Thanks, Ann; Update: Audio added; Update: Video added
posted at 4:27 pm on March 2, 2007 by Bryan
Ann Coulter is speaking at CPAC as I write. As is typical, she gave a brief speech full of her usual witticisms, including a few brilliant attacks on Al Gore’s green hypocrisy. All was good. Untill the last few seconds, when she launched into a joke about John Edwards.
Here’s what she said.
“I’d say something about John Edwards, but if you say ‘faggot’ you have to go to rehab.”
I’m no fan of John Edwards, but that’s just a stupid joke. It’s over the line. The laughter it generated across the room was more than a little annoying.
Last year it was “raghead.” This year it’s calling John Edwards a “faggot.” Two years in a row, Coulter has finished up an otherwise sharp CPAC routine with an obnoxious slur that liberals will fling at conservatives for years to come.
Thanks, Ann.
—
So what else is going on?
A lot. We interviewed a couple of presidential candidates. We asked a hard-hitting question of some of the ladies here at CPAC. I signed my first, and likely last, autograph. And we (well, Michelle) danced a revolution.
Update (AP): Sean Hackbarth has audio of Coulter.
Update (AP): Howard Dean wants the GOP candidates to formally denounce what Coulter said.
Update (AP): Here’s the video.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: 1 2 3 4 Next »
Bryan, you’ve really arrived if you’re signing autographs!
dalewalt on March 2, 2007 at 4:30 PM
Screw Ann. I was a fan when I thought her schtick was more than just schtick.
Enrique on March 2, 2007 at 4:30 PM
IIRC, somebody actually did go to rehab for calling someone a “faggot” to mask their homophobia as a side effect of alcoholism. I don’t remember who it was, but if I could, the joke would probably be a lot funnier. It sounds like Ann hit the Dennis Miller ratio on that one.
Savage on March 2, 2007 at 4:35 PM
It’s important to realize that Ann does schtick. Bryan, it is ridiculous to accept liberal’s using Ann’s quotes to tar the right anymore than I would use Rosie’s.
Ann’s humor might not be to your taste but any Lefty who claims that what she says tells you anything about conservatives should be laughed at.
Bill C on March 2, 2007 at 4:36 PM
am I supposed to be outraged that Ann used the word or used the word to describe Breck? I’m confused and need to write this one down so I can keep up on my pc-lish.
Editor on March 2, 2007 at 4:37 PM
Girls with Guns, and Ann at that ! What a turn on !
abinitioadinfinitum on March 2, 2007 at 4:41 PM
Since the former is incident to the latter, what you’re asking is “Should I be outraged that Ann Coulter said “faggot” at a very public and heavily covered conservative event?
The answer is yes.
DaveS on March 2, 2007 at 4:42 PM
Actually, I love Ann more every day. I recently heard someone on the Right say that sometimes we need to say some things out loud instead of just thinking them. That’s what Ann does. She effectively tells the Left, “Either you believe in free speech or your don’t!” The fact that people on the Right would freak out about calling an effete sissy like Edwards a “faggot” is simply proof that we’ve bought into their schtick.
dostrick on March 2, 2007 at 4:42 PM
Annie’s our dirty street fighter, and she eats their dirty street fighters for a light snack. Don’t ask her to address our conservative parliament if you don’t like her style.
dhimwit on March 2, 2007 at 4:43 PM
Much like George Carlin, Ann pushes the language barrier. She does it to get a rise out of liberals, who obviously feel that there is a double-standard when it comes to language.
JinxMcHue on March 2, 2007 at 4:44 PM
I don’t think criticizing Coulter for making a stupid joke is ‘freaking out.’
Slublog on March 2, 2007 at 4:44 PM
When the left sticks up for NAMBLA and compares Bush to Hitler its free speech. Ann calls Edwards queer and shes off the rails heading for a trainwreck? I love Ann as she has done a great deal to advance the cause of conservatism. One of the reasons she is so successful is she knows how to get press. This proves that for sure. I know some of you don’t like to get your hands dirty and want to appear a notch or two above the lefties in decorum but I have news for you.. They don’t care. Not only that but Mr. & Mrs. undecided voter don’t care either. All you have to do is see what the entertainment industry is selling. You don’t have to agree with it but you do have to admit they know how to sell products and messages. Many of us long for the days when we were growing up and it was okay to be a tiny bit intolerant of others. After all what is liberty without the freedom to be intolerant of others. Plus, have you seen John Edwards? I knew there was something about him.
RobertCSampson on March 2, 2007 at 4:46 PM
Or could it be that she endorsed Romney? Seriously, you guys need to get off the Rudy man love and look at the issues and the positions. Rudy is only slightly to the right of Hillary!
Slightly.
JackStraw on March 2, 2007 at 4:46 PM
I think Ann makes these over-the-top comments to keep herself at the forefront. As conservatives, we might groan at them, but for the left, it’s fuel for the fire. She still writes very good and well-researched articles.
Bryan – great job on your tv appearance at Red Eye. Just watched it here.
thedecider on March 2, 2007 at 4:47 PM
she’s explained this at cpacs past.
the idea is that it works for liberals. “moderate” liberals are as strident and extreme as they are because they have people like michael brecker and ward churchil saying the unspeakable. the entire left wraps it together with the free speech red herring.
in any case. she sees herself as splitting the soil for deeper penetration of conservative policies. we’re supposed to circle the wagons around her and offer the liberalish apologia: “what she said was terrible, and i utterly reject it and renounce all affiliation whith her and her vile words, BUT far more dangerous than a hateful slur uttered here and there, is the thickening opposition to free speech which chills public discourse. our first ammendment…”
but, no ann. i’m not a liberal. i can be strategic with my message without emulating everything about the left which makes them vile and weasley.
and besides, what conservative policy does calling edwards a “faggot” break ground for? the one where we just wholesale introduce leviticus as an ammendment? no thanks. we’ve got too much of that already, and i search in vain for any prohibition to gay identity in any of the works of kirk or burke.
jummy on March 2, 2007 at 4:48 PM
how awkward…
Lehosh on March 2, 2007 at 4:52 PM
I should have been more specific, I wasn’t just referencing Bryan here. I also had in mind encounters I’ve had with other conservatives like him. Some of them have passively absorbed some Lefty attitudes from the culture and don’t realize it.
dostrick on March 2, 2007 at 4:53 PM
I absolutely agree with Ann Coulter in this instance; the word she used was singularly appropriate and and ideal descriptor,
IntheNet on March 2, 2007 at 4:54 PM
this is called weasle envy. you’ve accepted the left’s defense of their indefensible elements. having accepted their defense, you feel entitled to be indefensibly crude and get a pass for it too.
this is a corrupt mentality.
the only way to not be undertaken by this kind of corruption is to NEVER ACCEPT A LIBERAL’S EXCUSES IN THE FIRST PLACE. NEVER ABSOLVE THEM OF ANYTHING EVER. never let an offront of theirs simply fade into normalcy just to be done with it.
jummy on March 2, 2007 at 4:56 PM
I don’t know. Insulting Edwards like that isn’t funny, but it is funny (in my mind) how many celebrities have gone to rehab over saying one word.
To me that seemed to be the whole point of the joke, but maybe I’m just trying too hard.
Esthier on March 2, 2007 at 4:57 PM
My point is that it’s not pc-ism to stand up for civility in politics. I like what jummy said above – “i can be strategic with my message without emulating everything about the left which makes them vile and weasley.”
Slublog on March 2, 2007 at 4:57 PM
She should have used “Silky Pony”………
PinkyBigglesworth on March 2, 2007 at 4:57 PM
WTG guys… become the Republikkkan stereotype.
I guess we can take some comfort in the fact that Edwards isn’t actually gay, so when the left excoriates y’all for active and tacit approval of Anne’s language we can all pretend it was “colloquial” use of the word, like the 155,000 pages of Kos trash, and not actually “hateful”.
Lehosh on March 2, 2007 at 4:58 PM
Guess I’m doomed.
Editor on March 2, 2007 at 4:59 PM
I don’t care if it is funny, it’s just wrong.
You can either be a funny/crude comedian or a political pundit, but you can’t be both.
Rightwingsparkle on March 2, 2007 at 4:59 PM
dostrick, it’s the other way around. people who are coarse and make politics a practice of hurling slurs are the ones who have absorbed leftwing attitudes.
the regret brian is expressing is what used to be known as decency.
jummy on March 2, 2007 at 5:00 PM
It was that actor on tv a few weeks ago (can’t remember his name either). So you can get offended all you want, but her joke is founded on reality.
forged rite on March 2, 2007 at 5:03 PM
So what is Rosie?
Esthier on March 2, 2007 at 5:03 PM
Faggot used to be used as a description for someone that is a little wimp. Heaven forbid someone uses the term “Fag”. Comedy Central bleeps it faster than the other “F” word. Mel Brooks movies have it dropped on every channel. Who are we afraid of offending? Perfumed, velvet clad fops? Can we say “fops”?
What’s wrong with “raghead”? Good grief? If they could use “krauts” and “nips” during WWII against fascist killers, we at least deserve one good term for modern fascist killers with their faces wrapped in Italian tablecloths.
Hening on March 2, 2007 at 5:05 PM
So what is Rosie?
I wouldn’t call her either, but she is an example on the left of why one should pick one or that other.
She was quite well liked when she was just a comedian and not a screeching political activist.
Rightwingsparkle on March 2, 2007 at 5:06 PM
Maybe she just made a “botched” joke. No, seriously, Jummy, is calling Edwards “faggot” worse than saying that other Ann defenders and I have a “corrupt mentality” and that we are guilty of “weasel envy”? Sticks and stones, my friend. Plus, its your logic thats flawed. I can’t see where I accepted the lefts defense of anything. I merely pointed out that she said this to get a reaction and judging by the voluminous posting action going on here, it worked! Plus our goal is to win back power. Schoolyard tactics work in America. As I have said, look around.
RobertCSampson on March 2, 2007 at 5:07 PM
Isaiah Washington. He plays Preston Burke on “Grey’s Anatomy.” One of his co-workers is gay, and aparently the comment (though Isaiah denied making the comment) was directed at him.
This was months ago. Recently, at some awards show (not the Oscars), Isaiah talked to reporters and said “I never called him a f@ggot” and has since appologized for saying it then. He may also have appologized for saying it the first time, but I could be wrong about that.
The twist is that he’s black, but that hasn’t really given him a pass on the issue.
Esthier on March 2, 2007 at 5:07 PM
We’re not sure yet, but a team of scientists is on the case.
Slublog on March 2, 2007 at 5:08 PM
Sorry, but I just haven’t seen in change of opinions on here except for in places like this.
Esthier on March 2, 2007 at 5:09 PM
Lardtard.
I’m pretty sure that’s PC.
fogw on March 2, 2007 at 5:12 PM
red herring. nobody’s arguing that here joke was topical.
jummy on March 2, 2007 at 5:19 PM
eh. who cares what she said…it really doesn’t matter – she can just show up and she becomes fodder for the left.
pullingmyhairout on March 2, 2007 at 5:19 PM
Ridiculous. She has been doing this shtick for years. CPAC either knew exactly what they were getting when they booked her, again, or they are too stupid to be in charge of a lemonade stand.
Liberal partisans go out of their way every day to call Cheney a war criminal or Bush a moron and everyone on the right gets their panties in a twist. Ann Coulter is a conservative fire breather, not a political consultant, not a candidate. Her job is to fire up the base.
If the Dems are spending all their time firing away at her, which she loves, they will spend less time taking shots at the candidates. Or did you think she chased away all those moderates who were going to vote Republican? Ha.
JackStraw on March 2, 2007 at 5:19 PM
thanks for the recognition.
jummy on March 2, 2007 at 5:19 PM
According to Carlin, a fag is someone who won’t go beat up queers with you. Maybe that is what she meant.
B Moe on March 2, 2007 at 5:22 PM
I just can’t believe she’d liken Edwards to a small bundle of sticks or a cigarrette. I’d think she’d use a more descriptive term, like “homo” to get people really offended.
NTWR on March 2, 2007 at 5:22 PM
Or even worse, “sissy.”
NTWR on March 2, 2007 at 5:24 PM
Ann should tone it down to, let’s say, the level of Joy Behar of The View, and call people she opposes “murderers”.
Anil Petra on March 2, 2007 at 5:25 PM
So if Coulter can call a presidential candidate a “faggot,” is it okay to call her an “emaciated gorgon”?
Jim Treacher on March 2, 2007 at 5:28 PM
actually no. the current meaning of the word came from a comparison of the way street whores are thought to litter the gutters like ciggarette butts. this was then translated then to the male hustlers who’d do it cheaper. it was never as innocuous as simply meaning “wimp”.
during wwii “boy” was an accepted way to address a black man, who had to drink at a separate fountain and all the rest. what was socially acceptable two generations ago isn’t nessesarily okay today.
jummy on March 2, 2007 at 5:33 PM
Ann’s lady-part is diamond hard.
Some folks aren’t comfortable with that fact.
Stephen M on March 2, 2007 at 5:33 PM
It’s unnecessary, but she’s a big girl, so let her defend it.
Nothing compared to the daily bilge we get from the left.
JammieWearingFool on March 2, 2007 at 5:34 PM
jummy,
You might want to have a peek at the 3rd comment.
Jim Treacher,
Why, yes! I believe it is!
But those legs…
Pablo on March 2, 2007 at 5:34 PM
Maybe she has a new book to be released soon…I can’t wait for her to be attacked in person on it to see what she ‘spits’ out next. It’s not right and it’s never boring.
Entelechy on March 2, 2007 at 5:35 PM
You guys need to relax. I mean, who are you performing for?
Ann was making a multi-faceted crack on several levels. She didn’t exactly go “Kramer” or anything. You act like she diminished us conservatives so horribly with her comments. Get a grip really. If you consider the language and actions of prominent political figures of the past, we live in a very enlightened age. After no “duels” have occurred recently. If you want more insight into how nasty things were in the past.. click here.
RobertCSampson on March 2, 2007 at 5:40 PM
It would seem that the only people that would be offended by someone calling someone a faggot would be someone that was slightly (or more than) homophobic.
:)
Lord Nazh on March 2, 2007 at 5:44 PM
Ann pushes things too far, and this example is just another instance. In calling John Edwards what she did indirectly, she sank to the level of discourse of which she famously (and correctly) accuses liberals of dwelling and bottom-feeding.
She can talk the talk, but she’s got to walk the walk, too. Unless she can provide concrete evidence that John Edwards is gay, she shouldn’t hurl such a slur. I’m rather disappointed in her; she’s a hypocrite.
flutejpl on March 2, 2007 at 5:45 PM
Is saying that word legal?
Rick on March 2, 2007 at 5:48 PM
The left is the left. We should expect more out of the people on our side.
John on March 2, 2007 at 5:49 PM
Ann rules!
budugirl on March 2, 2007 at 5:50 PM
Hey AP, Bryan, Ian, etc.
On one of the message boards a couple of days ago, when you asked for someone to give you an example of someone on the Right who’s as vicious as those on the left, someone gave you an example of Ann Coulter. You (at least one of you), said that Ann “really didn’t count,” because you don’t like and agree with her, and neither do many of the people you know. Therefore she is not representative of most Conservatives, and only representative of just a small lunatic fringe on the right.
Take a look at the comments on this message board. Do you still think that’s the case?
asc85 on March 2, 2007 at 5:56 PM
har har. is that a joke? or is that a strategy you’re earnestly suggesting? because you go on to say amazingly cynical crap like…
yes.
jummy on March 2, 2007 at 6:00 PM
yes. we’re uncomfortable with ann profaning gay people to take a shot against edwards because she’s a “strong woman”. that’s allegedly why i won’t vote for hilliary clinton too.
jummy on March 2, 2007 at 6:06 PM
I think it was a botched joke. She will probably go windsurfing pretty soon. Too bad that will ruin her chances of being elected POTUS.
brtex on March 2, 2007 at 6:07 PM
To paraphrase the great Barry Goldwater: Coarseness in the defense of liberty is no vice; “decency” applied to the enemies of liberty is no virtue.
If calling a pansy a pansy makes me coarse then I will proudly wear that label. Those overly concerned about finesse are the lapdogs of the evil that’s killing our country.
dostrick on March 2, 2007 at 6:08 PM
i guess what we’re supposed to take from that is that it’s okay for the base and the punditry to be bigoted as long as the face people fake decency.
jummy on March 2, 2007 at 6:10 PM
I think we can agree that it is a subjective judgment whether what someone says is PC and/or civil. It depends on how you judge their motivations.
The problem that I have, and the real debate that is happening on this post, is the idea that you should judge whether someone can make a joke about race, ethnicity, religion, gender, etc, based on the speaker’s race, ethnicity, so on and so forth.
IOW, blacks make racist jokes about whites, women about men, Muslims about Christians but converse is not allowed in polite society. That is the definition of PC.
Bill C on March 2, 2007 at 6:11 PM
I tell you folks something, some or your responses to something so ridiculous makes me wonder exactly how “conservative” many of you really are. You’re starting to sound a little like the lefties many seem so opposed to when it comes to “political correctness” (a curse term in my house BTW.)
1) I think many of you are envious you haven’t used the word before to describe the man. I mean, come on, the guy fits the definition to the letter.
2) I’m 42 years old. Ask anyone of my generation and they will remind you that when the term faggot was being tossed around in the 70′s and 80′s more commonly than it is now, it didn’t imply one was gay. It applied one was “effimate” or female like. We used other terms like “light in the loafers” and yes even the word gay. But it did not automatically imply homosexuality.
The response from a conservative group such as this to her “humorous” characterization show just how hung up people are about labels and name calling and I actually find that quite humorous. You folks need to learn how to direct your disgust and contempt at things much more important (Like the socialist/liberals agenda and the camel jockeys that would like to kill us). Also, remember, AC is not a politician or on a politicians staff. She is a journalist/writer and too a certain degree an entertainer, therefore she can take more liberties with the terms she uses to describe people. I for one am much more offended when butt wipes like Rosie PigODonnel get on the air and say my President has ruined our country because of the Patriot act, then I am when a Presidential wannabe is called a faggot.
rayvet on March 2, 2007 at 6:11 PM
To realize Dr. King’s dream: One day we will judge the humor of a joke not by the race/gender/religion of the comic but by the content of the joke.
Bill C on March 2, 2007 at 6:14 PM
Oh, and one more thing. The reason that Ayaan Hirsi Ali is invited on to Real Time and Maher calls her his hero is because he is a racist.
Bill C on March 2, 2007 at 6:16 PM
Annie would not have said this without a plan. She is liberal baiting, and that’s a good thing in my opinion. I wouldn’t want to be the first liberal interviewer that tries to call her down on this, I’m sure her response will singe his eyebrows.
If there is good evidence that Edwards is a homosexual, then …. oh well … the truth hurts. Why do liberals get to say whatever they want, but conservatives can’t even call a rose… a rose?
Remember when Trent Lott simply said something nice about old retiring Senator Strom Thurmond and the press called him a raciest simply because Sen. Thurmond had voted against some “Civil Rights” legislation forty years ago. No one stood up for Trent Lott and he lost the majority leadership position as a result. That cost Republicans dearly. Trent was a much better leader than Bill Frist. Why didn’t someone have the courage to stand up and say Trent Lott is no raciest ? This was one of my first big disappointments with the White House.
How many fine Generals have we lost from the military because they expressed their valid concerns about gays in the military? Liberals have Republicans painted into a corner on speech issues, believe me, you don’t have to be a raciest or a homophobe to be called a raciest or a homophobe. Sometimes its a little hard to make your point when you have to tiptoe around all of these speech-landmines, I got a feeling Ann has a plan to do a little landmine clearing, and its about time we got started.
Annie use to by a lawyer so she probably remembers there is something in this country called free speech and under the law there is no such thing as “hate speech.” If liberals ever get “hate speech” laws passed, then whatever Republicans say will be labeled hate speech. I think Ann is setting herself up to drag this issue into the light, and when she is called out for it, I think she will shine a very bright spotlight on the lefts hypocrisy.
Where’s my popcorn?
Maxx on March 2, 2007 at 6:18 PM
Ann just got herself two more weeks of interviews on network and cable TV, such as when she came out against the Jersey Girls being exploited by the democrats.
This is a publicist’s dream. In this instant, though, she is her own publicist.
pocomoco on March 2, 2007 at 6:19 PM
Are you people nuts or humorlous? She was making a joke about a Edwards. The man who just canned Marcotte and her fellow blogger for being foul mouthed bigots after defending their previous writing. Her joke about using the word faggot and rehab was a clear allusion to Hollywood where an actor just went to rehab for calling his co-star a faggot.
You remember Hollywood, yes? And for all you who sit around wringing your hands about how mean Ann is and can’t we go back to the days of Ronald Reagan, two words. Lee Atwater.
JackStraw on March 2, 2007 at 6:28 PM
Ah, geez. How sad. I’ve defended Coulter for years … and I just stopped.
It’s just a question of common sense and common decency. Not only was it ridiculously offensive, it was utterly gratuitious – and completely counter-productive.
Not that I necessarily mind offense or gratuitous – but there’s exactly one rule when it comes to that: it has to actually be funny. This wasn’t even close to funny.
Bigoted and offensive, plus weak and lame? Well … no more Ann for me.
Anybody who does *not* condemn this is going to have an awfully hard time condemning things liberals do, that’s for sure. I’d like to think nobody here would use a word like “faggot” in their daily lives, but even if you do, I’d assume you’d have the decorum and maturity not to use it about a presidential candidate.
And if none of that gets through, I’d at least hope that if you’re a public figure, representing a movement, and in a very public place, knowing you’re being recorded … you’d have the sense to avoid that language, no matter how bigoted you might be.
Sheesh. Too bad. Ann always had the potential to really be a benefit to conservatism. The schtick is old and now its empty.
Now she’s just dead weight dragging the rest of us down.
Wonder how many votes she just cost her party?
And to hear some of you defending it? Gag. Half this thread sounds like its on DU or Daily Kos. What fascinates me about some of you is that you (probably unknowingly) not only use the exact same logic in defending Ann that the left uses to defend people like Marcotte or Kos … some of you used almost the exact same words.
“Screw them. We need to fight hard. Don’t let them tell us what to do! We need to get dirty!”
Oh, yeah. That’s we want. To imitate the left. To become exactly what we oppose. To act exactly like them.
Remind me again: we’re different how? Oh – that’s right. It’s our team. So it doesn’t matter.
(insert eye roll here)
But ignore all the above, since for some of you its going to fly right over your heads. Forgetting all that, even if you have no morals and no ethics and no decency, you ought to have the brains to condemn what she did just for its political stupidity. This was stunningly stupid. The leftwing media is going to eat this up. That audio is going to be on permanent loop.
If you can’t have principles, at least have the good political sense to fake it.
Well done, Ann.
Professor Blather on March 2, 2007 at 6:30 PM
no. it isn’t. the first time that was introduced was just there when you introduced it.
“duuuuhhh. how come is it that blacks can have a black entertainment televsion, but if whites…”
stop whining. or, if you’re going to whine, write new material. yes blacks have more social liberties in talking about race than whites on ballance. this did not emerge from a vacume. it came from a time when whites had more social liberties to vote than blacks on ballance. men can’t make jokes about women? wtf are you talking about? and were are you watching this epidemic of muslim stand-up performed? non-muslims can’t joke back? hot air featured two saturday night live sketches doing exactly what you allege “can’t” be done.
apart from all of that, no. this isn’t even about “political” correctness. political correctness is when someone is punnished for proposing welfare reform or some other political policy. not calling black people “niggers”, gay people “faggots” or, for that matter, beltching in peoples’ faces is a matter of social contract. it’s called decency. it’s called respect.
when i hear that stupid, “how come black people can…but if a white guy…” line, all i can think is here is a person who feels put apon when basic respect of others is wxpected of him.
jummy on March 2, 2007 at 6:31 PM
Yes Jummy, its a joke, you can tell by where I say “No, seriously.” If you are going to take me out of context, at least be entertaining. Also, I would appreciate you taking it down a notch. You have referred to me in several negative ways already and now refer to what I write as “crap”. For someone so worried about stone-throwing, you are quite adept at it. We disagree on Ann’s comments being so horrible. Its hardly worth this much ire. Especially when we are likely in agreement on most issues.
RobertCSampson on March 2, 2007 at 6:31 PM
If that photo of Ann doesn’t make a soldiers barrel stick out straight, then their equipment needs to be reevaluated.
Machine Gun barrels is what I’m referring to. Yeah, that’s it, Machine Gun Barrels.
Helloyawl on March 2, 2007 at 6:32 PM
Coulter’s use of language is often too sharp for some cultured, civil sensibilities. But then again, it’s probably intended to be.
The term she used is somewhat ambivelent in it’s interpretation, but that’s probably why she chose it – it’s an open dare for people to make the leap that she was about to call John Edwards a homosexual, or of having homosexual-ish characteristics, or some other linkage to a group, of which, there are members and defenders who live, eat, sleep and breath promotion of the group’s victimization. Something that is almost certainly untrue, of Edwards, no matter how effette, foppish, or downright wimpish Edwards may actually be, or be perceived to be.
An excellent example of tossing out red meat made entirely of diced red herring, serving a dual purpose. First, to provide fodder for those on the right to decry and denounce, thus generating evidence (which is rarely, if ever produced by the left, no matter how outrageous the statement or opinion) of the genuine disdain present on the right (and absent on the left) for such rough and tumble, uncivil and (apparently) unproductive ad hominem. Secondly, it’s an excellent spark to set of the tinderbox of lefty outrage, which, when they get into full throated indignation and spittle filled ‘response’ usually turns out to be a far, far more ugly spectacle than just about anything Ann may say to light that fuse. hat is to say, she grants them the opportunity to show their “best” side. Particularly if the whole thing erupts into a kerfuffled response from the Edwards camp directly (insecurity indications, anyone?)
So, no, no apologies for Ann’s comments. just a smirk, and only the slightest hint of a cringe.
And a “heh”
Wind Rider on March 2, 2007 at 6:34 PM
Best post in this thread. Thank you. Last one I’ll read, and I sure appreciate it.
Professor Blather on March 2, 2007 at 6:34 PM
Anne has gored the PC ox. The joke is funny as hell. Good for her. Now, if she were to launch blanket attacks on homosexuals, that would not be funny, just bigotted. If you cannot make the distinction then you are taking yourself way too seriously.
mcgilvra on March 2, 2007 at 6:37 PM
the “real” conservative chrionicles. ep. 238…
“a “real” conservative would be all like, “fuck those faggits” and nuke mecca. then he’d totally f**kin’ be like, hey frito burrito, get the f**k out!”
jummy on March 2, 2007 at 6:37 PM
WTF the left eviscerates conservatives no matter what they say anyway. Has GWB ever gotten on television and really said anything bad about anyone? Would that he might, IMO, but the left still calls him everything they can think of, which admittedly is rather limited in scope.
Ann Rocks.
The comment in question cracked me up.
She’s a comedienne when she does this schtick, not a politician, matter of fact I don’t think she has ever even run for any political office, has she?
No wonder we can’t deal with the islamofascists.
.
The Machine on March 2, 2007 at 6:38 PM
Yeeesh, This is exactly why conservatives are viewed as uptight, humorless, bible-thumpers.
bmac on March 2, 2007 at 6:43 PM
No, a real conservative would say Edwards has no balls.
JackStraw on March 2, 2007 at 6:45 PM
So let the left take the moral high ground. Jummy, among others, is correct. This is a matter of respect and decency. Conservatives whine and complain all the time about the attitudes of the left; they resort to name-calling, they won’t show respect to conservatives.
Admittedly, Ann *does* act like a lightning rod, but that doesn’t mean you should embrace the lightning rod as it’s doing it’s ‘job’.
dalewalt on March 2, 2007 at 6:46 PM
I love coulter
I read her work alot
I back her alot
this was reallly really freakin dumb! And she should bloody well know better
Defector01 on March 2, 2007 at 6:47 PM
A lot of people bemoan the fact that we don’t really have any “Reagan conservatives” leading us. Do you think Pres. Reagan would’ve resorted to calling Jimmy Carter a ‘faggot’? The man had class… what Ann did was show *no* class.
dalewalt on March 2, 2007 at 6:48 PM
I just lost alot of respect for Blather, not all because I have a lot. I didn’t think it could happen. Shucks. Siding with Jummy’s fascist argument however, is crossing the line.
Can I ask some questions of you all?
It’s Ann. This is what she does. Thank heavens for the handful of you that understand the red herring shes tossing. For the record, she made a well thought out DennisMillerian comment about the recent faux pas of Isiaiah Washington and picked on Edwards precisely because of his relationship to the anti-christian bloggers. She didn’t frame it as a personal attack even though thats how you anti-Ann folk are framing it. Yet, I’m the one “using the liberal logic.”
RobertCSampson on March 2, 2007 at 6:49 PM
In what universe?
RushBaby on March 2, 2007 at 6:51 PM
that’s exactly what happened.
let me try an alternate example. you’re shopping for stereos with a friend and he keeps settling on the cheapest one. you say, “c’mon dude. stop being such a jew.”
do you see it there? do you see how using the name of a group as a general insult represents a compound insult to the group?
jummy on March 2, 2007 at 6:55 PM
Ann Coulter is not running for any office let alone President. And if you saw my earlier post, you would have seen my mention of Lee Atwater who helped run Reagan’s campaign and was absolutley vicious. He let Reagan stay above the fray while he kneecapped people. Look it up. There are plenty of nice, sweet conservatives. They just have nothing to do with politics.
And my allusion to “no balls” should be clear to anyone who reads this site or watches the highest ratest news site on cable news.
Personally, I think Michelle has a ton of class.
JackStraw on March 2, 2007 at 6:56 PM
Problem is, actor Isaiah Washington did go to a treatment center because he used the word “faggot”. Think about that for a moment, how absolutely chilling that is. What’s next? What word will require you to seek “treatment” for some politically incorrect problem cooked up by liberals? This is so Stalinist that it isn’t even funny.
That pic of Ann with the cannon is hot!
jaleach on March 2, 2007 at 6:56 PM
Exactly. There is no right to not be offended. I DO get offended when the Commander in Chief is labeled a “murderer” or “liar” or “traitor” during a time of war. That’s MY problem. Ann’s stab, while possibly politically inept, is just red meat, is no means out of character for her, and will serve the purpose she intended even if it offends some of our sensibilities.
No, a real dick head would say those things, jummy. Chill out and eat an orange or something-low blood sugar is the enemy here, not those you are having a virtual dialogue with.
NTWR on March 2, 2007 at 6:56 PM
Oh lighten up! “Faggots” was the word used by high schoolers for wimps and losers since I was in High School – male or female, so I doubt very much that the current crop of high schoolers uses your “current meaning of the word.”
Does it help anyone to know that right now, kids from 3rd grade to 12th are freely and lavishly using the word “gay” to describe any “loser” move? “That’s so gay. He’s so gay!”
You can indoctrinate them and shove the PC down their throats, but they’ll go off and do what they want.
Ann was sharp all right, but not necessarily wrong. It wasn’t she who was caught on film inspecting her hairdo with a little round powder compact, fussing with her hair for ten minutes. Even if she had been, as John Edwards had, it wouldn’t have provoked snickers.
naliaka on March 2, 2007 at 6:58 PM
You just actually used the liberals’ favorite buzzword – “fascist” – to describe those of us who think: 1) that mature adults should have enough class and dignity not to use that language and not to applaud it, at least not in this setting, and 2) that intelligent political partisans should, at the very least, have the brains not to intentionally offend significant groups of the electorate.
You called that “Fascist” … and then with a straight face said you’re not using “liberal logic?”
(snort) What you just did is classic liberal logic. The irony is hilarious.
“Fascist.” That’s rich. Somehow, I’m guessing that losing the respect of someone who labels those in favor of class and dignity as “fascist” isn’t going to cause me to lose much sleep.
For bonus points, you could have at least called me Professor BlaHitler or something.
Sheesh. “Fascist?” If you had any self-respect, you’d be jumping all over yourself to apologize for that silliness.
Save it. If conservatives are no different than liberals, if they engage in exactly the same behavior with the only excuse being “they do it, too” …. and then call the adults among them “fascists” for pointing out the obvious, there’s really no point.
You are what you hate. Period.
I’m going to go find some good Fascist websites. Hang with my peeps for a while. Godwin’s law for the win. (snort)
Professor Blather on March 2, 2007 at 7:01 PM
Blather I was being facetious (not fascist) with regard to my comments regarding your post.. It’s those who bemoan Ann’s comments that are expressing fascist tendencies was my point. Simple. Eh?
RobertCSampson on March 2, 2007 at 7:03 PM
saying edwards has no balls is a world apart from profaning all gay people by using a pejorative aimed at them to insult edwards.
jummy on March 2, 2007 at 7:04 PM
lol!
jummy on March 2, 2007 at 7:06 PM
Oh, and thank you for proving my point in your last post. You expressly state you want to silence dissent. Another one that needs to eat an orange. Thanks NTWR
RobertCSampson on March 2, 2007 at 7:06 PM
And lastly, I was hoping you would be smart enough to throw out my own red meat, the word “fascist” precisely to prove Ann’s point.. I think thats Rob 2 Jummy -1 Blather 0
RobertCSampson on March 2, 2007 at 7:08 PM
that would be “smart enough to know that I was throwing out my own red meat”
I don’t care who you are, thats funny right there..
RobertCSampson on March 2, 2007 at 7:08 PM
Here are some examples of political correctness in our schools:
http://calbears.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4155/is_20050212/ai_n9729182
A Denver-area school board has suspended a middle school student for using the word “gay” in a disparaging way.
http://www.gay.com/news/article.html?2003/04/04/4
NTWR on March 2, 2007 at 7:09 PM
The most interesting part of this, previously Coulter has put “even money” on Sen. Hillary Clinton coming out of the closet,” said Bill Clinton shows “some level of latent homosexuality,” and called Vice President Al Gore a “total fag.”
Hmmm….I wonder if she has ever heard of psycological projection? Either she’s very uncreative with her insults or she has a bad case of teh ghey stuck inside her and she’s looking for any way she can to get it out.
JaHerer22 on March 2, 2007 at 7:10 PM
So what, it’s tame compared to what the libs throw at us.
Have yourself a Wendys happy meal and get over it.
Kini on March 2, 2007 at 7:13 PM
Comment pages: 1 2 3 4 Next »