Our Mailbag: Hate Mail

What a week.Coulter annoys me on Sunday and I buy the domain name. On Monday it's active. Tuesday, Wednesday, and Thursday I'm putting together the site. Thursday I mail to a few progressive web sites, one of which, Bartcop.com was kind enough to mention me. I got a lot of hits Friday as well as a lot of mail (and had to rush some changes into the site as technical issues caused some people to have trouble reading it). All the early mail was positive and very gratifying (THANK YOU!!!) and then, today, Saturday July 13, less than a week since AntiCoulter.com became a reality:

I GOT MY FIRST PIECE OF HATE MAIL!!! (Well, ok, so maybe it's just hostile mail, not hate mail. I inflate things a bit just to add savour to the moment.)

I cannot tell you all how proud I am. My own piece of badly punctuated email from a Coulter fan. (Yes, I know I have too many typos on my own site and I shouldn't poke fun at other people's punctuation. Trust me, I know.) Anyway, while it would be nice if this was the beginning of a whole sea of hate mails, I have to face the fact that THIS MAY BE IT. I may receive no more. So, to keep the moment preserved in history forever, I have decided to publish it. Along with a few gentle comments, of course. My motivation is not pure vanity and schadenfreude, I also think the letter epitomizes the style of fan that makes Coulter mania such a warped part of our collective political landscape. But see what you think...

Date: Sat, 13 Jul 2002 14:37:57 -0700 (PDT)
From: carson koch
Subject: Coulter
To: editor@anticoulter.com

Shes pretty, shes smart, and she helped screw the rapist marauder, and perjurer Clinton. Shes got the whole package, baby! You still havent refuted any major policy position shes ever taken.

C

Carson (may I call you Carson?), let's cover your issues point by point.

1 - "Shes pretty," - Two points here. First: Why does this matter? True, we all know that she wouldn't get her gigs on TV if she didn't qualify as attractive, but that's the way television works. Looks sell. There are some very talented people who first got their foot in the door because of their looks, and then proved themselves. Of course, they had to prove themselves. Pretty doesn't make her a good pundit, an intelligent person, an insightful analyst. Second: Even more irrelevantly on my part, I just don't think she's that pretty. I'm more the Linda Ellerbee type.

2 - "shes smart," - I grant you she is not dumb, but I don't see her as that smart. I've never seen anything "smart" she's written. I mean, what brilliant insight, beyond "liberals are bad and let's lock up the Muslims" has she ever offered?

3 - "and she helped screw the rapist marauder, and perjurer Clinton." - The poor bastard is gone (ok, rich bastard) and they still can't let go. Poor things, let's hope Clinton doesn't go and die or something; it would leave the rabid right destitute. As to Carson's points... Clinton served out his term, in spite of the actions of Coulter and her ilk. Clinton has never been indicted much less convicted of any sexual assault, it's only his enemies who "know" he is a rapist. Perjury, sure, he did do that, he lied about having sex. Oh boy, stop the presses, he cheated and lied about it.

4 - "Shes got the whole package, baby!" - And this package would be? Carson's exact meaning is unclear but we can make some educated guesses. The word "package," together with the word "baby," in the context of his earlier use of "pretty" leads me to think he is suggesting Coulter has sex appeal (and we must not ignore the exclamation point after "baby"). Checking the Shorter Oxford, I see that package can mean "4b A girl, esp. an attractive one. slang. M20." The Full Oxford adds a 1960 reference which states that a package could be a "attractive, usu. small and neat, girl or young woman." So, I don't think we're going out on a limb to say that Carson finds Coulter attractive. This fact, if fact it is, has no relevance to anything and we will ignore it and move on.

5 - "You still havent refuted any major policy position shes ever taken." - And now we get to the nub of the letter. My failure to refute Coulter's points on the major policy positions of our day. Carson is right, I really should have done this. The problem is, Coulter has no points about major policy decisions. She doesn't make real policy arguments. C'mon Carson, find me an essay with real, serious discussion of any policy decision. I don't mean her advocacy of bombing the terrorists (vague, and everyone already supports it) or her loathing for liberals (unsubstantiated and irrelevantly ad hominem) I mean a real argument for or against some issue of the day.

This is the thing which is most annoying about Coulter: she doesn't make arguments, she just slings mud. And it's not like there aren't lots of issues worth discussing.

• For example:
  What kind of tax system does she support (progressive, flat, etc.) and why?
• Exactly how far should we allow the government to impinge on our civil liberties? Is there any limit? What are the trade-offs?
• I think she opposes abortion, but does she do so in all cases or does she make an exception in cases of rape, incest, or birth defects?
• In the Middle East, should we push for some kind of Palestinian state or should we encourage Israeli hard-liners to annex the West Bank. If the latter, how will we deal with the fallout from our Arab allies in Saudi Arabia, Morocco, and Pakistan?
• What kind of energy policy should we have? Does it make sense to work at consuming less gasoline, and thus becoming less dependent on Middle Eastern oil? Or should we, rather, aggressively exploit untapped oil fields elsewhere in the world? Or should we do both?

These are all serious issues. Serious conservatives discuss them at some length. I offer William Safire, for example. As I've said elsewhere, I disagree with 90 percent of what he writes, but he writes well and makes clear, intelligent arguments. You have to take him seriously. Coulter does not make arguments and therefore there is little to refute.

Go to her web site, find me an argument (not a bald assertion) that I can refute. Please. Until then...

Most of this web site's energy is not spent refuting Coulter's arguments (as she makes so very, very few) but rather pointing out her distortions, inaccuracies, and outright falsehoods.

For example, at random I checked out a column "Should Gay Priests Adopt" from March 21, 2002, and found this opening paragraph:

DESPITE THE GROWING MEDIA CONSENSUS THAT CATHOLICISM CAUSES SODOMY, an alternative view--adopted by the Boy Scouts--is that sodomites cause sodomy.(Assume all the usual disclaimers here about most gay men not molesting boys, most Muslims being peaceful, and so on.)

A - There is no "media consensus" that Catholicism causes sodomy. There isn't even a suggestion of such a thing. This is a mindless assertion which is designed to appear like exaggeration for humorous effect, thus implying some reality under the exaggeration. You are supposed to be left with some floating idea along the lines of "well, she's exaggerating but there's is something here, those media types sure do hate religion." There is no reality here.

B - The "usual disclaimers" is meant, of course, sarcastically. From Coulter's previous columns her fans know that she really doesn't think most Muslims are peaceful (in fact, she thinks most Muslims are, by definition fanatic terrorism supporters), so when she says disclaimer, she means the opposite. Which leads us to assume that she feels the same way about the "most gay men not molesting boys" line.

What do you think Carson? Isn't she implying that she thinks gays are all boy-lovers? She doesn't come out and say it because that would be braver than she ever gets, but it seems pretty damn clear to me. So, gutless and homophobic.

Innuendo and allusion, that's Coulter's style. And it's the dirty job of this web site to uncover it, tear it apart, and leave it gasping and wounded on the bloody beach of intellectual combat. I love the smell of empty assertions in the morning. They smell like...victory!

So, Carson, if Coulter ever starts making real points, I'll refute them. Until then, I'll just keep pointing out her lies and distortions.

©2002 Carl Skutsch. All rights reserved.
All opinions expressed herein are those of the author unless otherwise noted
(and it goes without saying that they make more sense than Coulter's opinions.)

graphics & design by pixelforge