Reason Writers on Stossel: Matt Welch Discusses Post-9/11 Policies With Ann Coulter

On Thursday, Sept. 8, Reason Editor in Chief Matt Welch went on a special 9/11-themed episode of Fox Business Network's Stossel to debate with firebrand conservative commentator Ann Coulter whether United States policies in response to the horrid attacks of 10 years ago have made us safer. Whole panel discussion comes in at just over 10 minutes:

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  • ||

    Ann looks like she shined her carapace just for you, Matt.

    Not to be alarmist, but you can never really be sure if she laid any eggs in you until they are about to hatch. Stay near a hospital for the next 72 hours, just to be safe.

  • Paul||

    I thought the plan was to have Matt lay his eggs in her... so to speak...

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    They definitely made out in the green room before the show. Unless Welch happens to wear the same color lipstick.

  • ||

    I see your mistake. The Coulter reproduces much like the gall wasp, parthenogenesis through a host organism. In this case, her preferred medium is TV co-pundits. This is why she is on TV so often. It is a biological imperative to mate, but every TV appearance makes it much more likely that some will expose the undying abortion that is her genetic doom.

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    You're both right, and you're both wrong. It might have actually happened on camera. It's possible Ann's uncircumcised ovipositor met Matt halfway, right there, under the desk.

  • ||

    I'd hit that. Not gonna lie.

  • ||

    When her chittering brood is gnawing on your wet bones, I'll remind you of that right before you pass out from terror and pain.

  • ||

    As long as she's wetting my bone, she can gnaw all she wants.
    just sayin..

  • the real OO||

    dunno, her pervic bone would totally bruise

  • ||

    Why the hate?

  • Ken E.||

    Would you believe some are now tying IRAN to 9/11?

  • Paul||

    Dude, they were tying tourists taking pictures at... tourist attractions to 9/11 ten years ago.

  • twenty-something||

    So future President Perry will probably invade Iran?

  • Paul||

    As soon as current president Obama is done with Libya, yeah.

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    During the show I pitched the idea of Matt and Ann driving around the country together in a van solving crimes. Good cop/waterboarding cop. That's something I would watch.

  • Paul||

    Who would be the straight man?

  • ||

    I think it's awesome that Matt Welch gets his voice heard out there on the airwaves--and I wish Americans were smarter...to the point that having Ann Coulter on the show wouldn't drive viewership.

    The woman's a walking talking straw man. She's made a career of striving to be being the straw man liberals are always screaming about. ...but in the end, she's just a straw man.

    I had a hard time getting past the point where she said she'd have taken Iraq--rather than Afghanistan--in the War on Terror. There's no compelling reason to make such a statement--unless she's just striving to be the left's straw man.

    On the list of those who do the most harm to the cause of old school Barry Goldwater/Ronald Reagan conservatism, people like Ann Coulter come in second (just behind people like George W. Bush). She makes a mockery of conservatism--and herself the butt of liberal jokes. ...I can't imagine any pundit being more harmful to the conservative cause--if you're concerned about trying to appeal to swing voters anyway.

    Thank God she doesn't call herself a "libertarian". That would be a millstone around our necks.

  • Jeff P||

    I understand the need to get the word out and all, but speaking with one of the destroyers of modern political discourse as if she is in any way relevant does nothing accept legitimize her. Debating the Time Cube guy or appearing on WWE would be a more effective use of time.

  • ||

    I'm sympathetic to that argument.

    The thing is that she'll be on the air regardless. How can less libertarian voices be better?

    The world's a better place for Matt Welch being there to counter Coulter's vile garbage. I'm clicking the link to make another donation to Reason right now!

  • ||

  • Matt Welch||

    Thank you, Ken Shultz!

  • Paul||

    How can less libertarian voices be better

    I think Tim Cavanaugh would suggest "fewer libertarian voices". Where is Cavanaugh? Can we get a ruling on this?

  • Matt Welch||

    Well, there's a meaning of "less" here that could be appropriate. As in "Ann Coulter's voice is *less libertarian* than Tim Cavanaugh's"....

  • ||

    I was going for absolute value there.

    If 45% of what people hear is knee jerk conservatism--how can hearing only 3% from libertarians be better than hearing 5% from libertarians?

    That's what I was goin' for anyway.

    What I was trying to say wasn't about how many libertarian voices make up the 5%; it was about 5% being better than 3%.

  • Paul||

    Fiiiine.

  • ||

    If the Obama Campaign were smart? They'd pay for Ann Coulter to go on a speaking tour--and do everything they could to get her television coverage.

    Because the more she talks? The more people want to vote for whomever she opposes. Matt Welch is to Ann Coulter like music is to scratching a chalkboard. And you gotta love the idea of Matt Welch's brand of libertarianism being sent out on the airwaves as the alternative to Ann Coulter's brand of conservatism.

    No, America, libertarians aren't just conservatives who want to smoke out--and that segment's your proof!

  • Apogee||

    If the Obama Campaign were smart?

    There's your problem.

  • Doug||

    Because the more she talks? The more people want to vote for whomever she opposes.

    Agree. Some conservatives still banter on about 9/11, National Security, GWoT the same way they did in '08, clearly oblivous that that's what cost them the election. Santorum and Newt sounded the same way on Wednesday.

  • affenkopf||

    Ann Coulter: People who have control over other people will become fascists, that's why we need more torture.

  • ||

    Is that an actual quote?

  • Apogee||

    No, but she did make both of those points in reverse order.

  • ChrisO||

    Stossel's look at 3:50 is priceless. "This woman is nuts."

  • hmm tell me more...||

    Stossel: but there are also people who want to murder us.

    Welch: Yes there are, and there are effective ways of doing it and ineffective ways of doing it.

  • J||

    I have little good to say about Coulter, but I still give props to Welch for not being disrespectful and condescending towards her. Others who argue against her seem to think that merely not being Ann Coulter makes them right. Welch actually made real responses. Which, in turn, made her look sillier than she does elsewhere.

  • ||

    why did Matt allow Coulter to get away with her remark labeling him as a "liberal"?

GET REASON MAGAZINE

Get Reason's print or digital edition before it’s posted online

  • Video Game Nation: How gaming is making America freer – and more fun.
  • Matt Welch: How the left turned against free speech.
  • Nothing Left to Cut? Congress can’t live within their means.
  • And much more.

SUBSCRIBE

advertisement