Ann Coulter was on Kudlow and Company tonight. She seems to be on it a lot. She seems to be on a lot of shows a lot. And I'm not sure why.
It's not that I hate Ann Coulter nor am I a fan. I just don't find her very relevant for understanding the important issues of the day. Ann Coulter is like an episode of Seinfeld. A lot of people either love her or can't stand her and few that are likely to change their minds. She's entertaining (to those who like her) but rarely important. She makes a very big deal about small things which becomes bigger and bigger as she talks to the point of absurdity. Often this results in making fun of others which usually isn't a big deal unless you're trying to learn something.
The only differences here are that everyone on Seinfeld knew they weren't that important and the show's a lot funnier.
Friday, August 11, 2006
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
6 comments:
Well Coulter did say she loves talking with people dumber than her. Maybe that's why she's on Kudlow and Company. I have read some of her books and editorials. She doesn't know what she's talking about most of the time. Her one skill is provoking strong emotions. In her mind she is right and anyone who disagrees with her is not only wrong but innately evil and wants to destroy the country.
I hate her because she never lets the truth get in the way of what she believes, seeks every attempt to demonize people who disagree with her, thinks being religion-free is bad, and wants me executed. It's pretty hard not to hate someone who wants you dead.
I wouldn't compare her with Seinfeld though, even though both ignore facts when they get in the way. Seinfeld at least tries to appeal to your intellect (not much, but he does try). Coulter avoids it and goes straight for your basic emotions.
Jason
If she doesn't believe what she is saying, then she shouldn't say it. To do otherwise is false advertising, even fraud. If what you say is true, that she says what she says only to sell books, then why should anyone believe anything she says?
If what she says returns to haunt her, do you think she'll accept responsibility for her words?
Jason
rsp, I have to disagree. An old proverb goes, "you own every word you speak". If you sell a book on the premise "this is what I believe" but it's not really what you believe then it was sold on false pretenses. That is fraud.
Remember "A Million Little Pieces"? It was sold as an autobiography when some parts of it were fiction. If Coulter's books was put under General Fiction, it would be a different story. But it isn't, she's implying she believes what she writes.
On a related note, what she is doing is bringing down the level of discourse in America (which is already pretty bad). It's gone from, "America right or wrong" to "How can you think Bush can be wrong you freedom-hating terrorist!" While people are responsible for their actions, we shouldn't discount what influences them.
Jason
RSP,
Lying is often a crime. If you lie to your insurance agent to get money, that's fraud. If you lie about how your iPod was broken to get a replacement, that's fraud. If I write books that say I believe in certain things when I don't in order to sell books, why isn't that fraud? At the least it's misleading advertising.
The difference between people like Franken and Carlin from people like Coulter is that the former are comedians while Coulter does not. Go to the book store and see where you find "When will Jesus Bring the Pork Chops" or "A Fair and Balanced Look at the Right". Then go see where Coulter's books are. With comedy, you don't have to believe what you say, what counts is that it's funny. Go to the sci-fi/fantasy section. Do you think Margert Weis really think dragons exist the way they do in her books?
Coulter appeals via negative emotions like fear and hate. Carlin looks to common sense and irony for his humor. Frankin goes mostly for humor and mixes in some facts and stories. The problem with using humor is that it can be hard to tell when you're serious. Coulter is always serious unless you take everything she says as a joke like, "No reasonable person can take this seriously."
The problem is, too many people do take her seriously. That's why I do too. Just like someone who is black, homosexual, or Jewish has to take the KKK seriously. Sure they're nuts (and should be considered a terrorist organization) but enough people think they aren't to make them a threat.
Jason
So where does misleading end and fraud begin? We have a little problem since contracts come in many shapes and forms. For example a sci-fi author said (haven't unpacked that particular book of quotes yet) that writing a book is a form of a contract. The reader pays you money and invests the time reading your story. In turn the reader expects to be entertained. Of course if the reader isn't entertained, it's not fraud since the author made an honest effort to fulfill his end of the contract. Coulter creates the impression she believes what she says and uses inaccurate information in her arguements. Why isn't that fraud?
Also the KKK lost power when they lost a court case and had to pay most of their funds. Then they started loosing members left and right. I don't think Superman had much to do with it. But I could be wrong.
Jason
Why is she painted as a dysfunctional woman. I'm sure she can't be all that bad. Maybe she just had a bad childhood.
Post a Comment