Mediaboss Marketing

Breadcrumb Trail Links

It is to the eternal shame of many in the self-styled progressive community that they have turned against the library system for the crime of tolerating free expression

Author of the article:

Publishing date:

If Dr. Seuss Enterprises did anything useful last week in taking six of the late doctors books out of print, surely it could have done something more useful by showing its work: Which hurtful and wrong depictions and descriptions of non-white people did its panel of experts consider beyond the pale, and which did it not, and why? Seuss Enterprises is free to publish and not publish whatever it wants, but its decisions will contribute to a much broader and important conversation about what to do with otherwise beloved or revered literature, especially childrens literature, that reflects unfortunate attitudes of its period.

Some of the culprits are clear: In If I Ran the Zoo, published in 1950, stereotypical caricatures of African and Asian men are depicted helping young Gerald McGrew collect his menagerie including from the mountains of Zomba-ma-Tant, where young Geralds aides all wear their eyes at a slant. But much of the other material is far less obviously problematic not just compared to the six delisted titles, but potentially also to Seusss most famous and beloved works, which his executors presumably wish to continue selling for profit.

This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below.

The Grinch is thought of by some as a Jewish stereotype, taking diabolical glee in subverting societal norms and desecrating Christian traditions, as University of Michigan literature professor Ryan Szpiech wrote in 2019. In 2014, Kansas State University childrens literature scholar Philip Nel argued the Grinch also echoes 19th-century caricatures of the Irish and that The Cat In the Hat is about a conflict between white children and a black cat whose character and costume borrow from blackface performance.

These were academic analyses, not denunciations. Neither was calling for any of Seusss work to be unpublished. But in the court of public opinion nowadays, things can spin out of control awfully fast. No ones setting these (books) on fire. No ones saying you cannot read them, Nel told Esquire last week, arguing the controversy was overblown. No ones saying they must be removed from libraries. No ones saying they must be removed from your home.

I can report from Toronto that this is not the case. Now looms a larger question, Toronto Star journalist Evy Kwong intoned last week on the papers TikTok account: What happens to the books that are still in the bookstore or at the library?

Its unclear on (sic) whether Dr. Seuss Enterprises will be mandating that the six books be removed from circulation across the globe, the paper reported.

This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below.

In a follow-up article on Monday, another Star reporter found and interviewed a woman who was offering for sale her personal copy of one of the cancelled Seuss books. The reporter explained that the womanbelieves she should maintain freedom to have or sell the titles, despite the conclusion of others or positions of companies much in the way she might believe the Earth orbits the sun and not vice versa.

Does it really need explaining that books are private property? That libraries have something much closer to an obligation to retain out-of-print or unpopular books than an obligation to get rid of them for historians sake, if no one elses?

The Chicago Tribune reports the citys public library system will allow the copies currently on loan to remain with their borrowers, and honour existing holds, and thereafter temporarily keep the books as reference copies while it assesses long-term options. If one of those options is not keeping at least one copy each as a reference item, then we have wandered into a very dark place. I trust that wont be the case in Chicago.

The Star, meanwhile, managed to find a Toronto bookstore proprietor who objected even to library staff taking the time to review the books content before deciding what to do. If the people who produce the book say theres an original culture concern why are you questioning it? Miguel San Vincente demanded to know.

Libraries have something much closer to an obligation to retain out-of-print or unpopular books than an obligation to get rid of them

Its mind-boggling. The Toronto Public Library keeps copies of discredited memoirs, preludes to genocide, inspirations to terrorists, anti-Islamic and anti-Christian and anti-Semitic and anti-atheist screeds, pulp non-fiction from Ann Coulter and Naomi Klein alike, and everything in between and beyond. Because thats what a library is for.

This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below.

It is to the eternal shame of many in Torontos self-styled progressive community that they have turned against the library system for the crime of tolerating free expression a grotesque phenomenon that reached its nadir when it dared unapologetically to rent a room to a feminist (but allegedly transphobic) activist in 2019 to deliver a really quite anodyne speech.

And it is bewildering that they cant see the truth lying just beyond their own noses: that if they ever manage to win these battles to silence unpopular voices of the moment, they will inevitably wind up ruing the day.Every year the American Library Associations Office for Intellectual Freedom publishes a list of the most challenged books in American libraries. In 2019, eight of the top 10 were on the list because of LGBTQIA+ content. The other two were Margaret Atwoods The Handmaids Tale and the Harry Potter series.

When culture warriors on any side lose the plot, dispassionate librarians in Toronto and many other cities are there to help them find it again. They just have to let them do their jobs. Assuming (confidently) that Torontos chief librarians dont decide to send the troublesome Seuss titles to the woodchipper, or alternatively to put them front and centre in their branches childrens sections, I suggest we defer to their wisdom.

Email: cselley@nationalpost.com | Twitter: cselley

This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below.

Sign up to receive the daily top stories from the National Post, a division of Postmedia Network Inc.

A welcome email is on its way. If you don't see it please check your junk folder.

The next issue of Posted Newsletter will soon be in your inbox.

We encountered an issue signing you up. Please try again

Postmedia is committed to maintaining a lively but civil forum for discussion and encourage all readers to share their views on our articles. Comments may take up to an hour for moderation before appearing on the site. We ask you to keep your comments relevant and respectful. We have enabled email notificationsyou will now receive an email if you receive a reply to your comment, there is an update to a comment thread you follow or if a user you follow comments. Visit our Community Guidelines for more information and details on how to adjust your email settings.

Originally posted here:
Chris Selley: For the love of Seuss, leave libraries alone - National Post

Here is this weeks installment of The New York Times is ALWAYS lying about criminals (and probably everything else).

The Times desperately wants you to believe that there are actual cases of innocent people being put to death in America. Their current poster boy for the cause is Sedley Alley, executed in 2006. But the Criminal Lobby is hoping a post-mortem DNA test on evidence that has nothing to do with his guilt or innocence will allow them to howl that an INNOCENT man was executed!

I knew nothing about this case, but I knew the Times description of the facts was a lie. How did I know?

1) No jury would have convicted a man, much less sentenced him to death, much less had that sentence repeatedly upheld, on such a flimsy record; and

2) There is no credible evidence that a single innocent person has been put to death in this country for at least 75 years.

Here are the facts the about the Criminal Lobbys latest baby seal.

On the night of July 11, 1985, two Marines from a naval base in Millington, Tennessee, reported a possible kidnapping after they heard a female jogger screaming, Dont touch me! Leave me alone! They ran in her direction, but just as they got close, a station wagon peeled off the side of the road. A gate guard also reported seeing a station wagon, which he said was being driven by a man constraining a woman.

All three witnesses described the car as a late-model green or brown Ford or Mercury station wagon with wood paneling, Kentucky tags and a loud muffler.

Alley, who owned a dark green 1972 Mercury station wagon with wood paneling and a Kentucky license plate, was brought in for questioning at 1 a.m. that night. The Marines whod reported the kidnapping identified Alleys vehicle as the one theyd seen, both by sight and by the roar of the muffler.

But Alley and his wife gave a satisfactory explanation for their whereabouts and were released.

At 6 a.m. on July 12, the body of 19-year-old Marine Lance Cpl. Suzanne Collins was found in a nearby park. Alley was arrested and promptly confessed to murdering her claiming it was an accident.

He told his wife, Yes, I killed the gal at ... Orgill Park.

In his lengthy, tape-recorded confession, Alley tried to soft-pedal his barbaric crime, claiming hed hit Collins with his car by accident, and only decided to savagely beat her to death because, as he was driving her to the hospital, she threatened to turn him into the police.

Alley then took investigators to the precise spot where hed murdered Collins and even showed them the tree where hed broken off the branch that hed jammed inside of her.

At trial, Alley admitted he did it, but pleaded insanity. The jury didnt buy it, convicted him and sentenced him to death.

Here is what the Times Emily Bazelon tells that papers clueless readers about Alleys case:

[T]wo Marines ... reported crossing paths with Lance Corporal Collins while she was running. They said that moments after they saw her, they dodged a brown station wagon with a blue license plate ... [L]aw enforcement officers stopped Sedley Alley, then 29. He was driving a dark green station wagon with a blue plate.

Times readers are led to believe that although witnesses said it was a BROWN station wagon, Tennessee yokels picked up a guy in a GREEN station wagon!

Except thats not true. The BOLO alert (be on the lookout) put out by the Naval Investigation Service identified a a brown or green Ford or Mercury station wagon with woodgrain on the sides.

Bazelon:

When the investigators began interrogating him, Mr. Alley, who had been drinking, denied knowing anything about Lance Corporal Collins and asked for a lawyer. But 12 hours later, he signed a statement confessing to the murder.

Times readers are supposed to think these backwoods Nazis interrogated Alley without a lawyer for 12 hours until he confessed! In fact, the only reason he signed a statement 12 hours later was that, after being questioned the night of the crime, he was sent home. Alley wasnt arrested until after Collins body was discovered the next day, whereupon he quickly confessed.

Bazelon:

Mr. Alleys admission, which he later said was false and coerced ...

Yes, later in the sense of 20 years later. For two decades, Alley never denied hed murdered Collins. He only recalled that his confession was coerced in 2004, when he was trying to delay the hangmans noose.

Bazelon:

But the location he gave for the collision didnt line up with the witness accounts.

There were no witness accounts for the collision for the simple reason that there was no collision. My car hit her by accident was Alleys attempt to mitigate his barbarous crime.

You know what else, Emily? His car wasnt seen driving in the direction of the hospital, either!

Somehow, his lies not matching the facts is supposed to be a point in Alleys favor.

Bazelon:

[Alleys confession] did not match the physical evidence. ... He said he ... stabbed her with a screwdriver and killed her with a tree branch. ... And the autopsy report showed that Lance Corporal Collins was not hit by a car nor stabbed with a screwdriver.

Again: There was no collision.

Im not sure what Bazelons point is about the screwdriver and the tree branch, but heres the evidence presented at trial:

The pathologist, Dr. James Bell, testified that the cause of death was multiple injuries, [many] of which could have been fatal. ... He testified that the injuries to the skull could have been inflicted by the rounded end of defendants screwdriver that was found near the scene ... He identified the tree branch that was inserted into the victims body. It measured 31 inches in length and had been inserted into the body more than once, to a depth of twenty inches ...

Bazelon:

Tire tracks found at the crime scene didnt match Mr. Alleys car, shoe prints didnt match his shoes, and a third witness who saw a man with a station wagon, close to where Lance Corporal Collins was killed, described someone who was several inches shorter than Mr. Alley, with a different hair color.

Times readers are perfectly prepared to believe that a jury of toothless hicks looked at evidence overwhelmingly clearing Alley and convicted him anyway.

But that didnt happen, because having seen the evidence for themselves, Alley and his lawyer decided his best course was to admit he did it and plead insanity. All this alleged evidence is post-hoc nonsense invented by defense lawyers that has not been admitted under the rules of evidence, has not been subjected to cross-examination, and would not prove his innocence.

Seventy-five years and counting with no credible evidence that a single innocent person has been put to death in America.

Go here to see the original:
Ann Coulter: NYT Was he innocent? Answer: No - Today's News-Herald

In the span of just 13 minutes, the Oscar-shortlisted short documentary Hysterical Girl unpacks a lot.

The film directed by Kate Novack not only elucidates one of Sigmund Freuds most famous case historieson a suicidal teenage girl the psychoanalyst called Dorabut how Freuds writing about her continues to impact our culture more than a century later.

We have one foot in 1900, Novack tells Deadline, and we have one foot in 2020.

The documentary draws a link between the Dora case and more recent examples of the reaction to women who have accused powerful menBrett Kavanaugh, Clarence Thomas, Bill Cosby, Harvey Weinstein and othersof sexual misconduct or assault.

Novack observes, I think it then becomes really hard to argue, Oh, no, thats the case from the past, Freud isnt relevant anymore, weve moved on.

As the film reveals, Dora had been sexually assaulted at age 13 by an adult male, a family friend. Doras parents dismissed her story as false, but Freud believed her. Crucially, though, he labeled Doras problem as hysteria, and informed his patient that the trauma she felt resulted from trying to repress sexual feelings aroused by her assault.

This father figure [Freud], this authority figure, responded to her on the one hand by believing that this had occurred, producer Andrew Rossi explains, but by trying to convince her that there was some other reason that it took place, and that actually she wanted it.

Freud interpreted a dream Dora related to him as a fantasy of forced seduction, implying her actual sexual assault amounted to that.

The [film] really is about this young sexual assault survivor having a voice, Novack comments, and about the legacy of Freuds theories in helping to silence and shame survivors.

Freuds conclusions about Dora map onto the notorious 1991 Supreme Court confirmation hearing for Thomas, when Anita Hill testified he had sexually harassed her during an earlier phase in the jurists career. Hysterical Girl intersperses clips of the all-male Senate Judiciary Committee cross-examining Hill.

I find the references to the alleged sexual harassment to be the product of fantasy, Republican Senator Arlen Specter declares. Later in the documentary Specter intones, Miss Hill was disappointed and frustrated that Mr. Thomas did not show any sexual interest in her.

The film includes a rapid-fire succession of similar moments from recent American historyconservative commentator Ann Coulter dismissing Kavanaugh accuser Christine Blasey Ford, Rush Limbaugh branding as a slut a woman who supported insurance coverage for contraceptives. In another brief clip, Paula Jones recounts her fear of accusing President Clinton of sexual harassment when he was governor of Arkansas. Whether its Jones, Hill or Ford, or innumerable other women, such claims have met with knee jerk skepticism.

We live, in a sense, in a world Freud shaped.

He helped to bring systems of disbelieving women into the 20th, and then beyond into the 21st century, Novack says. The Dora case is sort of exhibit A in that trajectory. The Dora case tells that story most vividly in a way that really, sadly I think, lands somewhat seamlessly in the contemporary moment.

The filmmakers cast a teenage actress, Tommy Vines, to play Dora. Instead of costuming her in turn-of-the-20th-century attire, she wears clothes of today, situating Dora not in the misty past but the present.

Tommy was 16 at the time, the same age as Dora, Rossi points out. She seems to embody this youthful fragility, and the whole world is ahead of her.

Dora, whose real name was Ida Bauer, went through 11 weeks of therapy with Freud, but then broke it off.

Dora persisted in denying my interpretation, Freud wrote, ascribing the young womans repeated rejection of sexual advances from her attacker to jealousy and revenge.

Hysterical Girl contains glimpses from films like Last Tango in Paris and Rosemarys Baby directed by mento further illustrate the durability of narratives that purport to explain the psychology and motivations of women.

It can be depressing how deeply embedded these ideas are. Theyre so embedded that they can be invisible, Novack observes. I almost view Freudian thinking, especially around this issue, as like a religionits there, but you dont see it. And so I think that by calling it out and naming it, it can be an important part of the process. I hope that the film can contribute in that way.

The documentary is part of the award-winning Op-Docs series of the New York Times. The newspaper shared a Pulitzer Prize in 2018 for exposing the Harvey Weinstein scandal, reportage that set off a societal reckoning with sexual abuse of women by men in Hollywood and other industries.

[The Times] played such an important role in breaking and really moving along and pushing it to be really an international story, the Weinstein story, Novack notes. For the film to exist on their site, it was a natural audience, and it really meant a lot to us personally to have it there.

The final five Oscar nominees in the documentary shorts category will be announced Monday, March 15. In the meantime, Novack and Rossi are savoring the shortlist recognition.

I hope that it will bring awareness to the film, and that more people will see it, Novack tells Deadline. It means a lot also that maybe some of the filmmaking [choices] resonated with people who are our peers.

To the extent that it is taking a position which is political, and that its taking some formal risks, or is not conventional, its really heartening to have this recognition of the film, Rossi affirms. If people can think about the issue of survivors coming forward and being disbelieved, and from this maybe reconsider some of the entrenched cultural norms, every effort to change that is tremendously important.

Follow this link:
Hysterical Girl Filmmakers On How Freuds Study Of Traumatized Girl Impacts Today, From Clarence Thomas Hearings To Brett Kavanaugh - Deadline

I assume its overkill to continue listing the evidence against death row inmate Kevin Cooper, duly convicted of committing a quadruple murder back in 1983. The blinding proof of his guilt was covered in last weeks column.

To review, this included shoeprint evidence, footprint evidence, cigarette and tobacco evidence, blood evidence and DNA evidence, proving that this violent rapist and mental hospital escapee:

hid out in a house next to Doug and Peggy Ryens Chino Hills, California, home for two days after escaping from prison;

used a hatchet and hunting knife taken from his hideout to hack to death two adults and two children at the Ryen home andcritically wound a third child;

stole the familys station wagon and later abandoned it in Long Beach, along with his DNA on prison-issued cigarettes, before escaping to Mexico;

returned to California, where he raped a woman at knifepoint, leading to his capture.

This week, well consider the specific claims made by The New York Times Nicholas Kristof purporting to raise doubts about Coopers guilt.

Kristofs special pleading proves that no one on death row is innocent. I didnt pick this case. The anti-death penalty zealots picked it, splashing it across the Newspaper of Record. I have to believe they didnt choosetheir worst example to showcase,so lets look at the honesty of their arguments about Kevin Cooper.

KRISTOF:

Although Josh [the 8-year-old who miraculously survived the hatchet attack] had indicated that the attack was committed by several white men, the sheriff announced just four days after the bodies were found that the sole suspect was Kevin Cooper

First of all, eyewitness testimony is the least credible evidence, particularly in the case of children - as the child molestation hysteria of the 1980s demonstrated and even more particularly in the case of a child whos found lying in a bloody mess surrounded by his murdered familymembersafter having his throat slit and being attacked with a hatchet.

In any event, Joshnever said he saw three men.He said he initially thought it must have been the three Mexicans who had stopped by the house looking for work earlier in the evening. But even in his initial interviews from his hospital bed, he said he onlysawone assailant in the house:a man with bushy hair.

KRISTOF:

Sadly, a tan T-shirt believed to have been worn by one of the killers didnt produce enough DNA to provide a profile.

That IS sad. Luckily, its also not true. The Department of Justice DNA lab at UC Berkeley did find Coopers DNA on the tan T-shirt discarded near the murder house, which also containedpartial DNA profiles of two of the victims, Doug and Peggy Ryen.

KRISTOF:

Could the San Bernardino County Sheriffs Office really have planted evidence, including placing Coopers blood on the tan T-shirt? We do know that the sheriffs office had a history of going rogue. Floyd Tidwell, the sheriff, was himself later convicted of four felony counts for stealing 523 guns from the evidence room [further denunciations of the sheriffs department].

The planted evidence ruse is a popular one for springing murderers, except oops! the T-shirt tested by the Berkeley DNA labwasnt in the possession of the sheriffs office.The tan T-shirt, along with the cigarette butts from the Ryens station wagon, had been in the custody of the San Diego Superior Court Evidence Clerk from the end of the trial right up until 2001, when they were shipped directly to the Berkeley DNA Laboratory for testing.

KRISTOF:

Likewise, hairs found clutched in the victims hands werent Coopers (no hairs from an African-American were found at the crime scene) but didnt lead to a match with a suspect, either.

While I love the idea of a 10-year-old girl ripping an African Americans hair out by the root as he came at her with a hatchet, the clutched hair nonsense has already been thoroughly investigated and dismissed by the courts.

A team of DNA experts spent weeks testing hairs from Jessicas hands, as well as two hairs found on Doug Ryens right hand and one hair from Christopher Hughes arm. Their conclusion? The testing failed to identify another assailant and confirmed that all tested hairs most likely came from one or more of the victims.

As U.S. District Court Judge Marilyn L. Huffexplained:

This should not be surprising.The hairs adhered to the victims bodies, including their hands, because there was a large amount of blood on the victims and a large amount of hair on the debris-ridden carpet. Also, the victims each sustained hatchet wounds to the head, causing clumps of cut hair to fall to the ground. Both animal and human hair were recovered from the hands of the victims. Just as with the animal hairs, the cut and shed human hairs adhered to the bloodied victims hands because the victims came in contact with the carpet when they were dying on the floor.

Finally, Kristof tries to pin the murder on other suspects (whom we know arent guilty or hed be defending them).

KRISTOF:

A different longtime suspect in the case recounted, not long after the murders, how he had killed the Ryens and Chris Hughes.

I guess confessions are only questionable in the case of the Central Park rapists. Kristof doesnt say who the confessor is specifically, but it sounds like the one repeatedly put forward by Coopers lawyers. Courts have characterized this so-called confession asa mental patients secondhand version of a confession.

KRISTOF:

This other suspect is a white man whom Ill identify just by his first name, Lee, for he must be presumed innocent

Lee came to the attention of the authorities during the investigation after his girlfriend, Diana Roper, fingered him as the killer: She reported that he had returned home late on the night of the killings wearing bloody coveralls, in a car that resembled the Ryens station wagon.

Roper turned Lees bloody coveralls over to the sheriffs office which eventually threw them away without testing them. By then, the sheriffs office had arrested Cooper, and deputies didnt want a complication.

Dont be fooled by Kristofs fake humility he must be presumed innocent all that blather about what Roper said was invented by defense attorneys.

Roper was not technically Lees girlfriend: She was his bitter ex. Far from bloody, the few red splotches on the coveralls were most likely paint (along with manure and dirt). Roper told investigators that she didnt even know if the coveralls belonged to Lee.

But let me quote from the court that reviewed the coveralls evidence: [I]ssues of guilt, innocence and sentence should never be decided on information obtained from persons whobelieve they are witches and believe an article of clothing is connected to a crime because of a vision they receive during a trance.(Emphasis mine.)

Yes, Ropers evidence was based on a vision she had during a trance because she believed she was a witch. These facts are exhaustively detailed in court orders and opinions but are entirely absent from the vast news coverage of Coopers case. Might distract from the claim that the sheriffs office tossed the coveralls only to avoid a complication in their single-minded pursuit of the wrong man as Kristof claims.

No one on death row, not one person, is innocent. Believe nothing you read in the media about their putative innocence. Its always lies and nonsense, as with Kristofs pet murderer, Kevin Cooper.

Visit link:
LIBERALS [HEART] MURDERERS! - Ann Coulter

Comedy Central hosts Roasts of various celebrities, especially those whove been involved in a scandal recently. The insults are usually things said in jest about the recipients of said insults and are a fun way of allowing celebrities to let off steam about the person on the hot seat.

When Comedy Central decided to host the Roast of Rob Lowe in 2016, they didnt anticipate that an unexpected guest would outweigh Lowe with the number of insults they received. Pundit Ann Coulter got so much heat it was almost cringy to watch. Among those who insulted Coulter was renowned singer, Jewel. Read on to find out what Jewel had to say about Coulter.

The musician was born in Utah, but shortly after, her family moved to their Alaska homestead. Jewels parents divorced when she was eight, and she moved in with her father. She and her father lived at a house that was far away from town, and she spent most of her time exploring the outdoors. Jewel performed in bars around the town and sometimes would perform with her father. After receiving a scholarship to a Michigan Art School, she moved and learned how to play the guitar. She began songwriting at the art school. She then moved to California and began playing in coffee houses.

The talented singer was discovered during one of the days she was playing at a coffee shop. She got signed to Atlantic Records and released her first album in 1995 called Pieces of You. The album, however, didnt break even. Her big break came when she curtain-raised for Bob Dylan in 1997, and her song Who Will Save Your Soul got massive airplay. Although the album was met with lukewarm reviews, it made it to the top 4 on the Billboard charts.

Jewel is known for her vulnerable lyrics and sweet melodies. However, in 2003 the songbird released a pop-sounding album, which was a stark contrast to her previous sound. Fans and critics didnt like the album and criticized her a lot saying that she had strayed too far from her catchy melodic and folksy sound.

RELATED: What Is Singer-Songwriter Jewels Net Worth?

Aside from making music, Jewel also doubles as an author and actor. She has starred in various movies such as Framed for Murder: A Fixer Upper Mystery and Concrete Evidence: A Fixer Upper Mystery. In both of these movies, Jewel plays a contractor and investigator called Shannon Hughes.

In 2016 Jewel was invited to the Roast of Rob Lowe to provide a musical approach to the event. She had met Lowe when the two were to film The Lyons Den. She appeared for one episode of the show and the two remained friends. During the Roast session, the singer performed a parody of her hit song, You Were Meant for Me. In the piece, Jewel joked about being the 16-year-old who was having sex with Lowe in his 1988 sex tape. Other people who were on the show included Pete Davidson, David Spade, and Ann Coulter.

Coulter is known for her unfiltered and often offensive comments and views about anything not Republican. She is a well-known Conservative pundit who doesnt hold back from being the devils advocate. Coulter is famous for her hateful views, racist comments, and false and exaggerated claims about historical events.

During the Roast, many people seemed to have aimed most of their insults toward Coulter, which seemed to make the pundit visibly uncomfortable. Many of the insults aimed at Coulter used sexist tropes and misogynistic language. However, singer Jewel seemingly stole the show when she said, As a feminist, I dont agree with whats being said here but as someone who hates Anne Coulter, Im delighted, a statement which the crowd applauded.

View post:
Jewel Hates Sexist Jokes But Will Let It Slide When Theyre Aimed at Ann Coulter - Showbiz Cheat Sheet