What do you think of Ann Coulters new book?

I havn’t read it, but the point she makes about single motherhood is very valid from what I’ve seen of it. Children from single mothers are at a huge disadvantage, and liberals do seem to promote it. I wish she would change her tone so the great points she makes would get more attention.

It’s deplorable people buy her books.

Are the people who purchase the books deplorable, or are the books themselves deplorable?

The books themselves. I’ve had the displeasure of reading one. She’s an inflammatory nutjob (way higher than my caliber) who doesn’t care about anything but covering her butt. :mad:

She makes some good points but the delivery is too caustic for my tastes.

Bill Maher has a pH of roughly 1, Coulter has a pH of roughly 11. I prefer something in the neighborhood of 7.35 to 7.45, just a tad to the right of center. Anything on the extremes is out of the therapeutic range and damages things.:wink:

Why not stick with a pH balanced 7?

She can make some good points and much of her research is of decent quality but her vitriole leaves me feeling slightly dirty for reading it.

Because normal human blood pH is roughly 7.35 to 7.45. It turns out that the perfect political “sweet spot” is just a tad right of center also.:thumbsup: Go figure.

I would argue more along the lines of a 6.65 to be the sweet spot. Being a lib myself, I find left-wing activist candidates (Kucinich 2016!) to be unsung heroes.

I read her earlier book, Godless, The Church of Liberalism. Her points were for the most part right on the money, but her delivery was too caustic for my tastes. Her attacks on people, were, IMHO, quite unchristian. You can make you point without belittling a person.

I flipped through it in a bookstore. Typical Ann Coulter, devoting space to meaningless attacks for the sheer reason that she doesn’t just disagree with Democrats, she actively hates them, going so far as to call Michelle Obama “freakish” and bizarrely accusing her of trying to imitate Jackie Kennedy.

America needs less hatred, but Coulter just calls for more, more, more…

She is a shock jock in my opinion. Her points are very valid, and although she says things quite caustically she is more accurate than some. I happen to believe that they are grooming this administration to immitate the Camelot of the Kennedy years, so yes I do agree that Michelle will try to continue to immitate Jackie-O.

I read everything, and have read Godless, but I just don’t buy books that I find offensive in any way. I buy books to support the authors, and I don’t feel compelled to support Ann.

By the way I think Bill Maher and Ann are counterparts- one on the left and one on the right. Both caustic, only one hates the Catholilc church and religion- and it isn’t Ann. Ann’s dad was Catholic, and her mom Protestant. Ann loved and respected her dad.

originally posted by Fitz
Ann’s dad was Catholic, and her mom Protestant. Ann loved and respected her dad.

That interesting.

I heard her on O’Reilly and he compared her to Al Franken.

Immediately, she took him up on this and explained that she doesn’t try to crush people or spread dishonest gossip as Franken has been known to do. She was horrified that she was compared to Franken.

According to her, she just tells things about people which are honest. (My comment would be that she is trying to sell a book to earn a living and there is nothing wrong with that.)

But it’s still wrong people buy her books. It’s not even good literature. It’s more like a game of How Many Words Can You Fit Into A Sentence (Bonus Points For Ones That Imply Erratic Accusations)?

It is not wrong of people to ever buy any books! I just wouldn’t want to give her the money. I feel the same way about many movie stars. When people cross over the line, I just don’t spend any of my money to reward them.

I read her ‘Treason’, and think it should be required reading for American high schoolers to balance the America bashing they imbibe at the hands of the NEA.

She is a polemicist: a fighter, debater, pot stirrer. She doesn’t always fight fair or make her points in the most constructive manner.

The difference is, she’s honest and open about her politics, unlike most of the ‘fair’ hard left ‘journalists’ like Bill Moyer and Marvin Kalb who claim to be honest brokers, but aren’t.

Typically, I am no fan of Ann Coulter. :nope: She’s like a female Pat Robertson to me.

…no offence.

Ironically Yours, Blade and Blood

I’m not sure what you mean by “America-bashing”.

The recently retired civics teacher at our local highschool loathed this country. He had more praise for Trotsky than Adams, more admiration for Che than Lincoln. In his world, anyone in a union was a hero, anyone not a patsy, a shill, or a villain.

He has since been replaced by another aging radical with a long gray ponytail, who leads the Junior trip to Washington DC, timed so he can have the kids hold up ‘Keep your Rosaries off my ovaries’ banners at the National March for Life.

Teachers are historically, provably more liberal than the population at large, and rarely bother keeping that bias out of the class room–90% of the NEA political money goes to Democrats. If you are on the wrong side of the Democratic platform [prolife, pro-business, pro-military] you are on the wrong side of history and basic human values. Coulter would provide some balance.

‘Treason’ is the side of the whole McCarthy era story that never gets told: turns out that a great many of the people Senator Joe unmasked really were Communists, many in the pay of the USSR [proven by recently released information from that country’s archives], who actually did support the violent overthrow of the US government…

That’s two teachers. I can counter with a middle school teacher I met who told her sixth graders “You should be ashamed if your parents are Democrats!” and a high school teacher I had who would go on tangents about the thought police and how the Democrats wanted to create the New World Order.

Teachers are historically, provably more liberal than the population at large, and rarely bother keeping that bias out of the class room–90% of the NEA political money goes to Democrats. If you are on the wrong side of the Democratic platform [prolife, pro-business, pro-military] you are on the wrong side of history and basic human values. Coulter would provide some balance.

Coulter certainly would not provide some balance; I’d never recommend her to a history class because she doesn’t understand history.

I think its a slur on the teaching profession to claim that they “rarely bother keeping that bias out of the classroom”. Maybe you should moderate your remarks about teachers so you don’t needlessly insult people who work very hard and don’t get paid all that much.

‘Treason’ is the side of the whole McCarthy era story that never gets told: turns out that a great many of the people Senator Joe unmasked really were Communists, many in the pay of the USSR [proven by recently released information from that country’s archives], who actually did support the violent overthrow of the US government…

Some, yes. He did unmask some, but even a stopped watch is right twice a day. McCarthy’s rantings damaged the cause he supported, and his unethical tactics turned him into an American disgrace. He accused anyone who opposed him on any issue of being a communist. His targets included Harry Truman (who he claimed was party to “twenty years of treason”), George Catlett Marshall (who he claimed had never made a single decision in favor of the United States, and had reached “an infamy so dark as dwarf any venture in the history of man”), and Dwight D. Eisenhower (who he also called a traitor).

To top that, he even managed to have the libraries of the State Department censored. Any Communists he caught were more than outweighed by the damage he did to American society, creating a ridiculous culture of fear.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.