I hope you are jocking about Ann Coulter!
She is doing great work in exposing liberals.

I think that Coulter has a point. Just as Sheehan has reveled in her son’s death, so have some of these women. Many are affiliated with Code Pink and other outrageous groups. Burlingame on the other hand, doesn’t self identify by any group affiliations and misuse her status as a widow to promote these groups’ causes. Burlingame speaks for herself on her own beliefs not with the groupthink espoused by Sheehan and the other moonbats.

Rick, I am inclined to agree with you as Coulter’s comportment is concerned. And not on this single issue either. She does seem to feel a need to feed her rabid fans, or else she is the bitter and acerbic supposed “spokesperson” for the right. So either it’s an act or legit, but in either case Coulter, while intelligent, is becoming known as the conservative version of (at least partly) the insufferable spokesperson. Kos for the Socialist left, Art Sippo for Catholicism and Coulter for the right. Or so they label her, but I didn’t nominate her for that role and I’m much prefer a more even-tempered representitive.

Re: Stevie Key’s comment:

Coulter does speak toward many valid issues, however no one is able to get past the angry rhetoric, and this is becoming true of even some of her fellow conservatives. Rick is not the first non-lefty to have shown misgivings about Miss Coulter. Just as “Screw them” Kos give us fodder due to his intolerant rantings, so too Ann for those who disagree with the conservative point of view.

I don’t think you’re quite getting her tact, wit and methodology.

The left typically have plenty of personal anger. Never seen any in Coulter. Seen her angry and incensed about things while simultaneously quite lacking in the internal ugly anger that is so often vomited at her by those that hate her. And you got to love her response: a chuckle.

Coulter has a valid point. You cannot use your victimhood status to silence debate. Now her style of expressing that is the subject of Rick’s post.

May I suggest to Rick, to stick to the issue, and not to the fluff? Coulter’s style of expression is her own business and some may put it to her insensitivity, and some may put it to her passion. Let us not debate something which is fluff in nature and a matter of taste.

Let us debate something that is hard fact, that has significance, and that is a hot burning issue today with all the obfuscatory political correctness that masquerades as “sensitivity and tolerance”.

In any age, at any time, from either side of the political spectrum, it is unconscionable to say that a widow is glad her husband died.

It is hurtful, spiteful and uncalled for. It has nothing whatsoever to do with political correctness nor is it simply “fluff.”

HOW you criticize someone is just as important in a democracy as what you say. That is my beef with Coulter.

She and Ted Rall would make a lovely couple.

Clearly she was referring to the things—finacial windfall and celebrity status—that she referenced just prior to saying that they were “enjoying their husbands death”, not that they were glad that they died. A no insignificant difference.

WORD! There is a place for comon decency even in political debate even as the blogosphere has become the scene of perpetual political roadrage syndrome.

I basically like Ann Coulter’s commentaries but it is a bad kind of like. I like the way she so effectively engages in button-pushing rhetoric against those that push my buttons. That said, she does sometimes go a bit too far and can be embarrassing.

Most of the time I find myself laughing at her columns because face it, many times she IS funny … and correct. Sometimes she goes a bit far though.

I agree. She should apologize for being mean but not for telling them that there comes a point when it is time to move on.

Rick:

OK, you don’t like Coulter, but what proof do you have that she is doing what she is because she is “forced to please her rabid base of red meat conservatives”? Perhaps she actually believes what she says?

And what is your basis for claiming that she has to offer up “ever more outrageous and off the wall statements in order to maintain her position as a “controversial” commentator”? I’ve been (sortof) listening to her since the days of Clinton and I think she’s been rather consistent over that time. And since I don’t see a lot of challengers to her title as the conservative b***h, she’s under no pressure at all to up the ante by becoming even more outrageous.

As for the specifics of what she said, are you upset with Coulter’s general implication that some widows ‘enjoy’ their husband’s deaths? Or is it her specific allegation that these particular women are doing so? I wouldn’t think it was the former that bothered you, for while we’d all like to believe that no widow would enjoy the death of her husband, we know that isn’t the case in real life (case in point: the widow who made herself a widow). As for the latter, since Coulter is the one who did the research on these ladies and what they are doing, why assume she is wrong on this?

Consider this: the widows Coulter takes on sure don’t seem to be hating what they’re doing. Nobody is having to drag them to the microphone. By (my) definition, something that isn’t bothersome has to be either benign or enjoyable… which means that Coulter has a 50-50 chance of being right.

As for the impact on their kids, if the moms are doing something wrong, they need to be called on it. Did you (the royal you) refrain from attacking Clinton during Monica-gate because you didn’t want to hurt Chelsea’s feelings? Or did you (rightly) put the blame for what happened to Chelsea on the insensitive lout she has for a father?

And, finally, I wouldn’t be too sure that some liberal somewhere isn’t taking shots at Debra Burlingame…

By the way, if I contribute a few bucks, will you put in a preview button?

Hmm, one of the commentors over at the Confederate Yankee raises a good point:

True on all accounts, however, the hyperbole is EXACTLY why we’re discussing this matter right now..Would it national or blogosphere news if you had made the argument you just did without resorting to hyperbole…I can see the headlines “confederate yankee makes great point about moral authority”...all over the place. Sometimes it takes hyperbole and shock to get those who normally dont respond to reason to begin on their path….

Posted by: redxiii at June 6, 2006 07:42 PM

Emphasis mine. At least she does get people talking about the issues, that’s for sure. I just hope they are thinking about the ISSUE (a select group of 5 particular 9/11 widows .. not all of the widows) and not about Ann.

Rick – you are putting too many words into what she says – you are not being reasonable. If the widow happens to enjoy a new car bought by the compensation due her husband, would it be wrong to make a factual statement that she actually enjoys driving a new car without accusing the speaker or the widow of insensitivity? Is the speaker saying that she does not grieve her husband? Is the speaker saying that she caused the death of her husband to gain a car? Stop seeing monsters in the clouds. This is the kind of narrow rationality the language-obsessed meaning-challenged cultural leftists use to make argument, IMO.

It is so obvious that Coulter is saying that this groups is reveling in the extra status they have gained as they are using this power to stifle debate – by virtue of the fact that they are direct victims. She is NOT saying that they are enjoying the death of their husbands.

“HOW you criticize someone is just as important in a democracy as what you say. That is my beef with Coulter.”

There is no rule to tell you how to say something – especially not in a democracy. How she says it is a matter of non-scientific taste and perception. Leftists obsessed with language will see dark clouds and insults. Those who wish to deal with meaning and content will see a valid issue expressed in an unusual way. Of course you are welcome to express your interpretation on this. But IMO, that takes away from the content.

No, in a democracy, it is not the case that “how you say it is as important as what you say”. That may be true in Southern Waziristan. But certainly not in a mature, educated, open and liberal democracy – where meaning and content trumps style and protocol.

Yes, I will contribute for a Preview button and a scroll bar too. For some reason, the scroll bar does not appear on my page. That is, it is hidden under the maroon right bar, and cannot be accessed.

Came back to add a few thoughts and found them (plus a few) stated better than I could in 12 and 14. Some good points in 11 and 13 too, but can’t agree with the apology thing.

Rick, been reading you for a while and love your writing. I have a question I’ve thought of asking that I’ll ask now: what the heck happened to your brother?

There seems to be a perception that conservatives have to talk with reason and civility. And while I agree with that in principle, conservatives took the moral highground in the 70’s and 80’s with little to show for it. At while at the same time they were accused with impunity by the left and media to be social security slashers, senior citizen and child gougers, racists, etc., etc. Well reasoned arguments held little sway. The old axiom, you can’t argue with irrational people.

The conservatives finally figured out you gotta fight fire with fire, and took off the gloves with great success. The media remains strongly entrenched with the left and perhaps is getting worse. If you don’t believe, name a broadcaster who you would consider “conservative” on any of the major networks. In the 04 election, there were a host of anti-Bush books and critics, all of whom were guaranteed an eager audience on the morning shows. Pro-Bush stuff was relegated to Fox, which is still referred as the great anti-liberal bane.

So what is Coulter is the dragon-woman and the flamethrower. For heavan’s sake there is a multitude of whackier ones on the left. As dumb as the left thinks we are, I mean we know the diff when Ann is rolling in the frags grenades for effect. And frankly, in spite of her take no prisoners style, she’s often not that far off mark. And it’s delightful to see the lefties pulling out their hair out and about to absolutely go into hysteria when she run’s a few magazines of rhetorical tracers into their sensitive litlle ego’s. They can dish it out, but can’t take it. I note she hasn’t been invited back on to Maher’s show after tap dancing on his head and the his atheist-left audience.

So lighten up, dudes and ladies, and let the girl have some fun.

Whether you like it or not, (and I love it), She tells it the way she sees it and doesn’t pander to anyone. Gosh imagine if more people were like that instead of always worrying about who will be offended. We are so worried about making someone feel bad in this country we, and that means both right and left, do not stand by our convictions. I respect people more when I know where they are coming from like their opinion or not.

Hey Rick,

I just watched the video at Hot Air. The point seemed well made to me, what’s the beef?

Rick—I’m with you 100%. Anyone who thinks that her words have a chance of persuading those who disagree with her to change their minds lacks an understanding of human nature. Her meanness has exactly the opposite effect.

Kind of thought this would be the reaction to your piece. Let’s agree to disagree.

Coulter is most likely refering to the group of 9-11 family members that turned grief into greed within 30 days of 9-11. You should have saw and heard the bunch that didn’t think 8-10 million dollars was enough when we really didn’t owe them a thin dime. I watched them during the 9-11 hearings and they are a bunch of self serving, point the camera at me bitches, just like Sheehan, but a few are much better looking than the witch.

Jsut remember, these widows were given millions of tax payers dollars as compensation and yet still spew their venom at the same administration that awarded them.

Ask the Murray Federal Building or the Waco survivors or even the families of those who were lost at Pearl Harbor where their multi-million dollar compensation checks are coming

If this is democracy then I need to tear up my civics books

#21 has identified the group I think she had in mind. I forget how many (possibly 4-6) that formed a group that I referred to as the Weepy Widows. I actually thought I was being very respectful considering their behavior. It was a first in my lifetime to refer to a widow this way. This small group of politicos formed and decided they would speak for the nation. They demanded until they got the 9/11 Omission Camera Hounds. Then they had TV appearance after appearance…..they were stars. Never have I seen anything like it, until Sheehan. You have to compare this group to Sheehan.

Their only goal was to attack the White House. That’s it. They appeared on Hardball after every sensational MSM tibit. This group has to be seperated from all other victims. They as a group, no more spoke for the widows than Sheehan speaks for the military families.

I laugh at Coulter but she does go over the top. Unless someone had followed that small group of widows, I can understand why you would be offended. Fact is they lost the automatic respect that I would have accorded them.

Coulter On Anti-Bush 9/11 Widows (Video)

Click to Download (.wmv) If you haven’t heard by now, Ann Coulter appeared on this morning’s Today Show to promote her new book Godless and, as could be expected, it wasn’t without controversy. Matt Lauer confronted Coulter about a…

Haha…well, I guess you can’t be right about everything. You still wallow a bit in the ultra liberal plantation….but we forgive you…

Your still reasonable, which is a lot more than can be said about most….

Rick,
I normaly agree with you but I think you just had your
‘Dixie Chick’ moment.

After reading what Ann Coulter said, her point was to personally attack the widows. She did not raise a point of substance. She said their points are wrong because they have impure motives, pure ad hominem argument. What Coulter’s motives are, I can’t imagine. From reading the comments, I understand that Coulter is funny; perhaps this was supposed to be comedy? I agree with the post above, these statements by Ann Coulter were offensive and insulting.

Ann Coulter Trashes 9/11 Widows on Today Show (Video)

Ann Coulter has managed, once again, to inflame Left and Right alike with comments she made on the “Today” show with Matt Lauer.
Here’s a transcript of the most controversial part:

LAUER: On the 9-11 widows, an in particular a gro…

Rick- I know that you know this but you’re a very clear thinker. It’s appreciated.

My friends:

I’m sorry, I don’t buy into the parsing exercise some of you are using to try and excuse what Coulter said. I hope I made it clear that the point she was trying to make about the fallacy of grieving relatives having some kind of moral authority that immunizes them from criticism is valid.

But to those who don’t think that the way you say something impacts the legitimacy of what you are saying, I have to say I think you’re wrong.

And as for evidence that Coulter has somehow gotten out of control recently, I can recall when Coulter was considered a leading intellectual in the conservative movement. Her remarks the other day to Matt Lauer didn’t take much thought and by no means can be considered representing a mainstream conservative point of view.

In short, I think there are boundaries that shouldn’t be crossed regardless of the provocation or issue. Coulter has crossed it.

Rick,

That’s exactly her point crossing boundaries – watch the video again – she acknowledged crossing the boundaries because the widows time and time again crossed it while using their tax payer incomes and status a war widows has cover to nto garner any criticism. You never post anything these “widow” millionaires have said but Anne chronicles their vile march into politics quite accurately – that’s why she’s ever been sued – love her or hate her – she’s a relentless researcher

Face facts – Coulter said it because it was true and it was right to do

When Ann calls someone names she should not be excused, but when you call her names you should?

Rick,

“Thou doth protest too much, methinks”. In my opinion Coulter does not spew the hatred and is not equivalent to say a Rosie O’Donnell or Rhandi Rhodes who have larger forums. And honestly, I’m a bit tired of seeing the Sheehans and “911 Widows” propogandarizing (word?) for the most part unchallenged. Of course we all grieve with them- but when you turn that grief into “absolute unqeustionable moral authority” then your grief not into a moral crusade but a self-serving politico. And being a self-serving politico is fine- just don’t tell me I can’t challenge and expose you.

Graet blog the rest of the time.

Sorry for the spelling- it’s a tad early on the right coast

[...] Rick Moran over at Right Wing Nut House smacks Ann Coulter for her behavior yesterday on the Today Show. Specifically addressing the remarks that have gotten a lot of attention in the blogosphere regarding the 9-11 widows. I won't reprint the remarks here, they are all over the blogosphere. Moran says this: There are ways to criticize the widows without saying something so wrong, so hurtful. And what do you think their children would think if they heard Coulter’s remarks? Are they to be in the line of Coulter’s wildly off target fire as well? [...]

Rick #30. Precisely. It’s part of the inherent problem in adopting a shock-jock persona (others include Stern and Madonna). You must keep pushing the envelope to garner attention, inevitably leading to more and more egregious transgressions of social norms. Coulter had a valid point to make; she crossed the line in making it. But I suspect in Ann’s world that there’s no such thing as bad press.

Ann Coulter, a “shallow, bitter bitch of a woman”

For a long time, I’ve felt that of the most visible right-wing bloggers, Rick Moran of the ill-named blog Right WIng Nut House spoke with the most sincere, even admirable voice. (Everything’s relative.) I almost always disagree with him, but…

It’s easy to find the info this morning. I believe she is talking about the Jersey Girls with ringleader Kristen Breitweiser.

I am usually fairly moderate except when we speak about some of these moonbats and the MSM. Their aim is always the same. Destroy the country and in particular attack the WH and military. This group is no different. They did NOT conduct themselves as widows. So you say how does a widow conduct themselves? That we can not attack back because of their statis?

That is precisely Coulter’s point. They put an old man that that served in the military out as their mouthpiece. He says on TV that our guys “killed in cold blood”. How do you ignore that fool? They send a CIA husband out to call the President a liar but you can NOT answer the lies because he can hide behind CIA. They sent these Jersey Black Widows and they sat on my TV almost everyday…...forever…..trashing the WH. They appeared as TV stars of our foreign policy. We have to sit with our mouths shut BECAUSE they are WIDOWS. Another example was their own grieving mom that was supposed to have the “absolute moral authority” to speak for all of us. This is what you wrote (Rick) about Sheehan on 9/16/05.

Cindy Sheehan is a living photoshop image. Set her down anywhere on the planet, put a microphone within 10 feet of her, and out of her mouth will spew the counterintuitive, the illogical, and the jaw dropping rants of a half-crazed, drooling dervish; a maddening combination of weepy radicalism and angry ideologue.

And..Should we pity her loss? Yes, but for how much longer? When does her radicalism negate whatever sacrifice she has given in the effort to defeat Islamism, that other radical ideology whose rhetoric about the west and America is so similar that it could have been born of the same mother’s tongue?

Now this is much milder than Coulter but at some point someone has to recognize that we are forced to battle “victims” because the other side sets it up that way. Look at the current military/MSM Iraq fiasco. Are we suppose to take the word of media and Murtha that our boys are killers, just because they have finally produced women and children victims?

I hate having to defend Coulter because I do not like the “ragheads, etc”. I quit reading her a while back because of it. But on this one point, she does shine some light on something that is very ugly. This time the ugly turned out to be 4 widows with a political ringleader and the full MSM in tow.

I really am kind of puzzled.

I thought I made it very clear that there are ways to criticize these women without accusing them of such slanderous calumny. In fact, everyone who has criticized the “Jersey Girls” in the comments has done an infintitely better job of it than Coulter did.

Coulter should be recognized for what she is – a shameless dealer in hate speech. She has crossed the line between making fun of someone (something she used to do so riotiously well) and being hateful and hurtful. It is a fine line and she seems to have abandoned herself to the latter in order to sell books and maintain her image as a “controversial” commentator.

Rick,
Coulter’s black humor may be shrill and open to ridicule, that is how she got Matt to ask her questions about it. Just like she got them from Katie, the Eva Braun of morning TV. Ann isn’t the problem, the Matt Laures’ that are shocked that the motives of these widows could be challenged is. Don’t be naive, Haditha coverage, like the 9/11 widows, is to deflect attention from the real perpetrators of Haditha & 9/11, to attack the Bush Administration.

I think this post (and several others relating to the same topic) is illustrative of what I see is generally the largest difference between blogs on the right and left. As with Rick’s blog, most blogs on the right are not shy of taking our leaders, writers and speakers who represent the Right to task when they individually or collectively “step on their d*cks.”

When was the last time you saw one of Ted Kennedy’s incoherent rants brought to task by Kos kids or readers over at DU? Or Pelosi? Or Dean? Or Durbin?

That is why I am a person of the right – and proud of it. Not proud of comments like those supposedly representing the right like Ann Coulter. But proud of a segment of our community that take’s those comments and the commentors to task.

Keep up the good work, Rick. Keep fighting the good fight – not the fight for any particular ideology but a fight for what is and should be right.

you’re absolutely right. incredibly insensitive, and if she wants to go around saying such things – why surely she leaves the door open for people to say, ‘ah well in that case the entire Bush administration is thoroughly enjoying the death of all those people..’

When was the last time you saw one of Ted Kennedy’s incoherent rants brought to task by Kos kids or readers over at DU? Or Pelosi? Or Dean? Or Durbin?

Fair enough, SShiell. When somebody on the left behaves as universally offensively as Ms. Coulter did, I, for one, will be all over it.

Hell, I’ve attacked fellow Dems for far less, so you can certainly count on me.

Ted Rall makes Coulter look like a boy scout – plus he draws savage cartoons the likes of which used to be seen only in public restroom toilets.

And I guess every commenter who refers to Bush and Republicans as “Hitler” and Nazis” is okay in your book?

There isn’t enough time in the day to criticize that number of pople.

Methinks thou doth project too much jealousy, Moran. What you consider ‘idiocies’ are just the opposite. Apparently, even right wingers (Rinos) have a hard time actually hearing the truth. While this country is disintegrating before our eyes you have to attack a true patriot. Get ready for HRC’s Brave New World—you are helping to make that real!
I don’t agree with any conservative on every issue but Ann leaves her envious detractors in the dust as she speaks much truth, without apology. We need more conservatives like her out there speaking truth to idiots.

Hey, Rick. Just think. If Kerensky had had Ms. Coulter at his side, we here today might never have heard of Lenin, Stalin. Thanks for the post. Enjoyed it and the comments that flowed from it, and I’m sending (more) $$. Nice work.

Obviously you don’t understand the argument that she’s trying to make, so I’ll try to use small words to explain it to you.
Democrats are using people who are obvious victims (9/11 widows, Cindy Sheehan, etc) to make their arguments for them, rather than making them with logic and intelligence. These people are people that those of us who disagree with them look like asses for attacking their ideas because the mainstream media and Dimwitocrats love to point out that we’re ‘attacking widows’ or ‘attacking someone who just lost their son in a war’ rather than attacking their stupid statements and positions.
Anne Coulter just has the intestinal fortitude to SAY the things that others merely think. Or to think the things that others who are so brainwashed as to not to allow themselves to think don’t.

I’ll forgive your nauseating condenscension but only because it’s apparent you are too ignorant to have read the entire post.

For the last time…there are other ways to skewer these moonbat ladies than accusing them of “enjoying” the fact that their husbands are dead. What part of that don’t you understand?

I was trying to count syllables there and I think I used a couple of words that had more than two so I hope I made it sufficiently clear…

hey your part of the fifth column and a liberal infiltrater.ann coulters not about politics but about truth.yes it would be sweet of her to say drippy things about these women whose husbands died.lets face it not every person that suffers tragity is jesus christ ok.for instance when a person sues someone or complains about someone or something else making their life miserable i.e. bush ,the war, ann coulter there is usually something else wrong with these people. depresion,finances , being an idiot.for instance if i sued you for writing this article because you made my life miserable that would be like saying life would be a better place if you didnt give your opinion but thats not fair to you .is it.besides ive heard of ann coulter i aint never heard of you though.what are you out there doing for the truth you big baby.you liberals whine too much

Mr. Wolverine:

Congratulations on perhaps the most incoherent, ignorant, worst grammatical comment ever left on this site.

I’d give you a prize but I’m fresh out of dogsh*t.

Rick, as a liberal, I commend you for taking Coulter to task. I must point out, though, that many (most?) of your commenters are batshit insane.

hey rick you just got done saying coulter was insulting and insensitive to people. you are a very insulting person yourself.arnt you little man.and if you need dog*hit just puke up your breakfast.

Rick: Not being a widow myself, I can only guess at what goes through the minds of those who are. Having said that, I don’t think it’s inconceivable that a widow might very well enjoy aspects of her husband having died. She hooks up with someone who’s better in bed. She cashes the huge insurance check and ‘enjoys’ (yes, pun intended) a richer lifestyle than what she had before.

Or, just to hypothesize a bit, she finds herself adopted by those sharing a certain political viewpoint and ‘enjoys’ being on the Today Show, invited to all sorts of political events and being treated as a celebrity instead of the bland suburban housewife she once was.

This isn’t to say that such a person wouldn’t give everything back to have her husband alive… it is just that not every widow finds every aspect of the circumstances of her widowhood terribly distressing. And, by my definition, one enjoys what one doesn’t dislike.

So is it wrong for Coulter to have said out loud what a lot of people think?

Ann Coulter can say and do as she sees fit. The uber left will hate it, the left will bray against it, forget the MSM, conservatives will wince; uber rights will hooray her; me, a traditionalist will say: go girl!!

You can’t always pick “good” targets,you gotta use what you have and the truth must also be said, whether we like it or not. Those who yell the loudest on our side need to visit KOS and/or read his comment section. What Ann is doing is sooooooo nice compared to that.

After all, I’ve watch tons of people fall in love with their 15 minutes of fame ala Sheehan. Once they’ve been bit they can’t give it up, no matter how disgusting they behave.

I may disagree with Ann but I will defend her right to say what she wants…she needs exactly the “freedom” the MSM and leftists demand from us but castigate us for.

Rick,

Excellent post, unfortunately you are wrong about the major point of it. She does speak for conservatives, or rather for republicans who call themselves conservatives. As obvious as the points you made were look at the comments you got back. Ann Coulter is not a fringe republican.

“Ted Rall makes Coulter look like a boy scout ”

Nice try Rick. But the fact is that Coulter and Rall are two peas on the opposite side of the same pod.

The relevant differences are:

Rall is a very minor figure on the left, whereas Coulter is a RW superstar. That tells you something about the RW. Y’all get together and feed her millions of dollars to do her number, whereas Rall labors on in obscurity.

And of course, it isnt just Coulter on the right. You got Savage, Ingrahma, Limbaugh, and jeez, just countless number of people who use this aggressive, over-the-top disgusting rhetoric as their shtick. And MANY of them make millions of bucks from this gig. Besides Rall, there really arent that many on the left who are anywhere near that level of slime, and the ones that are certainly dont get rewarded for it the way the right feeds and nurtures its crazys.

Even people like you, who seem to spend half their time trying to sound reasonable, routinely spend the other half of their time sounding like little Coulter-wannabes.

I appreciate that you are willing to take a stand against her truly revolting comments, but I do wonder if it doesnt come from a certain sense of embarrasment – seeing in her a pure version of your own dark side.

Rick’s point is made very well by this thread. Annie is over-the-top entertainer, who’s sole purpose is to pander to the most extreme members of the Republican party. That segment of the party (90% of which the above respondents fit into) eat up anything and everything that Annie pens.

Mainstream America (Republcian or Democrat) is offended by the extreme comments made by Annie. It’s unfortunate that this type of behaviour is welcomed by members of either party. Annie’s not attacking a pol that is running for office, she’s criticizing a group of women who lost their spouses in one of this countries greatest travesties.

[...] Conservative bloggers denouncing her include Captain Ed, Allahpundit, Don Surber, Rick Moran, the Political Pit Bull, AJ Strata, etc.. [...]

Coulter Fall Out

For decades the left has gotten away with diabolical tactics of singling out and exploiting individuals who they claim represent an entire cause – from Roe v. Wade, to Jimmy Carter, to Jesse Jackson, to the Dixie Chicks, Cindy Sheehan, Jane Fonda to the 911 Widows – and no coincidence that these individuals enjoy the spotlight, profit from the suffering of others.

I heard the quotes from the 911 widows and Ann Coulter is right. So was Zell Miller when he confronted Chris Matthews. There is sweet-sounding lies are the most seductive and damnable of all.

“I feel your pain.”

“It’s for the common good.”

“It’s for the children.”

Sorry, you can’t negotiate with scorpions.

Ann’s a straight-talker who dares say what should have been said many, many years ago in the public square as smooth-talkers seduced sleepy Americans out of their heritage, and revised our history to suit their personal agendas, and sell out America to America’s enemies around the world.

Crooks and Liars? That would be Joe Wilson.

Ann is right about him and his fellow traitors within, as well.

You can give lessons in decorum when the US troops risking their lives in Iraq and Afghanistan for the rest of the free world don’t have to PAY to get the truth out to their families back home, never mind to the cozy French politicians and BBC propagandists who shield their neighbors from reality as the barbarians rewrite current EU reality to push their sharia slavery.

She’s as much your spokesman as you seem to think Michael Moore speaks for the left. Which is to say, not at all. But, then again, those of us who are center and left didn’t start this fingerpointing and utter tomfoolery that is dividing the nation. Those with an agenda and an axe to grind on the right began this war. Now that your generalisimma is blowing up in your faces, you’re backing away with all the haste of vampires running from the sunrise. She’s YOUR creation, so learn to deal with her. The rest of us have had to swat her off like a shitfly for years. Time for the right wing to take its whiny two-year-old with the stinky diapers someplace private and clean her up so the rest of us adults can live our lives in peace.

Do you wonder why those of us who you have excoriated as being un-American because we DARED to disagree about the war, because we recognized the utter ridiculousness of certain right-wing positions (on such things that are NO business of government or religions as marriage, child-raising, and medical decisions, and so many others) are now chortling with glee as Ms Cunning Stunt’s fervid and noxious spew is now backsplashing on you?

Shouldn’t be a mystery. Whenever you moralize, bloviate, and support such a boorish person, and use her to point your fingers at everybody who doesn’t live their lives the way you think we ought to, you point three fingers back at yourselves. And she’s just the middle finger of your overweening hatred of free, patriotic Americans who are supposed to be enjoying a free society, despite your side’s best efforts to enslave us all in thrall to some sort of feverish, ugly vision of America that never was.

Our country is bigger than you righties and your ugly spoor, thankfully. It’s about time to move back to the center of things and ENJOY building our country back into a great one. But first we have to remove the rightwing defilers of freedom and decency. Starting with Ms Cunning Stunts, and moving on down the line of Republican purveyors of greed and corruption.

Of course I expect to be censored here. That’s what you righties do when you don’t like something you hear from the reality-based community. It’s okay though… that’s your right to dig your head into the sand. Just remember what you leave sticking out when you do that…

Coulter’s popular in large measure because she dares to say what the rest of the right believes but is too polite or too scared to say. She’s the id of conservatives. Bush better send her to Gitmo before the country sees the black heart of the modern conservative movement.

Hey, Rick –
I’m basically a “liberal” or “libertarian” I suppose who somehow found my way to your blog but I do want to congratulate you. I believe there is too much tendancy on both the right and left to demonize other Americans simply because they vote Repub or Democrat. What is that? I’m a Registered dem but I’ve voted for decent repubs and I just don’t understand where all this seething animosity for each side is coming from. If we can’t agree to disagree on some issues and move on with more important things than our country really is lost.

Coulter really is a provacatuer with no real ideological arguments to make. Clearly 9/11 widows have and deserve some moral authority in this country – no matter whether they lean left or right – and perhaps it’s their authority that galls her most. She feels that she must skewer any sacred cows that might possibly contradict her senseless rants.

For other conservatives to say that this “steps over the line” for one states the obvious (Coulter helps no one with her rants except for the liberals she detests, who benefit when the far-right proves itself, as in this case, to be as crazy as bin Laden). But for another, it is nice to see that at least some conservatives have sense enough to know that this kind of nonesense hurts their own point of view as much as it does civil discourse. It makes those on the left think there are at least a few people out there who it would be worth having a discussion.

“And the networks who use Coulter as some kind of “Spokesman” for the right should be told in no uncertain terms by as many of us as possible that she doesn’t speak for any conservatives that we want to be associated with.”

why did she get invited to the Conservative Political Action Committee conference, where she made her “ragheads talk tough…” remark to uprorious applause?

you may not support her any longer, and i congratulate you if you do, but you shouldnt pretend mainstream conservativism has rejected her, because they havent.

Another Ann Coulter Controversy

Recapped. I agree with Rick Moran here: She has descended into a black hole of necessity from which there is no escape; where she is forced to please her rabid base of red meat conservatives usually by going beyond the…

I applaud both Rick, and the other conservatives who have their eyes open and are willing to look at the vitriol Coulter spews without partisan glasses. I cannot fathom how some people can defend her most recent actions, and frankly the fact that conservatives still support her makes me I’m ashamed to call myself one.

Rick says: “For the last time…there are other ways to skewer these moonbat ladies than accusing them of “enjoying” the fact that their husbands are dead. What part of that don’t you understand?”

Rick, Coulter is CLEARLY saying that these widows are enjoying their “victimhood status” by abusing that to stifle debate. There is NO WAY you can arrive at your statement from the facts. Your gripe is simply with her rhetorical style – and what you say is MISLEADING.

This said, let me incidentally add that I am not a Coulter fan, and her comments about evolution and god reeks of ignorance of the methodology of science and the process of arriving at knowledge – so central for a functioning democracy.

the 911 widows have legitimate concerns with how the government is being run. you’re deluded if you think no mistakes were made in the run up to 911, and you’re deluded if you think those mistakes arent still being made (the 911 commission’s recommendations still havent been implemented 5 years later). the only way to push for reform is to criticize those who are running bad policy. thats not partisanship. partisanship is when you defend someone no matter what they do.

Well Rick, I think the feedback to your post pretty much sums up the ‘right.’

I’d like to give credibility to those on the right who say that their side doesn’t rely on espousing hate, but you post about keeping a civil discourse and your respondents crap all over you and praise the hate speech.

I’d like to give credibility to those on the right who say that their side uses logical arguments to come to their conclusions, but you post that Coulter’s arguments are illogical and the conclusions can instead be reached by using logic and your respondents crap all over your argument in praise of the illogical Coulter ones.

I’d like to give credibility to those on the right who say that their side ‘takes their leaders to task,’ but you post about a mistake by one of your leaders (i.e. Coulter) and your respondents get visibly upset at in their vehement support of her clearly indefensible position.

Whenever you want to be on the defensible, logical, responsible side, you just come on over buddy. We accept all kinds regardless of sex/race/orientation/religion – just as long as they can think.

Because unlike you guys, when one on our side makes a good point, no matter how different from our belief it may be, we will take it into consideration and judge it based on merit, not on what the talking point of the hour is

Hello everyone! This is my first time visiting this blog, and I have to say I feel sick to my stomach. I am an old school conservative and all I see here are partisans. Lefty, righty if you think in these terms you are helping to destroy our country. The future of the U.S.A. is not a sport and should not be treated as such.

Rick, this false equivalence thing is lame. When did Dean, or Kennedy, Pelosi, or Durbin, say anything as hate-filled as Coulter? Durbin, I surmise, got on your list because of that one time he said that torturing people in prisons with no access to lawyers and no charges brought was reminiscent of Nazi Germany. I’m darned if I see why it’s offensive to say that torture and dungeons are not American traditions. And Durbin was doing his job as a Senator—telling the public why he objected and they should object to policies he disagreed with. Coulter, in contrast, insults grieving widows so she can sell books.

And it’s not as though this is a one-off for Coulter (unlike that one expression of sheer disgust and horror by Durbin). Crack open her last 3 best-sellers. You’re only now noticing that Coulter is beyond the pale? How exactly did you miss it when she called all liberals, in all seriousness, “Traitors!”? I mean, it was only the title of her book, only in bookstore windows across America. She specifically indicted, by name, folk singers, politicians, and many others who have spent their lives trying to help people. Ex-military, lives in public service, whatever, they disagreed with Coulter, so they should be executed. An entire book of this crap. So tell me, what has Pelosi (or Kennedy, or Dean) said that compares to a whole book of hatespew? Not things you disagree with, things that demonize her enemies and call for their death? When?

And by the way, let’s not pretend Coulter’s alone. Not only is she joined in these sorts of obscene, vicious, lying rants by Limbaugh, Hannity, and others, but this comment thread shows that she has countless devotees among your fellow conservatives, including many of your readers. So many, that her books keep selling like hotcakes. So if you have finally noticed that Coulter might just be a tad uncivil, then maybe you need to take a good, hard look in the mirror and ask why you two share so many fans. Instead of consoling yourself with the false reflection that the other side does it too.

“she’s a relentless researcher”

I am conservative but not a supporter and not blind – that has to be the most rediculous statement ever.

Just linked to your site from C&L.

Yes, I am liberal, and I rarely pay attention to Coulter, although she always pisses me off whenever she opens her mouth. In the many years I have heard her crap, I have never, ever sent her an email…..she doesn’t deserve the recognition….until yesterday, after I saw her on the Today show. That was just too much, over the top.
Thanks for your input, Rick. I respect people who disagree with me, unless they use the type of rhetoric Coulter does.

Besides, I’m glad I heard a word I haven’t heard in a long time….”lout!” I’m trying to build up my vocabulary of words to use when confronting nut cases like Coulter, without using the standard 4 letter words!

Yes, Ann Coulter is indeed a “conservative lout!”

Judging from the comments here, I think the collective sum of IQ’s hovers around a Tallahassee summer day.

How come you folks don’t fault all those 9/11 cheerleaders when they stump for the failed Bush policies?

Coulter and the rest of the “hate America” crowd so admired here only exemplify the ignorance prevalent in the red states. No wonder the Bush polls are so low.

try and name one time when those dem. figures used language as abrasive and offensive as coulter. the reason no one on the left blogs ever says anything about the dem. leaders is that they never say anything like the filth coulter spews.

For the record, Zel Miller wasn’t right when he attacked Chris Matthews, he misheard the question. I find it laughable that one would compare Ann’s “rightness” to an incident, a filmed incident, that was clearly and unquestionably wrong.

“When was the last time you saw one of Ted Kennedy’s incoherent rants brought to task by Kos kids or readers over at DU? Or Pelosi? Or Dean? Or Durbin?

I think I hear crickets chirping…”

Rick, just out of curiosity, when was the last time Kennedy, in one of his “incoherent rants,” called for the forced conversion of the followers of an orthodox religion, or complained about their hygiene, or stated routinely that conservatives in this country are traitors, or that a Supreme Court justice should be assassinated? Yeah, I think I hear those crickets chirping as well…

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

Uh, yes he did. He printed the paragraph that Lauer read. And his point was well-made? The “Doctrine of Infallibility?” Who made that up? Those women get to speak just like you or I or Coulter. They never said nobody else can’t speak. And the cool new hip and smart sounding-to-some “Doctrine of Infallibility,” well, it honestly seems more fitting to a statment like “You’re either for us, or against us,” doesn’t it?

And SSheil didn’t put it nicely, IMO, she or he put it strawman-ly. Please show me one example of Ted Kennedy or Nancy Pelosi or Howard Dean or Dick Durbin saying something close to the odiousness of this. Even close. And that’s a hallmark of Conservatives? I missed the taking to task of Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, Bill O’Reilly, Sean Hannity, Tom DeLay, Inhofe (just yesterday) etc., etc. etc.

Please attend your own crickets. That simply doesn’t stand.

“When was the last time you saw one of Ted Kennedy’s incoherent rants brought to task by Kos kids or readers over at DU? Or Pelosi? Or Dean? Or Durbin?

I think I hear crickets chirping…”

See, it’s reality-challenged idiocies like the above that make me think conservatives really do have a maximum IQ. Here’s the point: liberals do not call for their opponents’ death; conservatives do. It is not true that conservatives are all evil, but it is true that nearly all evil people are conservative.

Ann Coulter has a valid point?! How did the widows silence anyone? Coulter published her attack on them in her book and then went on the TOday Show and Tucker Carlson attacking teh widows. How was she sielnced? Since when did Cindy Sheehan silence anyone? this is more right-wing nutia is in which hte right wing aways attacks those it disagrees with by claiming—boo-hoo—that the right wings are the victims. how runs Faux News? CNN? The right-wing runs the media, as Coulter herself as admitted on Faux News (“We have hte media. We have hte media.”). Yet all you supporters of Coulter can say is that she has a valid point about being a victim of women whose husbands were killed by terrorists. Enjoy your hatred of American victims of terrorism who dare speak up about the Bush terrifing incompetence and the numerous ways he has made us less secure after 9/11.

Dejah Thoris:

Tars Tarkas is out today so I’ll answer your screed…

Can’t say much about your knowledge of history – pretty damn selective if you ask me.

And why is the default position of people who come here and insult me that I will automatically delete their comment?

You look pretty idiotic now, don’t you? Or at least more idiotic than you did by simply mouthing a bunch of idiocies about the right.

Lefty here. I was going to congratulate you because you’re the first conservative I’ve seen who disavows Coulter. And you’re correct that here in the blue states, we often fail to distance ourselves from the crazier comments by Michael Moore or Hillary Clinton. The right has no monopoly on hate speech.
What the right has is a monopoly on POWER. And when people in power allow bigots and lunatics to speak on their behalf, without denouncing them, that’s irresponsible at best. At worst it’s speaking through a proxy.

the lady is dead inside i saw flies buzzing around her on the today show

I’m a conservative guy and I am sickened by comments like that. To slander widows of our nation’s largest catastrophe because they don’t have the same political views as you is sick. I don’t care if I believe in some of her views or not, she is a hatemonger. She is no different than