This response to Edwards/Matthews is great. But Ann did NOT respond during the interview itself. Why not?
Why couldn’t she have simply said, “I was lampooning your HUSBAND’s use of the boy’s death, not the death itself. I read that John Kerry himself had a similar reaction to Mr. Edwards exploitation of the tragedy.”
Or “I was comparing the reaction to my silly remark to the total lack of reaction to Maher’s death-wish for Cheney.”
A simple, concise explanation is better than 5 minutes of additional name-calling. Ann could have done better.
Matthews wouldn’t let her talk when Mrs. Edwards was on.
IMO she has to say shocking statements in order to stall their minds for a few seconds so she can respond.
She does a good job of responding in her columns because she can’t be interrupted.
Imagine her “speaking” this column to Chris Matthews. What with all his interrupting and injecting inane liberal-speak comments it could fill a whole hour of Hardball...and Coulter STILL wouldn’t be able to finish those few words.
This response to Edwards/Matthews is great.Perhaps.But Ann did NOT respond during the interview itself. Why not?
Why couldn’t she have simply said...
-- snip --
...A simple, concise explanation is better than 5 minutes of additional name-calling.
Ann could have done better.
Then again, even RUSH says that being ambushed on live TV can be difficult to defend against -- in the moment.From my previous post, with commentary by Rush Limbaugh:
...Look, it's easy, you go on television, you finish, and somebody says, "You know what you shoulda said," and sometimes I've resented that, but if I would have been on that show last night and been ambushed by a guy's wife...-- snip --
...That's one of the things that I would have said.
It's easy to come up with this stuff after the fact.
I'm not being critical of Ann Coulter.