Air America Host: Coulter's Never Had Relationship Longer Than Fruit Fly Gestation

MSNBC-Tucker Carlson/NewsBusters ^ | Mark Finkelstein

[governsleastgovernsbest]

by Mark Finkelstein

September 25, 2006 - 17:10

Let's play one of our favorite games: WIACHSI, which of course stands for "What If a Conservative Had Said It?"

Ready? OK, let's play. What would happen if a conservative attacked a female liberal icon by calling her promiscuous? How many outraged Dem elected officials, NOW leaders, Naomi Wolfs . . . and Air America hosts would be popping up all over the MSM to proclaim their outrage?

And yet, on today's edition of Tucker Carlson, Air America host and class-action trial lawyer [nice two-fer!] Mike Papantonio leveled the loose woman charge at none other than Ann Coulter.

The subject was a new book, "I Hate Ann Coulter", written by four authors who have chosen to remain anonymous out of their supposed fear of "gun-toting abortion-clinic bombing, self-proclaimed wing nuts who follow Coulter."

Asked to comment on the authors preference for anonymity, Papantonio, instead uttered this slanderous non sequitur:

"To really understand Ann Coulter you have to focus on the fact that this is a woman who has never had a relationship with another person that has lasted longer than the gestation period of a fruit fly."

Carlson cut him off: "I will not have that. Going into people's personal lives is out of bounds. We're not going to talk about people's personal lives unless they're doing it in public."

Papantonio then claimed that Coulter "has invited this discussion," but Carlson made it clear he would brook no further discussion of Ann's private life, and that put an end to matters. Let's remember this one the next time an MSMer accuses conservatives of being hate-filled, sex-obsessed, puritanical or misogynistic.

[soccermom]

"Now, if someone is capable of taking action to rain on the parade of classless political whores, and does so, that's up to them. :-)" Yes, and if someone thinks personal attacks are the only "action" she can take to "rain on the parade" it doesn't speak well of that individual. And if people want to defend her for making personal attacks, "that's up to them :-)" But they can't turn around and whine when Coulter is personally attacked.

[MadIvan]

To my knowledge, there has been no public reference to the Lady Ann's personal life, nor any verifiable information about it. Just so, she's entitled to keep that aspect of her life personal.

Typical that the left cannot attack her ideas, so they try to wiggle their way into her knickers.

Regards, Ivan

[an amused spectator]

Yes, and if someone thinks personal attacks are the only "action" she can take to "rain on the parade" it doesn't speak well of that individual.

You're just envious because you haven't been able to leverage your stint on the Free Republic into a weapon of the political wars like Buckhead or others. You'd be singing a different tune if your opinion here made a difference, dear. I know that from personal experience. ;-)

But they can't turn around and whine when Coulter is personally attacked.

I don't recall whining about the asbestos tort "lieywer" and his anonymous buddies personally attacking Coulter. She can handle herself right well when it comes to frauds and faceless scum, I believe. :-)

[an amused spectator]

Rudolph plead guilty to that one and the one in Georgia to avoid the death penalty and is serving four consecutive life sentences without the possibility of parole.

Maybe our governmental OCDs can up the ante to five or six consecutive life sentences without the possibility of parole.

THAT will show him...

[JohnD9207]

But they can't turn around and whine when Coulter is personally attacked.

---

I'm sure Ann is amused by this banter and really couldn't give a rats behind about what is said about her. I would also bet she is secure in her adult relationships, something that comes with being a beautiful woman. Geez

[soccermom]

"You're just envious because you haven't been able to leverage your stint on the Free Republic into a weapon of the political wars like Buckhead or others."
Of spare me! Every time there is a thread in which someone dares to criticize Coulter -- be it O'Reilly, Parker or whomever -- the predictable response is "they're just jealous". Can't you guys come up with anything else? Why is it so diffcult for people like you to conceive of the fact that some conservatives might actually want their side to be represented with decency and civility? I have no clue who "Buckhead" is or what he or she does. I presume I've posted to him or her at some point on these threads, but you'll have to forgive me for not turning anonymous posters into cult figures. I address the argument and the issue and don't really concern myself with who the poster is. I have no interest in "leveraging my 'stint'" into a weapon of the political wars. Who thinks like that???? I have a life. Posting on FR is a hobby that I may take up for a few weeks at a time and then leave for a while -- depending on how busy I am. If you think FR exists to launch your obscure life into stardom, knock yourself out. If it consumes you to the point that you turn everything into a soap opera or war, enjoy your little world. For the rest of us,it really is just about an exchange of opinions, a source of information, etc. But if it'll make you feel better, I promise to vote for you as Grand Poohbah of the Freepers at our next homecoming dance. :-)

"I don't recall whining about the asbestos tort "lieywer" and his anonymous buddies personally attacking Coulter." You may not, but there are others on this thread who have. May I remind you that you initially responded to a post I made to someone else. If it doesn't concern you, why feel the need to repsond? If you're prefectly happy to watch the personal smears fly from both sides, goody for you.

[soccermom]

"I'm sure Ann is amused by this banter and really couldn't give a rats behind about what is said about her." I agree. I think Ann actually enjoys the mudslinging. I was addressing the posters on this thread who complain about personal attacks against either. Either they're off limits for both sides or they're fair game for both sides. Personally, I'd like to see it off limits for both sides. But that clearly isn't going to happen, because the bases of both sides seem to thrive on it.

"I would also bet she is secure in her adult relationships, something that comes with being a beautiful woman. Geez" I have no clue about her relationships and I've said if she's happy with her life, good for her. It isn't the kind of life I would choose. I couldn't imagine a life without my husband and my children. But, I understand there are women who can lead happy and fulfilled lives without them.

[unspun]

Watching Miss Coulter on the FoxNews' Your World right now. Thinking maybe Ann's amour in shining armor is Uncle Sam.

(To any liberal bloggers looking in: no accusation of incest inferred.)

[soccermom]

Well, no one can deny Ann loves America! There is something to be said for women like she and Condi, who have such a devotion to their service of the country that a personal life takes a back seat.

[unspun]

Yes, I'm kind of familiar with that phenomena.

But I haven't been in the back seat with either of them!

[an amused spectator]

Every time there is a thread in which someone dares to criticize Coulter -- be it O'Reilly, Parker or whomever -- the predictable response is "they're just jealous".

I never said "jealous". I said "envious". There's a difference.

I have no clue who "Buckhead" is or what he or she does.

LOL! Buckhead is the Freeper who put a full spread of torpedoes into the good ships Dan Rather and Mary Mapes while they were steaming merrily along with their phony "Bush memo" story.

I have no interest in "leveraging my 'stint'" into a weapon of the political wars. Who thinks like that???? I have a life. Posting on FR is a hobby that I may take up for a few weeks at a time and then leave for a while -- depending on how busy I am. If you think FR exists to launch your obscure life into stardom, knock yourself out. If it consumes you to the point that you turn everything into a soap opera or war, enjoy your little world.

So, you're a lightweight who is just shooting your mouth off blowing off a little steam on FR. Thanks for the heads-up! We'll file your opinion about Coulter where it belongs. ;-)

The rest of us serious Freepers will continue manning the fort walls so you can sleep easier at night. Don't mind us!

May I remind you that you initially responded to a post I made to someone else. If it doesn't concern you, why feel the need to repsond?

As it turns out, I probably was right to respond. You're most likely as clueless about the true nature of the Jersey Girls as you are about the identity of Buckhead.

Try not to get on Coulter's case when it comes to issues that are deeper than your interest.

OK, I've done my public service in this matter. You may resume playing on the Free Republic, and I'll go off to stand watch in your stead. :-)

[unspun]

I agree that just a few of our beloved Ann Coulter's statements have been over the top, to the extend of handing the opposition ammunition.

[soccermom]

LOL! Buckhead is the Freeper who put a full spread of torpedoes into the good ships Dan Rather and Mary Mapes while they were steaming merrily along with their phony "Bush memo" story. Oh, OK -- kudoes to him or her. That was a fascinating story. I actually took an interest in that story myself: Yes, I'm still toiling away in bitter envy that I wasn't recognized for my pajama-clad sluething!

The rest of us serious Freepers will continue manning the fort walls so you can sleep easier at night. Don't mind us! I think it is cute the way you guys take internet forums so seriously. Carry on soldier! Defend us all with your trusty keyboard!

"As it turns out, I probably was right to respond. You're most likely as clueless about the true nature of the Jersey Girls as you are about the identity of Buckhead." I'm well aware of what the Jersey Girls do and say. I am also well aware that people can disagree with and discredit the Jersey Girls, without making up lies about their marriages. Just as they should be able to disagree with Coulter without making personal attacks on her.

Try not to get on Coulter's case when it comes to issues that are deeper than your interest. The "issue" of this thread is personal attacks. Coulter has made them. Coulter is the victim. I oppose both. I don't see anything complex about that. Unless you are soooooooo deep that, in your world you spin it so that personal attacks are justified for one, but not the other.

[soccermom]

"to the extend of handing the opposition ammunition." Exactly -- that is my objection. We lose the moral authority to challenge people like Sheehan and the Jersey Girls when she makes personal attacks. She unwittingly validates the tactic she is trying to undermine.

[soccermom]

"But I haven't been in the back seat with either of them!" LOL!

[gathersnomoss]

Whatever.

[gathersnomoss]

Cutting edge humor.

[Hoodat]

Ahem . . . Per the rules:

[hotstuff]

The Levin/Papantonio firm is also home to the conservative sellout Joe Scarborough. This ambulance chasing firm bought half the billboards in Pensacola and plastered their ugly mugs side by side. I think they are joined at the hip (or somewhere).

[an amused spectator]

I think it is cute the way you guys take internet forums so seriously.

I think it's cute that you know so little about this forum and its history. The Clintons certainly took this forum seriously - to the point of recruiting a couple of major media outlets to legally attack it, and having the case directed to a friendly Clinton appointee.

Name-calling by Coulter is tiddly-winks compared to that kind of suborning of the political and legal systems of this country.

Apparently, the Clintons' gut sense about the kind of danger posed by this particular kind of forum was correct, and we have the heads of Rather, Mapes and others hanging on our gates to prove it.

I'm done with you.