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

Her book, calling liberalism godless and suggesting that the widows of 911 who disagree with her and the president are “witches” who are “enjoying their husband’s death,” is outrageous and untrue. How can she attack the women who lost their husbands on 9/11 and still call herself a “patriot”?

2006-12-11 07:51:59 · 17 answers · asked by Sean 4 in Politics & Government Politics

17 answers

I do not know. I accept most republican pundits, for they have just as much right to speak as liberals ones.

However, I have no respect for that woman. With all she has said, and she's said a lot, she has proved herself as a despicable excuse for a human being. I do not like her, and a certainly have no respect for her after when she's said about the 9/11 widows, who have each lost so much.

I don't care about her liberal bashing, I can take that. What I can't stand is her hate-filled remarks. I didn't loose anybody on 9/11, but I still will never forgive her for what she said.

2006-12-11 08:05:39 · answer #1 · answered by amg503 7 · 4 0

You didn't even quote the worst of what she said. She urged the "witches" to quickly go out and pose for Playboy before their brief celebrity disappears. And she said that we shouldn't pay special attention to them because who is to say that their husbands weren't about to divorce them just before 911. On Hannity and Colmes, Alan pinned her down and asked her outright, "Are you saying that if these women had the choice of having their husbands back or keeping their fame and money, that they would rather keep the fame and money?" Her reply: "Yes, I think they would."

So let's get this straight. She isn't tacky and hypocritical; she is vile and hateful.

Of course she has the right to her opinions. And we have the right to criticize her opinions and the way she expresses them.

She actually has half a point here in that victims do not always possess special insight or understanding that others don't. And they aren't above criticism. But to be as vicious as this woman is unconscionable. And conservatives who let her represent them without criticism got what they deserved on election day. Republicans are making a mistake by letting the Ann Coulters and Michael Savages and Bill O'Reillys and Rush Limbaughs be their voice to the world. They persuade no one. They only fan the flames of the diehard base.

One more thing that is seldom mentioned: her looks. It's interesting that she suggested the widows pose for Playboy since her sometime boyfriend was Robert Charles Guccione Jr., son of Bob Guccione, the founder and publisher of Penthouse. It's clear that she gets a lot of mileage out of what some consider her good looks. If she was a chunky, 5' 3" brunette with thick glasses, do you really think Fox would have her on nearly as often to spew her venom? I seriously doubt it.

2006-12-11 09:08:46 · answer #2 · answered by ktd_73 4 · 4 0

Jealousy, organic and straightforward. Liberalism delivers lies and straightforward solutions to each thing (Conservatives are undesirable and basically throw wealthy peoples' money at each thing!). Ann Coulter does not enable this to circulate unchallenged, it is the only way those terrible techniques can income any traction! besides, how might desire to you inspect how eye-catching Ann Coulter is, know she does not such as you, and admit that she does not such as you for a reason? fantastically while the the remainder of your existence isn't something yet lies in any case? they are able to't call her a Lesbian, because of the fact they tell one yet another that each and everyone women people could be Lesbians, so they console themselves via asserting that she basically does not like absolutely everyone!

2016-12-11 07:05:57 · answer #3 · answered by bustamante 4 · 0 0

I think shes slipped a gear here and there. Cons have been calling the book, indeed so slanderous as it is, a satire. Even they know that it went too far. It sold, so it must ring a bell with some who wish they lost their husbands and got some money instead. Shes never married has she?
Shes neither tacky, nor a hypocrite she has always been that way and has never tried to hide it.
So you could fairly say she is nasty and cruel, evil and conceited, thoughtless and cold.
But a hypocrite....no
Tacky is what you call men wearing white patent leather shoes, not what you call someone who compares widows who don't agree with the Great Leader, to witches. Not to mention all the rest of the world who believes in God, even if they aren't Republicans.

2006-12-11 08:01:21 · answer #4 · answered by justa 7 · 3 3

She is a hypocrite and I take her as a joke. You can't take her seriously because she isn't. Coulter makes the conservatives happy and the liberals angry. That's what she does. For me she is only a joke of a writer who preaches to a loyal base that kisser her ***. That is all you should know.

2006-12-12 08:39:03 · answer #5 · answered by cynical 6 · 1 0

She has the constitutionally protected right to say whatever she wants no matter how tacky it is. She is just a shewolf saying inflammatory things to get her mediocre at best books to sell. I have read two and they were just vile pure factless garbage.

2006-12-11 08:02:52 · answer #6 · answered by Perplexed 7 · 4 0

Why is it that conservatives may not agree with what Coulter says but support her right to say it, but when they don't agree with a liberal, the the liberals are unpatriotic, unamerican, and socialist?

2006-12-11 08:52:35 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 5 0

Anyone can call themselves anything they want. It's called Freedom of Expression. I personally don't agree with some of her positions but I support her right to spout them, just the same way I don't agree with some of the leftist stuff I hear. They still have that right.

2006-12-11 07:55:39 · answer #8 · answered by ? 5 · 4 2

She sure does know how to make money!

Say the right things, keep people riled up, keep her name in the spotlight, the money keeps rolling in.

When it quiets down, say something else to get her name back out there.

Its not her, its anyone making money in the current Media Entertainment Industry - formerly known as "the news"

2006-12-11 07:57:55 · answer #9 · answered by RustyOwls 3 · 3 2

It's all about playing to your base. Her base is the Republican party and the conservatives. This is a very wealthy base. Therefore it is all about the money. And in her case the willingness be an incredible vile woman all for money.

2006-12-11 07:56:58 · answer #10 · answered by truth seeker 7 · 4 2

fedest.com, questions and answers