A voice rises up...

The NYT has an article about Ann Coulter's comments regarding the 9/11 widows.
This is the second level of attack regarding the liberals attack on Ann Coulter. The first attack was very similar to Matt Lauer's reaction, simple rude confrontation, no real point, and basic slander. But they discovered this was simply making her point, that simply saying "How dare you criticize their "loss"" was not sufficient anymore as Ann had pulled the wool from the eyes of the people, and now they had realized yet another of the liberals dirty tactics. "Human shields", or the process of using another's loss or grief publicly to score political points has now been revealed, and this is why it is a good thing Ann is getting this publicity. Now that it is shown how this attack works, it is negated. It is hard to use this tactic anymore with any great efficiency. Now, liberals realized they were simply making her point when they responded to her argument with hypocritical chest-puffing and indignant "how dare you's" to the potent point she was making, and have concocted a second attack on Ann Coulter, hopeful that it will prove more effective now that their initial mode of attack has been neutralized. This new attack is evident in the NYT article, and I predict you will be hearing it more and more from Democratic talking heads, and as part of the talking point when confronted with questions regarding it. The smarter ones will use this second mode of attack, as the public is not yet aware of it, and the first mode is rather hysterical.

SECOND MODE : Negate Ann's point by portraying her as a "controversialist" looking to say "controversial" things to "sell" books. Draw any attention away from the actual things she is saying by talking about her drive to sell books, have handy quotes ready, misquote them without providing any real context with the only objective to momentarily shock, and then slide the proverbial knife home by framing her as money-hungry and ready to say anything to make a quick buck.

Unfortunately the NYT article is no longer available free to read, but here are a few excerpts:

"All manner of televised talkfests, including 'Today,' welcome Ms. Coulter's pirate sensibilities back aboard whenever she has something to peddle, in part because seeing hate-speech pop out of a blonde who knows her way around a black cocktail dress makes for compelling viewing.

"Without the total package, Ms. Coulter would be just one more nut living in Mom's basement. You can accuse her of cynicism all you want, but the fact that she is one of the leading political writers of our age says something about the rest of us."

The first part is pretty obviously blatant in calling Ms. Coulter's words "hate speech", and then making a (sexist?) comment about a blonde in a cocktail dress making for compelling viewing, as ironic as that is.

The second paragraph labels her a "nut", then laments how far political literature has fallen for Ms. Coulter to be a leading political writer. All in all, a rather petulant tone throughout. Not that it's surprising. Ann Coulter decimates the NYT on a regular basis, this pitiful response is more than expected.

But expect this to be the second mode of attack while she is still in the limelight. She will be appearing on Jay Leno on Wednesday, so it will be interesting to see how any liberals on that show attack her. There is certainly no question they will attack her, the only question is how, and whether or not they can muster a fairly intelligent volley. Time will tell, as for me, I will try to watch it and comment.