Skip to main content

View Diary: We Need to Cut Off Ann Coulter's Income (26 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Foolish (none)
    Thats just foolishness, you don't get rid of hate by ignoring it, you oppose it. How in any way is this diary supporting her? By trying to get people to stop giving her money? Where have you been the last decade or two? The right wing fundys have taken over the airwaves and terrified once respectable news organizations by using exactly the tactic suggested here, boycotts, letter writing campaigns etc., not by ignoring speakers they disagreed with.
    •  You give her a loudspeaker (none)
      People want Ann Coulter to speak because she causes contraversy. She can't cause contraversy if no one cares.
      •  I want to take away her loudspeaker (none)
        I do agree that we should ignore Coulter--I was a bit distressed to find that my son had actually gone to hear her, as had enough people to fill an auditorium.  My point is that if she is doing this for the cold hard cash, taking that cash away from her will make it MUCH easier to ignore her.  I routinely change channels when she is on tv (and email the networks that give her space to complain--and to explain why I won't watch anything she is on) and I refuse to dignify her "commentary" by ascribing to her any legitimacy.  I am concerned, however, that university event planners see her as viable option for events because she's so provocative.  Let her be provocative on her own dime and keep student activity fees out of her pocket!
      •  but lots do (none)
        Lots of people do care, and agree with her. It is vitally important that there is a loud voice speaking in opposition, and making it clear that this is not acceptable.
        She already has a loudspeaker, a quite lucrative one at that. What the diarist is proposing is to remove the financial support for that loudspeaker, how can this possibly be a bad thing?
    •  I totally disagree (none)
      Ann Coulter makes her living because she gets you nuts. That is exactly why she gets the enormous speaking fees, it is why she is on talk shows, it is why her name is even known. You think by arguing with her, speaking out against her all the time will make her go away or cause her to change? You're crazy! It will only cause her fees to increase and her popularity to increase. Believe it or not, she has a hero worshipping fan base. You feed it because there will always be millions of Americans who have her ideology and nothing you say or do will change those people.
      •  So why speak at all? (none)
        I guess there is no outrage that we should ever contest.
        Let every racist, homophobic, anti-democratic asshole out there stand up and take over the airwaves and never speak out, never protest, never let them know that decent people think they are evil bastards. Yep thats the path to a better world alright. History has shown over and over again that the best way to combat evil is to ignore it.
        When the KKK shows up in your town with 50 people don't make an effort to have ten times that many ralley against them, no don't have anyone come out that would be MUCH more effective.
        When Fred Phelps protests a funeral don't say anything, he'll go away.
        Never speak up, nevr point out the absurdity or evil in some jerks speech, just close your eyes, be quiet and all will be wonderful. It's all those damned liberals out there talking about justice and tolerance that are maing the world so evil.

        You folks just amaze me.

        •  Just because you are obsessed (none)
          Doesn't mean the rest of the world has to obsess with that woman. You think you are having any negative impact socially against her? I don't give a shit what any bigot thinks. I live my life quite happily trying to help people and educate people who want to be educated and helped. I don't waste my time with assholes with closed minds. She makes millions of dollars on you, man, not me.
        •  I Do Disagree (none)
          In a civil society such an approach might work, but in a society degenerating towards violence or oppression action is required.  The key variable is sponsorship.  If it is just a single person such as Phelps or a small group of wingnuts like KKKers, then it might be better simply to ignore tham.  However, if there is state, corporate, or institutional support - as in the situation described above - then it is necessary to act.  The lack of a concerted response indicates to those orchestrating the repression that it is possible to continue further.  Every single instance of genocide unfolds in such a way.  

          And Coulter has made repeated and virulent statments against many groups - especially the gay community.  I see little difference between her and Julius Streicher of Der Sturmer.  Because she has institutional financial support, I fear there is the potential for real violence against GLBTI people.  Hate crime statistics bear me out.  So action - precisely of the type described in this diary - is not only desirable, but essential.

          •  Action indeed... (none)
            perhaps people should start filing lawsuits (or a class-action) against her for "slander" or "Libel" or, heh, "public indecency".  ;-)

            Seriously.  Not only would it exemplify that there is serious opposition to Coultergeist, but it would cost her mucho dinero in order to "clear" her name.  It would be negative publicity, forcing her to both explain and defend the case.

            Well, I don't know if this can be done or anything, but I just think of Randi Rhoades and her situation with Khaki Internat'l.  They're suing her for 10mil just because she read a transcript of an interview that implicated Khaki in the torture going on in Iraq!  And, you know what?  Randi is forced to defend herself!  So, frivalous or not, I still think there's a chance that we could bleed her bank non-the-less.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site