LAT Columnist: Ann Coulter Is A 'Pornographer'

In his latest "Regarding Media" column in the Los Angeles Times (Sat. June 10, 2006), the perpetually clueless Tim Rutten claims that author Ann Coulter is a "pornographer" and her latest tome is "pornography" and "hate." ("Like most pornographers ... [Coulter] is resourceful in the service of her own economic and other interests.") In addition, Rutten expounds (emphases mine),

If you've ever encountered Coulter on television or glanced at one of her book covers — all of which feature a "glamour shot" photo — you've probably noticed that she's inevitably dressed in an improbably short and low-cut black dress. At a gaunt 45 years of age, you might think the ingénue with fangs shtick would be wearing rather thin. Still, it's always been true that a certain segment of pornography consumers derive an erotic charge from the trappings of hate. Black leather and relic Nazi paraphernalia, for example, have a kind of iconic status in the sadomasochistic subcultures inclined toward fetishism.

Is Rutten comparing Coulter's book to "black leather and relic Nazi paraphernalia"? Ugh. And, apparently, if I'm a purchaser of Ann Coulter's Godless, I'm part of the "sadomasochistic subcultures inclined toward fetishism"? Good grief.

Rutten's dim piece also appears to challenge the practice of "name calling," yet he's not shy to throw around some name calling of his own. In addition to plastering Coulter as a "pornographer" and an "ingénue with fangs," Rutten also attacks Fox's Bill O'Reilly as "the Diamond Jim Brady of televised epithets" (Diamond Jim Brady at Wikipedia).

Rutten's relentless record of liberal bias has been documented in several places, including here, here, here, here, here, here, and here. (Patterico is a must-read for followers of the LA Times.)

Equally as frustrating is that Rutten has had the gall to actually portray himself as a "pretty conservative guy." No. He's not kidding. (Rutten has actually called himself, "pro-life," yet he does not favor the reversal of Roe v. Wade. Wha-?)

Maybe if Rutten would have shown as much criticism of the hateful works of the likes of Ted Rall (here, here, here, here, and here), Tom Toles (here), and Markos Moulitsas Zúniga (“Daily Kos”), he could gain an ounce of credibility. Instead, Rutten remains disillusioned in the belief that he is a balanced reporter.