I want to thank Karen for picking up the slack (and my piece) yesterday, now I’ll try to remind people that we’re more than a comment board, we actually sometimes give people something to comment on… which is sometimes something about a comment. I am, for instance, happy to have an excuse to repeat my thoughts on Ann Coulter — or, as I like to think of her, “that horse-faced political ambulance-chaser.” Actually, I really only have one thought about her: That we should not think about her. Sure, mock Jay for his quickie profile if you want
(they’re called assignments here at the magazine)*, but she, like any bully, will go away if you ignore her.
Let’s avoid the campaign season rush and start now.
*UPDATE: I shouldn’t have made it seem like writers aren’t responsible for what they write, no matter whose idea it is. I pretty sure Jay himself does not find Ann personally “irresistible” (in context, it seems clear he’s resigned to her high media profile, not raving about it — and I understand the irony of that sentiment being expressed in Time magazine) but I shouldn’t speak for him or try to explain the logic of Time magazine editors, such as it is. ALSO: I really believe we should ignore her. “We” meaning, I guess, the MSM. Sure, she’ll continue to get top billing at CPAC, but beyond the tinfoil hat brigade, her influence is limited. And if we studiously avert our eyes from her ghoulish visage — bonus! — she’ll have to get more and more outrageous in order to get our attention, which will marginalize her further. I mean, look at the wingnuts who denounced her recently. I was going to say, “She’ll eventually become the female version of that God-Hates-F*gs guy,” but I can’t even remember his name. (Thus, my point.)
Or maybe I’m overly optimistic. I, personally, am tired of her so, you know, I’ll be moving on. Talk amongst yourselves.