Posted on 06/12/2006 6:45:38 PM PDT by Aussie Dasher
Following my interview with HUMAN EVENTS Legal Affairs Correspondent Ann Coulter and review of her new book, Godless: The Church of Liberalism, Ive received a slew of e-mails from fans and foes.
Many of those writing the negative e-mails are outraged that a conservative would ask a conservative author questions from a conservatives perspective for a conservative newspaper. One person writes, You are so unfair and unbalanced! Well, there goes my shot as a Fox News anchor. But lest you think he might have any intellectual points to make, the rest of the e-mail refers to me and Coulter in a sexual manner. In fact, several e-mails included this kind of rhetoric. I would quote them, but to make it decent it would look like Morse code.
Another person writes, So how does it feel to interview Hitler reborn first-hand? I think I would need about 20 showers just to feel normal again after being in the presence of such a pathetic excuse for a human being. I was actually surprised that it took more than 12 hours since the interview was published to get the first Hitler comparison. The comparison of [insert Republicans name] to Hitler is as hack as I just flew in and, boy, are my arms tired.
Then came the e-mails from those claiming to be conservatives or Republicans who had an instant conversion because this time shes gone too far. As Coulter recently pointed out on Your World with Neil Cavuto, these phonies say that every time she writes a new book. One guy from San Diego stated in an e-mail to me that he supported Bush after 9/11. Yeah, so did Rosie ODonnell. He also wrote that he is a gun-owning, meat-loving, fishing, entrepreneur and a moderate. Inexplicably, his proof is that he listens to Rush Limbaugh and Bill Bennett and would vote for Rudy Guiliani (moderate Republican), Chuck Hagel (Republican) and Mark Warner (Democrat). One must have a dart and a map of the U.S. to come up with this list. He writes, I am surprised that you would softball-interview someone who is as blatantly hateful as Ann Coulter. She gets paid to promote anger, hatred, and division. The kind of bile Ms. Coulter is spewing is decidely [sic] very mid-90's. Using loaded words against a political opponent (you know, Godless, traitorous, etc.) reads like a page from Gingrich's 1990 GOPAC memo. Very tiresome.
Hmm, it seems like anyone who is holding on to a grudge against Newt Gingrich from 1990 might have been drinking the Kool-Aid for a little longer than hes letting on. Unfortunately, I cant recall the existence of this phantom memo because I was only 12-years-old at the time.
Another curious claim in this e-mail, as well as several others, is that Coulter makes outrageous statements just to sell books. Then these same people say she doesnt represent most conservatives. Yet, Godless still becomes No. 1 on Amazon.com and will undoubtedly be a New York Times bestseller. And by the way, those mystery mass purchases by Richard Scaife (I received those e-mails, too) dont count toward the bestseller lists.
Its a typical ploy by liberals to claim to be Bush voters or moderates or Republicans in order to project a false sense of credibility. Its like when they use an anti-war veteran or group of pro-Kerry widows from New Jersey to advance their unpopular agenda. Liberals call the War on Terrorism President Bushs personal vendetta on behalf of his father. How is this any different from making the case against the President based on someone elses personal tragedy or vendetta? Not to mention giving these people carte blanche to make outrageous claims and condemn anyone for questioning their motives. Someone should really write a book about this phenomenon!
Another lifelong Republican says that I have gone too far. He writes, I have always been a fan of your previous writings. Your latest interview with Ann Coulter has left me shocked and dismayed. You have lost all integrity in my mind. Your inability to question her regarding this outlandish rubbish is disgraceful. I guess he missed my review of Coulters last book, How to Talk to a Liberal (If You Must).
The e-mails I enjoyed the most were those that said I was worse than Coulter herself. One guy wrote, As a sycophantic piece of s***, your review of Coulter's latest piece of s*** is exceeded only by it. Another writes, [Y]ou revealed yourself to be just as vicious as Ann Coulter -- and that's saying a lot. I plan on adding this to my résumé.
So, for those of you keeping score, conservatives cannot write about people they agree or disagree with because it makes them hucksters or Hitler. Instead, we should be writing about issues we dont care about and people with no political relevance. Fortunately, HUMAN EVENTS has no need for articles on Brad and Angelina and their new baby, so keep those emails coming!
Nothing will shut those people up. Some of them have been at it for years.
Not too far, about the second segment. You gotta see it, it's the best I've seen of her in awhile. Doesn't take long to figure out she is the smartest on on the set.
I hope you are... :)
thanks
It will be rerun in about two hours and fifteen minutes from now. I'm in Hawaii so that would only be 8 o'clock here. Sill early evening in paradise.
Oh I like that idea .. I think I'll do that the next time I'm in the book store *L*
LOL! Have you checked your testosterone lately?
in michigan its 2 AM
The more they hate her the more we love her.
Call in sick, it's worth it. LOL
"Actually I consider such creatures as Cindy Sheehan and the Jersey Girls as sacred cows."
I agree with what you say although I think there is a spelling issue, not sacred but scared. They are afraid that they are going to lose their platforms, that they have become blase and won't be able to scam any more $ or publicity.
Idiot Colmes walked right into that one, didn't he?
We had dinner over at friends tonight and thank goodness they had FOX on afterward and we were like a cheering section going on. We've been beat on for so long by the demos and the msm - let down by our spineless RINOS, it's great to see someone with guts come out and tell it like it is.
Just because 2 idiot NJ Democrat Assembly Members called for a boycott of her book I will now buy 3 copies and give 2 as gifts.
Doesn't anyone get it!?
The title of misses the point altogether.
Instead of "Coulter's Foes Launch Hate-Filled Attacks"
it should read.
"Coordinated effort by left political machine to keep dupe base away separated from Coulter's thoughts and opinions gaining momentum"
This is about leaders on the left actively promoting groupthink dysfunction under the cover of ad copy writers for the DNC in the MSM posing as "credentialed journalists".
Below is a list of these dysfunctions. To me they describes the foundation of the lefts strategy to control the opinion and loyalty of its members.
Eight symptoms of Groupthink:
Type I: Overestimations of the group's power and morality
1. "An illusion of invulnerability shared by most members, which creates excessive optimism and encourages taking extreme risks (Janis, 1982)."
2. "An unquestioned belief in the group's inherent morality, inclining the members to ignore the ethical or moral consequences of their decisions (Janis, 1982)."
Type II: Closed-mindedness
3. "Collective efforts to rationalize in order to discount warnings, or other information that might lead the members to reconsider their assumptions before they recommit themselves to their assumptions (Janis, 1982)."
4. "Stereotyped views of enemy leaders as too evil to warrant genuine attempts to negotiate, or as too weak and stupid to counter whatever risky attempts are made to defeat their purpose (Janis, 1982)."
Type III: Pressure toward uniformity
5. "Self-censorship of deviation from the apparent group consensus, reflecting each member's inclination to minimize to himself the importance of his doubts and counterarguments (Janis, 1982)."
6. "A shared illusion of unanimity concerning judgement conforming to the majority view (partly resulting from self-censorship of deviation, augmented by the false assumptions that silence means consent) (Janis, 1982)."
7. "Direct pressure on any member who expresses strong arguments against any of the group's stereotypes, illusions, or commitments, making clear that this type of dissent is contrary to what is expected of all loyal members (Janis, 1982)."
8. "The emergence, of self-appointed mindguards members who protect the group from adverse information that might shatter their shared complacency about the effectiveness and morality of their decisions (Janis, 1982)."
The leadership on the left probably have stone templates with these 8 "commandments" on display in their offices. I'm sure Murtha does.
That gives me an idea...
the lefts Eight Commandments
I
Thou shalt create an illusion of invulnerability shared by most members to foster excessive optimism and encourage extreme risks taking
II
Thou shall not allow any member to question the group's inherent morality, instead members shall be encouraged to ignore the ethical or moral consequences of their decisions
III
Thou shalt promote collective efforts to rationalize in order to discount warnings, or other information that might lead members to reconsider their assumptions before they recommit themselves to their assumptions
IV
Thou shalt reinforce stereotyped views of enemy leaders as too evil to warrant genuine attempts to negotiate, or as too weak and stupid to counter whatever risky attempts are made to defeat their purpose
V
Thou shalt self-censor any deviation from the apparent group consensus, inclining each member to minimize the importance of their doubts and counterarguments
VI
Thou shalt create and maintain a shared illusion of unanimity concerning judgement conforming to the majority view
VII
Thou shalt apply direct pressure on any member who expresses strong arguments against any of the group's stereotypes, illusions, or commitments, making clear that this type of dissent is contrary to what is expected of all loyal members
VIII
Thou shalt appoint mindguards to protect the group from adverse information that might shatter their shared complacency about the effectiveness and morality of their decisions
I will forever remember her mentioning Chappaquiddic on Hannity and Colmes. Everyone was shocked into silence while she said, "What, we can't mention it?"
WHADDA' LADY!!!!
Please FReepmail me if you want on or off my miscellaneous ping list.
There are a lot of self-proclaimed "conservatives" on FR who, just like the e-mailer in the article, love to say, "I'm a conservative, but this time Ann's gone too far." You can tell they're lying as soon as you read that phrase.
Nice ripostes by David Horowitz. Lukewarm presentation by the conservative lady.
Still, Ann never suggests putting a bullet into the President. Ann does not deal in an absolute litany of hate about him. That to them, that must be sheer innocent satire. Ann got under their skin and how.
Ann has twice as many admirers since the book.
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.