What a mouth: Yes, Ann Coulter exaggerates, but she's got a point

Dallas Morning News | Mark Davis:

“So, here's the deal – let's all be big boys and girls and realize that anyone intentionally entering a vigorous arena of debate is fair game. And instead of wasting our time hand-wringing over whose style wounds our sensibilities, let's focus on who has a point and who does not.”

Ed Cognoski responds:

So, let's focus on the point. The women in question are criticizing this nation's response to 9/11. Ms Coulter and her apologist Mark Davis are trashing the women's reputations. Who has a point worthy of respect? It's a no-brainer. And I'm not referring to Mr Davis.

I can understand why Coulter and Davis act as they do. Ms Coulter is selling books, mostly to right wing nuts. Mr Davis makes a living from inciting the same audience on talk radio. The politics of personal destruction plays very well with their audience.

What I don't understand is why The Dallas Morning News is a party to this. Providing space for a diversity of opinion on the op-ed pages is one thing. But opinion that crosses the line from reasoned debate to vicious personal attacks has no place in civil society. This isn't a legal question. Ms Coulter may have a legal right to write what she has. Mr Davis has a legal right to squeal in delight over the outrage generated by her reprehensible remarks. It's a question of sound editorial judgment. The DMN failed miserably in this case.