Coulter is right, I can be righter

Ann Coulter may scare Frank J., but you have to admit, the woman IS right. About everything. More right than Rush Limbaugh, More right than Newt Gingrich and waaaaaaay,( should that be caps?, yes, it should) WAAAAAAAY, more right than W.

So far right, in fact, that it's nearly impossible to get anywhere to the right of her. But I think it's the duty of each of us IMAO conservatives make an effort to do just that. So, I am throwing down the gauntlet.

My first contribution. We need to get rid of the electric chair and lethal injection as a means of capital punishment. "But, but, but, but, Mr Monkey, you're talking about ending the death penalty! How's that left of Coulter, your confusing me!", you might be saying at this point, But you could not be further from the truth than if you'd loaned the truth some money. Lethal injection and the electric chair could be considered cruel and unusual by some. It's definitely cruel, and you don't hardly ever hear about people accidentaly strapping themseves to a bed or a chair or any other type of furniture and dying an electrical or drug induced death.

No thats what makes them unusual to some people. Who has a cross shaped bed at home anyway? Besides maybe Bono. The death penalty for people who've been convicted of capital crimes should be restricted to purposefully infecting them with deadly diseases, more than one disease is good, as soon as they are convicted. And then not treat them for those diseases.

We let God's will or survival of the fittest, if you swing that way, be the appeals process. If they get well? They don't die! Otherwise, life, albeit a short miserable life ending in death in prison. Either way it's a life sentence. So, in a way my plan does eliminate the death penalty. It changes the options from life or death to life or short, miserable, diseased life with the (slight) possibily of immunity.

People die from untreated diseases all the time, all over the world. Is it cruel? Sure, you bet, giving people deadly diseases is probably as cruel as murder is heinous. But it's not cruel AND unusual. And THAT'S what makes it constitutional.

I remember my teacher asked me, “Brian, what’s the ‘i’ before ‘e’ rule?”

“Um…I before e always.”

“What are you, an idiot, Brian?”

“Apparently.”

So she explains it, “No, Brian, it’s:

‘i’ before ‘e’ except after ‘c’
and when sounding like ‘a’
as in neighbor and weigh
and on weekends and holidays
and all throughout May
and you’ll always be wrong
no matter what you say.”

That’s a hard rule. That’s a rough rule.

Plurals were hard, too.

“Brian, how do you make a word a plural?”

“You put a ‘s’…put a ‘s’ at the end of it.”

“When?”

“On weekends and holidays.”

“No, Brian. Let me show you.” So she asked this kid who knew everything. Irwin. “Irwin, what’s the plural for ox?”

“Ox. Oxen. The farmer used his oxen.”

“Brian?”

“What?”

“Brian, what’s the plural for box?”

“Boxen. I bought 2 boxen of doughnuts.”

“No, Brian, no. Let’s try another one. Irwin, what’s the plural for goose?”

“Geese. I saw a flock of geese.”

“Brian?”

[Exasperated laughing]“Wha-a-at?”

“What’s the plural for moose?”

“Moosen! I saw a flock of MOOSEN! There were many of ‘em. Many much moosen. Out in the woods…in the wood-es…in the woodsen. The meese want the food in the woodesen…food is the eatenesen…the meese want the food in the woodesenes…food in the woodesenes.”

“Brian. Brian! You’re an imbecile.”

“Imbecilen!”

“What? Are you speaking German, Brian?”

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.