Really? It’s hard to tell with that superhero jaw and Adam’s apple.
Huh? No I’m not. I’m assuming that the primary reason she’s successful is because a lot of conservatives buy her books. (I find John Mace’s suggestion that she’s a bestseller out of a “Know thy enemy” mechanic to be wholly unsupported, and manhattan’s Unabomber comparison to be drivel: Coulter didn’t establish herself as anyone’s enemy EXCEPT through her writing.)
You misunderstand. The half of my agreement is that Sharpton is a charlatan. I disagree that Chomsky is a lunatic. It’s been awhile since I’ve read any Chomsky, but I found no lunacy there, and certainly no assholery.
If he was a hateful asshole who made good points, I’d say that. I wouldn’t say that his good points negated his assholery.
I wouldn’t buy the books of such a hateful asshole no matter good the points were. Apparently, the majority of liberals agree with me, and a huge number of conservatives disagree.
Daniel
That might be in part because it is wholly unsaid. What he said was that the books are not necessarily bought by her fans. It may be (and this is my belief) that most of her books sell to people who are broadly conservative but who do not agree with her invective – they buy the books as a guilty pleasure with full knowledge of what is crap and what isn’t. She’s Danielle Steele for policy wonks.
It was supposed to be drivel, you idiot. Just as this entire OP is drivel which should have dropped to the second page immediately after John Mace agree that “I can’t think of anyone on the left who is as bad as she is.”
As to her book sales or other output having any meaning other than making her rich and pissing liberals off, no one in here has produced any instances of Ms. Coulter’s writings having any discernable influence on policy or on policymakers. No Congressmen quoting her ideas (such as they are). No actual inflence-wielders relying on her input. No policies which she advocated early on which later became popular. Nothing besides “she says mean things about us and sells a lot of books.” You sound like the fundies whining that Christianity is under attack because so many people like Ozzy Osbourne.
Toughen up, you pussies.
And you stated above that the reason that those conservatives who bought her books did so because they found “evil sexy”.
I think this is most of the issue.
Liberals who use hateful rhetoric but also make good points, you consider worthy of examination (although you are honorable enough to concede that they are still hateful). Conservatives who use hateful rhetoric but also make good points, you dismiss out of hand.
Bit of a double standard, I would say. Not that I have never done it myself.
Regards,
Shodan
Voters wield influence en masse; she sells books en masse.
Daniel
Ah. That was a jokingly-asked rhetorical question. I didn’t realize you thought it was asked seriously. I know that’s not the reason.
Pardon? I thought I said just the opposite. I thought I said that I dismissed out-of-hand the people on Air American who are as hateful as Coulter.
Daniel
So, Manny, do I understand you to be saying by this that you approve of the methods of the late Sen. Joseph McCarthy (R-Wisc.) and Ms. Coulter’s glorification of them, and that the making of felonious allegations against your political opponents, simply because they’re your political opponents, is acceptable politics?
Gosh, Poly. When I wrote earlier about people too stupid to distinguish between Congressmen and pop authors I wasn’t thinking of you. I’m disappointed.
For the record, the answer is “no.” I’ve nowhere said anything at all approving of Ms. Coulter, her “scholarship” or her methods. In fact, I included a snarky “such as they are” in reference to her “ideas.” I compared her to the Unabomber and to Danielle Fucking Steele. I approvingly quoted John Mace saying that he couldn’t think of anyone on the left as bad as she.
What I’m saying is that when such attacks come from a pop author as opposed to lesser attacks from, just thinking out loud here, the Chairman of the opposition party, people should indeed be able to “laugh it off,” in the words of the OP.
What “good points” of Coulter’s might you be asking us to consider, pray tell?
“When contemplating college liberals, you really regret once again that John Walker is not getting the death penalty. We need to execute people like John Walker in order to physically intimidate liberals, by making them realize that they can be killed, too. Otherwise, they will turn out to be outright traitors.”
Ha ha.
(BTW, that particular little gem was delivered in an address to the Conservative Political Action Conference. Condoleeza Rice and Lynne Cheney were both in attendance. But of course, Ann Coulter has no political influence whatsoever, nope.)
Well, Left Hand of Dorkness wouldn’t read it, since he dismisses her out of hand. And you are too cretinously incompetent to understand anyway, so it would pretty much be a waste of time to explain.
Sorry.
Regards,
Shodan
Shodan, I gotta say, you’re pretty shitty at interpreting my words and guessing my motivations or actions. I dismiss her because of her hate, just like I’ll dismiss leftists who spew as much hate as she does. But if you describe her good points, then contrary to your prediction, I will read them.
You’d do well to quit predicting my actions or guessing my motives.
Daniel
Translation: “Yeah, I know I’m just making up hateful lies just like she does and just like I usually do, but as always, I’m too chickenshit to admit it”.
Regards,
ElvisL1ves
Not to speak for Manny, but as I read his point, it was specifically that Ms. Coulter was not dangerous precisely because she was not in a position of power. Manny said, for example:
You then ask about Senator McCarthy, who was, by all accounts, an actual US Senator. I suspect Manny would say that he disdains Senator McCarthy’s actions, because he was an actual Senator, and thus in a position to do much more damage than simply talk (or write).
I based it on the part where I recommended that you read one of Coulter’s books, and you responded:
Forgive me for misinterpreting the part where you said you wouldn’t read her book as an assertion that you wouldn’t read her book.
Perhaps you will agree that it was a natural mistake.
Regards,
Shodan
I’ll gladly forgive you for that, since it was a correct interpretation. What I’m not real willing to forgive you for is your continued twisting of what I said. A quick reminder:
Put up or–well, you can figure out the rest.
Daniel
It was here on the SDMB that I first learned of the concept of the “helicopter”. Briefly, it is a strategic overstatement of a project’s requirements, submitted by the project’s planners to the project’s financial backers. The purpose is to give the financial backers something they can deny on the proposal request without depriving the planners of anything they really want.
Now from my perspective, both of the following statements are wrong:
“All liberals are traitors.”
“Allowing any provisions of the USA PATRIOT act to expire is equivalent to giving up effective weapons in the war against terrorism.”
The first statement is attributed to Ann Coulter, the second to Attorney General Gonzalez. The first can only be embraced by a politician who is willing to be viewed as a wild-eyed caricature of a right-wing jingoist. The second, when viewed against the backdrop of the first, can be defended as “downright reasonable.” The second is the proposal; the first is the helicopter.
Like it or not, Ann Coulter is a part of the rhetorical landscape in twenty-first century American political discourse. Her rhetoric plays a part in the formation of obnoxious and unacceptable policies. By providing a contrasting picture of right-wing extremism from which a Tom DeLay or a Phil Kline can distance himself, she makes it easier for them to fram their positions and proposals as “not extremist.” The more “mainstream” her appearance (by virtue of her respectable position on so many bestseller lists), the greater the benefit to policymakers who are able to make the obnoxious appear reasonable.
Laughing that off strikes me as perilous.
What I don’t understand was how the Coulter shirt was being sold to conservatives. I would’ve thought it would’ve been marketed to liberals, so they could show off the hateful ignorance shown by that quote.
And yet John Walker is NOT on death row. The Bush administration could have tried him for treason if they wanted, but instead made a plea bargain. You just gave an example of how Ann Coulter does NOT have influence over Republican policy.
Where the hell do you get “continued twisting” from an admittedly correct interpretation of your post?
You take a position, I call you on it, and then you change your position. This is “twisting”?
Some stones you got there, bucko.
:shrugs:
I’ve got How to Talk to a Liberal (If You Really Must) on reserve at the library. Maybe when it comes in, I can post some quotes and see if your blood pressure can stand it.
Regards,
Shodan