When I checked the Huffington Post earlier today it only seemed to have two subjects - al Zarqawi and Ann Coulter.
al-Zarqawi was the most prominent terrorist in Iraq. He was responsible for numerous deaths, some of them done by his own hand on camera. He was actively trying to start a civil war - not a "low level" one but a major, all-out one. He also blew up the UN headquarters in Baghdad and the Golden Mosque. So what do the Huffies have to say about his death? Either that he wasn't really important or that we should have killed him four years ago - back when his relationship with al-Qeada was in question. Somehow I just can't see Eric Alterman approving of us killing someone in a foreign country who was, at the time, not a threat to America.
The truth is that something went right under Bush and it would kill them to admit it.
The other topic is Ann Coulter. Ann is a conservative shock jock. She regularly makes over-the-top statements. In this case, he was talking about a quartet of 9/11 widows. She referred to them as "witches" and said "I've never seen people enjoying their husbands' deaths so much."
Like I said - over the top.
But who are these widows and why would Ann say such things about them? Like Cindy Shehan, they are over-the-top themselves. One of them sued naming George W. Bush, Richard Cheney, John Ashcroft, Donald Rumsfeld, George Tenet, Norman Mineta, Peter G. Peterson, Condoleezza Rice, George H.W. Bush and Kenneth Feinberg, in addition to "Other unnamed past, present, officials, representatives, agents, and private consultants of the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA". She insists that President Bush knew in advance about the 9/11 attacks and allowed them to happen in order to build support for the war against terrorism. It would be nice if someone mentioned this when talking about Coulter.
It doesn't matter. The controversy will sell lots of copies of Coulter's books.