No, Jesse, you’re not alone. I don’t find Coulter especially attractive, and not just because she’s a vicious, foaming-at-the-mouth intellectual lightweight. Apparently, neocons are determined to attribute any criticism of their hotheaded hero to jealousy of Coulter’s looks. That’s the claim they’re making about Sara Rimensnyder in response to a recent article in Reason. Well, you tell me:

vs.

Umm, yeeeeah, whatever. Sorry Ann; not even in the same league.

UPDATE: You know, the title for this post was tounge-in-cheek, but given that everyone seems to have a favorite political hottie, maybe there should be pundit pageants. There could be op-ed, public speaking, and swimwear categories, with the winners of the Mr. & Ms. Conservative / Liberal / Libertarian / Socialist (assuming socialists would participate in such a commodifying spectacle) competitions crowned King and Queen of the Punditocracy. Nominations?

UPDATE 2: So most of this feeding frenzy is just lower-level conservative feces throwing by people who think anyone who criticizes their heroine must be a “liberal Stalinist.” But a few posters, like chimps mimicing human behavior, attempt something resembling an argument — to wit, they object that Sara only attacks the “form” of Coulter’s writing, rather than the content. But of course, that’s precisely the point. Coulter’s content is largely unremarkable; if all the substance of her work were expressed in civil tones by some middle aged guy, they wouldn’t even rate as a mediocre blog. Her fame, like that of, say, David Horowitz is a pure function of style. That was the point of the original article. So of course her “content” was ignored — as with Oakland, there’s no there there.