Tuesday, November 21, 2006

Thoughts on Ann Coulter


I checked out her latest book, “Godless: The Church of Liberalism,” from the library last week, and started reading it this morning. I think she’s out done herself as I could only make it to 6 pages before I gave up. I then looked at her footnotes (she only sources maybe a third of what should be sourced, if she were writing a “serious” piece of nonfiction and commentary.) and found them frustrating as I wanted to check out a couple of her sources, but there were no footnotes on that stuff. Then I checked out her index, and realized that this index was misleading also. You know, if she’s going to write a “jokey” book condemning “them” (she writes in a plural form of first person—using “we” and “them” mostly) then she shouldn’t mask her book with an index or footnotes. If she’s going to write without them, then more power to her, go for it, but don’t make a half-hearted attempt to use them so you can go on the air declaring that this is a “serious” book, when more than half of the sources referenced are not listed.
As far as humor goes, she’s so one note, its just so lame and I only made it to page 6. She doesn’t say anything that’s new for anyone who lives in the United States, at least in the first 6 pages. If she’s going to attack liberals, that’s totally cool, but in the first six pages I found holes in her arguments, misleading use of information, half truths, almost every logical fallacy known to men used. If she hates liberals that much, and has a strong case against them, why does she have to distort the information so blatantly? Can’t she crack a joke without pandering to her audience, distorting the information and dumbing down the debates between conservatives and liberals?
I know several peeps who read this blog like Ann Coulter, and that’s cool. I can’t help but wonder if these political pundits like Coulter (on both sides) loved their country more than they loved their money, if they would fuel fire into the “red-blue” war as much as they do? Would they pander to whatever side they belong to and thumb their noses at the other? Seriously, the actual division between both sides is more complicated than what Coulter, Moore, Sorkin, Franken, and almost everyone on Fox News etc dumbs it down to. Do they give the people on both sides, your average Joe Red or Joe Blue a disservice by simplifying it down the way they do? Would we profit more as a country intellectually if the lowest common denominator in political pundit world was held to a higher standard?
After trying to read this book, I couldn’t help but think of a quote that I found recently:

“The Great flaw in American Democracy has nothing to do with voting machines or lobbyists; it is the enormous tolerance for intellectual dishonesty.
-Anonymous

7 comments:

Hoo said...

I am a registered Republican and I can't stand Ann Coulter. She is a shrew.

Jesse Harris said...

This sounds like my experience trying to read a book my Michael Savage. I got so disgusted with it that I literally disposed of it in a wastebasket at a rest stop somewhere in California's desert. The "substance" of the book was little more than partisan jabs, infantile insults, and straw man after straw man. I felt worse for having made it through 40 pages.

SJ said...

Ann Coulter has the crazy eye. Those guys tend to ramble and never make any sense. She's just lucky she isn't homeless.

Steve said...

Plain and simple she is a media whore. She knows how to get attention and saying "un-pc" things will get her attention and make her money with books and appearances. I don't even think SHE believes half the stuff that comes out of her mouth, heaven help her if she does! She is a gimmick, plain and simple.

Excellent post by the way and good summation of how she divides more than conquers!

Hoo said...

One has to ask the question...why would you even pick her book up to read? Did you think it was going to be different than what it was?

SJ said...

I am forced to listen to Sean Hannity every day over the intercom (the station I work for broadcasts his show). He just says stuff to rile people up for ratings, but the sad part is that some people actually believe his often bizarre and outlandish opinions (like that all Muslims are terrorists and they are trying to take over the world and make it a militant Islamic state). It's appalling and breeds prejudice for the sake of bringing in numbers.

Sherpa said...

Hoo: I was challenged.

SJ: My dad has listened to Rush since he came on the air, and Hannity since kneu in Vernal picked him up. I hear, hear, hear your pain.