Today I was listening to the radio on the way to work and there was an interesting lady promoting her new book. It was Ann Coulter talking about her new book, Guilty: Liberal "Victims" and Their Assault on America.
Now I'll never read this book. Strongly opinionated books like this one tend to do something to my blood pressure that's not fun.
However, I think Ann is behaving in an outrageous fashion for the media attention and she gets lots of it. If you don't listen to her raving and instead listen to what she's saying, it makes some sense. She's probably a very smart woman who knows how to get media attention. She could say what she's trying to say in a politically correct fashion and people would be saying, "Ah, that makes sense." But then no one would hear about her new book because her media appearances would be dull. I think I'm going somewhere with this.
For example, today she started spewing off factoids about how single moms are bad. Basically, they can't raise children and there is lots of evidence to prove it. I don't remember the exact data she spouted off, but it basically amounted to the fact that children brought up by single mothers tend to be less contributing members of society. In fact, according to her, in lots of cases, they tend to be detrimental to society. They don't get the same upbringing. They don't get the same chances, etc.
It all may be true. I didn't do any research. But the way she presents it just immediately makes everyone mad and stupid. One of the DJ's on today's program said that she was skewing the results because she said that if you drink orange juice you are getting 200% of your daily allowance of vitamin C and it's impossible to have anything over 100%. "100% is all. You can't have more than 100%," he argued adamantly. I almost had to change the channel. Of course, she wasn't talking about vitamin C, she was talking about children raised by two parents compared to one, but you get the point. She said something had gone up by 300%. She could have said, "tripled". She could have said, "gone from 2 to 6", but 300% sounds drastic.
She says that a single mom would be a greater hero, in her eyes, and statistically speaking, to give her child up for adoption. Statistically speaking, children that are adopted as babies have a better life than children raised by single mothers.
Now, I tried to phrase that in a way that would infuriate the least amount of people. Since very few people read my blog and the majority of them are not stupid, I probably have a lesser chance of infuriating anyone anyway. However, if she had written that same statement, she would have written it in such a way that even the most calm among us might have had a small spike in our blood pressure level. It's quite ingenious.
I must work on it.