Hillary rips Coulter for smearing terror widows (Update: Coulter responds) (Update: Coulter slammed — by Hugh Hewitt?)
posted at 3:31 pm on June 7, 2006 by Allahpundit
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
The bad news is, she’s right.
The good news is, it gives me an excuse to re-run this.
Why, it’s a catfight of Olympic proportions!
Update: Ace isn’t thrilled with her either: “[T]his nastiness is uncalled for. Even if something is actually felt deep inside — even if you’re filled with toxic hatred for very annoying, very presumptuous, very left-leaning women with an overweening sense of entitlement — most people would find less abrasive ways to express such an emotion.”
Update: Drudge scoops with Coulter’s response:
ANN COULTER RESPONDS TO SENATOR CLINTON: ‘BEFORE CRITICIZING OTHERS FOR BEING ‘MEAN’ TO WOMEN, PERHAPS HILLARY SHOULD TALK TO HER HUSBAND WHO WAS ACCUSED OF RAPE BY JUANITA BROADDRICK AND WAS GROPING KATHLEEN WILLEY AT THE VERY MOMENT WILLEY’S HUSBAND WAS COMMITTING SUICIDE.’
Update: Hugh Hewitt(!) lays into Coulter. Wow.
Update: Here’s what Michelle had to say about AC in February after she popped off about “ragheads” at CPAC. And here’s Dorothy Rabinowitz writing about the terror widows in 2004. Believe it or not, there is a way to make Coulter’s point tactfully.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: 1 2 3 Next »
Ann was not smearing the widows. She just point out that when those widows make a political statement, they are subjected to disagreement as much as everyone else. Being a 9/11 widow does not give them the absolute moral authority.
easy87us on June 7, 2006 at 3:37 PM
She also said they were enjoying their husbands’ deaths.
Allahpundit on June 7, 2006 at 3:38 PM
Yes, Allah, perhaps that was a tad over the line. No need to apologize for her. She can fight her own battles.
If Hillary wants to take her on, they should debate. But Madame Dufarge would never get on stage with anyone who will challenge her. Coulter would leave her in ruins.
JammieWearingFool on June 7, 2006 at 3:45 PM
On a much more important note, can someone tell that girl that the bleached blonde long lanky hair bit went out some time ago, and was never appropriate for anyone past the age of 30. Jesus, get a stylist.
honora on June 7, 2006 at 3:47 PM
I agree that Ann was a bit over the top on her comments about the widows. Yet, I’m not surprised by Hillary’s jumping into the comment fight. Pandering suspect as usual.
I think Ann was having just about enough of Matt anyway.
Kini on June 7, 2006 at 3:50 PM
Hillary should know all about heartless and cruel. Billy Dale could fill you in on it.
9/11 may never had occurred had her husband been paying attention instead of getting blown by a fat, cheesy intern.
JammieWearingFool on June 7, 2006 at 3:50 PM
easy87us you really shouldn’t expect a libertarian like Allahpundit to be on the side of a true Christian concervative like Ann.
cmc on June 7, 2006 at 3:53 PM
The bleached blonde long hair look NEVER went out in Southern California. Of course, there’s the “hot” new hairdo of Cynthia McKinney she could consider….
clyde on June 7, 2006 at 3:54 PM
Hilary did not read the book, jumped out a phrase taken out of context, and just proved Coulters point. namely that you can not say anything about the 9/11 widows because “they lost a husband”
Hillary is a tool and a card.
Wyrd on June 7, 2006 at 3:54 PM
I fail to see where Ann’s comments are anymore over the line then some of the things Kerry, Kennedy, Schumer, Murtha, Durbin, Pelosi, and any “progressive” radio talk show host has said about our troops. The real issue is Ann isn’t holding any elected office and does not purport to speak on behalf of America only for herself.
LakeRuins on June 7, 2006 at 3:55 PM
Wow — Allah, you are surprising. I think the lowest of the low is making a fortune off of your dead spouse while campaigning against the president who only wants to prevent more of the same kinds of deaths. Then … playing the grieving widow card and expecting no one to call you on it. Pathetic. I agree wholeheartedly with Ann.
wytammic on June 7, 2006 at 3:56 PM
Ann couldn’t have wished for a better marketing strategy of her latest book, over the top comments or not.
She will welcome and be invited to deabate this topic for the next few months, forever.
Entelechy on June 7, 2006 at 3:56 PM
No Allah, she’s not right. I have seen some of these women. They are Bush haters and use the deaths of their spouses to slam the President every chance they get. I’ve seen them in a crowd, followed by paparazzi, smiling and enjoying the limelight, like the celebraties they think they are. Coulter was right-on. She has the guts to say what alot of us are thinking.
msplitt on June 7, 2006 at 3:59 PM
honora-
Have to go w/clyde. It has NEVER gone away in Tx either. Might want to get out more.
Brian on June 7, 2006 at 4:00 PM
Ann stepped out a little too far on this one. She had a point to make, but she used a bazooka against grieving women, and a nation really. Whooops. She will pay for it in many ways. Sadly its another distraction for the drive-by-media as well.
The left is supposed to be the ‘Culture of Inconvenient Truth’.
.
Damn Ann, cant back you up on the ‘enjoying it’ writings.
shooter on June 7, 2006 at 4:00 PM
Honora,
Have no other argument? Agree with everything except her hairstyle?
wytammic on June 7, 2006 at 4:01 PM
My feeling is that the widows are using their husbands’ death to make a political statement. The very act itself is not very proper and Ann is right to point that out! If Ann Coulter thinks the widows are enjoying it, it is her opinion. I am sure the widows can come out and prove that they are not enjoying it.I think they should. How about adding some more tears to the act?
Why is the act not proper? Since we do not know what their husbands believed in, I think the widow should at least have the respect to let their husbands rest in peace.
I tend to agree with Ann. If it is painful to drag their husbands into a political argument, then they should not do it. By default they must be enjoying it.
What else could that be?
easy87us on June 7, 2006 at 4:04 PM
The core of what seems to be Coulter’s argument about the Left’s new favorite tactic of using victims as politcal voices so that they cannot be questioned on their politics seems spot on. Of course, Coulter does her usual and blows the whole argument with the stupid comments about enjoying their husband’s death.
Cindy Sheehan uses her “grief” status in an offensive way as a shield against objections to her poltics, but one doesn’t make that point well by suggesting she is happy her son is dead.
Clark1 on June 7, 2006 at 4:06 PM
Say what you will about Ann’s choice of words, both the NY Daily News and Hillary Clinton just proved her point.
rshurbet on June 7, 2006 at 4:06 PM
“easy87us you really shouldn’t expect a libertarian like Allahpundit to be on the side of a true Christian concervative like Ann.
cmc on June 7, 2006 at 3:53 PM”
I respect all who argue sensibly. Allah sees one point and I see why he sees what he sees. Read my response please.
easy87us on June 7, 2006 at 4:06 PM
Couldn’t this group, the grieving wives, find any grieving husbands or men to join their group. As always I am sympathetic to people expressing their grief in the aftermath of a tragic event however 5 years later and all I see is these “ladies” on liberal leaning talk shows and television programs still playing the grieving widow part and it is time to get counseling. They have a political agenda and if they can’t take as good as they get then they need to step off the field of play. Some of them have taken it to the point that they are supposedly “experts” on a variety of subjects all of a sudden, about like the Hollyweird crowd are experts in international diplomacy.
I wonder why Debra Burlingame wasn’t asked to join?
LakeRuins on June 7, 2006 at 4:07 PM
Sorry, but Coulter is 100% correct here. Wyrd’s comment is dead on, also, that Coulter’s point is being proved with each passing comment made by the likes of Hillary, Matt Lauer, and the rest of the MSM. The fact is that the Left can dish it out, but they can’t take it back. It works for a first-grader, perhaps, but not for adults. It’s time to put away the Victim card and grow up.
As far as I’m concerned, when the likes of Kristen Breitweiser make statements on HuffPo like “Flush Bush, not the Koran” (yes, she wrote that), they’re no longer victims. They become every bit the target Coulter is.
Fly_in_Ointment on June 7, 2006 at 4:07 PM
I can’t argue with Ann on this. These women (and Cindy Sheehan even worse) are almost “Giddy” and “Gleefull” from all the attention.
And Hillary has some nerve saying she is mean to women, when she is married to a Rapist and a guy who treats women like sperm recepticals.
havok on June 7, 2006 at 4:09 PM
I think she’s a cartoon, but one that is laughing all the way to the bank. Actually I get a bit tired of the 9/11 families myself–there’s a difference between a hero and a victim. What’s funny is this: imagine some liberal had said this instead of Annie. The mind reels thinking of Sean (help my head is going to explode) Hannity.
And to you folks who say lanky bleached blonde hair never went out–get the hell out of the trailer park!!!
honora on June 7, 2006 at 4:11 PM
If she wants people to stop being cruel to women, she should have a chat with her husband Bill
Defector01 on June 7, 2006 at 4:14 PM
I have had some experience with 9-11. Firstly, the first plane which slammed into the World Trade Center buzzed over my building at low level before smacking into 1WTC causing me to rush to the window. Secondly, by sheer coincidence, I knew a passenger on that plane. Thirdly, two other friends were also killed on that tragic day.Fourthly, I know (or more accurately am acquainted with) with one of these constantly complaining women.
Certain facts should be known: 1 The average settlements received for any spouse, etc. of a WTC victim has been three and one half million dollars. Compare that with the pension for some surviving spouse of the Iraq and Afghan Wars 2 The vast majority of the persons tragically affected by the WTC calamity have remained blissfully silent. Only a tiny percentage with far left political agendas have been strident. 3. These same bumptious troublemakers have facilitated in creating red tape snarling the reconstruction of the WTC site.4 The role these political crybabies play is identical to that of Cindy Sheehan in the Iraq War. 5 It is one thing being a victim. It is quite another to use the VICTIM CARD as an offensive weapom.
MaiDee on June 7, 2006 at 4:14 PM
If these greiving wives could not accept the fact that 19 Islamic terrorists controlled three planes and killed 3000 Americans with these planes, including their husbands, that they should go after those terrorists and their associated organizations, then………
all arguments are futile and meaningless.
easy87us on June 7, 2006 at 4:17 PM
I believe alot of what is being posted here. I think Ann had a valid point. BUT, she put ‘enjoyed’ and ‘death’ in the same sentence. Had she said they are ‘abusing’ or ‘improperly using’ their husbands death for political gain????
She made this choice, we’ll see.
shooter on June 7, 2006 at 4:19 PM
Yeah, but she didn’t really mean it. It’s a gag. Get it?
Jim Treacher on June 7, 2006 at 4:22 PM
Ann tells the truth. The truth is not always pretty.
NRA4Freedom on June 7, 2006 at 4:26 PM
The simple truth: every word Coulter said is unquestionably accurate with one exception – that “enjoy.”
That bothered me.
Have the widows EXPLOITED their husband’s deaths? Yup. Gained fame and fortune from their widowhood? Yup. Do liberals intentionally use them as spokespersons because of that “doctrine of infallibility” that makes it difficult to respond to their partisan rhetoric? Most definitely. This thread is proof. Ironically, there are even conservatives here who are openly arguing that you can’t attack these women, simply BECAUSE they are widows.
Anne is right. And we’re all proving her point with this very discussion.
But … what about that “enjoy?”
Should she apologize for that word.
Maybe. I used to think so.
But I’m starting to have a change of heart. I’m starting to wonder if she didn’t pick that word very, very carefully.
Because after spending a little time researching the women, watching a few of their hundreds of interviews, reading a few of their hundreds of shrill screeds … watching them being paraded around like celebrities … and watching their faces …. I realized something pretty obvious.
They ARE actually ENJOYING their husbands’ deaths.
It may sound cold. Callous. But I think its truth. And I think if you could hook them up to a polygraph, they’d admit it.
“Enjoying” is the right word.
Distasteful. Ugly. Cold.
But true.
And conservatives should care about truth above all else, shouldn’t we?
Professor Blather on June 7, 2006 at 4:36 PM
I, for one, applaud Ann for taking these tools to task. Soon after seeing Kristen Buttwiper (my own name for her) on NBC’s good morning show (for the second time)I began feeling a distinct, rising, uncontrollable absolute hatred for how she was using her husband’s death to try and make the Pres look bad.
One interview had Buttwiper, another common tool and one conservative widow on NBC. Matt and Perky Katie all but ignored the conservative and instead, loving wiped the crap from Buttwiper’s mouth as it blopped forth. The consevative woman (notice she is not a common household name like Buttwiper is) was a little too, well, *sad* to make her point, but it was well taken by me and I’m sure many others. Ibegan wondering just how many balck turtlenecks Buttwiper owns after I saw her EVERYWHERE, always such the victim, but never crying.
I have no tolerance for people who think the only way to make claim to an arguement is to be a victim of whatever the argument is about. We are ALL victims of something, whether we choose to make that victimship our identity or not is a choice. All Americans are victims of 9-11-01, so we can ALL make a claim about how we feel or what we think or know went wrong. The fact that these few liberal women were given carte blanche to spew their political views unchallenged is what Ann is talking about and she is RIGHT ON!!!
PS, my friend’s mom died on flight 93 so I have a “right” to talk about this. Don’t challenge me!
NTWR on June 7, 2006 at 4:36 PM
Honora, trailerparkanoia- you lose somebody to a long blonde haired beauty or something? Need help? http://www.onlyhairloss.com/…www.wigsrus.com
Why the animosity towards blondes? Not having enough fun?
.just funnin’
.
P.S. Anything to see the Hillary Pic, thx A. is that yours or a sanctuary?
shooter on June 7, 2006 at 4:37 PM
Er …. or I could have said what NRA4Ever said in two sentences. She told the truth. It’s ugly.
We can shoot the messenger, but the message remains true.
I challenge anyone: go do the research – go watch the clips – and ask yourself sincerely whether “enjoy” is so far from the truth …
Professor Blather on June 7, 2006 at 4:37 PM
They are using their husband’s deaths as a reason to engage in political activism when chances are they never would have if they hadn’t died. They became millionaires, public figures and insist on using their soapboxes to bash the administartion. Coulter could have been “nicer” but her point stands. And as someone already mentioned, Clinton proved Ann’s point by bashing her because she bashed the widows. The widows aren’t doing anything different than Cindy Sheehan. Politicizing a personal tragedy.
darwin on June 7, 2006 at 4:42 PM
Re: Coulter’s hair —
At this point, it’s part of her persona. Might as well tell Carrottop to get a new do, or Telly Savalas to grow some locks. It’s part of her image. Changing it would be sheer stupidity from a public relations perspective. About as smart as telling KISS to go onstage without their makeup. Oh, oops.
Professor Blather on June 7, 2006 at 4:44 PM
Honora, I am starting a Honora Blonde Fund. All contributions welcome, and I figure you’ll have enough in the bank to make a hair appointment in what, about….maybe a couple years.
Give you time to let it grow out too.
Make a fashion statement!
clyde on June 7, 2006 at 4:44 PM
At first I was shocked by her statement…which, like most people, I read isolated, out of context, on Drudge. Then the missus brought home the book. She’s referring not to all widows but to four specific women, and she backs up what she says with their own words, quoted from their many, many media appearances. Still a shocking statement, but less so.
Wasn’t it Maureen D**d who claimed that Cindy Sheehan had “absolute moral authority?” What about the thousands of other women who have lost spouses and children to war? Like Kos says, “screw them.”
saint kansas on June 7, 2006 at 4:45 PM
Can. Open. Worms everywhere.
On Drudge right now:
ANN COULTER RESPONDS TO SENATOR CLINTON: ‘BEFORE CRITICIZING OTHERS FOR BEING ‘MEAN’ TO WOMEN, PERHAPS HILLARY SHOULD TALK TO HER HUSBAND WHO WAS ACUSED OF RAPE BY JUANITA BROADDRICK AND WAS GROPING KATHLEEN WILLEY AT THE VERY MOMENT WILLEY’S HUSBAND WAS COMMITTING SUICIDE.’
rshurbet on June 7, 2006 at 4:45 PM
WOOOHOOOO!!! BRING IT ON! I would LOVE to see Coulter battle Hitlary even with half her brain tied behind her back!
NTWR on June 7, 2006 at 4:50 PM
I agree with Ann..these ‘widows’ have used their grief as a wedge to put forth their own political agenda. The real crime is the politicians who play on them, offer them a stage and a spotlight in order to drive a split throught the American people at a time when we need to be united. This terrorist thing is real, in case anyone thinks it is about only their loss….have they read the papers about what just happened in Canada and in other parts of the world? The terrorists win every time we divide our loyalties…I am behind Ann 100% on this one…Tell the widows and that Sheehan thing to shut up and use their grief to unite us on what will ultimatly effect us all.
Sandys Beach on June 7, 2006 at 4:58 PM
For what it’s worth, Drudge doesn’t attribute the quote (yet) but it comes from an on-air interview on Sean Hannity’s radio show (still going right now) at a book signing on Long Island.
I have the audio…mwa ha ha!
saint kansas on June 7, 2006 at 4:59 PM
Oh God this is too funny.
Leave it to them to step in it and THEY WILL.
Way to go Hillary! Proving once again that you’re just as sleazy as your husband, and only half as smart.
venmax on June 7, 2006 at 5:04 PM
Ann’s remarks were a bit over the top in this case, but the basic gist of her point was right. These widows are using their victim status as a shield for their agenda, as if that places them beyond having to answer questions. It’s no different than what Cindy Sheehan does with her aggrieved mother schtick, as if all the rest of her hate-filled rants off limits for rebuttal. As such, Ann’s remarks should be given their full context, and conservatives shouldn’t shy away from the larger message merely because they are afraid they might get tarred with the same brush the media is going to try to tar Ann with.
thirteen28 on June 7, 2006 at 5:07 PM
This is just Ann being Ann. She has the guts to say the inconvienent truths and smiles when she does it. If more people had the stones to challenge libs with their own tactics we wouldn’t have half the problems we do.
And what’s with attacking her for her looks? What are we all dumpy girls..uhh.. I mean libs now?
Iblis on June 7, 2006 at 5:15 PM
Ann’s just doing the job other so called “conservatives” won’t do: luring out nutbar whackjobs like Hillary since these days on The Hill it seems we only have one party – the party of appeasement and amnesty.
Ann’s right on. The truth is ugly. Her point is being proven by their response right now! They fell right into her trap! If you don’t want people to criticize you or your loss, then by all means don’t politicize your loss in the first place!
God forbid if some Islamo-fascists kill my wife, and I politicize that loss, you can bet your a$$ it’s gonna be for finding, apprehending, and killing the ba$tard$ who did it.
These widows are appeasers. But they are fair game, for trying to influence our policy with their loss. Our nation is at war. Their husbands are casualties of that war. Let’s hope more of us don’t become casualties. But appeasement will ensure that.
Terrorists started it. We’ll finish it.
BirdEye on June 7, 2006 at 5:16 PM
I think someone needs to buy Ann a puppy to improve that mood. And someone needs to crate train Hillary, for then at least she will be caged up.
Wineaholic on June 7, 2006 at 5:21 PM
Wineaholic
Maybe Ann should wear sweater-vests like Wesley Clark
and if Hillary is in a cage, can i feed her peanuts?
Defector01 on June 7, 2006 at 5:28 PM
Ann makes her living being over the top. All this yowling about her latest is just silly.
rightwingprof on June 7, 2006 at 5:29 PM
It seems slightly pathetic that so-called conservatives are teaming up with Hillary Clinton (of all people!) to attack Ann Coulter for making what others have already shown is a very true assessment of these disgustingly opportunistic widows.
Concerning the accusations that Ann is “vicious” or “self-obsessed” — those are seriously the most ridiculously untrue adjectives that could describe her. I was lucky enough to meet Ann Coulter about a month ago when she was speaking at Cornell University. I’ll admit that I was somewhat surprised to discover that she is one of the nicest people I have ever met. She is not rude at all to individuals that she meets and she seems genuinely interested in getting to know them personally. At the same time, she stands firm on her Godly convictions.
Those of you who are pathetic enough to level these ad hominem slurs at her should reconsider your statements. Prove why these widows aren’t opportunistic rather than attacking Ann personally.
tiekitwist on June 7, 2006 at 5:31 PM
Has anyone else noticed that bashing the dead husbands by calling them Little Eichmanns is a fair point but bashing the wives of those husbands is just vicious and mean spirited?
Kirun on June 7, 2006 at 5:31 PM
Ann is shrewd in the choice of her words. Only she knows if it is what she herself truly believes, but being the successful lightening rod she is, calls for astute choice in selecting those words that, like a visual artist, will illicit a reaction. That the ‘truth hurts” is already proven by the reaction to her observations.
Chief1942 on June 7, 2006 at 5:54 PM
My copy of Godless is on the way and I am looking forward to reading it. I loved Ann’s response to Hillary’s silliness. I tried to get to Ann’s website and could not, so the attacks against Ann are starting.
All I have to say to Ann is You Go Girl!!! Keep fighting!!! Don’t let these crazies get to you.
TheFamousOne on June 7, 2006 at 5:54 PM
You people missed the forest for the trees!
Hillary is supposed to be the smartest woman in the world, but she was TAKEN by Ann.
How? Simple. FIVE LETTERS: “e n j o y ”
They ALL swallowed the hook, as did many of you here did.
How much LESS press would this important book have gotten w/o that one word?
And Hillary’s smart?
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Carl Rove is jealous right now. Sorry, can’t help it…hahahahahahahahha!!!!!!!!!! Now I feel better.
Jimmyboy1 on June 7, 2006 at 5:57 PM
Ann being Ann sells books. Nothing to see here, move along.
thegreatsatan on June 7, 2006 at 5:57 PM
Although I did not like AC’s statements on Today about the widows, I LOVED her response to St. Hillary!
Labamigo on June 7, 2006 at 6:03 PM
“Nothing to see here,” tgs? The fact that millions of people are buying her books notwithstanding stuff like this is something to see, isn’t it?
Allahpundit on June 7, 2006 at 6:04 PM
Ann makes her points and the Blogs and Commenter’s are proving her point. The left rolls out these widows and then if someone does not agree with them then you are picking on someone who lost someone on 9/11. Just look at the comments here…Thanks for all who attack Ann as you are proving she is right…
Wade on June 7, 2006 at 6:06 PM
Defector01
Sweater-vests would be pretty hot for Ann, really show off her figure. She could also go for the tried and true John Kerry spacesuit:
http://images.usatoday.com/news/_photos/2004/07/26/kerry-space.jpg
Ahh, the sweet smell of Klassic Kerry.
And you get to feed Hillary the peanuts so long as I get hose her off with the pressure washer once a day.
Wineaholic on June 7, 2006 at 6:13 PM
Allah the point is, Ann is doing her same routine which tends to be distastefull and inflamatory and guess what the media and “blogsphere” is buying into it and giving the ultimate troll all the free press she could ever want.
Technorati has Ann Coulter as number one today.
Mission Accomplished!
The old addage still holds true, don’t feed the trolls. The media has never learned this, and apparently much of the “blogsphere” hasn’t either. Sure sometimes its fun to play with the troll, but their resistance to fire (ie flames) is well established.
thegreatsatan on June 7, 2006 at 6:22 PM
The only reason Hillary is criticizing Ann about those liberal agenda-driven anti-military, unpatriotic, Bush-hating “wives” is because she is just like them – a liar and an opportunist.
She’s just mad because she saw Bill mouth “I love you” to one of them…
Richard Davis on June 7, 2006 at 6:24 PM
Ann was on the Hannity radio show this afternoon and so help me if Sean, (he’s scarcely the only host guilty of this), one more time gives his caveat mantra re widows et.al., before slamming their actions I will scream. You know, (stuttering) “they have a right to their opinion, they have a right to protest,” ad nauseum. Why can’t he make up an acronym covering all that before he speaks about a cindy sheehan? It’s getting tiresome.
But Ann, well she’s got her act together hasn’t she? Her comments re the Left’s Agenda BEING their “religion” were spot on.
BeeCharmer on June 7, 2006 at 6:24 PM
What should have been the Mothers Against Jihadists became Mothers Against Bush. That’s the point. These women have become Cindy Sheehans in “widows” clothing. They have publicly stated that their husbands lost their lives due to the President, that the president let Osama get away, etc., etc., campaigned for John Kerry. And to argue the facts with them openly in public debate is to slander them, because they are widows.
gary on June 7, 2006 at 6:33 PM
Can anyone get to Ann Coulter dot com?
If they can, can they click on the chat button & get to the forum?
……I am having difficulty getting to her main website, and I can’t get to the forum at all.
Is ir just me?
:/
VonHelton on June 7, 2006 at 6:46 PM
Tiekitwist nails it
wytammic on June 7, 2006 at 6:49 PM
Re: Coulter’s hair —
At this point, it’s part of her persona. Might as well tell Carrottop to get a new do, or Telly Savalas to grow some locks. It’s part of her image. Changing it would be sheer stupidity from a public relations perspective. About as smart as telling KISS to go onstage without their makeup. Oh, oops.
Professor Blather on June 7, 2006 at 4:44 PM
Kiss is using their makeup again…..They realized the mistake they (KISS) made.
:/
VonHelton on June 7, 2006 at 6:53 PM
It’s no secret the left takes every opportunity to shut down debate concerning their pet issues. They’ve done it since the beginning. It’s the last refuge for those holding bankrupt ideas. Race, anyone? Gender? Diversity? Challenge them on these issues in the slightest and you’re a racist, sexist, intolerant tool of the far right. No facts and no figures required.
Not only is Ann 100% correct, she won’t retract her comments. Nor should she.
jaleach on June 7, 2006 at 6:53 PM
Enjoying their husbands’ deaths? I don’t believe so.
Using their husbands’ deaths?
Capitalizing on their husbands’ deaths?
Politicizing their husbands’ deaths?
Absolutely.
Where’s the outrage for that, Hugh Hewitt? Hillary?
Has anyone else noticed that bashing the dead husbands by calling them Little Eichmanns is a fair point but bashing the wives of those husbands is just vicious and mean spirited?
Egg. Zactly.
scoobysnack on June 7, 2006 at 7:07 PM
Dear Allahpundit and Rick Moran- You guys do a very good job,
even when you are wrong.
Bic on June 7, 2006 at 7:12 PM
Hugh Hewitt, intelligent ‘papa of the blogosphere’, too priestly sometimes.
Lay off Allah’s libertarianism. He’s not the only one and can remain proud of it! Conservatives should live by what they claim – to be a large tent and more tolerant. Libertarians are the ultimate conservatives.
Ann threw the hook and never knew that the ‘biggest’ fish would catch. Hillary envies Ann because she knows that secretly Bill loves to look at her (Ann). This will go into 2008 and potentially ruin Hillary’s chances (too bad because we will miss the spectacle). In the meanwhile let’s enjoy it now.
Ann really meant to say “they enjoy the benefits from their husbands’ death” – she is too pure to retract/revamp the statement. And no one could have conceived a more effective marketing plan for selling her new book. Ann is indeed very pleased right now. The gift will give on giving. Never mind that the media will play this harder than the war on terror. Maybe it will even overshadow Haditha…
I worked for 10 years with the wife of the co-pilot of the first plane which slammed into the WTC. His throat was slit while he tried to help the attendants. The family had moved to Boston in 2000, from California, to attend to family health matters. This widow is tending to her two children. She is now focued on helping others too. She has moved on.
Entelechy on June 7, 2006 at 7:12 PM
I haven’t seen much on here or anywhere else today to indicate that we true conservatives don’t pitch a big tent and enjoy good banter when we don’t exactly agree.
“Libertarians are the ultimate conservatives”, let’s agree to disagree.
God bless the families like the co-pilot’s.
Bic on June 7, 2006 at 7:21 PM
OK, People: I’m going to get flamed for this but I’m pretty much in agreement with Hewitt. There are things that need to be said, but it is often HOW you say them that makes the impact. In this case, Ann damages her own credibility on a very valid point on HOW she chose to say it. Frankly, it’s pretty similar to the tenor of the Kos’s kids language and we don’t need to sink to that level.
Mike O on June 7, 2006 at 7:28 PM
Worth repeating a second time:
Has anyone else noticed that bashing the dead husbands by calling them Little Eichmanns is a fair point but bashing the wives of those husbands is just vicious and mean spirited?
Kirun, your valuable and coveted Post of the Day award is in the mail.
Again, at first I was shocked and offended by Coulter’s comment, but with evening comes the cold realization that if Bush and the Senate Republicans had even the most vague hint of the testicles she has… ah, no use dreaming.
saint kansas on June 7, 2006 at 7:34 PM
It seems to me that conservatives are hopping on the band wagon to condemn Ann for the “widow quote” from the Today show. What’s up with that? Has anyone condemning Ann read her book??? Anyone read the entire chapter where the one quote comes from???
It’s like being at a party with liberals and having the urge to qualify a positive statement about Bush with something like “I don’t always agree with him, but…”
It’s a way of gaining credibility from liberals. We want liberals to like us and listen to us and so we’ll dinstinguish ourselves from Ann’s coldblooded quote. Give me a break!
If you haven’t read the book and know the context or if you’re unwilling to try and understand her point then you’re likely falling prey to the liberal media. They frame the issue for debate and we debate it framed their way. I’ve read numerous stories today about this one quote and we’re losing focus on every other point she may make.
She may be harsh or abrupt but she is smart, she makes good points, and she is NOT demonstrably wrong — even when it comes to a widow potentially “enjoying” liberal celebrity status. (Look at Mother Sheehan)
Greg on June 7, 2006 at 7:34 PM
ANN – It’s about time someone takes off their dainty PC gloves and comes out swinging. I am so sick of the liberal agenda and their whinning!!! YOU ROCK!!!
HILLARY – Put your money where your mouth is!!!
HUGH – Didn’t your daddy teach you to stay out of a catfight?
dddave on June 7, 2006 at 7:38 PM
I love how we’re all supposed to pretend we don’t know who Ann is talking about and feel so offended that she’s insulted the 9-11 widows. We DO know who she’s talking about, the 9-11 widows (and widowers) know who she’s talking about and I’d be surprised if any of them feel as though Ann has attacked them.
The fact is, Ann used a broad brush (9-11 widows) but zeroed in on her target by describing their actions. We all know she’s not bashing everyone who lost a loved one that day. She’s bashing the trash who used the loss of their loved one(s) to take political cheapshots.
bambam on June 7, 2006 at 7:41 PM
“Again, at first I was shocked and offended by Coulter’s comment, but with evening comes the cold realization that if Bush and the Senate Republicans had even the most vague hint of the testicles she has… ah, no use dreaming.”
St. Kansas, you get 2nd place for post of the day, behind your favored nominee. Ann’s comments are really only shocking when they are taken out of their proper context. In their intended context, they hit the bullseye.
And if Hewitt and some others would find their own testes they’d realize it.
thirteen28 on June 7, 2006 at 7:41 PM
P.S. to my last – once, just ONCE I’d love to see Hewitt lay into liberals with the same fury.
thirteen28 on June 7, 2006 at 7:44 PM
Over the line? My butt! Ann is on the money and if you let her she and she alone could put that PIAPS just where she belongs; in the ground!
NEMETI IN SYRACUSE on June 7, 2006 at 7:46 PM
At some point in time these widows overcame their grief and became ‘unassailabe’ critics of everything conservative, much in the same manner of Cindy Sheehan.
pat on June 7, 2006 at 7:53 PM
Well, it would have been better if Ann clarified more then once that she was taliing about 4 9/11 widows. It might have deflected the outrage people have by thinking she means ALL 9/11 widows. This outrage is derailing her valid point about the liberals use of the recently bereaved to spot their message secure in the knowledge that no one can call them out on it due to their “moral mandate”.
Cindy Sheehan comes to mind. I would LOVE to see a woman that lost a son in Iraq just B slap her and tell her to STF up about it, and to quit carying Caseys corpse all through the mud of her bush hating.
Wyrd on June 7, 2006 at 7:59 PM
I love it, the MSM is up in arms about Ann’s comments.
She has bigger balls than a horny rhinoceros.
(Sorry Ann, I meant that in a GOOD way!)
;-)
speed647 on June 7, 2006 at 8:05 PM
Has anyone else noticed that bashing the dead husbands by calling them Little Eichmanns is a fair point but bashing the wives of those husbands is just vicious and mean spirited?
It’s OK to smear men. And mouthy conservative women. The rest of them have all the love, so hands off.
Great point.
Pablo on June 7, 2006 at 8:12 PM
Oh come now . . . Coulter gets a little carried away but Hillary’s a brutal back alley fighter and needs someone like Coulter to take her on.
rplat on June 7, 2006 at 8:15 PM
This is a publicist’s’ dream. The more the lib’s rant, the more books she sells.
BRING IT ON, LIBS!!!
pocomoco on June 7, 2006 at 8:25 PM
Two types:
1) People who see reality the way it is, or…
2) People who see reality the way they WISH it was.
Your brain is in your head, people…Not in your chest cavity.
Liberals are childish, willfully idiotic fools. Period.
ecamorg on June 7, 2006 at 8:25 PM
Amazon.com Sales Rank: #1 in Books
Yesterday: #5 in Books
http://shorl.com/fygristeprabrale
Someone’s having a banner day.
Pablo on June 7, 2006 at 8:29 PM
I agree with ‘Prof Blather’ on this one. ‘Exploit’ is more accurate than ‘enjoy’, but the widows deserve some flack. When these widows became active participants in the political fray, they became public figures, and thus fair game.
The libs had no problem attacking the integrity and veracity of the swift boat vets. Turnabout is fair play. Yes, it IS equivalent.
dman on June 7, 2006 at 8:33 PM
I agree with Ace. What she said could have been said in a much less inflammatory manner, without the point getting lost in vitriol.
Saying that someone “enjoys” the death of their husband is just really nasty.
It’s counter-productive.
With regard to her hair, I think she needs a trim and some lowlights. I want to give her a makeover, but fear my own disembowelment.
violet on June 7, 2006 at 8:47 PM
Read between the lines folks. The four 9/11 widows are “enjoying” their husband’s deaths in the same fashion that Cindy Sheehan is “enjoying” her son’s death.
Don’t hold your breath waiting for an apology. I wouldn’t expect one from Ann, nor should she give it. She put it in a book, she didn’t spout off without thinking about it. She writes what she thinks and if some don’t like it…don’t read it.
kmackie6612 on June 7, 2006 at 8:55 PM
With apologies to AllahPundit and Mr. Hewitt, I think the two of you may have forgotten what it was that the Jersey Girls did and said. Other family members of 9/11 victims had a few harsh words for the Jersey Girls as well. Remember Debra Burlingame (a Democrat BTW)? And for that matter, remember what Dorothy Rabinowitz had to say and the reaction she got?
The simple truth is that Ann Coulter is right. And more to the point for some, the problem is that Ann Coulter is right.
GT on June 7, 2006 at 8:55 PM
I just re-read Michelle’s comment above.
[quote]Believe it or not, there is a way to make Coulter’s point tactfully.[/quote]
If it was tactful, it would be a Coulter point.
kmackie6612 on June 7, 2006 at 8:58 PM
Excerpted from http://www.commondreams.org/headlines04/0401-02.htm
“Before Sept. 11, the Jersey girls (the nickname, which distinguishes the women from their New York and Connecticut counterparts, was popularized in song by Bruce Springsteen) knew little about government and less about politics. The closest Ms. Casazza came to foreign affairs was processing visa applications for French trainees while working for the cosmetics company Lancôme. Ms. Van Auken could not keep the two chambers of Congress straight.
“I remember saying to Patty: `Which one is the one with more people, the Senate or the House?’ ” she recalled.”
mikeyboss on June 7, 2006 at 9:11 PM
What is interesting to me is that it took Rainowitz paragraph after tactful paragraph after tactful paragraph to say what Coulter said in one vexatious sentence.
GT on June 7, 2006 at 9:11 PM
I just saw Sean Hannity’s interview of Ann on FNC. She’s outrageous, to be sure. Over the line? Probably. But she’s whacking away at the foundation of policical correctness in a way that’s getting attention. This is war, folks, and war isn’t always tidy.
dman on June 7, 2006 at 9:11 PM
Hugh Hewitt,
Cut it off, you hypocritical tweed.
When has Ann insulted all 9/11 widows?
Ann just pointed out the fact that “some” 9/11 widows enjoyed dragging their husbands around when makine political statement against the government.
What part she said that was untrue?
When have you become political correct?
easy87us on June 7, 2006 at 9:13 PM
Comment pages: 1 2 3 Next »