Ann Coulter Sells It Hard in the Style Section


Only a few years after Ann Coulter called John Edwards a “faggot,” she spoke to a room of conservative homosexuals at Homocon 2010. Marriage, she told them, “is not a civil right – you’re not black.” Presumably, they clapped for her. (“She boasted of having several gay friends.”) The New York Times was there, following around the performer, and deduced that in the wake of actual crazy people — they of witch, masturbation and Nazi fame — Coulter is switching her style up, advocating some “shocking” political positions. In other words, this whole this has always been about making a splash — and making money — so Coulter has a new plan:

She called the decision to send more troops into Afghanistan “insane,” warning that it could be a new Vietnam. She has decried fellow Republicans for continuing to insist President Obama is Muslim. And perhaps most startling, she wants to bring more gay Republicans into the conservative fold.

All, of course, because the Tea Party has invaded her niche. But even her readjustment to remain shocking doesn’t require too much work. The lines are often the same, touching on keywords like “Muslim” and “God”:

“I’d be disappointed if liberals did not spit their drinks out when they heard my name,” she said. “That’s kind of what I’m shooting for. But that does not relate to the reality of me. It relates to me creating a reaction in godless traitors.”

Bill Maher, a friend (and rumored ex) sums it up, while sort of giving her the benefit of the doubt, probably because he too plays a character:

“I happen to think that Ann believes everything she says,” said Bill Maher, the host of “Real Time,” who is a friend. But at the same time, “it is a bunch of show business. You are working in the media. You are in makeup.” For a person like Ms. Coulter, Mr. Maher said, “once they are in the public eye, they don’t want to be irrelevant.”

In typical Style section form, we get some requisite biographical information. Coulter is credited with all but inventing “the archetype of the combative, feisty female pundit.” There is also a passage on her love life.

The problem in covering someone like Coulter, of course, is that having her name on anyone’s lips — all the better that it’s the Times, the beacon of the Liberal Media — is the woman’s lifeblood. She’s a walking advertisement, a brand. She’s impossible to beat except to ignore. And no one ever does! Even by blogging, we’re buying.

Archive Highlights