If Ann Coulter was a Dem, and ripping Freepers, would we

[mediaman007]

be entertained or embarrassed?

Just askin'?

[oppositionmember]

1. Well if she was claiming Republican = Child molester

I might disavow her.

[YDogg]

2. I would still ...

... think she was over the line. A raging looney tune (with my apologies to all other looney tunes).

[leftofthedial]

3. If she tried todo it at DU, she'd have been tombstoned long ago

she's a racist, bigoted liar

some of us here (I'm not naming names :) ) push the envelope sometimes, but nothing remotely like what she does. And we get tombstoned, threads locked, put on ignore, strenuously attacked for not being politically correct, etc. She wouldn't last a day here.

I think liberals would disown her.

[Cleita]

4. She'd have no legs as a Democrat. She would sink

into the circular file of the unpublished and unheard from. This might explain partly why she's a right wing hack. I mean she's already gotten fired from two of the RW rags she wrote for, imagine if she wrote the same diatribe for the Nation? Yep, history.

[Tux]

5. A crazy girl

Is still crazy no matter the label of politics she uses.

[walldude]

6. No liberal minded person would ever say the things she says

If they did I certainly wouldn't be entertained by it.

[BuyingThyme]

7. We never even would have heard of her.

[kliljedahl]

8. You're serious?

She's fucking Loony Tunes. She wouldn't survive 5 posts here. That being said, let her rant. The more she talks, the better it looks for us.


Keith’s Barbeque Central

[Catherine Vincent]

9. Embarassed!

She wouldn't be a Dem.

[Melynn]

12. No, she wouldn't be a Dem and talk like that

A progressive wouldn't hurl insults and make shallow arguments. I don't think the Lame Stream Media would allow it.

[Vektor]

10. She's too extreme -

she advocates senseless violence.

Look through these comments...
http://www.time.com/time/covers/1101050425/what_did_she_say/

Never OK, no matter what side you're on. She talks about killing people she doesn't agree with, or to "make a point to Liberals." It's too much - if she tried to do that for our side I'd ask her not to do us any favors.

[mediaman007]

11. Thank you all...

I just wanted to point out that we do have higher standards than Freepers. Your responses were thoughtful.

Thanks to each of you. I'm proud to be one of you.

[susanna]

13. Since she spews vitriolic and divisive hate whenever...

...she opens her mouth, I doubt that she would find a lot of compassion amongst generally egalitarian dems. Just sayin'.

[thebigidea]

14. we'd have never heard of her... 7 people would've read her blog

without the Scaife creatures to proper her up, she'd be eating out of dumpsters.

[Lone Pawn]

15. I think most people here would be entertained, though they don't admit it.

We've thrown just as bad at the Freepers. And though I've never seen, say, Randi or Franken spit as badly as she can, their bread-and-butter isn't much better than hers.

Oh, dear. I'm going to get flamed.

[Solon]

22. I don't see that at all...

Unless Franken or Randi call for the death of all conservatives, or some other such bullshit, then there is absolutely no comparison to Coulter. Her bread and butter are personal attacks and generalizations with no basis in facts, at worst, Franken cracks actual jokes, and Randi uses facts for arguments. Individuals on a message board do not make up the "leaders" of Liberalism, just as Free Republic has no "leaders" of conservatism on it, so our words don't carry nearly as much weight, and we have our crazies, like FR, too. However, even then there are wide disparities between our words. I don't know how many times I lurked over there and see racist, sexist, and violent language almost every day, things that should be offensive to the decent people everywhere, not just Liberals or Conservatives. We are simply different, whether it is how the boards are moderated, or simply that one side actually is more decent and grounded than the other is up to debate, but the fact remains, that the differences in style at least, are there.

[Lone Pawn]

31. "death to liberals" isn't Ann's bread-and-butter.

It's her hallmark, but she doesn't overuse shit like that. Usually she just decries liberals for moral failing A or reason for idiocy B based on spun facts. Randi usually decries conservatives for moral failing A or reason for idiocy B based on spun facts. More or less the same thing, it's just that Randi stops before she calls conservatives traitors.

EDIT: I find it interesting, though, that on FR a common insult to us is that we're more 'hotheaded,' more interested in personal attacks, and less interested in actual debate than they are.

[Pushed To The Left]

36. I tend to agree

Mike Malloy is probably just as brutal to conservatives as Sean Hannity is to our side. I'll admit that when somebody on the left goes over the line, I sometimes find myself really enjoying it. Other times, it really bothers me. It depends on my mood when I'm listening to it.

[SerpentX]

16. "My only regret with McVeigh is that he didn't go to the Washington Times"

Reprehensible any way you look at it.

[MnFats]

26. thank you. i was about to mention that one...

...
for those who don't follow her trail of slug-scum, she actually said her only problem with McVeigh is that he didn't bomb the New York Times building....

[Warpy]

17. She'd have to be a little better acquainted with facts

before I'd consider her anything but a rabid fool.

[peacetalksforall]

18. I would be offended. Though we wee ones say some things equally

offensive, we are notoutspoken self-acclaimed constitutional lawyers-authors-guest 'expert's-exhibitionists in the public eye who are paid to be sensational and find boring ways to name everything that is not ultra right to be dirty liberal or vv.

[Verve]

19. I can't believe you even conjured up the thought of Ann the Man as a Dem.

She has no heart, no morals, probably no soul. Until she can have at least an ounce of consideration for other humans I find a political move for her completely impossible.

[mediaman007]

21. You have to know that the Universe has many ideas floating around...

some are fruitful, others are discarded. The Coulter idea just floated in and I thought it might be an interesting discussion point.

I have to say that I am feeling good about posting this, if only to demonstrate that we are not the same as the other side. We are fair and humble. Maybe it doesn't win a lot of votes at the moment, but sooner or later, any thinking people that have voted for the Neocons will choose us. I just hope that we aren't the only ones left.

[gratuitous]

20. But there IS no left-wing analog to Little Arfin' Annie

Quick! (Or slowly, no matter to me.) Name any left wing, liberal, progressive voice who has been featured on the cover of Time, appears as often on television as Little Arfin' Annie, AND gets the fawn treatment here at DU that Ann gets at FR or Ldot.

One is all I'm asking for. Just one. There is nobody, and if there was somebody, they wouldn't be anywhere near as Looney Tunes as Ann. Nor as dissembling. Nor as just flat-out brain dead.

[wellst0nev0ter]

39. How About The Guys Who Ran "Ramparts" Magazine

You know, David Whore-o-witz and Peter Collier back when they were avowed communists.

Modern day versions of the Coultergeist, however, can't even be found on Z Mag.

[gratuitous]

43. Wow, you have to go back 35 years?

And how many folks here or at FR could list three articles that Ramparts ran back in the late 1960s? It was a vastly different mass communication world back then, but there wasn't nearly the exposure of Ramparts (a mostly NYC phenomenon) that Little Arfin' Annie gets today, certainly no Time magazine cover stories.

Verdict: No analog between Coulter and Ramparts, even discounting the gap of 35 years.

[norml]

23. Embarrassed to have someone so dishonest representing us.

Such obvious liars should always be rejected.

[LittleClarkie]

24. Lefty freepers are just about as annoying as Righty ones

So I'd be embarrassed.

[Borgnine]

25. No, embarrassed.

I feel like crawling in a hole whenever a prominent right-winger dies and people here celebrate. Since Ann Coulter's garbage is several times worse.... no. I'm glad she's a right-wing loony.

[entanglement]

27. If pigs had wings, would they fly at supersonic speeds? n/t

[tallahasseedem]

28. No, we would never have her.

Those of us on the left tend to have a little more education.

[genieroze]

29. embarrassed and ashamed of her nastiness.

[Stirk]

30. You would never have *heard* of Ann Coulter if she was on the left.

I'm sure there are plenty of abrasive, deluded, utterly dishonest hacks who are left of center as well. But they don't get on television, they don't get to write newspaper columns for major newspapers, and they certainly don't get on the cover of TIME Magazine.

[tinonedown]

32. They would be calling her Man Coulter

And we, correctly so, would be pointing out the sexism in that label.

[oasis]

33. Empty headed Dems are at least smart enough to keep quiet. Shooting

off at the mouth is trademark GOP.

[sandnsea]

34. Churchill went over well

And he wasn't anywhere near as vitriolic and disgusting as Ann Coulter. We prefer Howard Dean rephrase "I hate Republicans". No, I don't think an Ann Coulter would work for Dems. We like our pundits to have real talent, to be both funny and factual, like Molly Ivins.

[MsConduct]

35. I would be ashamed if she was a Lib. n/t

[Pushed To The Left]

37. Both! n/t

[tavalon]

38. I don't like liars

on either side.

[wellst0nev0ter]

40. I Guess I'd Be Slightly Amused

It'd be like listenting to an early Ice Cube album. No I don't take his politics seriously, but I'd take some comfort that his music pisses off the right people.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

41. I'm afraid I have little doubt

That if Anne Coulter was on the left, a large fraction of DUers would regard her as insightful, plainspeaking and admirable. I'd like to think that I wouldn't be among them, but I can't honestly claim to be 100% certain.

Still, there are left-wing pundits I don't admire, and as far as I can impartially judge they are objectively considerably less awful than Ms Coulter, so I hope I'd still be able to spot that she substitutes invective for syllogism and vitriol for evidence, and is far more concerned with getting in her requisite quota of insults than with making a logically valid argument.

Far, far too many people confuse "this person advances arguments that reach conclusions I like" with "this person is arguing well". I do my best not to, but I'm far from as unbiased as I should be.

[KayLaw]

42. I couldn't disagree more

And who are these LW pundits of whom you speak? I can't imagine a single DUer agreeing that we should kill all the Fundie leader and force their followers to join the Unitarian Church, or suggest that Republican women don't groom themselves or bathe.

Also, I see Anne Coulter as a victim. Anyone should be able to recognize the plain fact that the woman needs help. I just read a book called The Obesity Myth that happened to mention her. I'm not sure how old she is but she unwillingly single and complains she can't find a date in D.C.
If her handlers and hangers-on would get her treatment instead of exploiting her illness and parading her around like a prize pig, maybe the poor woman could have a chance at a happy life.

[ChipperbackDemocrat]

44. To Answer The Question...and to Ask A Question

To answer the question. I'd be embarassed and tell the woman to shut the heck up. And don't be misled, we have left-wing versions of Ann, they just don't have the forum she does and probably wouldn't have the forum she does.
The closest thing I see to an Ann Coulter on the progressive side in my mind is Mike Malloy, and in terms of kowledge, Malloy is well ahead of Coulter in my view. He's a little shrill for my taste, but the difference is who could hold their own in an intellectual battle with the opposition. Malloy could win that fight because he does understand the calculus of what he believes and can explain it.
I do not believe Ann Coulter has the same ability in her head to do so. The women is nowhere near the intellectual capacity of say a Condolezza Rice for example. I know, people here have nothing kind to say about Rice, but having met and interviewed the woman I can conclude that she is a thinker. It is a shame that she has chosen to waste her gifts on brainless policy.

However, I have a question. Why do we give so much energy to Ann Coulter...and for that matter Sean Hannity, Rush Limbaugh and the rest of the Right-Wing Dead-Wrong All Star Team?

To me, they are comedians. And deep down inside, they know it. Ann Coulter knows, she an entertainer. She's no thinker, and she know it. Her books are crap, and she knows it.
The same goes for Sean Hannity. If it wasn't for Fox, could this guy really get a job as a political commentator? Are you kidding? Sean Hannity is not a thinker, and he's know it.
Rush Limbaugh is the original gangsta intellectual farce and he's know it.
The first step to depowering them is to "frame" them as they are. When somebody at the water cooler interrupt them and say, "Credentials, please. What are Limbaugh credentials on this issue? Has Limbaugh ever stood for an office? Has this man actually taken action on this issue outside of mere punditry?"
You adversary will say "no". My response is, "quote someone who has."
And those of us on the left who encounter these people in forums and on shows have to intellectually kick that buttocks quickly. I have yet to see someone progressive, liberal, etc when faced with Ann Coulter need to look her dead in the eye and call her a fraud.

The answer to an Ann Coulter is nice forum with an Amy Goodman. ;) Somebody who can get down and tax the few brain cells she has and openly expose her as what she is.
The biggest mistake we make is that our side of the aisle when faced with abject ignorance tries to treat that ignoramous as a thinker.
Its starting to work with Bill O'Reilly and I love it. Notice how guests opposed to him are beating the crap out of him lately? Because they quit treating him like national voice of reason and more like the second-rate product of thwarted ambition that he is. O'Reilly worked in network television as a correspondent yet very few people ever saw much of what he did. He was one of the called but wasn't chosen and sticks in his craw. He reeks of it.
Sean Hannity is the Chris Russo (New York Sports Fan know how I'm talkin' about ;)) of political discourse. This guy hasn't played a down in the game in his life, yet he fancies himself as a political all-star. His biography is, I found a hook to get on radio. Does he really believe what he says? Heck no. This is a vehicle a to make to moolah. This guy probably didn't have a political thought in his mind until he found, "I can make a dollar being a right-wing jackass."
Rush Limbaugh? Same deal. What has this guy done, outside of being a PR flack for a baseball team, that's make him and expert on anything besides being a talking head comedian?
To me that is the beginning of the change. Quit treating these people like voices of wisdom. Take them for the court jesters they are, and that goes for their followers, too.

[Toots]

45. Well Randi Rhodes is probably as close as we have and it's a mixed review

A lot of people here seemed turned off by her. A lot of people seem almosty addicted to her. She is probably more akin to Rush than Coulter though except for being a woman. :shrug: Not everyone goes for the hate thing....

[New Dealer]

46. I like Ann Coulter

She makes me laugh. I don't take her seriously, and I don't think anyone with a room temperature IQ does either. I wouldn't have a problem if there was a left-wing equivelent.

[itcfish1]

47. Embarrassed

I think we would see that the woman is Looney