Speakeasy forum

General discussion

Ann Coulter, Again.

by Ziks511 / June 28, 2006 2:02 AM PDT
http://www.philly.com/mld/dailynews/news/opinion/14918025.htm

Annie's media enablers
By PAUL WALDMAN

"ONCE AGAIN, THE loathsome Ann Coulter has emerged to throw grenades of bile at anyone who might disagree with her. And once again, the mainstream media has done all they can to lend a hand.

"As you've no doubt heard, Coulter's new book, "Godless: The Church of Liberalism," contains her usual mixture of deception, distortion, and invective.

"Although the book is filled with vicious attacks on her political opponents, the one that has garnered the most attention is this statement about a group of Sept. 11 widows who have been critical of President Bush:

" "These broads are millionaires, lionized on TV and in articles about them, reveling in their status as celebrities and stalked by grief-arazzis. I've never seen people enjoying their husbands' deaths so much."

"Despicable, sure, but just about what we've come to expect from Ann Coulter.

"After all, she has elevated the over-the-top personal attack to an art form, seemingly trying to ascend to new heights of outrageousness every time the cameras turn on her, as they do on an almost daily basis.

"But the questions raised by Coulter's prominence aren't so much about her as they are about the news organizations that create that prominence.

"If it weren't for the magazines, newspapers, and television programs that give Coulter a forum for her repellent views, she'd be just another extremist throwing darts in all directions.

"But there she was on the "Today" show - where she has appeared three times in the last eight months - and on the "Tonight" show, and on Fox News, and on MSNBC. Not to mention the glowing profile that graced the cover of Time magazine a few months back.

"Every time a producer or editor turns their megaphone over to someone like Ann Coulter, they debase our discourse."

Some piece of work, and what's this stuff about her not using her real address in Palm Beach on her voter's registration card. I guess she doesn't like being mobbed by hordes of "the little people" who actually read her ... offerings.

Rob
Discussion is locked
You are posting a reply to: Ann Coulter, Again.
The posting of advertisements, profanity, or personal attacks is prohibited. Please refer to our CNET Forums policies for details. All submitted content is subject to our Terms of Use.
Track this discussion and email me when there are updates

If you're asking for technical help, please be sure to include all your system info, including operating system, model number, and any other specifics related to the problem. Also please exercise your best judgment when posting in the forums--revealing personal information such as your e-mail address, telephone number, and address is not recommended.

You are reporting the following post: Ann Coulter, Again.
This post has been flagged and will be reviewed by our staff. Thank you for helping us maintain CNET's great community.
Sorry, there was a problem flagging this post. Please try again now or at a later time.
If you believe this post is offensive or violates the CNET Forums' Usage policies, you can report it below (this will not automatically remove the post). Once reported, our moderators will be notified and the post will be reviewed.
Collapse -
She really made me laugh...
by Josh K / June 28, 2006 2:19 AM PDT
In reply to: Ann Coulter, Again.

...one night on Hardball when she started complaining that she can't get any airtime on the "liberal media." After pointing out that she was getting airtime at that very moment, Chris Matthews proceeded to rattle off a list of TV appearances she had made just that day. It was hilarious watching her react to that.

Collapse -
I must have her
by WOODS-HICK / June 28, 2006 3:50 AM PDT

that is a deflection protection measure. some here are obsessed with my saying I am not obsessed with here. oh well obsession is obsession. anyway,

ac is another crybaby from the right who calls 'foul' which fuels her vapid vapors. classic persecution complex. she is always being insulted and personally attacked. boo hoo, boo hoo, says the crocodile. she thinks the heat in her kitchen is a culinary delight.

my conspiracy theory is that with all her cash; she has an entourage of pie throwers, shouters, screamers, etc. on her payroll. it is a thin skinned drum to summon her tribe. it works. bringing in the trash with the cash. I must have her more now.

Collapse -
I really don't find her at all attractive
by Josh K / June 28, 2006 5:20 AM PDT
In reply to: I must have her

And (at least consciously) it has nothing to do with her personality or politics. I just don't see what the big whoop is about her looks.

You may have her. If it's OK with her, it's OK with me.

Happy

Collapse -
I am kidding about 'having' her
by WOODS-HICK / June 28, 2006 6:38 AM PDT

she is a mirror breaker. her hair is too phony blonde, too long and her skirts are too short for a middle aged woman. professional opinion: she needs a stylist.

Collapse -
Gibberish fever
by EdH / June 28, 2006 5:21 AM PDT
In reply to: I must have her

You have it bad. Ar you stalking her yet?

Collapse -
(NT) (NT) I am stalking everybody
by WOODS-HICK / June 28, 2006 6:14 AM PDT
In reply to: Gibberish fever
Collapse -
(NT) (NT) must adjust deflector, bad vibes entering
by WOODS-HICK / June 28, 2006 6:41 AM PDT
In reply to: I must have her
Collapse -
That was long ago ...
by Evie / June 28, 2006 5:39 AM PDT

... when it was true. And Hardball has only gotten fewer viewers than its former lackluster viewership since.

Collapse -
it is too bad
by WOODS-HICK / June 28, 2006 6:33 AM PDT
In reply to: That was long ago ...

I like him. matthews, c wallace, dobbs let their guest give their pov. they remain fairly neutral, except dobbs on immigration and outsourcing. I do not learn anything when the pundit strokes himself for the entire show.

I wonder how the 'matthews show'(more like mClaughlin than hardball) does on his sunday nbc slot. as you pointed out msnbc is hardly viewed.

Collapse -
?????
by EdH / June 28, 2006 6:38 AM PDT
In reply to: it is too bad

Chris Matthews hasn't let a guest complete a sentence in at least five yeras. He is totally egotistical. It's all about him on that show.

Dobbs is simply pathetic. Wallace is okay.

Collapse -
(NT) (NT) who do you like?
by WOODS-HICK / June 28, 2006 6:40 AM PDT
In reply to: ?????
Collapse -
History Channel, South Park, PBS...
by EdH / June 28, 2006 7:15 AM PDT
In reply to: (NT) who do you like?

most of those talking heads type shows are not worth spit, IMHO.

Collapse -
those are good stations
by WOODS-HICK / June 28, 2006 7:29 AM PDT

as you know cartoons are in 'my' spittoon. but different strokes and all. I watch cspan also, you see the events as they are happening in congress. then I watch any news network and think "why didn't they watch cspan". sound bites are too biased. I like their morning 'call in' show. I like watching the mod try to remain like a mannequin. it's two sided 'watch' radio.

Collapse -
I like that show too, in small doses...
by EdH / June 28, 2006 7:43 AM PDT

They have a couple of really lunatic liberals who call in and I always crack up listening to them rant.

Collapse -
now don't forget
by WOODS-HICK / June 28, 2006 7:53 AM PDT

the crazy conservatives. unfair and unbalanced is my motto. once a caller got the f word past the screener, the mod didn't even blink. everybody says they are biased unless they agree with the caller. I also like that some are on a first name basis with the mods, that is strange.

Collapse -
The call in hasn't been the same ...
by Evie / June 28, 2006 11:14 PM PDT
In reply to: now don't forget

... since they instituted the different lines and give equal time to both sides. It artificially inflates the value of the minority opinion on issues and gives the distorted impression that there are far more people that share that opinion than is true.

Collapse -
let me see the numbers
by WOODS-HICK / June 28, 2006 11:36 PM PDT

I could say the same thing about this forum. criticism based on your opinion? do you think you should be the voice of moderation? I still do not know who you think represents your views? the only question that might be easier is: is today considered thursday in the usa?

Collapse -
Your habit of taking my statements and ...
by Evie / June 28, 2006 11:41 PM PDT
In reply to: let me see the numbers

... veering into gibberishland is getting rather annoying.

Anyone that watched CSpan in the early days knows that the callers were heavily skewed to the right. That's WHY in the interest of "fairness" they instituted the calling line policy. That's not a matter of opinion, it's a fact. Brian Lamb said as much in defending the policy when it was instituted.

Collapse -
you might find it annoying
by WOODS-HICK / June 29, 2006 1:05 AM PDT
In reply to: let me see the numbers

but if you think my opinions are gibberish; that is your opinion. every 'call in' show does not express the majority or the minority. it only expresses the opinions of those who have time to call in. your reply does not explain your statement.

your words:
''give equal time to both sides. It artificially inflates the value of the minority opinion on issues and gives the distorted impression that there are far more people that share that opinion than is true.''

Posted by: Evie (see profile) - 06/29/2006 6:14 AM
In reply to: now don't forget by WOODS-HICK
Report offensive post

since turnaround is fair play to you to avoid answers. you criticize but you are afraid to give examples. I still do not know who you consider the perfect pundit, host, whoever. you might need a bigger mitt for hardball.

Collapse -
You continue to make no sense
by Evie / June 30, 2006 5:28 AM PDT
In reply to: let me see the numbers

If a call-in show routinely has 75% of callers favoring "X" and 25% opposing "X", and the show arbitrarily changes it's policy so that it will give equal time to the opinions of the 25% and the 75%, that does indeed artificially inflate the minority opinion and give the distorted perception that more share that opinion than do in reality.

So long as everyone has an equal opportunity to use their telephone and phone in, it is more fair to let the distribution of opinions represent the crosssection of callers than to arbitrarily divide it by any other formula.

Collapse -
of course I disagree
by WOODS-HICK / June 30, 2006 5:51 AM PDT
In reply to: let me see the numbers

the people that get through to a 'call in show' would be the only ones to give an opinion. what record is kept of people who try and fail. a screener could allow only opinions that are favorable to the ideology of the host.
the host does not answer the phone himself in the order the calls are received. all calls are pre-screened. alternating calls is the only fair way, but the screener has to rely on the honesty of the caller.

there is no equality. those who have the time; call. those who don't; don't. it is impossible to tell what any majority/minority opinion is. your version of the world is that there should be one opinion. that only works for god.

keep trying

Collapse -
More BS
by Evie / June 30, 2006 6:11 AM PDT
In reply to: let me see the numbers

If 75% of callers BEFORE the artificial policy was instituted favored ''X'', then after that, the 75% are unfairly disadvantaged. Let's say you have 100 callers and 20 callers are put on the air during the course of a show. If the opinions of the callers are split 75/25 then those 20 calls if answered randomly will result in an average 15 pro/5 con calls on average. All callers have an equal chance of getting to voice their opinion. With two lines, 10 pro and 10 con, you have 75 callers vying for 10 spots but only 25 callers vying for the other 10 spots. This is patently unfair.

I don't favor one opinion, but I also don't favor inflating the importance of minority opinions by giving preferential treatment to airing them. It may well be impossible to tell what majority/minority opinion is for any call-in show, but the callers are likely representative of the listening audience unless there is some manipulation at the screening level. Nobody is being prevented from voicing their opinion when there is one call in line for all. The total airtime for their opinion will be reflected in the popularity of it. This is fair unless you think that minority opinions deserve some special treatment. IF the opinion is REALLY more widely held then more people will simply have to choose to be politically active, vote, call in, campaign, etc.

I won't keep trying. If you haven't grasped this concept by now, you never will.

Collapse -
I grasped your opinion.
by WOODS-HICK / June 30, 2006 7:20 AM PDT
In reply to: let me see the numbers

and your current reply is not bs as you state.

adding more words does not add gravitas. why not have the host call himself?

you have not answered; does every one who calls get through? you have not answered; do people with opposing opinions have the time or the inclination to call.

otherwise the majority opinions are all that are heard. which would be a distorted view of what is the majority opinion. that could be determined by the demographics of those whose calls were answered. the demographics of their listening audience would also have to be considered.

where are you getting these figures? is there a chart I could review? you reaffirm my observation that you believe a minority opinion has less worth. the prevailing view of a 'call in' show without equal access has no value. most votes on anything are yes, no. or no opinion. if one does not vote that opinion is not counted. results of any vote are detemined by the majority of those who voted, nothing else.

so your dismissive posture indicates a sandy foundation, my house is built on granite.

that is verified by ny geological survey, hudson highlands

Collapse -
(NT) (NT) I won't encourage you further. Bye bye.
by Evie / June 30, 2006 7:27 AM PDT
In reply to: let me see the numbers
Collapse -
It amazes me,W-H...
by EdH / June 30, 2006 7:59 AM PDT
In reply to: let me see the numbers

That you cannot understand a concept this simple. Evie's right; you're wrong.

Go sit in the corner and really think about about it. It is obvious.

Not kidding here. This is really simple to grasp. Even Togo gets it.

Collapse -
sorry no corners in this circle
by WOODS-HICK / June 30, 2006 4:32 PM PDT
In reply to: let me see the numbers

of confusion. I understand the concept, I do not agree with it. I have agonized over this debate and consulted with my local talmudic scholar. I called myself and realized I had the majority opinion. their was not a murmur from the opposition. while waiting for someone that did not know I was waiting, I waited.

I then spent the last 8.59 hours, stripped to my beginnings. I remained motionless, cool and wet on my power spot at the crest of storm king mountain. a thor stick exploded and blinded my bias. the powerful rumble trembled down the canyon walls past worlds end, past breakneck mountain, and echoed these words that caressed and comforted me;
"this debate has no answer".

or we are debating both sides of the same coin. care to flip.

Collapse -
(NT) (NT) Whatever. Have a good weekend.
by EdH / July 1, 2006 12:15 AM PDT
In reply to: let me see the numbers
Collapse -
Which may be the purpose...
by EdH / June 28, 2006 11:41 PM PDT

but all attempts at "equal time" fall into that conundrum.

Collapse -
CSpan is just ...
by Evie / June 28, 2006 11:12 PM PDT

... a different set of talking heads mugging for the camera.

Collapse -
You've GOT to be kidding me
by Evie / June 28, 2006 6:45 AM PDT
In reply to: it is too bad

Matthews, when he's not drooling over some attractive woman, can't get his conspiracy theories out fast enough!

Popular Forums
icon
Computer Newbies 10,686 discussions
icon
Computer Help 54,365 discussions
icon
Laptops 21,181 discussions
icon
Networking & Wireless 16,313 discussions
icon
Phones 17,137 discussions
icon
Security 31,287 discussions
icon
TVs & Home Theaters 22,101 discussions
icon
Windows 7 8,164 discussions
icon
Windows 10 2,657 discussions

CNET FORUMS TOP DISCUSSION

Help, my PC with Windows 10 won't shut down properly

Since upgrading to Windows 10 my computer won't shut down properly. I use the menu button shutdown and the screen goes blank, but the system does not fully shut down. The only way to get it to shut down is to hold the physical power button down till it shuts down. Any suggestions?