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]...