No Brainer: Ann Coulter.
From the New York Daily News:
Fresh from slamming a group of 9/11 widows as "witches and harpies," viper-tongued Ann Coulter turned her venom on Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-N.Y.) yesterday after the senator challenged the conservative writer's wild comments.Aw, shucks, while we're giving her the MEAA, we might as well add the Poorest Arguer, Most Hypocritical, and Most nearly Resembles a Horse awards onto her record, too.
Clinton led a parade of outraged politicians from both parties who said Coulter's book 'Godless' went beyond the pale by painting four 9/11 widows known as 'the Jersey Girls' as self-obsessed opportunists.
"I find it unimaginable that anyone in the public eye could launch a vicious and meanspirited attack on people whom I've known for the last 41/2 years to be deeply concerned about the safety and security of our country," Clinton said in Washington. "Perhaps her book should have been called 'Heartless.'"
During a radio appearance on Long Island, Coulter countered that Clinton was attacking her "for being mean to women. This is, I remind you, Bill Clinton's wife.
"If she's worried about people being mean to women, she should talk to her own husband."
Coulter here is displaying a classic case of several tried and true neo-con rhetorical tactics:
1.) Pointless, inaccurate name-calling. "Harpy"? "Witch"? How do these words apply to the Jersey Girls? They really don't; they're simply gendered insults designed to take credibility from an opponent without actually having to do anything. Generally, it's not a good idea to use offensive and gratuitous epithets in an argument unless you're appealing to mean-spirited people who care nothing for an impartial assessment of the situation. Fortunately for Coulter, she's writing to just such an audience: The American Right Wing.
2.) Non sequitur statements. In response to Clinton's accusation that Coulter is "heartless," Coulter invokes the neo-cons' omnipresent antichrist, Bill Clinton. I'm sorry, but I was under the impression that Clinton actually, I don't know... CARES ABOUT PEOPLE. What on earth is Coulter trying to prove here? Again, she's using a rhetorical shortcut to deflect the attention from her own statements onto someone else... and her shortcut is failing because it's not a very good one.
3.) Ad hominem attacks. Faced with someone who would like her to take responsibility for what she has written (no doubt in an effort boost book sales so she can buy still more of those ridiculously short skirts that make her legs resemble those of a malnourished mule), Coulter refuses to address the issue, instead opting for the "you're married to Bill Clinton" route (a.k.a. "the sucky, weasely route that doesn't fool anyone, you idiot").
Is there any doubt in anyone's mind that this woman is nothing better than a sensationalist attention whore who thrives on the pain of others?
New York Gov. Pataki called Coulter "at best insensitive and at worst really insensitive" to the families of 9/11 victims. I couldn't agree more.