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!
The committee studied all of the circumstances and after months of investigations, determined a specific sequence of actions that the flight crew could have taken in the fifteen seconds that could have avoided the crash...and listed the "Pilot Error" as a contributing factor to the crash.
Hindsight is 20-20 and given enough time, most of us could come up with a devastating comeback to any liberal. It is completely different when you are one-on-one, live. That is what many of us are objecting to in your criticism of Ms. Coulter. Your criticism seems to be one of personal animosity, not unlike the professor who is posting on this thread as well.
Well hey, thats you Pet. But don't kill yourself over it.
Wow, Lauer really is an idiot.
Yes, because I'm a committee who spent months investigating Coulter's comment before determining an intricate series of steps that could have avoided the issue.
Exaggerate much?
My guess is, you exaggerate a million billion billion times!
You're still digging.
Keep on scratching on that tin roof...you will cover your doo-doo sooner or later.
You're still here arguing over slight differences in words? I think ol' cyborg is getting a raw deal and should take a second look at the sycophant she is getting bamaboozled by. I think I misspelled bamaboozle.
Yep. That is definitely proof of something.
I'm still here replying to your personal attacks and obscene language, because I want to see how far you'll go.
You're an sychophant, no doubt about it. My, that IS obscene! Hey cyborg, got cold feet yet? You should.
Lets go Pet. I've got all day.
That would be quite an accomplishment since they are very different.
I consider them = it is my opinion
They are = it is a fact
Point, set, match to Ann. Lauer: back to your homo-sodomite pals in the shower, sonny.
The biggest problem with The Today Show audience is that they never get to hear the other side. They are presented liberal propoganda as news.
Coulter's not my favorite, but she handled this interview pretty well, and the audience, for a change, got to hear someone tear apart the liberal propoganda.
That's a good thing. :-)
They had her on because of her new book. Did Matt bother to even talk about that?
I think the Today Show anchor with a set bigger than Lauer's just left for CBS.
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.