Originally Posted By SingleParkPassholder <a href="http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/03/04/coulter.edwards/index.html" target="_blank">http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITI CS/03/04/coulter.edwards/index.html</a> Who else but Ann Coulter? Some samples from the linked article: "I was going to have a few comments on the other Democratic presidential candidate, John Edwards, but it turns out that you have to go into rehab if you use the word 'faggot,' so I'm - so, kind of at an impasse, can't really talk about Edwards, so I think I'll just conclude here and take your questions," said Coulter, whose comment was followed by applause." "Prominent politicians from both parties and a gay-rights group on Saturday condemned right-wing commentator Ann Coulter for her reference Friday to Democratic presidential candidate John Edwards as a "faggot." "Ann Coulter's use of an anti-gay slur yesterday was un-American and indefensible," Edwards said in a posting on his Web site, www.johnedwards.com. " "CNN has reached out to Coulter's representative, and received no response. But the New York Times reported that she responded, in an e-mail, "C'mon, it was a joke. I would never insult gays by suggesting that they are like John Edwards. That would be mean." A spokesman for Sen. John McCain, a Republican presidential candidate, called Coulter's comments to the conservative group "wildly inappropriate." There's even more "wildly inappropriate" comments by Coulter in the article. So does Coulter rightfully earn her place with the Michael Richards and Tim Hardaways of the world with this comment? Will Republican take steps to finally blackball and distance themselves from her like the NBA has done with Hardaway and show business has with Richards? The woman is vile and full of hate. Considering her despicable comments about 9/11 widows and other bon mots that have tumbled out of her, why would any self-respecting political group continue to associate themselves with a female member of the Klan?
Originally Posted By gadzuux >> Will Republican take steps to finally blackball and distance themselves from her like the NBA has done with Hardaway and show business has with Richards? << Maybe the ones that are running for office. As for the rank and file, politics is blood sport to them. >> The woman is vile and full of hate. << And she mirrors her constituency.
Originally Posted By ecdc I genuinely am curious how many conservatives subscribe to Coulter's absurd brand of thinking (if indeed it can be called "thought"). On the one hand, I believe Republicans like McCain and Romney have denounced her comments not just for political gain, but because they're decent people who think it's wrong to use slurs (just as McCain denounced the Swiftboaters). But on the other hand, conservatives seem to take great pride in the much higher ratings and sales of conservative commentators vs. liberal commentators, suggesting there's more demand for Coulter's crap than Michael Moore's. But I've never seen the actual numbers.
Originally Posted By jonvn she is not a conservative. she's a right wing extremist reactionary. People don't say "reactionary" anymore. They call themsevles conservatives. These people are not conservatives, and neither are their supporters.
Originally Posted By DlandDug >>Will Republican take steps to finally blackball and distance themselves from her...<< As far as I know, Coulter is not a spokeman for the GOP. I certainly can't speak for all Republicans (since the party is not a monolith), but I would prefer she just go away. Jonvn has it right-- she is a simple reactionary, or at least skillfully plays one in order to boost her book sales and increasingly infrequent public appearances.
Originally Posted By jonvn You don't need a large fan base to make yourself rich. Say she has 1/300 people in this country who agree with her or like her. That is a small amount percentage-wise, but if they each bought a copy of her book? that's a million copies. She doesn't need to be nice or make rational statements. She just needs to keep her name out there so that people stupid enough to buy her books continue to do so.
Originally Posted By Darkbeer So where was all the outrage when the word was used in October of 2004? <a href="http://www.classicalvalues.com/archives/001581.html" target="_blank">http://www.classicalvalues.com /archives/001581.html</a> >>In a fit of rage, Fumo (D., Phila.) had lashed out at the top Republicans in the Senate, referring to them as "faggots" several times. "It was a very unfortunate word choice," Fumo said in a prepared statement yesterday. "I am especially sorry about using the term because it is not the way I feel in my heart toward gays." The incident occurred Wednesday night during a break in the Senate's consideration of a bill to prohibit public officials from owning any stake in gambling ventures. What set Fumo off was a move by the GOP to abruptly cut off debate on the measure. Republicans, Fumo said, had promised Democratic leaders that they would have a chance to offer amendments to make the bill even stronger. With that opportunity denied, Fumo approached President Pro Tempore Robert C. Jubelirer (R., Blair) and Majority Leader David J. Brightbill (R., Lebanon) when the Senate was at ease and at least four times called them "faggots." Exactly what was said is unclear, but several witnesses said that Fumo screamed "faggot" so loud that it could be heard throughout the upper chamber.<< Or how about another Talking Head wishing that folks were dead... <a href="http://newsbusters.org/node/11169" target="_blank">http://newsbusters.org/node/11 169</a> >>In 2002, ABC decided not to renew Bill Maher's contract apparently due to some disgraceful comments he made on his program "Politically Incorrect" following the 9/11 attacks. After what transpired on "Real Time" Friday, the heads of HBO should be equally outraged, if not more. As the discussion moved to the attempted assassination of Vice President Cheney last week, Maher asked his panel why it was necessary for the Huffington Post to remove comments by readers concerning their disappointment that the attempt failed. As the conversation ensued, Maher said one of the most disgraceful and irresponsible things uttered on a major television program since Bush was elected. 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.<<
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan >>So where was all the outrage when the word was used in October of 2004?<< Probably, people were outraged. But I guess since other dunces have used the word, you defend your pal Ann Coulter saying it now. I can safely assume you do defend her use of the word, because you haven't said otherwise. You don't ever offer your opinion, just news clippings of articles from YEARS ago. LOL! Desperate times call for desperate measures I guess...
Originally Posted By gadzuux You cannot equate maher and coulter as if they are somehow equal in stature or respectability. Maher is a satirist, a humorist. His comments, while abrasive, have some rooting in reality. And the context of his comments were defending their right to exist on a blog. Absolutely no one suspects edwards of being gay, so coulter's comment is a 'left field' vulgar insult that is solely designed to desperately attract attention.
Originally Posted By SingleParkPassholder "Probably, people were outraged. But I guess since other dunces have used the word, you defend your pal Ann Coulter saying it now. I can safely assume you do defend her use of the word, because you haven't said otherwise. You don't ever offer your opinion, just news clippings of articles from YEARS ago. LOL! Desperate times call for desperate measures I guess..." So Darkbeer is defending Coulter's use of the word? Figures. Since we're always left to infer his thoughts, because otherwise he would seem to be devoid of any, he must approve. I eagerly await linked articles about the Klan.
Originally Posted By SingleParkPassholder Meanwhile, in the real world: Coulter's syndicate refusing to address her latest remarks: <a href="http://www.mediainfo.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1003553800" target="_blank">http://www.mediainfo.com/eandp /news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1003553800</a> U.S. News and World Report calls her a fraud: <a href="http://www.usnews.com/usnews/opinion/mashekblog/archive/070305/ann_coulter_wingnut_fraud.htm" target="_blank">http://www.usnews.com/usnews/o pinion/mashekblog/archive/070305/ann_coulter_wingnut_fraud.htm</a> And rather than back off, Coulter is insisting Edwards's campaign manager is fronting for Arab terrorists: <a href="http://www.mediainfo.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1003553697" target="_blank">http://www.mediainfo.com/eandp /news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1003553697</a> Although she joked about it, at what point does Coulter indeed go to rehab in order to make amends for being the spawn of Joseph Goebbels?
Originally Posted By fkurucz >>Jonvn has it right-- she is a simple reactionary, or at least skillfully plays one in order to boost her book sales and increasingly infrequent public appearances.<< She's the female version of Michael Savage.
Originally Posted By DlandJB Although she joked about it, at what point does Coulter indeed go to rehab in order to make amends for being the spawn of Joseph Goebbels?>>> She hasn't screeched like this in awhile. Even the right is distancing themselves from her. She must be ready to release the paperback version of her latest book, or a new book because she needs the spotlight on her. McCain, Romney and Guliani have all condemned her remarks. The Christian Defense Coalition also has. Conservative Bloggers are calling for CPAC to drop her (<a href="http://amcblog.nationaljournal.com/njoncall/2007/03/conservative_bloggers_want_cpa.php" target="_blank">http://amcblog.nationaljournal .com/njoncall/2007/03/conservative_bloggers_want_cpa.php</a>) The Lancaster New Era paper has dropped her column <a href="http://local.lancasteronline.com/4/201385" target="_blank">http://local.lancasteronline.c om/4/201385</a> Her reaction "I'm so ashamed. I can't stop laughing." She doesn't know the meaning of the word shame. I don't think she understands that most people understand that polarizing talk is not going to win the next election. On the plus side, Edwards is understandably capitalizing on it.
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan >>I don't think she understands that most people understand that polarizing talk is not going to win the next election.<< She might have been busy harping about 9/11 widows while the GOP was losing the house and senate and didn't notice. >>"I'm so ashamed. I can't stop laughing."<< As long as she stirs stuff up, she'll get the attention she craves. That her antics hurt the GOP is of no concern to her. She's now revealed that she's in it for the money and attention, nothing more.
Originally Posted By DAR Well I broke my rule about never coming back here(this section is like crack) She obviously has nothing of value to say anymore(as if she ever did) so would it not be best to just ignore her?
Originally Posted By DAR I just looked at that picture of her. Any man who thinks she's attractive needs to get his head examined.
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan <a href="http://www.aim.org/aim_column/5279_0_3_0_C/" target="_blank">http://www.aim.org/aim_column/ 5279_0_3_0_C/</a>
Originally Posted By DAR <<On the plus side, Edwards is understandably capitalizing on it.>> Though I'm disturbed by him asking for $100,000 to fight the evil that is Ann Coulter.
