Does Sullivan believe that if Ann disappeared, Moore would go away? This is hardly the case. Until recently, the left had a monopoly. There was no Sullivan, no Coulter, no Limbaugh, no Fox. No intenet. No Free Republic. Until recently Walter Cronkite could say things no more extreme than Moore and get paid to say it. And no one would refute him.
But those days are gone.
, in the wake of 9/11, she urged the invasion of all Muslim nations and the forcible conversion of their citizens to Christianity.
Not all. Just our enemies. She's right, however impolite it was to say it.
In Coulter’s world there are two types of people: conservatives and liberals. These are not groups of people with competing ideas.
In Coulter's world, Conservatives compete. They are not required to sit still with hands folded while "liberals" re-write history. In Coulter's world, paid liars like Chomsky and the New York Times are confronted and forced to eat their words.
Coulter does not seek to complicate her view of liberals with any serious treatment of the many Democrats and liberals who were ferociously anti-communist. Scoop Jackson? Harry Truman? John F Kennedy? Lyndon Vietnam Johnson?
Sullivan needs to study history. Truman's anti-communism is open to debate... precisely the debate Ann has begun. JFK's anti-communism is completely false. The only room for debate, after considering his betrayal of the Tibetans, the Cubans, his assassination of Diem, his withdrawal of US assets from Turkey in the face of Soviet aggression, is whether he was a traitor, or merely drug-addled and incompetent. As Ann would say, where our national security was concerned, the difference between the two was immaterial. Or, as she might say, if he had been a traitor, what would he have done differently?
As for Johnson, he mismanaged the Viet Nam War. That is his claim to anti-communist fame.
American politics has been badly damaged by the scruple-free tactics of those like Moore and Coulter. In some ways, of course, these shameless hucksters of ideological hate deserve each other.
It comes down to this. Moore is a liar, and it is pretty easy to deconstruct his work. Coulter is telling the truth. So far, every attack on her I have read has focused on her supposed hatred of "liberals" but have not bothered to refute her on any substantive point. They don't refute her because they can't. I know my history as well as anyone, and she is telling the truth. The best her critics can do is complain about her tone, or complain that she says "the Times said..." when she should have said "an editorial in the Times said...".
I am disappointed in Sullivan for this rather unworthy attack on her.
If you really think Ann does anything but preach to the converted you're delusional. No one but firebreathing right wingers are going to even bother to listen to her arguments. The vast middle that you want to persuade is totally turned off by her attitude and crude behavior.