Does anyone agree with any of Ann Coulter's views from "Godless"?

Question

I thought the chapter about teachers was very well laid out and argumentative. The rest of her yammering seemed rather silly with her ad homenien attacks on Darwin, Clinton, feminists, etc

Oh, I didn't buy the book. I simply borrowed it from the library. She is borderline psychotic but I would say she's using her writing talents for a foul swing

Answer 1

I've never read it. In one of Al Franken's books ("Lies and the Lying Liars Who Tell Them" or "Truth", I forget which) he tells a story about how he made a bet with one of his researchers (an occupation Coulter is unfamiliar with) that he could open "Treason" and find a lie before his wife finished getting ready to go out one night.

He opened to a random page, scanned down to where she mentioned a New York Times article, looked up the article in Lexis Nexis, and discovered that she had indeed taken it out of context and lied about it.

Ann Coulter is nothing but a shock jockey. She's the Howard Stern of conservative politics. She'll say anything to get a reaction, and because of this she has to make more and more absurd and offensive comments because otherwise people become numb to her shock tactics. Consequently she's become a complete joke.

She (or at least the character she plays) is a lying, intolerant, psychopathic bigot. I find it hard to believe that she's capable of a coherent argument, but I'll have to take your word for it, because I can't stomach her writing.

Answer 2

Liberals are unintended clowns who have faith any conservative concept is a lie or hate speech and could be censored, shouted down and hysterically refuted. don't experience sorry for Ann Coulter. the resultant exposure the fools gave her will sell many thousand extra books. if that they had taken care of her courteously,it does not be shown persistently on each and every information channel and the internet. lots for liberal intelligence. What she tried to declare became real, ie: Neither the horribly gruesome no expertise whoopee or the different fat black female (the single that may not particular no rely if the earth is around or flat) could be on the view in the event that they have been white.

Answer 3

Three words: "Consider the source". Look at the "Spinsanity" website for a list of the errors she has made. The site doesn't just attack conservatives either - Michael Moore gets taken to task for some of the things he has said and done. Ann Coulter needs a fact checker... BADLY.

Answer 4

I agree with almost everything she says most of the time.

What you call ad hominem attacks aren't ad hominem attacks when they are definately in a context and she definately has a beef with specific issues.She may seem vitriolic to leftists but she is infact REACTING to the lefts shrillness and vitriol.She is playing to a conservative audience which probably takes it alot more as humor while the left takes it as vitriol or ad hominem.

What most liberals do is ad hominem attacks without reference to any sort of context or specific complaints, and without speaking to any actual issues.

Also liberals do ad hominem personal attacks.That's a far cry from strongly denouncing Darwin or Communism or Scientology.

And the fact that lately she has been boldly going against POLITICAL CORRECTNESS just makes me love her all the more.

Answer 5

Ann Coulter said the way to solve the problems with other countries is to just invade that country, kill the leader and convert the people to Christianity. How anyone can give her any credibility is beyond reason.

Answer 6

I haven't read it. but I doubt I'll agree with it.
I already disagree with the title- its bad sign if the title alone causes diagreement.

she isn't logical and is insulting. if she could speak like an intellegent, mature human being I'd read it and see if I agree or not.

Answer 7

I share many of her views, and disagree with some of her views. She is a least consistent in her viewpoints and doesn't flip flop about. She does incur controversy for the purpose of selling books and then being called to promote more controversy to sell viewers.

Answer 8

She def. did NOT make any Ad homenum attacks. All of her points are very organized, with footnotes brought about from her very extensive research. One thing that you have to consider is that 1st and foremost, she is a political commentator, and will express her opinion quite often in a humorous way. personally, I thought her take on Darwin was right on the money. It's called a theory because it has no proof.

Answer 9

I have never read the book because she is one of those people who strikes out at anyone they do not agree with. She claims to be a Christian but shows no sign of the teaching of forgiveness.

Answer 10

I haven't read it and I doubt that I would agree with her on anything. I find her ranting incredible lacking in intellectual research, argument or credibility. If her writing is anything like what she does on FOX then her books are simply that, ranting and nothing more. Anyone can do that. Who needs to buy and read a book of someone ranting?