COURIC VS. COULTER ON TV

nypost.com ^ | 6/23/02 | PHILIP RECCHIA

[paltz]

Morning television darling Katie Couric may be extra early to work Wednesday.

That's when Couric may get to settle a score with one of the scheduled guests on "Today," conservative commentator Ann Coulter.

Coulter is supposed to show up to promote her new, 205-page book, "Slander," which hits bookstores Tuesday. In the tome, she rips into A-list names from the worlds of media, politics and entertainment in her quest to expose "liberal lies about the American right."

[SkyPilot]

I see you are attacking Ann Coulter again.

We should remind Freepers of your last endeavor:

Here, also see posts 144 thru 180

[2Trievers]

Good morning Skyster ... you are the quintessential Galahad! LOL &;-)

[ConsistentLibertarian]

Is that the thread where I said I thought Ann once argued that it would be great if she, an unmarried woman, went out to a bar and slept with a different stranger every night? I remember that thread. First people denied she made the claim. Then they denied she meant it. Then they got angry. Laz is the exception. He was already angry -- about a year ago he posted a long argument directed at me. I asked a simple, straightforward, polite question. He ran away and he's been angry ever since. When I mentioned that on the Coulter thread, he said I was making things up out of whole cloth. I asked: "You abandoned the thread for almost a year saying your girlfriend was coming to visit. True? Made up out of whole cloth? In the course of that year, rather than answering the simple question I posed, you'd get angry in threads, saying I was dishonest for not owning up to your brilliant refutation. True? Made up out of whole cloth? You can, of course, decline to answer." Laz declined to answer.

[TomB]

Laz declined to answer.

CL, not having a dog in this fight, it seems to me that after reading that thread, you should really be careful about thowing the "declined to answer" charge around. In all honesty, you didn't come out looking very good.

And I'd have to agree that the Coulter quote you give is taken WAY out of context.

[ConsistentLibertarian]

If you're interested in the issue, and you think the quote is taken out of context, take a look at posts #108 and #166 in the thread. If the quote is taken out of context, it should be possible to state what she did mean. If I've got it wrong, the invitation is open to set it straight. I can't do more until someone offers a different view. I'm not sure what questions you'd like answered. If it's about Ann's views on fascism, I responded in post #80. I try to ignore red herrings. Some people live by them.

[Joy Angela]

"They are saying that Coulter asked for this interview, which is their way of degrading and slandering her" You think Coulter did not ask for this interview? Or you think she did, and they're telling the truth, but the truth reflects badly on her?

The mentionable wasn't meant for my ears, but for the ears of viewers and for reporters who will mention Coulters appearance. It's a little liberal tidbit meant to override the content of the interview.

In SPIN CYCLE by Howard Kurtz, he goes into great detail how the Clinton Administration used this technique to slant news in their favor. If they could get a "soundbite" into each reporter's notebook, they knew they could slant the direction of the article. Reporters are like hungry dogs, if they can get that crunchy tidbit, something cute and snappy that can be headlined, they'll run with it.

It could be that the Ever Ambitious Press Corps just don't have the time to research subjects and the Clinton Administration learned how to play that weakness. It's well known that the heads of major news networks and even the AP are Clinton Cronies...so manipulation of the news lives on!

[TomB]

I try to ignore red herrings.

Pretty convenient when you can call any argument used against you a "red herring". No?

You wouldn't happen to have the entire Coulter conversation from Rivera Live, would you? I've only been able to find that individual sentence on the web.

[Pharmboy]

Katie also has MUCH nicer legs than Goebbels...(as a matter of fact, if her legs weren't so curvy and her eyes weren't so big who knows what she'd be doing)

[InvisibleChurch]

Actor Paul Sorvino talks about his role in the animated movie, “Hey Arnold! The Movie.”

i don't get it. what's the point? will paul sorvino talk about the demanding acting challenge of doing a voice for an animated football head?

[Pharmboy]

expect the rat Katie Couric to try and ambush her

You got that right...they will pull up all of Ann's outrageous quotes (outrageous in their minds, that is) and have practiced retorts to Ann's likely responses. I'm sure they will have brought in the smartest lawyers and PR flacks they could find at NBC.

But I'm sure Ann knows this too: she will be ready and those lightweights (Couric and Lauer) will not stand a chance.

[RGSpincich]

In need of several sandwiches.

[webstersII]

As screwed up as her politics are, she has taken on a lot tougher interviewees than Ann Coulter.

Generally I agree with your comments but I would like to know who else she has taken on that is tougher. Generally she lobs softballs at the liberals so a tough interview would have to be with a conservative. And her response to conservatives is usually to belittle them and look down her nose at them, then after they are gone she makes a snide comment. This is not a person who handles tough interviews well.

[ConsistentLibertarian]

I don't remember seeing a full transcript, so if you do find one please post it. Someone else thought they remembered the conversation and offered their best recollection about the context. I thought they were right, but couldn't be sure. That was the topic in #166. Note that if they were right about context, it confirmed the interpretation I offered in #108. Maybe other people have a different view? I can't tell until they state it.

[ConsistentLibertarian]

What's the format of her show? Does she sit in a chair and chat for three minutes with a guest? Is it a half hour debate? Is it an audience participation thing, like Oprah?

[RooRoobird14]

"Today" weekend anchor Jodi Applegate is dubbed a "telegenic half-wit."

This ain't no opinion. Jodi is infamous in NYC news circles for her spaced-out, Goldie-Hawn-on-"Laugh-in"-style airheadedness. Nice, but dumb as a stump.

LOL, Jodi is dumb as twelve bags of hammers. An NBC producer spotted Jodi on local Phoenix TV when he went to Arizona for the Super Bowl (1998?); he apparently decided he needed more "perky and nice" reporterettes. Gag......

[ConsistentLibertarian]

I miss Buffy, but you're reminding me why I don't have a TV.

[RooRoobird14]

Good Lord, Dain Bramage, what IS that picture you posted!?!

[johniegrad]

No one seems to be getting it. That's the viewing end of a colonoscope. I would have thought that Katie would be far more clogged up than that based on her "reporting".

[Joy Angela]

I miss Buffy, but you're reminding me why I don't have a TV.

Buffy the Vampire Slayer was a great show, and I just loved the episodes where she battled the Evil Mayor who was a dead-ringer for Bill Clinton!

[ConsistentLibertarian]

No doubt about it, Buffy rules.