Replies

I'll just post a reply to you as a surrogate for all the others on this thread who hold the notion that Ms Coulter chose her words poorly. Some of her words may have jarred YOUR sensibilities; however, she is very much the wordsmith and each word was vetted by her, the editor, and lawyers. Those were not poorly chosen. They were precisely chosen. They got precisely the intended result.

As proof, those sections were hyped, ridiculed, exploited, and focused the debate on a niggling problem that conservatives were having some difficulty in responding to- the immunized victim criticism. The left took no offense to being labeled "Godless".

To have taken on the major thesis of the book would have left them in an indefensible position. By throwing out the inflammatory words about the JG's, she reeled in liberals who were all to ready to quit the debate of liberalism as a religion and take on what looked like an all to easy dismissal of Ms. Coulter as a loose cannon.

At the end of the day, all of Ms. Coulter's objectives met precisely because she chose those exact words which you find poorly chosen.

Additionally, I don't think we (conservatives that agree with Coulter) should hold a private citizen to the same speech standards we would hold our elected officials.

Citizens are guaranteed the right to free speech; politicians have a need to be more PC (they want to keep their job). Ann, a well trained lawyer, knows her boundaries.

If the "Joizy Goils" are offended, let them litigate against Ann and provide proof in court. (I'll handle ticket sales!)