An Internet hub with domestic and international news, analysis, original reporting, and popular features from the left, center, indies, centrists, moderates, and right
The Conservative World Turns Against Coulter
Senator John McCain, former NYC Mayor Rudy Giuliani and former Governor of Massachusetts Mitt Romney have condemned Ann Coulter for the bigoted remark she made when she spoke at CPAC. As all of you will remember she referred to John Edwards as a “faggot�. Howard Dean and others called on Republicans to denounce Coulter’s remark… and they did.
opinions powered by SendLove.to
17 Responses to “The Conservative World Turns Against Coulter”
Prominent Conservatives running for office might denounce Coulter, we will see what the reaction of the rank and file will be. My feeling is that the left and right will do what they have always done, point out the transgressions of the other side while ignoring anything said on their side. This is why I objected to Shaun using the charged term of “chicken hawk�, even if it is mild in comparison to “faggot�. I still hope that the moderate/centrist hallmark will be respectful and civil discourse not a copy of the ranting that goes on at the daily Kos or Blogs for Bush. If the center truly wants to lead the way in political discourse then dropping the invectives and talking seriously should be our way of getting a point across. This is the lesson we should draw from the Coulter remarks.
OK, let’s go through the process again:
1)Coulter appears as a major speaker at a national conservative organization and makes incredibly inflammatory and offensive remarks
2)Major politicians reject her remarks after being called on it by those moonbat liberals (Romney’s statement was so vapid as to be meaningless)
3) Coulter is then offered more time on FOX and a return speaking engagement to throw her garbage in the public discourse with the continued support of conservatives (see #1)
Meanwhile…the mainstream media picks anonymous posts off of a blog to decry the nastiness among the left and to tar the Democrats with a very broad brush indeed.
Give me a break – until Coulter disappears and until Cheney comes out with a serious rebuke to her words this is just more of the right playing games with the media.
Serious conservatives take note, your party is in bed with people who support terrorism and the murder of Supreme Court justices (just two of Ms. Coulter’s recent speaking points).
If she’s still got a gig on Fox, if newspapers still carry her column, and if she still gets invited to speak in events that purport to be part of the political discourse, then nothing has changed.
Of course the big three have to renounce Coulter’s bigotry. It may have gone over at CPAC, but they know she’s out-of-step with mainstream Republicans and with the country as a whole. There is definitely a faction of the GOP that she appeals to though, or her book sales wouldn’t be in the millions at Amazon. The real test, in my mind is whether she’s invited back to CPAC aa a headliner in 2008. (remember she’s also responsible for the towel-head comment at the conference in ’06, yet neither Romney nor Julie had any problems appearing alongside her this year, lol!) My bet is she’ll be on the roster, same as usual.
Her comments will make her more in demand at ratings-hungry Fox, and may even get a big buzz for her at CNN and MSNBC. She caused a similar stir after her comments about the 9/11 widows, and was the toast of the town for months. The media O’D'd on Coulter as they have more recently O’D'd on Anna Nicole. Controversy creates ratings.
the fact that none of the candidates spoke up to tell cpac to not invite her in the first place, speaks volumns
let us not forget her “raghead” comments from last year
let us not forget that she didnt vote in the last election, and voted illegally in the previous one
let us not forget that she called former pres clinton a latent homosexual and former vp gore a fag
let us not forget that everytime she opens her mouth, lies and venom spew forth
right before coulter spoke, romney spoke and told the crowd how happy he was that she was coming to the daius…well eff him
They haven’t turned against her that much. Malkin claims that she only got a smattering of laughter. She significantly doesn’t note the applause she received both before and after her remarks. Sister Toldjah briefly notes that she doesn’t care for Coulter before launching into her own screed against the hypocrisy of the left for not reacting against people from their ideological bent who say offensive things without once noting that none of them have the stature among liberals that Coulter has among conservatives. I have no doubt that she’ll still make a mint selling similar opinions to huge numbers of “conservatives” who agree with every vile thing she’s ever said and will remain on Fox and any other outlet that want to focus on appealing to the core Republican voters of 2007 and beyond.
I never thought I’d do this, but I’m going to “defend” Coulter. Actually it’s more of a comment on “decency” that I know Glenn Greenwald has pointed out and is reflected in the recent post where they counted the number of swear words on popular right and left wing blogs. Coulter said shortly after 9/11 “we should invade their countries, kill their leaders and convert them to Christianity.” I don’t remember much outcry from conservatives or Republicans (which actually need to be counted separately now because fewer and fewer conservatives are self identified Republicans and visa versa). About 9/11 widows she said, “I’ve never seen people enjoying their husbands’ deaths so much.” There was a little more outcry but not much. She also said, “I think [women] should be armed but should not vote… women have no capacity to understand how money is earned. They have a lot of ideas on how to spend it… it’s always more money on education, more money on child care, more money on day care.” No response to that either that I can recall.
About homophobia in general, prominent religious conservatives that Bush confers with personally either implicitly or explicitly blame gays for the problems of the country — even Katrina and 9/11. Republicans have made political gains demonizing gays and blaming them for the failure of families. I mean, even Mary Cheney was accused of deliberately denying a child a mother and father to push some agenda.
But all this hasn’t used any swear words so it’s not “angry and unhinged.” The second someone uses a swear word suddenly people are tripping over themselves to repudiate it…and it’s especially ironic because it’s one of the few times where it was obvious she was completely joking. It was making more fun of the ridiculous PC idea that someone has to go to rehab for saying “faggot” so they can be “cured” (I’m sure there’s a great Isaiah Washington meets Ted Haggard joke in there somewhere) and just used Edwards as a playground smear. She called Gore a “total fag” and said Bill had “latent homosexual tendecies” in an interview without causing a whole lot of hand wringing — apparently the “got” suffix is really important to get people up in arms.
All she’s doing is providing a window into the real undercurrent of the movement and it’s pitiful people are focusing on her words instead of the ideas she’s exposing that I know are relatively popular.
While I Coulter goes overboard with her nasty insults she is on the mark with her general points regarding the left . She is not an eected official and is free to comment as she sees fit .
As C.Stanley pointed out in another thread, there are plenty of people on the left who engage in the same kind of vitriol if not worse. To attempt to excuse the Edwards Bloggers for not having the same name recognition is weak.There is no dearth of examples of famous authors , comedians , movie producers ,etc who spew their own brand of mean spirited rebukes . The fact that Coulter is simply better at winning over an audiance is besides the point . A bankrupt left wing radio station tried and failed despite making far more dereogatory remarks, alegations , and lies .
The same standards never apply to remarks by Rhandy Rhodes and Al Franken .
Who decided that being called a “fagot” is worse than being called a “chickenHawk .” Or that it is worse than suggesting a person would stand by and do nothing despite knowledge that an attack would occur which would injure or kill thousands of his own countrymen. Or that such an insult is worse than a claim that a person engaged in rigging an election. I beg to differ.
In fact, the left has a callous disregard for spurious allegations. Recall a recent joke made by Ellen DeGenereste at the Oscars implying that Gore had won the election. I will join them in denouncing Ann Coulture when I see an honest reaction from thier own side .
The left is always willing to jump out of their chairs to claim foul but have no desire for introspection. Go check out the Edwards Bloggers who have tried to claim they quit as a result of threats and intimidation. Coulter and other right wing writers have experienced the same kind of threats and more. In fact. the left poked fun of Ann’s fear which resulted from a progressive thinker charging at her with a pie in hand.They were positively giddy over her
fear .
Jim Satterfield said:
March 4, 2007 at 11:25 am
Sister Toldjah briefly notes that she doesn’t care for Coulter before launching into her own screed against the hypocrisy of the left for not reacting against people from their ideological bent who say offensive things without once noting that none of them have the stature among liberals that Coulter has among conservatives
That’s because that is not true. Rosie O’Donnel is held in atleast equal regard from her lefty supporters . Her remarks easily equal that said by Ms. Coulter .
The same can be said for Al Franken despite the fact that he physically manhandled a heckler during a speech by Democrat presidential candidate Howard Dean . The man was a supporter of Democrat presidential candidate Lyndon LaRouche .
Barbara Striesand uses her concert to pitch her brand of lies and distortions . All with very little complaint from her fans .
Jim Satterfield said:
March 4, 2007 at 11:25 am
I have no doubt that she’ll still make a mint selling similar opinions to huge numbers of “conservatives� who agree with every vile thing she’s ever said and will remain on Fox and any other outlet that want to focus on appealing to the core Republican voters of 2007 and beyond.
Sure. The same network that continues to prominently include Al Sharpton and Charlie Rangel ? and has invited the likes of Michael Moore,Carville & Begala ,Janeane Garofalo , Al Franken , Jessie Jackson and more ? What exactly is your point Jim ? That Ann will continue to have a voice ? Well , I hope you are correct.But people need not “agree with every vile thing she’s ever said ” for her to continue to do so .I doubt you would hold any of your favorite pundits to such strict standards .
How timely . Can we have a thread on left wing hate speech ?
http://newsbusters.org/node/11169
In a nutshell, the host said the world would be a safer place if the assassination attempt succeeded. And, he even had the nerve to reiterate it. Here’s the deplorable sequence of events for those that have the stomach for it (video available here courtesy of our friend Ms Underestimated):
Maher: What about the people who got onto the Huffington Post – and these weren’t even the bloggers, these were just the comments section – who said they, they expressed regret that the attack on Dick Cheney failed.
Joe Scarborough: Right.
Maher: Now…
John Ridley: More than regret.
Maher: Well, what did they say?
Ridley: They said “We wish he would die.� I mean, it was (?) hate language.
Barney Frank: They said the bomb was wasted. (laughter and applause)
Maher: That’s a funny joke. But, seriously, if this isn’t China, shouldn’t you be able to say that? Why did Arianna Huffington, my girlfriend, I love her, but why did she take that off right away?
After some discussion about why Huffington should or shouldn’t have taken these comments down, the following occurred:
Ridley: It’s one thing to say you hate Dick Cheney, which applies to his politics. It’s another thing to say, “I’m sorry he didn’t die in an explosion.” And I think, you know…
Maher: But you should be able to say it. And by the way…
Frank: Excuse me, Bill, but can I ask you a question? Do you decide what the topics are for this show?
Maher: Yeah, I decide the topics, they don’t go there.
Frank: But you exercise control over the show the way that she does over her blog.
Maher: But I have zero doubt that if Dick Cheney was not in power, people wouldn’t be dying needlessly tomorrow. (applause)
Scarborough: If someone on this panel said that they wished that Dick Cheney had been blown up, and you didn’t say…
Frank: I think he did.
Scarborough: Okay. Did you say…
Maher: No, no. I quoted that.
Frank: You don’t believe that?
Maher: I’m just saying if he did die, other people, more people would live. That’s a fact.
MichaelF carefully distorts by saying “That’s because that is not true. Rosie O’Donnel is held in atleast equal regard from her lefty supporters . Her remarks easily equal that said by Ms. Coulter .”.
There are far more conservatives supporting, nay, worshipping Coulter than there are people supporting O’Donnell at her nuttiest. Examine the best seller list. Go see what Andrew Sullivan saw of how Coulter was being treated at CPAC. As far as her appearances on Fox are concerned I do believe that the question is not whether liberals have ever appeared there but how often Coulter has been there and what her relationship is with the network.
As far as Maher is concerned he should have thought about what he was saying. I don’t like things like that no matter who they come from. But let us take some choice quotes from your hero Coulter.
I think the liberals are quite likely outnumbered just by Coulter’s bile given that I only quoted the ones directly threatening death and violence, whether claimed as a joke or not.
Rosie ODonnel isn’t a political pundit, she’s a entertainer mouthing off on politics. When an Coulter goes on the View I welcome the cat fight.
To attempt to excuse the Edwards Bloggers for not having the same name recognition is weak.
What’s weak about it? If you’re a well-known political pundit who appears regularly on cable news shows as a GOP spokesperson, I think that puts you into a different category than a blogger who few had heard of before the Edwards blow-up. But I actually hope dear Ann keeps mouthing off. She’s the gift that keeps on giving for the Democratic party.
kritter said:
March 4, 2007 at 6:59 pm
To attempt to excuse the Edwards Bloggers for not having the same name recognition is weak.
What’s weak about it?
How famous one is says nothing about the level of hate in their speech. I would think that would be obvious. The impact they might have might be different but the words hold meaning regardless of how well known they might be. Do we need a meter which will determine when someone is now famous enough to be expected to own their words?I went on to clearly point out a number of other examples of equally or more well known lefties
Rudi said:
March 4, 2007 at 5:31 pm
Rosie ODonnel isn’t a political pundit, she’s a entertainer mouthing off on politics
Yup. Just keeping changing the goal lines. Sure, Rosie is no political pundit. but neither is Ann Coulter a politician. Nor Bill O’Reilly or Sean Hannity . But Rosie has decided to enter that arena and is now fair game. She also is far more popular and well known than Coulter . Al Franken is another comic who became a political pundit and an author.
When you want to excuse a person on your side you claim they are not politicians but rather pundits. Now pundits are fair game as opposed to comics and so it goes. I think the distinctions are meaningless and used differently depending on the situation.
Michael F- Yes it definitely makes a difference how famous you are, of whether you hold a position of some authority or public trust (not that Coulter does). The larger an audience you reach, the larger the impact, the greater the damage you do to someone’s reputation. But, as I said in another thread-we Democrats love Coulter and her big mouth. She’s the gift that keeps on giving, dividing conservatives and revealing the camp that supports her for their extremism and bigotry. I hope CPAC features her as a headliner in ’08, as well.
My guess is that Ann Coulter leaves the impression as being more viriolic that Bill Mahr, for example, because she’s not fuuny enough. Her personna comes off as cold and angry, while Mahr just seems to be having fun; I’ve never seem without an impish grin as he delivers his own poisoned arrows. The fun, or funny, part soltens the blow.
It’s not fair, maybe, but life isn’t fair.