Idiot Ann "Oops, She Did It Again" Coulter
Self-monitoring is a process by which individuals examine the situation they are in in order to determine how they should behave. High self-monitors are very much concerned with appropriate communication, while low self-monitors are concerned with their own selfish motives. Self-monitoring generally consists of three components:
(1) the willingness to be the center of attention
(2) sensitivity to the reactions of others;
(3) ability and willingness to adjust behavior to induce positive reactions in others.
Anyone want to guess where Ann Coulter falls on the self-monitoring continuum?
She was at it again on the Sean Hannity radio show yesterday (Thursday). Two things she said were typical of her lack of any understanding of logic. First, she equates her current number one ranking on the New York Times bestseller list as indicating a groundswell of support for her berating the so-called "Jersey Girls". Coulter's prior books have sold from 300,000 to 400,000 hard copies. Those numbers would qualify her as a bestseller, though not a blockbuster. Her cynical attacks on the 9/11 widows has generated a lot of publicity, and probably 1) prompted her normal book-buying audience to buy her book earlier than normal and 2) led to some people to buy her book out of morbid curiosity. Remember, NASCAR viewership has never been higher, but there's a chunk of the audience that is not watching to see drivers go around in a circle, but to see the crashes. Right now, Coulter's book is the equivalent of a car accident.
Second, Coulter asserts that liberals have not been complaining about the other claims in her book (that liberals are godless, that evolution is bunk, etc.) and are thus conceding that her arguments are correct. Ms. Coulter, here's a newsflash. Liberals are not addressing those issues because liberals are not interested in interplanetary dialogue. Your positions are so out there, it's not worth discussion. But, the viciousness by which the 9/11 widows are attacked can't be ignored.
The third claim by Coulter was the most troublesome. Twice she referred to David Corn -- who apparently gave her a prior bad review of her book -- as a heroin addict. If Mr. Corn is a recovering addict, the ad hominem attack was both gratuitous and cruel. If Mr. Corn has never been an addict, Ms. Coulter is in danger of being sued for libel (though Mr. Corn is a public figure, you can't libel a person out of malice, and revenge for a bad review would constitute malice).
Beyond yesterday's performance, Ms. Coulter has other problems.
1) She has lied about her age. She has claimed she is 43, but she is actually 45.
2) She is being investigated in Florida for voter fraud, not only giving a false address on her voter registration form, but also voting in the wrong district.
3) She plays fast and loose with the facts, and may have committed plagiarism -- check out the Huffington Post, the Rude Pundit and the Raw Story blogs.
I think it would be really entertaining if Ann Coulter turns out to be this usmmer's James Frey. Oprah, are you listening?
(1) the willingness to be the center of attention
(2) sensitivity to the reactions of others;
(3) ability and willingness to adjust behavior to induce positive reactions in others.
Anyone want to guess where Ann Coulter falls on the self-monitoring continuum?
She was at it again on the Sean Hannity radio show yesterday (Thursday). Two things she said were typical of her lack of any understanding of logic. First, she equates her current number one ranking on the New York Times bestseller list as indicating a groundswell of support for her berating the so-called "Jersey Girls". Coulter's prior books have sold from 300,000 to 400,000 hard copies. Those numbers would qualify her as a bestseller, though not a blockbuster. Her cynical attacks on the 9/11 widows has generated a lot of publicity, and probably 1) prompted her normal book-buying audience to buy her book earlier than normal and 2) led to some people to buy her book out of morbid curiosity. Remember, NASCAR viewership has never been higher, but there's a chunk of the audience that is not watching to see drivers go around in a circle, but to see the crashes. Right now, Coulter's book is the equivalent of a car accident.
Second, Coulter asserts that liberals have not been complaining about the other claims in her book (that liberals are godless, that evolution is bunk, etc.) and are thus conceding that her arguments are correct. Ms. Coulter, here's a newsflash. Liberals are not addressing those issues because liberals are not interested in interplanetary dialogue. Your positions are so out there, it's not worth discussion. But, the viciousness by which the 9/11 widows are attacked can't be ignored.
The third claim by Coulter was the most troublesome. Twice she referred to David Corn -- who apparently gave her a prior bad review of her book -- as a heroin addict. If Mr. Corn is a recovering addict, the ad hominem attack was both gratuitous and cruel. If Mr. Corn has never been an addict, Ms. Coulter is in danger of being sued for libel (though Mr. Corn is a public figure, you can't libel a person out of malice, and revenge for a bad review would constitute malice).
Beyond yesterday's performance, Ms. Coulter has other problems.
1) She has lied about her age. She has claimed she is 43, but she is actually 45.
2) She is being investigated in Florida for voter fraud, not only giving a false address on her voter registration form, but also voting in the wrong district.
3) She plays fast and loose with the facts, and may have committed plagiarism -- check out the Huffington Post, the Rude Pundit and the Raw Story blogs.
I think it would be really entertaining if Ann Coulter turns out to be this usmmer's James Frey. Oprah, are you listening?
posted by Rod Carveth at 5:54 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home