Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Coulter's 'Slander' a lazy mix of errors, invective (Roeper continues his slander)
Chicago Sun-Times ^ | July 23, 2002 | RICHARD ROEPER SUN-TIMES COLUMNIST

Posted on 07/23/2002 10:11:23 AM PDT by Chi-townChief

In her book Slander: Liberal Lies About the American Right , the hyperventilating conservative pundit Ann Coulter states that one of the "unbending rules of the universe" is that "It is horrendous to attack a woman for her looks."

Yet in the very next paragraph, Coulter writes, "A blind man in America would think the ugliest women ever . . . are Paula Jones, Linda Tripp, and Katherine Harris. This from the party of Bella Abzug."

Now that's impressive. With a two-paragraph spread, Coulter just might have set the record for hypocritical invective.

And Coulter must think Rush Limbaugh is "horrendous," seeing as how Limbaugh has mocked the looks of Hillary and Chelsea Clinton and Sally Jessy Raphael, among others.

Speaking of Limbaugh, Coulter tells her readers, "Locating some minor accuracy by Rush Limbaugh ... turned out to be more difficult than I imagined ..." and goes on to speculate about the "off chance that anyone ever ... locate[s] some minor inaccuracy ..." in Limbaugh's work.

Minor inaccuracy? Limbaugh's committed dozens of MAJOR gaffes over the years, e.g., "It has not been proven that nicotine is addictive."

Yippee! Smoke 'em if you got 'em.

*****

An ongoing theme of Slander is that liberals never want to talk issues--that it's all about name-calling and making emotional arguments.

Ahem. From Coulter's own book:

P. 26: "The [Ku Klux] Klan sees the world in terms of race and ethnicity. So do liberals!"

P. 157: "The good part of being a Democrat is that you can commit crimes, sell out your base, bomb foreigners, and rape women, and the Democratic faithful still think you're the greatest."

p. 123: "Everyone knows it's an insult to be called a liberal, widely understood to connote a dastardly individual."

p. 181: Katie Couric is "the affable Eva Braun of morning TV."

Good thing Coulter isn't like those liberals who resort to cheap generalizations and insanely inaccurate accusations.

*****

Coulter demonstrates sloppy bias when she writes, "When ABC was considering scrapping Ted Koppel's 'Nightline' in early 2002 because of its low ratings, the most common reaction was, 'Is that still on?' "

Of course, the primary reason ABC considered dropping "Nightline" wasn't ratings--it was the chance to hire David Letterman. As for "the most common" reaction, Coulter's jibe makes her seem silly and uninformed. Yes, dear, "Nightline" is still on. Tell all your friends.

Coulter is equally disingenuous--or is it lazy?--when she reports what she perceives to be a typical example of liberal bias in the media:

"[Jesse] Jackson's son also got his own television show--while actually serving in Congress. A CBS-owned Chicago television station, WBBM-Channel 2, gave the Democratic congressman his own talk show, 'Chicago Focus With Congressman Jesse Jackson Jr.' ''

Wrong again. True, it was once announced that Jackson would be getting a weekly show on Channel 2, but the program never came close to getting on the air. It's been two years since the idea died.

And it's just plain funny when Coulter charges that "the entire information industry works overtime to suppress conservative books . . .publishers don't like conservative books, the major media ignore them, and bookstores refuse to stock them." On the very next page, Coulter cites a long list of best-selling books by conservative authors. So the "entire information industry" is suppressing books by conservative writers, yet many of these books have been top sellers. It's a miracle.

*****

In an effort to illustrate media slant, Coulter writes: "In the New York Times archives, 'moderate Republican' has been used 168 times. [But] there have been only 11 sightings of a 'liberal Republican.' "

But the American Prospect Weblog Tapped did a search of the New York Times archives and found 524 mentions of "liberal Republicans."

I guess some conservatives just aren't that good with a computer.

*****

Coulter repeatedly drags up two tired urban legends about Al Gore --the "invented the Internet" and "Love Story" tales--and passes them off as fact, even though both have been thoroughly debunked.

And she makes the claim that unlike Gore, George W. Bush was no fortunate son: "When Bush was admitted to Yale, his father was a little-known congressman ... His father was a Yale alumnus, but so were a lot of other boys' parents. It was Gore, not Bush, who had a famous father likely to impress college admissions committees."

Right. Dubya was a Phillips Academy preppie whose Yalie father was a congressman and whose Yalie grandfather was a two-term U.S. Senator. I'm sure the whole Bush clan was lighting candles every night while waiting to hear if Georgie boy was going to be admitted.

Coulter reminds me of the little girl in "Hey Arnold!" who shouts in Arnold's face that she hates him--though she secretly loves him.

Maybe that's how Ann feels about liberals. Maybe deep down, she's got a crush on us. It's kinda cute.

rroeper@suntimes.com


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Editorial; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections; US: Illinois
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-59 next last
Roeper's latest whine about Ann Coulter that started here:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/720396/posts

1 posted on 07/23/2002 10:11:23 AM PDT by Chi-townChief
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Chi-townChief
Amazing - all the liberal whining about Ann's book and it soars to the NY Times BestSeller List. HMMMMMM! Looks like America wants to hear the truth!
2 posted on 07/23/2002 10:14:56 AM PDT by areafiftyone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Chi-townChief
He should stick to reviewing Adam Sandler movies.

Not the relatively challenging ones like "The Wedding Singer" but the "simplier" ones, like that one where Adam is the devil's retarded son.

That's more his speed.

3 posted on 07/23/2002 10:19:11 AM PDT by dead
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Chi-townChief
I don't normally buy this type of book, but did so because of the way it was footnoted. Of great help when I need to slap down a liberal. I read it in two days on a short vacation last week in Northern Wisconsin, loved it.
4 posted on 07/23/2002 10:30:05 AM PDT by UB355
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Chi-townChief
Of course, the primary reason ABC considered dropping "Nightline" wasn't ratings--it was the chance to hire David Letterman.

Not that hiring David Letterman would have anything to do with ratings!

5 posted on 07/23/2002 10:46:54 AM PDT by DallasMike
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Chi-townChief; All
Sorry, I see this is already here:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/720932/posts
6 posted on 07/23/2002 10:46:57 AM PDT by Chi-townChief
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Chi-townChief
Speaking of ugly women, has anyone taken a look at Chelsea Clinton lately? Every day, she looks more and more like her father, Webb Hubbel. Just look at the jowels! There can be no question.
7 posted on 07/23/2002 10:50:35 AM PDT by Tacis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #8 Removed by Moderator

To: riggs2002
Welcome to your first day on Free Republic, you liberal puke.
9 posted on 07/23/2002 1:48:27 PM PDT by an amused spectator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Chi-townChief
Has Roeper ever heard of...H.L. Mencken or Punch?
10 posted on 07/23/2002 1:55:47 PM PDT by HowlinglyMind-BendingAbsurdity
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: an amused spectator
Richard Roeper still doesn't refute any of what Ann Coulter wrote. Sure he nitpicks and says made a few mistakes of attribution and that sort of thing by way of criticism but he still hasn't undermined the substance of her charges about liberals. Heck if this is the worst attack Ann's gonna face from a liberal reviewer, she doesn't have anything to worry about. Roeper's faint damnation actually counts as praise. No wonder Slander is a runaway best-seller the infuriates liberals to no end.
11 posted on 07/23/2002 1:59:42 PM PDT by goldstategop
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: HowlinglyMind-BendingAbsurdity
Yup.... much of what Ann says is satire and sarcasm. Then again humor is beneath liberals. They take everything so very seriously.
12 posted on 07/23/2002 2:00:34 PM PDT by goldstategop
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

Comment #13 Removed by Moderator

To: goldstategop
Libs have short memories as well. Some liberal had said of Reagan (back in '80) that if he were elected "it would be legal to shoot black people." He was a "war monger" who would get us into a nuclear war. He was described as a religious extremist, devotee of crank apocalypticism who would welcome Armageddon, etc., etc. They were not exactly moderate in descriptive discourse when it came to Reagan. Ms. Coulter may get a tad colorful in her imaginative rhetorical gymnastics, but...uh...the targets are rather extreme in their own ways. Would it be possible to engage in hyberbole in lampooning, say, Hillary or Bill? They're beyond words.
14 posted on 07/23/2002 2:06:43 PM PDT by HowlinglyMind-BendingAbsurdity
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: HowlinglyMind-BendingAbsurdity
Liberals think conservatives are everything they feared under the bed that they can't see in the light of day... and more. No wonder they're so extreme in their rhetoric against the right.
15 posted on 07/23/2002 2:09:13 PM PDT by goldstategop
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: riggs2002
Hey, if this is all Roeper can come up with, fine. Just spell her name correctly, and she won't mind.

Her book has literally hundreds of footnotes, and if Jesse's son not quite making the TV show he was floated is an example of how erroneous her book is, then it's a testament to the fact that the hundreds of other footnotes detailing liberal bias do NOT get banged around as 'bogus'.

If you're delusional enough to believe that there is no liberal bias in the media, then you've got a long way to go before you can qualify as an even remotely rational thinker.

16 posted on 07/23/2002 2:20:31 PM PDT by zoyd
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

Comment #17 Removed by Moderator

To: riggs2002
Thanks for letting me know I pushed the right buttons.

You're free to push buttons, if that's all you can do. Most of us prefer to actually discuss issues around here. Please also feel free to do that at any time. We'll wait.

18 posted on 07/23/2002 2:27:05 PM PDT by Ramius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: riggs2002; Admin Moderator
We don't like to waste bandwidth on liberal disruptors around here, so,

BUH-BYE!!!!

19 posted on 07/23/2002 2:35:31 PM PDT by stands2reason
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: an amused spectator; riggs2002
The old fashioned way:

riggs2002 Disruptor  since July 33, 2002

Back to DU for you, Bub.

20 posted on 07/23/2002 2:36:30 PM PDT by facedown
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-59 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson