Best Seller Trampled Under Footnotes

St. Petersburg Times | August 26, 2002 | Jjohn C. Cotey

[Lightnin]

The liberal gang is in a state of near panic over the astonishing success of Coulter's new book, still atop the NYT best-seller list.

If you haven't bought the book already, race out to your nearest bookseller and do so!

It's so much fun to see the lefties in such agony.

[FreedomPoster]

It's so much fun to see the lefties in such agony.

Worth-saying-again bump!

[UbIwerks]

They're nearly foaming at the mouth.

I remember one smear personally: Andy Hiller's pop quiz to then candidate Bush.

Who the hell knows that?

[marta R]

I started at Chapter 2, because Chapter 1 seemed to have been well-mined," says Limerick. "I learned only yesterday that AHC (Coulter) calls it her favorite."

Limerick cites nearly 50 places in the chapter where he feels Coulter erred or merely twisted facts to fit her theme

Limerick? First off claims he cites nearly 50 places where he "feels" coulter twisted the facts? That's liberal logic for you; forget reason and logic they feel their way to finding answers. Show me the footnotes!!

[maica]

This article seems to say that a lot of liberals are actually buying Ann's book because there are so many facts that they have to study! Good work, Ann! She has actually engaged some people in acknowledging that there can be a different viewpoint from theirs.

Conservatives can come out of the closet in many more arenas now!

[Movemout]

Even if she was lying her pretty little tail end off, and I am sure that she is not, then that would merely put her on a level playing field with the libs. She has generated enough foam from the left to extinguish an Oregon forest fire started by liberal policies. Kudos to Miss Coulter (I hope she would prefer Miss to Ms).

[section9]

Lost in all of this is the central point of Coulter's book.

It is not that Liberals are nasty and engage in ad hominem argument. It is that this intellectual laziness has grown to a point that almost all serious intellectual policy debate exists on the Right.

That's where the serious policy formulations are being germinated. Welfare Reform came out of the Republican Governor's Conference and the Republican House, not out of Bill Clinton's fertid mind.

Coulter is dead on. The lefties know it. That's why they're going through this St. Vitus' Dance routine.

Be Seeing You,

Chris

[stlrocket]

AND...... She's not only smart, but very attractive as well!

ANNE COULTER - LOOKIN GREAT!

[Woahhs]

These people do nothing but prove Coulter's insight. The misleading title of the article promises a slam-dunk, we gotcha dead to rights, expose' of Anne Coulter's perfidity. Then it delivers absolutely NOTHING but the ranting of fools who can't distinguish fact errors from their own opinions.

Priceless!

[fporretto]

In all fairness, Miss Coulter probably interpreted the quotes she found in the Big Media as harshly as she possibly could -- perhaps too harshly now and then. She's angry about the treatment the right has received from them over the years. So am I. Even though it's grown subtler in the past couple of years, television and newspaper journalism still floats on an undercurrent of disdain for conservative and libertarian thought.

The antidote to Big Media's bias is the development of alternatives. That's happening now, on the talk radio circuit and the Internet. People who thought they were isolated in their convictions, and were therefore afraid to speak, are gradually discovering that they're a majority of ordinary persons in private life. Books like Slander don't directly contribute to the growth of that new, grass-roots right wing community, but they do assist its coalescence by reinforcing its belief that it's been unfairly treated.

As for "Miss" versus "Ms.", my Fiction Editor Pat tells me that, whereas "Mrs." is an abbrevation for a French term that means "the wife of," and "Miss" is the English contraction of "Mademoiselle," "Ms." means nothing, is an abbreviation for nothing, and should not be used. Ever. Since Pat is a highly-rated Aikido player and could probably toss me into geosynchronous orbit, I tend to take her advice.

Freedom, Wealth, and Peace,
Francis W. Porretto
Visit The Palace Of Reason: http://palaceofreason.com

[moyden]

A pride of lions.

A gaggle of geese.

A howling of liberals.

[Movemout]

Thank you for your reply. I always enjoy your posts and many of the articles on your website.

Sometimes one must overreact to make a point when the holder of an opposing view refuses to pay attention. Thus "too harshly" may, in fact, be just harsh enough. Likewise, your generous characterization of media bias by the left as being an undercurrent is seemingly, to me, a riptide. A riptide may result in your eventual drowning if you struggle directly against it. If you swim as close to perpendicular to the tide as possible then it is more likely that you will regain the shore alive. Ann's book puts us perpendicular to the riptide by using its force to give us all a chance to regain the shore.

I agree that ten years ago that I felt rather isolated and impotent in the face of liberal rhetoric.There were no obvious outlets to vent an opposing opinion to the mainstream media. You are also right in identifying talk radio and the internet as the counterbalance to that trend. Thank God for that.

As far as the lesson on the origins of Mrs, Miss, and Ms--- I have never been inclined to argue with an experienced editor on such matters. However, I feel compelled to point out that the origins of Ms may have no rational origins but common usage has given it a popular context equal to the historic context of the other abbreviations.

[BillCompton]

Limerick cites nearly 50 places in the chapter where he feels Coulter erred or merely twisted facts to fit her theme.

Yes! I picked up on it too. Don't you love an article like this that refers to countless errors, but can't find a good example where she says a=b, b=c, but a<>c. Perhaps disagreements count as 'errors'. After all, think about the term Polically Correct. Correctness, is not aligned with truth, but defined at the outset without any logic to validate it.

But I agree that the book should have no credibility, because Dale Earnhardt's name was covered on the NYT in a timely fashion. This Coulter mistake proves scientifically that everything in her book is dead wrong. It also proves that the NYT is NOT out of touch with the rest of the country. And it proves, conclusively, that conservatives of all stripes have been proven wrong in everything. Check and mate. I feel so vanquished!

[William Terrell]

This is a really strange article. It claims that Ann's book is riddled with errors, too many to count. But all the author does is excerpt quotes from the book as if just seeing the language used is enough to prove it wrong. The closest to an error he gets is 70 references to civil rights marches instead of the Coulter claimed 100 and an article printed the next day instead of the day after.

This looks like just a fit on the floor to me.

[maica]

Sometimes one must overreact to make a point when the holder of an opposing view refuses to pay attention. Thus "too harshly" may, in fact, be just harsh enough. Likewise, your generous characterization of media bias by the left as being an undercurrent is seemingly, to me, a riptide. A riptide may result in your eventual drowning if you struggle directly against it. If you swim as close to perpendicular to the tide as possible then it is more likely that you will regain the shore alive. Ann's book puts us perpendicular to the riptide by using its force to give us all a chance to regain the shore.

---

This is a terrific analogy and would be very useful when critics of President Bush's tactics complain that he is not 'doing enough.' Instead of butting heads with Daschle, et al, he is using their actions against them. A recent example - his reference to the waiver that Daschle gave to South Dakota forest managers resonated well with the President's audiences on the west coast .

[7thson]

After this book came out, I believe that more and more people are seeing the liberal bias. One glaring example recently is when the network news covered Larry Klayman's Judicial Watch's court action againt VP Cheney. For years, while it was going after Clinton, Klayman was regarded by the press as a hack. Now, the liberal media gives him respectability.

[Movemout]

A nice illustration of my point. Thank you.

[Lightnin]

"The antidote to Big Media's bias is the development of alternatives. That's happening now, on the talk radio circuit and the Internet."

I also view, great satisfaction, the rapid rise of the Fox News Channel.

[Drawsing]

Somerby: "'Atheist liberal?' Who uses that term? She makes up a term to make her point. I love those kinds of silly things."

The very absence of such a term is an indication of bias. The unspoken assumption in the media is that there are your average well balanced Oprah watching "normal" people and then there are these rabid, foaming, gap-toothed Christian conservatives who definitely need to be labeled so the proper stereotype is in place before you listen to their ideas.

[Publius6961]

"So over the top," laments Davis, a 30-something aspiring writer. "That anyone would take that seriously astounds me."

Keep your day job, loser.

Wait.
Why am I responding to this silly thread and giving it credibility?
Can I take this response back?