Peoples thoughts on Ann Coulter

Post Reply New Topic

It popped up on my youtube play list I don't know why but it did,a video of Ann Coulter speaking at Oxford University.
A couple thoughts,she was dressed in a very racy tight skirt and leather boots,which seemed rather tasteless for Oxford,at least as the key note speaker.

She also said that gays shouldn't marry or adopt children,which seemed hypocritical being the way she was dressed.I don't have an issue with women dressing sexy but if you going to preach biblical morality it seems you ought to be living by it,and she wasn't dressed for church by any stretch.

I'm not trying to tell women how to dress and I'm fine with women who dress sexy but once you start telling people who they can and can't marry or whether they can adopt,you better be living righteously yourself.

Also her thinking seemed incoherent and blurry,like she drank to much coffee on an empty stomach and was having racing thoughts.

She seemed to rush to points before a context existed for the points,like she was thinking to fast.

As a writer she is very thorough in research,she once ordered the real original transcript to the Marie Antoinette trial for a book she was writing.Maybe she expresses herself better on paper than with verbal words,or maybe she just drank to much coffee that day.

She gave up a law career to be a writer and stands by her controversial books and says she loves hate mail.

Quite an unusual individual,not the run of the mill conservative pundit,speaks her mind boldly from an unusual perspective,and an odd way of speaking but a good sense of humor.

Whether you like her or not,a very unique individual

Her wry wit and the way she presents it reminds me of a female friend I had in high school. When I read the occasional Coulter article I hear the words in the voice of that high school friend. I found my friend's dry sarcastic and witty sense of humor to be very funny and enjoyable.

She's not preaching biblical morality, though, is she? She's just preaching homophobia. No hypocrisy in dressing sexy for a homophobic fanbase then.

She's also found a way to get rich by feeding her fanbase, so it doesn't matter if she was incoherent, she wasn't there for Oxford students, but for her fans and soon-to-be-fans to see her at a reputable institution on YouTube, giving legitimacy to her incoherrent homophobic nonsense.

People with dry, sarcastic senses of humor tend not to like me.

I’m not a big fan of Ann Coulter’s political views.

most homophobes are biblical fundamentalists.

And?

While the majority are, not all of them are.

I said most,not all, sweeping generalizations never work.

Do you have a comment on the topic,Ann Coulter.

She's an effective troll, but beyond that not particularly interesting. She needs to up her trolling game by getting AC tattooed on her face (and everywhere else, repeatedly) and dyeing her hair rainbow coloured - the public trolling game has been upped and she's falling behind. Hasn't she even seen the other right-wing troll? He's dyed himself orange, like all the time; look at the hate he gets, she might as well retire if she can't keep up.

I've read most of her books and enjoy her articles.

Hmm. We've had the range from homophobe to 2nd rate right-wing troll (admittedly, the first rate trolls today are leaders of countries, so 2nd rate troll is still a pretty major troll).
That doesn't shed the best light onto your character ...

Antebellum architecture was created at a time and in a place where slavery was an accepted practice. Slavery was a racist action. Therefore, if anyone likes antebellum architecture, they must be racist....

Is that faulty logic a formal or an informal fallacy?

Your formal logic is formally correct, but the analogy is bad. Anne Coulter's books aren't antebellum architecture. She's a racist.
Her books propagate racism.

But hey, I have only read about her books, maybe they are some Leni Riefenstahl level of aesthetic achievement worth experiencing despite the content. Weirdly, no one seems to be praising Ann Coulter's prose....

He mentions enjoying her books and her articles. You mention only her books. I've never read any of her books either, but I have read some of her political articles. Nary an article was on the subject of race that I recall. It would be incorrect to insinuate that someone is racist by association if they enjoy reading articles written by someone alleged to be a racist who writes about a wide array of topics.

Since there are two sides to every coin, who are some left wing trolls? Please make my night and tell me there aren't any.

Two words: Hot Mess.

It's easier to think of the obvious centrist/centre-left trolls; The Notorious SBC, John Oliver, Trevor Noah, Colbert, Seth Meyers, Sam Bee, Cody Some More News News Guys Who Does News, etc.

It's really not a matter of 'two-sides to every coin', more like 'n sides to the dn'. Every view has corresponding satirical takes on disagreements they have. Among things, the far-right has a number of micro-sects that are often just as willing to rip into each other as anyone they might frame as an ideological enemy, both due to ideological splits on issues that only matter to the fringe and also egos. The left far-has also struggled with most of those issues too. At times the trolls are more focused on fraternal rivals, but since I'm not exactly immersed in crimethinc or other blogs with a heavy ideological slant I'm not really aware of who might count as a more exact analog of Ann or Milo or Ben, but from the left. Over all though, I wouldn't give them more weight/gravitas than the comedians I named, the only real problem is when these people are given credibility beyond that.

Bands like Propagandhi and CRASS would count, but you don't see Chris Hannah on the news like some expert even on topics on which he may well qualify.