Add to My Yahoo!
 
 

NYT: Ann Coulter may be 'afflicted by a kind of rhetorical Tourette's syndrome'

RAW STORY
Published: Sunday June 11, 2006

Print This | Email This

Conservative pundit Ann Coulter, still under fire for declaring that a group of 9/11 widows were "enjoying" their husbands' deaths, may be "afflicted by a kind of rhetorical Tourette's Syndrome," writes David Carr for his weekly media column set for Monday's New York Times, RAW STORY has learned.

"Once again, Ann Coulter has a book in need of flogging, and once again, people are stunned by what a 'vicious,' 'mean-spirited,' 'despicable' 'hate-monger' they say she is," writes Carr.

"Coulter, who seems afflicted by a kind of rhetorical Tourette's syndrome, most recently labeled the widows of 9/11 'harpies,'" Carr continues. "But Coulter knows precisely what she is saying."

"Her current book, "Godless: The Church of Liberalism," is heading to the best-seller lists," writes Carr. "By now, she, along with Crown Publishing, have come up with a dexterous formula for kicking up the kind of fuss that sells."

Carr suggests that Coulter and her publisher may have devised a "dexterous formula for kicking up the kind of fuss that sells books," which looks "something like this":

The Times columnist references an interview that he conducted with Coulter in 2003 at an Italian restaurant in the Upper East Side of New York City, and notes that he "never figured out the line between her art and her artifice."

"She picked at her plate of lobster ravioli before serving up Fred Flintstone-size slabs of red meat," Carr recalls. "For the duration of the media opportunity, she was playful and on point, other than fibbing about her age, because she cares deeply about the franchise."

The New York Times, one week later, had to add a correction to Carr's 2003 profile.

"An article last Sunday about the author Ann Coulter and her emergence as a major conservative voice in television, radio and newspaper interviews misstated her age," the Times correction reads. "She is 41, not 39."

FULL NYT COLUMN AT THIS LINK


 

 
Advertisement