I laughed at this bit from her current column:
And, like the funniest remarks from her counterparts on the opposite end of the political spectrum, that bit is funny because it has more than a little truth to it. 
That’s exactly right…in order to be funny, it does have to have a ring of truth, and it does work for both sides. The way I see it, if you don’t find stuff like what has been quoted in this thread funny, it’s because A) your sense of humor is a little lacking, or B) you aren’t willing to poke a little fun at yourself or what you stand for.
The difference between “both sides” is that Colbert and Franken actually recognize that they’re comedians.
The bolded part would seem to be Ann’s problem in the majority of cases. Some of the stuff quoted here is indeed funnyesque, but the rest of it, not so much.
See? I can laugh at that! 
Now you’re putting a ring of truth into option B from my last post! 
Hmm, I’ve never really read any of her work before, but some of the stuff quoted in this thread is pretty funny. Are we sure that her whole act isn’t supposed to be a Colbert-esque satire?
It really doesn’t matter who is reading Ann Coulter’s books. What matters is her books generate publicity to where she does interviews on radio, television, and in print. It’s the interviews where she sways the ignorant.
Well, that logic would hold if we were to assume that her goal is to sway the ignorant. I think it’s more likely her goal is to sway dollars into her bank account, in which case it’s probably a case of her doing the ridiculously over-the-top interviews in order to drum up sales for her books.
I’d love to see a meeting of minds between Ann Coulter and Fred Phelps.
I’ve heard it suggested before, but I think it’s more likely that she’s just willing to say anything to make a buck. Or, what OneCentStamp said.
She’s mean. Lots of conservatives like the mean. As long as she says mean things about people they don’t like, they don’t really care much if she’s got her facts straight or not. They just like the mean.
Extremely hypothetical question:
There’s a very popular liberal author, say Michelle Moore. She writes books that are frequently New York Times bestsellers. One of these books is called “molestation”, and it’s first lines are something like “Conservatives have a preternatural gift for striking a position on the side of child molestation. You could be talking about Scrabble, and they would instantly leap to the pro-NAMBLA position. Everyone says conservatives don’t molest children. Yes they do.”
Note that there is no disclaimer there that she is talking about conservative leadership, or certain prominent conservatives, as opposed to conservatives in general. Also note that while one might possibly read this whole thing as one enormous exercise in hyperbole, there’s no actual textual clue to tell you that that’s the case. The book just goes on and on and on in that vain for hundreds of pages.
So, this woman claims that YOU, personally, as a conservative, are a child molestor. And millions of copies of each of her books are sold, and you have no reason to think that the guy sitting on the airplane next to you, reading this book, isn’t taking it seriously. Thus, directly due to her actions, there are now millions of people in the US who take more or less seriously the idea that all conservatives are child molestors.
Now you go onto the SDMB and some liberal poster says “I’m not what you would call a big fan of hers…she’s too rigid politically…but I have to admit, some of the quotes were really pretty funny.”
How would that make you feel?
Does she say that liberals are child molesters? I’m not opposed to answering your question, but I don’t understand the analogy.
I’m paraphrasing the first few lines of Treason. And I think calling someone treasonous, saying someone hates America, is something that is at least in the same league of vitriolic slur as calling them a child molestor. If you say that my policies are misguided and doomed for failure, or that I have a poor understanding of international economic realities, or whatever, well, then I can argue. If you say that I’m a treasonous America-hater, all that does is result in hatred and division.
Coulter made a similar pronouncement about liberals being the party that wants everyone to have abortions (as opposed to simply wanting them to remain legal). The term “party of death” came up, I believe. Max appears to be spoofing that.
ETA: Max answered for himself.
:dubious: This has to be the bizarrest and most hysterical comparison I’ve read on the SDMB.
I also think it’s incorrect: even if you do dislike your country, that’s merely a political position. Case in point: I spent Monday night with some Austrian friends of mine who detest Austria and never wish to return. Fair play to 'em, they’re entitled to their opinion. I do not consider their political and emotional stance anywhere near the level of criminal sexual assault on a minor.
ETA: or have I sat on a whooshee cushion?
Well, first of all, I didn’t read Treason. I only flipped through the latest book, which is random quotes from other books & from her columns. So, I can’t speak to her overarching philosophies. For the most part, I don’t follow pundits because of what I said earlier…I don’t go for the strict party-line thing. ALL I am saying is that I found some of the quotes funny (and, apparently, I’m not alone in that opinion.)
Secondly, the idea that Liberal ideas are treasonous is a matter of her opinion. It may be a stupid opinion, but saying that she believes that all liberals are America-haters is more like saying that all conservatives hate the poor and want them to die (and I’ve actually heard that from people on the SDMB). It’s not accusing them of any specific criminal action on the part of the person, such as saying they are child molesters would be, but (perhaps purposely) misconstruing their core beliefs based on their political affiliation and what YOU think it stands for, looking at it from the other side.
If the poster could point to the lines that were funny, and I found them funny, then I’d probably say, “Yes, although much of her work is dispicable, she does get a few funny lines in now and again.”
In much the same way that people around here support Der Trihs, and say he’s an assest to this board, even though he’s said things in a very similar vein about conservatives – that they hate women, for instance.
I know it’s just a typo, but yeah, he’s one of the assest people here.