She won't poison our pages
The best decision our editorial department made earlier this year when we were selecting syndicated columnists was NOT to add Ann Coulter.
The latest episode would be exceedingly embarrassing.
Why was Coulter even considered? She gets strong reader reaction. She "moves the needle." It would be good to have a "female conservative" writer in the mix.
None of that would be worth the baggage Coulter brings. Nowhere near.
Even Bill O'Reilly is denouncing her "vitriol" as "mean and counterproductive."
Coulter may have a following, but they can follow her somewhere else. I'm glad she's not our problem.
Comments (17)
To report abuse of the comment feature on this site, please use the feedback form at the bottom of any page.
I don't care about her journalistic integrity or lack thereof, I can't believe you're depriving me from the opportunity to gaze weekly at her gorgeous legs.
Gee Doug, you could just not run her article if you find it to offensive and the item you're referring to occurs in her book "G-dless" and not in an article. Of course I agree it was offensive, but being offensive markets well, unfortunately.
Posted on June 9, 2006 5:07 PM
She's too tall for her legs to make the mug shot.
I'm betting she'll write about this controversy in one or more of her columns. You can check her Web site if you want. I'll skip it.
Posted on June 9, 2006 5:17 PM
Good call.
Posted on June 9, 2006 5:39 PM
I can't believe you're depriving me from the opportunity to gaze weekly at her gorgeous legs.* Jon
You must be doing the same stuff that Bill Maher did when he hit on her for a date..... He also said that it would be the last married women that he would ever hit up on. I didn't even know that she was married until that comment. Now I want to see the fool that marry her?
Posted on June 9, 2006 7:44 PM
She may be crude with her words, but she does not lie.It funny a paper that knocks O'Reilly uses him when it suits your purpose.
Posted on June 10, 2006 6:38 AM
Um, Doug, can you remind me of when we've knocked O'Reilly?
Posted on June 10, 2006 8:13 AM
I admit that Coulter can go over the line, and probably did in her comments about the 9/11 widows, but her greater point is a good one. These widows have stepped into the political arena (with plenty of their own criticism) but are somehow protected from criticism because of their emotional connection to Sept. 11. Is that fair? Of course not.
Posted on June 10, 2006 8:27 AM
Even Bill O'Reilly is denouncing her "vitriol* Doug
I can understand that! One could assume that Anne rejected him during one of the alleged phone sex calls from Bill. Now we can understand why lawyers want to seal court records.
Posted on June 10, 2006 5:11 PM
We already have two "female conservatives" writing on national issues-- Kathleen Parker and Mona Charen-- both of whom are quite good.
Posted on June 10, 2006 6:26 PM
"Now I want to see the fool that marry her?"
What an ironic statement from you, Connie Mack. I'd like to see the husband of Madame Justice on the same basis.
Doug, if you want to get rid of Anne Coulter because she poisons your pages, I assume tha tthe same thinking led to getting rid of Moly Ivans. I'd also think that Maureen Dowd would follow. She's as revolting to me as Anne is to you. She might not be as frank in her comments, but the essence is the same.
And, I afree with Jason. The Jersey Girls have entered the world of politics shrouded in the emotions of 9/11. They have become part of the political machine.
Posted on June 11, 2006 8:00 AM
Now I want to see the fool that marry her?"
What an ironic statement from you, Connie Mack. I'd like to see the husband of Madame Justice on the same basis.* Stormy
Stormy! How nice of you to call me a fool! Is there any reason that you have been condition to use the term " Madame Justice" in a political race where the term is forbidden. So who is the fool now?
Posted on June 11, 2006 9:24 AM
I find Coulter's writings and speech to be no less inflammatory than that of Teddy Kennedy, Nancy Pelosi, or Harry Reid. And they get quoted and published every day in the newspapers.
Posted on June 11, 2006 10:51 AM
I was no fan of Ivins. She's a one-note Sally, which I found tiresome. Dowd has more of a repertoire, in my opinion.
If Kennedy, Pelosi and Reid offer syndicated columns, I'll vote no.
Posted on June 11, 2006 2:31 PM
What's the problem with Ann? She fits right in with the Toxic Waste that already spews from the N&R's Editorial pages.
Posted on June 12, 2006 4:59 PM
Maybe we're envious that she's so much better at dishing it out than we are.
Posted on June 12, 2006 5:06 PM
"Is there any reason that you have been condition to use the term " Madame Justice" in a political race where the term is forbidden. So who is the fool now?"
I'm not sure what the question is, Connie Mack. What does been condition to use the term mean?
The last time that I looked you were still the fool here.
Posted on June 12, 2006 10:49 PM
Is there any reason that you have been condition to use the term " Madame Justice" in a political race where the term is forbidden. So who is the fool now?"
I'm not sure what the question is, Connie Mack. What does been condition to use the term mean?
The last time that I looked you were still the fool here.* Stormy
Stormy! You are still using the term " Madame Justice" again! Are you working in the promo department of the campaign to keep it out there to the public? I am not going to stoop to name calling by calling you a fool after that last supporting comment for the campaign.
Posted on June 13, 2006 9:34 AM