Haute Coulter
Cidu Bill on May 7th 2009
“The only thing I have against her is that she threatens to surpass me in attracting the left’s hatred.” -Ann Coulter, in a Time magazine aricle about Sarah Palin, in which she insists that Palin only lost in November because of “the deficits of her running mate.”
Couter often talks about how liberals hate her, fear her, or both. Do any liberals actually hate her or fear her? Does anybody, either liberal or conservative, view her as a serious spokesperson for the conservative right? I always thought of her as an entertainer, sort of Archie Bunker with better verbal skills.
Filed in Ann Coulter, Bill Bickel, Sarah Palin | 72 responses so far
TonyJazz May 7th 2009 at 01:31 pm 1
Your assessment is correct. Like Rush and Savage, she is promoting an image of authority and morality—but mostly promoting herself.
And like her peers, she is neither authoritative nor moral.
Let her make her money from the gullible….
Elyrest May 7th 2009 at 01:38 pm 2
As a liberal I have found Ann Coulter laughable and rather pitiful. I certainly don’t fear her and think that even people who might agree with her squirm uncomfortably when she talks. She also took a good University of Michigan education and squandered it.
Howabominable (aka Lindsey ^_^) May 7th 2009 at 01:47 pm 3
I know plenty of people who hate her, but no one who fears her.
PeterW May 7th 2009 at 01:59 pm 4
Fear her? Nobody fears her. But then, she’s never had a shot at being a heartbeat away from the presidency.
Charlene May 7th 2009 at 02:07 pm 5
The word I’d use for both of them is “despise”, to wit: “to regard with contempt, distaste, disgust, or disdain”.
I think they use words like “hate” and “fear” because those words allow them to play the “poor little oppressed martyr” card.
James May 7th 2009 at 02:40 pm 6
What I hate is the fact that someone so vacuous can garner the kind of media coverage she does, while far more intelligent and insightful people (on all sides) are passed over. Though that’s not unique to her.
Paperboy May 7th 2009 at 03:13 pm 7
She might be mocking the Left’s labeling of “hate” and “fear” to opposing view-points.
Ted in Fort Lauderdale May 7th 2009 at 03:49 pm 8
I don’t know that “hate” is the right word, but I certainly dislike what she and her ilk have done to political discourse in this country…
Daniel May 7th 2009 at 04:04 pm 9
The nature of the visitor comments she attracts to “Huffington Post” and “Daily Kos” suggests that, for many, “hate” may indeed be the right word.
Charlene May 7th 2009 at 04:47 pm 10
I suppose that’s the problem, Paperboy. To Rep. Foxx and her ilk, not having one’s opinions considered naturally superior to everyone else’s is hate, unlike torturing a gay man to death which is just robbery.
Rasheed May 7th 2009 at 05:04 pm 11
She is an absolutely useless person. I have yet to hear anything intelligent or relevant come from her. I have never figured out why so many people pay attention to her. I have never even figured out her definitions for conservatives, liberals, left, right, up, down, or even “the.”
Kate C May 7th 2009 at 05:44 pm 12
I’m left leaning, and I just ignore her as best I can. Hell, as soon as a blog mentions her more than once, I usually stop visiting the blog (hmmm–should I stop visiting here?). I don’t find her “scary”–just obnoxious, and tiresome, and she has no real purpose in the debate.
Tiffany May 7th 2009 at 06:08 pm 13
I strongly believe the woman doesn’t change any minds for better or worst. Anyone who lets her fuel their opinion or beliefs, left or right, would find find someone else to do it, if it weren’t her.
She’s a pundit. That’s all. The right equivalent of a burn-out hippie. I can’t hate her or fear her.
Scott May 7th 2009 at 08:23 pm 14
She’s a living example of Mencken’s comment that no one ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American public. (Not what he said exactly, but how it is quoted.) I doubt she really means it, but most of her readers probably think she does. William F. Buckley demonstrated that conservatism does not preclude intelligent commentary, too bad there aren’t many like him around any more.
BGneiss May 7th 2009 at 08:27 pm 15
Sure, I hate her, and I think every thinking and feeling person of every political party, religion, and nationality should hate any person who spews such idiotic vitriol. Republicans in general and conservatives in particular should hate her for giving them all a negative image. Just because I don’t think she speaks for any substantive group of people doesn’t mean I don’t fear and hate her. A lone crazy gunman in Mexico or Ireland or Russia is still a scary thing for me.
John DiFool May 7th 2009 at 09:06 pm 16
Mirrors the world over fear her.
tofor May 7th 2009 at 09:23 pm 17
Sounds like you’ve had your question answered, Bill. With a resounding *YES*.
src May 7th 2009 at 09:29 pm 18
She, and others like her, serve as the outlet for the venomous thoughts that many people dare not speak in public. She says the things they wish they could say. She legitimizes their prejudices and fears, and makes them feel like someone with power understands them. She makes them feel like they have a valid place in society.
Much like a chihuahua hears a wolf howl, and thinks that gives them a reason to exist.
padraig May 7th 2009 at 09:35 pm 19
Every time some conservative asks me why righty radio gets better ratings than Air America, I say, “Because most liberals don’t need someone to tell them what to think.”
She’s just following in Rush’s footsteps, charging the conservatives $$ to tell them what they want to hear.
Kamino Neko May 7th 2009 at 09:38 pm 20
Of course people hate her.
Her problem is that she thinks that proves there’s something wrong with them, not with her.
mdgoldrush1984 May 7th 2009 at 09:57 pm 21
The fact that this hasn’t descended into some type of political thunderdome is a testament to the people posting here. Thank God.
Personally, I see Anne Coulter as offensive but harmless, like an 8 year old calling me an asshole: She doesn’t hold any sway over anything important, but man, I’d like to give her a good smack.
Nicole May 7th 2009 at 10:58 pm 22
If I leaned any further left I would fall over
One more vote for ‘hate is the wrong word’. Like others I think she is a small petty woman who desperately wants attention and will say anything to get it no matter how vile.
What does anger me is that someone like this can be on serious news program as though she had something important to say. Any time I hear that she has a scheduled appearance on a channel other than Fox, I write asking they cancel her appearance.
But I have a question, can anyone think of any pundit on the left who has the national prominence of Coulter that spews the same kind of vitriol that she does,or is this kind of punditry exclusively the domain of the right ?
Rebecca May 7th 2009 at 11:12 pm 23
I’ve spent so much time with both liberals and conservatives that I know both have a persecution complex and view themselves as the scrappy underdog. *shrug*
Joshua May 7th 2009 at 11:36 pm 24
Judging from this:
http://www.zazzle.com/ann_coulter_scares_me_tshirt-235012695528447210
it appears that at least one person thinks that some people want to claim that they are afraid of Ann Coulter. (Whether the t-shirt buyers, if any, are actually afraid of Coulter may be a different matter.)
Molly May 8th 2009 at 12:54 am 25
The thought that she might even ever entertain the idea that we’re afraid of her is thorougly laughable. You. Wish. Ms. Coulter. You. Wish.
Ted May 8th 2009 at 02:38 am 26
To me she’s like a mosquito, mildly annoying, and of really no consequence to modern man.
Ted May 8th 2009 at 02:44 am 27
Clarification: Ann Coulter
Palin is just plain nuts.
David Skaar May 8th 2009 at 06:09 am 28
My thought are similar to Paperboy’s (#7). When widely disliked, or perceived to be disliked, your best move is to claim that it’s because people are “afraid” of you or hate you for being right. It’s more fun to have a cause when you’re a martyr, and easier to define your cause by who you hate than by what you stand for.
Not long ago, I was volunteering at a local library, reshelving books after the move to a new building. One section I got to reshelve were the political rant books. I made a comment to various people that these are “books written for audiences that already agree with everything the writer says, and not meant to change anyone’s mind.” Different people interpreted it as a shot at the right-leaning or left-leaning authors, when I meant it for all of them.
Regarding wny talk radio is conservative, one line I heard (badly paraphrased here) was that the reason political radio is mostly conservative and political TV is mostly liberal is that listening to talk radio requires paying attention so as to hold a line of reasoning (or unreason) in ones head for consideration, whereas TV just washes over you, requiring no conscious effort by the viewer. I don’t know if I belive it, but it’s a good line for an argument.
Powers May 8th 2009 at 06:48 am 29
I don’t think it holds up under logic, David. If you just let (say) The Daily Show “wash over you”, you’re not going to really “get it”.
But perhaps The Daily Show is a bad example, since it’s supposed to be comedy. But if we exclude Comedy Central’s offerings, I’m not certain that political TV actually is “mostly liberal”.
Rick May 8th 2009 at 07:18 am 30
She’s a cartoon character in a strip I don’t follow… if I saw in the real world I certainly wouldn’t cross the street to see her - but I wouldn’t cross the street to avoid her either.
Nicole May 8th 2009 at 08:26 am 31
Hmmm — when I looked up this quote from Macbeth, I was thinking of Coulter, but then realized that it could apply equally to Palin as well
“… a poor player
That struts and frets his hour upon the stage
And then is heard no more: it is a tale
Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury,
Signifying nothing.”
Nicole May 8th 2009 at 08:47 am 32
That TV journalism is liberal is a myth — study after study shows that the Sunday morning talk shows have a prepoderance of republican and conservative guests. During the Bush years the excuse was that these were the people making policy, therefore it only makes sense to give them a bigger voice. Now that the Dems are in the majority, the excuse is that the minority party deserves a voice since there’s is now much smaller in congress.
Morris Keesan May 8th 2009 at 08:48 am 33
I think Ann Coulter is moderately attractive, visually, if you just look at her and don’t pay any attention to what she says or writes. I’ve long assumed that her looks are the only reason anyone pays any attention to her at all, and that if she were older, heavier, and plainer-looking, she wouldn’t get any of the television airtime she so desperately craves.
Nicole May 8th 2009 at 08:56 am 34
Josh - there is a coloquial usage of scare that people use to indicate that someone is crazy. That is to say that someome is diranged in a way that you think they might try to hurt someone. I think the t-shirt in question is using scare in the same way.
Buzz May 8th 2009 at 09:08 am 35
I like both Palin and Coulter. And they both seem to be doing well.
The more you hate Ann Coulter, the more successful she will be.
Why not ignore her?
Here’s how scary or world is now: I was not going to post this at first, out of fear. I knew I would be attacked for the outrageous opinion above. Free speech is fine as long as it is politically correct.
Nicole May 8th 2009 at 10:04 am 36
Buzz — Freedom of Speech does not mean you get to say whatever you want without someone vocalizing their disagreement. In fact, that is the idea behind freedom of speech. I get to say what I want; you get to say that you disagree.
The reason I don’t ignore Ann Coulter is because, IMHO, she adds nothing to the political discourse and that hurts America. She is a distraction from the real issues that face us. IMHO, she will say anything about anybody that she disagrees with just to get attention, regardless of if it is the truth or not. Now, if she was someone who sat in her living room and said the things she does, I could hardly care less. But, she has a national, and to some extent an international platform to promote her vitriol. And yes … I want that platform taken away from her. She can say whateve she likes, just not on the TV, or radio. That is not silencing her right to freedom of speech. There is no constitutional guarantee that you get a radio program or TV appearances to promote your ideas.
I realize this is sort of off topic, but only sort of. Can you please explain to me why Sean Hannity, Laura Ingraham, and Mark Steyn spent time criticizing Obama as an elitist because he ordered a burger with “spicy mustard” ?
http://crooksandliars.com/john-amato/latest-right-wing-lunacy-smear-about-ob
Really ??? Mustard ?? With all the problems facing America, one of the most popular right wing pundits chooses to talk about … mustard.
As I recall, during the lead up to the Iraq war, it was the right who were fond of questioning people’s patriotism, and saying that people wanted the terrorists to win if they had the temerity to speak against the president’s drive to war or any of his other policies for that matter. Was that OK ? That wasn’t trying to silence critics ???
You know, I had a friend who was a conservative. We had many enjoyable discussions about our differences each of us trying to present facts and ideas in a respectful way. But for the life of me, I can’t remember him ever calling anyone a fag, or talking about mustard.
padraig May 8th 2009 at 10:33 am 37
Don’t sweat it Buzz. We all know someone’s buying her books, and we all know people with lots more opinions than you.
Besides, what’s to be afraid of? Some anonymous stranger on the internet picks on you?
And I’ve tried to ignore crapmongers like her and Rush, only to hear more and more people repeating their Big Lies. Same problem with the PETA people. At some point you have to jump up and yell BULL$H!T!!!, even at the risk of being labeled a horible liberal. (Or if it’s the PETArds, an animal-hater.)
BTW, Nicole? Air America had Randi Rhodes on for quite a while and she took a lot of conservative hate, until she got too rude even for Air America. Main conservative hate targets now would probably be Janeane Garofalo and Stephanie Miller, pundit-wise. However, they save most of it up for Nancy Pelosi.
Nicole May 8th 2009 at 10:46 am 38
padraig — actually I didn’t much like Randi Rhodes. While I thought that she made good points with verifiable information to back it up, I thought that she took too much from right wing radio playbook for my tastes. Still, and I freely admit this could be my ‘liberal bias’, I can’t remember anything coming out of her mouth on the radio that sunk to the same level as Ann Coulter.
But you bring up a good point, the pundits on the left do not shy away from critizing thier own. It is fairly easy to find pundits on the left critizing everyone from Obama on down. I don’t see much of this kind of behavior from the other side. And woe betide anyone on the right who does critisize thier own — check out the reaction to Peggy Noonan saying that she thought Palin was a mistake and should step down.
Chakolate May 8th 2009 at 10:55 am 39
I *love* Ann Coulter. I wish the Rabid Right had a dozen of her. She’s so off-the-wall wing-nutty that she makes moderate Republicans want to be Democrats. Coulter and Michelle Bachman (for different reasons) are the best friends the Democrats have.
Buzz May 8th 2009 at 11:20 am 40
Do you people ever listen to yourselves?
Nicole May 8th 2009 at 11:48 am 41
Buzz — please feel free to expound on what you mean
Buzz May 8th 2009 at 01:21 pm 42
“crapmongers” “PETArdss” “Rabid Right” “wing-nutty”
S.P. Charles May 8th 2009 at 01:33 pm 43
Buzz, Ann Couler is much more aggressive in using epithets, and she does it in the context of “journalism.”
Nicole May 8th 2009 at 01:43 pm 44
Awww come on Buzz — that kind of thing is not just the pervue of the left — Rush Limbaugh’s femi-nazi leaps to mind and I’ll bet that with a little effort I could come up with more
DrDan May 8th 2009 at 01:51 pm 45
I don’t get the attraction, when I see her one word comes to mind
“Skankzilla”
p May 8th 2009 at 03:28 pm 46
I hate her, but ONLY because I am prejudiced against trannies.
A blonde lady with huge hands and adam’s apple killed my dad! *sniff*
and WAS my dad! *sniff*
Anon E. Mouse May 8th 2009 at 03:28 pm 47
I’m a conservative, and I find her an offensive, obnoxious idiot. Her use of charged words like “treason” for mere disagreements just waters down the importance of a serious crime. Now, when conservatives are suffering for idiotically
following Bush43 (I didn’t), we need someone like William F Buckley: an intelligent and articulate voice in the public sphere. Who do we get? Coulter and Limbaugh, self-serving half-wits. And the same morons who believed Bush43 believe them too, more-or-less ensuring that the GOP is going the way of the Whigs.
However offensive you find her, I find her worse. But it can get even worse: I had a student in one of my classes whose last name was “Coulter”. I jokingly asked if he was related to the famous one; he got a look of disgust and annoyance and said “Yes, but I don’t like to talk about it.”
BGneiss May 8th 2009 at 03:57 pm 48
I’m just not sure why people like Tranny Coulter (sorry, I couldn’t help myself - this debate has been way too civil and grown-up) think that people are scared of her because she is correct, or wise, or powerful, or anything besides just plain scary. Sometimes I need to get scary at work to get people to listen to me and do things correctly (I’m the youngest and lowest-level person on the project, but I’m the technical lead and responsible for 95% of the project). But I don’t mistake what I’m receiving for respect, although in the long run I think/hope I’m getting there because I nearly always end up being right. I hate that I have to sink to the level of invoking fear to earn their respect, but that’s the way things are in the old boy’s network at my office. If it takes fear to get their attention, then I don’t have a choice.
BGneiss May 8th 2009 at 04:20 pm 49
Chakolate - I just noticed your comment, and I wholeheartedly agree. A couple of years ago I re-registered to vote because I’d moved to another state, and I changed my party for the first time because I was tired of being embarassed and apologetic. I’d never changed parties before because I believe each party can and should have a spectrum of beliefs, but the highly-visible vitriolic people who are loud caricatures of the extremes tend to chase off people who are more moderate or strongly disagree with the loudly-stated extreme opinions.
Todd May 8th 2009 at 04:40 pm 50
The media is generally controlled by the left. When’s the last time you read an article on abortion that used the phrase “pro-life”, but didn’t include the phrase “pro-choice”? (I’m sure they really want to say “anti-choice”.)
I’m now convinced that the liberals won’t allow a level-headed conservative anywhere near print or the air-waves, or if they can’t stop him or her, they’ll ignore him or her, hoping that he or she will disappear soon.
The media have no problem with blowhards like Rush, and I guess Ann (I haven’t paid much attention to her), because they make conservatives look like the clan.
And, mdgoldrush1984, the reason this discussion hasn’t turned to mud throwing is because the posters on this forum are mostly liberal. How could it be anything but a “me too” lovefest?
KobeClan May 8th 2009 at 06:36 pm 51
Have any of you people criticizing Coulter EVER read her columns or books? Thought not. Tolerance to you people is only for those who agree with you.
Cinco de Quartro!!
Cidu Bill May 8th 2009 at 06:47 pm 52
KobeClan, I’ve read two of her books, and I have an e-mail subscription to her column. Do I pass?
ty May 8th 2009 at 07:17 pm 53
KobeClan - can you explain your “thought not” comment? You appear to be judging the anti-Coulter side based on an assumption you can’t prove. As for me, one book and a few columns were all this moderate conservative could stomach. How much is required to meet your approval?
When Ann Coulter and her ilk demonstrate tolerance for others, then perhaps they will have earned some for themselves.
S.P. Charles May 8th 2009 at 09:11 pm 54
Todd: The media is generally controlled by the left. When’s the last time you read an article on abortion that used the phrase “pro-life”, but didn’t include the phrase “pro-choice”?
Huh??? What does this prove, and why shouldn’t they use the phrase “pro choice”?
KobeClan May 8th 2009 at 10:02 pm 55
CIDU,
I don’t see you making ad hominum attacks. In this thread, you really haven’t given your opinion. You actually have read her work and I guess you probably have an opinion similar to mine. But you just had a comment from a “moderate conservative”?? WTF??
My advice is to just leave politics out of CIDU. It will keep the trolls away.
KobeClan May 8th 2009 at 10:09 pm 56
OH,
CIDU,
The “Archie Bunker with verbal skills” was spot on.
But I’m not sure you know why.
Cidu Bill May 8th 2009 at 10:28 pm 57
Please do explain, KobeClan, what it is I don’t know.
tofor May 8th 2009 at 11:01 pm 58
Man, I really didn’t want to get mired in this discussion, but the subject of word choices really peaks my interest. SP Charles: The terms you use to explain an issue belie your bias. The terms used in the abortion debate to refer to people as pro-choice, pro-life, pro-abortion, anti-abortion, anti-choice, are all extremely politically charged and decidedly not neutral terms. The right always refers to themselves as pro-life, and the left always refers to themselves as pro-choice. If you watch television news you will find that the reporters almost always use the liberal terms pro-choice and anti-abortion. This is just one simple, very small example of their bias. IMHO a channel like FOX is far far less dangerous because they are open about their bias. When you turn on FOX, you know you are getting the conservative version of a story. When you turn on ABC or CBS or NBC if you really think you are getting a ‘fair and balanced’ perspective you are sadly mistaken because there is no such thing. Everybody has a bias and it comes out in the words you choose, the facts you emphasize or ignore. Having an ‘equal number of guests’ from either side does not even begin to tell the full story.
S. P. Charles May 8th 2009 at 11:14 pm 59
But tofor, wouldn’t you agree that the fairest and least biased approach would be to refer to each side the way they prefer to refer to tehmselves, that is pro-life and pro-choice?
BGneiss May 9th 2009 at 08:52 am 60
KobeClan - Yes, I have read Coulter. Just because someone doesn’t agree with you doesn’t mean they’re not informed. We can know the same facts and still have different beliefs. That’s why there are a whole lot of different religions, and a whole lot of different flavors of ice cream. And we’re lucky enough to live in a country where we’re allowed to express our different beliefs.
As for tolerance… I don’t recall ever saying that, although I might hate and fear her, I don’t tolerate her (or seeing anyone else here even hint that she shouldn’t be allowed to express her opinion). I don’t even ever express an opinion about her unless someone asks me for one (and I was asked for one here). Just because someone disagrees with you doesn’t mean they’re trampling your freedom of speech. They simply disagree with you, and that’s allowed and encouraged in this country. It doesn’t make any sense to get angry at everyone who disagrees with you, and it doesn’t change anything anyway. You can’t insult and berate someone into agreeing with you. Live and let live.
Powers May 9th 2009 at 09:01 am 61
The problem with “pro-life” is that it implies the abortion supporters are “anti-life”. True, “pro-choice” implies that the abortion protesters are “anti-choice”, but that at least is true — they are very specifically arguing that the choice to have an abortion shouldn’t be allowed. No pro-choice people are arguing that life shouldn’t be allowed.
Gadfly May 9th 2009 at 01:45 pm 62
Powers,
“No pro-choice people are arguing that life shouldn’t be allowed.”
Except for the specific life they’re trying to terminate with the specific act of abortion… They’re saying “this” life should not be allowed — for whatever reason…
S. P. Charles May 9th 2009 at 01:58 pm 63
Gadfly, that’s just silly: You might as well say that anybody who’s in favor of capital punishment is “anti-life.”
Cidu Bill May 9th 2009 at 02:02 pm 64
Let’s not turn this into a thread about abortion. No good will come of that.
Gadfly May 9th 2009 at 02:07 pm 65
Sorry. I didn’t mean to side-track things…
Just shows that words have power and how they’re used — whether by the media or by individuals — reveals bias. Ms. Coulter’s use of ‘hate’ and ‘fear’ illustrates more how she views the world than how the world views her.
Todd May 9th 2009 at 09:43 pm 66
Something like twenty years ago, most newspapers agreed that articles about abortion should use the “neutral” terms pro-abortion and anti-abortion, and avoid the use of the biased terms pro-choice and pro-life. (I know of at least one paper that changed pro-life to anti-abortion when it was part of the name of a pro-life organization.) Yet, within a few years, pro-abortion was near completely replaced by pro-choice. And anti-abortion has never sounded neutral.
By the way, isn’t the law very much anti-choice? You have to drive your car on the right side of the road, not the left. You can only go this way on these roads, and that way on those. You can park here, but not there. You’re not allowed to take certain drugs at all, and others you can only take if a doctor says you need them. You can’t take a human life (you know what goes here).
mdgoldrush1984 May 10th 2009 at 11:36 am 67
Todd-Not to start a huge argument or anything, but it seems that you’re trying to sidetrack the Coulter debate, whether intentionally or unintentionally.
The law is anti-choice? That’s not really true. You can do whatever you want as long as you’re prepared to deal with the consequences. Besides, if anyone could do what they wanted, that’d be anarchy. I’m not sure that would end well.
Also, just to be more of an asshole:
“And, mdgoldrush1984, the reason this discussion hasn’t turned to mud throwing is because the posters on this forum are mostly liberal. How could it be anything but a “me too” lovefest?”
Well, Todd, that’s the kind of inflammatory language that got Coulter/Limbaugh/Malkin/Hannity famous.
Damn liberals, thinking that everyone should be equally.
Nicole May 10th 2009 at 10:14 pm 68
In keeping with the topic:
http://assets.comics.com/dyn/str_strip/000000000/00000000/0000000/200000/70000/6000/900/276911/276911.full.gif
For those of you interested — it’s the Grizwells
Nicole May 10th 2009 at 10:37 pm 69
I would still like to know if anyone can name a liberal pundit, who is as mean spirited as Ann Coulter who gets the kind of national coverage and air time that she gets.
padraig mentioned Randi Rhodes, but I just don’t see her comments in the same league as Coulter’s. Additionally … Randi definitely does not get the kind of coverage Coulter does.
As far as this being a liberal love fest goes. I will admit that most people who frequent this site seem to have a liberal political philosophy. But I can assure you there are no nefarious plots to keep conservatives away. Besides, there have been on occasion, some fairly heated discussions — The New Yorker cover with Obama as a Muslim comes to mind. During that discussion, issues of race and journalistic fairness were discussed, and even though these can be inflammatory topics, the discussion remained civil. Frankly, I think this site attracts smart people regardless of their political leaning, and in general smarter people tend to be more civil.
Hunt May 11th 2009 at 08:38 am 70
I like nice people. Coulter isn’t nice. It’s that simple.
As far as fear, I find clowns to be scary, but I don’t really fear them. Same deal here.
Brian May 28th 2009 at 01:14 pm 71
Better verbal skills than Archie Bunker’s? I’m not so sure.
Bill, why have you read two of her books & do read her column? She’s not intelligent as any cursory reading of her work can show.
As for the media, they are hardly liberal. Most of American media are controlled by huge conglomerates that are conservative in nature.
tofor Jun 1st 2009 at 09:42 pm 72
Brian-If I’d been drinking milk when I read your post, I would have snorted it out my nose. Have you even read an AP story on a controversial topic, or watched CNN lately? The idea that any major news outlet other than FOX is conservatively biased is absurd.