Accuracy - To The Nth Degree
No matter what your opinion of Ann Coulter, this column absolutely rocks. Her cutting wit is much more subdued. Her outlandish rants not apparent. Her level of insight and her accuracy are amazing.
Coulter addresses the situation in Pakistan and the media coverage of it along with some historical references. To be quite blunt - she hit the nail on the head as they say. Unless one is an anti-American liberal ("progressive" to those ashamed of themselves), you'll probably just say, "yep, that's right."
Just an observation.
posted by Ol' BC @ 10:16 PM
7 comments
7 Comments:
I find your sentiments to be right in line with the rest of the so-called patriotic lunatics in this country. Somehow you equate disagreement with war and American policy as "un-American".
And how you can overlook Coulter's ranting and raving in rhetorical madness like she always does is even more amazing. Why is it that the Right can't seem to refer to anyone by their real names? Why do they have to give them villainous nicknames? I'll tell you. Because the Right can't function in confidence unless it has first belittled, mocked, and reduced to cartoonish bafoonery every one of its adversaries. They have to demonize everyone who does not share their views.
I guess if it confirms our own view of the world then it is deemed accurate. If it does not confirm our worldview, then it is deemed falsehood, regardless of the constraints of reality.
I find Coulter's screeds intolerable indigestable vitriol with ultimately only one purpose in mind: The glorification of Ann Coulter.
Actually, I don't overlook Coulter's ranting and raving. Take a breath and reread sentences two and three. It's just in this case she is correct in everything from throwing the Shah under the bus to the brutality if Sharia law.In fact, I can't disagree with your view of her purpose. That's been obvious for some time. BUT, she is still right on the money this time. BTW, you're up early.
I guess your comment "Outlandish rants not apparent" sort of made me think you were unaware that she was simply ranting once again.
I just don't find editorializing in this way to be all that productive. She says things in a way to be controversial, inflammatory, and inciteful which detracts from her real point, which may or may not be true. It is, ultimately, just her opinion.
I don't find her to be thoughtful. I find her to be a sensationalist. I appreciate the former and denounce the latter.
And, yes, I was up early. I always am. Just checked in earlier than usual, I guess.
You didn't answer my question. Why does the right have to nickname all of their detractors?
Humor,I guess. Works for me. However, it's not only detractors. Remember Tricky Dicky? He opened up China to the world.
Yes, but it is not particularly funny. It hints at a certain control and belittlement that the right seems to need to exert over its political rivals, and it is particularly poignant today. Bush himself is notorious for nicknaming everyone. It seems unprofessional to me and counter productive if one wishes to show and garner respect.
By "absolutely rocks" I assume you mean it's funny as hell that Coulter could praise Musharraf for the imposition of emergency rule and the shut down the Supreme Court while he wiped his ass with the consititution without a hint of irony. An indespensible "ally," Musharraf is such a threat to terrorists that Khaled Sheikh Mohammad actually lived about ten miles away from him. He's a failed leader with an authoritarian streak. Perfect Republican, I'd say. So, yes, she did hit the nail on the head. You should nominate him....
I don't know you, Jeff, but I like you!!! Well said!
Post a Comment
<< Home