Buy WILLisms

XML Feed

Featured Entries

The Babe Theory Of Political Movements.
Mar. 21, 2005 11:50 AM

Iran's Sham Election In Houston.
June 20, 2005 5:36 AM

Yes, Kanye, Bush Does Care.
Oct. 31, 2005 12:41 AM

Health Care vs. Wealth Care.
Nov. 23, 2005 3:28 PM

Americans Voting With Their Feet.
Nov. 30, 2005 1:33 PM

Idea Majorities Matter.
May 12, 2006 6:15 PM

Twilight Zone Economics.
Oct. 17, 2006 12:30 AM

The "Shrinking" Middle Class.
Dec. 13, 2006 1:01 PM

From Ashes, GOP Opportunities.
Dec. 18, 2006 6:37 PM

Battle Between Entitlements & Pork.
Dec. 21, 2006 12:31 PM

Let Economic Freedom Reign.
Dec. 22, 2006 10:22 PM

Biggest Health Care Moment In Decades.
July 25, 2007 4:32 PM

Unions Antithetical to Liberty.
May 28, 2008 11:12 PM

Right To Work States Rock.
June 9, 2008 12:25 PM



Blogroll Me!



July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004

Social Security Reform Thursday.
March 13, 2008

Caption Contest: Enter Today!
Due: July 29, 2008

The Carnival Of Classiness.
Mar. 14, 2006

Quotational Therapy: Obama.
Apr. 4, 2008

Mainstream Melee: Wolfowitz.
May 19, 2007

Pundit Roundtable: Leaks.
July 9, 2006

A WILLisms.com(ic), by Ken McCracken
July 14, 2006


Powered by Movable Type 3.17
Site Design by Sekimori

WILLisms.com June 2008 Book of the Month (certified classy):

The WILLisms.com Gift Shop: Support This Site


This Week's Carnival of Revolutions: carnivalbutton.gif

Carnival Home Base: homebase.gif


« Iraq Jihadis Tried To Stage Child Massacre | WILLisms.com | Osirak + 25 Years »

Ooops, Ann

In my blackest of black hearts, I have had thoughts along these lines regarding some of the 9/11 widows:“These broads are millionaires, lionized on TV and in articles about them, reveling in their status as celebrities and stalked by griefparrazies. I have never seen people [manipulating] their husband’s death so much.”

Well, while playing Mad Libs, Ann Coulter decided to say this instead:

"These broads are millionaires, lionized on TV and in articles about them, reveling in their status as celebrities and stalked by griefparrazies. I have never seen people enjoying their husband’s death so much.”

Yeah, this crosses the line. Loutish, says Rick Moran.

I would not go so far as to declare Ann Coulter persona non grata, for she is spot-on correct more often than she is dead wrong. It certainly detracts from the weight of whatever she might say in the future, though.

Posted by Ken McCracken · 7 June 2006 05:55 PM



Posted by: reliapundit at June 7, 2006 05:57 PM

I would rather have my husband alive and well than any amount of money... I don't think it is appropriate to comment on why a widow of a 9-11 victim might do an interview. I usually agree with Ann BUT, not this time.

Posted by: Zsa Zsa at June 7, 2006 06:23 PM

en-joy, v.:

1. To receive pleasure or satisfaction from.

2. To have the use or benefit of

Maybe a poor choice of word, but that's it.

Posted by: D-Max at June 7, 2006 06:39 PM

These widows chose to become political activists for the democrat party after 9/11. While Coulter's comments are sharp and biting, the deaths of the widow's husbands does not protect them from political attack, it's a mean world, this political thing. Coming out and being purely political on the 9/11 attacks and aftermath, then trying to insulate yourself behind a personal tragedy won't work.
I do think if she would have replaced "enjoying" with "enjoying the celebrity their political activism has brought them solely based on their husband's deaths.

Posted by: Eneils Bailey at June 7, 2006 08:11 PM

Oh, please! That's a rather petty complaint, isn't it?

Posted by: JohnJ at June 7, 2006 09:14 PM

I would hasten to add that Cindy Sheehan seems to be "enjoying" the fame her son Casey brought upon her. She is using a tragedy for personal gain too.

Much like Brady enjoyed supporting the "Brady Bill" or the parents of Megan enjoyed passing "Megan's Law". The difference is that the Brady Bill and Megan's Law are directly related to the tragedies of the families, while Shehans crusade against Bush and desire to "meet face to face" with him has not a damned thing to do with her son's death. And bashing Bush has not a damned thing to do with the 9-11 tragedy. What do these women want? Sooner or later, like say almost 5 years later, you should fade away and let the next set of victims have their 15 minutes. Being a political activist opens you up to these partisan attacks. Being a widow only works as a shield for so long. Shehan lost the shield when she met with Hugo Chavez. What the hell does he have to do with your son's death in Iraq?

Posted by: Justin B at June 8, 2006 01:14 AM