Posted on 06/11/2006 6:17:44 PM PDT by RonDog
ONCE again, Ann Coulter has a book in need of flogging, and once again, people are stunned by what a "vicious," "mean-spirited," "despicable" "hate-monger" they say she is.
Ms. Coulter, who seems afflicted by a kind of rhetorical compulsion, most recently labeled the widows of 9/11 "harpies." It is just one in a series from a spoken-word hit parade that seems to fly out of her mouth uninterrupted by conscience, rectitude or logic.
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
How do yu know they aren't?
Ann deals in hyperbole. I'm sure the J girls grieved, or at least most of them did, but they seem to be having a jolly good time now, ala Cindy Sheehan.
When one sees them in action, a tiny thought does cross our minds maybe that, gee, they seem to be relishing the attention and the grief shield that protects them from any response to some of their more idiotic comments.
When that tiny thought crosses Ann's mind, she goes with it.
I, for one, don't mind.
Carr lives in Montclair, New Jersey and is married to Jill Rooney Carr. They have three children.
I see your standards of honesty have not changed.
Ann isn't some barbie doll. She's taller and thinner.
She is a is necessary voice someone needed call those NJ widows on how they are using their lost to undermind the defence of this nation!
I live in NYC I have heard enough of them gals for a life time!
Now we can't be expert in every area so take it with a grain of salt her big issues or those who undermind the morals and defence of this nation!
For cryin' out loud, get real! They are playing their husbands' deaths like a violin for publicity/face-time on TV.See also, from the LONG (but WONDERFUL) analysis:I don't know how you missed it when it was going down, but it happened.
Battered Conservative Syndrome: Defending Ann Coulter
[Big Lizard: BEST defense of GODLESS yet!]
BigLizards.net ^ | June 9, 2006 | Hatched by Dafydd
Posted on 06/10/2006 7:55:08 PM PDT by RonDog
June 09, 2006
Battered Conservative Syndrome: Defending AnnAll right, folks; put on your manly gowns, gird up your loins, and go tell the Spartans: I'm about to defend Ann Coulter. And not by sweeping her words under the rug and blubbering "but she's a good girl in spite of the horrid things she says!"No no, not Big Lizards style. I defend the very words she used and bat the ball right back across thet net at the liberals and their conservative "enablers."
-- snip --
And now at last this brings us by a commodious vicus of recirculation back to Ann Coulter vs. the Jersey Girls.
Enjoying their husbands' deaths
Here is what Coulter wrote in her newest book, Godless, that has provoked such a fury of denunciation... not just from the left, but from the right as well:These self-obsessed women seem genuinely unaware that 9-11 was an attack on our nation and acted like as if the terrorist attack only happened to them. They believe the entire country was required to marinate in their exquisite personal agony. Apparently, denouncing Bush was part of the closure process....
These broads are millionaires, lionized on TV and in articles about them, reveling in their status as celebrities and stalked by griefparazzies. I have never seen people enjoying their husband’s death so much.
Very hard words; but I stick up for Coulter even here. Read above: the Jersey Girls have used their grief as an offensive weapon against Republicans and in support of the candidacy of Sen. John F. Kerry (D-MA, 100%)... and that means that by their own actions, they forfeit the right to use their personal tragedy as a shield against attack.
But who are the "Jersey Girls?"
The Jersey Girls or Jersey Widows (Kristin Breitweiser, Patty Casazza, Lorie Van Auken, and Mindy Kleinberg) are four women from New Jersey whose husbands were killed in the September 11, 2001 attacks....
The Jersey Widows testified for hearing led by congresswoman Cynthia McKinney on July 22, 2005 [2]. In Lorie Auken's statement she said this of the 9/11 Commission Report:
And finally, without compromising our national security, it would have reported all of its findings, with its redactions blacked out and submitted to the American people. In essence, the Commission could have produced a final product where the resulting conclusions and recommendations could be trusted. Instead, at the end of the day, what we got were some statements that truly insulted the intelligence of the American people, violated our loved ones’ memories, and might end up hurting us, one day soon.
One such statement is that 9/11 was a ‘failure of imagination’. A failure of whose imagination? What exactly does that mean? When you have a CIA director with his hair on fire, a system blinking red, 52 FAA warnings, an August 6th, 2001, PDB entitled ‘Bin Laden Determined to Strike in the United States’, leads on several 9/11 hijackers including Alhazmi, Almihdhar and Marwan Al-Shehi, warnings from many foreign governments, a Phoenix memo warning of Islamic extremists taking flying lessons, the arrest of would-be terrorist Zacarias Moussauoui, facts imparted to one agent, Agent Frasca at the RFU at the FBI, 9/11 was truly a failure alright.
What else did they do? Was that it? Not by a long shot. From the Today Show exchange, here is Coulter on the Jersey Girls' politicking... facts which none of Coulter's critics have troubled to dispute. (This is a hallmark of the infallibility of grief, by the way: Cleland didn't try to argue that his votes against the DHS were right... he simply denied Chambliss the right to criticize him at all because of the tragedy Cleland suffered in Vietnam.)
They were cutting commercials for Kerry. They were using their grief to make a political point while preventing anyone from responding.In a Hannity and Colmes segment yesterday (no transcript, I just watched it), she elaborated, noting the television shows and magazines that had featured them, the Democratic fundraisers they attended. I myself recall them sitting on some panel on terrorism, as if they were experts by virtue of grief. The Jersey Girls were not "grieving widows," for they were not grieving... not unless, as Coulter put it, "denouncing Bush was part of the closure process."
They are not grieving widows; they are crusading widows.
The difference is colossal...CLICK HERE for the rest of that thread
Why get dragged down to the liberal level? Why not take the high road?
It's the liberals that started this Bush = Hitler nonsense.
So these widows got their faces all over the liberal media. Screw the liberal media. It's only liberals that take them seriously anyway. The liberal media is fastly rotting into nonexistence.
No, I am not Oprah or Dr. Phil and I only go by what I saw them deliver on TV.
Among the 9/11 widows it was only these four that went on this publicity binge. Had it been all or even most of them, you would have had a point but there's just the four Kerry supporters that did this...and you still can't detect a political motive?
Unbelievable!
Do some research and read what they said and did before coming to some high-minded analysis.
Virulently hating slightly less than 50% of your fellow countrymen. It's called patriotism.
If I was out there getting my face on TV and getting publicity from it, YES!
That would be a correct assumption and most people would catch on to it.
Coulter ridiculing anybody's marriage is hilarious, since marriage or anything longer than a six week affair is something she knows nothing about.
Isn't it interesting that the NYT writer did not address a single point Ann made about the religion of liberalism. He called her names, questioned her motivations and attacked her sincerity. Anyone who has watched her even for a short time could not possibly question that she believes what she says, if one is honest. No, this column and almost all the attacks on Ann this week have been perfect examples of all that she has been writing about for years. They can't even see how silly they are by acting exactly as she claims. The past few days have produced enough material for a whole new book! Way to go libs. Keep feeding her meat.
Yeah, isn't it unbelievable that the Democrat congresscritters for life are even more incompetent, lazy, shiftless, out of touch and arrogant than our own guys.
Term Limits is an issue the next GOP POTUS canidate must be forced to take a position on.
Coulter smeared Bush on Bill Maher's show by calling for his impeachment, and saying "he's gone back to drinking" after his nomination of Harriett Miers.
Coulter's been just as vicious toward Bush as most liberals.
Nobody cares about term limits. Congresspeople are not going to impose term limits on themselves.
Do you have some kind of alarm clock that goes off and you have to make some random attack on Ann Coulter by bringing up negatives.
You seem to have a grudge against her of monumental (and completely hilarious) proportions.
I'm glad you're up. I was getting bored.
Obviously, that why I said the next GOP POTUS canidate must address the issue.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.