0
   

Ann Coulter Attacks 9/11 Widows

 
 
JustanObserver
 
  1  
Reply Sun 2 Jul, 2006 01:59 pm
Two phrases come to mind when I read most of his posts...

"Don't argue with an idiot, he'll just drag you down to his level and beat you with experience," and "never wrestle with a pig, you both get dirty and only the pig enjoys it."

Although admittedly, it is tough to ignore them at times...
0 Replies
 
Finn dAbuzz
 
  1  
Reply Sun 2 Jul, 2006 06:53 pm
JustanObserver wrote:
Two phrases come to mind when I read most of his posts...

"Don't argue with an idiot, he'll just drag you down to his level and beat you with experience," and "never wrestle with a pig, you both get dirty and only the pig enjoys it."

Although admittedly, it is tough to ignore them at times...


Must not respond to this idiotic post....So tough to ignore it, but pigs and dirt and all that.....! Aaaaggghh!
0 Replies
 
BumbleBeeBoogie
 
  1  
Reply Mon 3 Jul, 2006 09:20 am
Shreveport Paper Considers Dropping Coulter
Shreveport Paper Considers Dropping Coulter
Ann Coulter
By E&P Staff
Published: July 03, 2006

Craig Durrett, editorial page editor of the Shreveport (La.) Times, revealed in a column in his paper that he is considering dropping Ann Coulter as a columnist, and in fact, has "come close" before.

It's a matter of style, not ideology, he explained, and if she got the boot he would replace her with another conservative columnist.

"My opinion: She is more about entertainment and self-promotion, understanding that shock and outrage translate into publicity that feeds into her quest for media airtime and column space," he wrote. "Her comments about several women who were made widows on Sept. 11, 2001, is a prime example."

He also cited the analysis of Republican B. Jay Cooper, former deputy press secretary to Presidents Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush: "To me, Ann Coulter's exercise of her right to free speech is the political equivalent of yelling fire in a crowded theater. She crosses the line of decency. To me, individuals who engage in name-calling and hate speech to get attention, sell books, increase speaking fees and feather their own nests, are speaking for themselves, not any political party. My problem is the popular presumption that she represents the Republican Party. We all get painted with her tainted brush."

Among other things, Coulter has often wished or fantasized about a violent end for some of her perceived opponents on the left, including New York Times reporters.

Durrett also observed: "In this slash-and-burn, raw meat world of political discourse, unfortunately it seems more readers and viewers are entertained by Coulter one liners than impressed with George Will's stylish pursuit of logic." Yet he affirmed: "Coulter's days may indeed be numbered, but it won't be because of some liberal bias. Besides, she would be replaced by another conservative voice."

Coulter is syndicated by Universal and has more than 100 newspaper clients.
0 Replies
 
BumbleBeeBoogie
 
  1  
Reply Mon 3 Jul, 2006 09:26 am
'NY Post' Cites Evidence That Ann Coulter Plagiarized Parts of Book, Columns
By E&P Staff
Published: July 02, 2006 7:35 PM ET

Well, Ann Coulter may be "liberal" in one respect, anyway. The New York Post reported Sunday that author/columnist Coulter "cribbed liberally in her latest book" and also in several of her syndicated columns, according to a plagiarism expert.

John Barrie, creator of the iThenticate plagiarism-probing system, claimed he found at least three examples of what he called "textbook plagiarism" in the new Coulter book "Godless" after he ran its text through the program.

He also discovered verbatim copying in Coulter's weekly column, which is syndicated to more than 100 newspapers by Universal.

The headline in classic Post fashion: COPYCATTY COULTER PILFERS PROSE: PRO

Bloggers had been citing examples of alleged Coulter cribbing for months.

After detailing some of the alleged plagiarism in the book, the Post article related that Barrie also ran Coulter's columns from the past year through iThenticate "and found similar patterns of cribbing.

"Her Aug. 3, 2005, column, 'Read My Lips: No New Liberals,' about U.S. Supreme Court Justice David Souter, includes six passages, ranging from 10 to 48 words each, that appeared 15 years earlier in the same order in an L.A. Times article, headlined 'Liberals Leery as New Clues Surface on Souter's Views.' But nowhere in that column does she mention the L.A. Times or the story's writer, David G. Savage.

"Her June 29, 2005, column, 'Thou Shalt Not Commit Religion,' incorporates 10 facts on National Endowment for the Arts-funded work that originally appeared in the same order in a 1991 Heritage Foundation report, 'The National Endowment for the Arts: Misusing Taxpayers' Money.' But again, the Heritage Foundation isn't credited."

Barrie said, "Just as Coulter plays free and loose with her citations in 'Godless,' she obviously does the same in her columns."

Meanwhile, many of the 344 citations Coulter includes in "Godless" "are very misleading," said Barrie, who holds a Ph.D. from the University of California at Berkeley, where he specialized in pattern recognition.

"They're used purely to try and give the book a higher level of credibility -as if it's an academic work. But her sloppiness in failing to properly attribute many other passages strips it of nearly all its academic merits," he told The Post.

Coulter did not respond to requests for comment.
0 Replies
 
JustanObserver
 
  1  
Reply Mon 3 Jul, 2006 09:28 am
Finn d'Abuzz wrote:
JustanObserver wrote:
Two phrases come to mind when I read most of his posts...

"Don't argue with an idiot, he'll just drag you down to his level and beat you with experience," and "never wrestle with a pig, you both get dirty and only the pig enjoys it."

Although admittedly, it is tough to ignore them at times...


Must not respond to this idiotic post....So tough to ignore it, but pigs and dirt and all that.....! Aaaaggghh!


An idiotic post complaining about an idiotic post that complains about idiotic posts!

It's a neverending cycle! Stop the madness!
0 Replies
 
ehBeth
 
  1  
Reply Mon 3 Jul, 2006 09:33 am
0 Replies
 
Roxxxanne
 
  1  
Reply Mon 3 Jul, 2006 09:35 am
Looks like Michelle Malkin is trying to outdo Annoerexic. Re: the Gitmo suicides "Boo-freaking-hoo."

Further proof that these extreme righties suffer from a deep emotional void.
0 Replies
 
BumbleBeeBoogie
 
  1  
Reply Mon 3 Jul, 2006 09:42 am
BBB
They have found the goose that laid the golden egg: hate mongering for pay.

BBB
0 Replies
 
snood
 
  1  
Reply Wed 5 Jul, 2006 09:34 pm
In all fairness - and I despise Malkin, Coulter, Limbaugh, et al....


...but folks like Michael Moore do the same damn thing....
0 Replies
 
BernardR
 
  1  
Reply Thu 6 Jul, 2006 12:10 am
It is crystal clear that Joe Nation, Just An Observer and Yitwail know very very little about American Education. Public Education in the United States is horribly expensive because of the tendency of appeasing minorities, the presence of Political Correctness, the existent of the malevolent selg-serving Teachers Unions and the general dumbing down of Education.

The attempt to twist Coulter's statement about Socialism to pertain to Sweden was pathetic. Coulter wasn't talking about Sweden.

Do any of you really know what you are talking about when you speak of Education in the USA in the last thirty or forty years? Most of you only know what you have experienced in YOUR OWN EDUCATION which does not translate to what is really happening out there.

I am sure that you have heard that in a recent poll, the large majority of people WERE NOT ABLE to locate Iraq on a world map

and that MOST people were able to name one or both of the contestants on American Idol but were NOT able to name A SINGLE MEMBER OF THE UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT.

As, I said, you don't know very much at all about American Education and you really ought to learn what is really happening out there. You really should stop trying to brag about a system which is enormously expensive and very very inefficient!!
0 Replies
 
BumbleBeeBoogie
 
  1  
Reply Thu 6 Jul, 2006 09:01 am
Coulter's Syndicate Requests Report From Plagiarism Prober
UPDATE: Coulter's Syndicate Requests Report From Plagiarism Prober -- As She Hits Back at 'NY Post'
By Dave Astor
Published: July 05, 2006 5:15 PM ET

Universal Press Syndicate has requested a copy of a report about Ann Coulter's alleged plagiarism, according to a post on the TPMmuckraker.com blog. Meanwhile, in her latest column, Coulter has hit back at the newspaper that aired the latest plagiarism charges -- but did not refute them.

The report was conducted by John Barrie, creator of the iThenticate plagiarism-probing system. A New York Post story this Sunday said Barrie found several examples of alleged plagiarism in Coulter's new "Godless" book as well as in her Universal column.

Universal Director of Communications Kathie Kerr, when contacted by E&P, said she called Barrie on Wednesday morning and left him a message asking him for a copy of his report. "Once we see a copy of the report, we'll be happy to comment on the findings," she added. "We take allegations of plagiarism very seriously." E&P has also left a message for Barrie, who appeared on MSNBC late Wesnesday.

There he explained that the Post had asked his company to put Coulter's book and the past 12 months of columns through his program. But his staffers stopped before completing the task--"we gave up after awhile, we'd seen enough," he explained. The many examples added up to "advanced plagiarism," he said, the kind of stuff that would "flunk any English student."

The alleged plagiarism is the latest development in a tempestuous 2006 for Coulter. Universal distributes Coulter's column to more than 100 newspapers.

Today, the latest installment of Coulter's column takes aim at the New York Post, although her July 5 piece doesn't mention the Post's July 2 plagiarism story.

Coulter wrote: "Once considered a legitimate daily, the Post has been reduced to tabloid status best known for Page Six's breathless accounts of Paris Hilton's latest ruttings, and headlines like 'Vampire Teen -- H.S. Girl Is Out for Blood.' How crappy a newspaper is the Post? Let me put it this way: It's New York's second-crappiest paper."

Of course, the Post could hardly be "reduced to tabloid status" since it is, in fact, a tabloid.

She added: "Maybe the Post's constant harassment of me is an attempt to shake me down for protection money like they did with billionaire businessman Ron Burkle. I have sold a LOT of books -- more books, come to think of it, than any writers at the New York Post."
0 Replies
 
yitwail
 
  1  
Reply Thu 6 Jul, 2006 10:28 am
BernardR wrote:

The attempt to twist Coulter's statement about Socialism to pertain to Sweden was pathetic. Coulter wasn't talking about Sweden.


bernard, i appreciate your expressing your disapproval with such a delicate adjective. others have used far more disparaging terms in this very thread.

Quote:
As, I said, you don't know very much at all about American Education and you really ought to learn what is really happening out there. You really should stop trying to brag about a system which is enormously expensive and very very inefficient!!


i can't speak for anyone else, but *i* never bragged about it, as far as i can recall. maybe you have me confused with Mr. Dinesh D'Souza, who wrote:

Quote:
Every child is given an education, and most have the chance to go on to college.
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  1  
Reply Thu 6 Jul, 2006 11:00 am
snood wrote:
In all fairness - and I despise Malkin, Coulter, Limbaugh, et al....


...but folks like Michael Moore do the same damn thing....


Others, yes, but not Moore. Neither of the individuals you mention above have regard for accuracy or truth and each have said or written things really quite vile. If Moore is to be faulted, it is in presentation of ideas which are not fully or clearly substantiated.
0 Replies
 
Ticomaya
 
  1  
Reply Thu 6 Jul, 2006 12:16 pm
blatham wrote:
snood wrote:
In all fairness - and I despise Malkin, Coulter, Limbaugh, et al....


...but folks like Michael Moore do the same damn thing....


Others, yes, but not Moore. Neither of the individuals you mention above have regard for accuracy or truth and each have said or written things really quite vile. If Moore is to be faulted, it is in presentation of ideas which are not fully or clearly substantiated.



Laughing Laughing Laughing

Good one, Bernie.
0 Replies
 
Ticomaya
 
  1  
Reply Thu 6 Jul, 2006 12:20 pm
Quote:
Top-secret interview exposed!
Posted: July 5, 2006
5:55 p.m. Eastern


© 2006 Ann Coulter

It was nice to see the New York Times commemorating Independence Day this week with a tribute to its favorite Revolutionary War hero, Benedict Arnold. Times editor Bill Keller spent the day attending Revolutionary War battle re-enactments, where he passed the Continental Army's secret battle plans to the British.

This week, I plan to reveal my own top-secret information: an interview I did with the New York Post the week my current No. 1 best seller, "Godless," was released. On account of an important breaking story on Angelina Jolie's new tattoo, the Post never found room to run the long interview. I wasted my time answering questions for the Post's Larry Getlen.

Once considered a legitimate daily, the Post has been reduced to tabloid status best known for Page Six's breathless accounts of Paris Hilton's latest ruttings and headlines like "Vampire Teen - H.S. Girl Is Out for Blood." How crappy a newspaper is the Post? Let me put it this way: It's New York's second-crappiest paper.

Maybe the Post's constant harassment of me is an attempt to shake me down for protection money like they did with billionaire businessman Ron Burkle. I have sold a LOT of books - more books, come to think of it, than any writers at the New York Post.

Here's Part 1:

NY POST: Vitriol aside for a moment, how would you define a liberal, politically speaking?

A: Naive, misinformed fanatical Mother Earth-worshipers and fervent America-haters - and those are their good traits.

NY POST: In "Godless," you lump many views you disagree with under the banner of a liberal religion. But many Democrats (as with Republicans) disagree amongst themselves on many of these issues. Do you consider all Americans who vote Democrat to be liberals?

A: Or fools.

NY POST: How many liberals do you think there actually are in this country?

A: Way too many, but that's just a rough estimate. You know, somewhere in the ballpark of "way too many."

NY POST: Your books, like Bill O'Reilly's, generally go to No. 1. But so do Michael Moore's and Al Franken's. What do you think this says about the real nature of what Americans believe, politically and ideologically?

A: Judging by your list, that half of them are patriotic.

NY POST: In the last two presidential elections combined, the number of people who voted for the Democrat and the number who voted for the Republican were pretty close to even. Isn't it safe to say that the country rests somewhere in the middle of conservatism and liberalism?

A: Yes, I think the results of the last "American Idol" vote pretty much proved that.

NY POST: Your characterization of liberals paints them as extremists. But with people like Pat Robertson telling us how God keeps telling him who He's angry at, isn't it fair to say that there are extremists on both sides?

A: Pat Robertson opposes capital punishment, opposed the impeachment of Bill Clinton and supports trade with China, just for starters. Seems like a pretty mixed bag to me. So what makes you call him extreme? That he believes he has dialogue with the Lord? Do liberals now call anyone who thinks this an "extremist"?

NY POST: Do you believe there is a political middle? If so, how would you define it?

A: There is no more a "political middle" than there is a family in America with 2.3 children. People with opinions take sides. Contrary to what you've heard, it's actually more important to stand for something than it is for everybody to "just get along."

NY POST: You speak in the book of "Muslims' predilection for violence," accepting it as a given. But many would argue that many Muslims, in this country and others, lead average, everyday lives, and denounce violence. How is painting all Muslims as violent any different than looking at the Crusades, or at any of the Christian extremist groups around today, and saying, "All Christians are murderers"?

A: Quite obviously, referring to "Muslims' predilection for violence" is not the same as saying, "All Christians are murderers." It would be the same if I had said, "All Muslims are murderers." You didn't do too well on the analogies section of the SATs, did you?

NY POST: You say that "without a fundamental understanding of man's place in the world" (by which you mean God), we risk being lured into, among other things, slavery. But weren't the American slaveholders devout Christians?

A: They may have been devout Christians, but they weren't being good Christians by holding slaves. That's the point: Any Christian slaveholder had to violate Christianity to own slaves.

Thus - and obviously - the abolitionist movement was fueled by Christians, much as the anti-abortion movement is today.

I'm sure in the year 2106 some future Ann Coulter will be asked to explain why some Christians had abortions 100 years earlier. Christians sometimes lapse into the church of liberalism by doing bad things, just as liberals sometimes lapse into our church by doing good things.

(To be continued later this summer ...)


I don't understand why some of you can't find her amusing ...
0 Replies
 
parados
 
  1  
Reply Thu 6 Jul, 2006 01:05 pm
Ah yes,...


Ann Coulter. religious virgin teetotaler spinster, Coulter. That is the same Coulter we are talking about, right? Ann Coulter that has never committed adultery in her life compared to those godless heathen liberals.

That is the same Ann Coulter, isn't it?
0 Replies
 
parados
 
  1  
Reply Thu 6 Jul, 2006 01:09 pm
Of course Ann does have the conservative predilection for saying stupid things.

It makes her about as funny as the drunk at the bar that can barely slur out his words. Funny for about 2 minutes before you realize how pathetic he is.
0 Replies
 
Ticomaya
 
  1  
Reply Thu 6 Jul, 2006 01:15 pm
Ah, yes. She makes me laugh every time I read her.
0 Replies
 
Ticomaya
 
  1  
Reply Thu 6 Jul, 2006 01:16 pm
parados wrote:
Of course Ann does have the conservative predilection for saying stupid things.


Sorta' like Howard Dean?
0 Replies
 
snood
 
  1  
Reply Thu 6 Jul, 2006 03:20 pm
Ticomaya wrote:
parados wrote:
Of course Ann does have the conservative predilection for saying stupid things.


Sorta' like Howard Dean?


The stupidest thing I've ever heard Dean say ("I still want to be the candidate for guys with Confederate flags in their pickup trucks") doesn't even begin to approach the level of mindless stupidity of the things Coulter has said (about being no fan of the 1st amendment - about 9/11 widows "enjoying" the deaths of their husbands- about wishing McVeigh had gone to the NY times building - about fragging a congressman - about invading countries, killing their leaders and converting them to christianity,etc., etc., etc.,). Dean says things that, in retrospect he wishes he'd phrased differently; Coulter says things that are defiantly mean-spirited and, yes- abyssmally stupid.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.04 seconds on 01/10/2025 at 05:08:57