Giuliani, Romney, McCain camps denounce Coulter’s attack on Edwards
posted at 5:12 pm on March 3, 2007 by Allahpundit
Share on Facebook | regular view
Conservative author Jennifer Rubin wondered this morning whether any Republican candidates would have the decency to do a little Sistah Souljah-ing here:
It is not “caving” into political correctness to distance and indeed condemn such remarks as unworthy of a political event like CPAC… Excommunication is not being suggested, just a public rebuke. By clearly stating her comments are beyond the bounds of civil discourse and her presence not a welcome addition to a mature political party, the Republicans could do themselves a world of good. How often does a party have the opportunity to display some measure of dignity, restraint and self-reflection.?
Actually, it sounds like she is suggesting excommunication. No presidental contender’s gone that far (yet), but if it’s condemnation she’s waiting for, the wait is over:
Of the major Republican candidates, only Mr. McCain did not attend [CPAC], but he denounced her remarks on Saturday morning. “The comments were wildly inappropriate,” said his spokesman, Brian Jones.
Mr. Giuliani said, “The comments were completely inappropriate and there should be no place for such name-calling in political debate.”
Kevin Madden, a spokesman for Mr. Romney, said: “It was an offensive remark. Governor Romney believes all people should be treated with dignity and respect.”
Coulter’s own reaction, per an e-mail to the Times: “C’mon, it was a joke. I would never insult gays by suggesting that they are like John Edwards. That would be mean.”
Do the denunciations mean Edwards’s site will quit referring to her as a “Republican mouthpiece” or his campaign manager, David Bonior, will stop sending out fundraising appeals like this?
John was singled out for a personal attack because the Republican establishment knows he poses the greatest threat to their power. Since they have nothing real to use against him, Coulter’s resorting to the classic right-wing strategy of riling up hate to smear a progressive champion. And the Republican attack dogs will keep playing this despicable trick as long as they think it works.
No, of course not. But there is, at least, a potential silver lining here for gay rights advocates. Says Robbie at the Malcontent:
Romney has spent months wooing the Religious Right with culture warrior issues like gay rights and abortion. It certainly doesn’t take an oracle to know gay marriage will come in for yet another bit of rehashing during the 2008 campaign. Now, every single time Romney or any other Republican candidate decides to take gay issues for a good beating to curry favor with the base, at the back of the media’s and many voters’ minds will be Ann Coulter calling someone a faggot after Mitt Romney said nice things about her. Politicians like to euphemize their positions. The sanctity of marriage. Platitudes about disagreeing with gay rights but affording homosexuals in society dignity and respect. Coulter has now made those euphemizations just a little bit more untenable…
If those who support gay issues possess any political wisdom, Coulter’s message will be entwined with anti-gay political rhetoric from now until election day. “Sancitity of Marriage. Faggot. Applause.” All of a piece. Love the sin, hate the sinner? Applause for faggot. Coulter receiving choice interview spots on programming like Hannity and Colmes? Applause for faggot.
For what it’s worth, Romney won the CPAC straw poll. Rudy came a strong second and, unlike Romney, with no big contingent of his own volunteers there cheering him on.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
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 Next »
Wasn’t that iowahawk?
Max Power on March 3, 2007 at 5:19 PM
Coulter,like with Jersey Girls, has something up her sleeve, this was not just a random comment
EricPWJohnson on March 3, 2007 at 5:27 PM
Mitt made a mistake here. He looks more liberal by missing Anns point. He should have slammed the reporters for missing her point. Technically he still could, so maybe he’ll pull a win out of it.
Either way, he can’t make that mistake again.
csdeven on March 3, 2007 at 5:27 PM
So, you can call Bush any name in the book, Alcoholic, Coke head, Hitler etc. But if someone points out that The Silky Pony is a little swishy, well we can’t have that. Is Faggot worse than Hitler?
R D on March 3, 2007 at 5:33 PM
Didn’t take Rudy McRomney long to hand in their rented testicles, did it?
I guess Ann was wrong after all. She called the wrong candidate(s) “faggots.”
Misha I on March 3, 2007 at 5:35 PM
The Hillary! campaign should send a dozen or so roses to Ann right now. Coulter has the chattering classes discussing whether or not it’s appropriate to call John Edwards a “faggot.”
I can just see her press release: “Hillary! finds it in poor taste to refer to her DemocratIC opponent as a faggot, sissy, p-ssy, or a nancy-boy. John can express his masculinity in any way he chooses. And if he chooses to live life as a closeted homo in a sham marriage to a frumpy old fag-hag, well good for him”
billy on March 3, 2007 at 5:35 PM
The media insults President Bush and Republicans in general EVERYDAY yet that is okay. Insult on democrat and they fall on the floor crying.
DoubleU on March 3, 2007 at 5:42 PM
Many on the left called (now) Governor Crist of Florida a closet gay before the 2006 elections, will we hear apologies for that?
DoubleU on March 3, 2007 at 5:44 PM
Hugh Hewitt has taken Ann Coulter to the woodshed and rightfully so:
Excerpt -
“I cannot imagine Coulter being invited to any panel or television appearance on which I would want to appear. Colleges and universities must also stop inviting her to appear as a representative of the conservative movement in America. She is not. You want smart, accomplished and funny conservative women? Ask K-Lo, Laura Ingraham, Carol Liebau to appear, or chose from scores of others. But not Ann Coulter –she represents only a snarl and a deep need to be noticed. ”
http://hughhewitt.townhall.com/g/a6cf3577-9d04-4e49-99ce-bc2b706d382b
olympian2008 on March 3, 2007 at 5:45 PM
Why? I’ve still got refills left on the Restoril.
Misha I on March 3, 2007 at 5:46 PM
Red State weighs in -
The Shunning of Ann Coulter
Excerpt -
“When I blogged on the PandaGate scandal, I swore to myself that I would never support or defend anyone who uses the same kind of hateful rhetoric that Amanda Marcotte uses. I didn’t realize that this would mean having to denounce a conservative celebrity just days after joining the Republican Party and declaring myself a conservative. Be that as it may, that’s exactly what I’m doing: I’m denouncing her. And I’m saying that all other conservatives should do the same thing.”
http://www.redstate.com/blogs/nathan_nelson/2007/mar/03/the_shunning_of_ann_coulter
olympian2008 on March 3, 2007 at 5:46 PM
I know you’re joking and that you can actually tell the difference between acting a person and attacking a race/religion/sexual preference, right?
Example -
Jesse Jackson is an idiot and a crook = ok
Jesse Jackson is a n_____ = not ok
Benaiah on March 3, 2007 at 5:49 PM
>Coulter,like with Jersey Girls, has something up her sleeve, this was not just a random comment.
Absolutely! She’ll now be on H&C to remind folks that she didn’t actually call Edwards a faggot and yet people are still falling all over themselves distancing themselves from her or denouncing her. Fox will be talking about it for a week. It’ll be throughout the blogosphere and she’ll have what she wants, and we don’t really know what that is. I mean, it’s not attention, for she already has that. It’s not to create outrage, for she does that merely by showing up. She’s working on something for sure, maybe just political wisdom.
Drum on March 3, 2007 at 5:50 PM
*acting = attacking in that last post
*goes back to bed*
Benaiah on March 3, 2007 at 5:50 PM
Um, it’s not like he’s more masculine than a homosexual. Anyone who spends THAT much time on his hair has to be a tad…stylish…
At this point, every Republican candidate should publicly state that they will demand Ann’s apology just as soon as every Democrat mouthpiece apologizes for calling us and our leaders: fascists, Nazi’s, warmongers, babykillers, etc.
Darksean on March 3, 2007 at 5:52 PM
You sure got that one right! Rented Testicles. That’s a classic!
R D on March 3, 2007 at 5:55 PM
Well there goes Hugh Hewitt and Red State.
What did someone say? They gave up their balls?
That’s two more whom have partaken of the PC kool-aid.
csdeven on March 3, 2007 at 5:55 PM
I am with R D. They can dish it but not take it. How many times have we heard the words ‘liar’, ‘Hitler’, “Bush’s Vietnam”, ‘Nazi’, ‘Warmonger’, etc from the left?
Should she had said that? NO! It is a personal attack based on no facts. But she is a glamorized citizen within the right’s world. She is not a politician (in the real world).
Now I want an apology from…dayum there’s not enough room to list them here! But you know who they are….
How well do you think ‘manny’ would have gone over?
:D
lsutiger on March 3, 2007 at 5:57 PM
Michelle Malkin’s comments -
***4:15pm update***
Ann Coulter just finished her riff on Al Gore, tossed out some cute jokes (”You can understand why Hollywood is concerned about global warming. You know what heat does to plastic.”), and ended with a cheap one-liner about John Edwards being a “faggot.” (Paraphrasing) She said she would refrain from commenting on Edwards because “if you say faggot, you have to go to rehab.”
A smattering of laughter.
Not from this corner.
Crickets chirping.
http://michellemalkin.com/archives/006976.htm
—
Ed Morrisey of Captain’s Quarters -
Excerpt -
“Bottom line: Coulter’s remark was indefensible. She had the right to say it, but that doesn’t make her right for saying it, and she deserves every bit of criticism she’s getting.”
More at -
http://www.captainsquartersblog.com/mt/archives/009308.php
olympian2008 on March 3, 2007 at 6:00 PM
So? Am I right about Faggot being worse than Hitler? What say you, oh wise one?
R D on March 3, 2007 at 6:01 PM
You are correct. Liberals will never understand because it requires second level thinking. Liberals think with feelings not facts or logic. They never get past level one thinking, thus they will never understand true intellectuals. That is the irony of it all, they think they are the intellectuals and in reality they are just a group of paper intellects.
Wade on March 3, 2007 at 6:02 PM
I for one am SUPPORTING AC!!! She didn’t outright call him any name. However, Ann HAS been called names but I don’t see her getting all worked up and demanding an apology. No she is made of sterner stuff to go whining and crawling to the media that someone called her a name. As a country we need to grow some balls.
ChrisIansNana on March 3, 2007 at 6:06 PM
I just hope we now hold the Libs in extreme high standards they are holding Ann Coulter. By Howard Dean calling for the denunciation, kind of escalated this to do. Will be watching him and his ilk very very closely.
StuLongIsland on March 3, 2007 at 6:08 PM
It’s too bad MM and CQ missed it too.
That’s a crying shame.
csdeven on March 3, 2007 at 6:09 PM
Why bother?…if they were to say something we found offensive it would just be us blowing it out of proportion because we do not “understand their brand of humor”.
EnochCain on March 3, 2007 at 6:10 PM
All great choices. But it’s pretty obvious who Hugh’s leaving out.
see-dubya on March 3, 2007 at 6:11 PM
Dang you guys (and gals)!
Between yesterday’s gazillion comments and now today’s I can’t get that 2nd verse of “Money for Nothin’” out of my head. MTV must’ve played that video every hour for a year and I never heard any outrage …
:-)
Fat Old Guy
Fogpig on March 3, 2007 at 6:11 PM
I have no intention of shunning Ms. Coulter. I too tire of the pass Howard Dean, Harry Reid Al Gore, et al get when they describe Republican leaders in the most vile of terms.
If the Silk Pony is offended, he can challenge Ms. Coulter to a duel. Handbags at 3 paces is probably right up his alley.
Remember too, Ms. Coulter is a private citizen, not the chairman of the DNC, the Majority Leader of the Senate or a former VP.
MCPO Airdale on March 3, 2007 at 6:13 PM
ChrisIansNana on March 3, 2007 at 6:15 PM
See……….
That works MUCH better……. now if we can keep the momentum going…..
PinkyBigglesworth on March 3, 2007 at 6:19 PM
When does the phrase “That’s so gay!” come in here?
Kokonut on March 3, 2007 at 6:28 PM
Hahahahaha!! Classic!
.
GT on March 3, 2007 at 6:28 PM
muahaha….Someone call the Waaaambulance for the conservative movement cause mean ole Ann has hurt our feelings.
The leaders we have right now at the top of the “Conservative” Movement have stood around and wrung their hands while the left has slapped us around like step children and subverted our entire country. Every single major teaching institutions, all of the MSM, nearly every Newspaper and most of the country has been converted into mindnumbing idiots who mumble stock phrases right out of the Marxist play book for destroying a country.
After a tremendously amazing string of defeats the conservative movement’s leaders still think they should control people…bah. So then because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spue thee out of my mouth
The Conservative leaders have not objected to the direction we are headed, they have objected to the speed which we are heading in that direction because they are in general balls-less. Not ever wanting a fight…not ever wanting to say this far no farther. So we have decended into the madness of multicultural idiocy. Thanks Conservative leaders…WELL DONE!
Coulter on the other hand doesn’t like the direction, nor the speed nor anything else about the victories of the left.
The left did not achieve all of this by comprimising with the right. They achieved all of this destruction by a single minded goal, they have given us situations and have then stood around waiting for us to say…hey this isn’t so bad. Cannot wait till we are explaining to each other how sex with a 7 year old isn’t so bad…we should allow those sorts of people their lifestyle choice.
Bah…out of my mouth.
PierreLegrand on March 3, 2007 at 6:31 PM
Christ, what a bunch of mealymouths, our McCain, Romney, Guliani. How in hell would any one of them stand up to a Putin or Chavez? Right now I’d vote for AC. OK. Go ahead excommunicate me too, I dare you.
dhimwit on March 3, 2007 at 6:32 PM
If there was a little more bluntness in the world, it’d be a better place.
Iblis on March 3, 2007 at 6:32 PM
Careful, you just chewed through your cigar.
Jim Treacher on March 3, 2007 at 6:40 PM
The world is what it is. There are rules and you have to play the game if you want to get ahead. If you guys were saying some of this sh*t behind closed doors in a candidate’s stratedgy sessions you would been seen as pretty green(I am assuming here, of course).
Max Power on March 3, 2007 at 6:43 PM
She was making fun of political correctness, albeit clumsily.
Ann Coulter is the only well known conservative with any guts left.
doingwhatican on March 3, 2007 at 6:54 PM
I don’t think we should get on Howard Dean so much about demanding an apology. I mean, remember when he apologized for having a terrorist supporting imam do the opening prayer for the Dems’ winter meeting? Oh wait…
Seriously, get off of Ann Coulter already. We all know she is intentionally provocative. We also all know that she is brilliant. The fact that one of her insults gets more coverage than all of the Democrat insults Bush has endured for the last 6 years just shows that the other side realizes the strengths of her arguments and wants to shut her up. Let’s not play their game anymore. Support Ann
Shivv on March 3, 2007 at 6:57 PM
Still Love You Ann!!
TheFamousOne on March 3, 2007 at 7:09 PM
Ann should only consider apologizing when the left actually apologizes AND OSTRACIZES people like this who are continually slurring our troops and leaders.
Does nobody remember Turbin?
Has Churchill ever apologized?
How about Behar?
91Veteran on March 3, 2007 at 7:11 PM
Well, it depends on what your definition of “is” is.
$$$
Jim Treacher on March 3, 2007 at 7:13 PM
Do you suppose if Coulter had sang….
The little faggot with the earring and the makeup
Yeah, buddy, that’s his own hair
That little faggot got his own jet airplane
That little faggot he’s a millionaire
….folks might not have gotten their panties in a twist?
.
GT on March 3, 2007 at 7:19 PM
What’s good for the gander is good for the goose.
Huh, let’s try that again. What’s good for the gay’dar is good to be goosed?
Not that there’s anything wrong with that, you know.
Why are we all getting our panties in a bunch over a
botchedjoke. It’s not like it hasn’t been done before and by others of lesser character.Kini on March 3, 2007 at 7:19 PM
I bet Britney Spears doesn’t have that problem.
.
GT on March 3, 2007 at 7:26 PM
No.
Edwards may not be fagot (MIG-15), but sure qualifies as a metrosexual.
TwinkietheKid on March 3, 2007 at 7:28 PM
Truly sad when a gal has more balls than men.
jaleach on March 3, 2007 at 7:48 PM
First, how could HH leave out Michelle?
Second, I agree with all those who are not calling for AC’s head. Silkly Pony? ok. Breck girl? ok. insinuating something else? No ok. Wtf?
I am disappointed in Coulter only because she is intelligent and this sort of epithet is beneath her–though not for publicity reasons. She is a conservative firebrand, no doubt about it, but her comments continue to pale in comparison to anything from Marcotte, the left, and liberals in general. Coulter mentions poison and a SC justice and she is excoriated, Maher implies that taking out Cheney would be a good thing. Crickets chirping.
elpresidente on March 3, 2007 at 8:00 PM
Have these three dorks got around to denouncing any Democrats yet?
Perchant on March 3, 2007 at 8:09 PM
As I said on another thread “Much ado about nothing”
conservativecaveman on March 3, 2007 at 8:24 PM
Nothing says “testicles” like running around slurring people and saying “just kidding”. It’s terrible optics, for one thing. It’s also horrendous politics to bring a 3rd rate also-ran into the spotlight. Absolutely stupid.
Krydor on March 3, 2007 at 8:25 PM
Meh, it doesn’t much matter that the three camps apologized. Doesn’t much matter that Ann said what she did.
Most folks that aren’t already politically involved either don’t care who she is, or already understand that it’s not socially acceptable to like her. I really don’t think there’s that many people out there that would be affected by learning she said this; I would think that most people who would be shocked by such a statement already hate her.
I’m still glad the camps said something, though. What she said was just plain icky and deserved an official denunciation. Besides, I am getting pretty tired of the sphincter-clenching “what’s she going to say now?” feeling. Hopefully she’ll learn that she isn’t helping anyone, including herself, with this behavior.
Beyond that, I still support AC. I think the charge of homophobia is silly and politically motivated (as it usually is). I seriously doubt the woman is afraid of homosexuals, or has some sort of pathology beyond an overactive, and sometimes destructive, desire for attention.
She’s a big mouth with a riding crop for a tongue, a riding crop that sometimes hits the wrong target.
spmat on March 3, 2007 at 8:30 PM
Coulter is a bomb-thrower.
Best left to heaving them from over the walls, not inside them.
Because she doesn’t have the requisite self-control for the serious work which requires you to grit your teeth and sew up the glib messes that people like her, on each side, tend to enjoy causing.
She alienates when the times need wooing.
Something a butch character like her probably does by pistol whipping a date into a coma and them climbing on top.
Or is that too much in her metier?
profitsbeard on March 3, 2007 at 8:44 PM
Why I don’t support any of them.
A bunch of PC wimps,
piddling in their pantswetting themselves because they are afraid that somebody on the left might be offended!Horse Hockey. I’m offended by the left ten times a day, and those folks never seem to care. Why should I be so flipping tender of their poor widdle feelings?
I’m about ready to start a movement to draft Ann for President. (That’s tounge-in-cheek, but only slightly!)
Good Grief! We’ve got a bunch of PC wimps running for President, as Republicans. And I’m supposed to support them? I can’t do it. I’ll vote for the Constitution Party candidate first.
jefferson101 on March 3, 2007 at 9:09 PM
You do realize that this is a far more homophobic statement than what she said, right? Or at least it would be taken as such by the same homosexual lobbyists if it were not in the context of denouncing and excommunicating AC?
The only reason why your statement would be acceptable is that it is consistent with their political goals. They still will think you are a homophobe, and still raise gobs of money based on the spirit of your comment, even after they’ve patted you on the head for climbing out of the swamps momentarily to say something marginally acceptable.
Chucking AC will not woo anyone. It won’t win us any friends, and it will only make us feel better while the leftists beat us into political submission. Denounce her statement, yes, give her a stern talking to, yes, even punish her for a time, but casting her aside will only show our weakness and how comfortable we are inhabiting their stereotype of us.
spmat on March 3, 2007 at 9:19 PM
In order to cast her aside, she has to be on your side to begin with. She’s on nobody’s side but her own.
Jim Treacher on March 3, 2007 at 9:38 PM
Actually it seems to be the folks here at HotAir that are falling on the floor and crying.
wytammic on March 3, 2007 at 9:52 PM
And just who’s side was the Republican Party on these past few years while on its spending spree abandoning the Reagan principle of smaller government before losing both Houses of Congress?
I can’t say I blame her.
.
GT on March 3, 2007 at 10:05 PM
This gives FNC a chance to sh*tcan HHNH or at least the Limbaugh/Coulter skit tomorrow.
The Monster on March 3, 2007 at 10:21 PM
Please pass the ketchup, I think it’s going to rain.
Jim Treacher on March 3, 2007 at 10:31 PM
Then please tell me why her three threads are generating so much discussion? She’s considered to be part of the big tent by many people that have been part of that tent for a long time.
I know you’re saying that she’s just playing us all for rubes, but that’s a bit Truther for my tastes. A more logical explanation is that she has a big mouth and can be a liability at times. I think she’s an asset overall, though. She just doesn’t need to be allowed to get too comfortable with her putative status as high queen of snark. There are plenty waiting in the wings to take that place, and she needs to understand that her rule is not by divine right.
She needs to be reined, not shot.
spmat on March 3, 2007 at 10:37 PM
“It is not “caving” into political correctness to distance and indeed condemn such remarks as unworthy of a political event like CPAC”
Yes it is.
When Democrats and libeals stop refering to Bush as “Hitler,” as Republicans as “repugs,” conservatives as “goosesteppers,and stop wishing for the death of Dick Cheney and George Bush, then I will reconsider my position on this matter.
The fact that “Rudy McRomney” are complaining means nothing. The three of them all support gun control. I don’t consider them conservatives in the first place.
georgej on March 3, 2007 at 11:32 PM
Los Tres RINOs
Misha I on March 3, 2007 at 11:34 PM
Jesse Jackson is an idiot and a crook = ok
Jesse Jackson is a n_____ = not ok
Benaiah on March 3, 2007 at 5:49 PM
—
Is it okay if I refer to Jesse Jackson as “Pastor Pus*y” or say that his fathers bast*rds, given the fact he counseled Clenis about his extramarital sex with Monica while keeping a mistress WHO HAD HIS OUT OF WEDLOCK CHILD on his Operation Push payroll?
georgej on March 3, 2007 at 11:36 PM
This is a more correct view of whats really going on here.Political correctness.
If the left can get “the right” to gasp,clutch their pearls at a cheap one-liner,and cannibalize their own, then they have won.Thats assuming “the right” is still majority christian and holds to scripture condemning homosexuality.Whats next on the abomination list?
Ann can be harsh to say the least but,she is a valuable and quite brilliant political pundit.She will not scrape and bow to the left like everyone else and they hate her for it.They cant control her with real or perceived offenses nor should they.
Ann made a good point and folks just didnt get it.Just how bad a word is faggot that people will go into a blind panic when they hear it and not take into account the point offered up?
spazzmomma on March 3, 2007 at 11:49 PM
Again…. it’s okay if Maher says more Americans would be alive if cheney would have been killed, but if Ann Coulter calls Edwards a “faggot,” OMG, the damn world is falling apart. That is the epitome of conservative hypocricy.
MsUnderestimated on March 3, 2007 at 11:54 PM
She was flushing out the Republicans that would fold under lib pressure maybe?
- The Cat
P.S. If you notice she was contemplating whether or not to say it.
MirCat on March 4, 2007 at 12:02 AM
Oh yes,and you can’t call preening effeminates “silky ponies” or you might offend the left and get chastised.Those who are offended most (jihadis and leftists)have a more important agenda to complete.One is censorship.They achieve this thru being constantly being offended.Dont be owned!
spazzmomma on March 4, 2007 at 12:07 AM
faggot (1)
1279, “bundle of twigs bound up,” Esp. used for burning heretics, so that phrase fire and faggot was used to mean “punishment of a heretic.”
Makes sense to me. Edwards hires anti-Christian Amanda Marcotte. Edwards thinks he can get away with it. Ann burns ‘em both at the stake.
wryteacher on March 4, 2007 at 12:50 AM
Could be. Then again, if they knew they were rubes, they wouldn’t be rubes…
Jim Treacher on March 4, 2007 at 12:57 AM
As I posted in another thread
- The Cat
MirCat on March 4, 2007 at 1:05 AM
Obligatory.
x95b10 on March 4, 2007 at 1:11 AM
Hugh hasn’t had any juevos since he left the Marines.
He still insists the Government was right about the BP.
I’ll stick with Mark Levin for Constitutional insights.
Besides, Hugh lost all credibility with me when he said at a Q&A session to some guy in response to the anchor baby/14th Amendment argument, “You’re wrong.” When the guy restated his case he said, “I’m a lawyer, are you?” The guy said he wasn’t and Hugh said, “So don’t argue with me about the point.”
Nevermind the fact that other lawyers disagreed with him.
Less than 5 minutes later another person asked about Islam and the problem is that it is intrinsically violent. He responded, “No, the problem isn’t Islam.” The guy quoted one of the Sword Surah’s and Hugh responded, “No, Islam is not the problem.”
So I got up and said, “He makes a very valid point and the problem is Islam in itself.” He shot back, “No, he isn’t, he’s making nutroot statements, Islam is an honorable religion.”
So I asked, “Are you a theologian?” He said, “No.” I then said, “I am, don’t argue with me about the point.”
You could hear a pin drop. He then stuttered out, “Well, I’ve asked an imam and he said it wasn’t and I believe him.”
What I would have given to be able to say, “Isn’t that like having a child molester say, ‘I didn’t hurt the child, they enjoyed it.’ and believing them?” Unfortunately, he had pointed to someone else before he even finished that statement. One of my biggest regrets in the area of political debate.
Tim Burton on March 4, 2007 at 1:38 AM
this was so blown out of proportion:
http://www.floppingaces.net/2007/03/03/ann-coulter-the-lightening-rod/
Stop pandering conservatives…the liberals could give two craps!
Highrise on March 4, 2007 at 2:10 AM
Whatever happened to the left’s excusing of a “botched joke?” I guess it is different in their world when it is given by a single, attractive, educated and successful Republican woman.
LewWaters on March 4, 2007 at 2:48 AM
I still don’t think anyone has answered the question yet.
Is It Worse To Be Called Hitler Of Faggot?
One is responsible for unspeakable crimes against humanity, and the death of Millions.
The other is a male that has sex with another male.
Is there even a comparison? Get Over It. The Left always whines better. Pussies that they are,
R D on March 4, 2007 at 2:58 AM
Two Wrongs don’t make a right Children!
Ann Coulter is a provocateur and a dolt. This kind of discourse does nothing but divide and distract. She is the Queen wedge driving and therefore Anti-American; she wants division and fuels it for publicity. Heard of “United we stand, divided we fall”?
Her motto is when you have nothing intelligent to say, say something stupid. She stinks with arrogance, contempt and bitter hatred. She talks about christian values, but she is not a christian in her actions, words or deeds. She is a fake, an act, a show for money and that’s it. She has no higher calling but herself. Its just her act, entertainment with no serious thought or useful contribution to the civil discourse.
To the myopic poster that says Coulter is attractive, eweeeee. I threw up a little in the back of my throat. Gross. She has an adam apple, but I make no judgement if you like trannys. May be its time to move out of your parents basement and get out into the world.
Coulter should be ignored. There is civil, decent and intelligent way to debate and have discourse. Ann Coulter is an egocentric, attention whore child-woman, who is all about her self interest. She is a pariah and when conservatives embrace her as some kind of BRAIN TRUST, it confirms what people think about conservatism. Really its all for show, entertainment, selling books and appearance fees. She is a C@$#. I support her right however to be a C@$#.
gmcjetpilot on March 4, 2007 at 5:55 AM
Can’t fool me, Annie. Your venom gives you away.
dhimwit on March 4, 2007 at 7:01 AM
Thanks, wryteacher! This is always the definition I first think of when I hear the word faggot – although I did not remember the burning heretics part.
Here’s the reason: In my family it is a tradition on Christmas Eve to read aloud Helen Steiner Rice’s poem, The Christmas Guest.
Me as little kid, “Daddy, what’s that word mean?” Dad (every time): “Look it up in the dictionary!”
There is no denying that word’s meanings evolve over time, and that faggot is now acutely derogatory. And my little story is probably irrelevant to this controversy. I’m just grateful and hopeful that folks like wryteacher are out there to preserve and pass on the unsullied original meanings of words that have been converted to slang.
RushBaby on March 4, 2007 at 7:17 AM
Thank you for that. Curt at Flopping Aces nailed it.
.
GT on March 4, 2007 at 8:58 AM
That would have been nice, but the fact you get it and voiced as much as you did, MIGHT, one day lead him to finally get it. But I doubt your missed opportunity would have made a difference to him. I don’t know him, but felt entirely comfortable making the judgement I did on just the fact that he has partaken of the PC kool-aid. Thanks for relating your experience.
csdeven on March 4, 2007 at 11:29 AM
That? That isn’t an American Statement that defines us. The Founding Father’s never quoted it. They never believed it. It was a bastardization of Scripture used by Lincoln (who hated Christianity, except when he could use it to his use, like the Democrats).
American politics are nasty, they have always been nasty. Name calling, slander and everything else under the sun, hell we had politicians beat other politicians on the Senate floor after one slandered the relative of the other. No one did squat about it.
You need to check out history, such as:
Jefferson’s election. New England threatened to secede because the Tyranny of the Executive branch for purchasing Louisiana. (and people act like the CSA was wrong for leaving, yet never denounce New England for attempting the same thing)
Aaron Burr and Alexander Hamilton and their famous duel over the slander each was telling about the other.
South Carolina threatened to secede and called everyone else traitors (boy it was nasty, Jackson was threatening to hang everyone)
But don’t think it is just the old timers that ran around calling everyone traitors and threatening (and sometimes beating and at least once killing) everyone who disagreed. Look at the Johnson campaign’s slur of Goldwater. Yup, the famous Goldwater will nuke the world commercial.
The list goes on and on of your so-called “Anti-Americanism”.
Sorry, but nastiness has been our way of politics from the beginning.
Tim Burton on March 4, 2007 at 1:14 PM
I was leaning towards Mit, I thought he could stand up to the liberals, but after his cave in, it is obvious that he is sick.
He has a RINOVIRUS.
Too bad it looks like Michele may be catching it also.
Mark was here on March 4, 2007 at 1:26 PM
Does anyone remember during the Presidential debates in 2004 how both Edwards and Kerry slyly brought up the fact that Dick Cheneny’s daughter was a lesbian. That was as low and despicable as anything I’ve ever seen in politics. I have never heard any Republican… including Ann Coulter… say anything that would even approach that level of pure debauchery for political gain. Kerry and Edwards attempted to malign Cheneny because a member of his family was gay, you cannot go lower than that ! Where were all the denouncement from Howard Dean back then…. oh I forgot… he was too busy telling his democratic supporters how he hates Republicans and all that they stand for. The hypocrisy of this issue is overwhelming from both the Democrats and the self-righteous republican RINOs trying to cry down Coulter.
But back in 2004, Republicans more or less smiled and took it in stride, saying, oh well you got to expect that from the left.
And all this silliness about how Ann Coulter’s remarks are now raising funds for the Edwards campaign. If its true, I think that’s GREAT !!!!!!! Firstly I don’t believe Edwards could get the nomination if he owned the Federal Reserve and all of its contents, even though I wish he would win the nomination because he is so easily defeatable being the ambulance chasing shyster that he is. Secondly…. I think its GREAT that the hardcore left is wasting whatever cash they throw at the Edwards campaign because that’s less cash they have to send to any candidate that might be electable.
Great Job Annie…. keep up the good work and don’t pay any attention to the RINOs. Ultimately they want to cast you down because you are so very effective at what you do and the left is scared witless of you. Can’t wait to see you at CPAC again next year, and of course you will be there !!
Some of Ann Coulter’s best selling books so far have been titled: Slander… Treason and Godless, I’m thinking the next one might be Hypocrisy (from both the left and RINO right).
Maxx on March 4, 2007 at 1:29 PM
So why do Republican politicians have to denounce things Ann says, but Democratic politicians don’t have to denounce things people like Amanda Marcotte say?
JinxMcHue on March 4, 2007 at 1:59 PM
Ann told a joke. I’m over it already. Clutch your pearls and get the vapors. And then move on to more important issues.
Doug on March 4, 2007 at 2:00 PM
Lincoln hated Christianity? That’s strange, that’s not what Lincoln said.
-
Maxx on March 4, 2007 at 2:02 PM
Because we’re better than them?
Jim Treacher on March 4, 2007 at 2:25 PM
Giuliani, Romney, and McCain all caved in immediately. Now we clearly see that even Edwards has more gumballs than these guys. Consider that Edwards was directly responsible for hiring Marcotte and McEwan who filled hundreds of blog pages with such lovely phrases as… snakehandling Jesus Camp hatebots… f**ktard bible-humping extremists… toothless Southern white supremacist racists… and… Rethuglican Christofascists… etc. etc. etc… that even then this came to light, Edwards still managed to hang-on and not rollover for the Right for at least a few days. But Annie says just one little non-politically-correct word and Giuliani, Romney, and McCain instantly surrender without a fight.
So you see, what Ann said has already turned into a very good thing for the Republicans. She has shown us which Republican candidates are willing to immediately surrender and kowtow to the left. So now I have no doubt, that whoever I eventually vote for in the primaries, it won’t be Giuliani, Romney or McCain. My most sincere thanks to you Annie, I will always love you. Your the best thing to happen to the Republican party and the cause of freedom since Ronald Reagan.
Maxx on March 4, 2007 at 2:44 PM
Uh, thats probably not what he said either…
Your quote is apocryphal at best and an outright fabrication at worse. Virtually all of his statements that were Christian were from hear-say, his pen didn’t support those quotes. They were usually pastors or people who met him one time or another, they were not close friends.
The fact is that the over-whelming majority of people who knew him closely denied his Christianity, even some who had reason to promote his Christianity. His wife called him religious, but said he never joined a church.
To this day there is a debate if he actually used the terms “under God” in the Gettysburg address.
His Law partner William H. Herndon constantly denied Lincoln’s Christianity.
See the debate and see the fact that the over-whelming amount of evidence against his Christianity. Granted, there are a lot of quotes by people that are pro-Christian, but virtually none are from people who intimately knew him.
Finally ask yourself why he never publically denounced his 1835-36 work on infidelity?
http://www.positiveatheism.org/hist/quotes/lincoln.htm
http://www.infidels.org/library/historical/john_remsburg/six_historic_americans/chapter_5.html
I won’t even go into how Lincoln had a mass execution of Indians.
Tim Burton on March 4, 2007 at 2:47 PM
gmcjetpilot,
I almost forgot to mention one of the craziest moments in American politics: Bleeding Kansas
That was a place where the scum of both sides decided to kill each other over politics. It even spawned that American folk hero John Brown who went around killing Americans. Not only that, but the North named a folk song after a guy who murdered Americans from a different political party. Yup, the song is called: John Brown’s Body Ironically, for their hate of Jeff Davis in that song, Jeff loved black people more than most who sung it…He adopted a black child.
Tim Burton on March 4, 2007 at 2:55 PM
Well Tim, you can believe what they say over at the atheist website if you want to, for me, I’ll go with what is inscribed into the Lincoln Memorial Album.
Maxx on March 4, 2007 at 3:00 PM
Bingo! You are so right. It is sad we aren’t willing to throw it in their face. Just watch Hannity and Colmes, Hannity denounced statements from the nutroot left and Holmes and EVERY SINGLE LEFTIST democRAT defends them. KKK Byrd? Defended. Hillary being hilarious about Indian gas stations. Defended. Dean saying he hates Republicans. Defended. Kerry
callingjoking that the troops (including me soon, hopefully….come on medical waiver) are stupid. Defended. Gore calling Bush a traitor. Defended.Tim Burton on March 4, 2007 at 3:01 PM
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »