Posted on | June 9, 2006 |
(AFP) Attack on Sept. 11 widows sparks outrage The media hound most interested in self-promotion accuses the 9/11 widows of it and calls them witches
(WashPost AP)Sen. Clinton: Coulter’s Remarks ‘Vicious’ So far, the only major political figure to call her out on it
(WashPost) A Chilling Portrait, Unsuitably Framed Philip Kennicott on the iconography of Zarqawi’s death
(WashPost) White House Sees Diplomatic, Political Opportunities Turning the tide…again?
(AP) Deputy unwittingly led troops to al-Zarqawi “Al-Zarqawi died with five others, including a woman, a child and the man who unwittingly led the Americans to him”
(WashPost) Stand-Up Man On the lighter side, an online write-in discussion with one of my favorite comics, Lewis Black.
The problem with Ann Coulter is that part of her is doing this bull**** to make headlines, be invited on every TV network to be outrageous and get people to buy her books. That part of her knows what a con artist she is. The other part of her believes it and hopes by promulgating her hate-filled speech to become the new Magda Quandt Goebbels of the New World Order…or possibly its female Joseph Goebbels. That part of her is the scary one. It’s always frightening when a person of intelligence (I won’t deny her that–just as I wouldn’t deny it of Dr. Goebbels) holds such wickedness in her heart and soul. It’s entirely appropriate her new book “Godless” came out on 6/6/06…only she’s wrong–she’s the godless one. I’m certain I saw a Republican complaining about her attire while she was “representing the Republican party.” I believe the words were dressed like a slut–but this seems to have been scrubbed.
On the other hand, today it was a tossup–do I do Zarqawi, do I do Ann Coulter? Ann DID get knocked off the headlines–I’m sure she hates being upstaged by something she can’t shout down with her characteristic rudeness. But I went with her anyway, because she’s more fun to caricature than a dead Zarqawi. Moreover, Bush and Rumsfeld and Co. were remarkably lowkey about the incident. It may turn the tide, but there’s a lot ahead…I guess after as many tide-turnings as we’ve been through–and corner-turnings and turning points–it’s probably best not to crow until we find out if we have something to crow about. I thought I’d read earlier that the woman killed as collateral damage had been pregnant–but I can’t find a reference so that may have been a faulty reading on my part…
(MediaMatters) Media figures, GOP strategists defend Coulter’s attacks on 9-11 widows I should have realized that the defense of Ann would be carried out by the likes of Sean Hannity, Bill O’Reilly, Rush Limbaugh and their ilk. According to these, Coulter wasn’t being mean-spirited–she was satirizing. Ahhhhhhh, that’s what we call slander these days. First, satire is not JUST making caustic remarks (a guideline I try, not always successfully, to observe here). And slander is the telling of an untruth about another that the reasonable person MIGHT nevertheless conclude IS the truth because of the position and reputation of the person who made the untrue claim. The claim that the “Jersey Girls” have “commercially exploited” 9-11 (to become millionairesses many times over) is an attempt to tar these 9-11 widows with the brush that paints these so-called pundits. If anyone has “commercially exploited” anything, it’s these hatemongers who have used that tragedy to sell books, improve their ratings, boost their stock portfolios, etc., etc.. If the Jersey Girls have done any exploitation, it’s the exploitation of their position and grief to shame a shameless administration into a real investigation instead of a whitewash. That’s not “commercial exploitation.” That’s, to quote George W. Bush, “using their political capital.”