Join 3,512 readers in helping fund MetaFilter (Hide)


Dear Ann Coulter: You're fired.
September 5, 2002 7:27 AM   Subscribe

Dear Ann Coulter: You're fired.
posted by NedKoppel (41 comments total)

 
As a somewhat conservative person, let me be the first to say....

Good show. She's a git.
posted by dwivian at 7:39 AM on September 5, 2002


I'll have to be nicer to the CDTs telemarketers when I hang up on them from now on. As I told a friend, I don't think this will make any real difference, and I don't know that others will follow suit, but they've definitely got Ms. Coulter pegged.
posted by UnReality at 7:41 AM on September 5, 2002


Another day on MetaFilter, another deceased equine flogged.
posted by MrBaliHai at 7:41 AM on September 5, 2002


Ann Coulter - Queen of the Trolls.

That Editor is absolutely correct. I wish the TV networks would do the same. I can't believe the air-time this @#*^! gets.
posted by quirked at 7:42 AM on September 5, 2002


For a troll, she's got a nice ass.
posted by dhartung at 7:56 AM on September 5, 2002


While Coulter has been discussed to death here, I still say it is important to keep talking about her as long as she keeps getting booked on television shows and her books keep selling and the New York Times, Washington Post, and LA Times continue to look the other way. I would ask, "How does she sleep at night?", but the answer is obvious, "On top of a big pile of money."
posted by McBain at 7:56 AM on September 5, 2002


Whoa! Wait! Mean, vicious, flashy political conservatism isn't fit for public consumption? When did this happen???
posted by ZachsMind at 7:57 AM on September 5, 2002


dhartung: "For a troll, she's got a nice ass."

What ass? I don't see an ass. I see a smug face pasted onto a walking skeleton. She's like this bony, anorexic, assless person. She makes Sarah Michelle Gellar look almost plump. No wait. Oh! THAT kind of ass! I get it...

"I will say that there is only one thing wrong with liberals: They're no good... They are wrong about everything. Why would anyone want to be liked by these people?"

Yeah. Coulter's a great big ass.
posted by ZachsMind at 8:07 AM on September 5, 2002


re: the spacing of the article- DROP IT, FOR CHRIST'S SAKES! Point of the Thread? Oh yeah, it's that way.

That said, I think this (the article, not its grammar) is important to talk about as it relates to talking about Coulter in the mainstream. Coulter is a radical extremist, and the fact that she's photogenic is her primary (if not sole) excuse for being considered a media darling. A person as blindly and baselessly to the left as Coulter is to the right would NOT be considered mainstream enough to, oh, let's say guest host "Crossfire" on CNN. Nor, as I said in an earlier post about Coulter, would the comments she made be even tolerated as long as they were when they came from a non-cute-blonde-conservative-pundit.

The editor not just dropping Coulter, put publicly condemning her, is a sign that those who actually ARE relative to the mainstream, or at least are among those who can support their views with a macadum of fact, can still smell bullshit punditry like her. Essentially, an action like this doesn't give someone MORE credibility towards the chance of later hosting their own TV show. Except maybe on Fox News.
posted by XQUZYPHYR at 8:23 AM on September 5, 2002


And, Ann, you're not helping. You do nothing to elevate our spirits, to celebrate the great bond that holds us this unruly people together and makes us a nation.

She certainly is unruly. Great letter, and I thought that its form and content were great.
posted by adampsyche at 8:26 AM on September 5, 2002


I know who Ann C. is, but who is the editor and what is it he edits?
ps: choppy style is typical of much hjurnaistic writing today. But it doesn't make it good. In fact, turn to to Wall St. Journal, NY Times, Times of London etc and compare. Do they "require" this latest convention in journalism?
posted by Postroad at 8:37 AM on September 5, 2002


"Please continue the petty bickering. I find it most intriguing."

I've avoided previous Ann Coulter threads, not because of the petty bickering, but because I don't generally read any opinion columns anymore. In fact the only time I read newspapers is on the Web. Well, except when I was looking for a job, but I went straight to the want ads and threw everything else away, and to be honest they were of no help whatsoever. I had more success searching for job contacts and options on the Web. I see no advantage to buying a newspaper at all. Frankly I don't understand how newspapers still exist.

So I guess you could say I canned Coulter a long time ago.
posted by ZachsMind at 9:17 AM on September 5, 2002


For a troll, she's got a nice ass.

There are so many ways to read that.
dhartung - assman or trollassman? You tell me.
posted by y2karl at 9:34 AM on September 5, 2002


Good for them. They should have fired that intolerant, ranting nutcase a long time ago.
posted by AnneZo at 9:34 AM on September 5, 2002


I plan to write my congressman and ask him to send Ann Coulter to topple Saddam Hussein by herself.
posted by gsteff at 9:41 AM on September 5, 2002


you are either a hater or a hypocrite

a hater? We are now calling people "haters"? Maybe I'm not reading enough new-wave journalism/inverted pyramid newspaper stylisms but I find that a very awkward word. "A hater of ----- (fill in the blank)", I understand. Is Coulter just filled with hatred of everything on earth that it would take too long to fill in the blanks?

You, Sir, are a hater. Hmmmm it is going to take me awhile to get used to this.
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 9:46 AM on September 5, 2002


The editor: Bob Unger. The paper: The Centre Daily Times, a 21,000 circulation daily newspaper serving State College, Pennsylvania (home of Penn State). Incindentally, my first employer -- I was a reporter there. A letter from my former Journalism prof, Tom Berner, appears on a MediaNews page, pointing out that it was Unger's decision to run Coulter's work a few months ago.

And
posted by krewson at 9:48 AM on September 5, 2002


sorry bout the dangling 'and.' I meant to say 'And, Coulter herself started the use and mis-use of the hater term.'

Again, sorry.
posted by krewson at 9:49 AM on September 5, 2002


Ok, thanks for the clarification, Krewson. I guess it is obvious I just haven't read enough Coulter.
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 9:55 AM on September 5, 2002


While Coulter has been discussed to death here, I still say it is important to keep talking about her as long as she keeps getting booked on television shows and her books keep selling

Feedback loop --- as long as she's receiving attention, she'll be booked on TV and keep selling books. As long as she's booked on TV and selling books, she'll receive attention.
posted by nathan_teske at 9:59 AM on September 5, 2002


In any other context, this would be entirely irrelevant, but since Coulter has traded on her looks, and even admitted that she feels the way she looks is one of the reasons people are willing to listen to her, I feel it's appropriate to say that I do not now, nor have I ever found her attractive. And her blonde hair is just creepy, the way she grows it out long and casually makes it the centerpiece of her "look", as though it were a good luck charm.

Ok, now I feel better.
posted by Hildago at 10:09 AM on September 5, 2002


krewson: How many months ago? The National Review dropped Coulter a year ago. Shouldn't that have been a tip-off? Could any editor who's kept up with the world of punditry have been surprised by the content of her columns?
posted by raysmj at 10:12 AM on September 5, 2002


Here's the letter to MediaNews (error in an earlier link by krewson). Seems like it answers my question. What a brave, brave man this editorial writer is.
posted by raysmj at 10:22 AM on September 5, 2002


Ann gets attention because she's television's counterpart to the common whore: for a buck, she'll let anything come out of her mouth.
posted by troybob at 11:12 AM on September 5, 2002


not an editorial writer -- executive editor of the paper. (and sorry for the error)
posted by krewson at 11:13 AM on September 5, 2002


Secret Life of Gravy: "a hater? We are now calling people 'haters'? "
I think this is Unger's implication.
posted by eddydamascene at 11:36 AM on September 5, 2002


People have been saying "hater" in hip-hop slang since '96.
posted by dhoyt at 11:43 AM on September 5, 2002


I grow weary of the endless references to any women in the entertainment business as 'whores' and 'sluts'. No one went to Coultier and said "please spew hateful facist bullshit and we will pay you money". It's her approach to politics that got her on TV in the first place - and I have absolutely no respect for her or her ideas.

Close-minded? A simpleton? Intolerant and facist? Sure.

But why throw around sexist insults like 'whore' and 'slut' where they aren't even remotely appropriate - just because the offender happens to be a woman?
posted by glenwood at 11:46 AM on September 5, 2002


But why throw around sexist insults like 'whore' and 'slut' where they aren't even remotely appropriate - just because the offender happens to be a woman?

Er... because right or left, she's a woman wielding power and therefore a threat to insecure males everywhere, right or left?
posted by badstone at 12:01 PM on September 5, 2002


Second that, badstone. . .

I am definitely not a Coulter fan, but I really can't stand the constant she's-really-not-pretty patter. Yes, Hildago, she has traded on her looks, but that's still not the issue. It's a pretty ridiculous argument -- "she's a hateful, ignorant fascist and she's not even that pretty!

It just seems irrelevant to me. It's also something that would (almost) never get thrown at a male public figure, regardless of how he looked. You don't really hear that about, say, George Stephanopolis.
posted by LittleMissCranky at 12:14 PM on September 5, 2002


But you did hear it about Bill Clinton LittleMissCranky, and Rush Limbaugh. People's looks play a real role in the acceptance of their ideas. But of couse using words like "whore" and "slut" are not appropriate in criticizing a woman's political stance.
posted by pjgulliver at 12:20 PM on September 5, 2002


People's looks undeniably play a role in the acceptance of their ideas, pjgulliver, and people's looks are talked about. However, it's not as though anyone mentions Clinton's or Limbaugh's appearance in very close to every single discussion of either of them. You can't say Coulter's name, on the other hand, without getting some remark about whether she is pretty, too thin, too wrinkled, horse-faced, etc.

Personally, whenever I hear someone mention Coulter's looks like this, it's hard for me not to hit my own personal write-off button right then.
posted by LittleMissCranky at 12:31 PM on September 5, 2002


Hey, welcome to the club LittleMissCranky.

Ummm, I think one reason so many people (especially here) continually bring up Coulter's looks is the complete incomprehension many people feel as to why she is popular and well known. She is not a conservative commentator making sharp jabs (aka O'Reilly) but, to all appearances, a raving lunatic? Why is she all over the place then? Because there is a perception that she is attractive, and that it is this attractiveness that makes her marketable. For others, their looks may be secondary to their actions or thoughts, but to Coulter phenonmenon, it seems paramount.
posted by pjgulliver at 12:38 PM on September 5, 2002


Thanks, pjgulliver!

I understand that she gets more attention because she's not a) an old white man or b) off-puttingly ugly. Still, I think that the point is that she is, as you said, a raving lunatic, and not that she isn't as attractive as she is made out to be.

She is, clearly, attractive enough to be marketable. She is also, clearly, bat-shit insane. It seems to me that calling her ugly is, at best, a case of barn door open -- horse gone, since she has already used her appearance to gain the public eye. At this point, it's irrelevant and really pales in comparison to the insane part anyway.

At the risk of making a long post even longer, this reminds me of a situation with my 17-year-old sister a while back. She broke up with her boyfriend after learning that he had recently been released from prison after serving time on an assault charge -- committed against his former girlfriend, who he had put in the hospital. I expressed relief that my sister had gotten out of that relationship, and she said, "yeah, plus he had kind of funny ears."
posted by LittleMissCranky at 12:49 PM on September 5, 2002


I concede the point. And good for your sister to be out of that.
posted by pjgulliver at 1:00 PM on September 5, 2002


Your Friday column, in which you ... trashed the entire Kennedy clan as a collection of "heroin addicts, convicted killers, cheaters, bottleggers and dissolute drunks," crossed that line.

What line would that be? Certainly not factual integrity.

Furthermore, "Centredaily" appears to be some sort of college student rag associated with Penn State. But we won't dwell on that.
posted by paleocon at 4:03 PM on September 5, 2002


For the record, I think John McLaughlin is a whore, too.
posted by troybob at 4:12 PM on September 5, 2002


For a troll, she's got a nice ass.

All the better to talk through.
posted by inpHilltr8r at 4:36 PM on September 5, 2002


Summary of the letter: "The only thing we have to hate is... hate itself!"
posted by kindall at 5:26 PM on September 5, 2002


It just seems irrelevant to me. It's also something that would (almost) never get thrown at a male public figure, regardless of how he looked. You don't really hear that about, say, George Stephanopolis.

Well, George Stephanopolis is really that pretty.
posted by Epenthesis at 5:42 PM on September 5, 2002


OT/ Wow, pjgulliver, what a great person to have my first official MeFi exchange with. Thanks!
posted by LittleMissCranky at 7:04 PM on September 5, 2002


« Older Car Bomb Rocks Central Kabul, Many Dead:...  |  Mo Mowlam (former UK Governmen... Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments