Ann Coulter and ABC Girl: See You Next Tuesday!

Beware females who read Gothamist:

There's some guy --posing as KYLE --trolling this site claiming it's ok for women who are alone to let men into their apt/place of business/etc so they can be raped or robbed: next time you see him trolling, please give him a piece of your mind....

Funny how Coulter sounds very much like the crowd on Gothamist that takes swipes at anyone that lives outside of Manhattan. Why debate when you can call them hicks?

"...by the way, how do we know their husbands weren't planning to divorce these harpies?"

that's ann coulter in her new book.

lovely, just lovely.

p obviously hasn't been reading the papers for the last five years. When anyone criticizes the positions put forth by the 9/11 families they get a smackdown. And that doesn't even take into account that they get a podium based entirely on their victimhood, not on the quality of their ideas or commentary.

Impugning the grief felt by 9/11 widows regardless of their politics is nothing short of despicable. It denies them their humanity and disregards the very public and horrific nature of their spouses' deaths. The attacks motivated a lot of us to become more active in politics in order to make sure our voices contribute to the debate, and it is impossible to argue that the 9/11 widows (and widowers, and children, and parents) have less standing to opine on foreign policy than Ann Coulter.

But Coulter wouldn't be a rightwinger if she didn't reduce every argument to its most basic elements. Conservatives don't like nuance because the word sounds French.

That is fucking brilliant!

no, i would just say that you aren't allowed to disparage the integrity of their marriages when you know nothing about them.

if you don't like their policy ideas, criticize away.

The fact remains that you aren't allowed to criticize the 9/11 widows because they are 9/11 widows. Coulter isn't wrong about that.

How long before there is a lawsuit about the school next to Ground Zero?

um, again, the women coulter was criticizing were not the ones carping against the memorial. they are the ones who have been critical of bush and his policies in the war on terror and homeland security.

From Reuters yesterday:

"I've never seen people enjoying their husbands' deaths so much," Coulter writes in her book "Godless: The Church of Liberalism," published on Tuesday, referring to four women who headed a campaign that resulted in the creation of the September 11 Commission that investigated the hijacked plane attacks.

Coulter wrote that the women were millionaires as a result of compensation settlements and were "reveling in their status as celebrities and stalked by grief-arazzis."

The four, Kristen Breitweiser, Patty Casazza, Mindy Kleinberg and Lorie Van Auken, declined to discuss the book in detail but issued a statement saying they had been slandered.

p, that's a pretty stupid comparison. Drunk driving is ILLEGAL and it KILLS PEOPLE. Filing dozens of lawsuits over exactly how many square inches is dedicated to a memorial or protesting the contents of a museum is a nuisance.

given some of the idiot's comments, and coulter's, i guess mothers against drunk driving should just keep their mouths shut. what right do they have to tell us what to do?

Actually, I think it's pretty stupid to characterize the marriage of a few women you know nothing about. I'm sure not every person who died in the WTC was a saint but these women say they loved their husbands. And you feel the need to question that? You're right. I shouldn't have characterized that as right-wing stupidity. That's stupidity, plain and simple.

Coulter was not talking about ALL of the 9/11 families. In her book, and on the Today show, she was specifically addressing fewer than 5 widows who live in NJ and who are involved in policy and reform discussions that are generally anti-Bush.

Criticize them all you want for their policies or for using their victimhood for political purposes, if that's your opinion of their actions. But to insult marriages and to imply that their losses could not have been that bad because their husbands were jerks who were going to divorce them is a despicable position and one that I'm surprised that any human being would take. Shame on you.

And it would be a liberal on Gothamist if you didn't work in a way to call rightwingers stupid. Way to take the high road.

And we can easily speculate as to the likely state of someone's marriage since humans are pretty easy to categoriaze once you been around for a little while. How many rich Wall Street asshole types do I have to know before I can safely say the nice ones are the exception?

On a non Ann/Hillary front I will say I have waited only 15-10 mins at shake shack. Go on tuesdays-go today it will be a breeze in the rain.

I agree, Samantha.

It's one thing to state that it's difficult to argue with someone who has a platform of tragedy on which to stand. That's a valid point worth discussing.

But it's another thing entirely to ignore the substance of what some of the 9/11 widows are saying - their calls for an independent investigation, better allocation of funds, etc. - and simply criticize them as money-hungry media whores reveling in the newfound fame that their losses have given them. I doubt Coulter or any of these freepers posing as Gothamist readers can imagine what it must feel like to think about your husband being incinerated in a terrorist attack.

But Coulter wouldn't be a rightwinger if she didn't reduce every argument to its most basic elements. Conservatives don't like nuance because the word sounds French.

It's my understanding that Hillary C. is criticizing Ann Coulter's callousness more than anything. Remarking that you've never seen widows "enjoy their husbands' deaths" so much is not the same thing as gently pointing out that these women have no political experience.

So sensitive that all of you who didn't lose anyone on 9/11 have such strong insight into the widows' marriages! Do tell how you've been able to learn this information about people you don't know.

I don't think the four or five widows Coulter was criticizing (the "Witches of East Brunswick," as she calls them) would characterize their marriages as having been headed toward divorce.

I wonder if Coulter would levy the same criticism toward the 9/11 or Iraq widows who sat with Laura Bush at the State of the Union.

Sometimes people with direct experience in an event are the most vocal in the politics surrounding it. Do we criticize Lance Armstrong when he says that the government is not providing enough money for cancer research?

I don't find myself agreeing with Ann Coulter very frequently but in her book she also says that in general we aren't allowed to criticize the 9/11 widows simply because they are widows and because it is 9/11. Whenever the survivors make a demand, the politicians roll over. And witness Hillary Clinton rushing to their defense. This is foreshadowing to the kind of President she would be. Just like her husband she will probably govern by the polls and ultimately accomplaish very little.