Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Coulter sounds off in latest book
Yahoo & AP ^ | Wed Sep 24,12:27 PM ET | By FRAZIER MOORE, AP Television Writer

Posted on 09/24/2003 5:15:23 PM PDT by Forgiven_Sinner

NEW YORK - Ann Coulter rules as the saucy, blond siren of the Right.

Lashing out at all things liberal and Democrat (labels she uses interchangeably), she treats conservative Republicans to a spicy brand of reassurance that has leveraged her into multimedia stardom with talk-TV appearances, a syndicated column and big-selling books with shrill titles.

A year after her successful "Slander: Liberal Lies About the American Right," Coulter carries on with "Treason: Liberal Treachery From the Cold War to the War on Terrorism." The book already has spent 12 weeks on The New York Times list of best sellers, most recently in seventh place.

But despite bubbling sales and wells of success, Coulter has been faulted for research that is routinely sloppy and facts that are contrived.

"She builds a case on half-truths," declares Ronald Radosh, a historian and author whom Coulter salutes as a fellow conservative.

"She's a cultural phenomenon," concedes Joe Conason, a liberal columnist with his own best seller, "Big Lies: The Right-Wing Propaganda Machine and How It Distorts the Truth." He adds, "I wouldn't characterize what she puts forward as ideas. They're more in the nature of primitive emotions."

Bring it on, Coulter responds.

"There are people who would scream bloody murder if I wrote, 'It's a lovely day outside,'" she says with a satisfied look: People screaming bloody murder about her is great for business.

Continuing to do great business, "Treason" aims to spring Joseph McCarthy from history's gulag as "a wild-eyed demagogue destroying innocent lives," Coulter sums up.

Seizing quite the opposite position, her book lionizes the 1950s Wisconsin senator for his holy war against Communist spies in the United States, a crusade she argues was done in by the soft-on-commies Democratic Party, which has since compounded the outrage by demonizing McCarthy with its "hegemonic control of the dissemination of information and historical fact," she says between bites of a turkey club.

Writing the book was a mad scramble, Coulter reports during a recent lunch interview. She began "Treason" only last October, "but I worked pretty hard," she says. "I cut down on TV (appearances). I worked every Friday and Saturday night."

Veteran journalist and commentator M. Stanton Evans, who is writing a book on the McCarthy era, shared some of his extensive research with Coulter and "went over her manuscript on the McCarthy chapters," he says. "I can vouch for the facts. Her interpretations are obviously hers. They're obviously meant to be provocative."

Indeed, Coulter's McCarthy makeover only sets the stage for her wildly provocative main theme: Democrats, always rooting against America, are "the Treason Party," she explains with throaty conviction.

Democrats have "an outrageous history of shame," she says, "and they've brushed it all under the rug," racking up a shameful record that persists to present-day Iraq (news - web sites), where the Democrats, she claims, are hoping for America's comeuppance.

So the broad purpose of "Treason," says Coulter, "is to alert people, to send out flare lights: Warning, warning! Democrats can't be trusted with national security!"

It's all very simple.

In Coulter's America, everything, it seems, is simple. She reigns over a bipolar realm of either right or wrong; love or hate; smart or idiotic; men or — a Coulter favorite — "girly boys," a distinction that in her book yields such questions as the language-garbling "Why are liberals so loath of positive testosterone?" as well as "Why can't liberals let men defend the country?" (By men, she means Republicans.)

"Everything isn't black and white," counters historian Radosh, who has long contended that Communist spies posed an internal threat after World War II. Radosh draws the line at canonizing McCarthy for his blacklisting campaign to flush them out. "But the people who respond to her are people who already agree with her, and they don't want any nuance."

Just mention nuance to Coulter and she scoffs.

"As opposed to spending 50 years portraying McCarthy as a Nazi?" she says with a scornful laugh. "THAT's a very nuanced portrait! I think it's just meaningless blather, this nuanced business."

This nuanced business only muddies the issue, she insists, whereas generalizations are, in her view, a simple, get-to-the-heart-of-it way to make a point.

For example: "Gen-er-al-ly," she says with snide accentuation, "it's not good to play in traffic. Gen-er-al-ly, when your gut feels a certain way, you better hightail it to the bathroom or you'll be wetting your pants."

But is every registered Democrat automatically liberal, anti-American, godless, a liar and a "girly boy" — plus guilty of treason? That's a generalization Coulter all but states outright in her book, but in the interview has trouble defending.

"Don't worry," she wants every Democrat to know. "The country doesn't prosecute for treason anymore. If they didn't prosecute Jane Fonda (news) (for visiting the enemy during the Vietnam War), there's no worries there."

She is lunching at an open-air Upper East Side bistro near the apartment she rents in Manhattan. (Coulter, who is single, makes her primary residence in Miami Beach, Fla. — "lots of Cubans," she airily explains.)

Though known for her sexy garb (on the cover of "Treason" her twiggy form is sheathed in a sleek black gown), she is dressed down in white jeans and gray T-shirt. She just finished her column. She has hours of radio interviews scheduled later. It's a sunny, breezy day and life is sweet. The only cloud on her horizon, says Coulter, bright-eyed and full of herself, is insufficient time to savor her success.

At 41, Coulter has traveled a well-plotted road from her comfy Republican upbringing in New Canaan, Conn., to Cornell University in upstate New York, then law school at the University of Michigan.

She worked for the Center for Individual Rights, a Washington, D.C.-based conservative public policy group, then took a job with Spencer Abraham (news - web sites), the current Energy Secretary who then was a U.S. senator from Michigan.

In the mid-1990s, she signed onto a project to investigate alleged wrongdoings by President and Mrs. Clinton, which in 1998 led to "High Crimes and Misdemeanors: The Case Against Bill Clinton (news - web sites)," Coulter's first best seller.

From there, it was a short step to punditry, where she was well-served by her looks and sharp tongue, winning further notoriety after being fired by MSNBC and National Review Online for her inflammatory remarks.

When it comes to getting people riled, "I really have a gift," she chuckles.

And never more than right now, though she easily dismisses those who find fault with "Treason" as "people who haven't read it."

In the case of Al Franken, at least, she's right. Contacted by phone, the liberal satirist takes pains to say he hasn't bothered to read "Treason" cover-to-cover. Even so, he can reel off problematic passages he says he found just by spot-checking.

Here's one: On pages 265-266, Coulter blasts New York Times writer Thomas Friedman for opposing racial profiling in a December 2001 column. She quotes (and credits) several passages that seem to back up her complaint.

But it turns out that Coulter misappropriated Friedman's words in a way that has nothing to do with racial profiling or anything else addressed in his column, as anyone who reads it will discover. His column actually drew the less-than-startling conclusion that a new age of terrorism threatens our personal safety and our free society.

"She's shameless," says Franken, who examines Coulter's earlier pronouncements in "Lies and the Lying Liars Who Tell Them: A Fair and Balanced Look at the Right," which rests at No. 1 on the Times list of best sellers. Says Franken, "She deliberately misrepresents and distorts."

"I am giving an alternative view," states Coulter, reflecting mastery of a skill that, in "Treason," she lays on liberals: "infantile, logic-chopping games." It is how she struck gold — her artful, attention-grabbing game of argument for argument's sake.

"I'm not making that up!" she declares during lunch while pounding home yet another argument. Then, never one to doubt herself, she settles the matter with head-spinning proof: "It's in my book!"


TOPICS: Editorial; Extended News; Foreign Affairs; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: alfranken; anncoulter; bookreview; coulter; profiling; racialprofiling; review; slander; treason
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100101-113 next last
To: 7thson
Hillary's book is divine word to Dims.

I still have not heard a refutation of Coulter's book.

At least she is up front about who she is and what she believes. Unlike the Dims, who are totally dishonest in so many ways.


They have picked her entire life apart, and to my knowledge, have found absolutely nothing to criticize her on.
61 posted on 09/25/2003 5:34:36 AM PDT by At _War_With_Liberals (Celebrate Globalism)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: Rummyfan
That is an awesome montage.
62 posted on 09/25/2003 5:38:13 AM PDT by At _War_With_Liberals (Celebrate Globalism)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]

To: TigersEye
Someone once suggested that you should judge a tree by its fruits.

How about all the liberals in the military? Are they traitors?

63 posted on 09/25/2003 11:22:13 AM PDT by GoGophers
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]

To: Forgiven_Sinner
There you have it..
FRAZIER MOORE, AP Television Writer

Is guilty is slander and most probably treason too... nobodys is that dumb....
OK.. maybe Al Franken...

64 posted on 09/25/2003 12:04:32 PM PDT by hosepipe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: chudogg
basin = male
basinette = female
65 posted on 09/25/2003 3:16:48 PM PDT by firebrand
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: chudogg
It's in Slander, not in Treason.
66 posted on 09/25/2003 3:19:49 PM PDT by firebrand
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: chudogg
And the error easily occurs, because Norman Thomas's son was named Evan Thomas too, and the grandson doesn't use "Jr.," the way normal people do.
67 posted on 09/25/2003 3:21:50 PM PDT by firebrand
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: GoGophers
How about all the liberals in the military? Are they traitors?

Could be. I take it you haven't read the book either.

68 posted on 09/26/2003 5:13:24 AM PDT by TigersEye (Regime change in the courts. - Impeach activist judges!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies]

To: TigersEye
Could be.

Traitors that are putting their lives in danger to protect your freedom.

I take it you haven't read the book either.

I have read the first couple of chapters so far.

69 posted on 09/26/2003 6:17:27 AM PDT by GoGophers
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 68 | View Replies]

To: GoGophers
After you have read it all hopefully you will realize that the traitors she is referring to are the politicians, activists and media whores not the electorate.
70 posted on 09/26/2003 6:22:54 AM PDT by TigersEye (Regime change in the courts. - Impeach activist judges!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies]

To: TigersEye
After you have read it all hopefully you will realize that the traitors she is referring to are the politicians, activists and media whores not the electorate.

Does she explicitly say that only liberal politicians, activists and media whores are traitors?

71 posted on 09/26/2003 7:21:54 AM PDT by GoGophers
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies]

To: halfdome
"Does anybody here honestly believe that all Democrats are traitors and Saddam loving America haters who want us to lose the war on terror and live under the rule of Islamic fundamentalists?"

Did she say that?

How do you respond to the Democrat's party of perpetually appeasing America's enemies? Why vote for people who don't care for the existence of America as a country?

I await your responses.

72 posted on 09/26/2003 7:28:39 AM PDT by =Intervention= ( When you vote your own principles, there's always a winner -- YOU.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Eala
But a substantial number of the linguistic, um, changes in American English I see today look a lot more like ignorance (read: poor education) than anything else.

Very true!

73 posted on 09/26/2003 7:31:23 AM PDT by Chemist_Geek ("Drill, R&D, and conserve" should be our watchwords! Energy independence for America!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: GoGophers
Ok, so you are saying because there are some liberal servicemen who actually do care about their country, that the Democrat party machinery and the activists, are also patriotic?
74 posted on 09/26/2003 7:32:41 AM PDT by =Intervention= ( When you vote your own principles, there's always a winner -- YOU.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies]

To: EdReform
BTTT

read later...
75 posted on 09/26/2003 7:49:51 AM PDT by EdReform (Support Free Republic - Become a Monthly Donor)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: =Intervention=
I met VERY few "liberal" serviceman during my ten years in the Marines. Most were conservative, many were apolitical. The few liberals I did meet were either 1) women officers looking to advance their careers or 2) uneducated dull wits that couldn't get a job anywhere else.
76 posted on 09/26/2003 8:07:46 AM PDT by IGOTMINE (He needed killin')
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 74 | View Replies]

To: Bonaparte
"I'm still waiting for Yahoo, AP or any of her other leftist detractors to demonstrate factual error in her book -- instead of just saying that it's there."

Exactly. Take notice that they fail to point out that Ann's book is absolutely loaded with footnotes and facts that prove the traitorous deeds of the Dims.
77 posted on 09/26/2003 8:12:44 AM PDT by manic4organic (An organic conservative)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: =Intervention=
How do you respond to the Democrat's party of perpetually appeasing America's enemies?

Coulter makes an argument that is overly simplistic and ignores some realities of the Cold War and post-Cold War eras. The Democratic and Republican Parties basically agreed on foreign policy issues until the Vietnam War (see Cold War Consensus). Almost every prominent Democrat supported the war against Afghanistan.

Why vote for people who don't care for the existence of America as a country?

I don't.

78 posted on 09/26/2003 8:33:27 AM PDT by GoGophers
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | View Replies]

To: IGOTMINE
I met VERY few "liberal" serviceman during my ten years in the Marines.

About a third of the military voted for Gore.

79 posted on 09/26/2003 8:34:51 AM PDT by GoGophers
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 76 | View Replies]

To: Forgiven_Sinner; parida
A review of Ann's latest book by someone who actually lived through the years she writes about.

That being said, she's still talented, hot and successful, which I think riles folks like Radosh (Ron Who?) and Conason (first mate on the sinking flagship USS Salon) the most.

80 posted on 09/26/2003 8:55:45 AM PDT by Middle Man
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100101-113 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson