And I have the right to agree with that.

Unless, of course, she decides she needs money and wants to sue anyone who says nasty or naughty things about her for defamation.
Which, as she is not a government, she can do legally in some states - even if it is true that she is a pathetic attention-seeking professional troll.

What is even more sadly pathetic that two lack-wits went ahead and took her bait, instead of recognizing the bridge they decided to rush to prove their idiotic ideological purity had a huge troll under it.

Haele

If you were, say, to accuse Geller of being a paid agent of the Israeli government, that would be defamation. But simply calling her a troll is like calling someone an asshole. It's an expression of opinion and not of fact.

http://injury-law.freeadvice.com/injury-law/libel_and_slander/insults_epithets.htm

Insults and epithets are usually not considered to be defamatory because they are emotional outbursts and the intent of the person is to show displeasure or dislike. They are not normally meant to harm the person to whom they are directed, so would not generally meet the criteria required under the law for a defamation suit.

Defamation is, by nature, a false statement made to sound true and meant to cause harm. Examples may include subjecting a person to ridicule or contempt and/or causing him to be shunned or avoided. Defamation could also cause injury to the victim in his occupation.

But I might pay to see Geller vs Coulter

Say what you will, this was a brilliant move on her part. Support from the far right and the far left all in one package.

Brilliant. She's despicable beyond words.

If we survive as a nation for another 100 years, I will be amazed. We seem too stupid as a people, to be able to cope for much longer with each other.

I expect the fundie idiot elite to start mobilizing any day now against the liberal arts and all people of color.