The Daily Howler has this disturbing report about the Q&A session from a recent presentation by Ann Coulter. Try to believe that a sentient human being actually asked the following question:
QUESTION FROM SOMEONE EZRA KLEIN DOESN'T KNOW (7/28/06): Hi. My name is --, I'm a sophomore at Bucknell University and a summer intern at the Clare Booth Luce Policy Institute. In your book, Godless, you completely tear apart the theory of evolution and I was just wondering how scientists can still believe in such an implausible theory, especially since you don't disprove it based on Biblical facts and scripture, you disprove it based on, you know, pure science. So how do liberals react to that?
The Howler was responding to this idiotic post over at The American Prospect's blog, written by Ezra Klein.
Among the silly things Klein said was that “I don't know a single person who believes she's anything less than a talk show vaudeville act, yet she remains prominent in the conversation. ”
As The Howler points out, this is standard liberal cluelessness. The sort of people who take Ann Coulter seriously don't read or write for The American Prospect. But they are numerous and control large chunks of the South and Midwest. I've attended enough creationist conferences to know that the bizarre combination of blithering ignorance and supreme arrogance represented by the questioner above is alive and well in America.
The fact is that Coulter's success, and the almost complete unwillingness of anyone in the media to confront her on the substance of what she is saying, are further evidence of a very disturbing trend. People seem utterly unconcerned with the truth these days. In response to Coulter's last book, Treason, a number of websites undertook the thankless task of checking nearly all of her references and factual assertions. Their findings were that virtually every page contained outright errors or blatant distortions. Her present book contains four chpaters on evolution that go pages at a time without saying anything that is true. Most of her arguments aren't even coherent. Yet people lap it up, and the chat shows can't book her fast enough.
Hence the title of this post.
- Log in to post comments
I'm not a very good liberal. I base this on the fact that my answer to almost every problem can be expressed by the following equation:
Murder X until Y>X, where Y consists of myself, my wives and husband, and maybe a few other people who agree with us.
The difference between Coulter and I is that she can find people to publish her hate in paper form and I have to use the Interweb.
I'm deeply ashamed for Bucknell. Deeply, deeply ashamed. They're a good school, they have no business turning out retards like this, but I think they do just because of the pool they draw from is so contaminated by conservatives.
I can only hope she was being facetious. Otherwise I might have to return my degree.
"...the almost complete unwillingness of anyone in the media to confront her on the substance of what she is saying..."
Hmmm... hate to be the one to break this to you, but the reason the media is so uninterested is because people like Coulter preach to the already converted. She's a cheerleader, telling the faithful what they want to hear, and most people who read her book are not going to be swayed by what's printed/broadcast in the press. That whole liberal media conspiracy she touts, you know.
The thing Coulter seems to do best is piss liberals off and get a lot of notice as a result. I'm not sure why she gets so much attention from the left considering the virtual army of reality-challenged, right-wing wackos out there, but she plays it to full advantage. I'm not saying ignore her, but the amount of paper and time liberals waste on her is way out of proportion to her impact. Stop being her fiddle.
And before we get all high and mighty about people "utterly unconcerned with the truth these days," remember it works both ways.
Walter -
If that's the worst they can find about Farenhreight 9/11, it says a lot. There is often a left leaning issue with regard to oil; not EVERY war is about oil, some wars are merely vanity projects. Big oil wasn't too happy about the whole Iraq thing.
Compared to the right wing denial of basic biology (Evolution), basic physics (Global warming), basic economics (See the budget deficit) and, indeed, every bit of real world information that may slightly differ from what they already know, this is pretty small potatoes.
Hi Jason
Came across your splendid blog as we happen to be both listed on the Annotated Bible roll of blogs.
My theory is Christianity does not provide human meaning, it provides human comfort. You have to understand everything they say based on that premise. You are trying to tear away a person's security blanket.
(They will of course suggest science is our security blanket)
Keep up the good work.
There is no need to change this into a discussion of Moore, but ... "If that's the worst they can find about Farenhreight 9/11, it says a lot." Really, it is not the worst, not even close. It is easy to find web pages that tear the documentary apart frame by frame, and the inescapable conclusion is that Moore is lying, and has been lying since his early days.
This is worth noting because an important point is that the left generally does not tolerate Moore. See "Forgive us our Spins". I wish the right was honest enough to react to Coulter in a similar way.
Dom, yes, there are some on the left who are critical of Michael Moore, and I'm happy for it. But the right does react in a similar way to Coulter. Too many on the left make those kind of generalizations because they don't bother listening to what the other side has to say.
And hence my point: Coulter is considered a nutcase even in her own circles. The reason she gets so much attention isn't because of what she has to say, but because she gets liberals so angry. The left way overreacts everytime she hurls an insult their way -- using a sledgehammer to kill a fly -- and she plays it to full advantage. You want her to go away? Say you piece, then move on. There are far bigger fish to fry than Ann Coulter.
I agree with Walter. Ann Coulter gets attention not because of her ideas but because of her theatrics. Actually, she doesn't have any ideas. It's all just regurgitated neo-con babble. She doesn't have a single solution or breakthrough idea for actually making the world a better place. I don't think we should exactly ignore her but we should publicly make a point of dismissing her based on the fact that she has nothing important to say. She is a person of NO IDEAS. I would love to see Bill Maher, for example, make a public statement that he is no longer going to invite her on his show simply for the fact that she has nothing important to contribute. If she wants an audience she can then find it on the stand-up circuit where she belongs.
What pisses liberals off about Ann Coulter is not her so much as the way the media indulges her, despite what she does and despite the utter vacuity of her thoughts. We find it somewhat disturbing that the media falls over itself to broadcast the views, or if you prefer the theatrics, of someone who has repeatedly said in different, ha ha isn't it funny, ways the only way to "deal with" liberals is to use violence against them. You can only ignore a bestselling author and ubiquitous media personality joking about blowing you up or beating you with a baseball bat before you take serious offence.
Hi,
I'm from the Netherlands and into the ID discussion here. It seems the debate is much more alive over there than it is here. The remark that striked me most was "nobody seems to be interested in the trurh anymore". This is what we see slowly creaping up here too. Presentation is all, content nothing. If served up right, stones can fly.
I enjoyed your opennes on the matter, "gloves off". I wish you succes and keep up the good work. It is much needed.
Regards,
Martien Kuylman