Anne "Soulless" Coulter complains that she cannot challenge the 9/11 Widows, and thus she has been done a disservice by the "harpies," or "witches". Anne Coulter is furious about this, and you can feel her rage radiate as she spits out her self-righteous diatribe against the bastardly women who so disgustingly lost their husbands on the eleventh of September, 2001.
But her act is deceptive. I will tell you what she is angry about. And it is not because she cannot challenge the Widows.
Firstly, Anne "I Hate My Mother" Coulter is angry because suddenly she cannot ATTACK the Widows. Because she cannot BELITTLE them. Anne "I Cannot Physically Speak Without Spewing Bile" Coulter is upset because she cannot SLANDER the widows; that she cannot DEMONIZE them.
Because you know what? I can challenge them. I can challenge the widows if I want, and I never once have to worry about my conscience or a backlash. Because I would do it respectfully. But Anne "Still A Screaming Child" is psychologically incapable of a respectful confrontation. That is what her issue is, but she blames it on the Widows.
We sense the misplacement of blame, and we call her vile. But what we mean, specifically, is that the poor woman (and her particular strain of "political discourse") is injurious, extreme, unproductive, hostile, assaultive, and that she cannot choose otherwise.
This is the second part of Ms. Coulter's fury: she is seriously damaged goods. And on some level, this upsets her. Because she still does have a heart, even if it has been hurt badly at some point her past.
This crippled heart of Coulter's is writhing, fuming, spitting at itself. Faced with its own heavy-handed curse—The Claw That Can't Uncurl—it is raging. No longer can Coulter pretend she is a fierce, truthful soldier of the Right. She must see, at least for a moment, that she is but a cruel tyrant, exacting the same kind of abuse on others that was probably heaped upon herself at one time ( I'm sorry for assuming; how else does one become so inured to the suffering of others? Why else would someone make "weakness" a loathed object of obsessive attention and hate but for the fact that their own perceived weakness has proven damaging to themselves?) And this image is not "ego-syntonic," as is said in the field. This image paints herself as the Bad Guy.
By meeting such devastated, helpless, and pitiable opponents, humanity would demand some respect and care. Even when arguing them. But Anne "I Am Trapped In This Mangled Psyche" Coulter is directly confronted not with another image of hate she can engage, but her own reflection. Her own stumbling, damaged, diseased, anti-empathetic nature. Her own inability to feel anything but hate. Here is one situation that emotional state does not quite feel right—even to her. And staring at the twisted wreckage of her own social disease, she is furious.
She directs this anger not at her own condition, of course, but at the messenger of her realization. She calls it the "Left's Doctrine of Infallability." But a better title would be, "Anne's Self-Prison of Inhumanity."
Nezua is an author and illustrator by trade, a rebel at heart, and a fugitive from the iron claw of ennui. You can find more of his writing at http://www.theunapologeticmexican.org , his videos at http://think.mtv.com/profile/Nezua , and graphic art at http://www.xolagrafik.com
And why are we not supporting those widows, may I ask?
Colteur attacks not all the widows but only those four who ask for an independent investigation of 9/11. Now, if we are so ready to defend those women, where is the liberal outcry to support that cause? In fact, there is no discussion of that cause at all. Those women support Kerry but Kerry definitely does not support them. It would be a brilliant opportunity for a politician to go on the podium and say that if Colteur is against it then it does mean that it is a worthy cause, right? Not a chance. Total silence on the real issue. It is well known that the only way to cure the pyschopath is to make him known that his worries are not without foundation. If the democrats and liberals really do at least part of what they are accused by Colteur, she would be long gone. But they don't. As such
she rants openly and barks at any tree. She is a patsy but our negligence and total gutlessness of the political opposition elevates her to the state of celebrity. And she uses it. Instead of 'protecting the widows' we should protect the cause and say that thanks to Colteur the cause of the Independent Investigation of 9/11 will flourish.
by
Mark Sashine (47 articles, 19 quicklinks, 235 diaries, 3360 comments)
on Tuesday, June 13, 2006 at 7:25:03 AM
My intent and purpose with this post is certainly not to "protect the widows," but to point out how sad and broken down a certain hateful pundit happens to be, and to offer a view of her that mitigates, somewhat, the power she attempts to command.
I do not think Coulter would be "long gone" no matter what anyone else does. She is a tragedy in motion, and needs something to hate upon. She'll find it, regardless of whom does what.
However, I applaud your point—that we all ought to be making the same demands as the 9/11 widows: a priority on things that would give justice to the original WTC attack. Full investigations. That is a point worth forcing.
Thank you for doing so here.
by
Nezua (42 articles, 0 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 93 comments)
on Tuesday, June 13, 2006 at 9:06:51 AM
In fact, such people like Colteur can be useful as the sources of the information. Being dogs they bark at the issues they are told to bark at. Thus those issues are important. I kinda repeat myself, but here is the point: the 9/11 is one of the weakest links in the Bush's machine. The rejection of the Criminal Investigation was the key of the Bush's war strategy. If it was considered a crime and not a war act, there was no justification to attack Afghanistan and Iraq. In fact, all the Bush's actions from Patriot Act to the border militarization are based on that and only that.
Colteur knows that- she is certainly being 'briefed' by her employers. So she considers her obligation to attack any even slight possibility of real investigation to occur. She is very stupid but very loyal. Thus if we had smart people on our side (and those we really lack, unfortunately, I mean smart politicians with guts), those -people would actually rejoice from the source of weakness she provides. But as I said, the problem is with us.
We have to admit that Colteur exists because there is no power on the other side. Power is withdrawn. That is why I ask about Kerry. He and people like him have power to use the information above. But they don't. And then they come to us for donations?
by
Mark Sashine (47 articles, 19 quicklinks, 235 diaries, 3360 comments)
on Tuesday, June 13, 2006 at 1:05:03 PM
And I repeat myself, too, since that's the theme of the party. Coulter would exist no matter what. Whether we called her "Coulter" or something else. Thank you for reading, and for your point of view.
by
Nezua (42 articles, 0 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 93 comments)
on Tuesday, September 5, 2006 at 10:15:07 AM
There is no one with any intelligence, or sophistication that listens to Ann Coulter. Republican inbreeds are her crowd. However, as this is the only case so far, I agree with Ms Coulter in reference to her opinion of Cindy Sheehan. Past, the pretty little sweet pea is nothing but a muckraker and an unfortunately loud horn for the right wing radicals. Of no more worth or Stature than Rush Limbaugh, Michael Savage, and the rest of these meatballs. She said herself that if the people get tired of her, they'll stop buying her books and listen to her radio show. What else can you say. Simply put, she doesn't deserve any notice atall, except by a modeling agency. The more people that bring her up as a vitriolic virulent witch, she just listens to the money jingle into her accounts.
tedbohne
by
tedbohne (87 articles, 103 quicklinks, 3 diaries, 119 comments)
on Tuesday, June 13, 2006 at 7:56:19 PM
