The king is a fink!

Ann Coulter is not the Lone Haranguer riding bravely through the night to yell up at the castle, "The king is a fink!"

She works for the fink.

Coulter is a wholly-owned subsidy of the Republican Right, stamped with the Karl Rove seal of approval.  Her job isn't to humble the king; it's to help the king keep the peasants in line.

One of the ways she does that is the same way that Rush Limbaugh, Michael Savage, and the rest of the Right Wing bully boys and blowhards in the media and on the blogs do it---she stirs up their anger and resentment at the wrong targets.

She encourages them to hate people like the 9/11 widows for their truth-telling so that they don't listen to the widows and start saying things like, "Hey, you know what, Bush did sit there like a lox that day.  And he did have a memo a month before warning him that Al Qaeda was planning attacks that involved hijacking airplanes.  And he really hasn't done anything since to protect us except start an unnecessary war and use and manipulate our fear for his own political gain!"

Ann Coulter gets them to say instead, "Yeah, those women are glad their husbands are dead!"

Following up on my post below:  Elspeth Reeve defended Coulter in the New Republic using Coulter's own defense---Coulter's just a shock jock type of comic speaking truth to power.

The outrageous lies, vulgarity, and plain, open hatred that define Coulter's schtick are ok in Reeve's book because everything Coulter says is "kind of true."

That's why Liberals can't stand her, Reeve thinks, because we're uncomfortable with that little bit she says that's "kind of" true.

Reeve is accepting a definition of humor and satire that would have it that a joke is funny because it's kind of true.

But the mark of great humor and satire and a good joke is that they are wholly true, true through and through.   Swift, and Hogarth, Dickens, Mark Twain, Walt Kelly, and company didn't draw and write stuff that's "kind of" true.

It's "kind of true" that some Jews are cheap, that some Irishmen drink and fight too much, that some Poles are dumb, that some black people and Mexicans are lazy, that some women are castrating shrews and battleax fishwives.

But ethnic jokes don't attack cheapness, drinking and fighting, stupidity, laziness, or castration.  They attack Jews, the Irish, Poles, blacks, Hispanics, and women.

The object is to define "the other," make them objects of derision and contempt, in order to justify treating them as others and excluding them from any definition of "fellow human being."

Coulter tells the political equivalent of ethnic jokes.

When the subject is Muslims, she tells the ethnic joke equivalent of ethnic jokes.

Defending Coulter's attacks on the 9/11 widows, Reeve writes, that what Coulter says is again "kind of true."

It is a little absurd to hold up a person as an expert judge of the 9/11 Commission Report, for example, just because she lost a loved one.

Yes, it would be absurd, if those women had not made themselves experts on the 9/11 Commission Report, if they had not in fact been the ones who pushed and pushed and pushed until there was a 9/11 Commission to issue a report, if it had not been the case that if those women hadn't worked as hard and as intelligently and as expertly as they did, then George Bush and Company would have gotten their way and there'd have been no Commission, no report, no investigation at all, even the half-baked one that we had.

That's why the Bush Leaguers hate the widows.  That's why Coulter attacked them.  To discredit them, to distract the peasants from the widows' expertise and the truth---not the "kind of" truth, the real whole truth---they were speaking to power.

Reeve accepts Coulter's explanation that she wasn't criticizing the widows themselves, just the way Liberals use sympathy for the widows to try exempt them from criticism and stifle debate.

Reeve says it's "kind of" true that Liberals do this.  But what's more than "kind of true" is that not just Liberals but lots of Americans aren't trying to talk about the widows, they're trying to talk about the 9/11 Commission's report and the many and various failures of George W. Bush, which the Bush Leaguers don't want us to do, and so they've sent out their propagandists, like Ann Coulter, to change the subject in order to deflect the criticism and shut down the debate.

What's not "kind of" true but all true is that it has been the Bush Administration and its flunkys and apologists in Congress and in the Media who have been using emotional responses to 9/11 to shut down debate.

Criticize the President and you're a traitor giving aid and comfort to terrorists.

Object to the Radical Christian Right's attempts to outlaw freedom of choice and women's autonomy, replace science in school with superstitious twaddle, deny gay people status as citizens, and generally force a backwards cult of male authoritarianism they call Christianity on the whole country, and you're Godless.

Suggest in any way that the Republican Right wing agenda's not a boon and a gift to the nation and you're a liar, a malicious slanderer, who can only be properly argued with while holding a baseball bat.

All of this seems to have escaped Elspeth Reeve's notice.

Because what Elspeth Reeve likes about Ann Coulter is that Ann Coulter reminds her of Elspeth Reeve.

For six months, I was the only liberal on Line Three. It was in an assembly line in a small town in a dark red state, and I worked the second shift with mandatory overtime, which meant the only humans I ever saw were my fellow button-pushers and sticker-application specialists. The choice between soul-searching monotony and political shouting matches was not a hard one to make, especially after September 11. And, to avoid being trampled by the majority, I had to play dirty, to use the kinds of lines that kill political careers: about coat hangers, say, or about how Jesus was a liberal. It always helped to have a few seconds of stunned silence to let my point sink in.

<snip>

I love Ann Coulter because, in her, I see a loudmouth on the assembly line, fighting not to be squished and whittled and boxed into the shape Washington seems to think fits a girl just right.

Ok, how a fawned over and flattered multimillionare TV star who apparently can't say anything outrageous enough to lose herself a gig or a book contract is like a young assembly line worker being harrassed (sexually as well as politically, it turns out) by a gang of angry male co-workers needs to be better explained to me.

Doesn't seem even "kind of" true.

But what hasn't dawned on Reeve is that those angry male co-workers of hers were almost certainly getting their arguments, their "facts," and their style of "debate"---yelling punctuated by snorts of derision and angry, dismissive laughter---from the Right Wing blowhards and bully boys in the media.  And they were doing what they'd learned to do from the blowhards and bully boys, shout down your critics instead of engaging with them in rational debate, insult and humiliate them as a way of keeping uppity little snots like Reeve in their place.

In short, the men Reeve was "arguing" with were parroting what they'd heard on TV and talk radio.

Which means that Reeve, defender of her heroine Ann Coulter, was in a way being attacked and put in her place by...

Ann Coulter.

Comments

[aimai]

bravo! just--BRAVO!

aimai

[Thomas Allen]

Hear, Hear!

It's amazing how much water TNR and its individual writers will carry for the genocidal wing of the Republican Party, all the while, claiming to be liberal.

[Mysticdog]

Who subscribes to that rag anymore? It's got to be subsidized by the right wing at this point, it has about as much relevance to intelligent discourse and democratic values as a LaRouche campaign brochure.

[Steve M.]

It is a little absurd to hold up a person as an expert judge of the 9/11 Commission Report, for example, just because she lost a loved one.

Any more absurd than holding up a 9/11 victim's teenage daughter as an expert on the effectiveness of George W. Bush's foreign policy?

That's what I despise about this argument -- the fact that Coulter's hair or legs or tits or way with a one-liner have given the "moderate" mainstream press mass amnesia with regard to the fact that the GOP does exactly the same thing, if anything more often.

[Al]

"I love Ann Coulter because, in her, I see a loudmouth on the assembly line, fighting not to be squished and whittled and boxed into the shape Washington seems to think fits a girl just right."

One of the most nauseating things I've ever heard from a so-called liberal.

[garth]

making out coulter to be some kind of lone voice in the wilderness is stunning. the woman's been propped up by the GOP book machine for years...thousands of copies sold and never read. what a load of crap.

brilliant post, first visit, i'll be back.

[jane hamsher]

truly great post

[fourlegsgood]

Yo, kudos for using one of my favorite comic episodes- the whole "midnight haraguer" series- I absolutely loved that whole thing.

And Coulter should be shunned from both polite and impolite society.

[Fred]

Attacking the 9/11 widows is pure bullshit because the fact of the matter is that whenever Kristin Breitweiser was on the tube she was without a doubt the smartest person in the room, and dealt with facts not emotion. And she voted for George Bush in 2000.

[nashtbrutusandshort]

A truly magnificent post, sir. The final point you make about Reeve's hair-brained reason for identifying with Coulter is the icing on the cake. I know that the New Republic is a shadow of its former self, but I never thought I'd see the day when one of its writers could be so utterly clueless about a vile hack like Coulter.

[OxyCon]

When a Satirist speaks before an audience, the crowd laughs boisterously.
When Ann Coulter speaks before an audience, the crowd never laughs, but instead grows angrier as though they are preparing for a lynching.
Coulter peddles in hate speech. Her very existence is to incite hatred and violence.

[ellenbrenna]

The worst part she makes Coulter look entertaining and holds that up as one of her most important qualities. As if politics is a diverting game that has no real consequences for anyone. Pathetic.

["Fair and Balanced" Dave]

That's why Coulter attacked them. To discredit them, to distract the peasants from the widows' expertise and the truth---not the "kind of" truth, the real whole truth---they were speaking to power.

This goes right to the heart of problem with Coulter, Malkin, Savage, Limbaugh and the rest of the right-wing knuckle-draggers: Their real victims are not liberals, but the red state rubes who are fool enough to actually buy their bullshit.

[KC45s]

I "kind of" admire Ann Coulter, too. She's taken very modest writing ability and a chemical imbalance to the top of the bestseller charts and the cover of Time magazine. I know people with both those traits who have to wait tables. And they hate less than Ann does (some of their customers excepted).

Maybe TNR has decided to mine the "let's drive liberals crazy" vibe that the Right uses. You know, anything to stir up those humorless, Stalinist Berk-wearing hippies, etc. One can only assume from their recent writing that the staff wants to separate itself from liberals as soon as possible. Or maybe this is daring iconoclasm? If so, Foer should know better. From what I've seen of these guys, daring iconoclasm at TNR would be wearing boxer briefs instead of briefs, though only on casual Fridays.

One more thing: clearly Coulter strikes a chord. Every liberal blogger has written on that article, and here I am, admittedly as big a nobody as Elspeth Reeve, but nonetheless responding to a Mannion piece on Coulter when I did not comment on your essays concerning J.K. Rowling, a writer who has actually contributed something positive to the world. I don't get it, either.

[Jim]

This kind of adolescent contrarianism is, along with their shameful, fact-immune support for the Iraq War, is one of the reasons I no longer read TNR.

As far as Coulter's success, I don't admire it anymore than I admire Madonna or American Idol or other 'reality' TV shows. It's sign of a sickness in the culture, not any talent or ability on her part.

[Kevin Wolf]

Great post, Lance. While I feel the twinge of regret expressed by others above re the time and energy spent on Coulter, I do think it helpful to dissect what she does and show everybody how it is that she "works."

[fourmorewars]

Count me among those who are going over from the 'NR is clueless' camp to the 'NR has been consciously taken over by GOP propagandists posing as liberal/centrists' camp.

Is this woman asking me to believe that she hears Coulter with the same ears as the ones with which she heard her (real? made-up?) former coworkers rant brainlessly, and her reaction is other than that THIS is the source of their stupid prejudices and of the simplistically vicious talking points that came out of their mouths?

You cannot convince me that a person with the outlook and personal history she attributes to herself, would react to Coulter's swill other than with contempt, along with rage that, as we speak, dozens of rightwing creeps like Coulter continue to prop up the ignorant worldview of people EXACTLY like those co-workers. Not a trace of concern that ordinary people just like she (says she) used to be, are being assaulted NOW, day after day, to this prefabricated conservative garbage.

She's just lying. Either lying about who she used to be, or lying about what she feels now. The right pays for fake news pieces, they pay for countless mouthpiece foundations, they bribe journalists, in some cases to the tune of tens.of.thousands.of.dollars(Armstrong W. et al) to plug their talking points without disclosing any conflict of interest. Why is it so far-fetched that entities like NR are fronts? I mean, they're supposed to be left-of-the-dial? When's the last time they stood behind ANYTHING we support?

["Fair and Balanced" Dave]

I "kind of" admire Ann Coulter, too. She's taken very modest writing ability and a chemical imbalance to the top of the bestseller charts and the cover of Time magazine. I know people with both those traits who have to wait tables.

Those people waiting tables don't have right-wing sugar daddies like Richard Mellon Scaife bulk-buying their books.

[Kevin J-M]

Elspeth Reeve is suffering from Stockholm Syndrome caused by the trauma he suffered at the hands of rightwing rhetoric-spouting bullies at that factory. He's identified with and valorized their abuse of him and now defends and admires their point of view. He needs to be on a therapist's couch, not on the soapbox of a national magazine.

[S from Van]

Reeve might as well stand before a mirror and punch herself in the face as hard as she can every coffee break.
Jesus, people just don't think, do they.

[Pope Ratzo]

The New Republic has become a disgrace. I never would have thought they'd go this low.

"Elspeth Reeve"? Does TNR require any sort of qualifications from those they publish? Do they even HAVE editors?

I can't believe that a professional editor read that article and let it get past her desk.

[Thucydides Junior]

Ms. Reeve is a new journalist, perhaps 12 years old or so, out of Univ. of Missouri's well respected journalism school.

It sounds like she took Coulter's bait hook line and sinker. Coulter & her better fed ilk do not necessarily believe what they say. It is about the money and the niche they carved out for themselves.

Calamity Coulter has indeed been "squished and whittled and boxed into the shape Washington seems to think fits a girl just right" by her more wealthy masters and drooling but demanding admirers, that shape being a cynical, rabid, right wing anger magnet.

I wonder what would happen to her if she showed any moderation at all? Location reporter on local news I imagine. Wouldn't sell any books, which is her main goal, not making any useful addition to public discourse.

Ms. Reeve I fear is a bit too naive to see, or perhaps understand that. And her editors bit too lazy.

[Exiled in New Jersey]

I am trying to figure out if responses to Ms. Reeve by nearly everyone on the left is a good thing. We criticize the Right Wing Noise Machine aka The Mighty Wurlitzer when they pile on some real or imagined transgression by anyone not of their stripe, but here we go, Malkinizing or Rossifying this person who is probably auditioning for a job on Fox News or some other Beobachter-like employer.

The correct comparitive to Coulter et al would be Lonesome Rhodes from A Face In The Crowd, another 1950's film I would love to see Lance deconstruct.

[Northern Observer]

In short, the men Reeve was "arguing" with were parroting what they'd heard on TV and talk radio.
Which means that Reeve, defender of her heroine Ann Coulter, was in a way being attacked and put in her place by...Ann Coulter.

Bam. You nailed it. Perfectly.

[told you so]

Thanks for the reminder of little Ashley, who just happened to be around to be recognized and hugged by the Preznit so she could be displayed in campaign ads! Touchingly human, except for the fact that her surviving parent is...a Republican communications consultant! Ashley was nowhere near her hometown when she was "spied in the crowd" outside a campaign event and then became the human interest story of a campaign news cycle or two. Faking spontaneous compassion...another reason W is the worst president ever.

[Jim]

It just occured to me what this mindset is part of. I'm guessing since she's not yet a senior writer or contributing editor or whatever li'l Petey Beinart is, Ms Reeve is under thirty. The generation behind mine, I think, really doesn't get what the stakes are in this political fight, they have no sense of history beyond their own shallow memories. We don't have to worry about Roe V Wade; mine safety isn't a political issue; unions are like, so Great Depression.

Ms Reeve seems to think she has some real world chops because she worked in (gasp!) a blue-collar job for a summer. She reminds me of nothing so much as the starlet I saw on a talk show not long ago. Somehow and for some reason, her views on politics came up, and this tattoed, midriff-bared, overpaid ditz looked confused for about fifteen seconds, and then said, "Well, I'm not like a feminazi or anything..."

[Ralph]

True, all true, except in the "what they might say" part where you state that Bush "did have a memo a month before warning him that Al Qaeda was planning attacks that involved hijacking airplanes." The warning was extremely vague, and went on to mention that the FBI had opened up a whole lot of field investigations, so it sure looked to me like there was nothing specific for the frat boy to do, back there in August of 2001, except to be his cheerleader self and tell everyone to keep on doing what they were doing. I think the intelligence community dropped the ball on this one. (& I'm speaking as a former member of said community.)

[lush]

Our constitution specifically says the the people have the right to petition the government for redress of grievances. I don't even mildly agree that a citizen should be mocked for asking the government to take action to protect us from foreign attack. It's what government exists to do, and no one is any more privileged to make that point than anyone else.

I think the Ann Coulter nonsense regarding the widows relates to the ideas that Erich Fromm discussed in "Escape from Freedom" back in the 1940s: "The conservative believes rather in catastrophe, in the powerlessness of man to avoid it, in its necessity, and in the terrible disappointment of the seduced optimist." The current neocon/dittohead alliance has a base who have given up individual identity to be part of a movement, and all glory goes to their Leader. Part of Fromm's theory is that this fear of becoming an individual in an uncertain world led them to align with the powerful even against their own interests. To be confronted with someone who is capable of expressing her own desires reminds them of what they have denied within themselves, so they must destroy her - probably as "unlovable."

[Chicago Jason]

People still read the New Republic? Wonders never cease.

They were so rabid tearing into Howard Dean that I even cancelled my free online subscription. You couldn't pay me enough to read the droolings TNR churns out.

[jkd]

It's really important to examine where this has come from. Elspeth Reeve is not, of course, actually 12 years old, but she did graduate from the University of Missouri's much-lauded School of Journalism in 2005 (and even won a prestigious award). Since then, she's interned at Time magazine, worked for the Center for Public Integrity (a big DC journalism watchdog), and now is a reporter-researcher at The New Republic.

It's a good little resume for a 24-year-old. But let's think about it for a second.

She started college in the fall of 2001. Okay. So she was an 18-year-old fresh-person on 9/11 - her entire higher education and career has happened since then, at one of America's "best" schools of journalism, and at three marquee-brand institutions.

And this is the result.

Other than being, as usual, slightly terrified about the future of our republic, I think we should be very conscious that these are the attitudes that are prevalent among our elite and, yeah, "liberal" institutions right now. I think Ms. Reeve and many of her cohort are probably too far gone, until they all have their own little David Brock moments ("Oh shit. Those hippies were right and I was getting played for a chump"), but it's never to early to start trying to instill real liberal values (e.g., respect for truth and honest discourse) in the next generation of people responsible for our discourse.

[Campaspe]

Bravo. Some days I fear we will never be rid of this talentless fishwife, but then I have a happy little thought. Shall I share it?

The thought is, "Morton Downey Jr."

[Mark Smeraldi]

I don't suppose we can refer to this group as the "New Republicans" if they aren't really new. Too bad, as otherwise it's a good fit.

[Henry Holland]

It's "kind of true" that some Jews are cheap, that some Irishmen drink and fight too much, that some Poles are dumb, that some black people and Mexicans are lazy, that some women are castrating shrews and battleax fishwives

Hey! What about us promiscuous pedophile fags? Are you a homophobe or something? :-) :-)

[Lori Jablonski]

I can only hope Reeve has hopped aboard the Coulter train just as it’s about to derail. It's quite sad that this obviously talented recent J-school grad would focus her efforts on foolishness like this. I guess it’s “kind of true” that there are still to be found hungry young journalists trying to make a name for themselves by actually confronting power, rather than pandering on its behalf.

[Jay B.]

Anyone with a J-School degree at this point should be mocked and shunned. Writing shallow contrarianism is all they have left, because they decided to invest in straw just before the alchemy market went busto.

Seriously. If anything is obvious about the blogs, no matter what the persuasion, is that there are armies of writers out there searching for some version of the truth. True, not all are reporters, but since reporting shouldn't and doesn't require a Masters to understand as a premise (I was a journalist 10 years ago and laughed at J-School grads as it was). It would take a few days to figure out and maybe a couple of weeks of following some other journalist to figure out the beat. The poor young woman is as well pedigreed as it comes in a business staler than Missou bongwater.

[harry near indy]

when i worked blue collar/factory jobs when i was younger, my co-workers and i rarely talked about or argued about politics. instead, we usually talked about sex and sports, since we were mostly guys.

their political beliefs were the government and politicoes are full of beans, etc -- minor grumblings like that.

why tnr run s--- like that is beyond me.

[The Heretik]

But Coulter is a "loudmouth on the assembly line" cranking out the hate.

[mojo88]

Those people waiting tables don't have right-wing sugar daddies like Richard Mellon Scaife bulk-buying their books.

Exactly. The slot of conservative mens' masturbation tool/political porn star opened up circa 2000, and someone was going to fill it. If it wasn't Coulter it would be some other shill... Malkin perhaps.

[Susan]

that some black people and Mexicans are lazy,
*****************************
Dear Dumb Liberal:

Only a third rate propagandist would lump those two groups together when it comes to work ethic. Every other race/ethnic group you mention gets its own clause, but these two groups are connected by the "and" and placed in the same clause to create the illusion of similarity.

Mexicans have a work ethic and "lazy" is definitely not what comes to mind when I think of them.

Liberals are DYING to get Hispanics to think they are in the same boat as blacks, and that no amount of work they do will ever pay off for them.

It's all BS.

[mojo88]

The New Republic has become a disgrace.

The TNR is acting like a little child who realizes the other kids in the playground dont want to play with him anymore. He has a hyper spaz and says things he wouldn't normally say. The TNR needs to look in the mirror and recognize the fact that Coulter and what she represents is the #1 reason.. absolute NUMBER ONE reason that TNR-style centrism has FAILED.

[Leah A]

Susan,

Not that your comment deserves any response, but it is not Lance who is grouping black people and Mexicans in a category; laziness is and has been one of the standard negative stereotypes for both groups. You seem to think that such a characterization is just, in the case of black folks, not so in the case of Hispanics, only one of several astonishing implications of your comment.

Where you find evidence here that Lance, or any other liberal, is anxious to convince Hispanics that their lot in life is hopeless, remains utterly opaque, no matter how many condescending adjectives you employ.

If anyone can be accused of cruel, myopic, group stereotyping, in this case of African-Americans, it is you.

I probably shouldn't have bothered with this comment, but I must say, I am mightily tired of the condescending ravings of commentators like yourself, who seek to counsel "liberals" in what are their true beliefs. Believe me when I tell you that most of us know what we believe. And I would have thought the general quality of Lance's writing would have convinced you that he knows what he means to say in a post.

Also, before you address anyone as "Dear Dumb Liberal" again, you might consider a refresher course in English language comprehension; your comment betrays a striking lack of such in regards to the actual content of this post.

[Peter L. Winkler]

Reeve and TNR are just ratings whores anxious to take advantage of Coulter's notorious celebrity.

I don't see how anyone could mount an intelligent argument in defense of Coulter, but I'd be willing to read one. Reeve's piece was not the one to do it.

The premise of Reeve's piece is that, when you strip away the demagogic name calling, Coulter's points are essentially true.

Reeve didn't provide one example supporting her premise.

Coulter's infamous remarks about the 9/11 widows, which Reeve defends, was emblematic of her technique. If Coulter had written that the women were given immunity from criticism because they lost their husbands, no one would have paid any attention.

But that's not what Coulter wrote. In fact, it can't be derived from what she wrote. Coulter wrote that the widows had happily exchanged their husbands' deaths for money and celebrity, expecially since they would soon have been divorced anyway.

There's no kernel of truth there to be found.

If Coulter ever writes anything that proves to be true, some assiduous researcher will discover that she plagiarized it.

[Mr. Shakes]

Not bad, Mannion. Not bad at all.

[rooster50]

Sounds to me like Ann Coulter has your panties in a wad. So many words in an attempt to discredit her only shows her power.

[ananke]

Mr. Winkler,

As I recall there actually was an assiduous researcher (John Barrie of turnitin.com) who started running the "works" of Ms. Coulter through his plagiarism detection system. He gave up enumerating them after he became afraid his eyeballs would bleed if he had to read any more of her prose, but clearly after he saw enough of the type of evidence to get her bounced out of any English 101 class on her ass. (TPM really covered this well- that's where I read the bleeding eyes quote)

I am not really shocked her partisans defend her indefensible words - they've gone to far out on the limb with her to make it back to reality now - but anyone who considers themselves a writer or a journalist with some claim of objectivity? Please. Now I am waiting for the next call for a blogger ethics conference.

[Greg Robertson]

Ann Coulter is great! Because she is of far above average intelligence, a great writer, and she says it like it is, she continues to be a best selling author. Her theses are proved over and over by the substanceless attacks of the godless.

When I watch the news on television, my mouth drops open and I am astounded at the dishonest and biased reporting that is being fed to the masses – which, incidentally, are beginning to realize what's up. On the other hand, when I read Coulter, I join with the Lord in laughing out loud at the wickedness she exposes. "The wicked plot against the righteous and gnash their teeth at them; but the Lord laughs at the wicked, for he knows their day is coming. The wicked draw the sword and bend the bow to bring down the poor and needy, to slay those whose ways are upright." Psalm 37:12-14

Keep writing Ann! There are enough people with ears to hear that you have become a best-selling author!

Greg Robertson

[Nick]

You honestly associate Ann Coulter and the corrupted Republican party with God, after all these years?

[libertarian]

ann coulter is awesome! anyone dissing her even read her book? i did. she is hard to argue against. and dont mistake her sarcasm for hatred. her argument is that liberals are the haters. actually read her book to find out what the quotes are in context.

[Stacey]

I love Ann Coulter. Greg Robertson, what you wrote is all truth! I can't wait to get my hands on that new book, 'The Marketing of Evil." BTW all you pansies, can I say the word 'pansies' anymore? Or are you going to run crying to mama, my feelings are hurt. waah waah. The truth is, if you were truly comfortable with what you think you believe, you would not care what another person says. The reason you don't feel comfortable is because you feel conviction and no one wants to be confronted with the truth and have to repent(change). The truth is, whoever votes pro-choice, they have the blood of Gods' children on their hands.

[Sis]

People should NOT buy gas from Citco. American citizens are supporting Hezbollah. Venezuela, (Pres. Hugo Chavez) an OPEC nation, owns Citgo Petroleum. Filling up at any of the 14,000 Citgo gas stations across the US thus funds a gov. that is on the record as being a strong supporter of Hezbollah. Criminal activity in the US has raised millions of dollars for Hezbollah.