MonsterMark
Dedicated LVC Member
I thought you said the photos added 10 pounds.Ah, well, one member here (who shall remain nameless) has seen pretty current nudes of me and he thought I was a little on the thin side...
Ann Coulter Banned from NBC
- Thread starter Calabrio
- Start date
Ann Coulter faces off against Harry Smith
By Matea Gold
January 7, 2009
http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/news/la-et-ann-coulter7-2009jan07,0,4709566.story
Reporting from New York
-- Conservative author Ann Coulter initially seemed pleased Tuesday to appear on CBS' "The Early Show," especially after an interview she was set to do on NBC's "Today" the same morning was canceled.
"You are the most brilliant person in the mainstream media, the most manly," she told CBS anchor Harry Smith.
But by the end of the segment, she was no longer lavishing compliments on Smith, who aggressively confronted the controversial writer about the allegations in her latest book, "Guilty: Liberal 'Victims' and Their Assault on America."
At one point, he suggested that she was crying victim herself and "should have a cross."
"Here's my problem," Smith told Coulter at the outset. "Because you try to be funny, because you have this kind of sophomoric, sort of simplistic kind of view of so many things . . . who's going to take you seriously?"
"I think any comedy writer will tell you that sophomoric is New York Times code for funny, so I thank you for that," Coulter retorted.
Smith said afterward that he hadn't planned for the interview to get contentious, noting that Coulter devotes much of her book to challenging the mainstream media.
"I was just going to challenge her back," he said in an interview. "The thing is, there are things she says that have a real place in our ongoing political conversation in terms of issues of importance to everybody. The point I was trying to make to her was that if she was more serious, she would be taken more seriously."
In an e-mail, Coulter said she was flattered by Smith's questioning. "He treated me like a Republican vice presidential candidate!" she wrote.
Their seven-minute exchange was the latest dust-up involving Coulter, a polarizing personality who is adept at generating attention for her bestselling books. Monday, she cried foul when an appearance she was set to make on "Today" was canceled, telling Fox News’ Sean Hannity and Alan Colmes that NBC had only booked her as a "charade" to keep her from going on other shows.
NBC disputed that, saying that Coulter was bumped so the program could devote more time to covering the developments in the Gaza Strip, for which host Matt Lauer interviewed former British Prime Minister Tony Blair.
"We've had Ann Coulter on 'Today' many times, but because of the news in Washington and the Middle East, we decided to cancel her appearance on Tuesday morning," said NBC spokeswoman Megan Kopf. "Understanding the media as well as she does, we are sure she knows this happens from time to time."
After Coulter's complaints -- and coverage on the Drudge Report, which reported that NBC had banned her for life, which the network denied -- she was invited to appear on "Today" Wednesday.
That adds up to a media bonanza for Coulter, who also appeared Tuesday on the Fox News morning program "Fox & Friends." But it was her interview on "The Early Show" that has so far generated the most attention.
Smith, who is known for his even-keeled, affable demeanor, noted in his tease for the segment that Coulter called him "certifiably insane" in her book. "Perhaps I am, for having her on the program this morning," he added.
In their interview, he objected to her criticizing him in her book for asking Sen. Edward Kennedy last year about whether Barack Obama was a target for assassination, saying, "that was a legitimate question to ask."
When Coulter responded that all would-be or successful presidential assassins were "anarchists, communists, liberals, they were some form of basically Obama's base," Smith urged her five times to "take a breath."
"I'm breathing fine," she responded.
Smith said that as he read her book, "the more I kept thinking, well, you're the whiner. You're the one who's claiming victimhood here."
"You should put yourself up on a cross," he added, extending his arms wide.
Later, Smith said he didn't have any regrets about how he conducted the interview, but he was "not satisfied that we served any public good."
"People sort of verbally wrestling with each other -- you get a lot of heat and a lot of sweat, but I'm not sure there's any particular satisfaction for either side," he added.
________________________________________________________________
I guess the LA Times consider Anne to be an entertainer as this was in the entertainment section.
By Matea Gold
January 7, 2009
http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/news/la-et-ann-coulter7-2009jan07,0,4709566.story
Reporting from New York
-- Conservative author Ann Coulter initially seemed pleased Tuesday to appear on CBS' "The Early Show," especially after an interview she was set to do on NBC's "Today" the same morning was canceled.
"You are the most brilliant person in the mainstream media, the most manly," she told CBS anchor Harry Smith.
But by the end of the segment, she was no longer lavishing compliments on Smith, who aggressively confronted the controversial writer about the allegations in her latest book, "Guilty: Liberal 'Victims' and Their Assault on America."
At one point, he suggested that she was crying victim herself and "should have a cross."
"Here's my problem," Smith told Coulter at the outset. "Because you try to be funny, because you have this kind of sophomoric, sort of simplistic kind of view of so many things . . . who's going to take you seriously?"
"I think any comedy writer will tell you that sophomoric is New York Times code for funny, so I thank you for that," Coulter retorted.
Smith said afterward that he hadn't planned for the interview to get contentious, noting that Coulter devotes much of her book to challenging the mainstream media.
"I was just going to challenge her back," he said in an interview. "The thing is, there are things she says that have a real place in our ongoing political conversation in terms of issues of importance to everybody. The point I was trying to make to her was that if she was more serious, she would be taken more seriously."
In an e-mail, Coulter said she was flattered by Smith's questioning. "He treated me like a Republican vice presidential candidate!" she wrote.
Their seven-minute exchange was the latest dust-up involving Coulter, a polarizing personality who is adept at generating attention for her bestselling books. Monday, she cried foul when an appearance she was set to make on "Today" was canceled, telling Fox News’ Sean Hannity and Alan Colmes that NBC had only booked her as a "charade" to keep her from going on other shows.
NBC disputed that, saying that Coulter was bumped so the program could devote more time to covering the developments in the Gaza Strip, for which host Matt Lauer interviewed former British Prime Minister Tony Blair.
"We've had Ann Coulter on 'Today' many times, but because of the news in Washington and the Middle East, we decided to cancel her appearance on Tuesday morning," said NBC spokeswoman Megan Kopf. "Understanding the media as well as she does, we are sure she knows this happens from time to time."
After Coulter's complaints -- and coverage on the Drudge Report, which reported that NBC had banned her for life, which the network denied -- she was invited to appear on "Today" Wednesday.
That adds up to a media bonanza for Coulter, who also appeared Tuesday on the Fox News morning program "Fox & Friends." But it was her interview on "The Early Show" that has so far generated the most attention.
Smith, who is known for his even-keeled, affable demeanor, noted in his tease for the segment that Coulter called him "certifiably insane" in her book. "Perhaps I am, for having her on the program this morning," he added.
In their interview, he objected to her criticizing him in her book for asking Sen. Edward Kennedy last year about whether Barack Obama was a target for assassination, saying, "that was a legitimate question to ask."
When Coulter responded that all would-be or successful presidential assassins were "anarchists, communists, liberals, they were some form of basically Obama's base," Smith urged her five times to "take a breath."
"I'm breathing fine," she responded.
Smith said that as he read her book, "the more I kept thinking, well, you're the whiner. You're the one who's claiming victimhood here."
"You should put yourself up on a cross," he added, extending his arms wide.
Later, Smith said he didn't have any regrets about how he conducted the interview, but he was "not satisfied that we served any public good."
"People sort of verbally wrestling with each other -- you get a lot of heat and a lot of sweat, but I'm not sure there's any particular satisfaction for either side," he added.
________________________________________________________________
I guess the LA Times consider Anne to be an entertainer
as this was in the entertainment section.
So, my point is proven right here - a 'drudge type follower' encouraged letter writing to NBC to complain about Ann's being dropped from the line-up...
Thank you Bryan.
And didn't you read Drudge's Hillary stuff- it was hilarious- I love his gossip-y, did you hear, do you know, articles - but, you are right, he doesn't write then often enough anymore. His site is much better with his little asides.
Oh, I sent you the pole dancing shots - not the 'art nudes' - silly....
Why be "serious" with someone who is not interested in having an honest debate and, in his own words was, "...going to challenge her back", and, according to the article, "aggressively confronted the controversial writer".
It is rather clear that the interview was hostile toward her, and ment to trap her and facilitate smearing of her. You cannot have an honest debate with someone looking to smear and marginalize you. Instead, you expose the aburdity of their argument.
In fact, at first, she tried to play nice and make a joke about it. It wasn't her "crossing the line" in this interview, it was him. She tried to be polite at first, but, as always, ultimately refused to back down.
So, failing to trap her in anything substantive, he falls back on the claim that she wasn't being "serious" when he pretty much set that interview up to not have any "serious" discussion.
Also, did he stay on the questions (or general line of questioning) that was given to her before the show? I can't prove anything, but I doubt it. It is easier to trap someone that way, but Coulter is used to that.
The left celebrates hostile attacks mascarading as journalism in this manner. Just look at the who Frost/Nixon movie being made about The Nixon Interviews.
And fow....smearing Drudge and Drudge readers? Classy!
It is rather clear that the interview was hostile toward her, and ment to trap her and facilitate smearing of her. You cannot have an honest debate with someone looking to smear and marginalize you. Instead, you expose the aburdity of their argument.
In fact, at first, she tried to play nice and make a joke about it. It wasn't her "crossing the line" in this interview, it was him. She tried to be polite at first, but, as always, ultimately refused to back down.
So, failing to trap her in anything substantive, he falls back on the claim that she wasn't being "serious" when he pretty much set that interview up to not have any "serious" discussion.
Also, did he stay on the questions (or general line of questioning) that was given to her before the show? I can't prove anything, but I doubt it. It is easier to trap someone that way, but Coulter is used to that.
The left celebrates hostile attacks mascarading as journalism in this manner. Just look at the who Frost/Nixon movie being made about The Nixon Interviews.
And fow....smearing Drudge and Drudge readers? Classy!
Have you seen the movie Shag? I have and would love to discuss it...
And fox....smearing Drudge and Drudge readers? Classy!
Look more closely - I said I read his stuff, I love his trash! I was reading Drudge back during Clinton. Do you still considerate it 'smear' or 'we are all in this dumpster together'?
I think it is more of the later, but, if you need another way to impinge me - please do - down here in the dumpster we don't have much else to do 
MonsterMark
Dedicated LVC Member
Wrong. Where is it ever posted on the Drudge Report to write letters?
I wrote that to make the Left cringe as that is their favorite tactic to silence people they don't like. The likes of Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton are quite professional in their shakedown tactics of major corporations and sponsors.
Whenever the Left gets a taste of their own medicine, they say yuk!
And I do want to complain about those pole shots. You were wearing those, you know, covers.
Nowhere - but the little drudgies go off to other sites and tell others to spread the word...
Not as much fun as droogies though...
I think it is the pasties that make me look like I need to lose that 10 lbs - don't you Bryan?
Especially the purple ones... Maybe I should look into tassels...
Huh ?
MonsterMark
Dedicated LVC Member
:bowrofl: :bowrofl:
Look more closely - I said I read his stuff, I love his trash! I was reading Drudge back during Clinton. Do you still considerate it 'smear' or 'we are all in this dumpster together'?
You are claiming it is "trash". What is that supposed to mean? Do you think he is somehow not credible? if so, why?
There seems to be an air of condesention toward Drudge and his reporting/website. As if it is kinda interesting but not to be taken seriously. I have seen this from you before toward other sources (Coulter) that you view as entertaining but lacking in credibility, usually for less then justifiable reasons (bias). I take issue with that...
I think it is very credible trash... His gossipy stuff - He used to do a lot of catty 'who is sleeping with who', 'who is telling on who', 'who is going to be pouting next'. Drudge is best when he meows... He needs to get in a cat fight every now and then. He has lost some of his edginess.
His links are links - there isn't any judgment to be placed there. I think his 'scoops' almost always are founded on basically factual reporting - he does get in trouble sometimes with his 'unnamed' sources, but everyone gets bitten by them occasionally.
Couldn't he be entertaining and credible? I just find what he 'reports' on to be usually on the fringe of the beltway...
cammerfe
Dedicated LVC Member
Heavy Panting, (off)
Ah, well, one member here (who shall remain nameless) has seen pretty current nudes of me...
I'll promise not to say I was the one if you PM me!!!
KS
THIS IS THE DOWNER WE'VE BEEN WAITING FOR!
January 7, 2009
After NBC canceled me "for life" on Monday -- until seven or eight hours later when the ban was splashed across the top of The Drudge Report, forcing a red-faced NBC to withdraw the ban -- an NBC insider told The Drudge Report: "We are just not interested in anyone so highly critical of President-elect Obama, right now," explaining that "it's such a downer. It's just not the time, and it's not what our audience wants, either."
In point of fact, I'm not particularly critical of Obama in my new book. I'm critical of the media for behaving like a protection racket for Obama rather than the constitutionally protected guardians of our liberty that they claim to be. So I think what the NBC insider meant to say is that NBC is not interested in anyone so highly critical of NBC right now. It's such a downer, it's just not the time, and it's not what their audience wants right now, either.
In fact, I think my book is the downer America has been waiting for! So herewith, I present an excerpt from the smash new book out this week, "Guilty: Liberal Victims and Their Assault on America":
When the Obama family materialized, the media was seized by a mass psychosis that hadn't been witnessed since Beatlemania. OK! magazine raved that the Obamas "are such an all-American family that they almost make the Brady Bunch look dysfunctional." Yes, who can forget the madcap episode when the Bradys' wacky preacher tells them the government created AIDS to kill blacks!
Still gushing, OK! magazine's crack journalists reported: "Mom goes to bake sales, dad balances the checkbook, and the girls love Harry Potter" -- and then the whole family goes to a racist huckster who shouts, "God damn America!"
Months before network anchors were interrogating vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin on the intricacies of foreign policy, here is how NBC's Brian Williams mercilessly grilled presidential candidate Barack Obama: "What was it like for you last night, the part we couldn't see, the flight to St. Paul with your wife, knowing what was awaiting?"
Twisting the knife he had just plunged into Obama, Williams followed up with what has come to be known as a "gotcha" question: "And you had to be thinking of your mother and your father." Sarah Palin was memorizing the last six kings of Swaziland for her media interviews, but Obama only needed to say something nice about his parents to be considered presidential material.
The media's fawning over Obama knew no bounds, and yet, in the midst of the most incredible media conspiracy to turn this jug-eared clodhopper into some combination of Winston Churchill and a young Elvis, you were being a bore if you mentioned the liberal media. Oh surely we've exploded that old chestnut. ... Look! Look, Obama just lit up another Marlboro! Geez, does smoking make you look cool, or what! Yeah, Obama!.
The claim that there's no such thing as a left wing press is a patent lie said to enrage conservatives. Newspapers read like the press under Kim Jung Il, which, outside of a police state, looks foolish. The prose is straight out of The Daily Worker, full of triumphal rhetoric with implicit exclamation points. Still, their chanted slogans fill your brain, like one of those bad songs you can't stop humming.
There is no other explanation for the embarrassing paeans to Obama's "eloquence." His speeches were a run-on string of embarrassing, sophomoric Hallmark card bromides. It seemed only a matter of time before Obama would slip and tell a crowd what a special Dad it had always been to him.
The major theme of Obama's campaign was the audacity of his running for president. He titled his keynote address at the 2004 Democratic National Convention, "The Audacity of Hope" –- named after a sermon given by his spiritual mentor Jeremiah Wright, whom we were not allowed to mention without being accused of playing dirty tricks. (Rejected speech titles from sermons by Rev. Wright included "God Damn America!," "The U.S. of K.K.A." and "The Racist United States of America.")
What is so audacious about announcing that you're running for president? Every U.S. Senator has run for president or is currently thinking about running for president. Dennis Kucinich ran for president. Lyndon LaRouche used to run for president constantly.
But the media were giddy over their latest crush. Even when Obama broke a pledge and rejected public financing for his campaign -- an issue more dear to The New York Times than even gay marriage -- the Times led the article on Obama's broken pledge with his excuse. "Citing the specter of attacks from independent groups on the right," the Times article began, "Sen. Barack Obama announced Thursday that he would opt out of the public financing system for the general election."
So he had to break his pledge because he was a victim of the Republican Attack Machine.
When Obama broke his word and voted for the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act bill (FISA), the Times' editorial began: We are shocked and dismayed by Sen. Obama's vote on ... oh, who are we kidding? We can't stay mad at this guy! Isn't he just adorable? Couldn't you just eat him up with a spoon? Is he looking at me? Ohmigod, I think he's looking at me!!!! Couldn't you just die?
It has ever been thus.
COPYRIGHT 2009 ANN COULTER
January 7, 2009
After NBC canceled me "for life" on Monday -- until seven or eight hours later when the ban was splashed across the top of The Drudge Report, forcing a red-faced NBC to withdraw the ban -- an NBC insider told The Drudge Report: "We are just not interested in anyone so highly critical of President-elect Obama, right now," explaining that "it's such a downer. It's just not the time, and it's not what our audience wants, either."
In point of fact, I'm not particularly critical of Obama in my new book. I'm critical of the media for behaving like a protection racket for Obama rather than the constitutionally protected guardians of our liberty that they claim to be. So I think what the NBC insider meant to say is that NBC is not interested in anyone so highly critical of NBC right now. It's such a downer, it's just not the time, and it's not what their audience wants right now, either.
In fact, I think my book is the downer America has been waiting for! So herewith, I present an excerpt from the smash new book out this week, "Guilty: Liberal Victims and Their Assault on America":
When the Obama family materialized, the media was seized by a mass psychosis that hadn't been witnessed since Beatlemania. OK! magazine raved that the Obamas "are such an all-American family that they almost make the Brady Bunch look dysfunctional." Yes, who can forget the madcap episode when the Bradys' wacky preacher tells them the government created AIDS to kill blacks!
Still gushing, OK! magazine's crack journalists reported: "Mom goes to bake sales, dad balances the checkbook, and the girls love Harry Potter" -- and then the whole family goes to a racist huckster who shouts, "God damn America!"
Months before network anchors were interrogating vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin on the intricacies of foreign policy, here is how NBC's Brian Williams mercilessly grilled presidential candidate Barack Obama: "What was it like for you last night, the part we couldn't see, the flight to St. Paul with your wife, knowing what was awaiting?"
Twisting the knife he had just plunged into Obama, Williams followed up with what has come to be known as a "gotcha" question: "And you had to be thinking of your mother and your father." Sarah Palin was memorizing the last six kings of Swaziland for her media interviews, but Obama only needed to say something nice about his parents to be considered presidential material.
The media's fawning over Obama knew no bounds, and yet, in the midst of the most incredible media conspiracy to turn this jug-eared clodhopper into some combination of Winston Churchill and a young Elvis, you were being a bore if you mentioned the liberal media. Oh surely we've exploded that old chestnut. ... Look! Look, Obama just lit up another Marlboro! Geez, does smoking make you look cool, or what! Yeah, Obama!.
The claim that there's no such thing as a left wing press is a patent lie said to enrage conservatives. Newspapers read like the press under Kim Jung Il, which, outside of a police state, looks foolish. The prose is straight out of The Daily Worker, full of triumphal rhetoric with implicit exclamation points. Still, their chanted slogans fill your brain, like one of those bad songs you can't stop humming.
There is no other explanation for the embarrassing paeans to Obama's "eloquence." His speeches were a run-on string of embarrassing, sophomoric Hallmark card bromides. It seemed only a matter of time before Obama would slip and tell a crowd what a special Dad it had always been to him.
The major theme of Obama's campaign was the audacity of his running for president. He titled his keynote address at the 2004 Democratic National Convention, "The Audacity of Hope" –- named after a sermon given by his spiritual mentor Jeremiah Wright, whom we were not allowed to mention without being accused of playing dirty tricks. (Rejected speech titles from sermons by Rev. Wright included "God Damn America!," "The U.S. of K.K.A." and "The Racist United States of America.")
What is so audacious about announcing that you're running for president? Every U.S. Senator has run for president or is currently thinking about running for president. Dennis Kucinich ran for president. Lyndon LaRouche used to run for president constantly.
But the media were giddy over their latest crush. Even when Obama broke a pledge and rejected public financing for his campaign -- an issue more dear to The New York Times than even gay marriage -- the Times led the article on Obama's broken pledge with his excuse. "Citing the specter of attacks from independent groups on the right," the Times article began, "Sen. Barack Obama announced Thursday that he would opt out of the public financing system for the general election."
So he had to break his pledge because he was a victim of the Republican Attack Machine.
When Obama broke his word and voted for the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act bill (FISA), the Times' editorial began: We are shocked and dismayed by Sen. Obama's vote on ... oh, who are we kidding? We can't stay mad at this guy! Isn't he just adorable? Couldn't you just eat him up with a spoon? Is he looking at me? Ohmigod, I think he's looking at me!!!! Couldn't you just die?
It has ever been thus.
COPYRIGHT 2009 ANN COULTER
MonsterMark
Dedicated LVC Member
Coulter is so brilliant and hits the nail on the head time and time again.
Bony ride or not, (have had a few of those), I'd still give her the time of her life, as long as she kept talking and making me laugh.
Bony ride or not, (have had a few of those), I'd still give her the time of her life, as long as she kept talking and making me laugh.
Last edited by a moderator:
ford nut
Local nut case
MonsterMark
Dedicated LVC Member
Couldn't they at least paint the fingernails so I could pretend it was a woman?:shifty:
Fair enough...sorry to jump down your throat on the Drudge thing....
ford nut
Local nut case
Thats a good idea, but you know back in the day when you had to pleasure yourself....I have to ask......did you paint your nails ? :shifty:
TheDude
Dedicated LVC Member
That made me laugh; how do we know the "nameless poster" wasn't Pepper to begin with, he is rather charming and has a unique way with the ladies.
Perhaps it was.... he must have been sweet talking her through private messages.
here's the TODAY SHOW APPEARANCE:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ikTcXy0wAxw
