Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Coulter Called Gore A Fag - Where Was The Outrage?
Sweetness & Light ^ | March 4, 2007 | N/A

Posted on 03/04/2007 12:56:27 PM PST by Sam Hill

Come along with me if you will, to a time long ago. Well, actually just a few months ago. But apparently, it was seemingly a more innocent age:

(Click on photo to play.)

On the July 27, 2006 edition of MSNBC's Hardball, host Chris Matthews asked Ann Coulter, "How do you know that [former President] Bill Clinton is gay?" -- referring to her comment the night before on CNBC's The Big Idea with Donny Deutsch that Clinton "show[s] some level of latent homosexuality."

Coulter responded, "I don't know if he's gay. But [former Vice President] Al Gore -- total fag."

She went on to defend her theory about Clinton's sexuality by stating that "everyone has always known, widely promiscuous heterosexual men have, as I say, a whiff of the bathhouse about them."

Coulter claimed she was "just kidding" about Gore, but said of her theory about Clinton, "It's not only not a joke, it's not even surprising."

As the world now knows, Ann Coulter made a similar joke at CPAC a couple of days ago. But this time our watchdog media were looking for dirt from CPAC, so they latched upon her joke, and pretended she was calling Edwards a faggot -- and of course indulging in hate speech.

But where was their outrage last July?

Where was outrage here at Free Republic?

(I believe some of the members of the audience were even Freepers.)

How time flies.


TOPICS: Extended News; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: anncoulter; conservativefox; coulter; superbabe
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100101-120121-140141-153 next last
To: Miss Marple

Take yourself elsewhere...

Are you the self-appointed PC gestapo???


101 posted on 03/05/2007 6:23:40 AM PST by Sir Francis Dashwood (LET'S ROLL!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 100 | View Replies]

To: jellybean

You could add me to that list. I keep getting this picture of Ann dressed up like a female John Wayne, as the new sheriff of a town beseiged by scum. Shes saddling up her horse and turns around to the towns folk and says " you all have had it, right? You are tired of the scum sucking varmints keeping you holed up? Saddle up. We are going to chase them down". Heh heh....makes me laugh. You can tell I watched a cowboy flick this weekend.


102 posted on 03/05/2007 6:29:49 AM PST by dforest (Liberals love crisis, create crisis and then dwell on them.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 93 | View Replies]

To: indylindy
Shield Maiden of the GOP, Ann Coulter...


103 posted on 03/05/2007 6:36:23 AM PST by Sir Francis Dashwood (LET'S ROLL!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 102 | View Replies]

To: Sir Francis Dashwood

She definitly has the guts. I get a real kick out of her. It is a very nice thing to be unafraid to speak out. She has created that for herself.


104 posted on 03/05/2007 6:40:25 AM PST by dforest (Liberals love crisis, create crisis and then dwell on them.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 103 | View Replies]

To: indylindy
I keep getting this picture of Ann dressed up like a female John Wayne, as the new sheriff of a town beseiged by scum.

Sheriff Ann...I like that! LOL

You've been added to the Ann list.

105 posted on 03/05/2007 6:55:25 AM PST by jellybean (FRED THOMPSON FOR PRESIDENT! Proud to be an Ann-droid and a Steyn-aholic)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 102 | View Replies]

To: thinking

"While I enjoy Ann's comments, I have to say that, when someone becomes overly interested, in the sexuality of a distant person, then I, become concerned about the sexuality of the person voicing the comments..."

I'm not sure who you are talking about here? Perhaps you are saying that Coulter was too interested in the "sexuality" of Bill Clinton?

If that's your point, then Coulter had a lot of company around here.


106 posted on 03/05/2007 8:46:50 AM PST by Sam Hill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 95 | View Replies]

To: Sam Hill

Your bitching is getting really tiresome.


107 posted on 03/05/2007 8:52:10 AM PST by jmc813 (Rudy Giuliani as the Republican nominee is like Martin Luther being Pope.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Sam Hill

She even called Bubba a 'latent homosexual'. It took the left a little while to devise a plan to make something out of nothing.


108 posted on 03/05/2007 8:53:42 AM PST by Texas Songwriter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Sam Hill

When a good lookin babe calls a guy a faggot is it like a drill sergant calling a recruit a turd. You got to take it with a grain of salt and not get your hairdo in a bunch.


109 posted on 03/05/2007 8:57:59 AM PST by jetson (II)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sam Hill
Great post.



All this selective outrage doesn't impress me much.
110 posted on 03/05/2007 9:06:55 AM PST by Liberty Valance (theconservativecandidate@still2early.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: T.L.Sink
It's not wit or humor to call John Edwards a "faggot" at a conservative forum.

You're wrong. It's both witty and humorous.... the guy's a faggot.


111 posted on 03/05/2007 9:42:50 AM PST by Donald Rumsfeld Fan ("Fake but Accurate": NY Times)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 83 | View Replies]

To: BillyBoy

Good post, BillyBoy. It's gotten so bad around here that if you disagree with Ann Coulter calling someone a 'faggot' from the podium of a GOP convention you're a spineless liberal troll who has no place here.

Even a FReeper of 7 years like myself. Unreal.


112 posted on 03/05/2007 9:52:31 AM PST by Jhensy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | View Replies]

To: Sam Hill

Just the other day, many of us were proud that a recent study showed that most conservative sites WERE conservative in their language.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1794510/posts

I think it has something to do with how we were raised. Calling people names like Kike, Nigger and Faggot wasn't allowed around our home, much less encouraged in our speech in public.

I don't understand all this defense of the indefensible.


113 posted on 03/05/2007 11:38:28 AM PST by wildbill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jhensy

Bump to all that.


114 posted on 03/05/2007 11:40:24 AM PST by Howlin (Honk if you like Fred Thompson!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 112 | View Replies]

To: Sam Hill

Algore and Edwards. Now there's a couple a fag boys. Liars too! Ahhhh, I feel better.


115 posted on 03/05/2007 11:46:31 AM PST by dforest (Liberals love crisis, create crisis and then dwell on them.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wildbill; Jhensy; Howlin; Sam Hill; Ann Coulter; All
I don't understand all this defense of the indefensible.

Respectfully, please re-read the title of this thread. If as you state in your post this comment is indefensible "where was the outrage, when Coulter call Gore a "f.." on national TV--certainly a larger audience than CPAC. While its certainly acceptable to debate the vulgarity of the term, ceding the high ground to dishonest moralists who will allow calling for the murder of our President and VP, while displaying high moral dudgeon about what is simply a barnyard epithet (one that AC had used before) strikes me as intellectully dishonest.

This charge has already been made in this post: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/1795289/posts

Under a link to Hannity's home page: [quoting from the post]

"Sean Hannity announcement

Sean Hannity announcement at the end of Hanity's America: Coulter on Hannity & Colmes Monday night, March 5th.

If Ann makes any comment other than a sincere apology she will be making a fool of herself trying to defend the indefensible."

Hannity did not make this announcement. The poster here admits as much after several requests for a verifiable link of Hannity's statement in post 167.

This idea that AC's comments are 'indefensible' is irrational cant. And while I'm certainly an AC fan; this characterization of the poster's words as Hannity's show the level of mendacity the AC poster will stoop to make their "indefensible" point.

116 posted on 03/05/2007 12:17:47 PM PST by youngjim (Somebody better tell Ludacris that his/her name is ludicrous)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 113 | View Replies]

To: youngjim; ajolympian2004

The poster I'm referring to in the above post is pinged here as a courtesy.


117 posted on 03/05/2007 12:22:29 PM PST by youngjim (Somebody better tell Ludacris that his/her name is ludicrous)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 116 | View Replies]

To: Sam Hill
Let's see... Limbaugh's a drug addict, Coulter's a bigot... Who shall we destroy next to improve the conservative movement?

  1. Michael Savage
  2. Pat Buchanan
  3. Lou Dobbs
  4. Bill O'Reilly
  5. Tom Tancredo...

Do you want the whole list? (half kidding)

Seriously. I have no problem at all with knocking the pegs out from under wingnuts, ego maniacs, demagogues, pandering populists, rabble rousers, intellectually dishonest pundits, etc.

Just because there's a shameless double standard which often protects extremists and nuts on the left from marginalization and public rebuke (the anachronistic but still effective "red baiting" taboo) doesn't mean that we shouldn't police our own ranks and demand higher standards of those that deserve our support as conservatives.

I happen to believe that one of the reasons conservatism has thrived is because we've done this in the past. I don't think it's a coincidence, for instance, that the conservative movement started to take off in the late 60's after Bill Buckley, Barry Goldwater and others decided to disassociate themselves from and marginalize the previously influential John Bircher wingnuts.

No, I don't think Coulter is anywhere near as extreme as the Birchers, but she is rude, unconvincing to anyone not already convinced, intellectually dishonest and often false or slovenly in her research. At best she's serviceable as a kind of rodeo clown (irritating leftists and making them charge in the wrong direction).

118 posted on 03/05/2007 12:52:03 PM PST by Stultis (I don't worry about the war turning into "Vietnam" in Iraq; I worry about it doing so in Congress.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Sam Hill

Exactly. You have to hear the remarks in context, and you have to see Ann's face as she delivers her monologue. It was not a direct insult either to John Edwards, or to the faggots of America (which there seem to be many of, right here on FR).

It was a smackdown on political correctness, and on the infringement of First Amendment rights in a victim culture, where the supposedly victimized can force the utterer to be sent to a re-indoctrination facility. As used to be protocol in the Soviet Union (see Solzhenitsyn) and in Red China.

What is it--three or four days now? And the bright lights at FR STILL DON'T GET IT!


119 posted on 03/05/2007 12:57:56 PM PST by Palladin (You cannot glorify God better than by a calm and joyous life.--Spurgeon)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 84 | View Replies]

To: thinking

That was below the belt--waaaay below.


120 posted on 03/05/2007 12:59:42 PM PST by Palladin (You cannot glorify God better than by a calm and joyous life.--Spurgeon)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 95 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100101-120121-140141-153 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson