We try to avoid reading anything by Ann Coulter. Mostly because we find her style hard to "get a grip on" since it bounces around from true statement to falsehood to snide remark to falsehood to rhetorical question to ...
And even the (largely) true statements are presented in a condescending manner.
by Joe Conason in Salon (and linked to from Drudge), so we sat down and read the damn thing.
As usual, it was no fun, but we decided to at least see if we could analyze the structure of the essay. We expected, and were not surprised, to find the usual mix of material. If one is predisposed to think the worst about liberals (and accept Coulter's negative assertion after negative assertion), then one probably doesn't experience any cognitive dissonance. But for the rest of us, it's tedious to have to keep a ledger of: assertions-that-are-false; mostly-true-statements; rhetorical flourishes; and so on. For example, here is the breakdown (by word count) of the elements in Coulter's essay:
.
And here is a table with more detail. (Please note that classification into TRUE or FALSE is a bit crude, but it has to be due to the nature of Coulter's writing style. Also, we tried to be as generous as possible in declaring statements TRUE.)
| SUMMARY | TRUE or FALSE? | TEXT | WORDS |
| liberals are attacking Limbaugh | TRUE | So liberals have finally found a drug addict they don't like. liberals could find no excuses for Rush Limbaugh. | 19 |
| liberals found excuses for the Lackawanna Six | FALSE | And unlike the Lackawanna Six – those high-spirited young lads innocently seeking adventure in an al-Qaida training camp in Afghanistan – | 19 |
| liberals accuse conservatives of hypocrisy | TRUE | The reason any conservative's failing is always major news is that it allows liberals to engage in their very favorite taunt: Hypocrisy! | 22 |
| liberals have no morals | FALSE | Hypocrisy is the only sin that really inflames them. Inasmuch as liberals have no morals, they can sit back and criticize other people for failing to meet the standards that liberals simply renounce. It's an intriguing strategy. But the only perfect man hasn't walked the Earth for 2,000 years. In liberals' worldview, any conservative who is not Jesus Christ is ipso facto a "hypocrite" for not publicly embracing dissolute behavior the way liberals do. | 74 |
| liberals avoid the charge of hypocrisy | FALSE | By openly admitting to being philanderers, draft dodgers, liars, weasels and cowards, liberals avoid ever being hypocrites. (Evidently, Clinton wasn't a hypocrite because no one was supposed to take seriously the notion that he respected women or believed in God.) | 40 |
| liberals are hypocrites | FALSE | And yet, the wily hypocrite does not support flaws! | 9 |
| Clinton was a hypocrite | TRUE | At least Rush wasn't walking into church carrying a 10-pound Bible before rushing back to the Oval Office for sodomy with Monica Lewinsky. He wasn't enforcing absurd sexual harassment guidelines while dropping his pants in front of a half-dozen subordinates. | 40 |
| mainstream media ignored Limbaugh until this drug story | FALSE | After years of the mainstream media assuring us that Rush was a has-been, a nobody, yesterday's news – the Rush painkiller story was front-page news last week. The airwaves and print media were on red alert with Rush's admission that, after an unsuccessful spinal operation a few years ago, he became addicted to powerful prescription painkillers. | 55 |
| snide remark | n/a | (Would anyone care if Howell Raines committed murder?) | 8 |
| mainstream media ignored Limbaugh's big radio contract | FALSE | Rush Limbaugh's misfortune is apparently a bigger story than his nearly $300 million radio contract signed two years ago. That was the biggest radio contract in broadcasting history. Yet there are only 12 documents on LexisNexis that reported it. The New York Times didn't take notice of Rush's $300 million radio contract, but a few weeks later, put Bill Clinton's comparatively measly $10 million book contract on its front page. Meanwhile, in the past week alone, LexisNexis has accumulated more than 50 documents with the words "Rush Limbaugh and hypocrisy." That should make up for the 12 documents on his $300 million radio contract. | 104 |
| Limbaugh's anti-drug position is yesterday's news | FALSE | Rush has hardly been the anti-drug crusader liberals suggest. Indeed, Rush hasn't had much to say about drugs at all since that spinal operation. The Rush Limbaugh quote that has been endlessly recited in the last week to prove Rush's rank "hypocrisy" is this, made eight years ago: "Drug use, some might say, is destroying this country. And we have laws against selling drugs, pushing drugs, using drugs, importing drugs. ... And so if people are violating the law by doing drugs, they ought to be accused and they ought to be convicted and they ought to be sent up." | 100 |
| rhetorical question | n/a | What precisely are liberals proposing that Rush should have said to avoid their indignant squeals of "hypocrisy"? Announce his support for the wide and legal availability of a prescription painkiller that may have caused him to go deaf and nearly ruined his career and wrecked his life? I believe that would have been both evil and hypocritical. Or is it simply that Rush should not have become addicted to painkillers in the first place? Well, no, I suppose not. You've caught us: Rush has a flaw. | 86 |
| Limbaugh is an extremely capable radio host | TRUE | When a conservative can be the biggest thing in talk radio, earning $30 million a year and attracting 20 million devoted listeners every week – all while addicted to drugs – I'll admit liberals have reason to believe that conservatives are some sort of super-race, incorruptible by original sin. | 47 |
| Limbaugh wasn't a junkie | UNPROVEN | In fact, Rush's behavior was not all that dissolute. There is a fundamental difference between taking any drug – legal, illegal, prescription, protected by the 21st Amendment or banned by Michael Bloomberg – for kicks and taking a painkiller for pain. | 39 |
| some claim there is no difference between recreational drugs and prescription drugs | TRUE | There is a difference morally and a difference legally. While slamming Rush, Harvard Law professor Alan Dershowitz recently told Wolf Blitzer, "Generally, people who illegally buy prescription drugs are not prosecuted, whereas people who illegally buy cocaine and heroin are prosecuted." | 41 |
| rhetorical question | n/a | What would the point be? Just say no to back surgery? | 11 |
| Ted Kennedy was immoral and didn't get prosecuted | TRUE | I haven't checked with any Harvard Law professors, but I'm pretty sure that, generally, adulterous drunks who drive off bridges and kill girls are prosecuted. | 25 |
| Ted Kennedy supports immoral behavior | FALSE | Ah, but Teddy Kennedy supports adultery and public drunkenness – so at least you can't call him a hypocrite! | 18 |
| snide remark | n/a | That must provide great consolation to Mary Jo Kopechne's parents. | 10 |
| Newsweek (Evan Thomas) had a vicious story about Limbaugh | FALSE | I have a rule about not feeling sorry for people worth $300 million, but I'm feeling sentimental. Evan Thomas wrote a cover story on Rush for Newsweek this week that was so vicious it read like conservative satire. Thomas called Rush a "schlub," "socially ill at ease," an Elmer Gantry, an actor whose "act has won over, or fooled, a lot of people." He compared Rush to the phony TV evangelist Jim Bakker and recommended that Rush start to "make a virtue out of honesty." As is standard procedure for profiles of conservatives, Newsweek gathered quotes on Rush from liberals, ex-wives and dumped dates. Covering himself, Thomas ruefully remarked that "it's hard to find many people who really know him." | 120 |
| Coulter was ignored by Newsweek | TRUE | Well, there was me, Evan! But I guess Newsweek didn't have room for the quotes I promptly sent back to the Newsweek researchers. I could have even corrected Newsweek's absurd account of how Rush met his current wife. (It's kind of cute, too: She was a fan who began arguing with him about something he said on air.) | 58 |
| liberals have a double standard | FALSE | (Liberals can lie under oath in legal proceedings and it's a "personal matter." Conservatives must scream their every failing from the rooftops or they are "liars.") | 26 |
| snide remark | n/a | Thomas also made the astute observation that "Rush Limbaugh has always had far more followers than friends." Needless to say, this floored those of us who were shocked to discover that Rush does not have 20 million friends | 38 |
| Evan Thomas is insignificant (compared to Limbaugh) | TRUE | So the guy I really feel sorry for is Evan Thomas. How would little Evan fare in any competitive media? Any followers? Any fans? Any readers at all? And he's not even addicted to painkillers! This week, Rush proved his motto: He really can beat liberals with half his brain tied behind his back. | 54 |
The analysis above does not cover other aspects of Coulter's essay: most notably her dichotomy between "bad" street drugs and "forgivable" prescription drugs.
