You are putting words in our mouths. Neither of us said, or implied, any such thing.
AC's rhetoric pulls no punches; that you fellows do, displays an unseemly attempt to put your brothers (and sisters) in arms down by trumpeting how goo-goo you are. As Homer Simpson said: "BOR--ING."
Listen, buster. This website is open to pit bulls, and labradors. The fact that the American public prefers labradors to pit bulls ought to tell you that Coulter's vitriol is for her red meat audience only. She is not considered a serious person by most Americans, and lots of conservatives.
And you think that W.F.Buckley and Geo Will are? May be there were, but they lost it long ago. Consider the attention her appearances and writings get, certainly you jest. And she gets it on her own, because the points she makes are in the 'mainstream' regardless of what the NYT's or you spout.
You are putting words in our mouths. Neither of us said, or implied, any such thing.
Hmm, let's see. AC is a "banshee" and an "attention-seeker" who pulls out "hot-buttons to get guys like you ('sycophants') jacked up to buy her books" and "paints conservatives as a bunch of gap-toothed idiots." She "makes her living being low class and mean . . . we ought to be able to do better."
Furthermore AC "can't seem to snag a man on a bet. . . She dates, but nobody sticks around."
What part of supercilious do you not understand?
BTW, Buster (LOL) you comment that "she is not considered a serious person by most Americans, and lots of conservatives." And you know this how? I'll just add delusional to your irrational rants to go along with your psychological projections.
projection
8. a. The attribution of one's own attitudes, feelings, or suppositions to others:
Nah. Telling the truth about the Marxist swine isn't, you know, "serious." Is it?