~
Ann's new book, "Godless" (in which she presents Liberalism as a godless religion) is doing very well. Ann has been making the circuit of talk shows promoting her latest book. I happen to have seen many of her recent appearances. Some people do better writing about their ideas than they do speaking about them.
I like Ann's writing. It's ascerbic, witty, clever and as far as I am concerned her targets deserve everything she dishes out to them. Now take the current criticism of "Godless" by the effete Media. These macaronies seem to have fastened on her comments about the several wives of men who died in the Trade Towers on 9/11. These women have been using their sadly-acquired celebrity to espouse a very far Left Democratic point of view. According to the scripts they are following, it's all Bush's fault. But then this is no surprise to us, right? Of course not. Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld at al. killed their husbands. In one small part of "Godless," Ann Coulter takes on these once-obscure femmes who, with the help of the Left, generated their fortunes and subsequent fame as a result of their husband's misfortunes. According to the talking heads on the Left, Ann's most aggregious barb is that she has never seen women who so seem to enjoy their husband's demise. Well, who can argue they are not enjoying the resulting benefits.
The effetes charge this is incredily cruel and nasty and that Ann should be castigated and worse, that her book should be banned from all decent bookstores. And there-in lies proof of Ann's premise. The Democratic Liberal Left canonizes those public figures whose backgrounds, they scheme, will make it very difficult for Conservative Republicans to challenge without seeming to be cruel and nasty. But Ann has seen through this charade and has thrown it right back at them. Who are they to tell Ann and the rest of us we are not allowed to challenge these women, or Cindy Sheehan or John Murtha or John Kerry or any of the rest of those with "hallowed" backgrounds? If Cindy Sheehan calls President Bush a "bastard" who "killed her son," are we not allowed to challenge her patently looney claim simply because Ms Sheehan is a grieving mother? Perhaps if we really believed she was grieving and not preening in the warm glow of celebrity. Should we not challenge the claims of Kerry simply because he holds some questionably-acquired combat medals, as if that gives him immunity? Are we to remain silent when we clearly see opportunistic (and treasonous if you ask me) politicians like Murtha using the travails of our combat troops in Iraq to advance his miserable career? That's how the Left would like you to think. But Ann has poked a hole in their Marxist tactic.
When Ms Coulter appears on the talk show circuit, however, and goes up against tough street Liberals mano-a-mano she usually doesn't do all that well. That's because the game is rigged, and she ought to know better. I suppose she figures that's the price of promoting her book sales. Endure the slings and arrows to get on that NYT Best-Sellers list. But even Traditionalist talkers Hannity, O'Reilly and Savage come down on Ann. Perhaps they are envious of her success. Or want to maintain some sense of "reasonableness." One can hardly understand why Savage wouldn't embrace her ascerbic wit. It's right down his alley. Do we sense vagina envy there?
I would suggest to Ann that she would do well to take a serious course in on-camera communication. She does it so well on paper. But her power is diminished in her personal appearances which often degenerate into girlishness. We Conservatives need all the Ann's we can get on our side. People with wit and the ability to see through the Left's chimeric "goodness." When we get a good one like her, we should do everything we can to support her; buy her books, read her columns, and shield her from tossed pies. And in my case, offer some fatherly and experienced advice.
~
