On the October 22, 2209 edition of the Joy Behar Show on the HLN network, Ann Coulter made the statement that all the assassins and attempted assassins of US Presidents were liberals. However, she defines liberals as: left-wing loon, communist, anarchist, communitarians, or people with no politics at all. Using that as a definition, I assume that Ann will consider any potential assassin a liberal--well, until such time as Rush Limbaugh may take a potshot at the Chief Executive.
Now, I wonder how John Wilkes Booth fits Ann's definition of "liberal". He certainly believed in the right to bear arms, and he was fighting to preserve states' rights in the face of a powerful central government. And he wanted to preserve the existing right to enslave human beings. Doesn't sound like a liberal to me.
I understand that Ann explains her position on Presidential assassins in her book "Guilty". I suppose I could read it. However, this past August I read Ann's book "Slander", and that is quite enough of Ann's demonization of the opposition for me for a while.
Ann isn't quite in the mold of Glenn Beck or Rush Limbaugh. She does do research. But she is very careful to ignore anything that does not support her chosen point of view, which is that conservatives are ever virtuous, and everyone else is a liberal. And all liberals are evil, traitors--and terrorists and assassins, apparently.
Hard to take her seriously. But, hey, that's just me. But a lot of people do, and to the extent they do, real progress to solve real problems gets lost in the extremist ranting. And people like Ann laugh all the way to the bank.
Comments