English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

2006-07-07 22:50:18 · 11 answers · asked by GoateeBoy 3 in Society & Culture Other - Society & Culture

"These broads are millionaires, lionized on TV and in articles about them, reveling in their status as celebrities and stalked by grief-arazzis. These self-obsessed women seemed genuinely unaware that 9/11 was an attack on our nation and acted as if the terrorist attacks happened only to them. ... I've never seen people enjoying their husbands' deaths so much ... the Democrat ratpack gals endorsed John Kerry for president ... cutting campaign commercials... how do we know their husbands weren't planning to divorce these harpies? Now that their shelf life is dwindling, they'd better hurry up and appear in Playboy." (from Godless, pages 100-112)

2006-07-07 22:58:59 · update #1

11 answers

As I've stated before, Ann Coulter is an opportunist. And in response to a comment above, I have no doubt that Ann Coulter is intelligent. She's highly educated and very successful in her profession. But to call her rash and generalizing statements "concise" and "on the money" is taking a HUGE leap onto a traffic-filled highway. Both thoughtless and dangerous. As are many of Ann Coulter's comments. Now, she seems to have taken an exception to what she seems to perceive as a person using grief to further an agenda. Her argument doesn't make much sense. Grief is a motivating force to some people. I've seen people who lost their loved ones to cancer become advocates for cancer research and if the loved one was a smoker, perhaps a spokesperson against tobacco companies. I've seen people who have lost loved ones to drunk driving accidents become advocates for MADD and for more regulation regarding alcohol. Considering that the husbands of these women were murdered in an act that is directly related to politics, I understand them wanting to get involved. Ann Coulter's only problem with them is that they don't agree with her.

If a woman's husband was murdered and she went on television, said she believed the police did a shabby job with the investigation and didn't bring her husband's killer to justice, would anyone have a problem with that? Especially if she had some evidence supporting her beliefs? Probably not. But certain people seem to have a problem with the Bush Administration being scrutinized in the same way. Ann Coulter seems to have a problem arguing with anyone viewed as sympathetic. She says it isn't fair. Which is understandable. I wouldn't want to argue against field sobriety test with a person who lost someone in an alcohol-related accident and I certainly wouldn't have wanted to argue with Christopher Reeve against stem cell research before he died. But that would be my problem. I'd have to have a pretty damn good argument. Or I could just attack them like Coulter has. But again, Ann Coulter is an opportunist. If these widows had made statements praising the Bush Administration for their hard work against terrorists and thanked them for bringing their husbands' murderers to justice, Ann Coulter would be on television calling them true patriots and posing in photos with them. They'd be waiting in the wings to join her on interviews.

2006-07-09 16:21:53 · answer #1 · answered by Carlito Sway 5 · 0 0

Ann Coulter is brilliant, concise and right on the money.
Would love to meet her and thank her for her "telling it like it IS".
If you disagree with the premise of her recent book that is all the more reason to READ IT, before dis-avowing it.

After reading some on the replies to this question I will add:
Ann Coulter is a Constitutional LAW attorney.
After seeing her totally destroy and leave speechless, Geraldo Rivera and two Clinton Administration cronies all by herself, saying she is "dumb", "ignorant" or anything like that is TRUELY ABSURD. This just shows the senders lack of knowledge on the subject and PROVES many of Ann Coulter's points on the self-rightous, mean-spirited and in many cases ignorant LEFT.

2006-07-08 11:01:26 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

I agree and disagree with some things she says. Actually, I had an argument with my father--he thinks she's 100% conservative, but I fail to really believe that. I think she does a lot of what she does for publicity. There is liberalism hiding somewhere in her, I know it!
She's OK in my book, but not a hero or someone I really care to know much about.

2006-07-08 06:09:13 · answer #3 · answered by royal_78 1 · 0 0

Anti-intellectual shrieking shill sums it up. Unfortunately, obnoxious shrieking appeals to many people who also cannot think clearly, so I doubt she is going anywhere.

2006-07-08 05:56:44 · answer #4 · answered by ? 4 · 0 0

she thinks waaaaaaaaaaaaay to highly of herself and has waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay too much influence for her own good. she's bigoted, obnoxious as hell, and undereducated and makes up for it with bold (if grossly inaccurate) statements and a loud, ugly, blond Irish terrier-like mouth.

2006-07-08 05:55:03 · answer #5 · answered by XsylviaO 2 · 0 0

I think she is a fine example of what it sounds like to hear a fool speak.

2006-07-08 05:53:26 · answer #6 · answered by ? 6 · 0 0

Who?

2006-07-08 05:52:37 · answer #7 · answered by anseru 2 · 0 0

Great funny lady!

2006-07-08 05:57:15 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

I Like Her....She uses logic.

2006-07-08 06:44:01 · answer #9 · answered by tobinmbsc 4 · 0 0

LOVE HER!!!!!!

2006-07-08 05:56:41 · answer #10 · answered by Adyghe Ha'Yapheh-Phiyah 6 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers