The Case of the Missing Ann
Every week, I read Ann Coulter and think: the fact that she doesn't have a column in a major newspaper--or a column syndicated in a lot of newspapers--is one of the great travesties of modern journalism. That a second-rate mind and third-rate writer like what's-her-name Dowd over at the watchamacallit should have a major league column and a Pulitzer, while Coulter publishes largely online is an indicator of why newspapers are dying. Read this on Michael Steele and Afghanistan. Slashing, brutal, funny, well-researched commentary, saying stuff that no one else says without fear or favor. It's over-stated here and there, and very tough on Bill Kristol, but it's got major league truth in it too. Our journalistic poobahs, right and left, must be such stodgy cowards not to put this woman to use. They don't have to like her--they don't have to agree with her--but if they can't see this is good newspaper-or-magazine-selling copy, they ought to retire.
By way of full disclosure, I've met Ann a few times and like her very much and she sometimes posts my PJTV videos - but I've been saying this for years, far longer than I've known her. Plus she clearly doesn't need any help from me. I just genuinely find her exclusion from print amazing. Stunning, really.
- Comment (15)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (3)
Comments :
Jun '10
Re: The Case of the Missing Ann
She definitely has a unique and logical viewpoint. While being extremely persuasive, she is also hillarious. Quite a combination. I agree with you, Mr. Klavan. Why don't you bring her to Ricochet?
BTW, after reading her article, I definitely re-assessed my attitude towards the Michael Steele issue. Although, I still believe he was a poor choice for this job becaues he is more about himself than the party. He just can't seem to keep his mouth shut.Now, however, is not the time to make a change. But back to Ann Coulter...not too many will win an argument with her.
Re: The Case of the Missing Ann
It's an excellent column. I read it with admiration and thought, "Ann Coulter just made herself completely relevant again." The only other woman in public life who's done it as many times is Madonna.
May '10
Re: The Case of the Missing Ann
That kind of re-awakens the Afghanistan debate on the threads started by Victor Davis Hanson. There seems to be a split over what to do- push forward or pull out. And the opposing poles of the debate both can reasonably claim a mantle of conservatism. VDH notes that Afghanistan, despite backward ways and illiterate population, only recently became a truly Islamist basket case- the tribalism that makes it difficult to govern centrally also makes it difficult to be an existential Iran-type threat. So, they argument, come home and leave them to their dead goat polo games.
It is noticeable that, just as with abortion, the Right allows a variety of opinion. The Left tends to be anti-all-war, and regimented regarding abortion; no dissenters permitted.
My question: is there a middle ground here between pacifying the entire country a la Iraq, versus running home and "leaving the heathen to their misery"? It seems to me that we ought to concentrate fire on the two big warlords for as long as it takes to put them out of business, and maintain a prophylatcic presence on the Paki border. Beyond that, we can debate tactics and strategy.
Jun '10
Re: The Case of the Missing Ann
If Coulter was a plastic surgeon, she'd use a logger's ax to do face lifts--her style--and still get better results than her colleagues who used only the scalpel. You just have to know how to swing the ax.
May '10
Re: The Case of the Missing Ann
Ann Coulter at her best is quite a talent, and I too read the column that Mr. Klavan linked and thought she was "saying stuff that no one else says without fear or favor." There's been a weird disconnect between the opinions of the rank and file on Iraq and Afghanistan, and the seeming consensus among movement conservative journalists and public intellectuals. (In fact, I think a lot of folks who are less hawkish find themselves cowed into silence.)
OTOH, Ann Coulter used to be syndicated widely in print, and she got dropped, even from places like National Review. This wasn't because she has the courage to speak unpopular truths -- and it was at least partly because her shtick is deliberately stoking outrage by saying things even she probably doesn't believe. (Does Ann Coulter really think we should invade Muslim countries and covert them to Christianity?) This approach made Ms. Coulter a famous bestselling author. It cost her gigs at publications that don't publish folks who stoke outrage for its own sake. How much easier it would be for the writers among us if we engaged in Coulter style outrage baiting to raise our profiles.
Jul '10
Re: The Case of the Missing Ann
Ann Coulter can't be allowed in any major lame stream newspaper, they would rather go out of business than carry a woman columnist who is actively against abortion. That is why they are so likely to go out of business absent a federal bail out and a "legitimate journalist" licensing scheme. If the Party cadre caught them tolerating dissenting views they would lose their bailout hopes and the market restrictions against their economic enemies, smaller, more interesting local newspapers.
I am less thrilled with Mr. Steele, I was a poll watcher for him, in a liberal town where I had to fight to keep those who were not residents, not registered voters or not citizens from voting with regular ballots rather than provisional ballots [yes, the man who was not sure if he was a citizen was allowed to cast a provisional ballot] and Mr. Steele conceded before I got back from the polls [taking the count off of the digital voting machines and closing up shop take a lot longer than you would think, but not that long].
May '10
Re: The Case of the Missing Ann
Never been a big Ann Coulter fan having only experienced her schtick on TV. But based on Drew's recommendation I read the column and laughed out loud sitting in a Marin County Starbucks. (I had to hide her picture with my iced coffee so as not to be asked to leave.) So now I know that AC is best consumed in print where I don't have to watch the self-congratulatory hair flips and eye-rolls. I may even have to buy one of her books... or perhaps just borrow from SF public library where I'm sure it's in pristine condition. Thank you Drew.
May '10
Re: The Case of the Missing Ann
The only time I ever wrote a letter to The Miami Student, it was to thrash them for printing an editorial that imagined revenge sex with Coulter and other conservative women. Surprising as it was that The Student printed the original hate-filled rant, I was downright shocked when they printed my letter... accompanied by another editorial, whining about how people unfairly attacked The Student as a left-wing rag.
Whatever her other merits and shortcomings, Coulter sure does drive the lefties crazy!
May '10
Re: The Case of the Missing Ann
Yes, writing a book titled, "Treason: Liberal Treachery From the Cold War to the War on Terrorism" would tend to do that!
And Jason, I'm glad you wrote that letter to The Miami Student. I remember reading that column and thinking it was disgusting.
One more thing. Re-reading Mr. Klavan's post, I see that he writes, "Our journalistic poobahs, right and left, must be such stodgy cowards not to put this woman to use." I do actually think that editors are afraid to have Ann Coulter writing at their publications. The thing is, we live in a media landscape where publishing or saying certain offensive or supposedly offensive things can create a media firestorm that costs you your job. See Dave Weigel, Helen Thomas, that CNN producer, etc.
Imagine yourself as an editor. Would you want to risk a writer printing the equivalent of this on your site? And then be in the position of having to defend or denounce it under intense scrutiny? Most people with a sense of self-preservation answer, "No thanks!"
May '10
Re: The Case of the Missing Ann
I'd love to see her join Ricochet. But I fear for Peter Robinson if she does. Peter's far too soft-spoken to come out of that podcast alive. He would need you, Claire or Mark for backup.
May '10
Re: The Case of the Missing Ann
A welcome posting, Drew. I've always found Ann Coulter's rapier wit laugh out loud amusing-- and generally spot on. I know she's not everyone's cup of tea (to put it mildly), but how refreshing to be consistently presented with views totally alien to the conventional wisdom. The positions are unfailingly reasoned and supported, unlike those of her detractors. Really quite amazing and amusing.
Consider, for instance, Ann's contention that Joe McCarthy got a bum rap, that he was essentially right. Where else do you hear any such thing? Never!! The trouble is, when Ann turns what's always been accepted as gospel on its head, I'm left not knowing what to think, with no where to turn because the point of view is so contra. I mean, thoughtful critical review is AWOL when it comes to anything Ann writes or says. For all I know, the Joe McCarthy story might be the equivalent of "man caused global warming" myth.
Anyway, it pleases me to see an apologist here for Ann Coulter. Hard to tell how she might fit in as a Ricochet contributor, but it's an interesting prospect that I would welcome.
May '10
Re: The Case of the Missing Ann
I find myself actually reading her stuff, rather than scanning it it until I get to the "point." Newspapers would be better off if they has more Coulters (of whatever stripe) and far fewer Ellen Goodmans.
May '10
Re: The Case of the Missing Ann
Ralph Peters has said Petraeus's first great challenge is lowering expectations, creating a more modest definition of victory. That seems right. He needs to somehow both A) abandon the unrealistic goal of a nation-wide, Iraq-style pacification and B) do so without reinforcing bin Laden's paper-tiger narrative. The guy'll deserve a fifth star if he can pull that off.
May '10
Re: The Case of the Missing Ann
I'd much rather read Thomas Friedman, Paul Krugman, Gail Collins, Maureen Dowd , Frank Rich and Nicholas Kristof. Frankly if you're not going to reinforce Democrat policies, insist on additional Keynesian spending, criticize Israel, display white liberal guilt and/or accuse conservatives & Republicans of racism, condemn the Catholic church and demand more government, I don't think you should even have a platform to speak on the internets. My good friend, Jules Genakowski agrees.
May '10
Re: The Case of the Missing Ann
Conor Friedersdorf
The thing is, we live in a media landscape where publishing or saying certain offensive or supposedly offensive things can create a media firestorm that costs you your job. See Dave Weigel, Helen Thomas, that CNN producer, etc.
I do see a mild difference, of course. Coulter- who is funny but a bit over-the-top for my taste- for all her deliberately provocative brassy mouthiness is an opinion writer, and does not masquerade as anything else whatever. Weigel and Thomas pretended to be reporters and news journalists.
And regarding the interchange with Deutch, she was describing, pretty poorly, a rather esoteric and complicated issue of theology (in actuality, all humans, of any race, ethnicity, or creed, require perfection by grace; if anything, Jews had held almost a preferred position and now are the same as eveyone else).
Muslims say almost the exact same thing about the monopoly on Revealed Truth found only in their religion and are never excoriated for it in any media. It is taken as a description of belief, not bias against others.