Ann Coulters, leaves a bad taste in my mouth

Standard ignorant leftwing spin. If they disagree, it's hate speech and they threaten violence and try to censor. However they can spew death threats, personal attacks, and slander whenever they want and the leftwing media never questions it, and in fact, promotes it.

Ann C. rocks. she is right on the money and speaks the way liberals need to be spoken to. The pansies just can't take any of their own medicine.

I'm buying 20 of her books and passing them out at the local public school. It's more educational than any of the PC crap they are "learning" now.

Those vile three 9/11 widows deserve all the criticism they get. Losing a family member tragically does not earn you a "you can't question my politics or motives" license.
They injected themselves into the political fray on the backs of their dead loved ones. They can and should be questioned and called out...just like that nutjob Dad of Nick Berg.

[edit on 10-6-2006 by Apoc]

[edit on 10-6-2006 by Apoc]

[edit on 10-6-2006 by Apoc]

Originally posted by denythestatusquo
Uh let's get this straight... there is 4 major TV networks in the US with 3 of them being old school around forever...

Those three are as I see it Left of Center in their policial leanings and only 1 of the 4 is right of center in its political views (some have argued here that Fox is in fact moderate in its views..

Great point, I can't believe people are so up in arms about Fox News. People just dislike it when Fox News easily points out liberal failures, and President Bush's success.

Ann Coulter is awesome, she tells it like it is, and is no less offensive then Mr. Moore.

-- Boat

Boatphone,

You crack me up!

No comment.

Ann isn't above calling people she doesn't like "gay"...

At a February 23, 2006 appearance at Indiana University, Bloomington, in a speech entitled "Liberals Are Wrong About Everything", she told the extremely divided audience, "Liberals hate both God and America," and referred to a man with an effeminate voice who was asking questions as a "gay boy".[14]

Or lying about her age...

The Washington Post reported that Coulter had obtained a Washington D.C. driver's license with her birthdate listed as December 8, 1963, two years after the birthdate listed on her Connecticut license.[15]

Or committing voter fraud...

Coulter is under investigation by election officials in Florida for filing an inaccurate voter registration form in June 2005. Government documents indicate she provided her real estate agent's address instead of her own home address. On March 29, 2006, the Palm Beach Post reported that elections officials have given Coulter 30 days to explain the inaccuracy.

Ann supports terrorism...

In an interview with George Gurley, Coulter said, "My only regret with Timothy McVeigh is he did not go to the New York Times building."

And is a racist...

In describing the ability of reporters to get passes to White House press conferences, Coulter speculated that they must be easy to acquire since the "White House allows that old Arab Helen Thomas to sit within yards of the president." Helen Thomas is a White House reporter of Syrian ancestry.[25]

She's even sexist against women...

Coulter has stated that women are "not as bright" as men (though she doesn't seem bothered by this) ,[30] "have no capacity to understand how money is earned,"[31] Coulter has also remarked that women "shouldn't be in the military."[32]

This might sum her up well...

Commentator Andrew Sullivan, responding to the controversy, notes, "[T]he problem with Coulter is that she is a form of camp, is she not? The minute you take her seriously, you lose grip on her reality. She's not a social or political commentator. She's a drag queen impersonating a fascist. I don't even begin to believe she actually believes this stuff. It's post-modern performance-art." [19]

en.wikipedia.org...

[edit on 10-6-2006 by Jamuhn]

Excellent post, Jamuhn. I can never understand why anyone, liberal, conservative, Democrat or Republican would ally themselves with this joke of a person! At least she used to be a little bit good-looking. Now, she just looks baaaad. I guess that's what hatred, insecurity, dishonesty and anger can do to a person. She looks foul.

Every time I see the title to this thread, I throw up a little in my mouth. And it's probably not as bad a taste as the OP was describing.

Coulter's a hate-filled comedy act in my opinion.

Originally posted by WyrdeOne
Ann Coulter is pathetic and transparent. I'm not a big fan of Moore's ambush journalism, but at least he has the decency not to defame parents and spouses of people who suffered and died.

Who does she think she is, to make a comment like that?

I'd like to see her try that crap face-to-face with the people she's slandering. They'd knock her on her bony man-ass.

[edit on 7-6-2006 by WyrdeOne]

That's to funny... She's not so bad, she is kind of funny actually, you don't have to listen to her and base your political views on what she says! It is refreshing to hear someone bluntly lay it out on someone.

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
Now, she just looks baaaad. I guess that's what hatred, insecurity, dishonesty and anger can do to a person. She looks foul.

I guess hanging around the dead can do that.

www.allhatnocattle.net...

Originally posted by Boatphone
Great point, I can't believe people are so up in arms about Fox News. People just dislike it when Fox News easily points out liberal failures, and President Bush's success.

Ann Coulter is awesome, she tells it like it is, and is no less offensive then Mr. Moore.

-- Boat

I don't have a problem with the fact that FOX is more conservative than the other networks. I object to the frequent misinformation put out by the organization. I respect and enjoy the Wall Street Journal - also right leaning - but they don't blatently quote questionable fact.

I refer you to the statistics in "Outfoxed" regarding the perceived reality according to FOX viewers about whether WMD were found in Iraq, if there was an Al-Qaeda - Iraq connection and the like. An article about it is here:
www.worldpublicopinion.org...

I also would like to highlight the constant misinformation put out by its commentary shows like The O'Reilly Factor and the Big Story. Recently Bill O'Reilly stated incorrectly for the second time that US Troops committed war crimes in WWII at Malmedy - it was actually backward the Germans killed surrendering US troops. Two years ago when he made the same 'mistake' he was criticized publicly. This year he says the same thing, FOX then scrubbed the transcript to make it appear he said Normandy. Only after MSNBC's Keith Olbermann did a story about it did they republish the accurate transcript.
mediamatters.org...

Be conservative, I don't care. Be communist, I don't care. But don't lie, fabricate, and distort while calling what you do 'news.'


[edit on 11-6-2006 by Pragmatist Centrist]

Originally posted by Jamuhn

BTW: Ann's book is #1 on the best seller list!

According to who? Not NY Times...
www.nytimes.com...

Denied!

Now here would pay for a pay-per-view of Coulter and Maureen Dowd mud wrestling in bathing suits? I think that would be the best selling pay per view event ever!

I at least found Coulter to be tolerable before these recent Shenanigans, now I find it grotesque. She has slandered women who didn't agree with her. It is shameful.

On the other hand, it is her right, minus the slander part if proven, to say what she wants. So my opinion is that she is icky.

Thing is, "normaly" noone in his/her right mind would put someone like Coulter on television just because she overdoes it 100x and pritty much makes a fool of every subject she talks about.
She goes so far that it stopped being funny long ago.

I goto agree though, she's good at luring out retards, when you see someone idolize her or say she's so great, ignore the person, their mind is as far gone as that rediculous troll's mind is.

EDIT: For you niteboy82 :p

[edit on 11/6/06 by thematrix]

I simply love Ann Coulter, she's got some guts eh? We teach kindergarten kids to ignore those who make comments and or verbal attacks toward them.....funny how to acknowledge such, and attempt to defend oneself from such is what appears to be happening with the 9-11 widows......and Hillary to boot. Possibly it is the morsel of truth in Coulter's words that so enraged the accused

Originally posted by thematrix
I goto agree though, she's good at luring out retards, when you see someone idolize her or say she's so great, ignore the person, their mind is as far gone as that rediculous tranny's mind is.

I have friends who are transgendered (post op), and I wish people would stop grouping the likes of Coulter with my friends. She deserves a category all of her own. It insults my friends.

She writes exactly what she can to pull the number of sells out to keep her making money. She also has cheap dye jobs done, I could do better than that.

The Matrix, what a clever idea. I could bring her book to a first date, and if the date says, "oh my God, I looove Coulter!" I know that we are going to be splitting the check at the end of dinner, and that will be the end.

Guys for real can we stop talk about this ***** she think that black people should stay slave how can anybody say she got a point. Yes it sad that the deomcares (sorry if i mispell) have to use these widows to get there angend out but but ahrrrrr god I hate her this sheman is not worth .02 these people should speak there mind about what happen and most of them are not "golddigger"
as she said!!!!!!

Originally posted by Pragmatist Centrist

Originally posted by Boatphone
Great point, I can't believe people are so up in arms about Fox News. People just dislike it when Fox News easily points out liberal failures, and President Bush's success.

I don't have a problem with the fact that FOX is more conservative than the other networks. I object to the frequent misinformation put out by the organization. I respect and enjoy the Wall Street Journal - also right leaning - but they don't blatently quote questionable fact.

I refer you to the statistics in "Outfoxed" regarding the perceived reality according to FOX viewers about whether WMD were found in Iraq, if there was an Al-Qaeda - Iraq connection and the like. An article about it is here:
www.worldpublicopinion.org...

IMO, you do have a problem with Fox being more conservative. You're hiding behind some statistics that have very little to do with what you claim.

From your referenced poll article:

An in-depth analysis of a series of polls conducted June through September found 48% incorrectly believed that evidence of links between Iraq and al Qaeda have been found, 22% that weapons of mass destruction have been found in Iraq, and 25% that world public opinion favored the US going to war with Iraq. Overall 60% had at least one of these three misperceptions....

The polling, conducted by the Program on International Policy (PIPA) at the University of Maryland and Knowledge Networks, also reveals that the frequency of these misperceptions varies significantly according to individuals’ primary source of news. Those who primarily watch Fox News are significantly more likely to have misperceptions, while those who primarily listen to NPR or watch PBS are significantly less likely.

I'm not gonna copy the .gif of the results - so here they are:
Respondents with one or more of the three misperceptions by source they use
Fox - 80%
CBS - 71%
ABC - 61%
NBC - 55%
CNN - 55%
Print sources - 47%
NPR/PBS - 23%
NOTE - No margin of error was given.

CBS is not worthy of your loathing? Can we be sure, in the absence of margin of error data, that CBS' numbers are not statistically equivalent to those of FOX?

From the same article:

Variations in misperceptions according to news source cannot simply be explained as a result of differences in the demographics of each audience, because these variations can also be found when comparing the rate of misperceptions within demographic subgroups of each audience.

Anyone that believes this is just not thinking straight. This states that the demographic difference between conservative, right-wing Christian family types and East and West coast, liberal arts degreed left wing anti-Republican liberals can be ignored. Both groups, like everybody else on Earth, tend to believe a thing is true if it is something that they want to be true.
Examples? Okay, in the first group - the second coming of Christ. In the second group, Man is basically good. Neither is true.
First group - illegals are streaming over the borders taking our jobs. Second group - illegals are no problem - it's racist to say otherwise. Neither is true.

Even given this fact, almost a fourth of the NPR/PBS listeners still had at least one of the three misperceptions after constantly listening left wing liberal broadcasts.

Your attempt to blame FOX news for this unfortunate misperception is misdirected. It should be laid at the feet of the administration, of course. While they never once actually claimed Saddam was involved in the 9/11 attacks (which, incidentally, wasn't even one of the three "misperceptions,") they certainly never did anything to disavow this erroneous belief that a great number of Americans apparently held.

My feeling is that I'd like to see the questions that were asked. The misperceptions do not seem so "misperceived" to me. I mean, the fact is there were and are still WMD in Iraq. But these WMD were already known about and basically were under control before the war started. Yet the website you linked labels as a "misperception" the following phrase:
"that weapons of mass destruction have been found in Iraq."

Seems like that could be very misleading in and of itself.

Originally posted by Pragmatist CentristI also would like to highlight the constant misinformation put out by its commentary shows like The O'Reilly Factor and the Big Story. Recently Bill O'Reilly stated incorrectly for the second time that US Troops committed war crimes in WWII at Malmedy - it was actually backward the Germans killed surrendering US troops. Two years ago when he made the same 'mistake' he was criticized publicly. This year he says the same thing, FOX then scrubbed the transcript to make it appear he said Normandy. Only after MSNBC's Keith Olbermann did a story about it did they republish the accurate transcript.
mediamatters.org...

From your Media Matters reference:

O'REILLY [video clip]: In Malmédy, as you know, U.S. forces captured SS forces who had their hands in the air and they were unarmed, and they shot them down. You know that. That's on the record. Been documented.

OLBERMANN: Thus was the full depth of Bill O'Reilly's insult to the American dead of World War II made clear. The mistake of last October was not some innocent slip nor misremembered history. This was the way O'Reilly understood it, and thus, this way it had to be. No errors corrected, no apologies offered, no stopping the relentless tide of bull, even briefly enough to check one fact.

My emphasis.
IMO, this says more about O'Reilly than it does about Fox News, when you consider his job is not to report the news. The fact that the transcript was altered however is somewhat troubling. But I don't see any political agenda in it, unlike the Dan Rather-forgery story.
The upshot is, don't believe everything you read or see.

Dude is just too full of himself. I've noticed a lot of that in some areas of ATS as well.


Harte

I do find it pathetic and sad that this many people who watch network news are prone to errors - regardless the network. However, if you cannot see an agenda in Fox News' broadcasting you are not paying attention.

I'll also respond to your criticism of Dan Rather and CBS. When his error was made public what happened? CBS fired him, issued a public apology, and recanted the story. What happens at Fox? They edit the transcript and gloss over the event. This happens weekly on his show and others - O'Reilly is the worst, however. The spouting of John Gibson is also ridiculous. The one liberal I can find on the station is intentionally weak compared to his co-host (Hannity and Colmes). The network is less about news than it is filtration and commentary.

The other networks are bad - but Fox is torrid, and to have a motto of "Fair and Balanced" is simply ludicrous.

Niteboy ............. Where the hell did you get that avatar? so funny my eyes were watering first time I saw it.

Regardless if you like Ann you can't tell her to shut up because you don't like her. I have only seen her on fox so if you don't like her, well first your prolly liberal so it wouldn't hurt to change it to CNN since fox is conservative news. (they are not actually "Fair and Balanced" that would be a joke)

Originally posted by Rockpuck
Niteboy ............. Where the hell did you get that avatar?

so funny my eyes were watering first time I saw it.

Regardless if you like Ann you can't tell her to shut up because you don't like her. I have only seen her on fox so if you don't like her, well first your prolly liberal so it wouldn't hurt to change it to CNN since fox is conservative news. (they are not actually "Fair and Balanced"

that would be a joke)

Rock, ain't she a beaut??

Nah, I don't watch faux, no offense though. I don't really watch CNN (clinton news network) either if I can help it. I don't consider myself a liberal or a conservative. I am myself, and I am equal opportunity. I don't care for a lot that Coulter does, but I also don't really care for a lot that many liberal people do care for. I vote based on ability to perform the job at hand, nothing more.

I love this country, and I only vote for what I feel is best. It's the best I can do, personally.

My fiancee is the kind of person who would like to meet Ann and then punch her in the face. She's American, a registered Democrat, religious and takes great exception to being called a traitor just because she's a democrat.
Hell, Ann would probably have supported Lindburgh in the '30s, as she has no idea about the way that the world really works.

Tons of blogs around that are googled with "ann coulter is an idiot".

This one mentions an actual quote from Ann, after reading which I can only assume she's a heartless fark.

Japanese kamikaze pilots hated us once too. A couple of well-aimed nuclear weapons, and now they are gentle little lambs. That got their attention

And then again, she also said this:

I think the government should be spying on all Arabs, engaging in torture as a televised spectator sport and dropping daisycutters wantonly throughout the Middle East

My only regret with Timothy McVeigh is he did not go to the New York Times Building

[edit on 12-6-2006 by Aelita]

Originally posted by Pragmatist Centrist
I do find it pathetic and sad that this many people who watch network news are prone to errors - regardless the network. However, if you cannot see an agenda in Fox News' broadcasting you are not paying attention.

You'd be right, but as this is not what I said, I don't see how it applies. I meant specifically the transcript hanky-panky. I see it as FOX trying to protect a cash cow.

Regarding the errors, I too find it appalling. The worst is the constant stream of mispelled words - even in the "banners."

Originally posted by Pragmatist CentristI'll also respond to your criticism of Dan Rather and CBS. When his error was made public what happened? CBS fired him, issued a public apology, and recanted the story. What happens at Fox? They edit the transcript and gloss over the event. This happens weekly on his show and others - O'Reilly is the worst, however. The spouting of John Gibson is also ridiculous. The one liberal I can find on the station is intentionally weak compared to his co-host (Hannity and Colmes). The network is less about news than it is filtration and commentary.

It's not an apt comparison. Rather's story was given as not only a "scoop," but a huge breaking news story/expose. Rather was supposed to be a reporter. O'Reilly, on the other hand, is a News Analyst. In this manner, FOX gets around much of the scrutiny usually directed at news broadcasts. IOW, they (mostly) don't claim to be giving news at all on the O'Reilly-type shows.

I agree, of course, that FOX has a conservative bent. So what? They haven't spent the last fifty years repeatedly denying it like the other networks have denied their liberal leanings. FOX's actual news shows differ little from those of other networks, except they cover some things the others don't - because the others want to pretend they didn't happen - think Oil-for-Food.

BTW, I personally find it difficult to watch O'Reilly's shows. Same (even moreso) with Hannity and Colmes. Though I found both shows to be refreshing when they first started, I'm now really tired of all the sniping. Sort of the same thing that happened with M*A*S*H!!

I prefer The McLaughlin Group. At least they joke around sometimes.

Harte