Anne Coulter, Demon-Spawn Who Terrifies the Times
I don't get it.
Instead of the ball-less, sorry-ass headline the NYT came up with June 12th: Anne Coulter, Word Warrior, why don't they stop being pussies and say what all rational people think already:
The embarrassingly spineless article, by David Carr, begins: "Once again, Ann Coulter has a book that needs flogging." Hmm ... and once again, the NYT is more than happy to flog it for her, with (of course) an ironically high level of journalistic deference to the hate-spewing subject. Sure, Carr acknowledges that Coulter only says the shit she does to get attention, that most people find it distasteful, even - gasp - immoral, but he concludes that pretty much everyone is too afraid of her to do much about it. The Times used more vitriol on James Frey.
Carr then actually writes the following sentence: "seeing hate-speech pop out of a blonde who knows her way around a black cocktail dress makes for compelling viewing."
I want to kill myself. This is the wrist-slap Coulter gets for making our world a more miserable place every time she opens her vile, excrement-filled mouth?
The bitch actually said (referring to the 9/11 widows) that SHE'S NEVER SEEN WOMEN ENJOYING THEIR HUSBANDS' DEATHS SO MUCH. All Carr comes back with is that it's a "doozy of a sentence." Pardon me, Mr. Carr - do you HAVE ANY TESTICLES AT ALL??
The mealy-mouthed conclusion: "You can accuse her of cynicism all you want, but the fact that she is one of the leading political writers of our age says something about the rest of us."
CYNICISM? That's all we can accuse her of?? And the crap that comes out of Ann Coulter's mouth is our faults????
WHAT THE HELL IS WRONG WITH THE NEW YORK TIMES??