The problem with Ann

posted at 8:03 pm on March 3, 2007 by Bryan

Check this out: Ann Coulter is raising campaign cash for John Edwards!

Dear Friend,

Did you hear about Anne Coulter’s speech this afternoon attacking John? A friend just forwarded me the video and it’s one of the worst moments in American politics I’ve seen.

I can’t bring myself to even repeat her comments. Her shameless display of bigotry is so outrageous you actually have to see for yourself to believe it.

This is just a taste of the filth that the right-wing machine is gearing up to throw at us. And now that it’s begun, we have a choice: Do we sit back, or do we fight back?

I say we fight. Help us raise $100,000 in “Coulter Cash” this week to show every would-be Republican mouthpiece that their bigoted attacks will not intimidate this campaign. I just threw in 100 bucks. Will you join me? Just click here.

Coulter’s attack was no accident. It happened on national television at one of the year’s biggest conservative conferences. Dick Cheney and most of the Republican candidates were in the audience. She was even introduced by Mitt Romney.

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.

But this time, you and I can change the game.

If we can raise $100,000 in “Coulter Cash” this week, we can show that bigotry will only backfire on those who use it. John is not the first progressive leader to face this kind of slime, but together, we can make sure he is one of the last.

Tonight, I’ve put in 100 bucks of “Coulter Cash” to get us started. Can you match me, or chip in whatever you can afford? Just click here:

http://johnedwards.com/r/6665/839078

Thanks,

David Bonior
Campaign Manager
John Edwards for President

There’s a great deal of political silliness and wishful thinking in that letter–it is a political money pitch for a third-place candidate, after all–but at its core it contains a message that’s likely to resonate. That message is, Republicans are just hateful, horrible people and you need to stop them (by giving us your money, now for the campaign, and in the future through taxes). True, Democrats always say that. But Miss Ann gave them a shred of evidence upon which to convict us all.

And, what’s the big headline coming out of CPAC? Is it that Josh Sparling won a much-deserved award? Is it that conservatives remain committed to the war for freedom against terrorism? Is it that this post-blowout CPAC was the largest CPAC ever? Was it that I got to be on a teevee show?

No. The headline coming out of CPAC is that Ann Coulter said an awful thing. Which is what she wants, since it’ll keep her profile up and help her sell books. She doesn’t care that conservative heroes and leaders and thousands of other less known conservatives who were present will end up getting tarnished by her remarks. She doesn’t care that she’s putting the CPAC organizers in a bind, since she’s their biggest draw but also their biggest liability. She probably doesn’t care that she’s John Edwards’ spokesmodel. She probably likes the attention. It’s all about Ann. And that’s the problem.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Politically incorrect People

Ronald Reagan

Senator Muskie
those Pesky Republican Senators that fought against Communism and for equal rights circa 1945 to 1965
Winston Churchill
Jack fighting Kennedy RIP
Howling Mad Smith
Admiral Halsey
Harry Truman
Teddy Roosevelt
Ann Coulter
George Patton

The entire United State Marine Corp Circa 1941-1955

Chesty Puller

Close your eyes and imagine these people wringing their hands over one word to describe a controversial candidate who used all sorts of foul people and celebs to raise money for him to hear a “mild” word being used

Ann was toughening up the room

Get in the fight or be say the following after 2008

Greenmobiles
National Health Care
National Oil Companies
Internet License and Commerce Commission
Progressive tax structure

EricPWJohnson on March 5, 2007 at 2:24 AM

I’m using poor english as the new educational standards that will be in farce after 2008 as wells

(or I’m just real lazy)

EricPWJohnson on March 5, 2007 at 2:26 AM

Bryan- As much as I adore Michelle, and like Ian and Allahpundit and many of the outside commentators here at Hot Air, at you seem to be the closest to my overall philosophy. Generally I consider your articles/posts to be the most astute overall.

Hopefully this particular thread won’t cause you too much upset.

Personally I have mixed feelings about Ann Coulter’s most recent ‘outrage’. Lately, I have personally found her ‘over the top’ too… But at the same time, I am grateful that she is out there, saying what she says, even this. Why?? Because there are a LOT of people out there that NEED to be ‘hit over the head with a 2X4’ to get their attention.

I feel the same about Rush Limbaugh, Michael Savage and others.. I don’t care for them them personally for various reasons, but I’m glad they do exactly what they do.

You, Michelle, Allah and Ian (and others bloggers like them), speak most effectively to the thoughtful, civilized, informed conservative-libertarian cognoscenti. But, all too often, it takes an Ann Coulter or a Michael Savage to grab the attention of the ‘run of the mill’ American away from ‘Reality TV’ and the ‘Game of the Week’.

I don’t think they do more damage than good, overall; So I’m willing to appreciate them for the good that they do, and not get TOO upset with the occasional thing that they do/say that may be used by ammunition by the Left.

As interesting and provocative as this whole topic is, it is really way too much ado over nothing.

LegendHasIt on March 5, 2007 at 3:30 AM

Bryan, I don’t agree with you here, but you deserve everybody’s thanks for our Radio Free America here. Friends?

dhimwit on March 5, 2007 at 6:32 AM

I spent my Coulter cash on beer.

Sorry.

JackM on March 5, 2007 at 7:18 AM

I can’t read 390 comments…did anyone mention that she called Bill Clinton, “trash”.

Not one word disagreeing with that!

She used a “taboo” word for a reason, and sits back and watches everyone prove her point.

jjjen on March 5, 2007 at 8:10 AM

Our advice to Ann: She need to pull a Gavin Newsom. Get into rehab, and be the victim.

California Conservative on March 5, 2007 at 8:34 AM

Well, since everyone has commented on this, I guess I’ll throw one in too.

As far as the medium in which she made the comment, it was cringe worthy. Michelle summed it up in her Hannity interview as a ‘stinker’. Charitably put. If she had told that joke in a bar, or at a table full of people, I probably would have laughed. Yes, I realize that by some peoples standards on this thread, I’ve just earned the right to be shunned, or purged or thrown out of the conservative movement. Well, if you’re going to throw people out of your stupid little party for making off color jokes, get thee to a military base, because you’ve got a big job ahead of you.
Now, if I understand some of the less hysterical posts, she’s made these type of gob dropping comments before at CPAC events. If that’s the case, perhaps someone should reconsider inviting her back next year? Remember Cheech Marin in Desperado? ‘Bad food, bad service. Don’t people know not to come in here?’ I mean, considering she has made a 2 year habit of this, it rings a little hollow to jump up in outrage when she DOES say something awful.
As far as her giving the democrats ammuntion, well, it would have been something, if not her making that comment. She just made it easier. Honestly though, the anti-war crowd is in ascendency and they are some of the most strident name callers. They would be frothing over almost anything anyway.
Now, a logistical suggestion. AP, why don’t you give moderator status to one of the purgers? Call him the hangman. Let him purge the boards of the ‘bad’ conservatives. The only caveat is the hangman has to list the reason (list of offenses) next to the persons handle. I daresay you’ll narrow your member lists down to about half a dozen people. The most fun will be the self justfication for rhetorically executing those not of the ‘pure’ faith.

austinnelly on March 5, 2007 at 9:02 AM

I’m sure after 390-something posts this has little liklihood of being noticed at all, but I just wanted to say one thing.

Michelle described what Ann said as ‘fragging’ conservatives. Be that as it may, I think I’m okay with conservatives getting fragged a bit.

These same conservatives who almost to the person had a spine-ectomy upon taking their oath of office, these same conservatives who campaign as a conservative and then proceed to demolish everything they should be standing up for.

In my opinion, a lot of self-named conservatives DESERVE a little fragging.

Darksean on March 5, 2007 at 9:26 AM

She would be a much more effective fighter for our cause if she had a little bit better judgement on how far is too far.

Ok, how is the lead by example cause working? What headway has it made? How many extreme liberals have moved toward the moderate left? How many of the left are denouncing the extreme liberal? Are you reaching the kids in public schools or are the liberals? Do they kow tow you from encouraging conservatism by calling you intolorant? Are the kids more or less likely to embrace conservatism? What about colleges? More or less conservative thinking?
Are you waiting for all the liberals to die off so your moderate position has less space between it and the extreme left?

Look, I am not making this stuff up. We hear complaints about it on a daily basis. Look at the MSM. They define themselves as the center BECAUSE of the extremes the left has gone. It isn’t a game to them. THEY ARE SERIOUS.
The left is always being hypocritical. They excoritate us for the same things they embrace in themselves. WE have placed those restrictions on ourselves yet they have no such moral guidepost.

I want you to go back to MM’s last Vent, and if my last comment makes it through the filter, you will see a pretty clear (I think it’s clear anyway) explanation of the realities of how the center is defined by the extremes and WHY it is crucial for us to give Ann some breathing room on this. Because to be honest, the “lead by example” ideology will get you into heaven, but you’ll live in a liberal hell until you get there. We are well on the way and every single soul here knows it because we discuss it on a daily basis.

csdeven on March 5, 2007 at 9:40 AM

Perfect, suck the cash out of the Dems to back a loser. The more given to Edwards, the less for the real candidate.

right2bright on March 5, 2007 at 9:40 AM

And csdeven, I really don’t care who you nominate as the most “disturbing thread” because what has been said needs to be said, and I have no time for liberal-approval-seeking angst.

georgej on March 4, 2007 at 12:11 AM

I don’t remember doing that.

csdeven on March 5, 2007 at 10:00 AM

this knee-jerk support for Coulter is stupid, both morally and politically.
Bryan on March 4, 2007 at 11:45 PM

How is it stupid? Because deploying a personal attack will NEVER make the larger (valid) point about PC you Ann defenders claim she was trying to make. Maybe that is the point she intended – so what! Even a faked personal attack will fail to make her point so she picked a STUPID vehicle that’ll end up being nothing but a drag on the conservative cause.

Ok, how is the lead by example cause working?
csdeven on March 5, 2007 at 9:40 AM

Again, SO WHAT! If you’re suggesting we should abandon reason and pull out the weapon of vicious personal attack you’ve just written off the moral force of conservative principles. You cannot swing that blade without gutting yourself. In that world only might makes right.

Let me repeat, personal attacks will NEVER make a principled point. Anytime. Anywhere.

I think the conservative political movement’s in trouble precisely because NO politician has been leading by example, forcefully and consistently advocating and defending conservative principle.

Without that leadership the Right is devolving into a loose crowd that mills around engaging in arguments like this unbelievable thread.

The Ritz on March 5, 2007 at 10:22 AM

The left is always being hypocritical. They excoritate us for the same things they embrace in themselves. WE have placed those restrictions on ourselves yet they have no such moral guidepost.
csdeven on March 5, 2007 at 10:00 AM

You’ve made the point exactly! We claim to have a “guidepost” so why behave as though we don’t. It’s what I was giving you a hard time about here.

Personal attack isn’t productive, and it isn’t funny. Period.

Now this is funny! Tag line included.

The Ritz on March 5, 2007 at 10:37 AM

I just had to be #400.

Valiant on March 5, 2007 at 10:51 AM

Dadgum it! Valiant Ya beat me to it!

Give that guy (girl?) a PRIZE!

-Wasteland Man.

WastelandMan on March 5, 2007 at 10:55 AM

If you’re suggesting we should abandon reason and pull out the weapon of vicious personal attack you’ve just written off the moral force of conservative principles.

The Ritz on March 5, 2007 at 10:22 AM

That isn’t what I have advocated. I have advocated allowing Ann to do what she does by getting off the moral high horse, taking the time to actually understand the concept behind what she is saying, then get back on the moral horse and echo the concept MORALLY and with force of will.

….because NO politician has been leading by example, forcefully and consistently advocating and defending conservative principle.

And why is that? Because when they do the conservatives kow towed by PCness come out and carry the water for the left by complaining about percieved violations of PC speech because the left have conditioned them like so many Palovian dogs. This forces conservative candidates to move toward the left in order to get elected so they can try to lead by example. Yet, conservatives turn around and DEMAND they be moral.

Let see if we can get you out of this PC mindset you seem to be in. A 12″ ruler represents the left to the right. the 6″ mark is the moderate center. When you accuse Ann and excommunicate her and refuse to echo what she said in a moral way, you are effective cutting the ruler off at 6″ and making the new political center 3″ further to the left.

Believe me, the liberals LOVE you for it.

Instead of denouncing her and cutting off the ruler, explain the reasons behind her remark in a moral way that in no way weakens your position as a reasonable person. The minute all conservatives do that, the intent and the seriousness of the precarious position decent folks are in, regular working folks who are totally afraid of being seen as politically incorrect will suddenly see the wisdom and understand why such extreme actions are required and they WILL get on board with you and the moderate conservatives.

Rush had this same exact effect when he came on the scene and the conservative movement took back part of the ground we lost during the 60′ and 70’s. He taught us how to reject PC pressure with exercises like “Ugly people day”. That was where one day a year all ugly people had to stay out of the malls. By God we have to look at them all year long and we deserve to have at least a one day break. PEOPLE went crazy! Until that is they began to understand the real message behind his vitriolic comments. This tactic works with lazy people who refuse to think because offending their sensibilities amde them take a position and engage Rush. There are now involved in the discussion by their own free will and are responsible for dealing with it. All that is left is to educate them as to the meaning.

This is where you are at. Ann is the new Rush and now that we have you engaged you are responsible for your part in it. All that is left to do is get you to realize that you are carrying the lefts PC water when just last week you were condemning it.

Now maybe you’re too young to remember the days before rampant liberalism and feel that the moderate position is what the MSM define it as today. I don’t know, but that is what it sounds like to me.

So, I am not your enemy and neither is Ann. She is the conservatives best friend because she will take all the political heat and have her reputation sacrificed on the alter of conservatism. All you have to do is get behind the message. If you don’t, her sacrifice is null and void, and THE LEFT STILL HAS NO MORE RESPECT FOR YOU AFTERWARDS THAN THEY DID BEFORE. Oh, they may say they do, but they are not going to give up that 3″ center that allows they unfettered immorality, just because the conservatives “led by example”. That only works with other moral people. The liberals are not moral.

Thats reality.

csdeven on March 5, 2007 at 10:57 AM

I just had to be #400.

Valiant on March 5, 2007 at 10:51 AM

Congratulations! . . . I knew it was coming. Thought about it myself but since I’d just posted twice I figured it’d look too manufactured.

You win.

The Ritz on March 5, 2007 at 10:58 AM

You’ve made the point exactly! We claim to have a “guidepost” so why behave as though we don’t.

The Ritz on March 5, 2007 at 10:37 AM

I’m not asking you to. I asking you to allow Ann’s sacrifice to mean something by supporting the concept but not the words. Ann’s words are action, not conversation. Time to act.

csdeven on March 5, 2007 at 11:00 AM

Ugh! sorry, screwed up the block quotes. My response is in bold.

csdeven on March 5, 2007 at 11:01 AM

This thread needs more soy.

Readymade on March 5, 2007 at 11:13 AM

I really don’t want to plod through some of the 400-some odd comments I may have missed,

but did anyone just suggest Ann buy some PC offsets? I mean, what’s the big deal?

Darksean on March 5, 2007 at 11:24 AM

Darksean, yeah, it’s been covered. :)

csdeven, do you have a blog?

RushBaby on March 5, 2007 at 11:27 AM

csdeven,

I’ve been around for awhile, and it was the Reagan/Rush combo that gave huge momentum to the Right IMHO.

There’s also a key difference with Rush’s approach compared to Ann. “Ugly people day” isn’t directed at an individual and it does succeed in making the point in a funny way (for those who think.) With Rush, “Breck Girl” is as nasty as it gets and the Left just looks idiotic when they claim stuff like that is hate speech. Rush is funny – I still roll everytime I hear “Sen. Kennedy” sing “Osama Obama”.

I think you understand my point better than you’re admitting. You’ve come awfully close to saying Ann’s comment was immoral –

Instead of denouncing [Ann] . . ., explain the reasons behind her remark in a moral way that in no way weakens your position as a reasonable person.

All I’m saying is moral points are never scored by immoral means.

Incidentally, I genuinely appreciate your discussion about this because I think it concerns an issue that’s critical to the success of conservatism.

I hear your ruler-analogy, but think it’s incorrect. You fight PC by exposing it as false moralism while you determinedly retain the high ground and defend Morality by eschewing personal assaults even though every fiber may scream at you to launch one.

The Ritz on March 5, 2007 at 11:28 AM

csdeven, do you have a blog?

RushBaby on March 5, 2007 at 11:27 AM

Ditto. Maybe we could continue the discussion more directly.

The Ritz on March 5, 2007 at 11:36 AM

Ann will be Ann. We know that. But like many have said – whenever we take the high road (see Pres. Bush) the libs respect us even less. Remember: they are perpetual victims who enjoy being vicimized. The ONLY reason they hate Ann Coulter is because they wish they had someone as beautiful, quick-witted, cutting and educated as her (and Michelle and Laura Ingraham etc) on their side – that’s IT. Look at Randi Rhodes and Jeanine Garafolo – need I say more? So what’s the point of trying to be PC or take the high road? I don’t care. I only care in that people may have had children in the room or that gay Republicans might be offended. But the gay Republicans most likely don’t care because they get it. I’m also wiling to bet that Ann uses that word because she has a lot of gay friends and they use that word. My gay friends do, (even though I don’t,) and they use it in that very context – to refer to someone – regardless of sexual preference – who is flamboyant.

foxforce91 on March 5, 2007 at 11:40 AM

whenever we take the high road (see Pres. Bush) the libs respect us even less.

Who cares about their respect? For those who haven’t succumbed to the Progressive infection let’s just clearly demonstrate by contrast that libs are no where near the high ground.

The Ritz on March 5, 2007 at 11:47 AM

Who cares? Like her apologizing is going to make a difference? They are suddenly going to respect and like her? PLEASE…

Yeah what she said was outrageous. She is a very smart lady and what she espouses arguably verges on right-wing moonbattery (ouch! hey those stones hurt). The dhimmicrats have been polarizing things for years and then living off the “common-sense” middle. SOooo thanks for taking the heat Ann…

GoingThere on March 5, 2007 at 11:54 AM

The left has hordes of molotov throwing anarchists. We have Ann. I’d be disappointed if she didn’t offend someone now and then. We need her to say things no one else has the balls to say. Playing nice has gotten us where exactly?

Buck Turgidson on March 5, 2007 at 1:27 PM

Rush just finished talking about this.

In summary, conservatives can’t let the left define them as racist, homophobe etc. and by assuming a defensive posture concerning Ann’s comments we are, in effect, validating their opinion of us.

IMO, the conservatives who condemn Ann’s comment are too worried about being PC. If we continue to to march to their beat we will lose.

Rush also pointed out that the CPAC bloggers were almost universally condemning Ann and the commenters were almost universally calling them a bunch of ninnies.

Bill C on March 5, 2007 at 2:00 PM

What Ann Coulter said was stupid and offensive. I don’t care what the crazy Lefties do or say, stooping to such tactics does not help the Conservative movement. She has done nothing to further the Conservative movement by her comments. Her choice of that word was premeditated and purposeful. I wonder why she didn’t use the N-word when discussing Obama Barack or use the C-word when discussing Hillary?

As a gay man and an conservative, I have to question whether I’m really welcomed in the GOP’s big tent. Many of the speakers at the CPAC talked about the GOP being the party of freedom – that expanding opportunities for all Americans. Ann Coulter’s remarks give the perception that the Conservative Movement is also about stereotypes, biggotry and derrogatory comments about minorities. Her comments make the “party of freedom” description seem rather hollow and false.

And for all you straight men who think that using the word “faggot” in Junior High and High School was innocent and didn’t hurt anyone, think again. For the adolescent who was struggling with issues concerning his sexuality, being called “faggot” was very painful; especially back in the 1970’s. Just as calling each other “retard” seemed innocent, the child how actually had some learing disability didn’t think it was all fun and games.

DFWShook on March 5, 2007 at 2:15 PM

Rush also pointed out that the CPAC bloggers were almost universally condemning Ann and the commenters were almost universally calling them a bunch of ninnies.

Bill C on March 5, 2007 at 2:00 PM

Well in that case…

John from WuzzaDem on March 5, 2007 at 2:16 PM

Rush is right again. Conservatives are willing to fight for their beliefs especially when their spokespeople and leaders fold to dark side.

Valiant on March 5, 2007 at 2:21 PM

As a gay man and an conservative, I have to question whether I’m really welcomed in the GOP’s big tent. Many of the speakers at the CPAC talked about the GOP being the party of freedom – that expanding opportunities for all Americans. Ann Coulter’s remarks give the perception that the Conservative Movement is also about stereotypes, biggotry and derrogatory comments about minorities. Her comments make the “party of freedom” description seem rather hollow and false.

And for all you straight men who think that using the word “faggot” in Junior High and High School was innocent and didn’t hurt anyone, think again. For the adolescent who was struggling with issues concerning his sexuality, being called “faggot” was very painful; especially back in the 1970’s. Just as calling each other “retard” seemed innocent, the child how actually had some learing disability didn’t think it was all fun and games.

DFWShook on March 5, 2007 at 2:15 PM

I am truly sorry you had to go through that when you were young. Does this event remind you of your high school persecution?

To be part of a big tent means that you are going to share that tent with some people with whom you disagree. I’m sure you know that there are a lot of conservatives who think that homosexual behavior is abhorent, even those that will not associate with homosexuals. You have to ask yourself if you can live with that.

I personally don’t have any problems with homosexuals. I do have a problem with people telling me that I shouldn’t laugh at something I find funny because there was an offensive word in the joke. If you want to be a conservative homosexual then you are going to have to live with this. Or you could turn on us like Andrew Sullivan and David Brock when many conservatives refused to accept parts of their agenda.

Bill C on March 5, 2007 at 3:12 PM

Well in that case…

John from WuzzaDem on March 5, 2007 at 2:16 PM

There are times when standing up to the majority is a noble pursuit. And there are times when the majority is right.

IMHO, this debate is showing the divides in the conservative movement. John, I assume you were a Dem who chose to leave because of the left’s inability to even pretend they wanted to protect this country. If I am wrong correct me. There are a lot of conservatives who are libertarian at heart and who also are very sensative to charges of racism et al. They see conservatism as standing for individual rights and that includes protecting minorities. And there are conservatives who come to the movement from the paleo and religious PoV. Yet, we get along most of the time.

What Rush pointed out was that when we accept the left’s definition of conservative by censoring ourselves we are living up to the stereotype. When John who wuzzadem tries to tell Bill C who was neveradem how to behave then I get the impression that you look at me as someone who barely tolerate. I am someone with whom you have formed a temporary alliance because we hold a common desire to defend the country. The rest of conservativism like ending affirmative action is a la carte. That’s fine with me, the more the merrier. Just don’t tell me how a conservative is supposed to act. I know because I have been doing it all my life.

Bill C on March 5, 2007 at 3:34 PM

Bill C.

I don’t mind that some conservative have a problem with homosexuality, but I DO mind when they use offensive terms. I don’t think that anyone is saying that you shouldn’t laugh at something funny becuase there was an offensive word in the joke. (I have to wonder if you would laugh at jokes that use the words “nigger”, “kike” or “jap”. Maybe you would.) The complaint is that the CPAC was not the proper forum for the joke in the first place. Comedy can be enlightening, but her joke was far from it. It was a cheap personal attack. It didn’t address any substantial issues and it was done at the expense of others.

As far as accusing me of “turning on us like” AS or DB, don’t worry. As far as I’m concerned, the only ones who have “turned on us” are people like Ann Coulter and yourself who defend the right to make fun of anything or anyone, regardless of the approriateness of the forum or who you offend.

DFWShook on March 5, 2007 at 3:36 PM

Comedy can be enlightening, but her joke was far from it. It was a cheap personal attack.

Seems to me you are proving her point, in that if you dare to utter a PC word, you are destined to rehab

My 2 cents

ScottyDog on March 5, 2007 at 3:47 PM

I don’t mind that some conservative have a problem with homosexuality, but I DO mind when they use offensive terms

If you are offended that is your problem. (A Rushism.)

I don’t think that anyone is saying that you shouldn’t laugh at something funny becuase there was an offensive word in the joke. (I have to wonder if you would laugh at jokes that use the words “nigger”, “kike” or “jap”. Maybe you would.)

Growing up in Chicago I have heard plenty of black jokes, also Polish and Irish jokes were common. And I laughed at them. It was common in the schoolyard for students to have “cutting down” fights where anything about the other person was far game. I learned quickly that you have to be viscious in your humor in order to avoid being the butt of the joke. I learned that from the black kids. Don’t go onto a CPS playground, those kids will make you cry.

The complaint is that the CPAC was not the proper forum for the joke in the first place. Comedy can be enlightening, but her joke was far from it. It was a cheap personal attack. It didn’t address any substantial issues and it was done at the expense of others.

Yup comedy can simply be about pointing out your opponents flaws and making fun of them. Conservatives should do more of that. Trying to play nice really does not get the base fired up and being mean doesn’t seem to have cost the Dems anything. The definition of comedy is that it is true and does it make your audience laugh.

As far as accusing me of “turning on us like” AS or DB, don’t worry. As far as I’m concerned, the only ones who have “turned on us” are people like Ann Coulter and yourself who defend the right to make fun of anything or anyone, regardless of the approriateness of the forum or who you offend.

DFWShook on March 5, 2007 at 3:36 PM

Are you and the hord of gay Republicans going to lead a purge? And yes, I am making fun of you. Your self-righteous attitude about this incident is hilarious.

Bill C on March 5, 2007 at 3:52 PM

Bill C:

And being part of a Big Tent also means that you act responibly and make an effort not to offend any one who is in the Big Tent, unless of course you don’t want them there in the first place. And the whinings about being censored sounds too much like the Dixie Chicks. Free speech means being responsible for your speech and taking criticism when you are wrong.

DFWShook on March 5, 2007 at 3:52 PM

Bill C:

Are you and the hord of gay Republicans going to lead a purge? And yes, I am making fun of you. Your self-righteous attitude about this incident is hilarious.

I’m hardly leading a purge or being self-righteous. The only attitude about this incident that is hilarious is yours and the extent that you will go to justify it.

Growing up in Chicago I have heard plenty of black jokes, also Polish and Irish jokes were common. And I laughed at them. It was common in the schoolyard for students to have “cutting down” fights where anything about the other person was far game. I learned quickly that you have to be viscious in your humor in order to avoid being the butt of the joke. I learned that from the black kids. Don’t go onto a CPS playground, those kids will make you cry.

Last time I checked, everyone who attended CPAC was an adult. Ann Coulter is an adult. Rush Limbaugh is an adult. I also assume that you are an adult. If the strategy for 2008 is to resort to the taticts of “cutting down” fights from our childhood, then we don’t deserve to win back Congress or stay in the White House.

The saddest part of this whole incident is that the focus has become personalities rather than issues. We are at war with a very patient enemy. The U.S. media on its side. The Democrats and Lefties are on its side. 2008 is going to be about how we fight this war. So, Ann Coulter thinks that the best way to get that message out and garner support for conservatives is to imply that John Edwards is a faggot? Who cares if it turns people away and the Democrats can focus on that rather than the issues? As long as you think it funny, I guess its worth it.

DFWShook on March 5, 2007 at 4:11 PM

Criticize all you want DFWShook, I can take it. There are those in the big tent who I am less comfortable with than gays. Anybody who thinks outlawing online gambling for one. Pat Buchanan for another. What is really funny/aggravating is having you tell me that Ann Coulter, and myself for defending her, have turned on us like I am not the real conservative.

Conservativism is big enough tent that none of us can stand up and claim that the other should be excluded. On the same note I don’t want to be told what I can find funny. That’s it. Just let me be me.

Bill C on March 5, 2007 at 4:16 PM

DFWShook on March 5, 2007 at 2:15 PM

How about the kids who were fat, or skinny, or too short and small (me), or the kids being made fun of because they were straight A’s. How about the over developed girls, or the under developed girls. Or the kids with pimples, red hair, poor clothing. How about the kids with alcholic parents, or dad out of work. Quite kids, and kids who stammered, speach impediments, can’t run, can’t jump, dyslexic (dylsciex). You wore glasses…hey four eyes.

Get it? Every one was a target. You stating that you were struggling with your sexual identity, puts you in the category of everyone else struggling. Get over your victim mentality, don’t be so self centered. Everyone but a handful were ridiculed, picked on, made fun of, ostracized, accepted…than dumped. That is life as a kid, great one moment, sucks the next. Learn to deal with it, or spend the rest of your life whining.

right2bright on March 5, 2007 at 4:18 PM

Bill C:

Never accused you of not being a “real conservative”. The only reason I used that “turned on us” comment is becuase you wanted to compare me Andrew Sullivan – which is much more offensive than being called a faggot. A faggot I may be, Andrew Sullivan I’m not.

Again, you can laugh at anything you want. Hell, I enjoy South Park. But the CPAC Convention is not the proper forum for that kind of humor.

DFWShook on March 5, 2007 at 4:22 PM

right2bright

Get over your victim mentality, don’t be so self centered. Everyone but a handful were ridiculed, picked on, made fun of, ostracized, accepted…than dumped. That is life as a kid, great one moment, sucks the next. Learn to deal with it, or spend the rest of your life whining.

I don’t have a victim mentality nor am whining. I’m just responding to those comments about how using the word “faggot” as a child was all innocent and full of fun in a weak attempt to excuse Ann Couter’s behavior. And again, that kind of behavior may be acceptable and expected on playgrounds across the country, but it was hardly appropriate for the CPAC Convention.

DFWShook on March 5, 2007 at 4:32 PM

John, I assume you were a Dem who chose to leave because of the left’s inability to even pretend they wanted to protect this country.

No, I’m not a “cafeteria conservative”. Not even close.

When John who wuzzadem tries to tell Bill C who was neveradem how to behave then I get the impression that you look at me as someone who barely tolerate.

Wow. You certainly read a lot into four little words. My intention was not to “tell you what to do”, but I guess you can chalk that up to my inexperience as a conservative.

As for you being someone I can “barely tolerate”, I don’t even know you, and if I had any negative feelings toward you I would have ribbed you, which is what I intended.

Hey, what happened to “sharing the tent with people with whom you disagree”?

Just don’t tell me how a conservative is supposed to act. I know because I have been doing it all my life.

Bill C on March 5, 2007 at 3:34 PM

Oh, I see – you have seniority. Sorry, I’m a n00b, so I haven’t read the rule book yet.*

*BTW, that was a joke, so please don’t get on me for implying there is a conservative “rule book”.

John from WuzzaDem on March 5, 2007 at 4:52 PM

Michael Medved has a piece out on Townhall about the matter.

Its a good read.

.

GT on March 5, 2007 at 5:04 PM

DFWShook on March 5, 2007 at 4:32 PM

We agree, she crossed the line. I had posted that on another thread.

As a gay man and an conservative, I have to question whether I’m really welcomed in the GOP’s big tent…

This and your next paragraph is what I was referring to. Notice that the posts were not all supporting her. She is not the spokesperson, she is “a” spokesperson..hence the big tent. Remember, we have a VP that we support, and he has made room in the tent for you. As for me, I could care less what your sexuality was, I don’t even know what sex most of the posters are on this blog. I don’t know what religion, or race they are…and I don’t care. What they stand for, that I do care, and what they know, I like to learn.
And the term Fa***t is not only stupid, it is outdated. But then it was an obsure reference, that few people know. A tastless joke gone awry.

right2bright on March 5, 2007 at 5:18 PM

Rush just finished talking about this.

In summary, conservatives can’t let the left define them as racist, homophobe etc. and by assuming a defensive posture concerning Ann’s comments we are, in effect, validating their opinion of us.
Bill C on March 5, 2007 at 2:00 PM

Rush played it more down the middle than you let on. He also stated that Ann shouldn’t have used that word in that place. Look at the transcript when Rush posts it on his site.

Laura Ingraham was less equivocal.

The Ritz on March 5, 2007 at 5:20 PM

would everyone quit taking this crap so seriously?
we are all started to sound like a bunch of wussy liberals, and for what?

lgodfrey88 on March 5, 2007 at 5:29 PM

Michael Medved has a piece out on Townhall about the matter.

Its a good read.

.

GT on March 5, 2007 at 5:04 PM

“Senator Edwards deserves condemnation for his left wing politics, his naked opportunism, even for his long career as an ambulance chasing lawyer, but laughingly smearing him as a closeted homosexual constitutes an inexcusable degradation of public discourse.” – Medved.

The Ritz on March 5, 2007 at 5:32 PM

Pablo on March 4, 2007 at 7:24 PM

I’m sorry I missed your response.

Let me ask you this. Would this event mattered as much to the news cycle if Republicans had honored Reagan’s 11th Commandment?

If Coulter is just in it for the attention, wouldn’t honoring Reagan’s 11th Commandment dampened things for her a bit?

Just a thought.

.

GT on March 5, 2007 at 5:56 PM

Ritz,

No I don’t have a blog.

I have totally understood your point the whole time. I used to be where you are. I have commented so in every thread we have going on this. My point about Ann was that the word faggot is immoral. But she did not use it in an immoral way.

Other immoral words ares nigger, spic, kike, wop, blanket ass, mick, heb, etc. Ann did not use the word in an immoral way even if the entire room thought she did. AND, it wasn’t used immorally even if she knew people would react the way they did. (Just as my use of the words above were not used in an immoral way, someone could accuse me of politically incorrect speech.) Rush used to do this all the time. And he did make references to specific people. Barney Frank etc. AND, when Rush came on the scene, many conservatives were offended by him and tried to distance themselves for fear of being associated with politically incorrect speech.

Ann is doing the same thing. Her words have hidden meanings that only those with a better than fair knowledge of the entire scope of conservative thought really get what she is saying. Rush got us started and Ann is the next step.

To prove this we look back at Ann’s actions in the past. As recently as a few weeks ago, she commented on this very point. (Someone had left a link earlier) She was not calling edwards a faggot. Therefore she was not using the term as an insult but as part of a statement about PC insanity. Yet, she is being accused of saying something that she did not say and people are excoriating her for it so she will shut up and retrack what she said. That is the purpose of PC attacks.

This is the pivitol point that seperates us on this issue. I have always understood your point. The question I pose to you is: Can you see how Anns remark was not an insult but an attack on PC?

You fight PC by exposing it as false moralism while you determinedly retain the high ground and defend Morality by eschewing personal assaults….

Can you give me some specific examples of serious successes that this tactic you are persuing has produced? I have provided that evidence in my ruler analogy, and before I toss it out, I’d like to see the same argument made for your opinion.

csdeven on March 5, 2007 at 6:10 PM

Oh, I see – you have seniority. Sorry, I’m a n00b, so I haven’t read the rule book yet.*

*BTW, that was a joke, so please don’t get on me for implying there is a conservative “rule book”.

John from WuzzaDem on March 5, 2007 at 4:52 PM

But there is a book and if you didn’t know that it must means you haven’t been inducted into the fraternity. 1) Take your computer apart and put it in a paper bag. 2) Go stand on your front law. 3) Leave a message on your blog letting us know you have completed parts 1 and 2.

And again, that kind of behavior may be acceptable and expected on playgrounds across the country, but it was hardly appropriate for the CPAC Convention.

DFWShook on March 5, 2007 at 4:32 PM

If you want to argue that the venue was inappropriate I can respect that. Since I know you crave my respect. :-P

Bill C on March 5, 2007 at 10:20 PM

Cool – I’m finally going to get my certificate.

John from WuzzaDem on March 5, 2007 at 11:36 PM

outrage from the right forced marcott off the edwards blogging team, followed by edwards retracting his rubber condemnation and morcot and the nutroots protesting that they were “smeared” by being quoted accurately. when marcot and her comrades write about “godbags” and the like, its bigotry, and none of the antigay bigots like william2006 or hiraghm would accept any of their dissembling about it.

now they’re operating in the exact same mnanner as the edwards campaign and, with astonishing giant balls, questioning the authenticity of our conservatism for objecting.

jummy on March 4, 2007 at 12:31 AM

Bigoted?

What are you talking about?

You made a statement with nothing to support it and explain your claim.

My name does not belong with the world “bigot.”

There is nothing I wrote under this thread which is bigoted.

Nevertheless, your do appear to be bigoted, prejudicial, and arrogant to make such a statement.

I await your apology for your incendiary comment and false accusation.

William

William2006 on March 5, 2007 at 11:59 PM

Okay. Feel free to ridicule me now for even considering such a thing.

CyberCipher on March 4, 2007 at 12:35 AM

CyberCipher,

I agree with you.

I did not think to put it into words like you have. I do think Coulter has issues.

I notice she does not seem to have a family, children, and so on.

To my knowledge she is alone and this is her life.

She is witty, possesses a biting tongue, and can be sharp as a razor, but she does seem to have some issues.

I am happy that she does skewer leftists, liberals, for few do so, nevertheless there is a point at which she is swimming in very murky waters.

William

William2006 on March 6, 2007 at 12:04 AM