How does Ann Coulter get taken seriously by the press? She's a demogogue who shamelessly exploits distrust of minorities, and advocates the assassination of politicians from President Clinton to Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens
, and everyone knows it. Yet she still gets on all the leading opinion shows. I mean, I know the press thinks it owes the right wing, but this is ridiculous.
Every denunciation I've seen of her in the traditional media, like the op-ed piece in the Statesman today
by Tom Teepen, includes some liberal "counterpart", and says something along the lines of, "and liberals sometimes say bad stuff too". Um, no. There is no liberal counterpart to Ann Coulter. There is no liberal pundit out there advocating the assassination of some political opponents and seriously accusing others of treason. Ann Coulter stands alone in her reliable egregiousness among the character assassins of today's political world.
Honestly, I haven't been able to get my mind around why the press talks to her after she accused, quite seriously, half the country of treason. I haven't been able to listen to her since she came onto the national scene during the Lewinsky scandal. I've turned off every show she's been on since she, again quite seriously, argued that women's right to vote should be revoked because they vote for Democrats, and wasn't effectively rebutted.
Her latest ridiculous thing is criticizing the widows of 9/11, saying "I've never seen people enjoying their husbands' deaths so much," and according to Media Matters
, when pressed to defend herself on the Today Show:
She criticized the widows for "speak[ing] out using the fact that they're widows" and "using their grief" and "the fact that you lost a husband" to make "a political point while preventing anyone from responding."
But what's that? Ann Ann Ann... Fled the Asylum over at In the Pink Texas
seems to have pointed out pretty well what a load of hypocrisy that was:
From what I can tell, the gist of Coulter’s argument is “buy my book.” Other than that, her objection appears to be that these women have capitalized on their personal misfortune to advocate a certain national course of action. Neither James Brady nor Nancy Reagan were available for comment.
I’d like to say that I combed the archives and found a troubling inconsistency here. I’d like to say that I discovered a column dated September 13, 2001 in which Coulter capitalizes on her personal relationship with 9/11 victim Barbara Olson to lend herself credence in advocating a massive invasion of the Middle East and a global effort of forcibly spreading her brand of Christianity.
What a hypocrit. And although she decries the "Godlessness" of liberals, the church she claims as her own has never heard of her
. But hypocrisy is likely the least of her ethical concerns. Beyond seeming to be a serial plagiarist
, she might also possibly be a felon, having allegedly voted illegally in the wrong precinct
. Even Chris Matthews has turned on her
CHRIS MATTHEWS: Do you find her physically attractive, Tucker?
TUCKER CARLSON: I'm not going to answer that, because the answer, I don't want to hurt anybody's feelings. That's not the point.
CHRIS MATTHEWS: Positively.
RITA COSBY: Don't ask me that question.
CHRIS MATTHEWS: Mike, do you want to weigh in here as an older fellow. Do you find her to be a physically attractive woman?
MIKE BARNICLE: I'm too old to be doing that. I had enough fights in my life.
CHRIS MATTHEWS: OK, Rita, do you find her to be a physically attractive woman?
RITA COSBY: I'll throw it back to you, Chris, do you find her attractive?
CHRIS MATTHEWS: You guys are all afraid to answer. No, I find her—I wouldn't put her—well, she doesn't pass the Chris Matthews test.
Ha! She doesn't pass the Casual Soapbox test either. But I can't think of any conservative pundits who do. Anyway, it's time the media dump her... again. But this time, permanently, and from the talk show circuit too.