Ann Coulter pics from Craig Ferguson's Late, Late Show
Posted on 05/23/2005 10:23:49 PM PDT by Echo Talon
CLICK HERE for the rest of that thread
Posted on 05/19/2005 9:48:55 PM PDT by RonDog
Well, now you're misunderstanding ME. Let's try again.
When you are a commentator, your job is to communicate not only with those that think you're the greatest thing on two long legs, but to everyone else as well. Otherwise, it isn't worth it for a publisher to promote you since you are limiting your own appeal to a niche audience.
Ms. Nooyi of Pepsico is not a commentator nor a public speaker. Those are two things that could be said in her defense after her debacle at Columbia Business School. Coulter had been a commentator and professional lecturer for many years before making her volatile call for crusade in her post-9/11 column, albeit not one known for pulling her punches.
I don't know about her entire history of controversy, but when I discovered Coulter at WorldNetDaily, the most controversial thing that was attributed to her was that she believed women should no longer be allowed to vote. Now, that is a statement that is easy to identify as an absurdity meant to make a more relevant point -- that women allow romance and inappropriate emotion to factor into decisions about who should lead the country (in this case, the dashing perjurer, sexual harasser, and adulterer, Bill Clinton). No intelligent person really believed that this country could possibly go back to pre-Anthony days any more than it could go back to pre-Lincoln days. Anyone who treated that statement seriously was, as you said, trying to misunderstand her.
The same could be said of Ann's mentor, Phyllis Schlafly, who, in defiance of '70s era feminist revision of American manners and language, always insisted on being called "Mrs. Schlafly" and not "Ms." and began each of her speaking appearances with "I want to thank my husband for letting me be here." The Steinems and Abzugs feigned shock at her deference to her man, and the media ate it up.
On the other hand, in the grief that blanketed the nation and Coulter's personal loss of a friend in Barbara Olson, what was an appropriately angry column was ended by a three part call: to "invade [Muslim] countries..." OK, someone was going to have to be held responsible. "...[K]ill their leaders..." OK, that makes sense since they tried to kill ours. "...[A]nd convert them to Christianity." What?
I could go into mental gymnastics asking rhetorical questions about the range of things she could have meant by that, but the fact that Ann can't credibly defend them herself speaks volumes. I noticed that in your reply to me, you didn't address her ridiculous reference to Christianity as "a hobby," as if you can take malicious religious indoctrination out of the populations of Muslim countries by distributing rosary beads or crucifixes. That was, from the source, the best she could do to spin that.
In the same way, Pepsico is now trying to pretend that CEO Nooyi's reference to the USA as the world's middle finger was patriotic. They can say it all they want, but her words betray any revisionist claims of innocence. So, in this sense, Nooyi and Coulter are twins, one so far left and one so far right they meet in the middle on the opposite side of a circle.
I didn't give up on Ann, although I am definitely more critical of her. I try never to get so enthralled by anyone that I think everything they do, say, or write is golden, and that no one should dare criticize them. Ann's a babe, but she's not worth compromising my sense of proportion and intellectual honesty.
A lot of what you are commenting on is explained in her newest book.
Did her explanation have any resemblance to her dissembling she did when Couric asked her?
Your comments prove Ann's popularity. Several best sellers kind of dissolves the "niche audience" comment.
I could go into mental gymnastics asking rhetorical questions about the range of things she could have meant by that, but the fact that Ann can't credibly defend them herself speaks volumes.
She explained this very well many times in the Media, and also in her book. You should read her book, it will answer many questions for you and pare down your defense of your uninformed comments considerably.
I will grant you those that feel compelled to criticize her don't understand her sense of humor and her subtle nuances. They are kind of neat actually.
...and that no one should dare criticize them. Ann's a babe
Ah dern is that what happened. Don't let the babe thingie get in the way. Ann loves criticism...in fact thrives on it as she has an answer to it. The liberals hate that and throw pies or go all tourette's on her.
Oh and BTW, Katie is a liberal through and through, not perky (just had to say that) and her job is to try to trick conservatives and lay traps for them, set them up.
Ann is popular, it's true. But she is becoming increasingly popular with the left because she's a loose cannon; although they can't stand her, liberals like that she is around to prove their criticism of conservatives. It's in the same way that conservatives dislike Howard Dean, but are happy to see him dig himself holes every time he opens his yapper.
Look, as long as there are conservatives, there will always be a place for Ann. But with that post-9/11 column, she lost a lot of mainstream readership. I don't think reducing your influence is a wise move if you really want to effect change, not just sell books.
She explained this very well many times in the Media, and also in her book. You should read her book, it will answer many questions for you and pare down your defense of your uninformed comments considerably.
In the transcript of the Katie Couric interview, she had a chance to explain herself, and attempted to change the subject. Couric had to ask her two more times before Coulter finally gave her this, from a post earlier in this thread:
Ann Coulter: Point one and point two [We should invade their countries, kill their leaders] by the end of the week had become official government policy.As for converting them to Christianity, I think it might be a good idea to get them on some sort of hobby other than slaughtering infidels. I mean perhaps that's the Peace Corps, perhaps it's working for Planned Parenthood, but I've never seen the transforming effect of anything like that Christianity.
As I wrote in a subsequent post in reference to that answer, "This is exactly my problem with Ann nowadays. She simultaneously complains about being taken out of context, but makes cartoonishly outrageous statements that beg to be misinterpreted by her opponents."
Now, I realize that in another post, there is a reference to the way that MacArthur fostered Christianity in Japan in post-World War II, and Coulter claims that was the basis of her "convert them to Christianity" statement. Why couldn't she have said something about that to Katie Couric before an national audience of millions of people who will never crack open any of her books, instead of calling Christianity "some sort of hobby"? What would it have cost Coulter to say what she supposedly really meant instead of making yet another flippant, easily misinterpreted comment?
Ann loves criticism...in fact thrives on it as she has an answer to it.
Ann loves criticism she has answers to. When she doesn't have an answer, and doesn't show the courage to admit she may have been unclear or imprecise, that's when I find her agonizing.
Ann Coulter pics from Craig Ferguson's Late, Late Show
Posted by Echo Talon
On General/Chat 05/23/2005 10:23:49 PM PDT · 14 replies · 166+ views
LIVE Thread: Ann Coulter on The Late Late Show with Graig Ferguson
Posted by Panerai
On General/Chat 05/23/2005 9:45:55 PM PDT · 28 replies · 215+ views
05/23/2005
Fire up the VCR; set your TiVo!
ANN COULTER on "Late, Late Show with Craig Ferguson" MONDAY (5/23)
Posted by RonDog
On News/Activism 05/19/2005 9:48:55 PM PDT · 66 replies · 1,196+ views
The Late Night TV Page ^ | May 19, 2005 | interbridge.com [and RonDog]
Ann Coulter pics from Craig Ferguson's Late, Late Show
Posted on 05/23/2005 10:23:49 PM PDT by Echo Talon
CLICK HERE for the rest of that thread
no one is above criticism, and that includes ann coulter. however, i don't believe criticism of her "kill muslim leaders" statement has merit.
I read your comments about Craig Ferguson and you're right if he's a lib, he's at least patriotic.
But I'm not so sure about the lib part anyway.
I don't know if you were watching tonight, but he very rapidly moved a guest into a different subject the very second the guest made a Bush bashing remark.
His opening with Tim Meadows talking about the First Lady's trip was not even remotely political. It was a Star Wars spoof instead.
He did a fun interview with Alice Cooper tonight also.
I love the show personally.
NEW photos!
ANN COULTER joins the U.S. Marines [and L.A. FReepers] at party after "Late, Late Show"
Ann Coulter pics from Craig Ferguson's Late, Late Show ^ | May 24, 2005 | RonDog [and FRiends]
Posted on 05/24/2005 9:11:20 PM PDT by RonDog
NEW photos!
ANN COULTER
joins the U.S. Marines [and L.A. FReepers, and our FRiends]
at a PRIVATE PARTY after the "Late, Late Show with Craig Ferguson" taping last night!
All the MARVELOUS photos (above) are courtesy of David "SuperDave" Forbes
And, here is the GIANT (3-foot by 4-foot) card that we got for Ann,
signed by just about EVERYONE at the post-taping party:
THIS photo courtesy of Clark BakerCLICK HERE for the rest of that thread
I have been flamed since last night for saying that she wasn't very good. I was embarrassed at her behavior.
He tried to just talk about HER. Not politics or anything. But she managed to talk about Bill Clinton hitting on anything with a mouth, and that Ferguson must be leftist since he works for CBS, otherwise they would fire him, among other equally unnecessary things.
It was awful.
I haven't heard Craig doing any lib stuff, but i've hardly watched the show. I like it very much but I can't stay up that late most nights.
You seem to be doing what Ann describes in the interview with Couric.
The only thing lame about the Q and A was Katie's misrepresentational questions and repeating the liberal lies such as Ann being fired:
Katie Couric: You were also fired, I guess, because you wrote in the National Review that we should -- when it came to fighting terrorism, we should invade their countries, kill their leaders, and convert them to Christianity. Do you still believe that that's the best way to combat terrorism worldwide?
Ann Coulter: Well, that's a somewhat dishonest quote. I was referring to the people in the previous sentence of that column, cheering and dancing in the streets right now, and, in fact, this -- the way that was so widely misquoted is an example of what I described in my book, which is the constant mischaracterizations...
Ann didn't write in the National Review...they had the option to run the syndicated column or not.
Ann was talking about the fanatics celebrating the Twin Towers terrorizm.
Katie Couric: But obviously the National Review had a problem with these articles and some of the pieces you did because you were fired from that job.
Another lame attempt by Couric to paint Ann with the liberal spin that she was fired from a job. She wasn't fired.
Katie Couric: What do you think is the best way to battle terrorism?
Ann Coulter: Point one and point two [We should invade their countries, kill their leaders] by the end of the week had become official government policy.
As for converting them to Christianity, I think it might be a good idea to get them on some sort of hobby other than slaughtering infidels. I mean perhaps that's the Peace Corps, perhaps it's working for Planned Parenthood, but I've never seen the transforming effect of anything like that Christianity.
Coulter's use of the word hobby seems to mainly be used to show how offhandedly and without conscience many mid-easterners can justify killing innocent people. She obviously wasn't referring to Christianity as a hobby as shown by her last few words.
I can't understand how conservatives can call Ann's answer "lame" while ignoring the obvious attempts by one of the most popular liberal TV personalities to trip her up.
Let's go to the videotape transcript:
Katie Couric: You were also fired, I guess, because you wrote in the National Review that we should -- when it came to fighting terrorism, we should invade their countries, kill their leaders, and convert them to Christianity. Do you still believe that that's the best way to combat terrorism worldwide?
The crux of Couric's question was NOT the circumstances of the parting of the ways with National Review, it was whether Coulter really thought conversion of Muslims should be the goal of the United States. Ann chose to tackle the first -- and relatively unimportant -- part of the question, and IMHO, her eventual answer indicates she did that because she didn't have a believable way to defend her statement.
This didn't stop you from making a valiant effort to do just that.
Katie Couric, asking the question for the third time: What do you think is the best way to battle terrorism?
Ann Coulter: ...As for converting them to Christianity, I think it might be a good idea to get them on some sort of hobby other than slaughtering infidels. I mean perhaps that's the Peace Corps, perhaps it's working for Planned Parenthood, but I've never seen the transforming effect of anything like that Christianity.
Syncro:Coulter's use of the word hobby seems to mainly be used to show how offhandedly and without conscience many mid-easterners can justify killing innocent people. She obviously wasn't referring to Christianity as a hobby as shown by her last few words.
Nice try. This is exactly the sort of thing I meant when, in an earlier post, I wrote about the mental gymnastics necessary to suggest her initial statement shouldn't have been taken at face value.
Even if one accepts your explanation in her defense, it surely doesn't display any understanding of how ingrained Islam is the countries that produce and deploy terrorists. Killing infidels is not a "hobby" for those who participate in that practice, it's a mission from Allah. In some circles, those who kill themselves in the process of killing innocent civilians are elevated to a martyr status unheard of in the United States; our heroes are those who die in the process of fighting the enemy in battle, and there is no added religious significance added to their sacrifice by the nation.
If one is to believe that your dissection of that sentence is accurate, Ann looks less frivolous as she does ignorant. I think Ann is a very smart woman, and is just too impulsive for her own -- and conservatives' -- good.
If Ann didn't mean to use the word "hobby," she should have used another word. If what Ann really meant by "convert them to Christianity" was the offering of peaceful alternatives to a faith system rooted in the idea the faithful should slaughter non-believers, that's what she should have said. If she had in mind MacArthur's approach to easing Japan's loss of their quasi-demigod Hirohito, that's what she should have said. She didn't, she didn't, and she didn't.
On the issue of whether she was "fired" or not: It appears that she wasn't "fired" in the Trumpian sense, but for people who agree on conservative essentials, the separation of Coulter and National Review editors couldn't have been nastier if she had been escorted from the executive offices.
As for Couric: Yeah, she's a liberal. That's not news. And in this instance, it makes no difference. Her question suggesting that Ann was "fired" was inaccurate, but it certainly wasn't a "trap" or a "set-up." Again, the crux of Katie's question was not her parting with National Review, but whether she still stood by her 'invade, execute, and convert' remark. And all Ann had to do was answer the question.
Tuesday night's show may be the best of Ferguson's tenure in the Late Late chair.
His monologue riffing on Paris Hilton's burger-munching/car washing Carl's Jr. commercial was hilarious ("It shows her doing two things she's never done before; eating, and doing an honest day's work"), as was the Tim Meadows bit. His rapport with Alice Cooper was fun to watch, but the real magical moment was with the author, whom I had never heard of before, as they broke into a spontaneous yet flawless duet of an Irish drinking song.
I know that talk show hosts are intensely critical of their own performance most of the time, but I feel like Fergie had to go backstage after the show and say, "D---! I was great tonight!"
Oh yeah, the Irish author! I forgot about that song. It was very good.
I just love the show. He's delightfully funny and very warm.
Tonight he has Donny Osmond, so I'll be watching for sure. I had the biggest crush on him when I was a kid. I had planned to marry him actually. :-)
Ann chose to tackle the first -- and relatively unimportant -- part of the question, and IMHO, her eventual answer indicates she did that because she didn't have a believable way to defend her statement.
This didn't stop you from making a valiant effort to do just that.
Oh come on. You are going into way too much depth to defend your opinions. There is not enough time on these interviews to give a reasoned believable defense because the MSM just won't let it happen. So a conservative has to answer in a way to at least get part of the point across. Plus as the Couric's have their agenda, so do the Coulters. They each try to bend the convos to their advantage. Good for Ann.
Your comments on the "hobby" comment are just too Obsessive Compulsive and parsed to death and I stand by my previous comments.
As intelligent as I know you are, I am suprized you don't get Ann's clever and effective use of the word "hobby". She drew you in on that one too.
I just can't let this one go:
If she had in mind MacArthur's approach to easing Japan's loss of their quasi-demigod Hirohito, that's what she should have said.
LOL. Coulter doesn't talk like that, you do...:>)
Ha! I'm rubber, you're glue, man. You and others are the ones who are insisting that she is playing mind games with liberals too dense to understand that what she writes isn't really what she means.
As I said earlier, there are times when it's obvious she is saying absurd things to make a point. Other absurd things she says are just that -- absurd.
There is not enough time on these interviews to give a reasoned believable defense because the MSM just won't let it happen.
Which made it all the more important for Ann to get to the point and answer Couric's question about how Ann thought the U.S. should fight the War on Terror. Instead, she wasted precious time slamming Katie for saying she was "fired" from the National Review. It wasn't a hard question, it wasn't an unfair question, it wasn't a trick question. It was just a question that Ann didn't seem to want to answer. And once the answer came, we know why.
Everything I have been saying about Ann adding more heat than light and limiting her own appeal to a conservative niche is backed up by this blog entry after day one of the DNC convention in Boston:
Gloria Feld of Planned Parenthood addressed the crowd at the Fleet Center last night. Yesterday, Planned Parenthood proudly announced their new t-shirt available for purchase: bq. Planned Parenthood is proud to offer yet another t-shirt in our new social fashion line: "I Had an Abortion" fitted T-shirts are now available. These soft and comfortable fitted tees assert a powerful message in support of women's rights. Like most who have already written about this shirt, I thought abortion was a privacy issue. Well, now you can proudly display your choice on a t shirt. How repulsive. I wonder how proud the Kerry people are to have invited to speak at their gala a woman who represents the group selling t shirts with this saying? The gap widens. Watching the convention on C-Span last night (there's a lot to be said for tv without commentary), I felt as if I were watching a variety show; well-rehearsed skits complete with running gags, on cue applause and scripted emotions. That's not to say those things are exclusively Democrat. I'm sure I'll be witnessing the same scripted affair come August. It's all window dressing, anyhow - just a few well-timed phrases and pretty words designed to get you to come on inside and make yourself at home. I wonder how many people are really comfortable once they get in there? I find myself staring at the Republican end of the window sometimes. No, not just Republican - conservative. Let's face it, I'm really not a true conservative (an atheist who supports gay marriage? No way), but there are days I'm enticed by all their pretty words and emotions. So I let myself in, wondering if I could truly embrace everyone inside. And then they throw this at me:Here at the Spawn of Satan convention in Boston, conservatives are deploying a series of covert signals to identify one another, much like gay men do. My allies are the ones wearing crosses or American flags. The people sporting shirts emblazoned with the "F-word" are my opponents. Also, as always, the pretty girls and cops are on my side, most of them barely able to conceal their eye-rolling.That's Ann Coulter, writing at Town Hall the column that was spiked by USA Today. It's a simple paragraph like that which will cause me to run screaming from the conservative base. A few days ago I said that liberalism is the new elitism. Perhaps I misspoke. Maybe extremism is the new elitism, on either side. Coulter's piece - and just that one paragraph is enough to make my point - reeks of "better than you" attitude. Basically, she is saying that Democrats are ugly and vulgar while conservatives are beautiful, religious patriots. No matter how much you want to believe that, it's just a ridiculous notion. And I'm apt to think that Coulter really believes every word she wrote (admittedly, I never liked the woman). [on edit: Yes, I know Coulter's column was supposed to be humorous - but it's a kind of humor that often gets thrown back in your face. If you are considered part of the politics that Coulter represents - which I so often am - then it gets thrown at you also and that makes it hard to have a firm ground to stand on when you're trying to claim the other party is the intolerant one]...
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.
