Now, there's nothing wrong with a good rant. Helps keep the blood pressure at acceptable levels, and may improve the world a bit if it is sufficiently impressive that others point in awe or are reduced to helpless giggling.
But technique counts. For good or ill. If you can command the invective and with of a modern-day Disraeli, then, by all means have at it.
If, on the other hand, you find yourself using phrases that reinforce our opponents stereotypes of us - even if you don't mean them "that way" - you're not really being a huge help to gun-owners, libertarians, freedom-loving folks, or any other cause you happen to be affiliated with.
Open mouth, insert foot in other words...or to be more precise, "extend foot, open fire".
"Vile turd" or "feculent hybrid of a mange-infested wombat and a leprous rattlesnake" are, if not particularly artful, just fine.
In general, however, invoking womens (and often mens) body parts as negative descriptors gets one written off as either sexist or homophobic before the argument even launches - shooting all of ones cleverness and persuasive talents (or even giggle-making rant skills) straight to hell as you've just pissed off a fair chunk of readership while feeding ammunition to the nimrods of the left.
In general, handing ammunition to the hostiles for use when we're trying to win the hearts and minds of the undecided (and there are still great herds of them) is poor form.
And y'all are *smarter* than that. You're not intellectual cripples limited to a narrow band of self-destructive invective...most of you have sufficient wit and command of the language as to dwarf the average vocabulary and verbally skewer the average nimrod with little or no effort.
Think about it...