My belief is that she is engaged in an Andy Kaufman-esque comedy routine.

is Coulter's assumption that being "all over news" and stalked by "grief-parrazis" is something so very desirable and enjoyable that someone would use the death of a loved one to accomplish it. The unavoidable conclusion is that Ms. Coulter has described her own pathology while at the same time assigning it to someone else.

I suspect that, if it were her, she would be enjoying the hell out of all the attention and exploiting all that grief endowed credibility to the hilt. In short, I think her characterisation of those "millionaire broads" exudes more than just a whiff of envy.

It's interesting that people who seem to be progressive are so quick to call for the censorship and revocation of someone's right to free speech. I hope none of you ever piss off your "progressive" friends, they'll probably make you "disappear".

Whether Coulter truly believes the hate she spews or only does it because spewing hate is how she makes a living, I have no doubt that in the end, she is a miserable, self-loathing woman (okay, there is some doubt about the "woman" part).

She looks strung out, like she's burning herself up from within. No one can be filled with that much hate for other people unless she hates herself.

Do I feel sorry for her? I'm no saint, so the answer is no. Regardless of her own miserable status, she still exists only to destroy and demean others.

Jeffrey points out her degrees and book sales as if they actually mean something. There are lots of kinds of stupid, Jeffrey, such as showing off your poor reasoning ability, writing skills and, yes fashion sense for the world to see. Yeah, she makes a buck, so what. So do all sorts of other geeks. She is a really a man, by the way.

The New Republic had a composite of several Republican pundits on its cover not too long ago, and my four year-old daughter seemed fascinated by it for a minute or so. Then she said solemnly, "Wow, Mom. That is the UGLIEST picture of Rapunzel I have ever seen in my life."

Matt Lauer continues to be one of TV's worst interviewers. He simply cannot ask tough questions and keep at it. He's Larry King with smaller ears and a better manicure. Lauer let Coulter run rings around him. He should have stuck with one question: How can you say they're millionaries---give me proof that these women have profited from their husband's deaths. This is a conrete point, something much easier to focus on than the others they batted back and forth. But as usual, Lauer he was scattered (and unnerved by Coulter's hysteria). Why can't he prepare better?

From Wikipedia:

She graduated cum laude from Cornell in 1984, and received her J.D. from the University of Michigan Law School, where she achieved membership in the Order of the Coif and was an editor of The Michigan Law Review.

How to Talk to a Liberal (If You Must)

New York Times Bestseller list for 17 weeks.

Slander: Liberal Lies About the American Right (Crown Forum, 2002) ISBN 1400046610. Number one on The New York Times Nonfiction bestseller list for seven weeks.

High Crimes and Misdemeanors: The Case Against Bill Clinton

Eight weeks on the New York Times best-seller list.

You should be so stupid...

I'm a big fan of Oscar Wilde, who claimed that the greatest sin of all was to be boring.

In the case of Ann Coulter, I would shift that thesis slightly and assert that the greatest sin of all is to write badly.

Go to "Miss" Coulter's original texts, and you'll find she couldn't pass freshman English.

Take her theses to a freshman philosophy course, and she'd fail the most basic quiz.

As far as ethics are concerned-- she doesn't qualify even as a human being.

Here's hoping she will someday live up to a basic simian standard.

One does wonder if she isn't an agent provocateur for the Democrats. If so, she's absolutely my hero. Otherwise, I'd rather give a million dollars to a 9/11 widow in a widow's fund, than to someone who spews lies. They aren't refusing to let her comment. What's she talking about?

Did anyone see Ann smile when Matt Lauer asked if she believed everything that she said (look closely). The response was:

"No, of course I believe everything."

Then there was a slight smile, kind of like an "I gotcha" smile.

I don't think she believes what she's saying. I think she's just trying to see how long it takes before people find out that she's really a lesbian in love with an Islamic woman.

I agree with the view that this dervish should be interviewed relentlessly until November, in every available timeslot. When a transcript of an interview with Matt Lauer comes off like this one, it must mean something. Don't try to muzzle her. It is a big mistake. Of course even if she were made a regular guest on the Today show, she could say all the same vile crap, and party leaders would never acknowledge it, nor would anyone like Matt Lauer insist that they do. Does anyone on any of the regular morning or daytime or anytime shows ever bring up the hateful rhetoric of Rush Limbaugh? He matches Coulter's style every day, for years and years, and it's perfectly acceptable. Go figure...

There must be many lonely nights in her life

If Ann Coulter and Fred Phelps (you know, the godhatesfags.com guy who organizes those protests at military funerals) got into a fight, who would win? And how much would you pay to see that fight?

Yeah, Johnalive, that was not Time's shining moment but remember how weird that photo cover was..she looked like a giant pair of witch shoes with a person stuck behind them.

And let's not forget the awful lovefest that Time Magazine ran off it's cover recently about Coulter, thereby helping to mainstream this fascist who advocates violence against anyone on the left or who supports Progressives.

Please cancel, or at least do not renew, your subscription to Time magazine.