« Wednesday | Main | 06/15/06: Squeaking »
June 15, 2006
Notes from Ferdy - Ann Coulter on the Tonight Show
Bruce hasn't watched television for a long time, because he claims a TV show is much better when you watch it on DVD. As a result, I was totally unprepared when he tuned in to Wednesday evening's appearance by Ann Coulter on The Tonight Show. Great leaping bunnies, people, network television is absolutely chock-full of SPAM! There was everything from a pitch for Viagra to lottery commercials. About the only thing missing was the stranger looking to move money out of Nigeria. How can you stand it?
Anyway, Ann Coulter handled herself well, as always. Host Jay Leno seemed to think it was dangerous to put Ann on the same stage as George Carlin, but she treated him with respect, so he was hardly in a position to launch a partisan attack. The audience was apparently heavy with Coulter fans, because all of the anti-Bush jokes in Leno's monologue fell flat.
Ann expressed surprise that liberals had become unhinged by her attack on activist 9/11 widows but didn't at all seem to mind being called "godless". Leno felt that Ann's message was being obscured by the way the message was delivered. (He particularly noted Ann's use of the word "broads".) Ann maintained that the attention focused on this small part of her book was the death knell for grief politics.
She has a point. Click around on the news sites for a while. Analysts are arguing that Ann's attack is simply a PR gimmick or that she's being too harsh. Nobody, however, is arguing that Ann is fundamentally wrong. Think about it.
Ladies and gentlemen, thanks to the blonde chick to your right, It is now open season on useful idiots.
Respectfully submitted,
Ferdinand T. Cat
# At Thu 1:17 AM | Permalink | Trackback URI | Comments (9) | More Notes from Ferdy | Tags: Ann Coulter conservative George Carlin humor Jay Leno Jersey Girls television useful idiots
Trackback Pings
» Ann Coulter and Conservative Cat from Blue Star Chronicles
I’ve written 3 posts tonight that flew out into cyberspace never to be seen again. Out of frustration I gave up.
But then I read a post by Conservative Cat.[One of the reasons I like trackbacks and blogrolls, I get a heads-up on posts I might not... [Read More]
Tracked on June 15, 2006 2:20 AM
Comments
She's fundamentally wrong and plenty of people have said it.
Let's pretend I'm not a liberal and you're not a conservative for a moment. Those four women have every right to be politically active. That much is clear.
The more fuzzy point is whether or not they deserve respect regarding the death of their husbands. Almost everyone is above insulting a widow, but not Ann.
And I have a feeling you'd be above it to if you weren't so wrapped in being a conservative and rooting for your team.
It was morally wrong. A person that can't see that isn't just conservative, they've lost a little bit of their soul treating politics like a sport.
Posted by: Jon Bell at June 15, 2006 1:54 AM
JonBell, you might have a point except that the argument seems to only apply to people who have something critical to say about a liberal.
Otherwise it's fair game.
I've had ppl tell me my son deserved to die in Iraq because he's a monster for putting on a military uniform. The same people who say those kinds of things are outraged that Ann Coulter says these 4 women have made a living off 'being 9/11 widows'.
The same ppl who say that are the same ppl who get outraged when anyone says Cindy Shenanigans is really out of line because she lost her son.
The descrepancy defies logic.
The only factor that would make it reasonable to find one okay and the other not would be that it is solely political.
Which proves her point.
Posted by: beth at June 15, 2006 2:27 AM
You have to ask why Lorie Auken was put on the stand during the McKinney hearings. She made a mind-boggingly stupid comment about "failure of imagination", and the only reason she was allowed to do it is because she was a widow.
I freely admit that in the past I did have a concern about Ann being too mean-spirited, but that concern has been completely blown away by this latest episode. Once upon a time, I would have said Auken is grief-stricken and should not be expected to behave in a rational manner. That is, in fact, what I said about Cindy Sheehan. I now see I was too easy on Cindy, and I won't make that mistake again.
Posted by: Ferdy
at June 15, 2006 3:23 AM
I have to get this book this weekend and see for myself the awful statements Ann is making. But then again, we all know that liberals can, conservatives can't -- and if we dare, we are abused beyond the end. Pray for a liberal today -- piss them off ;) And pray for Ann, we need more people to stand up for what is right.
Posted by: Jo
at June 15, 2006 4:56 AM
Ferdy says, "I freely admit that in the past I did have a concern about Ann being too mean-spirited..."
Over the past four decades or so I have resided at various points on the political spectrum: Marxist, liberal, Bill Buckley conservative, paleo-conservative, libertarian.
I can tell you there are mean-spirited people in all those places.
BUT, in hindsight, I see that whenever I have gotten comfortable with the mean-spirited people on my side, it was the beginning of a slide into moral and spiritual corruption on my part.
Posted by: Rich at June 15, 2006 8:41 AM
Ann's "attack" is intellectual. Liberals think with emotions. It "does not compute."
My Ann Coulter blog entry (a joke really) is getting a ton of traffic mostly by liberals throwing hand grenades. And I thought they didn't like the military.
[Sorry for the duplicate. The typo was killing me. LOL.]
Posted by: drdisaia
at June 15, 2006 10:39 AM
I made both of my parents really mad at me when I defended Coulter. Karl Marx said that money could effect conciesness, the 9/11 widows (along with Cindy Sheehan) are loaded. Who's to say that their bottom line hasn't changed? Also, Al Franken has called Brit Hume a "scumbag" and attacked him for the suicide of his teenage son. Coulter was at least making a point. Yet congresswoman aren't calling for Franken's books to be banned.
Posted by: Ross Erdmann at June 15, 2006 11:53 AM
if ann coulter wasnt anorexic thin and blonde would anyone pay attention? she represents no one, would fail to be elected as polo club secretary in New Canaan and has a checkered past.
the real crime is that people take her seriously. Ban her books ? (if that is what she insists on having them called) Never! The best cure for illness is the healthy exposure in sunlight. Jay Leno is no intellectual and George Carlin ceased being funny - and perhaps breathing - in 1972 so it wasnt a fair showing on NBC.
I encourage people to read her books (not buy them, maybe steal them or sip a cup of fair trade coffee and scan). They are quick reads, devoid of analysis, full of selective edits, misleading and while occasionally entertaining, never humorous.
Coulter is damaged goods. Unmarried at 40, fixated on married women (the Moms as she calls them), unloved expect by her sycophants, given to drink, jilted by pornographer Bob Guccione (and others) hers is a story of sadness and we should have the pathos she lacks from all of us.
Posted by: Paul Marshall at June 15, 2006 4:23 PM
I just can't help but note how mean-spirited Paul Marshall's comments are - which once again, proves the point Ann was making.
I thought liberals were more tolerant than that. What do you have against women Paul? You make some pretty ugly remarks about women.
Jo - I think that's a good suggestion. I'll pray for a liberal immediately! :)
Posted by: beth at June 15, 2006 6:23 PM
| HTML is not allowed in comments; however, if you put in a raw URL (http://www.somewhere.com/page.html) it will automatically be converted to a link.. Also, it is likely your comment will not appear unless you refresh the page manually after posting it. |

