[Mike Bates]

Not to stir things up or anything. . . . :)

[NonLinear]

enjoy

verb

1. To receive pleasure from: like1, relish, savor. Informal go for. Slang dig. See like/dislike.
2. To have the use or benefit of: have, hold, possess. See owned/unowned.
3. To have at one's disposal: boast, command, have, hold, possess. See owned/unowned.

I'd say she was right by definition #2.

[Mr. Buzzcut]

Check out the first definition.

[Terpfen]

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.

Um... what? Coulter is stating her own opinion. I'm pretty sure she knows what her opinions are.

Idiocy on display.

[Radix]

"Coulter's comments are not only false but cruel."

How does this author know that the comments were false?

Maybe there are some 9-11 widows out there who are still too distraught to speak out on issues such as these women did. Maybe those callous unfeeling left wing women are the really cruel ones.

Keep this pot stirred. Make these people calling themselves commentators and journalists defend themselves and lets keep Ann's work in the headlines.

Idiots!

[Doc Savage]

Assuming that 3 out of every 4 marriages ends in divorce, and that their departed spouses all worked in a "high pressure" jobs which left little time for family or marital bliss without even mentioning romance, I think we could argue on a statistical basis that three of these harpies were planning on cleaving. For all we know one or more of them might actually be glad the clods gone, not to mention "he" paid off handsomely, win, place and show!

But more to the point, who cares? When genetic dreck on the left gets away with Bush is Hitler etc on a daily basis, why should we care what Ann calls these nitwit skanks?????

[presently no screen name]

I've never seen people enjoying their husbands' deaths so much."


That's her opinion. Do YOU know how many people she saw after a tragic death come into the limelight and stay for 4+ years, point fingers accusing others of causing 9/11 and degrade others daily. This was probably Ann's first - and mine, too.

She can't say what SHE has experienced? IT'S A PERSONAL OBSERVASATION....."I've never seen....".

[ozzymandus]

Ann was not "wrong". Ann was expressing her opinion. The author of this piece seems very slow-witted.

[NavyCanDo]

I've just finished the now famous 5th chapter where she wrote the line, "I've never seen people enjoying their husbands' deaths so much." Yea, in my opinion the line could of been said differently, but every thing she says about the Jersey Girls is true. They are using their husbands deaths as a "you can't touch me shield" in their anti-war activist movement. And only a small portion of the chapter is devoted to the Jersey girls. She also talks about others with infallibility because of their circumstances, including Christopher Reeve, Max Cleland, John Murtha, and even Nancy Reagan when it comes to stem cell research.

[freedom1st]

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.

[KoRn]

""I've never seen people enjoying their husbands' deaths so much."

That was a very poor choice of words in what was otherwise a correct point regarding the "Jersey Girls". They are nothing more than a group of political hacks using their husband's deaths as a backdrop for political attacks.

[Amelia]

Coulter is the "shock jock" of the right. She knew that she was being rude and insensitive, and she knew it would get her lots of media attention - and she was correct.

She could have made her point without being so nasty, but that wouldn't have been Ann, and it wouldn't have gotten her nearly as much publicity.

[DocRock]

I don't think this debate is really about Ann's comments of the four widows in question, but the comments she made in regard to evolution.

[FUD-EP]

Coulter is an former dead-head who works for the liberals.

Her entire purpose is to make shocking half-true remarks which make conservatives appear knee-jerk and mean spirited.

She's an ugly clown. People should stop paying attention to her.

[hosepipe]

[ 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. ]

Cliff;
You're a Moonbat.. Ann Coulter attacked obvious democrats spouting obvious democrat PaP.. for political reasons.. And the wives became millionaires because of their husbands deaths..

Worse Cliff you yourself didn't notice all that.. Not that you even read "the Book".. The Book was not about newly wealthy housewives defaming their husbands .. another thing you suspiciously overlooked.. many other far greater issues were discussed.. Conviently overlooked..

Cliff you are NO journalist.. and not worthy too use Ann Coulters name.. Coulter is NOT a Moonbat.. Suggest reading the book.. numbnutz...

[gondramB]

>>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?<<


My problem with the situation is that this is the wrong question. The question ought to be - why should the 9/11 victims families have such a large voice in policy. Why should shoud they any voice?

Did we poll the families of the people killed a Pearl Harbor to ask if we should declare war on Germany too?

[Clemenza]

Cliff seems like a nice man, and that is his problem.

We need more a-sholes on our side that call a spade a spade. We have enough "Davey and Goliath" types in the conservative movement. We need more Ann Coulters.

The Jersey Broads deserved every bit of criticism they received.

[TAdams8591]

I have loved Ann since I first saw her on MSNBC during Clintongate. But (monkey) I agree with the author of this piece.

[Lonesome in Massachussets]

Coulter responded:

Ka-ching!
Ka-ching!
Ka-ching!
Ka-ching!
Ka-ching!
Ka-ching!
Ka-ching!
Ka-ching!
Ka-ching!
Ka-ching!
Ka-ching!
Ka-ching!
Ka-ching!
Ka-ching!
Ka-ching!
Ka-ching!
Ka-ching!
Ka-ching!
Ka-ching!
Ka-ching!
Ka-ching!
Ka-ching!
Ka-ching!
Ka-ching!
Ka-ching!
Ka-ching!
Ka-ching!
Ka-ching!
Ka-ching!
Ka-ching!
Ka-ching!
Ka-ching!
Ka-ching!
Ka-ching!
Ka-ching!
Ka-ching!
Ka-ching!
Ka-ching!
Ka-ching!

[sauropod]

.

[jebeier]

Somebody call the WAAAAAAAAAAHmbulance.