Rhetorical Analysis Of Ann Coulter's Essay '

Though Coulter address evidence as a source of her belief, she draws a lot from her strong rhetoric and flawed logic to further her claims. Known as a political commentator, Ann Coulter has a polemic tone that is meant to rile the populace and to incite emotional outrage towards her commentary. Drawing from her points, it is clear that she cares little about the legitimacy and truthfulness of her article, but rather its strength of emotional appeal. Coulter attacks the character of hard working prosecutors and individuals involved in the case, and uses that as a basis for the events that unfold. Piling on with her harsh rhetoric is lines that are merely uncivilized statements that ridicule the overall situations. She turns current events of …show more content…
The Central Park jogger case is still centered around the fact that an innocent woman was assaulted and raped, left for dead in the park; it is not just about the miscarriage of justice that sent five youths to prison for a crime they did not commit. Rather than remotely having any sympathy for the victim, she uses the idea of rape for satiric effect in her article. Coulter even brings politics into her claim, outlandishly stating that “liberals are opposed to rape in the abstract, but when it comes to actual rapists, they're all for them” (Coulter). No one, regardless of political alignment, supports rape in any sort of way. Just because liberals are the “enemy” of Coulter’s political standing, it gives her no right to turn the case into a conspiracy of the left protecting rapists. Once she added this statement, she essentially loses all her credibility as a writer, and it would make her argument and stance meaningless. Harkening back to her disregard of DNA matching, she has the audacity to exclaim that “Hallmark should have a greeting card: ‘Guess whose semen wasn't found anywhere on the rape victim?’ (Open card) ‘I'm so proud of you, son!’”, a vile attempt to ridicule the case (Coulter). She lacks any sort of respect for both the jogger victim and the Central Park Five by turning this situation into a laughing matter. She concludes her article by explaining to the reader how “de Blasio wants to hold down our legs while the "Central Park Five" rape us, again”, an extremely inflammatory statement that leaves the reader questioning the legitimacy of the entire piece (Coulter). While Coulter believes that her strong rhetoric is key to tapping into the emotions of the reader to draw them into her argument, it in fact does the exact