Monday, April 18, 2005

Cover Girl

Good Time magazine cover this week. Except the suits missed the satire.

Story might be interesting too; guess I'll buy it Monday morning before it sells out.

7 comments:

@nooil4pacifists said...

Time Magazine disingenuous? Say it isn't so!

Have you noticed that the tin-foil hat brigade claims Ann Coulter is a transsexual? I'm not kidding--they're always remarking about her height and adams apple.

All I can say is that if Ann Coulter is a man, I think I'm gay.

Dingo said...

How you guys worship at the alter of Coulter is beyond me. She is no more a patriot than Moore is. She condones domestic terrorists, demeaned every brave woman who serves in the military calling them stupid, believes in forced conversion to Christianity, endorses racial profiling, endorsed assassinating a sitting president, etc. There is not a single American ideal that she supports (other than the 2nd amendment) but you guys thinks she is great. Until you guys can give up Coulter and realize she is just a pack of lies and hate, you have no real ground to criticize Moore and the ultra left.

@nooil4pacifists said...

It's also (I believe) my first mention. However, whether or not one agrees with her, she's among the finest writers in contemporary politics. Oh to be able to craft laugh-out-loud and withering phrases as well as Coulter.

Dingo said...

When I said, "you guys" I was mindlessly lumping all conservatives together (I'm a liberal. I am allowed to do that).

Actually, I was talking about right wing blogs in general. It reminded me of something like trekies all excited over the next generation or something.

As for the contention that she is a great debater... if she is talking to herself, maybe. She does nothing but yell and scream and call people liberal traitors (and no, I am not claiming anyone on the left never does this).

As for "she's among the finest writers in contemporary politics." Please, cite check her. Its all a bunch of made up crap (seriously, take the time and cite check her writing)

"Oh to be able to craft laugh-out-loud and withering phrases as well as Coulter"

Which ones of Ann's quotes do you mean?

"My only regret with Timothy McVeigh is he did not go to the New York Times Building."

or

"I would like a United States military capable of winning wars, which will not involve sending girls to do fighting." Coulter concluded: "And, yes, I think it's appalling that these women are mud wrestling, but I think it's appalling that they are in the military."

Who is laughing out loud more, the families of Oklahoma city bombing victims, or the families of female soldiers who died fighting for their country?

I have no problem with conservatives who disagree with me. It is a natural and healthy part of democracy, but what I can't stand is people who flat out lie and incite just because they can. If Moore had said anything like those two quotes above, the right would been all over him. Just recognize that just because someone is conservative that they are actually supporters of the things that make this country great.

@nooil4pacifists said...

Dingo, thank you for proving my point--Coulter is a gifted writer who's laugh-out-loud funny. Her talent for satire is what I love, and what you hate. More Coulter quotes here, here and here.

As for accuracy, I've read Al Franken and Coulter's rebuttal. And Coulter's right.

Dingo said...

I really don't think those comments are really funny, but I don't really laugh at lynching or holocaust jokes either. I'm more of the "so a priest, a rabbi and a pastor walk into a bar..." type of guy.

And, it also reaffirms my believe that this whole battle between media pundits is not about truth or facts, or who is more of less American. It is all about who tells us what we want to hear. them's my two cents.

@nooil4pacifists said...

Dingo, again you've proved my point. You say Coulter lies, but cite only satire. You compare Coulter to Moore, who's no satirist and did tell a bushel full of lies. Moore's falsehoods have been thoroughly rebutted. Coulter, by contrast, didn't lie--and admitted to two relatively minor errors. And her recent splash about Canadian troops on live TV turned out to be an editing error--she was right again.

I understand you think her mean spirited--and she is sometimes--but that's not the same as a liar.

The issue isn't about media pundits. They, for the most part, are labeled opinion-makers. The problem is anchors and reporters who pretend neutrality and dispense only one side. You conclude that "It is all about who tells us what we want to hear." Meaning people gravitate to news sources consistent with their views. That strikes me as an admission that the media is biased.