Posted on 06/06/2006 5:13:56 AM PDT by governsleastgovernsbest
by Mark Finkelstein
June 6, 2006
While considerable attention focuses on Ann Coulter's more superficial charms, from a conservative perspective Ann's real beauty is her absolute refusal to buy into liberal logic, no matter how pervasive. That independence of mind was on display this morning during her interview with Matt Lauer. Ann was on to tout her new book, Godless: The Church of Liberalism, released today on . . . 6/6/6 - sign of the devil and all that.
The first example came in the the context of President Bush's current push for a constitutional amendment that would prohibit gay marriage. The liberal mantra on his initiative, as exemplified by Ann Curry's performance on yesterday's Today, is that this is a cynical political ploy and a waste of time when there are myriad 'real' issues out there to be addressed.
Right out of the box, Lauer invited her to buy into that logic. Lauer:
"David Gregory said if you ask people what they care abou they say Iraq and gas prices. Gay marriages are way down on the list, but that's what the president is talking about and what the Senate is taking up. Why?"
Coulter would have none of it:
"I don't know what people are talking about or how David Gregory knows that. But I do know that gay marriage amendments have been put on the ballots in about 20 states now and passed by far larger numbers than Bush won the election by."
Lauer then hit Ann with a classic bit of perceived liberal truth: "Here's how E.J. Dionne puts it in the Washington Post:'The Republican party thinks its base of social conservatives is a nest of dummies who have no memories and respond like bulls whenever red flags are waved in their faces.' Do you agree with that?
Coulter: "That the base are dummies or that Bush thinks that?"
Lauer: "That he can wave a red flag and they will run to the polls to respond to him?"
Coulter: "They don't need to respond to him. He's not running again."
Lauer: "They want the voters to turnout in the mid-term elections. They don't want to lose control of the congress."
Coulter: "Maybe they want to do what the voters want. Whatever you can say about whether or not Bush has a mandate, the mandate against gay marriage is pretty strong. It passed by like 85 percent in Mississippi. Even in Oregon, and that was the state that the groups supporting gay marriage fixated on and outspent their opponents by like 40:1, it passed even there. There is a mandate against gay marriage."
Lauer: "Do you think George Bush in his heart really cares strongly about that issue?"
Coulter: "I don't know what anybody cares in his heart."
Lauer: "Would you take a guess?"
Coulter: "I know what Americans think because they keep voting, over and over and over again overwhelmingly they reject gay marriage. So why is that a bad thing for politicians to respond to what is overwhelmingly a mandate?"
Ann's rejection of Lauer's liberal logic was again on stunning display a bit later in the interview. Lauer suggested that Pres. Bush's low approval ratings are attributable to Iraq. That in turn engendered the following exchange.
Coulter: "I don't think so. That's the one thing he is doing right and that the Democrats are incapable of doing. That is fighting the war on terror."
Lauer: "But I am talking about the war with Iraq, not the war on terror."
Coulter: "I consider them the same thing. We didn't invade Guatemala."
Cue the rim shot!
One of her books sold 30,000 copies. Drudge introduced her one night as a controversialist. She is a master of one-liners, but she has no other responsibility than herself. ie. she doesn't have to go back to congress and sit on committees. I enjoy her, but regard her as a performer.
Coulter: "I don't know what anybody cares in his heart."
Lauer: "Would you take a guess?"
This is the funniest bit of the exchange. On print, anyway, it looks as though Lauer is grasping at straws to keep his agenda moving forward, and she just isn't buying.
Why the heck should I? You make the arguement for me.
She has a neck like that bush of Nefertiti - long and graceful and attactive and in need of fine caressing and kissing.
Apparantly. Laot?!!
I know what I think in my heart whenever I see her!!
Why should you? It's your contention, you should support it. It's okay though, I accept your concession. Oh, and there's only one "e" in argument.
LOLOL......have to feel sorry for Lauer.....almost but not quite! LOLOL
A beer?
An ice-cold bottle of BECKS!
(Condi 2008.<------added January 2004. Remember you heard it here first)
I could ask for Ann in 2008.
Does she fish? Does she own a boat???
So you want me to help you understand that "I consider them the same thing" and "they are the same thing" are virtually the same statement?
Come on Petronski, you're pretty well known here and you seem to be determined to make yourself look kind of foolish. Oh, and could you spell check this for me?
"Laot?"
Sorry about that. My fingers tire easily. :^)
The exchange about the 9-11 Jersey girls was also good. I think Matt believes that Ann is a heretic with regards to the 9-11 Jersey girls. After all, like Cindy Shehan, they have the right to voice their opinions without opposition solely because of the losses they suffered.
I rest my case.
Have a great day.
You can call Ann C lots of things, but if you've ever heard her speak you know that "ditz" ain't one of them. Her intellect and reasoning capacity exceeds that of at least 6 of the current justices on the SC, and I doubt that you would call any of them (even Darth Vader Ginsberg) a "ditz".
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.