Forums dot lukpac.org

...nothing?

Ann Coulter should be battered in flour and fried.

In the realm of fantasy literature, I prefer Tolkien.

Ryan

Is it me or are conservatives/republicans engaging in really aggressive online marking of this title and Bush policies ?

Lots of pop-ups and campaign contribution spam, are coming my way, to becoming REALLY ANNOYING !

They are. And frankly, I can't see ANY respecting academian on either "side" of this particular divide buying her trash...

At least, for a Republican, she's somewhat of a "looker" ! I mean, compared to Janet Reno !

These type of books usually are marketed to the converted, anyway.

mikenycLI wrote:At least, for a Republican, she's somewhat of a "looker" ! I mean, compared to Janet Reno !

These type of books usually are marketed to the converted, anyway.

She isn't bad looking. She is amusing and not completely wrong either.

What cable Tv, especially, has created, is that perfect Tv personality of a person, who trolls from news-entertainment show to news-entertainment show, plying their wares like some kind of traveling salesman of old. Pert, perky, humorous in pithy sort of way, physically attractive or at least appealing in a blah sort of way, yes...but in the end all one is left with is total emptiness...nothing, blah !

All they want to really accomplish is to give good sound bites, and a happy feeling. Suddenly the viewer finds themself at Costco, shelling out $27.50 for alot of great empty "read bites" of information.

What's funny about this Tv personality they don't go away, but turn up as a "Our Expert on whatever" on a cable news "network". Just scant credentials are given, and we just sit there listening to them, as long as we agree with what they say.

Ann Coulter is at least, the least objectionable of these, but I wish I knew more about her as a person, other than how good she looks, and whether I agree with her views.

But I don't want to spend the money to find out.

Matt wrote:She isn't bad looking. She is amusing and not completely wrong either.

If by "not completely wrong" you mean that perhaps the book's copyright page contains some accurate information, then I agree.

http://spinsanity.org/columns/20030630.html

Ryan

What's interesting about Coulter and her type of "personality", is that we don't know ANYTHING about her or these other people. They seem to just appear, magically into our consciousness, and are supposed to have credibility or Truth Power, about what we are supposed to think.

There is a virtual cottage industry of these "experts" on our Tv screens.

But who are they ?

Most of them, seem to be, paid employees of those Washington "Think Tanks", who subsist as leeches, on the body politic, lobbying one opinion or another, and only succeed by boring and numbing us from being interestd, in the Real Issues that we should be concerned about.

Rspaight wrote:If by "not completely wrong" you mean that perhaps the book's copyright page contains some accurate information, then I agree.

Pretty crisp, sir. I was referring to some of her political views/observations.

Let's face it, if she were liberal and bashing republicans she would be a hero in this forum.

Matt wrote:Let's face it, if she were liberal and bashing republicans she would be a hero in this forum.

Like Michael Moore? Nahh:

http://www.spinsanity.org/columns/20020403.html

Fair enough!

Yeah, that's why I like spinsanity. They're not pushing an agenda, other than accuracy.

Ryan

Pretty crisp, sir. I was referring to some of her political views/observations.

Let's face it, if she were liberal and bashing republicans she would be a hero in this forum.

Well, no, not really. And she doesn't just "bash" liberals. She "white house dog"s them. Her attacks, in general, make no sense; her theories are outlandish (she totally misrepresents the *actual controversy* about McCarthy...yes, of course there were actual Communist infiltrators...does this suddenly make the ends justify his means?); her disdain for her "opponents," put upon or not, overrides anything meaningful she might have to say, etc. She's all style and almsot no substance. Heck, lemme do a quick parody...I wanna see how easy this is:

"Liberals descend into a shrieking chorus of denial when it is implied that they don't totally support putting down the toilet seat. But liberals hate toilet seats more than anything else; they hate them with an adulterous passion that shows their irrational and treasonous condemnation of anything American. Liberals 'legislate indecency like it is a cause,' (1) and 'would like to roast babies on kebobs.' (2) They tried, but failed, to indict Clarence Thomas on the toilet seat issue, and now cannot stand to have their error thrown in their traitorous faces."

(1) Oprah Book Review
(2) Christian Science Monitor "Will Babies Roast on Kebobs? No, say Liberals."