Yes I once fought in the Coulter Wars of 2006
Posted on 06/13/2006 3:02:44 PM PDT by Mike Bates
In the controversy over Ann Coulter's comments about the group of 9/11 widows, there is one critical question, from the point of view of ensuring standards of accuracy in the media. How does Coulter know it to be true that, "I've never seen people enjoying their husbands' deaths so much." There is no evidence whatsoever that those women enjoyed their husbands' deaths, and Coulter offers none. The only "evidence" for this preposterous and hurtful claim is that the women became activists and sought the media spotlight and took a political position at odds with that of Coulter. But what does that prove?
I think Coulter probably would have been correct to say that the women appeared to enjoy the media attention. You don't go on these shows unless you enjoy them to some degree. But enjoying a death? And the death of a loved one when fatherless children were left behind? Coulter's comments are not only false but cruel. She has also made other disparaging personal comments about the women.
In journalism, facts and truth are supposed to matter. Opinions are allowed, and Coulter, a columnist for Human Events and many other newspapers, is entitled to her own opinions.
SNIP
If the matter only involved personal opinions about people or things, Coulter's comments wouldn't really be newsworthy or significant. But she is claiming to have inside knowledge of the personal psychology of this group of women who lost their husbands on 9/11. That is why the comments have generated so much outrage—except from a few conservatives unwilling to criticize her.
(Excerpt) Read more at aim.org ...
Ann was not "wrong". Ann was expressing her opinion. The author of this piece seems very slow-witted.
Wrong! I did not.
They are not entitled to protection from attacks on their own positions and behaviours.
Get real! Coulter's words were an attack on their personal relationships with their husbands .....not "positions"!
By the way, what did you think of her tartly surmising on Hannity and Colmes: "How do we know that their husbands weren't going to divorce them before 9/11?"
That is not an attack on their "positions". That is purely SICK!
Ann was not wrong. She said:
"I've never seen people enjoying their husbands' deaths so much."
This is a relative statement. For every wife that Ann has seen after their husbands' deaths, these woman cared less about their husbands' deaths implies that these woman enjoyed their husbands' deaths more than any other wives who lost their husbands.
These women showed no mourning for their husbands lives lost on 9/11 that I saw.
Right.
And that's the point that should be made. She could have made her much needed point about the left putting up these "untouchable victims" without that lamentable sentence.
Now.......... the left will isolate that one sentence and she will be dogged by it for the rest of her life.
I'm just surprised that everyone is not making more of her ugly comment about their husbands divorcing them before 9/11. That was even worse, in my opinion.
BTTT
I think it's more like 'there seems to be a knot IN Cliffy's undies' since his mind isn't working to well.....
Still, folks obviously went through the book and decided what they could perhaps shoot it down with and came up with the cause of the Jersey Girls. Now all in all, this shows how strong the book is that this is its weakest link. Honestly, this whole campaign to impugn Ann and suppress this book has primarily gone to benefit both Coulter's arguments and her pocket book.
Honestly, without this "Big Deal" being made, do you think she would be on Leno tonight? This is kind of attention that Wilson and Clarke got by the machinations of CBS and their media empire paid for given freely. She is getting opportunities to speak for the hopes she will say something truly unsupportable and humiliating. As long as Ann is up to the task, and if she can get off of this point and share her other points as well.. this will serve to vastly increase the reach of her ideas.
Yes I once fought in the Coulter Wars of 2006
Good post. Yet they constantly call those that don't stand a stand - spineless.
When someone does take a stand - they trash her. They trash her and accuse her of trashing others. They learned well from the libs - trash the messenger to avoid the message.
"They learned well from the libs - trash the messenger to avoid the message."
Except that in this case by trashing the messenger they are proving her message -- a thousand times over.
Troll. ;op
Exactly. That's the funny part - the trashers, by saying she is wrong are proving she is right! The irony of it all.
I just don't understand the reaction to this. There are far more important things to defend, and when we defend a disgusting comment just because a conservative says it, we look as bad as the DUmmies when they cover for Patches Kennedy or Jefferson or whoever.
I've had, and read, his/their books for many years. You can just pick one up and start reading anywhere and learn something.
"But she went into the gutter, and she will pay for that sentence forever. Because it's quite easy for the left or anyone else to isolate it by itself."
Man, are you on a self-righteous tear or what? How many posts in a row are you going to make on basically the same subject?
Funny, I didn't see you castigate Debra Burlingame for calling these same women "the rock stars of grief."
What exactly is the difference between her remarks and Ann's? Because she is a 9/11 widow?
Or is your outrage highly selective.
Your addiction to smug self-righteousness is clear. But that seems to be a theme on these Coulter threads.
Remind me to give you a wake up call at 1:00 am.
Speculating on their marriages ("they were on their way to divorce") or saying they were enjoying their husbands' death.
Leave the dead men out of it. Don't mention them. It's classless and totally unnecessary to the point Coulter's trying to make.
You're quite free with jumping on the motivations of other posters, yet you seem to have no trouble with Coulter's motivations (i.e., being outrageous to sell books).
The hypocrisy is hip deep on this thread from the Coulterites.
That's not what you told the Chicago Bulls when they called.
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.