cuz she's hot and get's the guys going, and the gals.

I thought that west of the Rockies, the older writer was known as Lillian Best Food.

cuz she's hot and get's the guys going, and the gals

I just thew up a little in my mouth

She's hot in a drag queen sort of way..

That's the point.
A visceral bodily reaction.
It 'moves' people.

It works. I swear.

I think it's a bit like "waving the bloody shirt"; the idea is to get a response from the emotional part of the brain before the rational part has a chance to kick in.

And of course, a lot of it is preaching to the choir, and they LOVE them some Ann.

I keep watching because I keep hoping that one day somebody is going to slap that bitch silly.

Now that's fun.

Violence never solved anything.

If she didn't have the best freaking publicists in the world getting her onto every TV talk show and then some, it'd be easier to just dismiss her as a crank. Since she's always on mainstream TV and people treat her like she's a reasonable pundit, people try and discredit her to show that she's not.

There are a few people I don't bother commenting on, and among them is Ann Coulter. But it's not because she's so outrageous. It's because she's so juvenile.

It's saying things like this that make conservatives like myself hate liberals and Ned Lamont Democrats. No one is asking you to agree with everything Ann Coulter says. We know you won't because you're a liberal. But you're stuck lauching vemonous personal attacks like now. Liberals like yourself can't imagine judging what Ann Coulter says with any measure than how it matches your ideological correctness. You offer NOTHING to your readers but your absolute certainty you libs are always right but conservatives are always wrong. You simply are UNABLE to judge anything except by the criteria of how much what somebody says matches your ideological correctness.

Because she's given a very prominent forum, and there are a lot of people who think she's clever.

She's hot in a drag queen sort of way.

You insult DRAG queens with that crap

All the guy's like her cuz she says what they want to hear, and they want to 'do her'. The chicks like her cuz she 'speaks the language', simple and direct and confrontational, so they identify with her.

Most amerikans and not to bright and get lost in a long dialog, longer than quick whippets of insults and inuendo. "giiiirrrlll - oooohhh...."

"And why do people bother responding to her obviously contrived provocations?"

Because she has the big media megaphone? Again you push back the limits of your own naivete.

=

I wonder if you feel the same way about Robert Scheer and Eric Alterman. Coulter always goes beyond what's reasonably defensible, but so do they. Molly Ivins and Maureen Dowd are hardly better.

Because the filth she spews appeals to the lowest common denominator, who figure 'cause she published a book and is on the TeeVee, their ignorant, bigoted filth is now legitimate and respectable. Because FoxNews, CNN, CNBC, MSNBC, and NBC treat her as a letimate commentator. Because Slate magazine (in the person of you own daily-linked Mickey Kaus) treats her as a serious pundit, and The New Republic says that there's an "uncomfortable grain of truth" in her bile. Because she is the voice of the George Bush Karl Rove Republican Party.

(Lillian Helman?)

I've always thought that the best way to deal with the woman was to just dismiss her. Her own arguments discredit her. Were it not for the women that pioneered the way toward equality of the sexes, whom she so savagely demeans, she could never have attained the prominent position she currently holds in the national discourse. If she had her way, her opinions would be deemed worthless because of her gender and she would be roundly dismissed and literally sent back to the kitchen. I say treat her the way she obviously wants to be treated. Do unto others and all that.

Ned Lamont Democrats.

LOL.

Yeah, Democrats who write pieces for the WSJ extolling the virtues of entrepeurship and that free market system. Those Democrats.

It was really funny watching the Lieberman campaign lurch from labeling Lamont a closet Republican to a Negro-loving leftist loon and back again.

Those poor wingnuts. The story lines aren't working so well anymore, and that's all they've got. No principles. No ideas. No competence. All they've got is slogans and smears. That works in opposition, but once you gain complete control of the government, you need more than bumper stickers and slander.

Worst Al comment ever. Think about the magnitude of that statement.

Kevin,

When Rush started becoming popular, I thought we could just ignore him because he was so obviously a clown.

By the mid 90's, most of my Republican friends got nearly all of their "news" from him.

Ann Coulter matters because many people read her books and take her seriously.

It's not Coulter, it the shows that spoil the national dialogue that need to be challedged. Insofar as a national TV opinion show allows this venom to be validated we must speak up against it. Bill Maher got fired for giving an unwise but defensible position.

Coulter is that weird girl in third grade who used to flash her panties at everybody.

Nothing's changed.

"But you're stuck lauching vemonous personal attacks like now."

Al I thought you were leaving the country? Speed it up please.

I am a big "free speech" guy, she has the right to say whatever she wants. Just be prepared to accept it if you dish it out. "If my answers frighten you, then stop asking scary questions" -Jules

I wonder if you feel the same way about Robert Scheer and Eric Alterman.

Can you post an example from each of those people that comes close to the contentless vitriol that she spouts?

saying things like this that make conservatives like myself hate liberals

If you ever had a comment that wasn't an egregious insult to my intelligence I might be able to actually muster enough emotion to "hate" you.

I suggest you go have another beer and watch some "news"

And anyone defending her as a right wind pundit with credible ideas is simply a hack. SHe takes the most base ideas and puts them out like facts.
Base ideas like immigrants, gays, the war, tax cuts, boosh and his folks, the list goes on.

Ideology? Screw that. I have ideology but it doesn't rule my life. Rational and thoughtful consideration of issues is what i bring to the table.

You, Senior al, are a fun tool to make fun of, and are the exact example of the foolishness of both the left and the right - a person, a voice - trying to divide the people into opposing groups, two groups, who view thier differning opinions as simply, basely, a 'war'.

That is a nihlistic, pointless work, and i hope to god and the universe that is is just that.

Becuase if you continue to multiply and procreate, the world, at least the United States is destined to a unsympathetic and disastorous decline.

Thankfully there are other places in the world to live in once, if your tunnel vision-ed world veiw becomes reality.

Damn, we need a good revolution.

Somebody told me that Ann Coulter is a stupid cunt.

Is that true?

And why do people bother responding to her obviously contrived provocations?

Why do people give a damn about Tom Cruise and Katie Holmes? Because this is the crap fed to them by the media. People talk about what's put in front of them.

Since the media is largely owned and run by right-wing interests, rabid right-wing demagogues will always have their podium, regardless of quality, rationality, or maturity.

Maureen Dowd is hardly better? She writes for the NYT, and her facts are actually checked. Coulter's vile spew is virtually fact-free.

Coulter absolutely deserves to be ignored, but the money and trolls behind her know damn well that the average American finds it difficult to ignore a skinny blonde with a sharp tongue. And she riles the peasants up while the money behind her hides. But she's dangerous in a way that most pundits aren't, because she viciously demonizes those she's trained well to despise, rather than argue against their ideas. It's patently undemocratic, and socially very dangerous.

If the level of rhetoric gets to the point where certain people feel physically threatened, some of these people are going to act before that happens. And I hope Coulter gets more than a cream pie at that point.

You simply are UNABLE to judge anything except by the criteria of how much what somebody says matches your ideological correctness.
Posted by: Al

Al is Jonathon Chait?

I wonder if you feel the same way about Robert Scheer and Eric Alterman. Coulter always goes beyond what's reasonably defensible, but so do they. Molly Ivins and Maureen Dowd are hardly better.
Posted by: republicrat

man, this very reasonable site attracts some dumb damn trolls.
Can you cite a single sentence from Dowd, Ivins or Alterman which compares to calling for a Supreme Court Justice to be poisoned, or that Kristen Breitweiser enjoys the fact that her husband was incinerated? I'll wait here.

Just go and see what Bob Somerby has to say about this at www.dailyhowler.com.

LMAO!

However, Kevin is correct. Why do liberals read her columns and give them wider play? Her columns are written for her followers, and she is enormously successful for doing so, and you go and give her the additional satisfaction of getting all hot-and-bothered over the things she writes. Just another example of the idiocy of trollkillers.

And why do people bother responding to her obviously contrived provocations?

not sure, but it's gotta be the same reason they bother responding to Al.

The right has been uncool forever. Now they get to pretend otherwise. Rock theme music for assholes like Rush, Sean, & Liddy. A miniskirt moron like Coulter is perfect.

We're sexy, we're hip, we're not cultural retards!

If she didn't have the best freaking publicists in the world getting her onto every TV talk show and then some, it'd be easier to just dismiss her as a crank. Since she's always on mainstream TV and people treat her like she's a reasonable pundit, people try and discredit her to show that she's not.

That's what I don't get. There's something very weird going on when Coulter is given a platform as somebody with some kind of "insight". One can certainly ignore her arguments. (Does she even make arguments, in the formal sense? From what I've scanned in her "books", she never gets beyond name-calling.) But it's foolhardy to ignore her media platform, and who's giving it to her -- and why.

"She's" actually Howard Stern in drag... or maybe "he's" actually Anne Coulter, I've lost track.

I have never understood why people care what Coulter says. I remember her as one of the interchangeable blonde Republican babes on Politically Incorrect, and she was no more memorable than any of the others. Interesting to think that Bill Maher helped bring Coulter, plus Chris Rock, Ariana Huffington and Al Franken to the forefront with his brilliant pre-election series in 2000.

True, the media is a large portion of the blame. As Communications 101 extoled: LCD.
Get as many viewers as you can. Why did timewarner take off the Canidan New Chanel that at least provide alternate world views??

And part of the blame should be heaped on the fiasco that is the educational system in the US: most people cannot place a state on a map, much less on country.
Reading at 4th grade level is an acceptable voting populace????

People are responsible to learn on their own. I know, bc I was a typical amerikan who hated the news and governemnt, didn't apply to my daily world.

That was a mistake given/placed on me by my parents and institutions.

I've since learned, lucky enough to graduate college and meet some international folks who showed me my ignorance of my own State.

I look the leaders, such as the President. But not this president. boosh should go back to a dark room and do coke and drink and not cause any more trouble.

However, Kevin is correct. Why do liberals read her columns and give them wider play? Her columns are written for her followers, and she is enormously successful for doing so, and you go and give her the additional satisfaction of getting all hot-and-bothered over the things she writes. Just another example of the idiocy of trollkillers.

It is not her columns that we protest against, it's her appearances on mainstream cable news programs where she is allowed to spew her fact-free giberish without dissent. She is a stain on political discourse that has no counterpoint on the left.

http://www.newsday.com._Walt Haldesman's News Flash
The clip at this site is all I've watched of Ann Coulter.

"I keep watching because I keep hoping that one day somebody is going to slap that bitch silly."

That's fun? Now, on the other hand, watching a moron play chicken with a bulldozer is lotsa fun!

"Bill Maher got fired for giving an unwise but defensible position."

Cheering for the terrorists is not only defensible, but it's the crux of liberal orthodoxy.

Ann Coulter is like Lillian Hellman?

On what planet?

I've never been an admirer of LH (or her shoddy over-heated melodramas), whom I've always believed would never had been published but for her relationship with poor dying, alcoholic Dashiel Hammett, but putting her in the same category as Ann Coulter is just plain nuts.

LH was at least an anti-fascist - or at least gave a good impersonation of same. She also acquitted herself with some considerable distinction under persecution from the House Un-American Activities hearings.

You've been reading too much Mary McCarthy.

Col Bat Guano,

"Allowed"? Should she be barred from doing so? Are you really suggesting that government regulate the content of cable news programs for balance? I would suggest that you turn the programs off and not watch them.

However, Kevin is correct. Why do liberals read her columns and give them wider play? Her columns are written for her followers, and she is enormously successful for doing so, and you go and give her the additional satisfaction of getting all hot-and-bothered over the things she writes. Just another example of the idiocy of trollkillers.

Well, in this particular instance, it seems that our "liberal" "friends" at The New Republic have come with yet another of their written-by-the-numbers contrarian pieces. Turns out that some Wonkette wannabe sez that Coulter's really about empowering women, or some such.

Not that we should be bothered by the content, of course. Because as perpetual grad student Chait reveals, an article at TNR can be "less about the destination than the journey".

I dunno what the fuck he means, either.

How the fork is Anne Coulter comparable to Lillian Hellman in any way?

There's an amusing/frighteining webpage -- don't exactly know what it's called -- that offers an Ann Coulter or Adoph Hitler? quiz.

There are 17 quotes from each, positioned side-by-side.

And damned if I only got nine of them right.

Coulter rings precisely the same cherry that Hitler did, and by the same means of self-righteous projective identification.

To that extent, she's a manifestation of neofascism -- and an extremely dangerous cultural phenomenon for being so widely disseminated.

I know many German women had their "ovaries rattle" (as Magda Goebbels' did) when they saw or heard Hitler speak.

Could you imagine if the dude was built like Max Schelling?

Bob

"What's the point? And why do people bother responding to her obviously contrived provocations?"

Kevin

Go read the past two days postings at the Daily Howler. Bob Sommerby explains why: "But a crucial fact is worth noting; this country is currently full of people who take every word from Coulter quite seriously."

BTW, on the topic of evolution, Coulter believes that we should not pay attention to biologists because they are not really scientists: "Most of the “scientists” favoring Darwinism, you know, they’re barely even scientists. They’re biologists. They’re not physicists. They not chemists."

I'm with Kevin on this one. Ann Coulter doesn't represent me.

Maybe the media like her because she's juvenile. She puts conservatives in a bad light. By comparison, the more mature Thomas Sowell has made some of the same points as she did in her latest book. Sowell is rightly feted by conservatives, but he's ignored by the main stream media.

Cheering for the terrorists is not only defensible, but it's the crux of liberal orthodoxy.

Posted by: Freedom Fighter on August 17, 2006 at 1:51 PM

Seriously, fuck you.

I mean, I keep trying to make these reasonable posts saying that liberals like myself don't love the terrorists, and that all we want is a President who can fight an intelligent war on terror. It never even makes a dent with you fucking people. So to hell with every single one of you.

She's really quite the hag, but we're stuck in this cycle in which the more we say so, the more it makes her backers convinced that liberal males all want her bony goodies.

why do people bother responding to her obviously contrived provocations?

Because they put her on TV.

Quite simply, if people - no matter how loony - are making an argument on TV, someone had better rebut it, and good, or people will believe it's true.

Plenty of them will anyway, of course, but them's the rules: if something's said on TV and it isn't countered, people will just assume it's true.

Cuz that skinny Ubertwat has a clitoris that keeps on giving ... and giving ... and giving ...

Freedom Fighter - to understand the point Maher was making one has to: 1) be capable of thought and 2) think. Which of those two crossed you up? (I'm thinking 1)

Could you imagine if the dude was built like Max Schelling?

Bob

I don't know Bob, I think Coulter is built like Schmelling!

Yeah, Freedom Fryer, FY. I've had enough of this crap, and if you said this to my face, you'd have a bloody nose. No one challenges my love of my country, and I certainly don't have it mixed up with love of government like you have. This government directly threatens me and my family with their screw-ups in the "war against terrorism," their busting the budget to prosecute an illegal war, their illegal listening to my private communications, their corruption and incompetence on so many levels, and their lying and treason against the Constitution. You on the other hand seem to want to defend all this, which makes you nothing more than a Tory. And you know what happened to the Tories in America...

Why the dig at Lillian Hellman? At least she wrote well. Though she was an ideologue she was primarily a playwright who came to what she believed pretty honestly. With Coulter, et alia, I have the impression that the ideology was a career move and very self-serving. Many of the writers of the 30's whose politics were of front suffered a good deal for them. Coulter has not.

She's a man baby!

Cheering for the terrorists is not only defensible, but it's the crux of liberal orthodoxy.

i'll second mmy's "Fuck You"

Maher did no such thing, you reprehensible smear of fecal matter.

On Politically Incorrect, Dinesh D'Souza was the one who first attributed courage to the suicide bombers. Maher merely agreed with him.

correction: "whose politics were OUT front"

That Chait assumes we don't like her because there is a grain of truth in what she says says a lot about him and shit about us. He may be worried that the scarecrow is plumming the depths of his frightened little id, but not the rest of us.
Christ, if I had to dig through so much smelly rotting garbage and feces for a gold nugget I would give up long before he does. It ain't worth it fella.

Ok now! enough about this motherf-ing broad on this motherf-ing blog!

"...you libs are always right but conservatives are always wrong." Posted by Al

Hey, Al finally got it right. I mean correct.

How the fork is Anne Coulter comparable to Lillian Hellman in any way?
Posted by: Gar Lipow

My point exactly! NOT!

correction: "whose politics were OUT front"

Al-

Give me a break. Drum's been consistently moderate and measured in his comments for the past few years. Seems clear to me that the only one speaking in hyperbole and hysteria is yourself.

No one is or needs to dismiss Ann Coulter because she is so clever. The obvious point is that someone calling another a 'total fag,' or 'narcissistic' homosexual IS juvenile. It's that simple. It's childish and beneath contempt. His point is to ignore her, since she obviously craves the attention. Remove her provocative comments, and you usually have conservative boilerplate. Sometimes there's meat there, sometimes not. But the boilerplate is not why she's famous. It's the outrage she wallows in causing.

Kevin Drum as ideologue? Pitiful. Go read Malkin, Little Green Footballs, etc.

Get real.

well, Kevin, that is just it, its not contrived, she'sreal, she is authentically Ann Coulter and to me, that is what's interesting about her. I don't like her views, and don't find her attractive accept in a FemDom kinda way, but she sure can rattle it off. She's the repug Colbert accept she's serious and not faking, which prevides the whole ironic pleasure to her personality. Shorter view: shes no phoney and not a pretender for ratings.

I think the only thing left to say about this is that Kevin has to explain the Ann Coulter = Lillian Helman thing.

I wonder if you feel the same way about Robert Scheer and Eric Alterman. Coulter always goes beyond what's reasonably defensible, but so do they. Molly Ivins and Maureen Dowd are hardly better. Posted by: republicrat

What a load of shit. Show us here one example of where any of the writers you name has ever advocated violence against anyone or been caught in an obvious lie, as Coulter is the case with Coulter on a number of occasions.

Coulter once had the temerity to argue with a Canadian broadcaster during an that Canada had provided troops and was an "ally" of the U.S. in Vietnam. So not only is she vile, she's stupid.

blue stater: Somebody told me that Ann Coulter is a stupid cunt. Is that true?

No, she's just a cunt, apparently a smart one, who says stupid shit.

i hate his message, but rush came along at the right time from his point of view and by comparision with ann coulter, is a mainstream conservative. coulter, on the other hand, is silly. she has no personality, no charm and certainly no serious ideas. just outrage. her bullshit provides her with a fine living, i'm sure, but wins few converts. she has all the the credibility, all the influence of a holocaust denier.

[W]hy do people bother responding to her obviously contrived provocations?

Holy Crap, Kevin, wake up!

When Ann goes on a political talk show, there's no chiron under her talking head that says "Whack-job Comic Relief Ann Coulter." It just says, "Ann Coulter, Columnist," or some such thing.

If nobody spends time pointing out that she is, in fact, Whack-Job Comic Relief, her viewpoint will be a fully-accepted component of the American political discourse.

If Ann were just some crank talking crazy smack at a cocktail party, then yes, the thing to do would be to ignore her. But that's not the case. Ignoring her, confident that everyone sees through her act, is a very, very bad idea. You've been having a lot of those lately in your effort to hold onto the Vital Center. Let go, and come leftward, where some semblance of sanity remains.

Why the dig at Lillian Hellman? At least she wrote well.

Well, no. Frankly. They tried to revive 'The Childrens' Hour' recently and it flopped like the dreadful 'lesbian' soap opera it is.

'Watch on the Rhine', maybe...

But that still doesn't justify equating her with Anne Coulter.

I greatly like her memoirs - the awful (truly dreadful) film they made 'loosely based' on them notwithstanding - and that's what pissed off Mary McCarthy so mightly. She didn't get top billing.

Ann Coulter's remarks are the political equivalent of a Sports Illustrated pre-season list or a Rolling Stone Greatest Rock Star list. They're designed to sucker in the yobs and nitwits with their artificial controversy.

What's Good for the Goose...

If 911 = Iraq, then GOP = Coulter

Anent McCarthy-Hellman

Hellman, unlike most American leftists, never bothered to distance herself from Stalin. Either from ideological sympathy or vanity. Probably vanity. McCarthy, like most of the Partisan Review crowd, hated Stalin and the what he meant for the ruin of their hopes (a lot like Bush and Conservatives, I imagine). McCarthy could have cared less about Hellman's memoirs.

I think all you fine folks are minimizing a bit on this. Coulter is more than merely a crank with a platform -- she's Adolf Hitler in drag.

Remember, in intellectual circles people dismissed the little brush-moustached nutjob for quite a long time, even after the Beer Hall Putsch and for a long time after that. It was quite fashionable not to take the man and his movement seriously.

I'm not saying that Coulter herself has any political ambitions -- only that she enables a truly frightening spirit of fascism in this country. Again -- take the Coulter or Hitler quiz?

Be very afraid when you only get about half the answers right. This is more than typical media commercialism having fun with the paying customers.

This is a slide down the obulette ...

Bob

I'm not saying that Coulter herself has any political ambitions -- only that she enables a truly frightening spirit of fascism in this country

I didn't want to make the Hitler comparison, but I thought the exact same thing. Monkeys often let tigers out their cage, politically speaking. And Coulter has talked about challenging Chris Shays in a primary, but I don't think she could take the hours, the paycut, or the scrutiny.

_______: (insert troll of choice)

Thoroughly debunked bullshit.

I have exactly zero interest in debating this with you.

Bob
Posted by: rmck1

Rinse and repeat.

Atta Bob.

Responding to her provocations is obviously not productive. But pointing out the massive double standard that treats hate mongers like Rush Limbaugh, Ann Coulter, O'Reilly, etc. as reasonable people to put on the air - while ignoring any "hateful" progressive is productive.

And that happens so frequently it takes a lot of pointing out.

The second angle that you see all the time from the right is conflating reasonable lefties with nut case right wingers, like this:

"I wonder if you feel the same way about Robert Scheer and Eric Alterman. Coulter always goes beyond what's reasonably defensible, but so do they. Molly Ivins and Maureen Dowd are hardly better."

Now, Dowd drives me crazy, but really what major factual errors so Scheer, Alterman, Ivins or even Michael Moore regularly make? Almost none. They're facts are right - and Coulter's, O'Reilly, and Rush's just aren't.

That's a major distinction.

Like it or not, liberals who "ignore" this flaming nonsense do so at their own peril. How do you think Bush got into the White House, because we "ignore" this stuff.

McCarthy could have cared less about Hellman's memoirs.
Posted by: Jeffrey Davis

It's unclear as to whether you refer to Mary or Joe here but you're still full of shit.

"Thoroughly debunked bullshit.

I have exactly zero interest in debating this with you."

"There are a few people I don't bother commenting on, and among them is Ann Coulter."

Don't look now, Kevin, but I think you just DID comment on Ann Coulter.

Mr. Knight rocks.

But did Hellman get invited onto television news shows as a journalist qualified to comment on political news?

i hate his message, but rush came along at the right time from his point of view and by comparision with ann coulter, is a mainstream conservative. . . . Posted by: mudwall jackson

More horseshit. Rush can't get through a broadcast without telling a whopper or two. He's no better than Coulter.

Hellman instead delivered a prepared statement, which read in part:

'To hurt innocent people whom I knew many years ago in order to save myself is, to me, inhuman and indecent and dishonorable. I cannot and will not cut my conscience to fit this year's fashions, even though I long ago came to the conclusion that I was not a political person and could have no comfortable place in any political group.'

As a result, Hellman was blacklisted by the Hollywood movie studios for many years.

republicrat wrote: I wonder if you feel the same way about Robert Scheer and Eric Alterman. Coulter always goes beyond what's reasonably defensible, but so do they. Molly Ivins and Maureen Dowd are hardly better.

Ann Coulter said in an interview, "The only problem I have with Timothy McVeigh is that he didn't blow up the New York Times building."

Ann Coulter called for terrorists to kill Americans.

Have Robert Scheer, Eric Alterman, Molly Ivins or Maureen Dowd called for terrorists to kill Americans?

Please provide quotes.

I think the only thing left to say about this is that Kevin has to explain the Ann Coulter = Lillian Helman thing.
Posted by: Jim

We're all waiting with bated breath.

Here's one for Secular:

"Rare indeed are the opportunities for religious leaders, philosophers, moralists, policymakers, politicians and indeed the "global public" to debate the trajectory of the world's human population in the context of its stress on the Earth system, and to decide what might be done.

Unless and until this changes, summits such as that in Montreal which address only part of the problem will be limited to at best very modest success, with the welfare and quality of life of future generations the ineluctable casualty. " Professor Chris Rapley - Director of the British Antarctic Survey

Kerry thought that if he took the high road the nuts attacking him would do little damage. He was wrong because the nuts say damaging things that create a climate that biases people against reasonable candidates. At sway are the people who vote based on a vague feeling about a candidate without reasoning much through. These people are influenced by the vague idea that Kerry is French or a coward or soft on terrorists.

Ann Coulter is part of the machinery creating those vague beliefs about liberals. She does it by using poisonous language. Her remarks are dismissed as jokes but they linger and influence people long after the specific statements are gone. As the Clintons demonstrated, it is more politically effective to address each of these statements directly, no matter how ridiculous (and thus ignorable) they may seem. The damage is not the literal content but letting them stand unanswered.

Kevin seems to think that Democrats can ignore anything obviously lame. Politics doesn't work that way. Even people like Ann Coulter must be answered, no matter how wearing it becomes. That's the unfortunate consequence of a media that gives a nationwide podium to every nut that comes along. There is no longer any way to have these people state outside public awareness so that means they must be dealt with.

One thing about Kevin's articles is his mistaken idea that the world consists of only those reasonale people he wishes to talk to (and about). It is a liberal equivalent to Bush's bubble and it is just as damaging when liberals mistake that for political reality as it is when Bush pretends the world is only what he wants to listen to.

Nancy - now can you enlist in our campaign to stop KD from reading and quoting Andrew Sullivan?

Please.

I want to kick her in the nuts.

cuz she's hot

My God! All this time I've been assuming [for good reasons, if you ask me] that Ann Coulter is a transvestite. And now you're telling me that "she" is a woman?! That's appalling!

My God! All this time I've been assuming [for good reasons, if you ask me] that Ann Coulter is a transvestite. And now you're telling me that "she" is a woman?! That's appalling!

Not quite. She's a pre-op male-to-female transexual.

It's saying things like this that make conservatives like myself hate liberals

Obviously you hit a nerve with Al, Kevin. Way to go!!

She is attractive according to pundit-standards, and she get's away with the most dumbest nonsense that like-minded conservatives accuse liberals of. Oh, and she lowers the bar for political discourse. Like Fox!

I want to kick her in the nuts.
Posted by: Osama_Been_Forgotten

Define 'her'. Surely not poor dead Lillian Hellman.

(Dorothy Parker made Lillian her executor. Lillian supported Dotty for the last 10 years of DP's life...)

I keep thinking that Anne Coulter is the Umma Thurman role in 'The Truth About Cats and Dogs' ... and it's all ghosted by a squat dumpy middle-aged 'other'.

Anne Coulter is definately the Hunter S Thompson of the Right.

Appropriate comparisons of writing competency and talent are well noted here.

LowLife,

It's not Coulter, it the shows that spoil the national dialogue that need to be challedged. Insofar as a national TV opinion show allows this venom to be validated we must speak up against it. Bill Maher got fired for giving an unwise but defensible position.

Er, Bill Maher calls Ann Coulter a good friend of his, and she has appeared several times on his talk show, Real Time With Bill Maher, where he gives her plenty of opportunity to express her views and to promote her books.

You gonna boycott him, now?

What did she ever do for America?

CFShep,

I keep thinking that Anne Coulter is the Umma Thurman role in 'The Truth About Cats and Dogs' ...

I didn't think you thought so highly of her. Do you remember how things turned out in that movie?

Anne Coulter is definately the Hunter S Thompson of the Right.

Appropriate comparisons of writing competency and talent are well noted here.
Posted by: Osama_Been_Forgotten

Now I have to consider the image of Hunter Thompson in a miniskirt. Curses!

Thanks CFshep.

On Hunter S Thompson - he might have been nuts, but he was hilarious. The 1972 campaign book remains a classic. Plus he really wasn't much of a lefty or a righty (gun and drug nut remember?) - just really nutty.

But it remains shocking to me how many right wingers with no experience in a particular field get feted as "experts" on TV. And rarely do any interviewers question any of the "facts" that they spout.

Sad, almost as sad as watching our democratic Senators not really get behind Lamont. Incumbent trumps party.

We like her because she quickly offends the sensitive liberal feelings. Liberals are good at insults and cannot stand the fact that a right winger might zing them.

Horowitz does the same thing.

It is simply good clean fun.

Plus he really wasn't much of a lefty or a righty (gun and drug nut remember?) -

That describes a lot of moderate lefties I know.

The Democrats could actually win those people back by getting off their gun-and-drug prohibition high-horse.

On Hunter S Thompson - he might have been nuts, but he was hilarious. S.K.

'Fear and Loathing' is truly one of best expositions of our political insanity to date.

Mind, he's just a low rent Joe Heller.

You do so rock.

"If the Founding Fathers could do it all over again, might they look at the House of Representatives today and wonder, 'What were we thinking?' " - Bruce Reed

Anne Coulter is definately the Hunter S Thompson of the Right. Appropriate comparisons of writing competency and talent are well noted here.
Posted by: Osama_Been_Forgotten

Hardly. That's an insult to Thompson's writing skills, and he was equally critical of the looney left and retard right.

What's the point? And why do people bother responding to her obviously contrived provocations?

The point, Kevin, is that if you don't defend your character the public with think less of you. By slandering liberals and liberalism she makes opposition to the conservative republican agenda impossible. If you don't want to live under the Republican boot, you have to attack and discredit her completely.

As Digby wrote:
Ann Coulter is not a brash comedienne, she is a propagandist and if you can't see that she is deadly serious you are a fool. She is part of a billion dollar industry that is designed solely to degrade, demean and destroy liberalism. It is subsidized by millionaires for the benefit of millionaires and they count on the ignorance of certain members of the public (and immature liberal writers) to fall for their scam.

I just wanted to repeat this pithy insight. She's a republican machine pundit who serves a precise purpose.

"CFShep,

I keep thinking that Anne Coulter is the Umma Thurman role in 'The Truth About Cats and Dogs' ...

I didn't think you thought so highly of her. Do you remember how things turned out in that movie?
Posted by: GOP on August 17, 2006 at 4:00 PM | PERMALINK"

How can I boycott something I don't watch? Moron.

osama,

The Democrats could actually win those people back by getting off their gun-and-drug prohibition high-horse.

Now you're channelling Charlton Heston.

The Democrats want to "prohibit" guns? When did that happen?

JRI:

CFShep,

I keep thinking that Anne Coulter is the Umma Thurman role in 'The Truth About Cats and Dogs' ...

I didn't think you thought so highly of her. Do you remember how things turned out in that movie?
Posted by: GOP on August 17, 2006 at 4:00 PM | PERMALINK"

How can I boycott something I don't watch? Moron.

By continuing to not watch it. Idiot.

(I'm not sure why you would want to boycott The Truth About Cats and Dogs, though)

Ummm...no.

>>I didn't think you thought so highly of her. Do you remember how things turned out in that movie?
Posted by: GOP on August 17, 2006 at 4:00 PM

I've never actually managed to watch it to the conclusion (Nor Woody Allen's Interiors' or 'Gone with the Wind').

You did?

"It's saying things like this that make conservatives like myself hate liberals and Ned Lamont Democrats."

Right, Al, because up until now you've really been approaching everything with an open mind. You are, without doubt, the most empty-headed, puerile and un-self-aware person to post in these pages.

"You simply are UNABLE to judge anything except by the criteria of how much what somebody says matches your ideological correctness."

Do you even read the drivel you write, let alone anyone else's words? I mean, all you ever seem to do is describe yourself -- and it's not a pretty picture.

Beyond all that, c'mon: you're willing to the matt for Ann friggin' Coulter? Calling her juvenile is what finally sent you over the edge to start hating Ned Lamont Democrats?

I've heard the crap about Coulter being no worse than Molly Ivins or other liberal commentators before. This is an utter and absolute lie. No liberal writer of whom I have ever heard has ever joked about "fragging" a veteran as Coulter "joked" about doing to Jack Murtha. No liberal has ever "joked" about McVeigh killing everyone at a newspaper, nor has one called for mass murder of Iranians by calling for the "carpet bombing" (her term) of Iran.

Coulter is a perverted sociopath and a compulsive liar who is repeatedly given a platform to spew her poisonous vomit. In any decent society she would be getting professional help in a psychiatric hospital for the criminally insane.

And btw, right wing posters: ANN COULTER IS THE TRUE ESSENCE OF TODAY'S REPUBLICAN PARTY. She should ALWAYS be referred to as "Republican Ann Coulter" whenever she happens to be mentioned. She says out loud what the other right wing fruitcakes are only thinking.

Kevin wrote: " And why do people bother responding to her obviously contrived provocations?"

That eludes me too. Coulter has clearly discovered that her schtick has a wide audience. Since an act like hers has a very short lifespan, she's going to milk it while she can. The few times I've seen her on TV, her expression coveys a message like: "Isn't it incredible that people actually believe what I'm saying?" It's almost like she can't believe she can get away with it.

If she really believes any of the nonsense she spouts, she's going to be depressed when people tire of her rhetoric and stop paying attention to her. That is, when no one is willing to pay her to listen to her "thoughts." So be patient and ignore her, folks, and she'll go away.

I just would like to announce that, since I never use hair gel that I have been in fact boycotting hair gel.

Nice to be set straight on that.

Kenji, Al's outrage at having Coulter called juvenile seems like he has some insecurities about his own political ideology.

The Coulter/Hitler quiz to which someone referred:

http://www.people.virginia.edu/~jac3he/GiveUpQuiz/hitlercoulterquiz.html

Dear Al
It's saying things like this that make liberals like myself hate conservatives and George Bush Republicans. No one is asking you to agree with everything Ann Coulter says. We know you will because you're a conservative. But you're stuck lauching vemonous personal attacks like now. Conservatives like yourself can't imagine judging what Ann Coulter says with any measure than how it matches your ideological correctness. You offer NOTHING to your readers but your absolute certainty you newcons are always right but liberals are always wrong. You simply are UNABLE to judge anything except by the criteria of how much what somebody says matches your ideological correctness.

See, works both ways rather tidily.

I wonder if you feel the same way about Robert Scheer and Eric Alterman.

No, but I do feel the same way about Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Bill O'Reilly, FoxNews, Dick Cheney....

I wonder if you feel the same way about Robert Scheer and Eric Alterman.

Let's see. How many times has Robert Scheer been on MSNBC versus Coulter? On the cover of Time?

Kenji

Take the trolls pledge:

'Thoroughly debunked bullshit.

I have exactly zero interest in debating this with you.'

Rinse and repeat.

CRShep,

I've never actually managed to watch it to the conclusion (Nor Woody Allen's Interiors' or 'Gone with the Wind'). You did?

Yes. You should too. It's a good movie. And the final line from Janeane Garofalo is hilarious.

They're designed to sucker in the yobs and nitwits with their artificial controversy.

Posted by: Jeffrey Davis on August 17, 2006 at 2:32 PM

Said yobs and nitwits vote though. Tis how Bushco took over the White House in the first place. And second.

Taobhan,

So be patient and ignore her, folks, and she'll go away.

125 comments in three hours. Thank goodness you're all so good at ignoring her.

It is amazing how effective satire is, and a lot of its effectiveness is directly related to the seeming inability of most readers to detect it.

cuz she's hot and get's the guys going, and the gals.

I never got this idea. I mean, if people said it about, (to name another insane right-wing commentator), Michelle Malkin, I could almost understand it.

But Coulter?

and Coulter's, O'Reilly, and Rush's just aren't.

Posted by: Samuel Knight on August 17, 2006 at 3:12 PM

Libs have to base their truth in facts or get blown out fo the water. Neocons base their truth on their own self-serving opinions. Getting personal opinion OUT of mainstream media would be an excellent start to media reform, however it would be the end of Neocon hate propoganda, as headed up by the above listed personalities.

Whole lotta ignorin' goin' on here, folks!

I've noticed that in my local Borders, her book seems to be moving very slowly. Fiasco they can't keep on the shelves.

Gilligan - I never hope to get personal opinion out of the media, because it is so intertwined in one's assumptions on where to start.

But I would like the media at least to bother fact checking. Or when someone lies at least raise the question: why are you mis-stating that?

The huge irony at this point is that the European media where there is no journalistic ethos of "objectivity" is more accurate in general than the US media. Or maybe I should say you get a much better idea of what's going on by reading it than you do in the US.

And a big reason for that is that too many Amierican editors confuse objectivity for accuracy. Or confuse having one GOP and one Democrat with being objective. They completely lose sight of the basic purpose of a story: to tell a story, to make a point.

her book seems to be moving very slowly...

If by "book" you mean a compendium of plagiarized claptrap.

The real issue isn't Coulter, the real issue is what the hell is wrong with that stooge Jon Chait?

Allow me to take a contrarian view. Maybe it will get me published in TNR. Liberals need to learn how to appreciate someone like Coulter, not for her indefensible views, but for other valuable contributions she makes to our national conversation.

Liberals hate to admit it but Coulter actually is sort of "hot," albeit in an ultra-skanky way. Her looks wouldn't get her the lead role in a low-budget porn video, but she's got the kind of look that would giver her a good shot at being the unnamed ho in an ultra hard-core anal or bestiality scene or something else of that nature.

I like watching her Adams Apple go up and down when she talks. I see she has really big hands & feet and wonder if she's hung better than me. I'd like to take her to bed, but I think she'd want to be a top and she'd really hurt my ass.

She's totally a man that's had a really bad sex change.

I can flat out agree with Kevin on this one. Reaction is what coulter and her enablers are looking for. To respond to coulter's provocations is to be manipulated.

Casey Stengel is reported to have said Mickey Mantle when he first came up and was booed something to the effect: 'it doesn't matter if they cheer you or boo you, its when they don't do anything that you have to worry.' Not reacting to coulter is the only thing that makes her go away.

The best I've read on this subject was Al Franken's Lying Liars. He has a couple sections on her that made me rotflol. It felt really good.

nice article

Salmon strike the flasher because it flashes, not because it looks like a fish. We keep watching because we can't figure out why we thought she looked like an attractive woman.

I can understand why people respond to Coulter, but I can't understand why anyone responds to Al.

For the ultimate takedown of Ann Coulter, see Homecoming in the Anchor Bay Masters of Horror series. Zombie soldiers return from the grave to vote against the war! Ann Coulter skewered on the film-maker's wit. Best political satire of the year.

"She's totally a man that's had a really bad sex change."

no doubt coulter gets most of her notoriety because she is alleged to be a woman. Nevertheless, attacking her looks or her likely transexual makeup is a distraction from the bilge spewing from her mouth. Woman should be just as free men to be creepy, insidious, vicious, and insecure as men.
.

"DON'T FEED THE TROLLS..."

you just did.

Comparing Hellman to Coulter is a cheap shot. 'The Children's Hour', a play about the evil of smear and innuendo holds up today and is possibly even more relevant when we have an administration wholly reliant on smear and innuendo to destroy their enemies. (ironic when the chief manipulators of smear are characters like Rove and Cheney who both acquainted with the gay world). Coulter is a hack who couldn't write decent prose if her scrawny neck depended on it.

"I thought that west of the Rockies, the older writer was known as Lillian Best Food."

Love that regional humor! At least she was spared the indignity of being called Lillian Overwaitea.

Bill Maher calls Ann Coulter a good friend of his, and she has appeared several times on his talk show, Real Time With Bill Maher, where he gives her plenty of opportunity to express her views and to promote her books.

But would he allow Ann to share a bed with him, a la Arianna Huffington?

Ann Coulter is proof that six-foot blondes with long legs aren't inherently sexy. Not with thoughts such as hers. (And don't insult transsexuals by calling Coulter one.)

We're mistaking categories when we treat Ms. Coulter as a political commentator. She's an insult comic with one predefined target: anyone to her left. Her schtick (and the books, columns, talk show appearances that aupport it) is funny when you hate the people she hates, not so funny when you're the butt of the jokes.

But to take her seriously? Would you take your political philosophy from a Don Rickles routine?

Does anyone think she really gives a crap about gay marriage or abortion or health care? Or about going to church -- like she does, all the time, we can be sure. More to the point, why would anyone in Jeff Foxworthy Land want her as an advocate?

Ann Coulter has called for the murder of those she deems insufficiently American. She is an evil, lying, venomous coward, with the intellectual ability of a dead rat. Anyone who agrees with her, finds her amusing, or thinks she is doing good work is either evil or stupid. Al, which are you?

But would [Bill Maher] allow Ann to share a bed with him, a la Arianna Huffington?

Probably.

Anyone who agrees with her, finds her amusing, or thinks she is doing good work is either evil or stupid.

So, in your opinion, is Bill Maher evil, stupid, or both?