Coulter Attacks 9/11 Widows

[Lila64]

 

[Irvine511]

As if she'd subject herself to the horrors of the librul Ivy league!

Cow went to Michigan.

it was Cornell undergrad, then.

i really do believe she's some sort of performance artist, a drag queen impersonating a fascist.

 

[maycocksean]

i really do believe she's some sort of performance artist, a drag queen impersonating a fascist.

Agreed. She says this stuff because it makes her money. She wouldn't make much saying things that don't offend anyone or respecting sacred cows.

I think she laughs all the way to the bank, which in my opinion is even worse. To promote such hateful, hurtful ideas and not even have the integrity to actually believe it is beyond the pale.

Re: the Christopher Hitchens piece. Yeah, I don't think he and Ann Coulter are in the same category. After all he's not a household name. Maybe he would be if he were telegenic and regularly wrote pieces like the one about Mother Teresa.

Personally, I found his article thought provoking to a degree, but in the end, I feel that people who aren't doing anything to help the poor don't have a leg to stand on critcizing those who are. If he were running his OWN charity for the "poorest of the poor" and doing it the "right" way I think I'd really give what he had to say a serious hearing.

 

[MrsSpringsteen]

To promote such hateful, hurtful ideas and not even have the integrity to actually believe it is beyond the pale.

Interesting point, sometimes I think she does believe it though.

http://www.anncoulter.com/welcome.html



When I lament the fact that I never had a sister, I think for a split second that she could have been like Ann Coulter through some genetic or environmental freak accident-then I feel much better

 

[nbcrusader]

Personally, I found his article thought provoking to a degree, but in the end, I feel that people who aren't doing anything to help the poor don't have a leg to stand on critcizing those who are. If he were running his OWN charity for the "poorest of the poor" and doing it the "right" way I think I'd really give what he had to say a serious hearing.

I think this touches on the approach that should be taken with Coulter - or any other provocative piece offered here. Look past the shock value and the sensationalism and think about the underlying issue.

After 90 some responses, no one has talked about the 9/11 widows referenced in the article (this omission was tagged a red herring, but I think we see the reality here). Is there loss really any different than the familys of anyone else murdered on 9/11/01 - or the days before or after?

 

[kellyahern]

After 90 some responses, no one has talked about the 9/11 widows referenced in the article (this omission was tagged a red herring, but I think we see the reality here). Is there loss really any different than the familys of anyone else murdered on 9/11/01 - or the days before or after?

I think this is because the problem is with Coulter's used of personal attacks, saying that these women "enjoyed" their husbands deaths, should be posing for Playboy and that their husbands were going to divorce them, etc. If Coulter really wanted a serious discourse on this issue, she would not have spoken the way she did.

As stated in one of the articles A_Wanderer posted:

Confederate Yankee takes Coulter’s message – that grief does not bestow absolute moral authority – without mentioning her brutalization of the widows.

His point is well taken but he seems to be able to make an even stronger case than Coulter without resorting to the degradation of grief stricken widows.

I don't think the issue is Coulter criticizing the polices of the 9/11 widows, but they way she has done so - in a cruel and personal way.

 

[ouizy]

After 90 some responses, no one has talked about the 9/11 widows referenced in the article (this omission was tagged a red herring, but I think we see the reality here). Is there loss really any different than the familys of anyone else murdered on 9/11/01 - or the days before or after?

Their loss is no different, however they decided to take their loss and this devastating, life-changing, horrible time in their lives, and the lives of their children, and use it as a catalyst to take action and ask questions.

Yes, they have and are mourning, but they are also asking questions of the government and making things happen. Things that Ms. Coulter takes as offensive because they question the government she has sworn her allegiance to.

Ms. Coulter has attacked these women on a personal level wheras they have asked why their loved ones were murdered.

It is a very twisted thing going on here, and yes it is fair to question the widows and their motives, but I have not seen anything to date in their actions that I find offensive.

I cannot say the same for Ms. Coulter.

Then again, I believe in Karma, so I would invite Ms. Coulter to attack whomever she desires, as long as she knows that somewhere down the road she may herself meet with some very ugly unpleasantness in her life as retribution.

Not retribution for speaking her mind, but speaking out against those in pain.

I wonder how she would like it if the tables were turned and people attacked her when she lost something she loves. Although from what I can tell all she loves is money and herself.

 

[Irvine511]

I don't think the issue is Coulter criticizing the polices of the 9/11 widows, but they way she has done so - in a cruel and personal way.

bingo.

 

[Irvine511]

Personally, I found his article thought provoking to a degree, but in the end, I feel that people who aren't doing anything to help the poor don't have a leg to stand on critcizing those who are. If he were running his OWN charity for the "poorest of the poor" and doing it the "right" way I think I'd really give what he had to say a serious hearing.

i think Hitchens would argue that the arguments he puts forward in his writings do just as much good through stimulating debate and influencing policy -- one example: he is a former Trotskyite who used to write for The Nation who is now considered a neo-con because he supported the invasion of Iraq. he felt that the overthrow of Islamofascism is the biggest moral struggle of our lifetimes (he's a staunch atheist and has contempt for most expressions of religion), and while he has criticized the Bush administration for messing up the post war, he remains steadfast in his judgement that Bush got the big things right -- that we engage the Arab World, overthrow their regimes, and install democracies.

many pointed to Hitchens, the former Leftist, and his support for the war (along with HRC, Tom Friedman, The Economist and others) as part of what eventually swung popular American opinion in favor of invasion in late 2002/early 2003.

Hitchens would argue that, as a writer, this is how he effects change and that 25 million Iraqis have been liberated from the tyranny of Saddam Hussein, and i think he would argue that this has done more good than whatever Mother Teresa has done.

and he's dead right about the sheer idiocy of the Catholic Church's stance on birth control.

 

[maycocksean]

i think Hitchens would argue that the arguments he puts forward in his writings do just as much good through stimulating debate and influencing policy -- one example: he is a former Trotskyite who used to write for The Nation who is now considered a neo-con because he supported the invasion of Iraq. he felt that the overthrow of Islamofascism is the biggest moral struggle of our lifetimes (he's a staunch atheist and has contempt for most expressions of religion), and while he has criticized the Bush administration for messing up the post war, he remains steadfast in his judgement that Bush got the big things right -- that we engage the Arab World, overthrow their regimes, and install democracies.

many pointed to Hitchens, the former Leftist, and his support for the war (along with HRC, Tom Friedman, The Economist and others) as part of what eventually swung popular American opinion in favor of invasion in late 2002/early 2003.

Hitchens would argue that, as a writer, this is how he effects change and that 25 million Iraqis have been liberated from the tyranny of Saddam Hussein, and i think he would argue that this has done more good than whatever Mother Teresa has done.

and he's dead right about the sheer idiocy of the Catholic Church's stance on birth control.

Good point about how Hitchen's may view himself as helping the "poorest of the poor." Not sure I actually agree with him, particularly on the Iraq war. After all, Saddam Hussein's government was decidely secular and Iraq is now in more danger of religious extremism becoming a dominat force than it ever was under Saddam Hussein. But. . .I see where he could be coming from.

And I agree, the Catholic Church's stance on birth control is idiocy. Mother Teresa's support of that stance was certainly not helpful, but I don't think that makes her charlatan either.

 

[melon]

i really do believe she's some sort of performance artist, a drag queen impersonating a fascist.

Ann Coulter certainly knows how to make me laugh, that's for sure.

Melon

 

[Golightly Grrl]

Like Paris Hilton, Ann Coulter is nothing more than a toilet plunger in a blonde wig. She lacks a heart and a soul, and despite her educational credentials, she also lacks a brain. She's reveling in the attention because Ann Coulter is all about Ann Coulter. And what she says and types (I would never call her books and articles writing) makes other conservatives look bad and I'm glad many of them are calling out on her BS. I may be liberal, but I know there are many conservatives out there who are intelligent, compassionate, and thoughtful. Sadly they don't get the attention that this hag in an "Addicted to Love" black dress does.

 

[MrsSpringsteen]

Like Paris Hilton, Ann Coulter is nothing more than a toilet plunger in a blonde wig

It's a damn sad commentary on this country when her book overtakes Anderson Cooper's and all the others

She was on Leno last night with George Carlin, from the very little I was able to watch on my tape Leno was his usual milquetoast self, and Carlin said nothing. Very disappointing..but I have yet to see the whole tape. I know she must have had the audience stacked with her fans who were applauding and hootin and hollertin, she probably got them to Leno from her web site or something. I taped it because I was hoping Carlin would have something fantastically intelligent to say to her for which she would reallly have no valid response.

Bottom line is, she has disdain for anyone who questions the almighty infallible Republican regime. And she resorts to such extremely cruel vitriol and name calling in order to get attention and to sell books. Now she can buy hundreds more of her little black dresses. I guess it's just easy for people like her to live with themselves, I don't get it . I guess little black dresses and lots o' arrogance keep one's conscience at bay, something like that.

 

[nbcrusader]

Seems like plenty of people like to play at her level - just look at some of the responses here. Perhaps she taps into a true level of public discourse.

 

[redsox04]

Professor Ward Churchill has made equally inflammatory remarks about the 9/11 victims, but because his position is more from the left, the reaction to his statements has not been so severe.

 

[Irvine511]

Professor Ward Churchill has made equally inflammatory remarks about the 9/11 victims, but because his position is more from the left, the reaction to his statements has not been so severe.

what?

he was vilified by the right, appeared on many talk shows to defend his comments, and had nothing else to say, and then faded into the woodwork.

Ann Coulter is a best selling author and an exremely visible pundit. many, many more people know who she is than know who Ward Churchill is, therefore, she is going to draw a much more public reaction to her comments than an obscure professor from Colorado.

 

[martha]

he was vilified by the right, appeared on many talk shows to defend his comments, and had nothing else to say, and then faded into the woodwork.

And he's about ready to lose his job over some very questionable research techniques.

 

[MrsSpringsteen]

Ann in hs, just thought it was interesting

plagiarism charges

gawker.com

Following up on yesterday’s suggestion that hate-speech-Pez-dispenser Ann Coulter may have plagiarized material from other writers, we’ve been informed that this isn’t the first time Ann’s been accused of lifting material. In 2001, Boston Globe columnist Alex Beam examined a controversy surrounding her 1998 tome, High Crimes and Misdemeanors. This is the book that David Carr called “fairly scholarly,” which is interesting, because it appears that the scholarship came from someone else. Beam compared Coulter’s prose to that of Michael Chapman, a former colleague of Coulter’s who, in 1997, wrote “A Case for Impeachment” in the popular right-wing nutjob periodical Human Events.


Chapman, “A Case for Impeachment,” page 13: “Four Democratic fundraisers have stated that former DNC Finance Chairman Marvin Rosen explicitly advocated selling access to the President…”

Coulter, page 219: “At least four Democratic fund-raising officials have revealed that former DNC Finance Chairman Marvin Rosen explicitly advocated selling access to the president …”

Chapman: “A DNC fundraiser told Nynex executives they would receive invitations to White House ‘coffees’ if they joined the DNC’s ‘Managing Trustees’ program and agreed to donate $100,000 …”

Coulter: “A DNC fundraiser told Nynex Corporation executives that they would receive invitations to White House coffees if they joined the DNC’s ‘Managing Trustees’ program and agreed to donate $100,000 . .

The piece is unfortunately no longer available on line, but those of you with LexisNexis access should be able to find it pretty easily. As for Coulter, we’re not sure how the charges of plagiarism might affect her career, but we suspect that this will do more damage to her reputation than any vile, inaccurate invective she’s been spewing for the last seven years. The media will tolerate brutally meretricious bullshit, but God forbid you rip off another writer… You can accuse the media of cynicism all you want, but the fact that plagiarism is considered a bigger sin than unsubstantiated vituperation says something about the rest of us.

 

[MrsSpringsteen]

Leno sucks , I'd love to see Letterman wipe the floor w/ Coulter

http://www.tvsquad.com/2006/06/15/the-tonight-show-no-fireworks-between-george-carlin-and-ann-cou/

"Then Ann Coulter comes out and, much to my shock, she gets a warm welcome from the audience. Are you kidding me? This hypocritical, abusive, loud-mouthed, hysterical screech gets cheers, whoops, and hollers from the audience? Am I missing something here?

Anyway, she comes out and Jay Leno simply blows it. He doesn't challenge her on any of her recent statements, he doesn't engage her in any real conversation. He basically lets her spew off lines like "I wear their (liberals) contempt as a badge of honor!" What horses**t! To top it off, George Carlin just sits by and doesn't say a word. Not one single word! What the hell is going on here! You would think that George Carlin, one of the most brilliant comedic minds around and someone who would give Ann Coulter a run for her money, would get in on the conversation. Again, I thought wrong.

Now, it could be that NBC brass told Leno not to engage in any debate with Ann Coulter for fear she would say more wild and hysterical crap that would offend their viewing audience. They may have even put the clamps on George Carlin not to say anything either. As far as I'm concerned, this show was a complete waste of time.

Do I think Letterman would have done a better job of "interviewing" Ann Coulter? I don't know--but Letterman is taped in New York and I don't think Ann Coulter would find an audience there that would whoop and holler for her.

I may be stretching this a bit, but I somehow think NBC condones Ann Coulter and her points of view. She appears on The Today Show occasionally, and now she gets a free pass on The Tonight Show. What next, her own variety show? "

 

[Lila64]

Leno sucks , I'd love to see Letterman wipe the floor w/ Coulter

I watched the whole Coulter "appearance", in horror. The crowd was applauding her & whooping it up, that's for sure. I was shocked as well. I was waiting for some boos or something. The only time Carlin spoke was when Ann was brought out on stage and he said something to the effect of... 'I never thought I'd be with Ann Coulter and have to move to the right'. You could see him occasionally during the show, and I'm sure it pained him not to say anything. Had he been the host, he would have let her have it.

And Coulter said she let her one liberal friend read her book prior to press, for any comments or whatever. One - would that be Bill Maher? He has her on his show (by remote) from time to time.

 

[Muggsy]

I was looking for information about this woman (i've never heard about her before... lucky me, I guess) and I found this

https://marketplace.yaf.org/cfwebst...lay&Product_ID=2&CFID=121697&CFTOKEN=90277297

she is a scary woman :S

 

[redsox04]

Few will argue that Coulter's approach and wording are horrifying. She knows she is being inflammatory, its her style.

But the point she is making is worthy of discussion. She is not talking about ALL of the 9/11 widows, just a group of four that have been extremely vocal in their opposition to everything the Bush administration does. Coulter is basically saying that she believes these women, like Cindy Sheehan, are being paraded around by left-wing organizations, knowing it is difficult to take issue with those who have been so directly impacted by a tragedy.

Of course, she chose such imflammatory language that her central point is lost.

 

[medmo]

I watched the whole Coulter "appearance", in horror. The crowd was applauding her & whooping it up, that's for sure. I was shocked as well. I was waiting for some boos or something.

That wasn't Jay Leno's normal audience. There was a large group of her fans there to "overwhelm" anyone who heckled her. I was shocked when I heard the cheering, too, but I figured there must have been a reason.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1649624/posts

 

[U2DMfan]

Few will argue that Coulter's approach and wording are horrifying. She knows she is being inflammatory, its her style.

But the point she is making is worthy of discussion. She is not talking about ALL of the 9/11 widows, just a group of four that have been extremely vocal in their opposition to everything the Bush administration does. Coulter is basically saying that she believes these women, like Cindy Sheehan, are being paraded around by left-wing organizations, knowing it is difficult to take issue with those who have been so directly impacted by a tragedy.

Of course, she chose such imflammatory language that her central point is lost.

I agree with this.
She had a point, a decent point and it got lost in an uproar, a pop culture uproar, that's about all it amounts to. If Ward Churchill were on Leno and Letterman and the Today Show etc. trying to sell a book on these views he might have had a little more "trouble" but in the end he's just a fool, and I think people knew what he was all about.

The thing about Ann Coulter is, I've always hated her schtick, I think it's lowest common denominator, 'Crossfire' like stuff that just pollutes the entire political discourse. People should be taking issue with literally every single news show, including these entertainment shows giving her airtime because they are using her inflammatory remarks to get viewership as well.

I detest the woman in general but she did say one pretty interesting thing on Leno the other night. She said (paraphrased) "I'm calling them Godless, apparently nobody has a problem with that" speaking of liberals. Well, I'd argue that it's because most of the subjects of her bile tune her out, but it does speak to the overall topic of what is wrong with our discourse.

We'll take the most over-the-top supposedly offensive statements and issues and parade them all around our little political/social version of pop culture and then get alarmed for the moment until something else comes along. It's nothing but schoolyard bullshit on steroids, people living vicariously through celebrities and the downtrodden, news cycles with ADD, and a politcal discourse that we ALL should be fucking ashamed of.

Good ideas take a back seat to controversy to make $$.
Hardcore news is left on the scroll at the bottom of the screen so we can find out about the latest bullshit from Aruba. Ann Coulter doesn't have any ideas, she has a gimmick and for this she's just as useless as the people she berates. Nobody calls her out on her methods, they just talk about the sound-bite, because that's about the attention span of the people who really give a shit.

 

[Lila64]

.

 

[Lila64]

That wasn't Jay Leno's normal audience. There was a large group of her fans there to "overwhelm" anyone who heckled her. I was shocked when I heard the cheering, too, but I figured there must have been a reason.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1649624/posts

 

[maycocksean]

I agree with this.
She had a point, a decent point and it got lost in an uproar, a pop culture uproar, that's about all it amounts to. If Ward Churchill were on Leno and Letterman and the Today Show etc. trying to sell a book on these views he might have had a little more "trouble" but in the end he's just a fool, and I think people knew what he was all about.

The thing about Ann Coulter is, I've always hated her schtick, I think it's lowest common denominator, 'Crossfire' like stuff that just pollutes the entire political discourse. People should be taking issue with literally every single news show, including these entertainment shows giving her airtime because they are using her inflammatory remarks to get viewership as well.

I detest the woman in general but she did say one pretty interesting thing on Leno the other night. She said (paraphrased) "I'm calling them Godless, apparently nobody has a problem with that" speaking of liberals. Well, I'd argue that it's because most of the subjects of her bile tune her out, but it does speak to the overall topic of what is wrong with our discourse.

We'll take the most over-the-top supposedly offensive statements and issues and parade them all around our little political/social version of pop culture and then get alarmed for the moment until something else comes along. It's nothing but schoolyard bullshit on steroids, people living vicariously through celebrities and the downtrodden, news cycles with ADD, and a politcal discourse that we ALL should be fucking ashamed of.

Good ideas take a back seat to controversy to make $$.
Hardcore news is left on the scroll at the bottom of the screen so we can find out about the latest bullshit from Aruba. Ann Coulter doesn't have any ideas, she has a gimmick and for this she's just as useless as the people she berates. Nobody calls her out on her methods, they just talk about the sound-bite, because that's about the attention span of the people who really give a shit.

Good point. Politics has just become another form of entertainment. It's really repugnant because apparently it didn't matter to Coulter that she might have had a point worthy of discussion.. .she knew that she'd get more traction (and $$) out of being bombastic and offensive.

 

[MrsSpringsteen]

Happy July 4th to me

NY Post

July 2, 2006 -- Conservative scribe Ann Coulter cribbed liberally in her latest book, "Godless," according to a plagiarism expert.

John Barrie, the creator of a leading plagiarism-recognition system, claimed he found at least three instances of what he calls "textbook plagiarism" in the leggy blond pundit's "Godless: the Church of Liberalism" after he ran the book's text through the company's digital iThenticate program.

He also says he discovered verbatim lifts in Coulter's weekly column, which is syndicated to more than 100 newspapers, including the Fort Lauderdale (Fla.) Sun-Sentinel and Augusta (Ga.) Chronicle.

Barrie, CEO of iParadigms, told The Post that one 25-word passage from the "Godless" chapter titled "The Holiest Sacrament: Abortion" appears to have been lifted nearly word for word from Planned Parenthood literature published at least 18 months before Coulter's 281-page book was released.

A separate, 24-word string from the chapter "The Creation Myth" appeared about a year earlier in the San Francisco Chronicle with just one word change - "stacked" was changed to "piled."

Another 33-word passage that appears five pages into "Godless" allegedly comes from a 1999 article in the Portland (Maine) Press Herald.

Meanwhile, many of the 344 citations Coulter includes in "Godless" "are very misleading," said Barrie, who holds a Ph.D. from the University of California at Berkeley, where he specialized in pattern recognition.

"They're used purely to try and give the book a higher level of credibility - as if it's an academic work. But her sloppiness in failing to properly attribute many other passages strips it of nearly all its academic merits," he told The Post.

Barrie says he also ran Coulter's Universal Press columns from the past 12 months through iThenticate and found similar patterns of cribbing.

Her Aug. 3, 2005, column, "Read My Lips: No New Liberals," about U.S. Supreme Court Justice David Souter, includes six passages, ranging from 10 to 48 words each, that appeared 15 years earlier in the same order in an L.A. Times article, headlined "Liberals Leery as New Clues Surface on Souter's Views."

But nowhere in that column does she mention the L.A. Times or the story's writer, David G. Savage.

Her June 29, 2005, column, "Thou Shalt Not Commit Religion," incorporates 10 facts on National Endowment for the Arts-funded work that originally appeared in the same order in a 1991 Heritage Foundation report, "The National Endowment for the Arts: Misusing Taxpayers' Money." But again, the Heritage Foundation isn't credited.

"Just as Coulter plays free and loose with her citations in 'Godless,' she obviously does the same in her columns," Barrie said.

Coulter did not respond to requests for comment.

 

[Lila64]

 

[Kieran McConville]

Describing Coulter as a 'leggy blonde' is like describing the devil as a leggy goat. She is the fucking devil, guys.