[BamaG]

This, of course will change no one's mind. Those who worship at the alter of Ann will continue to make "girly boy" comments and refuse to acknowledge that the National Review even had the right to drop her. I will continue to subscribe, as I have done for years.

[duvausa]

Me too

[BurkeanCyclist]

I was just about to post this. Glad I did one last search, because now you can take the heat for pointing out that there are two sides to this squalid little issue.

[sendtoscott]

btt

[Constitution Day]

This sounds like a catfight to me. But I'll still subscribe.

[<1/1,000,000th%]

Of course NR had the right to drop her. So what? Go Ann!!

[The Other Harry]

[lady lawyer]

I wish they'd stop tearing each other apart in public. The attempts at self-justification on both sides just make them look small.

[ken5050]

I'm surprised that JG didn't blame the column on PMS.....

[Jim Robinson]

These people should not be airing their lace panties in public.

[NittanyLion]

I agree with you - Coulter seems to be acting very odd lately. I understand that this is an emotional time for all, and hopefully she'll regain her senses soon.

[Notforprophet]

"Apparently, in Ann's mind, she constitutes the thin blonde line between freedom and tyranny, and so any editorial decision she dislikes must be a travesty."

This line is particularly low, and IMHO a cheap shot. What's the matter Jonah, did Ann hurt your feelings?

Notforprophet

[11th Commandment]

I think NRO should have picked-up the phone and called her. Solving issue via email is sloppy business practice.

[francisandbeans]

actually, this did change my mind. Jonah laid it our pretty well here, without resorting to name calling, and I believe that Ann is not of sound mind with lingering thoughts of Barbara Olson.

[white rose]

I'm usually a big fan of Ann's work, and I have no particular fondness for National Review (sorry, Jonah, but "girly-boys" is almost too apt.) However, that "Bring back the Crusades" column was embarrassing, and, from what I've heard, her behavior ever since has been yet more embarrassing. I understand how overemotional she is about 9/11--who isn't?--but Goldberg's right, her feelings are overriding her good sense on this one.

[habs4ever]

So, she blew it.NR will carry on, and I will continue to enjoy the wide variety of writers they have.It's all very petty.

[Justin Raimondo]

Goldberg: Oh, we've published PLENTY of anti-Arab, anti-Islamic, kill-everyone screeds, but Ann's was too ... honest.

Bwahahahahahaha!

Worse than Goldberg is David Horowitz, who "hired" Coulter as soon as she got the boot from NRO. His explanation was that her "invade their countries, and convert them to Christianity" was "tongue-in-cheek." Yeah, right. At least Coulter has the, uh, cojones to say what she really believes -- as stupid as it is.

[Paradox]

I'll buy his story. I read the column, and I thought she stepped out of bounds. Sure, I understood how and why she could write such a thing, and I personally had no problem with it because I understood where it was coming from. Having said that, I think NRO was perfectly within their right, editorially, to do what they did, and I understand their point of view as well.

There is no need to choose sides. I love them BOTH and unless they turn into commies, I always will.

Can't we all just git along?

[Illbay]

I don't know what to think. I love Ann, but I admit that I thought here "Christianize-'em-at-gunpoint" article was way over the top. But I chalked it up to the emotion of the moment. It wouldn't surprise me to learn that Ann lost a friend in the WTC or the Pentagon.

But the aftermath, where she's going around and bad-mouthing NR...that's just plain strange. No matter how much you disagree with editorial decisions, that's just WRONG. It's sophomoric.

Ann, you're the most beautiful conservative alive, but PLEASE get a grip!!!

[Vets_Husband_and_Wife]

Can't say we're sorry to see her go. She no longer comes across as rational or educated on the subject at hand. I know I'm repeating myself, but our friends and us have noted how shrill and rude she has become in the last 6 months. Time for Ann to get off the "Susan Ethridge" train, and back to the basics that afforded her respect from so many in the past.

In other words,.. Ann really needs to "get over herself". She should take some lessons from Barbara Olsen,.. not Susan Ethridge who drives us to change the channel upon hearing her voice!

[r9etb]

I will continue to subscribe [to NR], as I have done for years.

Me too.

In cases like this, the truth is generally someplace in the middle. Goldberg's probably overstating the case, and Coulter came out looking really bad even in her own defense.

I mean, really: if NRO can't "censor" its own content, then all the constitutional law in Ann's pretty head is moot.

IMO, Ann's real frustration is that her TV days are over for now. The networks don't want or need a telegenic blonde "constitutional lawyer" to discuss terrorists and special-ops warfare. Nor, for that matter, do I.

Whereas NR has a long and glorious history of bringing in experts to give a detailed and nuanced look at whatever subject is at hand.

NRO: 1
Ann Coulter: 0