Coulter’s Latest And Hatest
By Justin Gardner | Related entries in Partisan Hacks
It will be released on 6/6/06.
Hackilicious!
This entry was posted on Sunday, April 9th, 2006 and is filed under Partisan Hacks. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
April 9th, 2006 at 10:14 pm
Who cares?
Besides, she’s not a hack. A hack works in the service of a political party, offering unwavering and unquestioning support in exchange for patronage. She’s an ideologue, who will slam a Republican, too, if he strays from her vision of truth.
April 9th, 2006 at 10:24 pm
Who cares? Heh, well…me for one.
Many (like you) simply dismiss Coulter as an ideologue, but I don’t agree. I think she has much more of influence on the right-wing than you give her credit for. After all, she’s a frequent commentator of Fox News, sells millions of books and has speaking engagements all around the country. This is the right-wing base, and she’s preaching to a very receptive choir.
And so yes, I think it’s important to point out hacks like Coulter when they show their hacktackular side. And the moment Moore announces a new book with a ridiculous title like Coulter’s which is only meant to sell books…expect a post from me.
April 9th, 2006 at 10:44 pm
Calling her an ideologue isn’t dismissing her. It’s just pointing out the difference between an ideologue and a hack. And I thought it was you who always was telling me to ignore the extremists on the “other side.”
April 9th, 2006 at 11:50 pm
I agree with both of you. Coulter isn’t someone to simply be dismissed or ignored. That would be like ignoring H5N1; simply not very benificial. However, she is clearly not in cahoots with any party, making her too radically radical for my taste.
I at least seem to recall that she was hot at one point, that I could look at her books. Now I don’t even have that.
What is happening to this world (sorry I had to go there).
April 10th, 2006 at 12:03 am
Very true, and I’d still give that advice, But, as Joshua purports, I disagree that she isn’t in cahoots with a party. Hardly. And I’m sorry, but the 666 reference and the hit against liberalism and religion was just too much to pass up in this one. So incredibly hacktacular!!!
Personally, I don’t see Kos as a fair comparison to Coulter. Ward Churchill? Yes, he’s a valid comparison. But that indeed sets the bar low. I mean, can anybody argue that Ann isn’t a personality who tries to incite pure hate in her base? This latest move is her most hacktackular, hateful move yet.
April 10th, 2006 at 12:44 am
Also, just as Randi Rhodes doesn’t represent my side of the political spectrum, I don’t think that Coulter represents your side either. See, yours in the concerned right-middle. Coulter is certainly not that. In fact, she represents the worst of the worst religious-liberalphobic-baiters, which is the extreme right. Ugh. Just imagine if we were there. No room for conversation between us. Obviously we’re nowhere near those polar opposites, and so we can discuss.
Thank “God” for that.
April 10th, 2006 at 6:55 am
The sad thing is many people who don’t have the education to put her in perspective learn from listening to her, and begin to believe some of her horseshi*. I wouldn’t compare her to Randi Rhodes, I’d say Mike Malloy is the opposite on AA.
All that said, these kind of blowhards are the ones that fan the extremism we now see in politics. Disappointing, but there it is.
April 10th, 2006 at 7:08 am
Neato. $10 says this one will eventually find its way into our church library, just like the rest of Ann Coulter’s books. (I kid you not. They’re all there.)
April 10th, 2006 at 9:40 am
The following is an e-mail that I wrote to a friend after a Coulter speech on his campus:
Coulter is an interesting character, the sad case of an individual caught in her homemade death spiral and unable to leave. I’ve got a gut feeling that she believes only about a quarter of what she says. Her relevance and identity is based on being confrontational and controversial. However, in a society that grows ever desensitized by the day, in order for her to maintain that relevance she has to keep ratcheting up the rhetoric. To her, popularity and attention (and therefore the opportunity to rankle moderates and librals) are what counts, so she has to do whatever she can in order to keep getting media
attention.
Alas, such actions are only going to ever decrease one’s base of support. There are very few people who think that Coulter is not extreme enough for their tastes. By moving to further extremes, Coulter is not going to capture any additional supporters. However, she will continue to lose people who once supported her.
After all, quotes like, “[Liberals] hate God and they hate America,” and that Jesus would bomb abortion clinics are by their very nature decrease her overall fan base. There’s just nothing left to capture in the “I wish someone would agree with me that Jesus would lead military strikes against social issues” crowd that she doesn’t already have.
The parallels with Fr. Charles Coughlin are amazing. Coughlin, the “Radio Priest” had a nationally broadcast radio show in the 1930s. At his peak, he had millions and millions of listeners, but he had to keep moving to the extremes to keep getting attention. As time when on, he
got more and more anti-Semetic, and his overall popularity began to wane. Eventually, the Catholic Church told him to shut up (like most else in the Church, they get to the right answer eventually; it just takes a while).
This is the future of Coulter. The only difference is that her ire is directed to Mulims and liberals, not Jews and socialists. Do not worry, she will not win. It’ll just take a while as her pillar crumbles beneath her.
April 10th, 2006 at 10:44 am
Actually, I think it’s a good thing to ignore Coulter. I stopped mentioning her awhile back because she’s only important because people keep acting like she’s important. She’s basically a very bad stand-up comic who has found gold by pretending to be a serious pundit. Nothing she says is worth discussing and it’s a waste of time to engage anyone who agrees with her.
April 10th, 2006 at 10:50 am
ASC got this one right. Coulter is an enegy sucker … lights dim when she enters a room.
April 10th, 2006 at 11:07 am
Hey, the girl’s gotta eat.
(Seriously, she’s looking pretty sickly. Maybe we should start a fund – “Aw, Ann.”)
April 10th, 2006 at 11:20 am
Ok, no more posts on Coulter.
I promise.
April 10th, 2006 at 1:01 pm
I’m not sure why anyone ever did pay attention to Coulter … except for the obvious (sorry) reason.
Heck, whether hack or ideologue, there are “better” ones out there, and always have been.
April 10th, 2006 at 1:52 pm
Agreed. But “better” doesn’t necessarily mean “ratings”, and that’s what Coulter is good at. She’s a sideshow at best, and that’s what kills me about today’s punidtry. It’s so damn hacktastic it hurts.
But still, I’ll hold off on posting something about Ann until she REALLY makes news.
April 10th, 2006 at 3:30 pm
She’s not a hacker …. she’s a whacker!
April 10th, 2006 at 3:56 pm
Ann Coulter is entirely a creation of “TV politics” – being outrageous (and not unpleasant to look at) is her shtick, plain and simple. I’m occasionally amused by some of her barbs, but it’s a guilty pleasure – there’s a mean streak underneath it all which really isn’t healthy. And some of her comments go so far over the top as to be downright dangerous – like the time right after 9/11 when she suggested that we launch (literally) a Crusade.
Alan, don’t be so quick to dismiss “anyone who agrees with her”. None of us have any control over showboats like AC, and I’m not going to back away from something just because she happens to endorse it.
April 10th, 2006 at 4:27 pm
Thinking about it, I overrated her with “ideologue.” That implies a consistent ideology. But her schtick is all style no substance; it advances nothing and merely seeks to incite and repulse. She has no more ideology than a flamethrower. She’s an anarchist.
April 10th, 2006 at 5:53 pm
Hunter,
Point taken. Let me ammend my comment by saying: it’s a waste of time to engage anyone who agrees with her on a consistent basis.
Or maybe: it’s a waste of time to engage anyone who considers her a wise source of opinion.
April 10th, 2006 at 10:51 pm
Actually, I think she’s right: America should have nuked Mecca on September 12th, 2001. She’ll have to one day anyway, just like the Romans had to end the wars with the Jews by destroying their Temple: after all, the Kaabah would make an ideal symbolic target. I don’t see why people call her over-the-top or extreme at all! And she’s a fine lookin’ babe too! LOL
April 11th, 2006 at 3:59 am
Funny this.
The nazi bitch claimed to be a member of a church that never heard of her.
Then she claimed to be a registered voter in a place that had no record of her.
Does the cunt even exist? Seriously, is she some kind of amalgam of the fanatical right wing conjured up in our heads to give evil a face and a (stick man) body?
April 11th, 2006 at 10:21 am
Hey JollyRoger,
I don’t like this woman at all, but I find your language to be very offensive. It also makes this blog look bad. Please stop it.
April 11th, 2006 at 8:54 pm
JollyRoger…don’t continue to use that kind of language on this blog. That’ll get you banned.
Obviously I don’t like Coulter, but we’re trying to keep this blog free from hackery and invective on both sides. Respect that please.
April 13th, 2006 at 4:15 pm
Check out Roger’s blog! It’s a doozie. My new favorite.
October 10th, 2006 at 11:44 pm
Me loves Annie! Me lubbs Donklephant!
And isn’t she more of a hard kiprc? Isn’t it you, JollyRoger, JollyRoger, JollyRoger, a bit of a c, a c, a c, a c, a c?