Ann Coulter caught 'inventing her own facts.'

[Crabtownboy]

Everyone is entitled to their own opinions, but inventing facts is quite another thing. There is a three letter word to describe this.

Of course Coulter and Malkin and others are not bound by facts and like others discussed have to keep their fans happy with outlandish statements to keep their ratings or readership up. Still, "Shame on you Ann and Michelle."

Then on the other hand, why am I not surprised that they have been foun d to have invented their own facts?

Ann Coulter and Michelle Malkin are entitled to their opinions, which
they have plenty of -- in this case about President Obama and his reaction to the arrest of Professor Henry Louis Gates Jr. by Cambridge Police Sgt. James Crowley. They are not, however, to paraphrase the late Sen. Patrick Moynihan, entitled to their own facts, or entitled to invent a scenario in which the White House somehow prompted me to ask Obama about Gates at his press conference last week

http://www.politicsdaily.com/2009/0...e-malkin-looking-wrong-place-for-obama-gates/

 

[Salty]

Are you implying that Liberals never "invent" facts?

 

[Crabtownboy]

Are you implying that Liberals never "invent" facts?

Off topic and trying to derail the thread.

The article is about Coulter. So address the issue accurately. She has no ethics except her own strange world.

Let's see what others have said about her:

Coulter has a reputation for carelessness with facts, and if you Google the words "Ann Coulter lies," you will drown in results. But I didn't find many outright Coulter errors.

John Cloud's Time cover story ... this article is now in the Time archive and cannot be read online. You can go to your public library and readit.

Ann Coulter is merely the latest in a dubious tradition of self-promoters who have discovered that if you say enough outrageous things, you can get yourself an opportunity to say them on television. She is a sideshow attraction, not the main event. Her only significance in the war between Left and Right is diverting attention to herself, and away from the machinations of the real players in the game.

She excels in this role. She has a bizarre sex appeal and willingness to shoot her mouth off that make her a natural on television. If she were witty instead of just mean-spirited and nasty, maybe she could be the Right's answer to Sandra Bernhardt. But in the book Slander, she adds a dangerous new twist. In her book she has included, and heavily publicized, 780 or so footnotes, in the hope that their very heft will buy Slander a credibility not shared by the books of, say, Bernard Goldberg, Sean Hannity, or (on the Left) Mike Moore. This symbol of accuracy and scholarship is meant to reduce skepticism, tricking people into thinking that her rants are factually-based rants

http://slannder.homestead.com/

Group finds more than a dozen lies in Coulter's latest book

http://74.125.47.132/search?q=cache...=en&ct=clnk&gl=us&lr=lang_en&client=firefox-a

 

[Salty]

Your OP did not ask a question

 

[Crabtownboy]

Your OP did not ask a question

Another nice try at derailing the thread. Why not say whether you approve of Coulter's liberal making up of facts to inflame her readers and keep her readership up. What if your opinion of her?

 

[targus]

All you have here is the journalist who asked the question denying that she was a plant.

It is simply a "she said - she said" situation.

How do we then deduce who is not telling the truth?

A couple of tip offs from your article

The journalist admits, "I got a call from the White House about 6:30 p.m. July 22 confirming that indeed I was going to attend the 8 p.m. press conference. I was told I "may" get a question."

So is it typical for the White House to tell journalists who will and who will not be allowed to ask a question?

This partial admission sounds suspicious to me and IMO hints that in deed she with her question was a plant.

Additionally, when asked about this possibility of a planted question the White House response is, "Well, look, let's just say, it's safe to say we went over a whole lot of topics that we thought might come up, and certainly, this was a topic that was and has been in the news."

Sort of non-answer answer isn't it?

"Let's just say"? "It's safe to say"?

That's code for "I ain't saying".

Sorry Crabby, I am not convinced that Coulter is the liar here.

 

[targus]

Another nice try at derailing the thread. Why not say whether you approve of Coulter's liberal making up of facts to inflame her readers and keep her readership up. What if your opinion of her?

You have not proven that Coulter made up anything.

You have not proven that this has anything to do with inflaming her readers.

You have not proven that this has anything to do with keeping her readership up.

All you have is the journalist who asked the question denying that she was a plant. Maybe she is the liar.

 

[targus]

Off topic and trying to derail the thread.

The article is about Coulter. So address the issue accurately. She has no ethics except her own strange world.

Let's see what others have said about her:

Interesting - and telling.

You say that the topic is the article about Coulter - and then promptly take it off topic by asking us to look at what others say about her.

 

[targus]

Another nice try at derailing the thread. Why not say whether you approve of Coulter's liberal making up of facts to inflame her readers and keep her readership up. What if your opinion of her?

The only qestion that you ask in the OP is, "Then on the other hand, why am I not surprised that they have been found to have invented their own facts?"

So I guess that is the topic of the OP.

My answer would be that you are not surprised because you have an agenda that you have brought to this board and that you exercise that agenda in a manner that is consistent with your nomdeplume, Crabby.

 

[Mexdeaf]

We all know how upright Dan Rather is....


I'm just sayin'.

 

[sag38]

This article is nothing but a crybabies rant. It is full of very personal insults which make it hard for anyone with any objectivity to take seriously. Plus has crabby in any way criticized Michael Moore in any of his posts. If anyone is guilty of outright fabrication it is Michael Moore. All this does, once again, is expose the agenda that Crabby brings to this board.

 

[rbell]

We have a "she said, she said" disagreement.

Did Coulter lie? I have no idea. And neither does CTB. The article offers no proof. It is one person's word vs. another.

Of course, CTB doesn't see it that way...but this should surprise us how?

 

[Pastor Larry]

On another, and more important topic, Gibbs says that the administration covered this topic ahead of time as a possible question.

What does that mean?

It means that Obama actually thought about this topic before giving a dumb and racially inflammatory answer. This was no "off the cuff" answer on the spur of the moment. It was a studied response that was probably designed to inflame racial issues.

How shameful. This is another example of how inept and unwise Obama is. Why does anyone support him? He has failed at everything except spending more money. And the only reason he hasn't failed there is because the only people who want to spend money more than Obama is the Congress.

As for Malkin and Coulter, who cares? It is hard to imagine anyone could be less relevant than Coulter until you consider Malkin.

 

[Salty]

We all know how upright Dan Rather is....


I'm just sayin'.

MD - you are off topic :laugh:
besides Libs never invent facts

Salty

 

[Robert Snow]

You right-wingers just cannot bring yourself to admitting what a lying fraud Coulter is, so typical! Instead you simply attack CTB like you will attack me for this posting. Comment on the lying of Ann Coulter, quit attacking the messenger!

 

[targus]

You right-wingers just cannot bring yourself to admitting what a lying fraud Coulter is, so typical! Instead you simply attack CTB like you will attack me for this posting. Comment on the lying of Ann Coulter, quit attacking the messenger!

First it needs to be shown that Coulter was wrong and that the question was not a plant.

Got any proof?

 

[Pastor Larry]

You right-wingers just cannot bring yourself to admitting what a lying fraud Coulter is, so typical! Instead you simply attack CTB like you will attack me for this posting. Comment on the lying of Ann Coulter, quit attacking the messenger!

What about those of us who don't care about Ann Coulter, who are more concerned with the substance of this that Obama actually thought about this answer before he gave it. How much worse does Obama have to do until you see through the charade?

 

[Robert Snow]

First it needs to be shown that Coulter was wrong and that the question was not a plant.

Got any proof?

Lynn Sweet, in the coulmn said, "The Obama White House did not have a clue what I would be asking."

For me, that looks like proof.

What about those of us who don't care about Ann Coulter, who are more concerned with the substance of this that Obama actually thought about this answer before he gave it. How much worse does Obama have to do until you see through the charade?

This thead is not about Obama, it's about Ann Coulter and her "inventing her own facts."

 

[targus]

Lynn Sweet, in the coulmn said, "The Obama White House did not have a clue what I would be asking."

For me, that looks like proof.



This thead is not about Obama, it's about Ann Coulter and her "inventing her own facts."

So Ann Coulter says that Lynn Sweet was a plant...

And Lynn Sweet says "No, I'm not."

And that is proof that Ann Coulter is lying?

Could Lynn Sweet be the one that is lying?

Again, what is your proof?

 

[Revmitchell]

So Ann Coulter says that Lynn Sweet was a plant...

And Lynn Sweet says "No, I'm not."

And that is proof that Ann Coulter is lying?

Could Lynn Sweet be the one that is lying?

Again, what is your proof?

Maybe you should ask MP. That is where he will get his answer form anyway.