However, I think something's missing from the "ignore her" strategy that so many here are proposing. I'm a bit foggy on exactly how such kindergarten plans work (I should just ask my nieces), but if I remember correctly, "ignoring" doesn't work unless you promise to hold your breath a real, real long time. And then of course, if that won't work, you run to mommy and cry.

ps--I'm still waiting for SOMEBODY to give me a historical example of when a dispicable character with a huge following like Coulter's has been "ignored" into oblivion. I know John Kerry's strategy of ignoring the Swift Boat characters worked about as well as John McCain's strategy of ignoring the Karl Rove lies during the 2000 primaries.

But I'm glad now that I've been sold on the "ignore her" plan. I can't wait until I'm in my golden years, when I have my grandkids on my knee asking me what I did back at the turn of the century when the neocons took over:

"Well, I just ignored them!"

"And global warming?"

"I ignored that, too!"

"But why, Grampa?"

"You really wanna know, kids?"

"Yes, Grampa, please tell us!!!"

"Because, kids, it was just so fucking easy..."

Good. Because we can get her fired, and bury her for a while with this plagiarism rap. Of course, as we've seen with the contemptible Mike Barnicle, they resurface sooner or later.

is that Ann Coulter stands to lose tons of credibility (at least in the eyes of her readers and the MSM at large) if this plagiarism thing sticks, but she's been allowed to lie constantly with very few consequences. Some world we live in! You can lie all you want, just don't go around appropriating your colleagues' ideas.

For anyone to suggest that Ann Coulter should be ignored is just lazy and cowardly. None of the folks who write letters to Salon suggesting the she should be ignored can ever provide “non-fictional” examples or “non-anecdotal” data proving that a figure of Coulter’s immense popularity has ever been successfully ignored away. They always say “the best thing...” or “the best way...” and leave it at that--as though it suffices for an intelligent argument.

"The point I make here is that we validate right wing hysteria... simply by discussing it. The more we, as Progressives allow the dialogue to be dominated by discussions of plagarism [sic], and ignore discussions of fact and ideology, the weaker our argument is... But, the strength of the argument lies in arguing substance, not style. If she is a plagarist[sic], who cares? The point I make here is that Progressive dissent validates her by Headlining her obvious intellectual sloth."

That statement leaves me stunned and nearly speechless. How on earth can anyone talk about plagiarism without talking about facts? Your letter implies that "facts" and "plagiarism" are different somehow... that plagiarism issues are stylish rather than substantive. If I’m mischaracterizing here, please correct me! Progressives brought up plagiarism because Ann Coulter is a) an intellectual retard, and b) a liar. That a self-proclaimed "progressive" would claim that pointing out her “intellectual sloth” validates her in any way is astounding.

Wasn't it 1998, not 1988?

Oh yeah, that metaphor? Absurd.

"So now Fitzgerald has concluded that NOBODY did it and the only one guy lied about when, or where, or who, or to whom, or about what - - - and who cares anyway... Conclusion: Fitzgerald's investigation has failed to get at the bottom of the matter and has only satified the 'letter of the law'. The traitors are still in charge and continue with their program of dirty tricks."

FYI--Fitzgerald is a prosecutor. Not a judge; not a jury. He doesn't "conclude" anything. The only thing he concludes is what he feels he can successfully prove in a court of law. You want charges? Blame the grand jury. Bush's underlings successfully obstructed justice in this matter. That, is the bottom line.

Look, I find the nuances of this case to be as frustratingly tedious and confusing as anybody. But Fitzgerald isn't going to make an ass out of himself like Kenneth Starr by bringing up charges he can't prove.

"I come across these people all the time in the field."

He's not just stupid, he's a stupid liar, too.

This guy needs to head back to the briar patch, so he and Tony Snow can play with the tar babies.

Who thinks Michael Savage is getting a bad rap. So you think these, from Media Matters, are "taken out of context"? Note that the quotes below are culled just in the last 3+ months alone!!!

Savage: "Liberalism is, in essence, the HIV virus." Tuesday, July 11, 2006 12:44PM

Savage on possible Hillary Clinton run for president: "Her campaign will be one long hate crime against white people" Thursday, June 15, 2006 6:16PM

Savage to George Soros: "It's people like you who brought about the Holocaust." Tuesday, June 13, 2006 4:18PM

Savage compared Zarqawi to Murtha, declared Zarqawi is "sort of a Jesus figure now to the liberals." Monday, June 12, 2006 6:21PM

Savage called Iraqi witnesses of alleged Haditha massacre "vermin" and "scum," proclaimed detained Marines are American "POWs." Friday, June 9, 2006 5:32PM

Savage assigned "code word" for South Asians: "terrorist[s]." Wednesday, June 7, 2006 3:39PM

* Savage: "Jimmy Carter is like Hitler." Thursday, May 18, 2006 11:41AM

* Savage accused "ordinary Muslim" caller of using phone from "bomb factory in the Gaza strip." Wednesday, April 26, 2006 4:16PM

* Savage: NPR is "on the side of the harvesting of organs in China." Friday, April 21, 2006 9:02PM

* Savage advocated "kill[ing] 100 million" Muslims; called alleged Duke rape victim a "drunken slut stripping whore." Wednesday, April 19, 2006 10:13AM

* Savage called alleged Duke rape victim a "dirty, verminous black stripper"; described illegal immigrants as "brown supremacists." Friday, April 14, 2006 7:32PM

* Savage warned U.S. politicians not to "take to the streets" to support illegal immigrant "vermin." Tuesday, April 11, 2006 2:44PM

* Savage: "Burn the Mexican Flag!" Friday, March 31, 2006 2:33PM

does he mean by "they"?