think being called into question on reading comprehension when you can not accurately rely information clearly presented to you qualifies as a personal attack, but taking pot shots at someone's assumed political orientation is just reality you are sadly mistaken.
Good luck in the real world, your greatest glory will be back slapping amongst similarly minded left wing reactionary twats on the net. Have fun.
Proven statistic?
Or Assmaster Stat?
Is being able to receive constructive attention from parents important to a child? Probably.
Is it the single most important trait to define a child? Probably not.
Does Coulter again take the plunge into batshit insane commentary? Definitely.
I would put self-motivated drive to succeed far ahead of a household that has two parents (or even is functional) and even an education at a "good college" when it comes to success in life. But then again, I am from that old school of people who think that one can overcome their circumstances- an idea lost on today's conservatives, though they claim to preach it.
Yeah, that's it.
I'm poor because I have kids. This ignores the fact I'm a gay man in Texas who has been in a relationship for 2 years. I had two sets of parents, both married for over a decade, yet I'm not in college. I've chosen to pursue my two loves: music and writing.
Also, I can't get married because assholes like you won't let me. Not to mention, Coulter, but I'm not a democrat . I don't think you'll ever understand.
As a slightly curious, and occasionally horrified, observer to US politics, surely even the conservatives are a bit embarrassed by her stupid statements? Why haven't they dissociated themselves from her?
Oh another one of these brilliant generalizations where dipshits speak for millions of people and blame the poor for being poor. Shut up you foul, ignorant, ugly, ignorant, lying stupid bitch. You are blight on television, as well as the world. I wouldn’t hate you so passionately if you didn’t lead so many moronic sheeple down your same fucktarded path. Medically, please contract something awful; I don’t care what it is as long as it stops you.
Problem comprehending ryan, Ann Coulter STEALS her facts(the ones she didn't pull out her ass) from Christina Ooms of clasp org. You quote another similar article using some of the same facts from another clasp org. writer. Then our buddy Ann goes where Christina says the facts do not lead(with her 99% happiness nonsense and her keeping her legs closed crap) which APPEARS IN NEITHER ARTICLE, and YOU attempt to justify her statements by producing articles which may agree with her premise but in no way agree with her conclusions. And PS I happen to be a libertarian not liberal democrat, but I hate cheap politically expedient blather used as an attack on other parties instead of attempting to work toward a solution for a problem, which is Ann's forte.
So, Ms Coulter, the children that die daily all around the world from poverty-related illnesses would have lived long productive lives if only they had kept their "knees together until marriage"?
What smug, simplistic, dogmatic claptrap!
It seems clear that Ms Coulter is no slave to reason.
ryan: "Children raised in single parent households have a 26% chance of becoming poor as adults, children raise din a two parent household have a 5% chance of becoming poor."
First, what you are saying is that 1 in 4 children raised by a single parent will be poor, and 1 in 20 raised by two parents will be poor.
Second, to what country or planet does that pertain, given the vast number of humans below the poverty line worldwide? Do ya think there might be other factors in play besides marital status?
Coulter:"..and if the kids live with married parents, they will end up at good colleges and will lead happy, productive lives 99 percent of the time."
95% not-being-poor equals 99% happy and productive. You took College Prep math, didn't you? Please be so kind as to STF UP!
That is absolutely the most obscenely ignorant statement I have ever heard from Coulter! This is even worse than the "9/11 widows" shit she was spewing a ways back.
There is no way that any human being with more than 3 functioning brain cells could actually believe that poverty is caused by premarital sex.
My cousin was one of those unwed mothers and, shocker of shockers, she was and is still comfortably middle-class and lives in a nice suburb. Last time I checked having a kid doesn't make you lose your job or your house. She owns her house by the way.
A woman who had a kid out of wedlock owns her own house? Shocking!
As the son of a teacher (and, from the ages of 6 to 11, the son of a single parent), and as the grandson of a teacher, and as the nephew of four teachers, and as someone who has worked with both public and private-school students as a tutor and TA...I'd like to suggest to Ms. Coulter that she kindly stop speaking out of her ass.
Then again, maybe she's just trying to run Stephen Colbert out of business -- because really, how the hell do you satirize this shit?
(No, seriously, if public schools don't improve with better funding, why are the well-funded public schools the ones that perform as well as their European and Japanese counterparts?)
Here's a real-life counter that'll make Ann's head explode:
J.K. Rowling. Single mother, 3 kids, living on the dole (British welfare). Thanks to her education, she was able to write down the stories she's been telling her kids. Less than a year after the first book is published, she's a millionaire.
Tell me, where was abstinence involved?
@ ryan:
correlation
I guess I'm one of those "grim, dowdy" teachers that she keeps referring to in her article. Shame on me for trying to make a difference with children living in deep poverty.
What's the problem with raising our salaries? I can't even make $40,000 in my system without gettting a doctorate. H
You forget, dear, that keeping your knees AFTER marriage means fewer children and more money for yourself. And well, many on the Biblical Belt come from married parents and statistics say..............what they say.
Of course, no inheritances, lotteries, Hollywood parents who, divorced, married or single DO have money. Moreover, no matter that in third world countries, happily married couples produce and are illeterate.
And surely, if widows who can't make ends come, those whose partner left them in the ruin or those who were bankrupt or had debts, should better think about abstinence?.
sorry, couldn't be bothered to go through all 95 comments, but that voucher shit is to persuade parents to torture their children into going to private (read: religious) schools. I actually went to a Catholic school for 1/8 of a school year and eventually quit it because religion class was fucking stupifd (though I had an A) and every other subject was at least 1 year behind public schools if not more. I was actually in the advanced math class and asked the teacher what the most advanced thing we would do in that class was -- best case scenario and as it turned out I had learned that crap nearly 10 months prior.
To end a long rant, private schools =/= good education.
Okay, to be fair, teen pregnancy does seriously impede education, but no one here disputes that fact, right? And a lack of education is a contributing factor to poverty.
HOWEVER, what the delightful Ms. Coulter fails to address is that simply saying "Sex is bad" does NOT work. Abstinence only Sex Ed. fails at preventing teen pregnancy. Miserably, I might add. The way to achieve the best results is:
Contrary to Xtian opinion, a little knowledge goes a long ways.
SCREW THAT SHIT, FUCKING HOOKERS MAKES YOU RICH! Fuck that abstinence bullshit. And fuck marriage too. All those filthy rich tycoons with fancy casionos fuck hookers, so THAT must make them rich...
...
...JUST KIDDING, folks, but she IS one ignorant fuck.
"Most important, Democrats resolutely refuse to tell the poor the secret to not being poor: Keep your knees together until marriage."
...whereas Repubicans resolutely refuse to not tell the poor that...:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r-L3JMk7C1A
...they can treat the womb as a clown car, and sell their offspring for experiments!
[/OVER 9000-levels of sarcasm]
Besides, what are you doing on that computer, Ann? Why aren't you being true to your real surname - Cunt er - and chained to that cooker, pumping out those fundie spawnlings yourself, dearie?!
Shouldn't women keep silent in public?
Your "secret" is bullshit. The richest family among my relatives married after the third child.
1) Implying that poor people have no right to a family (my, is that a tiny scoche of social darwinism I'm tasting here?);
2) Implying that all responsibility for birth control lies with the woman;
3) Implying that remaining married is preferable in every last case to getting a divorce;
4) Implying--no, baldly stating--that no other factor is responsible for poverty, such as a lack of upward mobility, stagnant wages, health crises that devour savings, education, and jobs that pay more than a slave's rate;
K, am I leaving anything out here?
It's idiotic BS like this that discredits things like vouchers in most people's minds.
Vouchers are actually a great idea. I personally don't care if it applies to religious schools as long as religious schools are not privileged in receiving vouchers over non-religious schools.
Why do we need vouchers? Because the public educational system is a one-size-fits-all system that fails a great deal of students. We should either have vouchers or transform our educational system to be more like Germany's. Germany's educational system allows students to specialize in a subject or trade early on instead of having to suffer through years of being forced full of information they will never have any use of.
I personally would've done much better and had an easier life if I could've went to an elite prep school, and I had a mind for it. If only there had been more vouchers and the opportunity had been there. Not only would I have had a more appropriate and richer education I would've had a much more stable social life. I just couldn't relate to the more ordinary students that fills public schools. Smart kids need other smart kids to socialize with, forcing everyone to mix at that young of an age and expecting it will work out for all the students is expecting too much.
Confused?
So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!
To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register . Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.
