if you haven’t been following the miller light-style catfight from home, i recommend starting here, where you can read lydia cornell’s ridiculous email to ann coulter. then, if you’re interested, i’d like to enumerate the many ways in which cornell displays her intellectual eminence in her recent article on coulter.
first, let’s talk about the genius’ math skills. they’re lacking.
[some guy] defended the choice of Ann Coulter as the speaker for their BBQ â€œfundraiserâ€ — saying they raised $20,000 for their party! (But they paid coulter $30,000 to speak; I donâ€™t get the math.)
i KNOW! it’s, like, way mind-boggling! say gate receipts total $50,000. 50k-30k=20k. but seriously, $30,000 is a lot of money for a speaker. and lydia seems very bothered by this. only a conservative would try to make off with that kind of cash from normal, blue collar americans, right? wrong. al franken charges much more — $50,000 a pop, plus “travel and production costs.” but his show is a bargain at that price. there, you actually get to see live violence against republicans — showing techniques and strategies, in action!
also, did you notice the genius has a knack for writing, like, totally catchy leads to her articles? she was able to use $ex or some variation of it twice in her 8-word title although (ostensibly) intercourse had nothing to do with her piece at all. but lydia has an excuse for having $ex on the brain. first, because she (rightly) derides the $exism of hollywood in using $ex to sell movies (from lydiacornell.com):
“They objectify women, paint us into a corner. And only by gaining faith in ourselves and enriching our interior lives can we combat this social programming. But still, there really may be a plot â€“ a very $exist plot to dumb women down. I mean, why is Paris Hilton famous? Itâ€™s possible that we are all being brainwashed and kept in fear so they can make money off our insecurities.â€
secondly, because she has (oddly, considering the aforementioned) plastered her website with pictures of herself looking not unlike a hooker in revealing dresses and bathing suits. the hollywood $exists who objectify women probably made her do it.
I never mix religion with politics, but for Christâ€™s sake, donâ€™t they know that Jesus was a Democrat?
actually, he eschewed politics. he didn’t want to be involved with them at all. “render unto caesar that which is caesar’s…” and that’s kind of the key. christ’s mission was not of this world. he came to save the eternal souls of men. on the other hand, george bush has a secular call to keep country safe, among other things. can you imagine if president bush stood at ground zero after the 9/11 attacks and proclaimed through that bullhorn, “my religious faith tells me that we should turn the other cheek on this and any future attacks on america!”?? that would have gone over real well (a) in the polls (b) in the stock market and (c) with regards to deterring terror attacks on americans.
finally, one must marvel at how lydia cornell critiques ann coulter (especially her tendency to wish death upon people she disagrees with) on the basis of having watched some anti-coulter documentary or something (apparently the piece mentioned here?). has the genius ever read anything ann coulter has written? her meticulously researched articles? her frequent use of humor and satire in her columns and book chapters? the jokes are not the central message of her work (but she is certainly more funny than al franken). the genius, cornell, apparently does stand-up comedy. you’d think she would understand how humor works.
unlike most of the people who criticize coulter, i have read her work. i have read every column she has written (most of them twice). i have read every book she has written (as well as most of the footnotes). she has occasionally, satirically, raised the blunt notion of eliminating liberals altogether. as far as i can tell, no one has ever taken her literally. on the other hand, many people have taken to al franken’s “recommendations” to physically assault conservatives and damage their property. perhaps ann’s readers are more intelligent? more capable of nuance? genius cornell doesn’t see it (and somehow, i’m not surprised).
i cannot end this purging without microfisking her conversation with bryan harman. she calls herself “deeply anti-pr*n.” she claims to have “banned Paris Hilton’s Carl’s Jr. commercial, and Britney Spears’ writhing belly-button” from her home (they were also, she notes, “Republican agendas,” though that accusation seems a little loose. were they “republican agendas” because they were on a ballot somewhere? is MTV run by republicans? or is she speaking about the evils of “free markets” generally?) it really doesn’t matter. her hypocrisy is ASTOUNDING, considering her own website’s revealing images, as well as her role in creating sleaze on tv. i have tried watching “curb your enthusiasm.” i would love it if it wasn’t so consistently crude. (her role on CYE: bra saleswoman).
back to the conversation. next, she apparently shouted,
I DON’T KNOW A SINGLE DEMOCRAT WHO IS PRO-ABORTION!
at first, when i read this, i thought “wow…either you’ve got some kind of abortion ‘don’t ask, don’t tell’ policy, or you HAVE NO FRIENDS.”
but then i realized she’s a flip flopper. one minute, she’s yet to meet a pro-abortion democrat. the next minute (the very next sentence):
Democrats and reasonable people simply don’t subscribe to a Nazi state governing our bodies
ah, democrats and reasonable people are pro-abortion. but you’ve only met the reasonable people. is that what you’re saying? finally,
Pro-life to me means stop fighting senseless wars and killing our young soldiers and innocent Iraqi children.”
and pro-life to some people i know (and whom you claim never to have met) means abolishing the death penalty for convicted serial murderers and rapists, while applauding the unfettered right to abort babies. do you see how, with a little nuance, pro-life can mean many wonderful things?
gosh, i can’t wait for her next “book” to come out.