National Review Cans Columnist Ann Coulter

Washington Post ^ | 10/2/01 | Howard Kurtz

[BoomerBob]

Fair enough Doc. I will say that the firing suprised me somewhat too, but there is clearly more going on here than what we know at present. My point in this thread is that NR and its numerous writers have contributed far more substanitive essays than Ann Coulter, who IMO, gets more credit because of her physical appearance.

[Travis McGee]

That is the 20% they got from freepers clicking over to NRO after reading something you posted on FR.

[mercy]

Man! I'm telling ya. Put ten pounds on that girl and I'd ...... fill in any blank you can immagine as long as it involves great sex.

[ppaul]

Oh Kay - how very sensitive of you to forgive the Reverend Falwell.

:

[lightning]

"After 45 years, I'm done with NR."

You and me, Dude!

[F16Fighter]

"What NR did was take out the trash..."

Now Ann's "trash"?? How soon some of us forget.

With all due respect to you and the NR, who are assumingly on the same "team" -- Conservatism -- EVERY "team" needs a Ray Lewis (of the World Champ Baltimore Colts) to shake things up and go-for-the- throat-no-holds-barred sometimes.

When you play hard there's bound to be a little "collateral damage" now and then.

[connectthedots]

In any event, Coulter doesn't believe the controversy is hurting her. "Frankly, I'm getting a lot of great publicity," she says.

I like her attitude.

[TLBSHOW]

Coulter brushed off National Review's decision, saying the Web site paid only $5 a month for her column. Goldberg scoffed at that figure, saying "our records tell a very different story."

from wp story

[mercy]

You know, I think there is such a thing as being TOO conservative. Try a good blood tonic or maybe viagra or something.

[ppaul]

:

[BoomerBob]

Since when is the firing of an opinionated woman considered PC?

[ouroboros]

JohnHuang2 <---will never again post anything from National Review

There are endless principled reasons to "boycott" or otherwise thumb one's nose at National Review. The decision to no longer run Ann Coulter's syndicated column on NRO is not one of them.

[xm177e2]

No. Those are the ones you make into fertilizer.

Make zem into zoap, no?

[Tall_Texan]

**I don't know if it was tongue in cheek or not. Have to see the context of the original column. Standing alone though... it looks bad. She's entitles to her opinion. And NR is entitled to drop her. This is America! There are plenty of other places to express her opinion. I never cared too much for National Review anyway. **

Well said! Whatever happened to the right of an employer to fire anyone they wish? What ANN wrote I took as an emotional reaction to the loss of a dear friend (maybe more than one dear friend). Her airline security rants sounded more like Valley Girl whines than focusing on the meat of the matter.

I like her but NR has the right to do what it wants. So her column moves over from NRO to WND or Newsmax.com? Big deal! It's not the end of the world. She ought to be exploiting her assets by appearing more on television anyway. After all, she isn't *always* going to look that good so she had better line up a good-paying regular gig while she can.

NR isn't worth FReeping because, frankly, they aren't worth much of anything anyway.

[xm177e2]

No. Those are the ones you make into fertilizer.

Make zem into zoap, no?

ETHNIC CLEANSING!

Hahahaha Genocide is so funny Hahahaha

[SurferDoc]

I agree, Boomer, NR meant alot to me for many years. I 'learned' conservatism there.

[TLBSHOW]

check this out.

we do not apologize

[ValerieUSA]

The girl needs a sandwich. She's emaciated.