Bountiful Jr. High Teachers Valynne Bowers And Linda Nef Busted For Having A Sexual Relationship With The Same Student

Update July 21: Linda Nef sentenced to three years to life, details HERE.

Updated post on damage control measures HERE.

Update March 16: Valynne Powers pleads not guilty; updated post HERE.

The story has been picked up by KSL Channel 5, the Deseret News, the Salt Lake Tribune, the Ogden Standard-Examiner, and KTVX Channel 4. Valynne Bowers, a 39-year-old math teacher at Bountiful Junior High, has been accused of having sex with an unidentified student. Bowers was booked into the Davis County Jail early on Friday March 6th, 2009 and charged in 2nd District Court with rape and forcible sodomy, both first-degree felonies. She's being held in lieu of $50,000 bail, and her next hearing is scheduled for March 16th. The spelling of the woman's name is confirmed by her Davis County jail record.

Police said Bowers told them the affair with the student occurred from late December to January of this year. Officers then questioned the 14-year-old boy, who admitted to the affairs and identified both Bowers and another female teacher, now identified as 46-year-old Linda Nef. The boy is currently in the care of his parents, and state child welfare workers have been contacted. None of the sex acts occurred at the school, as far as police could tell. Instead, the teachers would go with the student to homes, parking lots or parks in Bountiful, Woods Cross, Farmington and Kaysville. [Ed. Note: Presumably, the steam room at Utah State University was unavailable at the time.]

Valynne Bowers, pictured above

Linda Nef, pictured above

Ironically, it was the other teacher, Linda Nef, who ratted out Bowers, once she realized what it was leading to. Nef told authorities that she had a relationship with the boy from October 2007 to December 2008. Nef has since resigned from her position; she was a part-time teacher who also served as a cheerleading advisor. Davis County prosecutors first filed charges against Bowers, then later filed the same charges against Nef, but they will take Nef's voluntary cooperation into consideration. Nef's first court date is scheduled for March 27th, and her attorney, Sean Druyon, has yet to comment.

At Bountiful Junior High, teachers were in shock, according to Davis School District spokesman Chris Williams, who stated, "They are serious charges and there's just absolutely certain lines you cannot cross as an educator".

Bowers has been a teacher in the Davis County School District since 1996, working for a decade at an elementary school before moving to Bountiful Junior High in 2006 to teach math. Williams said that she has been placed on administrative leave. Linda Nef, he said, "is not teaching for us". Williams would not say any more about her until criminal charges have been filed. The junior high school's principal met with faculty Friday to reveal the scandal.

Police said the boy, who is now 14, is in the care of his parents and state child welfare workers have been contacted. Both police and prosecutors said they never would have known about it if Linda Nef had not broken her silence.

Commentary: I don't mean to make light of this situation, but I couldn't help going into Jay Leno mode. The fact is, when a male student is victimized, it should be viewed as seriously as it is when a female student is victimized. The humorous references made throughout my post are designed to illustrate the gender disparity which exists when evaluating sexual relationships between teachers and students. This disparity needs to be eradicated to better prevent this problem.

And this problem is unfortunately widespread. The BadBadTeacher website documents and reports such incidents nationwide, although they have yet to pick up on this story.

Utah U.S. Senator Bob Bennett Attempts To Co-Opt Mark Shurtleff's Prospective 2010 Challenge By Offering Him Campaign Co-Chairmanship

Apparently Utah's U.S. Senator Bob Bennett is concerned about Attorney General Mark Shurtleff's trial-ballooning a prospective 2010 Republican primary challenge - so much so that Bennett has taken pre-emptive measures. KSL Channel 5 reports that Senator Bennett invited Shurtleff to serve as co-chair of his 2010 re-election campaign. This is also discussed in part in a March 5th Salt Lake Tribune article.

The offer was disclosed by Shurtleff himself, who made headlines on February 26th, 2009 by announcing a possible run against Bennett in 2010, primarily out of concerns about the economy. Shurtleff strongly disagrees with Obama's stimulus package. Shurtleff told local media that shortly after he announced his intentions, he got a call from Bennett tendering the offer. Shurtleff reportedly told Bennett he was honored, then asked Bennett if it had anything to do with the news he may be a challenger.

According to Shurtleff, Bennett then told him that he (Shurtleff) couldn't beat him (Bennett), because Bennett doesn't consider himself to be another Chris Cannon. But Bennett has expected a Republican challenger in this upcoming election and has already started aggressively positioning himself. Other prospective challengers include Mike Lee, who was Governor Huntsman's former general counsel, and former Juab County Attorney David Leavitt.

The Deseret News also reports that Bennett may have firmed up his re-election chances by swapping the position of ranking Republican on the Appropriations Subcommittee on Agriculture in exchange for the position of ranking Republican on the Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Energy and Water. Bennett further extended his Congressional reach by joining the Appropriations Subcommittee on Defense

In his new Energy and Water position, Bennett will gain additional power to seek funding for Utah water and energy projects. He intends to use his new position to continue to push for completion of the Central Utah Project, designed to bring water from eastern Utah to the Wasatch Front, and cleanup of the Atlas uranium tailings site near Moab.

This is an extremely savvy political move on Bennett's part, because energy and water issues clearly take precedence over agricultural issues in Utah at present. He has increased the relevancy of his political stewardship to Utahns and has made himself more electable in one fell swoop.

Shurtleff has been meeting this week with fundraisers in Washington D.C. and is considering family matters before announcing whether or not he'll run for Senate. If he ever goes to the Senate, he will not move his family to Washington D.C. But he will have an uphill fight if he runs; Salt Lake Crawler reports that Daily Kos commissioned a poll by Research 2000 which shows that in a head-to-head primary contest between Bennett and Shurtleff, Bennett gets 46 percent, Shurtleff 20 percent, with 34 percent Undecided.

Consequently, although Bob Bennett may be boring, he is certainly effective, and has taken steps to increase his effectiveness. Should Utah give up Bennett's seniority simply because he is boring? I don't believe Mark Shurtleff could beat Bob Bennett.

But another issue is health. Since breaking a leg in a motorcycle accident, Mark Shurtleff has had seven surgeries, the most recent in August 2008. You can read the "gorier" details HERE. Doctors say if the latest surgery doesn't work, amputation is the next step. Consequently, I question whether Shurtleff's leg could withstand the strain of a tough political campaign.

Mark Shurtleff would be better off waiting two more years, allowing his leg to fully heal, and then run against Orrin Hatch, who is truly ineffective and has essentially been "retired on active duty" since his celebrity presidential campaign in 2000. Hatch can be defeated and deserves to lose should he have the audacity to run again.

Nauvoo LDS Pro-Family Activist Mobilizes Illinois Mormons Against HB2234 Civil Union Bill; LDS Church Itself Remains Organizationally Neutral

A pro-family activist belonging to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is mobilizing Illinois Mormons to take action to prevent passage of a controversial civil union bill, HB2234, to be heard in committee this week. Full stories published by KTVX Channel 4. Supplemental information from the BoxTurtleBulletin blog.

You can view the full text of Illinois HB2234 HERE.

The activist, identified as Kristy Combs, sent a mass e-mailing to members of the Nauvoo (IL) Third Ward, alerting people to the existence, content, and implications of HB2234, and informing them that the bill will be heard in a legislative committee meeting on March 5th, 2009. Complete details are given in the e-mail, a copy of which has been cross-posted below (posted on numerous other sources throughout the Web):

From: Kristy Combs (kristyc at mchsi dot com)
Date: March 3, 2009 12:27:59 PM CST
Subject: Civil Union bill scheduled for a hearing Thursday - calls needed

This message has been authorized for sending by Bishop Church.
The Civil Union Bill (HB 2234) has been scheduled for a hearing in the Youth and Family Committee this week on Thursday, March 5, 2009 at 9:00 a.m. in Springfield. If the bill is voted out of committee, it becomes eligible for a vote before the full Illinois House of Representatives. This bill will legalize civil unions in the state of Illinois, and will treat such civil unions with the same legal obligations, responsibilities, protections and benefits as are afforded within marriage. In other words, civil unions will be different in name only from marriage. As has already been seen in Massachusetts, this will empower the public schools to begin teaching this lifestyle to our young children regardless of parental requests otherwise. It will also create grounds for rewriting all social mores; the current push in Massachusetts is to recognize and legalize all transgender rights (An individual in Massachusetts can now change their drivers license to the gender they believe themselves to be, regardless of actual gender, which means that confused men and women are now legally entering one another’s bathrooms and locker rooms. What kind of a safety issue is this for our children?). Furthermore, while the bill legalizes civil unions, it will be used in the courts to show discrimination and will ultimately lead to court mandated same-sex marriages.

To help defeat this bill, please call your state representative and state senator and ask that they support traditional marriage and vote against the civil unions bill. If you are unsure who your legislators are, please see the link at the end of this email.

Also, please take a moment and call the following members of the Youth and Family Committee to encourage them to vote no on this bill. We need 4 votes to keep it from passing out of the committee. And - as always, please pass this on to all who believe in protecting our families and our children. If you are interested in attending the hearing, it will be held on Thursday, March 5th at 9:00 a.m. in Springfield in Room 122B of the Capitol Building (I can give you directions to the Capitol Building if needed).

Members of the Youth and Family Committee:

Rep. Greg Harris (D-Chicago) (Greg Harris is also the sponsor of this bill, but he needs to hear your opposition to this bill)
Chairperson
217-782-3835

Rep. LaShawn K. Ford (D-Chicago)
Vice-Chairperson
217-782-5962

Rep. Mike Fortner (R-West Chicago)
Republican Spokesperson
217-782-1653

Rep. William D. Burns (D-Chicago)
217-782-2023

Rep. Michael P. McAuliffe (R-Chicago)
217-782-8182

Rep. Al Riley (D-Matteson)
217-558-1007

Rep. Dave Winters (R-Rockford)
217-782-0455

Directions for identifying your legislators:

You can use the following link to identify your state legislators and their contact information: http://www.elections.il.gov/DistrictLocator/SelectSearchType.aspx?NavLink=1 (and enter your 9 digit zip code). If this link doesn’t work, you can use the general link www.ilga.gov and then click on ” legislator lookup” near the bottom of the page, then click on “by zip+4″. Type in your zip code, and you’ll see a list of your legislators. You want your state senator and state representative as they will be the ones voting on the bill.

Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions. Sister Combs.

Predictably, because the name of Kristy Combs' bishop was invoked, anti-Mormons immediately assumed this had official church sanction. As a result, the bishop followed up with an e-mail clarification:

From: Chris Church
Date: March 4, 2009 1:58:47 PM CST
Subject: Church Position on Legislation

Members of the Church may take any action they wish concerning legislation but the Church does not take any position in relation to these issues.

Bishop Church

The fact that Bishop Church may have authorized the original e-mail simply means that the e-mail met the required eligibility standards for being transitted over the secure ward network. It did not necessarily mean "command endorsement" of the specific content. And this was reiterated on March 4th by an official follow-up statement from the LDS Church Headquarters in Salt Lake:

“As is widely known, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints believes in the sanctity of traditional marriage. The Church has not taken a position on any legislation currently being considered by the Illinois State Legislature. The Church did not send an e-mail to its members in regards to House Bill 2234, although a false report to the contrary has been circulated. An e-mail was sent from a local Illinois Church leader to his congregation – one of 129 congregations in the state — who was free to express his own views.”

-Scott Trotter, Church spokesman

The gay supremacist Human Rights Campaign (HRC) also responded by accusing the Church of spreading lies and calling on people to express support for HB2234, giving the same contacts as was provided in Kristy Combs' e-mail. However, it's the HRC which is prevaricating, because civil unions are being used as a Trojan horse by the gay rights movement to promote actual gay marriage. Civil unions in California did not stop gay activists from pushing for gay marriage.

This is why pro-family activists in Illinois need to mount a forward defense and stop HB2234 from passing. If civil unions become a fact of life in Illinois, the gays will merely come back with demands for full-blown gay marriage later on.

Utah State University Professor Tom Peterson Pleads Not Guilty To Committing A Lewd Act In The Campus Steam Room, Next Hearing On March 17th

On March 4th, 2009, the Logan Herald-Journal reports that Utah State University professor Tom Peterson appeared in Logan Municipal Court on March 3rd and pleaded not guilty to the charge of committing a lewd act in the steam room located in the campus's Health, Physical Education and Recreation (HPER) building. His pre-trial hearing is scheduled for March 17th, and he's being represented by attorney Shannon Demler.

As previously documented in this other post, Peterson is accused of engaging in homosexual activity with a man in the steam room on February 24th. A witness allegedly walked in on them and later told USU Police that Peterson was one of the people he’d seen, resulting in a citation for class-B misdemeanor lewdness. The second suspect is still being sought. But Shannon Demler said the defense team doesn’t yet know the scope of the incident, and hasn’t yet seen a copy of the police report. Demler indicates he could either press for a trial or a negotiated settlement.

University officials are not contemplating any sanctions against Peterson at this time, pending the outcome of the criminal case. Peterson was not amongst the 20 people just laid off by USU. And there's no reason to take disciplinary action against Peterson at this point, except maybe to put the steam room off limits to him as a public confidence-builder.

However, the Herald-Journal also discusses additional options under consideration by the university to discourage this sort of activity in the future. Not only is there now an actual allegation of lewd behavior, but there have also been several Craigslist.com ads listing the steam room as a meet-up location for sexual behavior. One short-term option is to cut back on the steam room’s hours so that the facility is only open when a sufficient number of staff are available to monitor it. The hours will be changed to 8 A.M. to 6 P.M. Monday through Friday, and 11 A.M. to 2 P.M. on Saturday. In addition, the university will hire a night manager to walk through the building and lock a back door that leads into the men’s locker room.

But administrators are also considering whether patrons should have to wear shorts or swimming suits when using the facility. Kevin Kobe, director of USU’s campus recreation, said he plans to bring up the issue at an April meeting of the committee that sets rules for the HPER building where the incident was reported.

The Salt Lake Crawler reveals that another influential voice has interjected herself into the debate. USU journalism instructor Nancy Williams reproduced the original article in this post, but raised a question of ethics. She implicitly questioned whether it was appropriate for the media to reveal Peterson's name at this stage of the investigation. In a comment, Emilie, who identifies herself as the city editor for the Herald-Journal, explains why they decided to cover the story and reveal Peterson's name. In summary, he's one of the highest paid and most recognizable individual at the [Cache] valley's largest employer accused of breaking a law in a very public place. The salient points:

-- A possible trend toward lewd activity in the steam room.

-- Tom Peterson is a longtime USU employee recognizable by thousands of people, and is paid $150,000 per year in public (TAXPAYER) dollars.

-- The HPER pool is frequently used by children and teenagers, in addition to students, staff and faculty.

Possible worst case scenario: The USU steam room has been the meet-up place with sexual activity for years. Best case scenario: This was an isolated incident — if it's true — and the Craig's List ads were just coincidental. In either event, it was deemed newsworthy.

Additional blog reaction is posted by Andee Leigh, one of Peterson's students. She doesn't seem too happy about Peterson's conduct. She does have a picture of one of the cutest babies I've ever seen posted on her blog.

The Logan Herald-Journal deserves a big hat tip for running with this story and placing themselves far ahead of the rest of the state's media on coverage. Both the Deseret News and the Ogden Standard-Examiner slept through the story. Likewise all broadcast outlets except KSL. And stung by the fact that they were upstaged by a Cache Valley newspaper, Utah's "Gray Lady", the Salt Lake Tribune, begrudgingly posted a story on March 2nd.

Salt Lake Tribune Poll On AIG Bailout 2.0 An Example Of Media Manipulation, But 79 Percent Of Respondents See Through It And Vote "No" So Far

A Salt Lake Tribune poll on the new bailout of AIG which seeks to ascertain public opinion is a classic example of media manipulation. It may well be unintentional or unwitting, but the effect is the same: To promote a desired response. The poll is displayed on the Tribune's News page, or can be directly accessible HERE.

Here is the poll question, and the responses current as of 11:35 A.M. MST on March 3rd, 2009:

Question: The troubled mega-insurer AIG lost $61.7 billion in the fourth quarter and now gets an additional $30 billion in federal aid. Good idea or just waste of the taxpayers' hard-earned money?

Total Votes So Far: 164

-- Good idea, the company is doing a great job and deserves a reward: 0.609 percent
-- A necessary thing to do, that company is too important to let it die: 6.097 percent
-- Probably worth doing even though no one knows if that extra cash can help: 14.02 percent
-- A complete waste, those "experts" will simply squander more money: 79.26 percent

But read the choices closely. Three of them promote a "Yes" response, while only one answer promotes a "No" response. Now why would a newspaper poll promote three "Yes" responses and only "No" response?

The answer is simple. The Tribune, at the very least, is allowing themselves to be co-opted by the Obama Administration and the financial elite, who desperately want to prop up a failing system. The elite know the financial system is in terminal condition, but they want to suck Americans' assets dry before they allow it to fold. Thus the first three answers on this poll are "Yes" answers in the hopes that respondents would not bother to read all four answers before responding, increasing the chances that respondents would select one of the "Yes" answers.

The tactic failed miserably. An overwhelmingly majority saw through the scheme and chose the No answer - 79 percent, to be precise. If this poll had been intended to solicit an honest appraisal of public opinion, it would have been structured as follows:

(1). A simple Yes-No choice.

(2). Three choices: Yes, No, and a "Maybe" answer.

(3). Four choices: Absolute "Yes", conditional "Yes", conditional "No", and absolute "No".

Why is it that so many people voted "No"? Perhaps it's because AIG has been previously bailed out. According to CNNMoney, in September 2008, the Feds first extended an $85 billion emergency loan to AIG. In addition, the Feds pushed the New York-based insurer to sell pieces of its business to repay its loan commitments. The elite regaled us with apocalyptic tales of doom and gloom if this wasn't done, and promised us this would solve the problem.

But guess what? A tough economic environment combined with a weakened appetite among potential buyers has hampered those efforts. So far, the company has managed to shed just a few divisions including Hartford Steam Boiler Inspection, as well as its stake in the Brazilian bank Unibanco. Now they're asking us for another $30 billion, and the payment will come from the second half of the $700 billion rescue package enacted last fall, even though some insiders are actually questioning whether this will be enough.

"I would expect to see the $30 billion used and then it is a question mark," said Donald Light, senior analyst at the Boston-based financial research and consulting firm Celent. "I think everyone is being pretty careful to say what is going to happen over time." Watch this YouTube video of a March 2nd CBS report:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NACyTFRYkoM



Wonderful. So the Feds are preparing to bet $30 billion of OUR money on a "question mark". Doesn't this remind you of a deadbeat relative who you allow to stay with you temporarily, just long enough to get back on his feet, but every month he comes up with another excuse to continue leeching off of you? If this doesn't work, are they going to come back and ask us for yet ANOTHER $30 billion three months from now?

Those who favor propping up AIG support their arguments by claiming that the collapse of the firm would have had disastrous consequences for the entire financial system. They cite the fact that AIG does business in more than 130 countries, employs 116,000 people, and oversees roughly 74 million insurance policies as proof of its criticality. Edward Liddy, AIG's chairman and CEO, said that Monday's actions were necessary to tame fears that the insurer's customers and business relationships are at risk. "We need to keep some confidence in the system," he said in an interview with CNN. "What the Fed is doing through AIG is taking every step possible to keep confidence in the financial system." And the Feds themselves weighed in. "Given the systemic risk AIG continues to pose and the fragility of markets today, the potential cost to the economy and the taxpayer of government inaction would be extremely high," the Treasury Department and Federal Reserve said.

The new rescue plan does offer one significant difference over the previous measure. It would help AIG conserve much-needed capital by, among other things, lowering the interest rate it pays on its government loans. However, this gambit would only save AIG $1 billion. But the company lost $61.7 billion in 4Q2008 alone, and $99 billion for the entire year.

Under these cirumstances, $1 billion is chump change. This scheme will not work. AIG is dying - the Feds simply don't want to take it off life support yet. Warren Buffett not only believes there'll be no recovery in 2009, but also that we have yet to hit bottom. Gerald Celente, who previously forecast revolution, food riots, and tax rebellion by 2012, believes the "greatest depression" is already underway. And bank runs are already taking place in Ukraine.

I believe the Obama Administration knows what's coming, and is merely throwing more bailout money at AIG and others to buy enough time to assemble and deploy as many resources as possible to try and control the effects of a complete economic collapse. This is why they're pushing these bailouts so relentlessly.

Pro-Gay Activist Roger Carrier Wants A Statue Of Harvey Milk On The Utah State Capitol Grounds

I refer to Roger Carrier as a pro-gay activist because he himself is straight, having been married to a woman for 40 years. Yet he emphatizes with gays so strongly that he wants to put up a statue to the late Harvey Milk, a "civil-rights hero" who never even set foot in the state. This story actually first broke on February 27th, but the Salt Lake Crawler just today brought it to my attention.

He first launched his campaign with an LTE published in the University of Utah's Daily Utah Chronicle on February 25th, 2009. But while he believes that gay marriage is simply a matter of justice, he's most troubled by the effect on Utah's image by Senator Chris Buttars. A news video aired by KTVX Channel 4 provides more information:



However, Carrier's pro-gay activism predates this latest campaign. In November, after Proposition 8 was passed in California, he posted a letter on Andrew Callahan's SigningForSomething blog in support of gay marriage. Callahan is the LDS high priest threatened with excommunication for his overt public criticism of the LDS Church's stand on gay marriage. The LDS Church does not sanction its members for merely expressing a different political opinion and working politically to implement it; it's only when a member launches a direct public attack upon the Church, as Sonia Johnson did, that a member becomes liable for Church discipline.

Roger Carrier also reportedly attended "Buttars-palooza", a rally celebrating the "galvanizing" effect Buttars' recent statements had on Utah's gay community. The rally was held on Salt Lake's Capitol Hill on Saturday February 28th. Attendance estimates vary; while the Deseret News reported only 300 people (which seems too low), both the Salt Lake Tribune and KTVX reported around 1,000.

The Salt Lake Crawler has picked up on this story, and to absolutely no one's surprise, Glen Warchol seems favorably disposed towards the idea. And in response to criticism that Milk was never in Utah, Warchol reminds us that other places in Utah are named after non-Utahns. Of course, there's that section of 600 South in Salt Lake that's named after Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., but nobody uses the name.

Besides, the intent of Dr. King's activism, before it was derailed, perverted, and transformed into a progressive extortion campaign by hucksters such as JE$$E JACK$ON and Al $harpton, was to ensure basic civil rights for black Americans. The campaign for gay marriage has absolutely nothing to do with civil rights, unless you subscribe to the preposterous notion that marriage is a fundamental constitutional right.

But even Roger Carrier homself admits there's no danger of this statue going up anytime soon.

Mitt Romney Wins Presidential Straw Poll At CPAC Conference; Jon Huntsman Attracts No Support. Could This Foreshadow Romney-Palin In 2012?

It looks like Utah Governor Jon Huntsman Jr. is already paying a price for coming out in favor of civil unions. In a Presidential straw poll conducted at the Conservative Political Action Committee (CPAC) Conference, he attracted absolutely no support. Instead, for the third year in a row, the catbird seat was reserved for former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney. Full story on the CNN Political Ticker, the Deseret News, the New York Times Caucus Blog, and Politico.com.

The straw poll was conducted over two days and surveyed 1,757 of the activists who descended on Washington for the annual conference. Here are the standings, along with my assessments:

-- Mitt Romney: 20 percent - clearly the cream of this crop.
-- Bobby Jindal: 14 percent - no way, should be running a call center in Mumbai.
-- Sarah Palin: 13 percent - a solid, enthusiastic running mate for Romney.
-- Ron Paul: 13 percent - good ideas, but too old and too flaccid.
-- Newt Gingrich: 10 percent - retread.
-- Mike Huckabee: 7 percent - not really leadership material.
-- Mark Sanford: 4 percent - who he???
-- Rudi Giuliani: 3 percent - too liberal.
-- Tim Pawlenty: 2 percent - a legitimate dark horse.
-- Charlie Crist: 1 percent - not Presidential.
-- Undecided: 9 percent

Even more encouraging was the fact that the voting was dominated by young people. More than half of the conference attendees this year were college students, and nearly 60 percent of the straw poll participants were between the ages of 18 and 25. This should put the kibosh on the claim that Obama owns the young. Note that Jon Hunstman didn't even make the list; recent Presidential rumblings about him are likely to subside, particularly since he came out in favor of civil unions.

Based on the listed talent above, a Romney-Palin ticket in 2012 would be overwhelmingly the best Republican ticket available as of right now and would drive Barack Obama all the way back to Kenya in 2012. There's no way the stoop-shouldered mulatto metrosexual currently in the White House could possibly compete with the square-jawed, Hollywood-casted Romney.

But while Rush Limbaugh received a lot of media attention, Ann Coulter delivered a 15-minute speech that was more persuasive. Although it played more like a stand-up comedy act than a political speech, each of her lines was met with roaring laughter from the crowd.

Among her remarks:

“Having pulled off their rather mediocre 53 percent to 46 percent victory, liberals can’t stop boasting about their new baby boy" [Obama], she said.

She said it was interesting that Obama’s “adorers” in the media compare him to Lincoln and Ronald Reagan, because, “apparently they can’t think of a Democratic president worthy of being compared to.”

“If [Obama] thinks people wanted change in 2009, wait until 2012,” she said.

Coulter was also at odds with Sen. John McCain during the campaign season, saying "John McCain is not only bad for Republicanism, which he definitely is — he is bad for the country." How right she was.