ANN COULTER: THE GOOD, THE BAD AND THE UGLY (Coulter v. hillary clinton)

6.11.06 | Mia T

[CyberAnt]

Why on earth are you bashing Ann Coulter?

Read this thread - and you might change your mind. Ann is correct in her analysis of how the "Jersey Girls", Berg and Shehan, and the rest of the left's "victims" use their victim status to shut up conservatives.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1647070/posts

[Mia T]

I agree with her analysis re the Jersey Girls, Berg and Sheehan, i.e., the New McCarthyism.
Read this post a bit more carefully.
Read my two prior threads on Coulter.
What I fault is her execution.

[Mia T]

I applaud Coulter for her insight on this issue and for having the guts to focus world attention on the clintons' rape of Broaddrick.

[Mia T]

I dunno....

What I do know is that when Ann's exposition descends into rant, she loses credibility. IMO, the best way to persuade is to moderate passion with dispassion.

I know you shun the tube. It is not Ann's best venue. Much of her problem there is technique... but some is control.

[CyberAnt]

That's funny .. I didn't get the sense that you were applauding her at all .. but maybe I mis-read what you said.

However, here is another link supporting Ann's comments:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1647271/posts

[Mia T]

Here's the original comment on my prior thread:

 

hillary 'LISTENING TOUR'-'KNOWNOTHING-VICTIM' clinton did something Wednesday she rarely does⁵: Open her mouth and actually take a stand.

Why did she do it?

Ever the cowardly opportunist, missus clinton thought she was risking nothing. She thought she could get a free shot here.

She figured most people would be sympathetic to the 9/11 widows because they wouldn't be able to see beyond Ann Coulter's heavy-handed satire⁷ to her underlying argument, which is this:

The Left uses victims--exploits them--and the victims themselves often exploit their own victimhood-- for the dual purpose of promoting the Left's untenable policies and silencing all dissenting voices.

This tactic--a subtle form of McCarthyism--is premised on the Left's pet pc theory of victim unassailability, which it has made a self-fulfilling truism with its Cindy Sheehans and "Jersey Girls," among others.

In the end, however, clinton's decision to take on Coulter is yet another example of her sheer incompetence.⁸

With missus clinton's 30-year history of real abuse of women, what could have possessed her to insert herself here? Unfailing arrogance, stupidity and a belief that all of us are stupid--that's what.

That woman apparently can't see two steps ahead of herself.

Missus clinton stepped in it Wednesday. Bigtime.

by Mia T, 6.10.06
Ann Coulter, 'Four Witches', One 'Bitch' + New McCarthyism of Left
I'LL SEE ANN COULTER'S 'BILL CLINTON RAPE CHARGE' AND RAISE HER 'ONE HILLARY CLINTON' FOREWORD

DEBUNKING CINDY SHEEHAN
HEAR ABE LINCOLN/JOHNNY CASH + PBS' NEIL CONAN
by Mia T, 8.31.05

also:
I'LL SEE ANN COULTER'S 'BILL CLINTON RAPE CHARGE' AND RAISE HER 'ONE HILLARY CLINTON'

[tomzz]

Ann's two chapters on the theory of evolution really nail it. Let's hope Godless turns out to be the final nail in the coffin of that particular brand of garbage "science".

[Luke21]

Everyone has a different way of expressing themselves, Mia. Yours is through lengthy, repetitive posts.

Do you honestly think the stuff you post about Hillary isn't "preaching to the choir" and "red meat?"

I am amazed at the willingness of our side to attack the people that do verbal battle with our enemies. No wonder political correctness has become such an atrocity.

[Brian Allen]

<< No wonder political correctness has become such an atrocity. >>

Only "atrocity?"

In some delusional fantasies and in its wake, perhaps.

Try: "Tyranny."

"Political Correctness" is the tool of terroristic tyrants!

[Mia T]

I am not attacking Coulter. See 22, 23 and 26.
I AGREE with her as to substance.
I am merely trying to offer some constructive criticism about her execution.

As for my own posts and 'red meat,' I try to remain dispassionate, although, as I have stated elsewhere, I, too, often fail. It is hard to be dispassionate about the seditious Left, generally, and the clintons, in particular. But that doesn't mean we mustn't try.

As for 'preaching to the choir,' the theory behind my "hillary talks" format is precisely the opposite: to reach the others by letting them hear the clintons impeach themselves.

I deplore political correctness. I deplore the new McCarthyism of the Left. I deplore the clintons' rape of Broaddrick. And I applaud Coulter for taking this on.

[Mia T]

bump!

The seeming benignity of political correctness makes it much more pernicious than the overt, jackboot kind of tyranny.

[Mia T]

Very well stated. I agree with everything you say. Just to clarify, I don't think Ann Coulter's comments about the widows were 'unseemly.' (The Left makes them appear so by taking them out of context.)

My general point is this: For Ann to be most effective, she must increase her audience beyond her conservative base and she must be credible. Her special brand of trenchant, analytic commentary minus the personal rant will go far to help her achieve both.

[jla]

And I'd like to add that Ann needs to do, whatever it is you girls do, to make her hair look like this again -

[Mia T]

Hair #1 looks air-dried, or twist-dried, the latest rage of some stylists (supposed to produce a wavy, natural look).

Hair #2 looks blow-dried, perhaps with some strategically placed rollers.

Which is the one you prefer?

[jla]

Which is the one you prefer?

If she were helping out in the yard, pulling weeds, mulching, pruning, etc. I'd go with #1. She could even pull it behind her head and put one of those do-dads around it, making a ponytail.
Now if we were driving over to Charlottesville that evening, having dinner and then taking in Monticello the next day, I'd opt for #2.
(and believe it or not, I'd insist on her wearing the longer-hemmed skirt)

[jla]

By the way...I really liked post #30.
Know why?

[Mia T]

I have a couple of theories.... but I'd rather you tell me.

[jla]

Because it was forceful, well-written commentary, all your own. Which I've previously said, your posts need more of.

[Gail Wynand]

In 1960 the left had a complete stranglehold on media and government. So overconfident were they, that they allowed the one nationally recognized conservative, Bill Buckley, to participate in the NYC mayoral debates. At one point, Buckley was challenged with a typical set up question, "When were conservatives going to join the modern era and support an end to African coloniism?". "When the Africans stop eating each other, " was Buckley's retort. Forty years later, we witnessed Idi Amin, the slaughter in Rwanda, and a host of other consequences to the lefts anti colonial, anti rational, pro socialist, policies/dogmas of the 1960s,

As with Coulter, the still youthful Buckley's remark was at the time easily demeaned as racist insensitive, etc.

One thing, at least, seems likely. At long last, the four widows will not have an entirely free pass in future expeditions into public policy advocacy, Everytime they appear from now on there will likely be some, probably negative, reference to Coulters description of them. The ring of truth will be heard despite the ongoing media smear.

Intentionally or not, Coulter "rope-a-doped" the MSN. With her "outrageous" presentation of her argumement the MSN, like Clinton, fell for the bait and took what looked like an easy swipe at conservatives. Coulter's comebacks put her arguments before the American public and end ran the MSN media gatekeepers. Now of course all attacks on Coulter are by proxy and she is not given response time.

But whats new about that?

[jla]

Excellent analysis, Gail W.