Uttering lines that send liberals into paroxysms of rage, otherwise known as “citing facts,” is the spice of life. When I see the hot spittle flying from their mouths and the veins bulging and pulsing above their eyes, well, that’s when I feel truly alive. This happens, I dearly hope, once a week when my column is released. But the public gnashing of teeth that I incite occurs approximately every six to eight months, which is rather peculiar, since I believe I annoy liberals much more often than that.
Coulter is an incredibly clever polemicist and provocateur and she's right when she claims that her writing sends liberals into "paroxysms of rage." And it reflects a weakness on the part of most liberals that they allow her to make them so angry.
But liberals really would be fools if they still wanted Ann Coulter to lose her writing gigs. After five books, hundreds of columns, and thousands of interviews, Ann Coulter has become an asset to political liberalism. That's because she really did go one step too far when she slandered the 9-11 widows in Godless.
As a result, public opinion has tipped against Coulter and she's become a living symbol of the right-wing's habitual venom and bigotry to mainstream America.
Now, Coulter's in the same league as Rush Limbaugh. When one of her outrages on Muslims, John Edwards, or the right of women to vote gets publicized, it's seen as an example of everything that's wrong with conservativism.
That makes Coulter a friend of the left. In fact, one of our best friends.
Posts
16 comments:
I'd never considered that Ric. Truth be told though, the point is very valid. With every bigoted, vicious anti-gay, anti-Muslim, anti-feminist statement she makes, Coulter exposes the dark underbelly of Conservative Republicanism.
She and Limbaugh are the patron saints of hate and with every vile word they and others like them dig themselves further into political/social relevance. She and Rush are tied at number one as America’s foremost hatemongers and liars.
What also interests and disturbs me is that this woman is believed. Good people believe that Anne is serious about her country and politics in general. Not so.
Anne Coulter is about money. She uses her "opinions" to make money, and like Howard Stern,Rush Limbaugh, and Michael Savage before her, she has to keep raising the bar of her craziness or people just move on to someone more interesting.
This tactic is taking its toll however. People who used to embrace her extremism have either distanced themselves or condemned her outright. People who never took her seriously (like me), have been proven right.
In the end, her words will hit Coulter in the only place she cares about: her wallet.
Coulter exposes the dark underbelly of Conservative Republicanism.
Not so, todd mayo. She exposes her personal beliefs, nobody elses.
BTW, congrats on having a whole comment without cutting and pasting large passages of somebody else's writing.
Nobody else? Then why do conservatives buy her books and pay her thousands of dollars to speak? Why will Sean Hannity be drooling over her tonight? Why should I let you off with her hateful screed, when you blame everyone on the Left for ANY perceived slight?
Ann Coulter is the soul of contemporary conservatism and her style and views represent the opinions of millions of conservatives. She was the rock star of this spring's CPAC conference and right-wing students at my university idolize her.
Well, I have never purchased one of her books, and I am a Conservative. I do not listen to Sean Hannity, and I am a Conservative. She does not represent the opinions of millions. She represents her own opinions, period. People may agree with her on some, disagree on others, but she still only speaks for herself.
Caric's knowledge of the "soul of contemporary conservatism" is beyond laughable, but if this is what passes for actual thought at Morehead, than I can scratch that institution off the list of potential colleges for my children. Since Michael Moore got to sit next to Carter at the Dem convention, can we say that he accurately represents the Dems? Since Sharpton got to run as a Dem candidate, is he representative? Kucinich?
Mendacity is a way of life for you.
In the 2007 right-wing blogger's "Favorite right-wing people" poll, Coulter (tied with Malkin) came in second only to Limbaugh.
http://www.rightwingnews.com/mt331/
2007/10/
rightofcenter_bloggers_select_2.php
I think it is fair to say Moore represents many liberals. I can personally say he doesn't represent my opinions, because I HAVE borrowed an audio book of his. Ten minutes into it, I turned it off, because it was the same as Hannity and friends just with different nouns.
On the other hand, I own all of Al Franken's book, except the best one (Why Not Me?) and consider him to be thoughtful and intelligent.
While you fulminate on that, let me add: to claim Coulter represents herself no one else and then spend your time here speaking of a monolithic Left is the height of hubris, JD. As I have before, look at the team you're playing on. If you dislike so many of them, why do you play on it?
tim - To engage your last question, first ... The other team has given me not one single reason to change teams. They have, in fact, made it less likely that I would ever change sides, absent a viable 3rd party, that would draw from both sides. One must not like everyone. Not possible, given the numbers involved. One must not even like most. We simply vote for those that share the greatest agreement on the ideas that we give the greatest weight to.
While you fulminate on that, let me add: to protest the monolithic Left while making assertions that Republicans are racist or align themselves with racists is the height of hubris, tim.
I chortled briefly (I think chortle is an under-rated word and it has a poor connotation, so I'm thinking of trying to bring it back!) at that last part and then i remembered that I can pretty prove that Republicans courted racists. I have demonstrated several times on this page that it is an historical truth, through the words of Lee Atwater, Roger Ailes, and Ken Mehlman, through the party switching of noted segregationists, through Bob Jones, through Bob Corker's ad, and Willie Horton, etc.
If you want to hold yourseld away from your team members, because they say some awfully stupid things: e.g today on Hannity's show, Coulter used this fact to illustrate "left-wing bias in the press": when Pat Tillman joined the Army, there were three stories in the NY Times. After he died from friendly fire, there were 24. Of course, Hannity's listeners are about a quarter educated as JD is, so that counts on them not knowing there was a Congressional investigation, that the Army initially lied about why he died, and that his family said the Army is STILL hiding documents...no wonder you don't want to be on her side, she's as dishonest toward conservatives as Goldstein is angry at academics.
Calling Corker's ad racist is precisely what I was describing in the prior thread. By calling everything racist, you take away from actual racism. That ad was only racist for those that wanted race to be an issue.
I could care less what Ann Coulter says. Apparently, you do not get that. Ditto Rush. Ditto Hannity. Ditto Savage. I do not base my beliefs on those of commercial talking heads.
Some Republicans courted racists. Yup. Some of the Dem demographics are the most virulently anti-gay out there, yet the Dems do not steer clear of them. Can I control what Atwater did when I was a child? Nope. Nor can you do anything about your party pandering to interest groups with competing ideologies.
Tim - When your side of the aisle gives me a reason to switch sides, I will be happy to listen. At this point, the only reasons that they have given me are name calling, stereotyping, and overall disdain. Not very convincing.
Bring it, whoever you are ;-)
Ric, that's cleo
I've got a better idea than suing you JD. I'll keep posting. Here's the kicker, from now on I might use my very own words (as I always did) AND, sometimes I really will cut and paste an entire statement with which I agree. Let's just see if you can make out the difference between my stuff and someone else's. I'm not a student anymore you see so plagerism is irrelevant.
Let's test those wits of yours; is it Todd, or is it someone better than me and you. Happy hunting.
Why would you sue me? Because I point out that despite your cries for civility, that you spew every bit as much, if not more vitriol on every topic imaginable? Because I point out that you post incredibly long comments that are simply cut and paste jobs of other people's words?
We know your views. Republicans are evil. Warforoil. Bush is Hitler. Tax cuts for those that do not pay taxes. Free healthcare for people earning $65,000+. You are a verifiable living breathing talking point memo for the moonbat left.
At least tim has his own ideas. Caric does too, but they are a little bit off.
I will ignore that since you so eloquently described your party better than I ever could.(it was very wise and quite courteous to explain that you were not accusing me of plagerism. I object to the idea that my thoughts are not my own. I've never quoted anyone, inserted any article, or written a single word that did not articulate exactly how I feel.)
Instead let me drop back to something you JD, said above about Ann Coulter. "She exposes her personal beliefs, nobody elses." Someone might want to tell her that. She claims to speak for all of you.
P.S. If you find my responces here so dirivitive, ignore them. You don't have to read everything. I rarely read any of the conservative responces here. Works well. Your views are irrelevant to me. I respond to Ric's posts, and usually nothing more.
Ann Coulter is an intelligent person who could further the cause for conservatives. Instead, she uses small words and small hatefilled speech to turn many people away from the very party she says she is supporting. She must really be a Democratic ringer for she does their cause much more good than harm.
Post a Comment