The beauty of doing nothing is that you can do it perfectly. Only when you do something is it almost impossible to do it without mistakes. Therefore people who are contributing nothing to society except their constant criticisms can feel both intellectually and morally superior.
If there is any quote that more perfectly frames the Anti-War Left at this time, I don't know if I can find it.
And now, has the furor over Ann Coulter's new book died down yet? Can we discuss it without a burst of self-flagellation?
Because let's admit it, folks. It's not what she said, it's how she said it that's pissing people off. And as a person who has been rude and crude quite often in his life, I'd just like to say that I agree with Ms. Coulter.
The Left has taken to using people who suffered great tragedy as their spokesmen, and then screaming "HOW DARE YOU ATTACK THIS POOR PERSON!" when valid objections are raised. Does Cindy Sheehan ring a bell? It should. Sheehan has been exposed as a particularly vile piece of filth, and yet she's still out there regurgitating the Democrat's talking points, plus a few of her own as well. The "Jersey Girls" are no exception. Question their political motives or message, and you're attacked with "YOU INSENSITIVE ASSHOLE! HOW DARE YOU ATTACK THEM! CAN'T YOU SEE THEY'RE GRIEVING?"
Actually, no, I can't see that they're grieving at all. That's the problem. Oh, I have no doubt that they suffered, and grieved at the loss of their husbands. But then they picked themselves up and used their victim status has a method with which to attack President Bush, the war in Iraq (and our military at the same time), Conservatives, Republicans, and anything to the Left of Howard Dean. And the Democrats were more than happy to use them, and give them microphones, and film political commercials with them as the stars, and are still using them this very day. So when Ann Coulter points that out, albeit not in the most polite fashion, the sheer verbal onslaught was staggering.
Methinks they doth protest too much.
A hell of a lot of people on the Right side of the blogosphere jumped away from Coulter as fast as they could. Condemnations were flying fast and furious over her writings about the Jersey Girls. People were jumping off that ship as fast as they could. And why? Because Coulter didn't just say what was wrong with the Jersey Girls, she delivered a few sucker punches while she was at it.
And for that, conservatives all over the web were shrieking.
There were only a few websites out there that stated "What she said was foul, harsh, and insulting, but her argument is essentially correct." Michelle Malkin brought up an essay by Dorothy Rabinowitz that stated much of what Coulter wrote, without the invective.
But if we as consumers didn't want Ann Coulter's invective, then Dorothy Rabinowitz would be a best selling author right now, while Ann Coulter would be a little known writer. So the hysterical shrieking and shouting over Ann Coulter's method of delivery strikes me as a bit odd, if not hypocritical. When Coulter talks about how the Jersey Girls are millionaires, reveling in their celebrity status, she's stating the truth. If she had not added "I've never seen people enjoying their husbandsÂ? deaths so much." this never would have been the shitstorm it became.
One damn sentance that is style rather than substance. That shouldn't void the entire argument, which is what the Left desparately wants. And what many people on the Right seem willing to give them.