Bloggers Are Foul-Mouthed Cranks

Just ask David Gregory.

According to NBC’s David Gregory we’re all missing the very important points that Ann Coulter makes because we get caught up in her hate speech. He just said to Elizabeth Edwards “if you strip away some of the inflammatory rhetoric against your husband and other Democrats, the point she’s trying to make about your husband, Senator Edwards, running for the White House is in effect that he’s disingenuous…”

Yeesh.

Glenn Greenwald also writes books and, unlike Coulter, he has the ability to argue for several sentences in a row without making fun of someone’s cancer or hoping that a terrorist blows them up. Ann Coulter represents a tiny and shrinking subset of obviously crazy people. Greenwald stands for a faction that just won a wave election. He, not Coulter, represents the demographic future of America. The fact that these very respectable media figures fawn all over Ann Coulter and shut out Greenwald to the best of their ability strikes me as very good evidence that we live in a slightly crazy world.






21 replies
  1. 1
    ET says:

    Coulter does soundbites. The media loves soundbites becuase they are quick/easy. Conversly, Greenwald is nuanced and lawerly. The media doesn’t like nuance becuase it is messy and since lawyers like to spend more than 10 seconds making a point the media gets lost and confused.

  2. 2
    Davebo says:

    You know, if you just strip away the genocide Hitler had some really good points…

  3. 3
    ThymeZone says:

    The fact that these very respectable media figures fawn all over Ann Coulter and shut out Greenwald to the best of their ability strikes me as very good evidence that we live in a slightly crazy world.

    The craziness is not subtle, and we didn’t really need more evidence.

  4. 4
    mrmobi says:

    You know, if you just strip away the genocide Hitler had some really good points…

    Fuck yeah, the autobahn, man! And he liked dogs and blondes. That holocaust stuff must have been made up by the jews. Cuz their mean, you know?

  5. 5
    Poopyman says:

    Ann Coulter is not crazy. She coldly calculates what kind of rhetoric a)she can get away with legally, and b)what will best bring out the hate in her followers and make headlines.

    Not crazy, but very hateful. Please don’t give her the benefit of the doubt.

  6. 6
    mrmobi says:

    The craziness is not subtle, and we didn’t really need more evidence.

    I’m back to thinking that Coulter is just working the insane rhetoric to make $, that’s it, not an idealogue, just a craven profiteer.
    I saw her on Tweety’s show, and the creepiest thing about it was a little chubby girl sitting behind her (about 11 or 12 years old), obviously a big fan, laughing at the bad jokes and smears. Reminded me of Hitler Youth.

  7. 7
    Zifnab says:

    She coldly calculates what kind of rhetoric a)she can get away with legally, and b)what will best bring out the hate in her followers and make headlines.

    Coldly calculating? Seriously? How coldly calculating do you have to be to call someone a faggot, on camera, in front of a giant crowd of people. I was that coldly calculating when I was five years old.

    Coulter isn’t on because of ratings. The Paris Hilton interview, that was ratings. A guy getting hit in the nuts with a baseball on AFV, that’s ratings. Ann Coulter is red meat for the Republican Base. Because I garantee you, the fastest way to loss a large section of your audiance is to stick a nasely stick-figure on camera for a full god-damn hour just to talk about all the people she doesn’t like. I’ve had more fun listening to gereatric nursing-home invalids (no offense TZ), and I’ll be damned if I’m going to waste an hour of my life on this crap if I can avoid it.

  8. 8
    ThymeZone says:

    the creepiest thing about it was a little chubby girl sitting behind her

    Yes, saw it, and had the same reaction.

    I kept wondering, why doesn’t Matthews ask her “What the hell are you laughing about? What do you think is funny here?”

    But that would require that Matthews not be a part of the game. He is part of the game.

  9. 9
    Dug Jay says:

    When you say, “Glenn Greenwald,” are you really referring to Messrs. Thomas Ellers, Rick Ellensburg, S. Ryan, Wilson, or Duard Farquard?

  10. 10
    Mr Furious says:

    Fuck David Gregory, that little monkey-faced brown-noser. He used to be one of my preferrred White House Correspondents, now I see him for the MSM whore that he truly is. Insecure and afraid of being replaced by a more honest and democratic medium. Pussy.

    Foul-mouthed enough for ya, David?

    Don’t worry. If you strip away the rhetoric, I acknowledge the fact that you’re a reporter. Or used to be.

  11. 11
    Dug Jay says:

    When you say, “Glenn Greenwald,” are you really referring to Messrs. Thomas Ellers, Rick Ellensburg, S. Ryan, Wilson, and Duard Farquard?

  12. 12
    The Other Steve says:

    The sad thing about the whole thing is that in the end Ann Coulter turned out to be right. Edwards used the phone call to try to raise more money.

    I think the examples of Imus, Coulter, etc. though is that people are getting tired of this style of speech. I thought the bit yesterday about how numerous media outlets refused to air shit about Paris Hilton was an example that some people are waking up. We’ll see.

  13. 13
    Rome Again says:

    Don’t worry. If you strip away the rhetoric, I acknowledge the fact that you’re a reporter. Or used to be.

    Newspeak is such an interesting term, isn’t it?

  14. 14
    mclaren says:

    And if you strip away the inflammatory rhetoric, Pol Pot turned out to have a serious point: intellectuals can get wrapped up in their own little world.

    And if you strip away his inflammatory rhetoric, the BTK Killer…

    Oh, fer cripes sake. Do they really think we’re that stupid…?

  15. 15
    demimondian says:

    When you say, “Glenn Greenwald,” are you really referring to Messrs. Thomas Ellers, Rick Ellensburg, S. Ryan, Wilson, and Duard Farquard?

    No, Dug, when I say “Mac Buckets”, I’m referring to Ellers, Ellensberg, etc.

  16. 16
    Tsulagi says:

    I’m back to thinking that Coulter is just working the insane rhetoric to make $, that’s it, not an idealogue, just a craven profiteer.

    That’s all it’s ever been.

    On her side of the political table, her batshit makes her cheerleaders look like punky dweebs. Then for the other side of the table, by her own acknowledgement she brings in dollars. Smart, strong.

    I saw her on Tweety’s show, and the creepiest thing about it was a little chubby girl sitting behind her (about 11 or 12 years old), obviously a big fan, laughing at the bad jokes and smears. Reminded me of Hitler Youth.

    I saw it too and had to laugh. You could almost see that right now she wants to be a Stepford Ann. She’ll grow out of it. I have faith.

    Besides, at the rate Annie is going she’s going to blow. To get attention, each time she has to top herself. How long before she’s calling for a conservative Rapture by nuking the country to get rid of the evildoer libruls within while the smart patriots hide in undisclosed bunkers? She’ blonde like that.

  17. 17
    Bubblegum Tate says:

    I think the interesting thing is that when Coulter responded to Edwards’ request that she (Coulter) stop slinging mud and generally being a fuckface, Coulter said, “She wants me to stop writing.” Ann Coulter herself stated that her writing is nothing but invective. Not even Ann Coulter thinks Ann Coulter has anything of value to say.

    Meh, She’ll be dead soon, anyway. People not named Keith Richards can’t survive on a diet of smokes, hard liquor, and chewing gum for very long.

  18. 18
    Tom Hilton says:

    Strip away the inflammatory rhetoric and you get…nothing.

    And Coulter is not only hateful/crazy (take your pick, or choose both; I don’t think it matters), she’s also a pathetic whiner. Just listen to her pissing and moaning to Joe Scarborough, a catch in her throat and a quaver in her voice, about the awful ‘harridans’ who dare to criticize poor innocent Ann Coulter. If anything can kill her career, it will be something like this; I can’t imagine the hate caucus wants to see Ann Coulter break down and cry.

  19. 19
    Tulkinghorn says:

    The craziness is not subtle, and we didn’t really need more evidence.

    Ockham’s razor, 2007 style: never attribute to craziness that which can simply and directly attributed to corruption and venality.

  20. 20
    bernarda says:

    David Gregory is a cowardly lying shill for corporate criminality. Ok, let’s take away the inflammatory rhetoric and clarify it.

    David Gregory is a wingnut asshole.

  21. 21
    David Gregory says:

    Dance a little dance with the Rove-ster and your base sure turns on you.

    Get down tonight, indeed!

Comments are closed.