What a moral degenerate, what an ignoramus — okay, this was something I thought I would never say in writing, but what a royal bitch. Ann Coulter used to be fun to hate. Because of the way she conducts herself, those attacking her have always had a sort of unwritten free pass — an exemption from the usual norms of polite debate. And God knows we here at the Last Chance Democracy Café have taken more than our fair share of swings at that ball over the years. Here are a few examples:
– “Well, now there’s a stupid example,” roared Winston. “Of course, liberals lie about sex as much . . . actually probably more than conservatives. Liberals have sex more than conservatives. I mean, really. Try thinking of a prominent conservative woman, like Ann Coulter. Now, try imaging having sex with her. See? You can’t do it, can you? It’s just too awful for the mind to conceive.”
– “Kind of like being asked for a list of all the places where Ann Coulter could use plastic surgery,” interjected Winston. “I mean, where would you begin . . . ?
– “Dad’s as sharp as Ann Coulter’s tongue (and a good deal smarter and less nutty).”
– Winston was in rare form, enthusiastically arguing his new theory that Ann Coulter and Pat Robertson are actually the same person. It was tongue-in-cheek, of course, but he made a compelling case just the same.
But the fun’s over now.
And if you have any doubt as to why, just check out the video of Coulter’s recent appearance on the Today Show (at Crooks and Liars); but be sure to have a vomit bag handy.
Or here’s a transcript from the same site: They’re discussing Coulter’s new book:
LAUER: On the 9-11 widows, an in particular a group that had been critical of the administration:
“These self-obsessed women seem genuinely unaware that 9-11 was an attack on our nation and acted like as if the terrorist attack only happened to them. They believe the entire country was required to marinate in their exquisite personal agony. Apparently, denouncing bush was part of the closure process.”
And this part is the part I really need to talk to you about:
“These broads are millionaires, lionized on TV and in articles about them, reveling in their status as celebrities and stalked by griefparrazies. I have never seen people enjoying their husband’s death so much.”
Because they dare to speak out?
COULTER: To speak out using the fact they are widows. This is the left’s doctrine of infallibility. If they have a point to make about the 9-11 commission, about how to fight the war on terrorism, how about sending in somebody we are allowed to respond to> No-No-No. We always have to respond to someone who just had a family member die–
LAUER: But aren’t they in the middle of the story?…
COULTER: …Because then if we respond, oh you are questioning their authenticity. No, the story is…
LAUER: So grieve but grieve quietly?
LAUER: What I’m saying is I don’t think they have ever told you, you can’t respond.
COULTER: Look, you are getting testy with me.
What makes this exchange shocking, even in the jaded context of Ann Coulter, of course, is that these hateful words weren’t tossed out off the cuff. They were published in a book.
Let’s be honest: Anyone who isn’t a complete moron or, it seems, the producer of a major news program (or am I being redundant?) has long known that Ann Coulter isn’t a serious pundit; she’s a shock jock in a miniskirt, a stage performer — the political equivalent to a professional wrestler (including the ludicrous costumes). We’re used to her saying extreme things.
But what makes the current outrage so unforgivable is the fact that it was so indisputably premeditated. Coulter not only wrote the words in question, she made the conscious decision to leave them in through the whole long process of rewrites and editing.
As unbelievable as it seems, Coulter deliberately set out to accuse September11 widows of enjoying the deaths of their husbands.
May she burn in hell.
I don’t want to make fun of Ann Coulter anymore.
I don’t want to use her as a way of firing up the progressive base.
I want her to go away.
I want the major media outlets to finally do the right thing, what they should have done years ago, and send her packing.
No one is trying to take away her freedom of speech; she can continue to publish her trash and travel around the country padding her bank account by feeding rotten red meat to fools.
But for national news programs and major publications to continue to present her to their viewers and readers as though she is a legitimate authority, a person with something valuable to offer to the debate of important public issues, is a disgrace. And if the people running these organizations have even an ounce of self-respect left, they’ll put a stop to it now.
And if they don’t. Well, then they can burn in hell too.
And, no, I don’t actually believe in hell. But I’ll tell you something: Coulter almost makes we wish that I did.