|
|
June 7, 2006“Is Coulter missing a humanity gene?” UPDATED:::Scroll down for update::: My brother Thom asked that question after reading this piece about Ann Coulter’s latest over-reach. She’s never been my cuppa, as I have written before. While she is whip-smart, I’ve never liked her because Coulter tends to overdo - she routinely loses sight of boundaries of common decency. She goes too far and discredits herself and the values she says she espouses. I must say, my skin crawled to read some of her statements. To me she is embodying everything I currently cannot abide in the “conservative movement,” the arrogant presumption of absolute moral certitude (which is ugly, ugly, ugly coming from the left, so honey, it’s not pretty when it’s from the right, either), combined with the sense of over-confidence which is sending so many on the right into a self-destructive Roy Moore/Tom Tancredo plunge off a cliff. Ed Morrissey, who says he normally likes Coulter has rightly called her the mirror image of Ted Rall and suggests she make a real apology and retract her statements. That would be a start. AJ Strata is not liking Coulter’s brashness anymore than I am, and his commenters are taking him to task (and immediately, predictably, calling him a ‘closet liberal’) for daring to not appreciate her. Apparently now, if we do not subscribe to intemperate demagoguery, we are not conservatives. Well, screw that, then. I mustn’t be a conservative. I must still be the classical liberal without a home that I was when I left the Democrats. Watch that demand to lock-stepping, please. It’s got a bad pedigree. It ruined the Democrats. Rick Moran calls Coulter a Conservative Lout. As her celebrity has grown – actually since she appeared on the cover of Time Magazine – she has had to make ever more outrageous and off the wall statements in order to maintain her position as a “controversial” commentator. This has often placed her at odds with many of us who, while generally in agreement with much of her critique of American liberalism, nevertheless recoil in horror and disgust at her rhetoric. She has descended into a black hole of necessity from which there is no escape; where she is forced to please her rabid base of red meat conservatives usually by going beyond the bounds of decency and proper public discourse in order to make a point that could have been made without resorting to the kind of hurtful, hateful, personal attacks that have become a hallmark of her war with liberals. I wonder if Coulter, like John McCain, Al Gore and Cindy Sheehan, has simply allowed the media attention she has garnered to affect her better judgement? Moran continues: “This rhetoric is not designed to advance debate or even make any kind of a salient point about the political activism of grief stricken parents like Cindy Sheehan and the anti-Bush September 11 widows. The remarks were designed to hurt other people’s feelings in a deeply personal and entirely inappropriate way. Can you imagine some liberal commentator making similar remarks about Debra Burlingame, sister of Charles F. “Chic” Burlingame, III, captain of American Airlines flight 77, which was crashed at the Pentagon and who is fighting to keep the 9/11 Memorial from being hijacked by the anti-American left? We would be all over that worthy and deservedly so.” Damn straight. Sister Toldjah writes, quite sensibly, “Ann, of course, has the right to say whatever she wants - but was something like that right to say? I don’t think so. This isn’t about being uber-sensitive. It’s about there being a better way to get your point across without going overboard.” Blue Crab Boulevard says he’ll go back to ignoring Coulter, now. Michelle Malkin has a a reprint of Dorothy Rabinowitz’s excellent take-down of the Jersey Girls written back in April of ‘04. Coulter should take note: Rabinowitz made a convincing case without descending to brashness or inhumanity. Ace of Spades is not happy with Ann, either. But he feels she is defending herself credibly. Sort of. Except for this part: Persuasive. Hey, she’s not one of the country’s foremost polemicists for nothing. But– no. I think the point she’s making — quite valid — is now rejected by persuadable independents because she comes across as the shrill harpy, rather than the Jersey Girls. Egg-zactly. I wrote a few days ago that America does not like extremism. Conservatives should KNOW that because they have been reaping the benefit of the left going extreme for some years, now. Unfortunately, heady with a few victories, they are beginning to embrace the same extremism that drove so many of us away from the Democrats. They are believing (quite mistakenly, I think) that the rest of the country is desirous of their relentless drive for ideological purity. I do not think for a moment that America wants to be submerged into the ugly boiling tar-bath of extreme and hostile rhetoric from either the left or the right. I do not think for a second that America wants to be represented by people who fume and roil and live in a very deluded place where up is down and black is white. But I do think that if conservatives are not careful - if they don’t pull themselves back from the edge - then simple American decency will move voters from right back to left, albeit reluctantly, if only because they do not wish to be associated with what they see as unconscionable hate, and immovable “principals” that oversimplify complicated situations. I don’t think America will like to see a comprehensive plan on illegal immigration fail because the conservatives were incapable of compromising one iota. I do not think America will call that a “victory,” any more than it would call a Dem loss a victory because they “lost by a small margin.” Conservatives lately are coming off as simplistic, unrealistic, moralistic, angry and pompous. And I’m sure I once wrote that about liberals. My guess is such folk are not going to be invited to lead the nation and will be relegated to the edges along with the Kos folk, where everyone can spit on each other and nothing ever gets solved. The recipe for disaster is written, and die are being cast. Once more, I’m asking my conservative friends to pull back, pull back from the hoary edge at which they are scratching. Meanwhile here is an roundup of other stories you might be missing as we overkill this one. UPDATE: The Jersey Girls, in particular, have taken it upon themselves to act as spokespeople for “the families”. In doing so, they have taken a rabidly anti-war and pro-Democratic Party stance. In reality, without media promotion, they have no more right to speak for others than does Cindy Sheehan. I do not find it especially cruel to recognize that self-appointed spokespeople are really not, and that some have ridden the dead bodies of their loved ones to a prominence and importance they might never have achieved had 9/11 not happened. The point is not invalid, but I think it must be said, in fairness to “the Jersey Girls” that the press has a great deal to do with the impression we have of their having “ridden their grief” into fame and fortune. They are not the only “9/11 family members” who have spoken out on policy matters. The excellent Debra Burlingame, whose brother was one of the slain pilots of 9/11 has done so, as have other 9/11 family folk. All of them have - to one extent or another - “used” the death of their loved ones to get into the bully pulpit and have their voices heard. The difference is that the Burlingame’s and the Long Island firefighter families (for example) who have supported the president’s policies have not been lionized and super-exploited while doing so - the press is not constantly praising them and shoving mics in their faces - and so they seem much less opportunistic than the others. It is the members of the press, who create these media monsters. Chris Matthews had The Jersey Girls on his show literally scores of times, because they were saying what he wanted to hear; what he wanted to promote. Burlingame is much less visible, because she takes a different stand - one which the press does not find interesting. The fact is if someone on the left, a Ted Rall or someone, used Coulter’s words against Burlingame, or a Gold Star Mother who publically supports the war, it would be reprehensible, and we’d be all over him for it. When someone in grief has decided to exploit that grief politically it is incumbent upon the rest of us to (once their actions have moved beyond grief and into giddy activism) question whether their motives are entirely pure…but it is absolutely necessary that we do so in a temperate manner that does not bring us down into the muck, or take the focus off of the issue at hand. In the end, all Coulter did was discredit herself and make the rest of us look very mean-spirited and grotesque…her valid point is lost in her inflammatory rhetoric; she does that all the time. Ugh. Having said all that, if there were ever two women who absolutely deserve to go at each other it’s Coulter and Hillary Clinton. Coulter oversteps and Clinton (ever-brave when she is at absolutely no risk to herself) exploits. And Coulter comes back with a right hook that should effectively shut Clinton down. Two women who consistantly leave themselves open for shots to the chin. Coulter, I think - even though I don’t much like her - is still the braver of the two, and she takes round 1. Flopping Aces (whom I have just added to my blogroll) says yes, Coulter was “harsh” but accurate. John at Verum Serum has a very interesting round up and unusual links. WELCOME: Instapundit and Andrew Sullivan readers! While you’re here, please look around: We’re also discussing how my little brother has come to admire Sam Brownback, my husband’s burial plans for me when I die, how President Bush’s victories earn scant attention, a CBS series on Teens and Technology, and if you haven’t seen Bryn Terfel in action check out the video. http://theanchoressonline.com/2006/06/07/coulter-missing-a-humanity-gene/trackback/ 52 Responses to ““Is Coulter missing a humanity gene?” UPDATED” |
Ding, Ding! Back to your corners, girls and don’t swallow that stuff in your mouths, it’s pure poison; just spit it out.
June 7th, 2006 at 3:23 pm
I agree, A. Such vitriol is unbecoming, and totally unproductive. There is plenty of criticism to be levelled at the 9/11 commission, and perhaps it’s even true that the widows involved deserve some amount of criticism for their role in demanding its formation. However, before she unleashed the full force of her righteous fury upon them, it would have been wise to reflect on the fact that it’s not necessary to napalm every misstep committed by those “in the wrong”. Judicious, articulate and diplomatic discourse wins the day every time. I just wish I could remember to apply this philosophy when arguing with my children….
June 7th, 2006 at 3:25 pm
In fact, Coulter is biting the hand that feeds her, by discrediting her conservative backers.
It’s that simple.
June 7th, 2006 at 3:41 pm
I don’t think anyone ever accused Ann Coulter of having class. Her career is built on being outragous and saying things everyone thinks at one time or another but usually excersizes better judgement before ever saying.
Nevertheless, since most people have thought what she said at least once, she resonates with a lot of people. The problem isn’t so much Ann Coulter. The problem is for every crisis, accident, bad thing that ever happens…there is a victim’s group that immediately sprouts up and starts using up the sympathy generated for their sometimes completely unrelated and pre-existing agendas. Most people can spot the difference between these kinds of groups and real grief/support groups even if they don’t think it’s appropriate to malign the miscreants. What Ann said was uncivil, impolite and violates social taboos. But she’s just pointing out the phenomena.
Leftists will always work the victimhood gig much better than conservatives because victimhood is an integral part of their ideology. Conservatives will always look mean no matter what they say about these groups, whether harsh and outrageous or measured and diplomatic.
June 7th, 2006 at 4:08 pm
What the hell has happened to manners in this country? Why are there people defending this tacky woman and her big mouth?
The Anchoress is right. Republicans are where they are because a majority voted for them. That can change and it will change if they do not stop defending people who show complete disdain for the feelings of others.
People want their leaders and government to accomplish something. That is what we pay taxes for, if every issue just becomes something to rant about without any realistic solutions in sight, people will look elsewhere.
June 7th, 2006 at 4:28 pm
On Boorishness
Rick Moran over at Right Wing Nut House smacks Ann Coulter for her behavior yesterday on the Today Show. Specifically addressing the remarks that have gotten a lot of attention in the blogosphere regarding the 9-11 widows. I won't reprint…
June 7th, 2006 at 4:38 pm
“And I’m sure I once wrote that about liberals.” More than once! And we have our fair share too
But most of us are more center, and more reasonable, than you think.
Personally, I don’t think “conservatives” have changed much. What I hear today isn’t different from what I heard 5 years ago. But, the major topics have changed, which is why the “unrealistic, moralistic, angry and pompous” side is perhaps more prominent than it once was.
June 7th, 2006 at 5:00 pm
What is worse for me is that there are those who criticize us for daring to condemn the bad manners.
I take very strong exemption to that - just as much as I take exemption to claims that free speech is something that has selective application.
June 7th, 2006 at 5:59 pm
[...] The Anchoress received a great email that she posted: The idea that, by having been present and murdered on 9/11, you have become a hero, or that your family is entitled to special recognition, has become a mantra for some of the families. Fate, or chance or whatever you call it, placed nearly all of the dead where they were on that day. It’s wonderful that a generous nation provided so much for the survivors but in doing so the quaint notion that because your loved one died on September 11 you are now the sole source of memory and decision making with regard to all of the many issues that surround the event of that day developed. [...]
June 7th, 2006 at 6:00 pm
Somehow the images of smiling faces proudly proclaiming their hatred of Bush seems to me to smack of enjoyment. Sue me. That’s what it looks like to me. Should Ann have said such a thing publicly? No, it isn’t smart to do. But it ain’t that she’s wrong, either. Just not terrribly diplomatic.
For conservatives to complain about the Anchoress or anyone else denouncing Ann for the way she said her piece is simply idiotic.
Ma’am, I don’t always agree with you. But, by GOD, you always think things through and make me stop and think. I disagree with you on this, but give her heck, Ma’am, if that’s what you think she deserves!
You clowns that can’t abide anyone disagreeing with you … stuff it!
June 7th, 2006 at 6:03 pm
People are defending her because most are tired of the constant use these type of events to form a group and without any full knowledge of expertise push for legislation in some form or other that we all end up living with for years. They are defending not Ann C., but the issue itself she is trying to point out. No one in their right mind would say that the 9/11 commission in any way made us safer. They forget that this is the commission that pushed for bringing all the agencies under one big gumba which of course we all know makes things worse. Does anyone remember the FEMA issue where the same politicians that pushed everything together are now saying we need to move FEMA out of homeland security. Next we move it out and then in a terror attack, we see in fighting over who is in charge and a failure to communicate.
Also, I cannot stand Hilary Clinton coming out saying Coulter is vicious to women with her husband in tow. Drudge had this with Coulter asking if Hilary also condemned Bill for Rape, abuse, and sexual harrassment.
June 7th, 2006 at 7:30 pm
Again, Joe, as I wrote to Charles, your point is not invalid. Coulter’s point wasn’t invalid, but her means of making it invalidated and discredited her. There is a way to say things and a way not to. Coulter has a stiletto in her hands, but she is not deft with it, she’s sloppy…she leaves way too much blood and that - over and over again - indicts her.
‘
I’ve been watching a lot of CSI lately!
June 7th, 2006 at 7:37 pm
Ann Coulter and her kind have been every bit as critical of Bush as a lot on the left have.
Can anyone even imagine Laura Bush saying something like that?
June 7th, 2006 at 7:39 pm
Charles (great commentary) effectively makes all of the points that Ann could have, if she had stuck to the issues rather than trashing the women from NJ (whom I abhor, BTW). Our hostess also makes the point that these women have performed the role of ‘useful idiots’ for the anti-war media. The fact that they have been lionized, and people like Debra Burlingame have been largely ignored, speaks volumes about our press.
June 7th, 2006 at 7:55 pm
[...] The Anchoress probably has the best wrap-up and commentary of the whole Ann Coulter flap. [...]
June 7th, 2006 at 8:04 pm
So Hillary feels comfortable tutoring Coulter about civility and dignity? My, my. I know there are anger management courses. How about courses for people who long ago lost any sense of propriety due to their notoriety? Then we could raise money for tuition for both of these . . . ladies . . . to attend the course.
June 7th, 2006 at 8:12 pm
CRITICIZING THE “JERSEY GIRLS”
You’ve read the story of the day, all day, on Drudge: Ann Coulter is antagonizing the Left with her comments about the liberal 9/11 widows known as “The Jersey Girls.” Hillary Clinton is going ape. TV producers of all partisan…
June 7th, 2006 at 8:25 pm
You go girl. And I too am no longer a conservative if that is the tar I have to wear (and smell) to assume the lable. I am an independent. And we decide which party wins. No one else.
June 7th, 2006 at 8:35 pm
The Coulter Controversy
Ann Coulter’s gimmick is that she’s basically a right-wing version of a left-wing pundit, except she usually doesn’t cross the line. I take that back: she usually doesn’t do a Mike Powell-esque long jump over the line.
…
June 7th, 2006 at 8:45 pm
I am not in the habit of defending Ann Coulter, but I think she thinks
about everything she is going to say before she says it. (After all
how hard is it to come up with the questions that Matt Lauer is going
to ask?)
I think that the outrage is that everyone thinks that Ann said “The
9/11 widows like it that their husbands are dead.” But she did not
say that, she said (the controversial part) “I have never seen people
enjoying their husband’s death so much.” Which is different.
My dad was a tightwad. He didn’t want cable TV, and would rather us
not get it back in the 80’s. But if I said “I have never seen Dad
enjoying the Braves (on TBS) so much.” His enoyment of the Braves on
cable TV does not diminish that he would still rather not have cable
TV in his house.
June 7th, 2006 at 8:52 pm
Oh, one more thing…
We on the right keep our extremes at the extreme. The left elects theirs to office. Pat Robertson, Jerry Fallwell, Ann Coulter, Ralph Reed, and limbaugh for that matter are all GOPers of one type or another but they are all on their own, none are elected to office. The Left puts all of their kooky nut brained moonbats in office. Really the only two big lefties not in office that I can think of are KOS, and ok, so I can only think of one.
June 7th, 2006 at 9:21 pm
Not Defending Ann Coulter
I’m sorry, but when I heard about what Ann Coulter said about the New Jersey widows who lost husbands in the World Trade Center on 9/11, I have to say that some criticism she’s getting is deserved. She apparently wrote…
June 7th, 2006 at 9:23 pm
[...] After seeing the attacks on Ann Coulter from The Anchoress, Captain Ed, Right Wing Nut House and other blogs, I have come to realize that the political blogosphere has finally become as trite and mundane once you get above the “B-listers” as the political publishers out there. It was inevitable, but I didn’t expect it to devolve into such a killjoy this quickly. [...]
June 7th, 2006 at 9:46 pm
Ann Coulter Book Reviews Up At Amazon
I somehow doubt that 180 people have already read Ann’s book (it just came out yesterday, for heaven’s sake!), yet there are already a number of libs going on the attack:
Pure tripe by the queen of hate. Why so bitter, Ann? Why so unfair and irrat…
June 7th, 2006 at 10:25 pm
Coulter war against conservative values?
Via Pajamas Media, James Joyner has what I guess should be called an Ann Coulter roundup, and Ann doesn’t seem to have too many friends in the right-of-center blogosphere. Whether it’s just her shtick or a form of trolling, conservatives…
June 7th, 2006 at 10:43 pm
Wake up and smell the red herring! Matt Lauer’s question about 9/11 widows is what 2 paragraphs in the book? It’s a classic dodge of the real issues Ann addresses in
her book and I haven’t even read the book.
I’ve read her other books and she doesn’t leave her opinions to chance but backs them up real well ie with evidence.
June 7th, 2006 at 11:39 pm
[...] As expected, the lefty blogs have their Outrage-O-Meters turned up to 12. The blogs on the right have done their basic duty by noting their outrage in no uncertain terms and saying, in as many ways as there are blogs, “she doesn’t speak for us” (you can hit this excellent post by The Anchoress for a good sample of what the right is saying). [...]
June 8th, 2006 at 12:20 am
In defense of Ann Coulter
Via Instapundit:ED MORRISSEY: Ann Coulter, meet Ted Rall. Hugh Hewitt: Ann Coulter owes an apology to the widows of 9/11, and she should issue it immediately. This is beyond callous, beyond any notion of decency. It is disgusting. My general strategy t…
June 8th, 2006 at 1:01 am
[...] The Anchoress, who I enjoy, has a more muted reproach to Ann, though my reading of her post suggests that as the day wore on she was in almost complete agreement with Ann’s larger point. At least the Anchoress isn’t calling anyone names. That would really have my head spinning. Generally speaking, I’m glad the right side of the blogosphere has the decent people, people who want to treat others with respect despite strong disagreement. You sure don’t find many people like that over at DU or Kos. But I think things have to be kept in some perspective. Before we come down on Ann like a ton of bricks… [...]
June 8th, 2006 at 6:03 am
There is exactly one incident recorded in the Bible where Christ, whom we are called to emulate, attacked his enemies in anger. That was when he threw the money changers out of the temple. Even then, He rebuked them with God’s Word, not personal attacks. People can learn from that…stick to the truth. The provable, straight truth. I am entitled to my opinion, but it’s probably not going to change anyone’s mind.
Know why you believe what you believe and defend it, but don’t yell and scream at me about it. I don’t listen to my kids when they act like that, I’m certainly not going to listen to an intelligent adult who acts like a two year old.
June 8th, 2006 at 11:12 am
[...] The Anchoress rightly condemns Ann Coulter for her idiotic remarks on the Today show earlier this week. I’m not a conservative, so I really don’t care about this, but Coulter is, without a doubt, the Michael Moore of the right. And I still don’t understand why she was wearing a cocktail dress at 7am. [...]
June 8th, 2006 at 11:23 am
Oh, sure, pile on Ann Coulter! Don’t mention the almost-universal MSM coverage that misrepresented what was said. When you hear, “Ann Coulter Insults 9/11 Families(or 9/11 Widows)” don’t you rightfully assume she insulted them all? The majority of the MSM coverage I saw Wednesday somehow failed to mention that she was referring to the four “Witches of East Brunswick”(Ann) or “Jersey Girls”(everyone else) that the MSM and the Dems trotted out as random and representative families of 9/11 in order to manipulate the last election, without ever mentioning that the four were part of the same political group and were part of an organized effort from the DNC(with printed tie-ins for immediate release).
Now show me the “pile on” from the other side when a Leftist says “Bush Lied,” “Osama is in US custody to be used to win the election in the 11th hour,” “Bush is going to re-institute the draft” or ten-thousand other ridiculous and indefensible things. I mean a “pile on” that doesn’t agree with the original statement, of course!
Ann Coulter may sometime be wrong or misguided in her APPROACH, but Ted Rall is never right about anything. And Rall’s opinions closely match those of the editors and writers of the publications that publish his “art”.
June 8th, 2006 at 12:09 pm
I was struck by this comment by apsuman:
“We on the right keep our extremes at the extreme. The left elects theirs to office. Pat Robertson, Jerry Fallwell, Ann Coulter, Ralph Reed, and limbaugh for that matter are all GOPers of one type or another but they are all on their own, none are elected to office. The Left puts all of their kooky nut brained moonbats in office. Really the only two big lefties not in office that I can think of are KOS, and ok, so I can only think of one.”
I’d like to make two points to refute that argument:
1) Off the top of my head, it’s easy to add plenty to that list of unlected, well-known moonbats: every righty’s least favorite filmmaker M.M., the always delightful Noam Chomsky, Arianna and the vast majority of Huffpo posters, Cindy Sheehan, Randy Rhodes, etc.
2) The right wing also must take credit for its elected wingnuts: Rick Santorum, Tom Tancredo, you’ve got Ralph Reed running for Lt.Gov in Georgia, James Inhofe, etc.
While the majority of the people in government are well with the mainstream of political thought, both parties succeed in electing their share of extremists.
June 8th, 2006 at 12:32 pm
The Right doesn’t have enough Ann Coulters.
The Left makes such extreme demands that they can afford to cool it a little in the name of compromise.
We don’t. We only ask for what we need. So there’s nothing extra to use as a concession.
Which is why we end up in situations like the current immigration mess: we want the law to be enforced; the Left wants illegals to be given privileges and gifts. If we compromise at all, the situation shifts Left.
If, on the other hand, we came out foaming at the mouth demanding that the illegals be rounded up and tortured to death and their homelands conquered and annexed, then we’d have some maneuvering room.
Justice Scalia put it this way:
“What is a moderate interpretation of the Constitution? Halfway between what it really says and what you’d like it to say?”
In our current PC culture, where Compromise carries more weight than common sense or law enforcement, yes, that’s what ‘moderate’ means.
Either we stand firm and refuse to compromise, or the socialist nanny state grows, or we act a little more extreme ourselves. One person can’t make the first two happen, but Ann Coulter can give the third a shot.
June 8th, 2006 at 1:44 pm
“In the end, all Coulter did was discredit herself and make the rest of us look very mean-spirited and grotesque”
Yes for the first part, but not for the second. I’m a liberal but I’ve never considered Coulter to be typical of conservatives. She seeks attention for its own sake and needs to constantly escalate her rhetoric to stay on the radar.
I do realize that some do support her comments in the name of a necessary extremism. Extremism does not equal mindless cruelty.
June 8th, 2006 at 3:42 pm
Coulter only gets mentioned in the MSM when they think they have the goods to destroy her. But since people are looking into this story themselves and are being reminded of the original dirty tricks(with the ‘Jersey Girls’) of the MSM and their unholy union with the Democrat Party and the Left, it’s a “good thing”–isn’t it?
kate q made some excellent points! I hope everyone goes back and rereads her comment more carefully, if you only skimmed it the first time.
June 8th, 2006 at 3:48 pm
Darrel:
The woman is trying to sell books, this about money to her. Tacky tacky tacky.
June 8th, 2006 at 9:06 pm
Ok, conservatives….buck up ! What are we trying to do? Prove we are holier than the libs who condone the utter filth put forth by the Jersey Girls and Cindy, and Murtha, and Kerry, and the rest? Have you forgotten the constant bashing of Bush for all these years? Mostly with “issue fogging”, lies, distortions, and conspiracy fabrications? Did Coulter land a low blow?…..yep…sure did! I say its about time someone gave ‘em a taste of their own gargle. Conservatives taking the “high ground” here disappoint me. This is a dirty, no holds barred knife fight with the libs. Grab some grit….or grab some pine, but get off your high horse!!!
June 8th, 2006 at 10:06 pm
I have never seen so many left wingers on this site. They must be googling for any mention of Ann Coulter. Great to have some of you visit this great site run by a person who is outstanding on many of the moral issues of our time. Maybe you can stay a learn a little bit about those things that are at the heart of the so called family values and faith you all love to hate.
June 8th, 2006 at 10:07 pm
And one more thing. Has anyone noticed what this coverage has done to her book sale numbers? Thanks to the left MSM, thousands more will buy and read her book.
June 9th, 2006 at 12:07 pm
If it was about money, Ann could join the ‘dark side’ and make Oprah-money. I’m sure she’s been approached. Or maybe not. Even they know that Ann believes what she says and says what she believes. Just like her best friend and confidant Barbara Olsen (December 27, 1955 – September 11, 2001) who encouraged Ann to start her column.
June 10th, 2006 at 7:25 am
Retro-Nose: Top 9 Suggested Ann Coulter Book Titles
We here at The Nose On Your Face are big fans of best-selling conservative authoress Ann Coulter. As a friendly gesture to her, our staff have compiled a list of potential titles for any upcoming books she may be planning.
June 11th, 2006 at 8:47 am
The only thing I can say about Ann Coulter is, if she is what a Christian is, I don’t want to be one.
June 13th, 2006 at 12:12 pm
[...] Coulter has earned every ounce of scorn and vehemence that’s she’s had to endure (just another day at the office for an empty-hearted provocateur, I suppose), and it’s come from all sides. Hell, even the Anchoress interrupted her hair-brushing reverie to complain. By paying the price for us she also challenges us to not be so timid, to fight for the integrity of substance, and to not fall for the idea that a victim can never be disagreed with. [...]
June 16th, 2006 at 11:43 am
[...] Captain’s Quarters is such a nice guy that its not odd he should be upset but I believe he is wrong. AJ Strata is having a tough time deciding whether he is a conservative or a moderate… Right Wing Nuthouse needs to breath into a paper bag. Anchoress is her usual calm self, wrong on this but calm. Michelle Malkin hits it out of the park pointing out that long ago the Opinion Journals Dorothy Rabinowitz had the Jersey Girls figured. Ace of Spades is only happy if he is doing the attacking of the left…he was pretty darn harsh on Sheehan. [...]
June 26th, 2006 at 6:02 pm
[...] In Coulter Missing a Humanity Gene She goes too far and discredits herself and the values she says she espouses. [...]
July 9th, 2006 at 9:52 pm
[...] First, long time Anchoress reader Darryl takes me to task for criticizing right-wing agitator Ann Coulter. Darryl, I wish I could take credit for being the first blogger to take aim at Miss Coulter but the fact of the matter is that the Anchoress beat me to it. You can read her criticism of Miss Coulter here. For purposes of comparison you might want to look at my take on the conservative grinch. [...]
July 14th, 2006 at 10:02 am
Boycott Ann Coulter
I am somewhat reluctant to write about Ann Coulter this week. The last thing I want to do is help her sell more copies of her book. But I am willing to take that chance in order to denouce her, to show that she is one of the greatest danger that exists to
September 1st, 2006 at 3:36 am
[...] You know what? I’ve pretty much said all I’m going to about Coulter when she does this sort of thing. She has a fans and her appreciators and apologists. I am not one of them, and I believe her antics reflect poorly on conservatives, but whatever floats your boat. [...]
December 7th, 2006 at 1:28 am
[...] Confederate Yankee - noting that yesterday several “progressive” bloggers were busy taking the right to task for “incivility - and he is wondering when or if any blogs from the left will give some heat to this woman or, at the very least, admonish her as you have seen right-wing bloggers do when one of their own crosses a line. So far, he doesn’t seem to have found any leftwing bloggers shaking the finger. Rick Moran is also looking for some condemnation from the left. He hears crickets. [...]
January 26th, 2007 at 10:59 am
The political blogosphere’s ashes smolder in their urn of stagnation
After seeing the attacks on Ann Coulter from The Anchoress, Captain Ed, Right Wing Nut House and other blogs, I have come to realize that the political blogosphere has finally become as trite and mundane once you get above the…
October 11th, 2007 at 11:16 am
[...] own arguments (and cause relentless misunderstanding and hardship for “her side”) with her undisciplined “let me be caustic, free-wheeling and outrageous” schtick. I don’t understand other people’s adoration of the woman. To me she has always been a [...]
October 12th, 2007 at 11:47 am
[...] her own arguments (and cause relentless misunderstanding and hardship for “her side”) with her undisciplined “let me be caustic, free-wheeling and outrageous” schtick. I don’t understand other people’s adoration of the woman. To me she has always been a partly [...]