Home / Sanity Returns, or Ann Coulter Go Home

Sanity Returns, or Ann Coulter Go Home

Please Share...Print this pageTweet about this on TwitterShare on Facebook0Share on Google+0Pin on Pinterest0Share on Tumblr0Share on StumbleUpon0Share on Reddit0Email this to someone

It has been reported that the Arizona Star has very wisely, due in part to the wishes of their readers, both conservative and not, dropped the syndicated column of Ann Coulter in favor of a less abrasive and hopefully less bile-filled Tony Snow. Snow is currently the host of The Tony Snow Show, a syndicated Fox News Radio show as well as Weekend Live with Tony Snow on the Fox News Channel.

It seems the readers have had enough:

Many readers find her shrill, bombastic and mean-spirited, and those are the words used by readers who identified themselves as conservatives.

This according to David Stoeffler publisher and editor of the Star.

This change is significant as logically many media organizations might pick up on this discontent among the customers and follow in the footsteps of the Star. It is increasingly obvious to a large part of the population on either side of the political spectrum, myself included, that the overly derogatory, hate-filled, non- researched-based op ed writing, full of rage and disdain for anything but one side or the other has the weary public growing tired, bored and finally angry.

I hope the age of reason is slowly coming upon us, again.

I am personally elated this occurred and hope the Star can be a trendsetter for the rest of the print media throughout the country, and frankly hope that this trend continues in the broadcast news and political talk shows as well – I foresee that it will.

It’s back to reality here folks. The people themselves will finally take control and let the media know we aren’t buying it any longer.

In an excerpt from her book, How to Talk to a (Liberal if You Must): The World According to Ann Coulter, Ann says,

Don’t be defensive, always outrage the enemy.

The enemy, as she will learn, is herself – the rest of us are tired of being told that if someone doesn’t agree with us they are our enemies: just isn’t so Ann, it just isn’t so.

Good for the Arizona Star and let the trend continue.

Daily Star: My Opinon

Powered by

About cooper

  • Nancy

    Finally! Hopefully bye-bye to Rush & other spitemongers left & right!

  • paul clark

    She is the balance to all of the James Carvelles out there. Cowardly newspaper.

  • Tom

    Oh my…this is a great idea! Ann is such a mean woman. I think she should be replaced with some one that is nice, level headed and BALANCED! I vote for MO DOWD of the NYTimes! SARCASM OFF!

  • I clicked on the amazon link to the dvd and here is part of what the first commenter said about Ann. (He is one of her fans).

    Coulter loves to bait her enemies and there’s no better example of this than in her “convert them to Christianity” line after 9/11. No one, including me, would agree with her, but I bet that she doesn’t believe in a US sponsored crusade herself. The only reason that she said it was to provoke and anger her opponents. She suceeded in this endeavor admirably.

    well, then, there we have one of her conservative fans summing her up. Kudos to the newspaper for firing someone who has no interest in promoting policy or who has no purpose in doing anything beyond angering people. We need less of that stuff in newspapers.

  • Relatedly, the LA Times ran an article this past weekend about the significant drop in market share of rabid talk radio shows, e.g., Limbaugh. Many “hosts” in California have lost over half of their listener base.

    Personally, I hope that this is part of a new trend to dump the pundits. Optimistically, could it be that mainstream media consumers are starting to understand that they’ve been duped by talking heads and red herrings? In the interests of a well-informed and reasonable democracy, I sincerely hope so.

  • I hope sense is coming to the print and mass media in general and if this is a trend I like it already.

  • Don’t forget in your condemnation of Ann Coulter that many liberals are equally over-the-top. I mean, read the comments people post on Blogcritics about George Bush — incredibly personal attacks. It’s time, in general, to have a little more respect for the opinions of people who don’t believe as we do and to remember that people who have other opinions can still be good people and want the best for our country.

  • Kevin

    Say what you want about Ms. Coulter, but I’ve never seen her print a lie.

    A sad day for Star readers.

  • Thank you, Alice. This site is lucky to have you here. Add my name to the list of conservatives who’ll be glad to see the last of Coulter.

  • Dan

    Personally, I think Ann’s star is on the rise. Every petty attempt to censor her only fuels the interest.

    I recently attended a free Coulter speaking engagement at a nearby university. The liberal university had “mis-calculated” the attendance demand, and didn’t provide a big enough hall to accommodate. I arrived promptly, but had to wait in line for about 30 min. Finally though, as enough outraged liberals embarrased themselves during the question and answer segment, they stomped out, and a few of us patient Ann supporters were allowed in under the fire code. It was standing room only, and I was impressed, and heartened by the politically astute young people in the audience.

    Liberals don’t like Coulter, not because of what she believes, but because she examines them and exposes what they believe, and the hypocrisy therein.

    Their only weapon against her is censorship.

  • This essay is an exercise in wishful thinking. One newspaper drops her, and there’s probably a half dozen more picking her up.

    She does not suffer fools gladly, but that doesn’t mean she’s mean and hateful. She’s laughing and having a good time ripping the lefties. She’s having a good time playing pirate, and making the pinkos walk the plank. Arrgh, but she’d look cute with an eye patch and a parrot on her shoulder.

    Also, did you ever consider that these occassional brouhahas only make her cooler and increase her credibility? Like, she’s too HOT for National Review. Dangerous!

  • I have seen very little of any true “exposing of the opposite side” from Miss Coulter. I hear a lot of unfounded ideological rhetoric.
    I took in a debate she had with Al Franken in Connecticut, it was some time ago and although she had one or two valid points she was rather ineffective and was not able to respond to questions presented to her. On this particular night she was not all that vicious she actually seemed quite docile and Franken, much to my surprise, treated her in an almost protective way. It seems when she is among people that have the same ideology as she does she is in her element and can fuel their fire quite adequately, but when confronted with some honest and well thought out questions she had no real response and started to spew a few sound bites which no one in this particular audience was impressed with. I was quite disappointed I actually thought she would have been better able to handle a simple debate such as that. Television sound bites and newspaper columns as well as books are a much better forum for her as she does not have to directly respond to people who counter her arguments.

    It seems she has only gotten more vicious and more desperate as things seem to be falling apart for the Republicans.

  • Settle down and take a cold shower, Barger.

    That is all.

  • I do think Coulter is a bit of a big mouth, but perhaps with reason. The left has cranked their rhetoric up several notches in recent years, and many conservatives are afraid to respond in kind because they’re just too civil – and I’d even include Rush Limbaugh in that crowd. Coulter on the other hand, is willing to say almost anything to make a point or score a point off the left, and some of what she says is spot on. On the other hand a great deal of what she says I find fairly abhorent, but only because they’re hard-line conservative positions I just can’t agree with for a variety of reasons.

    And remember, no matter how annoying she is, she’ll always be less annoying and less of a bitch than Dr. Laura Schlessinger.


  • The Blue Republic just published something about her today and in it they mention and I quote ” Even the prestigious Columbia Journalism Review (CJR) took a look at her book “Slander” and found it – well – essentially slanderous. In a sample of just 40 of the claims of inaccuracy on the Internet (there are around 780 claims of distortion or lies posted) the CJR found that while many were just silly hyperbole or absurdly oversimplified, or “would have raised the eyebrows of any good fact-checker”, more than half “would not pass without major debate.”

    This is exaclty what you can find in various articles and some of the articles she did in the NY Times prior to the last election did not hold up well under scrutiny.

  • Joe Garbial

    I used to think she was fine, even a little edgy. I have found her tiring over the last year, sometimes desperate.
    I feel it goes both ways and extremist media on both side needs to take a hike.

  • I find her verbal style exhausting. She talks too quickly with strange emphasis and listening to her tends to wear on my patience.


  • Nicely written and portrayed, Alice — I very much agree with your take.

    Coulter accused New Yorkers of being cowards who would surrender to terrorists recently.

    To me, that’s about the lowest thing an American could say about other Americans.

    You want to come to New York and say that again, Ann?

    I grew up in New York.

    I dare you.

  • Dan

    Jeez Eric, what are ya gonna do? Throw a pie?

    I was between planes at an airport one time, and I browsed a book store. The store was pushing an Al Franken book titled “lying liers…” (or something like that). In it, Franken was making a fuss about what a diabolical lier Ann was, but the only examples he provided were such obvious and inconsequetial, innocent gaffe’s, that my skepticism was aroused.

    That’s when I realized that Ann dealt truthfully… and Franken, (though humorous) did not.

  • At media matters, there is an entire list of lies from Ann Coulter. They have several people who do nothing but track what she says, so they can catalog the lies.

    For example, at this link check out the last paragraph on the page. Media Matters has catalogued dozens of these lies from Ann. Unfortunately she’s built a career on spewing hate speech, insults, lies and misrepresentation of facts. But conservative right wingers cut her slack because they lose focus due to her legs.

  • Dan, regardless of how often Coulter lies (I think she’s more in the outrageous distortion and shock value game than anything else, by the way) I heard the clip in which she basically accused the people of New York of being cowards ready to surrender to terrorists.

    To do so is so fundamentally anti-American that I don’t really think I can begin to debate someone who doesn’t see it that way.

  • Your point only fuels further attacks on Media Matters though, Steve. Nothing really matters to ideologues who are convinced that black is white, etc.

  • MCH

    I put Ann Coulter in the same category as Limbaugh, Hannity, Savage, etc. I feel that 95% of the stuff they say is to meant to create controversy and make money.

    I mean, obviously Rush Limbaugh doesn’t believe everything he says, or he wouldn’t have dodged the draft during the Vietnam War. And what kind of person gets a medical deferment for an ingrown hair on their keester…?

  • Eric, I can show someone the curvature of the earth, but you are correct in that I cannot get them to believe it’s not flat.

    However, I wanted the links and info here for the record. For lurkers and anybody else undecided or curious.

  • Dan

    “I can show someone the curvature of the earth, but you are correct in that I cannot get them to believe it’s not flat.”

    I’m moved by that.

    on the issue of prop 187, there are different polls to cite. In one pre-election poll a bare majority of Latino voters polled said they supported Prop. 187. In another, exiting Latino voters were 77% against.

    Either way, I can see why you would be motivated to conclude Ann is lying here. But consider:

    In the “77% against poll”, only 8% of exit poll voters identified as “Latino”. You would have had to have polled 1000 voters to find 62 against, and 18 for. Pretty flimsy.

    If Ann’s over-all point is to say that there was significant support from assimilated and content mexican immigrants, then she’s accurate.

    I do credit you Steve S. for pointing out the unknowable but unsubstantiated claim Ann makes.

    But, in light of the conflicting data, I don’t think this qualifies as a lie.

    Eric, I admire your New York toughness. I stand down. New Yorkers kick ass.

  • Dan, I don’t need you to tell me that. (But I appreciate the sentiment, if sincere.)

    That said, it’s an absolutely brutal, low, and borderline evil thing to say that New Yorkers would willingly surrender to terrorists.

    How dare she? New York took the brunt of 9/11 and lost 3,000 lives for it. I thought we were all supposed to be draped in the flag and dripping in American and patriotism.

    Except if you live in New York, I guess. I guess that’s not part of Ann Coulter’s “America.” She should stay the hell away from New York if she thinks it’s such a cowardly place.

  • Dam

    It’s because of the way you vote.

  • So in other words, you still believe the world is flat. Okay, that is your right.

    Ann has claimed that the Democratic Party “supports killing, lying, adultery, thievery, envy”. That is a lie.

    She said President Clinton “was a very good rapist”. A bold accusation of which she has no proof, I’m sure.

    She insists that “liberals love America like O.J. loved Nicole”. That is a lie.

    With her public comments of “I think a baseball bat is the most effective way these days” to talk to liberals, she advocates violence against Americans, and in an eerie precursor to Robertson, she advocated the assassination of Clinton. (she wrote that the only real question about Bill Clinton was “whether to impeach or assassinate.”)

    If that is someone you would choose to speak for you, then I doubt you would ever get my vote for something you want to come to pass. And I’m sure millions feel that way.

    And the first paragraph here, she is accused of falsely blaming someone for something when it is a matter of public record that she was the one responsible for it.

    Is falsely accusing someone of something, when there is public record stating otherwise, a lie? I dunno, if we boat past Aruba do we fall off?

  • D.C.

    Michael Moore is A KOOK.

  • Luke

    I don’t know the details of that, but I’m going to take a guess and say that many new yorkers don’t support the war, and to Ann, that’s the same as supporting terrorists. That’s like saying back in the mid eighties, if you’re against a war with the USSR, then you’re a communist.
    Me, I’m against oil, we’ve been living off the primitive shit for what, 100 years? If we’d switched to a different fuel source 20 years ago the middle east would be broke by now, and they certainly wouldn’t have enough money to develop WMD’s

  • To add to Steve’s great examples (of horror) and to touch on Al’s usual defense of Coulter: just because she lies, smears, and taunts with a half-smirk doesn’t make it anywhere near right.

  • Dan

    Steve, just to review:

    The extremist website you cited says Ann lied about Latino’s approval of prop 187. They use an exit poll, (hopefully not the same outfit that showed Kerry winning in a walk in 2004) and say that “proves” it. But then Ann is presumably using the pre-election polling data that showed some 60% of Latinos favored it. So both sides have equal substantiation. Only one is being called a liar though.

    So after this bit of trickery is revealed to you, you deal out more “flat earth” condescension, and return to the poisoned well for another so called “lie”.

    Steve: “Is falsely accusing someone of something, when there is public record stating otherwise, a lie? ”

    So your saying there is public record that the prosecutor did not drop the charges? Because that’s all Ann accused her of. Generally when charges are dropped, it’s the prosecutor who does it.

    Of course the ugly progressives violence against Ann is caught on tape, so a court appearance by Ann would seem unnecessary. But if it were, then according to Ann, (who I tend to trust because I’ve never seen an example of intentional deceit from her), she was never notified of a court date.

    I wonder what would happen if the violent liberal woman attackers succeeded in murdering Ann on video tape? Would someone need to bring her corpse in and prop it up in court to keep the democrat prosecutor from dropping the case?

    It’s always the same, whenever you run down these so called “lies” by Ann, they turn out to be “iffy” at best.

    Of course if you define “lie” as you do in comment #28, as any sort of hyperbole, or exaggerated humor from someone you hate, OK then.

    Al Franken and the gang, attempt hyperbolic humor at least as often. While I don’t often find him funny, (not intentionally at least) I do recognize that what he’s doing isn’t lying.

    Al Franken: “Rush Limbaugh is a big fat pig”.

    Steve and Eric: “ha ha ha, man! that guy cracks me up! Yeah! but he’s soooo RIGHT ON!!

    Ann Coulter: “New Yorkers are pussies”

    Steve and Eric: LIAR!! LIAR!! LIAR!! That is so fundamentally anti-American. Yeah! and borderline evil too!!

  • Lynda

    I hope people are getting tired of the mean-spiritedness. I would like to see the attack dogs on both sides take a hike. Disagreement is fine, vitriol isn’t. We all have to live together and a little compromise and civility would go a long way in making this country a better place to live for all.

  • Dan

    To me, “mean spiretedness” is often just an ugly label used by some to shut down thoughtfull, but sensitive debate. It works well to indoctrinate young people and others who may not yet have the intellectual maturity to grasp the full scope of complex social issues, but it’s not a logical alternative to honest debate.

    The partisan “attack dogs” I would like to see “take a hike”, on both sides, are the ones who don’t deal honestly.