« Happy happy joy joy, and the left is stuck on stupid. | Main | "Requiem for a Nightmare" »
June 08, 2006
Suitably blunt
I don't care all that much for Ann Coulter, and her comments to Matt Lauer this week were in bad taste, if only because they were so carelessly stated. Anyone who visits this blog semi-regularly knows I'm not a fan of cliche and eupehmism, but Coulter managed to offend even me, which is no small accomplishment.
That said, Coulter's "liberal infallability" line is probably a valid one - we're not supposed to criticize John Murtha, because he served in Viet Nam; we can't question Markos' patriotism, either, or Rep. Carolyn McCarthy's insight on gun control, or Cindy Sheehan's anti-war nuttery; and remember Ron Reagan speaking at the 2004 convention? Don't you dare question his stem-cell insight!
Coulter is probably onto something. Sensitivity is nice, but it tends to squelch actual debate, and when we're talking about people - and Congressmen, for God's sake - who hold ridiculous views, we can't be expected to muzzle it.
And it is just infuriating to watch the Dems and their medialand cohorts trot out another token at every turn. Today, on the heels the Al-Zarqawi news, they turned to Michael Berg, the father of Nick Berg (beheaded in Iraq in 2004) to blunt today's optimistic vibe. "I don't think that Zarqawi is himself responsible for the killings of hundreds of thousands of people in Iraq," he said. "I think George Bush is."
Whadda pantload. As I said I'm not a big fan of Ann Coulter's, but when the media resorts to this kind of nonsense, I suppose I am glad someone says the unsayable.
Posted by bill at June 8, 2006 01:19 PM
Comments
Post a comment
Thanks for signing in, . Now you can comment. (sign out)
(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)
