The Coulter Question and What It All Means

Ann Coulter’s latest incendiary statements, albeit meant to sell books, have raised some interesting issues.

Peter Daou posting at Crooks and Liars:

The issue here is not the damage done to America’s public discourse – we already know that liberals have become the equivalent of terrorists in the minds of millions of Americans. Nor is the issue the media’s hunger for ratings ( what’s next, snuff films?) The issue is the establishment media’s symbiotic relationship with these rightwing blatherers:

“I’ve argued that the propagation of anti-left and pro-right narratives by the establishment media is more insidious – and thus more dangerous – than the cowardly bleating of people like Sean Hannity, Ann Coulter, Bill Bennett, Bill O’Reilly, and Rush Limbaugh. When Coulter is invited to spout her putrescence on Larry King Live, the legitimacy granted to her is CNN’s fault, not Coulter’s. After all, there’s no shortage of desperate attention seekers willing to say and do outlandish things to get noticed. The question is, why does CNN grant an open forum to this particular whack-job and not others?

Read it from the beginning. It’s on the mark.

John Cloud doesn’t have a clue, and seems to think that Coulter is a national treasure because she gets people angry. John needs to get out of the house more, but his article is worth reading as an example of pseudo-intellectual pandering masquerading as a critical piece. As if the fact that Coulter mashes facts is news. It rather reminds me of movie critics who opine “I’m not sure what the movie was about, but the car crashes sure were cool.”

Avedon gets down to brass tacks and targets the reason behind Coulter’s attacks:

Her message is that liberals are evil and should never be allowed into the public discourse.

It is fundamental to the right-wing campaign against liberalism that no voice be heard that counters their campaign of lies. It is essential that each such voice be nullified without the questions we raise ever being engaged.

And that’s why she hates the 9/11 widows so much: because she can’t easily get away with smearing them.

The entire right-wing, having effectively silenced liberal voices with lies and mockery on issues relating to 9/11 and the invasion of Iraq long enough to make sure we were mired in a disastrous foreign policy from which we may never recover, is outraged that this one group of people, unlike all the rest of us (Michael Moore is Fat), just can’t be biliously attacked in such a way as to mute them entirely. That’s what this is all about.

It needs to be said again and again.

From the post by Mr. Doau above via True Grit, an excellent series of posts at Media Matters, which are required reading in order to have a tacit understanding of the propaganda techniques that are being employed.

Lest we forget, Coulter is a propagandist of the highest order and the meme that the 9/11 widows, the “Jersey Girls” have exploited the deaths of their loved ones for their own Liberal minded poliitcal gain, is one began by another 9/11 harpy who is exploiting the death of a loved one for her own Conservative political gain- Debra Burlingame. Which begs the question: Does Ann Coulter think that Debra Burlingame should not be allowed to exploit the death of her brother for political purposes? I’d imagine some goal post moving and sputtering would be involved. It’s all about ideology. To the conservative, if the ideology is not one they agree with, then it is verbotten and to be eliminated. Entirely. Coulter’s tactics are entirely created to bring such an atmosphere about, to nurture it and to fan the hatred which feeds it.

Finally, for context, David Newert’s fantastic essay “The War on Liberals”.