Ann Coulter and the Happy Widows

To stir up a little publicity for her new book, Ann Coulter said of some 9/11 widows:

I have never seen people enjoying their husband's death so much.

Atypical or usual Coulter? I think the latter. From the Huffington Post:

LAUER: Do you believe everything in the book or do you put some things in there just to cater to your base?

ANN: No, of course I believe everything.

LAUER: On the 9-11 widows, and in particular a group that had been critical of the administration: "These self-obsessed women seem genuinely unaware that 9-11 was an attack on our nation and acted like as if the terrorist attack only happened to them. They believe the entire country was required to marinate in their exquisite personal agony. Apparently, denouncing Bush was part of the closure process." And this part is the part I really need to talk to you about: "These broads are millionaires, lionized on TV and in articles about them, reveling in their status as celebrities and stalked by griefparrazies.I have never seen people enjoying their husband's death so much." Because they dare to speak out?

COULTER: To speak out using the fact they are widows. This is the left's doctrine of infallibility. If they have a point to make about the 9-11 commission, about how to fight the war on terrorism, how about sending in somebody we are allowed to respond to. No. No. No. We have to respond to someone who had a family member die. Because then if we respond, oh you are questioning their authenticity.

LAUER: So grieve but grieve quietly?

COULTER: No, the story is an attack on the nation. That requires a
foreign policy response.

LAUER: By the way, they also criticized the Clinton administration.

COULTER: Not the ones I am talking about. No, no, no.

LAUER: Yeah they have.

COULTER: Oh no, no, no, no, no. They were cutting commercials for Kerry. They were using their grief to make a political point while preventing anyone from responding.

LAUER: So if you lose a husband, you no longer have the right to have a political point of view?

COULTER: No, but don't use the fact that you lost a husband as the basis for being able to talk about, while preventing people from responding. Let Matt Lauer make the point. Let Bill Clinton make the point. Don't put up someone I am not allowed to respond to without questioning the authenticity of their grief.

LAUER: Well apparently you are allowed to respond to them.

COULTER: Yeah, I did.

LAUER: So, in other words.

COULTER: That is the point of liberal infallibility. Of putting up Cindy Sheehan, of putting out these widows, of putting out Joe Wilson. No, no, no. You can't respond. It's their doctrine of infallibility. Have someone else make the argument then.

LAUER: What I'm saying is I don't think they have ever told you, you
can't respond.

COULTER: Look, you are getting testy with me.

LAUER: No. I think it's a dramatic statement. These broads are millionaires stalked by stalked by griefparrazies? I have never seen people enjoying their husband's deaths so much.

COULTER: Yes, they are all over the news.

Couldn't hurt to have her speak and let people decide for themselves whether she offers cogent points or if she is truly evil. I think the problem is when she does make valid points, she then goes overboard with ad hominem attacks (as do her opponents, don't get me wrong) that detract from her logical opinions. And of course, she just happens to be making a profit blasting these widows, too.

And on radio.....
I listened to an interview Coulter had with Suzanne LaFrankie of WPHT-AM in Philadelphia last week. I kid you not, when Coulter talked about the "old days" of liberal-run media, she said the Big 3 TV networks absolutely killed Goldwater and also wouldn't let people like McCarthy and Nixon have enough time to get their points across. I almost ran off the road at that statement. Joe McCarthy and Richard Nixon were two of the most venal men this nation has known - and Coulter said they didn't have ENOUGH media access? Gag me.

-P