The National Review and über-moderate Ann Coulter have severed their ties. Apparently she used to write a column for them. Now I've never read much of NR and what I have read never grabbed my attention. It seems like a bunch of old-school pontificators.
Here's NRO's Editor-at-Large Jonah Goldberg's column addressing the fissure. There's one part I want to highlight:
Ann also told the Post that we only paid her $5 a month for her work (would that it were so!). Either this is a deliberate lie, or Ann needs to call her accountant because someone's been skimming her checks.
It's really only one or the other? THIS is intellectual debate?
This just proves:
1) That the pool of Morons who don't get sarcasm is deeper than most think - AND not defined by her sworn-enemies.
2) That Mr. Jonah Goldberg needs to decompress at the nearest comfort station.
Ann probably got sick of the pansies at National Review. All by herself she's multiples bigger than it. Who the heck is Jonah Goldberg anyway?
So I don't blame her for bailing. Imagine having someone intellectually three notches below you nit-pick your columns. It's like wanting to break up with an unsatisfying girlfriend/boyfriend - you use any little excuse, any slight as a springboard to dump them.
I've about had it with these 'old coot', self-proclaimed conservatives. They sit around at black tie affairs and pontificate in turn. Their plan, their only plan is to attack the thugs with persuasion. No wonder they're losing.
How come there's no comment section after Goldberg's column? Are they still waiting on the technology?
Oh, I'm sure it's a *point of order* for the vaunted Editor-at-Large. This is what I mean about them being old school stiffs - much like the crew at Forbes.
Here's a little taste of Ann from this past week:
