 |
|
|
Photo Credit: anncoulter.com
Ann Coulter is hated, even loathed, by some people. There are two ways to look at this, one is that she obviously must be doing something right, by some standards, as those who like her do so emphatically. The other is that in spite of this, there is probably some calculated, meditated methodology that goes into her public persona.
Whatever the case, there are various sides to every story and I thought it would be rather interesting to take a look around to see what information I could come up with, through browsing the net. Yet keep in mind a few things, that I’ve never met Ann, and have only heard what one hears upon being a couch potato and browsing the net. What little I have heard so far is not so good, and not just from a liberal or independent perspective. First there was the whole, “If you must speak to a liberal” book, then there were the infamous appearances on television, with her arrogantly attempting to defend her conservative views, now there is the incident with a pie having been thrown at her. I did not know what to think about her, although I was intrigued.
I took a look at her own web site, which, in this day and age is a must have for any public persona. Simply put, anncoulter.com, the site includes simple “quotations” that seem more like blog entries than anything else. Is she not owning up to the fact that she does blog like the rest of us? Take today for instance, she starts off referencing the Times, a well known paper, then shifts the focus of her editorialism with the assertion that she would not have mentioned the article yet for the “recent editorial snippily remarking that the amount of foreign aid to tsunami victims offered by the United States within the first few days of the disaster was "less than half of what Republicans plan to spend on the Bush inaugural festivities."” Ok now I’m sort of starting to like her, because her analysis of the criticism is similar to those I’ve voiced over Times articles in the past, if that is the case, then perhaps you might have better suggestions on how to resolve that issue.
But is the Times inherently conservative, or pro-republican? As a writer, I understand how slick and manipulative the Times can be with the most mundane and trivial issues; as much as writers loathe the Times, I doubt any of us would pass up the opportunity to work for them. After all, it looks good on the resume, and it is an accomplishment for them to want to work with you. Knowing this, Ann’s argument looks more than interesting, if for no other reason that she not only has the gall to go after them over an article, her site is probably one of the more read, far more than that of the average bloggers. Indeed, this argument must carry some weight if one can confidently take on a behemoth such as the Times.
Such is the beauty and wonder of Ann Coulter, here is a woman who shouldn’t have much to say, if anything, about anything, yet is far more intelligent and confrontational that her beauty every could be. No wonder why the Republicans like her so much. By the way, Coulter is the author of four, yes count them, four books on the Times bestseller list. Such hypocrisy. Yet such nerve, it’s almost sexy to think about.
Let’s talk about the fact that three of those books have the word LIBERAL in the title. “How to talk to a liberal … “ , “Treason: Liberal Treachery From the Cold War to the War on Terrorism”, “Slander: Liberal Lies About the American Right”, the latter two of which the titles seem more academic in nature. In fact, someone could easily mistake those for dissertations of some sort. Hey why are liberals guilty of treason, and what are their lies about the American Right. What is so bad about the American Right anyway? Why are they “lies” to begin with, and according to whom? Those are the questions I’m asking, if you’re into Ann, or conservatism, you already have your own answers to these questions, Ann is simply meeting your mind where you’re at on those issues.
Shouldn’t conservatives and liberals talk to each other, communicate with each other? Not in the world according to Ann, they’re guilty of treason and they lie to the American public. This is all of course, assuming, that the conservatives have never done that to the American public to begin with. What about the guy who is now in office, serving a second term, while Condoleezza Rice takes all of the pressure off him. What about that? Coulter did practice law, however, so she must know something, even if it was for the “Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit”, although, she was “an attorney in the Department of Justice Honors Program for outstanding law school graduates.” Maybe that makes her somewhat outstanding herself. Needless to say her site includes a photo-album, which is interesting, because usually those who abuse the privilege of putting pictures on sites tend to be recording artists or would-be models who digress towards soft-porn to sell themselves. Ann isn’t selling anything on her site. There is an archive of her previous “posts” and links to other materials that might interest conservatives.
Of course the problem with staying on one particular site, especially that of the person in interest, is that the materials will be skewed somewhat to present them in the best light. Notice that there is nothing remotely self-deprecating on Ann’s site, which is interesting because a person without humor should be distrusted somewhat. Moving on.
Here is the thing with Ann, and others like her, as there are numerous women out there presenting the conservative view. The conservatives have beautiful women who dress well and have deep pockets that are over-educated, very, very slick in their presentation, and that can hold up their end of a debate, regardless of the idiocy behind the views that are supporting. The liberals have guys like Michael Moore that are easy to attack because they aren’t as interested in their own public appearance (or hygiene), but rather, what issues they placate the public over to begin with. The goods are rather abundant and include a lot of propaganda mixed with true information, regardless of who you believe or who you listen to. Ann clearly has an agenda, but you might be distracted through your infatuation with her beauty and whatever designer clothing she is wearing and simply accept what she says as truth. But is that really such a bad thing? It all depends on what you’re talking about, or why you’re talking about it depending on from whom you’ve originally heard it.
Reader's Comments
Add Your Comment On This Article
Christopher Kendalls attempts to deconstruct the modern day article, and offer news-analysis through his blog, Pseudo-Reporter, found at Google Blogger.
For a complete bio, click here.
|
|
|
 |
|
