Ann Coulter on Couric, Palin, Biden

Here’s a quote from Ann Coulter’s latest column (see here). I loved it! I should read Ann more often.

“While Gov. Sarah Palin is being grilled on her position on mark-to-market accounting rules, the press can’t bother to ask Joe Biden if he could give us a ballpark estimate on when Franklin D. Roosevelt was president — or maybe take a stab at guessing the decade when televisions were first available to the public. Being interviewed by Katie Couric on the ‘CBS Evening News,’ Biden said:

“‘When the stock market crashed, Franklin D. Roosevelt got on the television and didn’t just talk about the, you know, the princes of greed. He said, ‘Look, here’s what happened.” For those of you who aren’t hard-core history buffs, Biden not only named the wrong president during the 1929 stock market crash, he also claimed a president who wasn’t president during the stock market crash went on TV before Americans had TVs. Other than that, the statement holds up pretty well. At least Biden managed to avoid mentioning any “clean” Negroes he had met.

Couric was nearly moved to tears by the brilliance of Biden’s brain-damaged remark. She was especially intrigued by Biden’s claim that FDR had said the new iPhone was the bomb! Here is Couric’s full response to Biden’s bizarre outburst about FDR (a) being president and (b) going on TV in 1929: ‘Relating to the fears of the average American is one of Biden’s strong suits.’

“But when our beauteous Sarah said that John McCain was a better leader on the economy than Barack Obama, Couric relentlessly badgered her for evidence. ‘Why do you say that?’ Couric demanded. ‘Why are they waiting for John McCain and not Barack Obama? … Can you give us any more examples of his leading the charge for more oversight?’ The beauteous Sarah had cited McCain’s prescient warnings about Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

“But Couric, the crackerjack journalist who didn’t know FDR wasn’t president in 1929, demanded more examples from Palin. We are currently in the middle of a massive financial crisis brought on by Fannie Mae. McCain was right on Fannie Mae; Obama was wrong. That’s not enough? Not for the affable Eva Braun of evening TV! ‘I’m just going to ask you one more time,’ Couric snipped, ‘not to belabor the point. Specific examples in his 26 years of pushing for more regulation?’ This would be like responding to someone who predicted the 9/11 attacks by saying: OK, you got one thing right. Not to belabor the point, but what else?

Obama was not merely wrong on Fannie Mae: He is owned by Fannie Mae. Somehow Obama managed to become the second biggest all-time recipient of Fannie Mae political money after only three years in the Senate. The biggest beneficiary, Democratic Sen. Chris Dodd, had a 30-year head start on receiving loot from Fannie Mae — the government-backed institution behind our current crisis.”

And Ann’s not exaggerating about the Couric story on Biden. See here.

I think Katie was right to press Palin on certain specifics. But she’s wrong to give Biden a free pass on his gaffes, even as she treats Palin like a bumbling idiot. And Ann Coulter is a valuable part of the national discourse for pointing that out!

About jamesbradfordpate

My name is James Pate. This blog is about my journey. I read books. I watch movies and TV shows. I go to church. I try to find meaning. And, when I can’t do that, I just talk about stuff that I find interesting. I have degrees in fields of religious studies. I have an M.Phil. in the History of Biblical Interpretation from Hebrew Union College in Cincinnati, Ohio. I also have an M.A. in Hebrew Bible from Jewish Theological Seminary, an M.Div. from Harvard Divinity School, and a B.A. from DePauw University.
This entry was posted in Candidates, Current Events, Politics, Sarah Palin. Bookmark the permalink.

17 Responses to Ann Coulter on Couric, Palin, Biden

  1. Bryan L says:


    All gaffes are not equal and people can see that. The gaffs Palin is making are completely different from some of the game show trivia stuff that Biden has messed up on. Palin being cluesless about her running mates history or positions and rambling on trying to fake it is quite different from saying when tv was invented and which president was on it when he wasn’t even born and it doesn’t even matter. Obama accidentally saying 57 states instead of 47 states is different from repeatedly not knowing the difference between a Sunni and a Shia and whether Al Quaeda is coming from Iran or not.

    Everybody makes mistakes in trivia things that really have no bearing on anything today (OBama, McCain, Biden all do), what Palin is doing is completely different (although she’s had some of those trivia things too).

    And I don’t think Coulter is a valuable voice. Many conservatives and Republicans can’t even stand her and she’s usually just dismissed because of the over the top stuff she says like a she were a political shock jock.

    Bryan L


  2. James Pate says:


    Did Palin just say Al Qaeda came from Iran? I did a search, and even Time Magazine had an article saying there are connections between the two.

    And I don’t think Palin is clueless about McCain’s positions. She said he warned about Fannie and Freddie. Who says that’s not good enough?

    The fact is that Katie Couric and the media decide whom they’re going to make out to be a bumbler. I’d love to see Katie interview Ann Coulter. She’d be in for a surprise there!


  3. James Pate says:

    A few more thoughts, Bryan, before I go to church:

    I do want to thank you for your open mind on this, and I’m not being sarcastic. I can tell from your site that you have at least watched the good Palin interviews, either through my blog or you-tube in general.

    And I apologize for being antagonistic to Steph on your blog. Some people bring out the worst in me, and it’s not fruitful for me to trade jabs with someone else. So I guess I’ll let her have the last word when she posts her next comment.


  4. Anonymous says:

    The way she harps, I rank her right up there with Howard Stern. They are too highly opinionated to really examine both sides of an issue. Coulter has gotten progressively worse over her career. Janice


  5. Anonymous says:

    Excuse me, I meant “she” instead of “they”–Howard Stern is, of course, already a joke. J.


  6. James Pate says:

    I like Ann Coulter in this case because she challenges what we’re told conventional wisdom should be. We’re supposed to think, “Oh, that Palin is dumb, and Biden cares so much about ordinary people.” Well, it’s refreshing when someone just says out loud, “Who says?”


  7. Russell Miller says:

    Ann Coulter lost all credibility with me a long time ago. She shows very little intelligence and can be counted on to say the most inappropriate and insensitive things at the absolute worst time, and then jump down the throats of anyone with the gall to call her on it. Basically a meaner version of Bill O’Reilly with breasts.


  8. itsmypulp says:

    As Bryan said, all gaffes are not equal.

    I was aware that Biden goofed on this occasion; I even posted a youtube of it on my blog. But the general thrust of Biden’s statement is correct.

    Roosevelt wasn’t President at the time of the stock market crash, but he assumed the presidency at the depth of the Great Depression. Biden was correct insofar as it was FDR who got the country back on track.

    Moreover, FDR made effective use of radio — the mass medium of that era — by delivering thirty “fireside chats” to the American public.

    So Biden mistakenly referred to the stock market crash when he should have referred merely to the Depression; and he anachronistically mentioned TV when he should have said “radio”; but his general point was accurate.

    Moreover, the gaffe was peripheral to the point Biden was making. Biden started by saying, “Part of what a leader does is to instill confidence.” He referred to Roosevelt to illustrate his point.

    So ask yourself: did Roosevelt utilize mass media to instill confidence in the American people during the Great Depression? If he did, then Biden’s point was fundamentally correct.

    As for Palin: she doesn’t just make gaffes; she tells bald-faced lies to the American people.


  9. Anonymous says:

    Yes, and it is good to have both sides expressing differing views, far right and far left–both voices are needed. However, tone is so important when it comes to readers…her tone has become increasingly antagonistic. The point should be to convince those who do NOT agree with her to do so. However, when her tone gives the impression that she is on an antagonistic defense, it tends to cause the opposite reaction. It doesn’t matter which side does that–again, the point for both sides should be to convince, not antagonize. J.


  10. James Pate says:

    I think Ann Coulter does well to use the New York Times to undermine the New York Times. And, while I personally wouldn’t want to name-call like she does, I do get some pleasure when she delivers a punch at conventional wisdom.

    Stephen, I may do some more research on Palin and Sudan. The thing is that people have smeared her or called her a liar in the past, and it’s turned out not to be true. For a while, all the articles on the web called her a liar on the Bridge to Nowhere. Now, we see some articles that defend her on that. People said she cut funding for special needs kids. Articles have cropped up refuting that claim. The same goes for McCain–it was universally accepted that his ad on sex ed was wrong, but now that’s being questioned.

    Regarding FDR, sure, he boosted people’s morale. Many have said that Reagan modeled himself after FDR. And I personally don’t crucify Biden on this gaffe. What I can’t stand, however, is the way the media and the left impose such high standards on Palin, while letting Biden get a free ride on his factual errors. Palin has been ridiculed for not knowing the history of the Vice-Presidents and whether they met with foreign leaders, for not having the Congressional Record memorized on McCain’s voting record, for not having the history of Supreme Court decisions memorized. I follow the news fairly well–though not as well as most–and I’d have a hard time answering those questions on the spot. I’m not saying Katie shouldn’t ask hard questions, but there’s obvious special treatment in terms of gaffes.

    Not that I want to whine on that too much. As I’ve said in the past, the media’s liberal. That’s part of the cards. Republicans have to learn how to surpass that, as they have in many elections.


  11. Russell Miller says:

    I don’t buy that the media is liberal for one second. Nor that it is conservative. I think it’s just a product of really bad journalism training.

    Note that the liberals think the media is conservative as well. It’s purely subjective and that kind of assertion is really more suited for opinion than fact.

    I’m not actually liberal, myself. But I think the media sucks. They try to be fair and report both sides, and they end up reporting neither, and pissing everyone off in the process.


  12. James Pate says:

    Yeah, the left does accuse the media of being conservative. I’ve read people who accuse the New York Times of being pro-Israel. The Nation doesn’t care much for the New York Times either. And conservative-turned-liberal David Brock wrote a book on this subject. I’ve read people who say that the media are too easy on Bush. And some have suggested that the corporate sponsors are conservative and owners of the media are conservative, so the media is not all that liberal.

    But there are surveys that indicate most in the national news media vote Democrat. Rothman-Lichter is probably the most famous of these. And think about media figures you know–Brian Williams worked on Democratic campaigns. Dan Rather is far from being conservative. And I don’t think one can deny that the New York Times editorial page has a Democratic bias.

    Also, I don’t read Accuracy in Media too much, but what I have read is good in terms of citing specific examples of media bias.


  13. Russell Miller says:

    And what bias does Accuracy in Media have?


  14. James Pate says:

    Conservative, of course. But I always liked how it quoted the mainstream media to point out their bias.


  15. Bryan L says:

    Thanks for the kind words James and I really don’t mind the back and forth between you an Steph on my blog, especially since I like to see what both of you have to say since you are both very honest and both of you speak what’s truly on your hearts. I just like to stay out of it though and I hope I’m not expected to jump in the middle of since I’m not going to since I don’t like to do that and come off like I’m taking sides or something.
    If it ever gets bad enough I’ll just delete comments and ask y’all to play nice ; )

    Keep being honest and sharing what you truly believe and feel. It’s why I read your blog even if I don’t always agree with everything.

    Bryan L


  16. Russell Miller says:

    Have you even bothered to read sites like “Media Matters”? Yes, it has a leftward bias, but if you were truly interested in seeing both sides of it, you’d welcome the challenge.


  17. James Pate says:

    I don’t visit it as a habit. I mostly read what’s on the AP or what I get in the New York Times or Townhall (a conservative site). Or I listen to NPR or watch the news. I usually don’t visit specific sites, since there are so many out there. I’m behind on my Ann Coulter reading, as a matter of fact! I’ve heard of Media Matters–either from TV, or some media group I joined to support internet neutrality. I just don’t visit it that often. But thanks for the recommendation. It looks like an interesting site!


Comments are closed.