What's the deal with Ann Coulter?

[atlantabiolab]

Who in the world on the left comes close to Ann Coulter's style? Seriously. There are a few pit-bull types but none that I know of who literally lie like she does. Gimme some names.

I guess you didn't fully read that I stated that she has "mastered" a tool of her opponents, meaning that she has bettered them.

If you want to read a devastating analysis of Coulter's style, check out teh chapter on her in Joe Conason's new book. Al Franken also has a chapter on her in his new book. Ditto, Eric Alterman, I believe.

Asking others to read the critiques of Coulter, by reading her opponents works is like asking people to read about Franken or Michael Moore, by telling people to read Coulter's take on these individuals. These are vehement opponents, so both sides will be filled with exaggerations and ad hominem attacks.

You essentially named names for me. Also, the concerted rhetoric of the Democratic left, with the use of the terms "fascist", "racist", "bigoted", "greedy", etc., when describing the right. The use of campaign advertisements with references to some irrational link between Bush and the lynching death of James Byrd of Texas. Claims that the Republicans want to throw the elderly out on the streets (the cartoon showing Bush pushing an old wheel-chair bound woman down a cliff that represented a Social Security graph). The claims of Democrats that the right wants to poison the environment and throw children out on the streets, I guess to keep the elderly company.

A favorite attack, on Clarence Thomas, by Julianne Malveaux, on PBS, claiming "I hope that his wife feeds him lots of eggs and butter and he dies early like many black men do, of heart disease."

My favorite AnnCoulterism -- actually it's ubiquitous on the right -- is the constant carping about the "liberal media." Of course, you can't turn on the television or radio or open a magazine without encountering her. Further, when her editor died at HarperCollins, well known for its roster of rightwing writers (thanks, Rupert), the publishing company dropped her and she was picked up by Crown, well-known for its liberal roster.

If the media is so controlled by liberal manipulators, why is she such a pervasive presence?

This is simple. She sells. Even the left, who hate the free market, understand that for them to remain "elite", must have income, and her items sell, unlike many of the left's works.

From my arguments, do not make the correlation that I think that she is correct or right on issues. She entertains me. Her ad hominem attacks are enjoyable especially when directed towards certain moronic pundits of the left. She provides little information, only entertainment.

 

[musclebrains]

I guess you didn't fully read that I stated that she has "mastered" a tool of her opponents, meaning that she has bettered them.



Asking others to read the critiques of Coulter, by reading her opponents works is like asking people to read about Franken or Michael Moore, by telling people to read Coulter's take on these individuals. These are vehement opponents, so both sides will be filled with exaggerations and ad hominem attacks.

You essentially named names for me. Also, the concerted rhetoric of the Democratic left, with the use of the terms "fascist", "racist", "bigoted", "greedy", etc., when describing the right. The use of campaign advertisements with references to some irrational link between Bush and the lynching death of James Byrd of Texas. Claims that the Republicans want to throw the elderly out on the streets (the cartoon showing Bush pushing an old wheel-chair bound woman down a cliff that represented a Social Security graph). The claims of Democrats that the right wants to poison the environment and throw children out on the streets, I guess to keep the elderly company.

A favorite attack, on Clarence Thomas, by Julianne Malveaux, on PBS, claiming "I hope that his wife feeds him lots of eggs and butter and he dies early like many black men do, of heart disease."



This is simple. She sells. Even the left, who hate the free market, understand that for them to remain "elite", must have income, and her items sell, unlike many of the left's works.

From my arguments, do not make the correlation that I think that she is correct or right on issues. She entertains me. Her ad hominem attacks are enjoyable especially when directed towards certain moronic pundits of the left. She provides little information, only entertainment.

LOL...She is a ubiquitous presence because she represents the opinions of most editors and publishers, though exaggerated of course. I love the way you go "gray" in your usual black-and-white world when it's convenient. In any case, if wingnut posturing sells and gets constantly aired, what is the basis of the claim that he media is manipulated by liberals?

Sorry, Conason's and Altermans' work is not ad h ominem. Nice try. Franken's borders on it. THe difference is that they deal in the truth, not conspicuous lies. I recommend people read them to get the truth. Contempt before investigation. You rail against labeling and turn right around and use a label you impose to argue against inquiry.

Your examples are not of media pundits, Malveaux excepted. If you're going to drag in the politicians to bolster a claim about the media, why not bring in the members of Mrs. Jones 7th grade civics class at the Dogpatch Christian Academy?