The Ann Coulter You Don't Know [The Daily Beast says Ann is "complicated" re: The Gay Speech Flap]

The Daily Beast ^ | August 19, 2010 | Matt Latimer

[RonDog]

The Ann Coulter You Don't Know

by Matt Latimer

The flap over Coulter’s speech to a gay Republican group
shows that the right’s provocateur is a heck of a lot of more
complicated than she’s made out to be.

"Wait until you hear what Ann Coulter did now" has become a cable news era cliché—up there with “fair and balanced," "we report, you decide," and "can I please get a word in edgewise, Mr. Carville?" So upon learning that Ann has found her way into another controversy—a sadly overused word when applied to Ms. Coulter—the natural temptation is to brace oneself. This, after all, is the woman who mused—in jest?—that perhaps America would be better off if women couldn't vote.

---

One of the carefully guarded secrets of Ann Coulter world
is how much she is not hated and—dare one say it—even liked
by many within the dreaded liberal elite.

---

No doubt to the surprise of Coulter haters—and "hate" is not too strong a word here—the supposed Bellatrix Lestrange of the Republican Party recently took a stand that the more rational among them might even applaud. When informed she could not participate in a political conference if she kept a commitment to speak to a group of gay Republicans, Ms. Coulter told organizers just what they could do with their conference. Noting that she speaks to all kinds of groups whose views she does not necessarily agree with—"the main thing I do is speak on college campuses, which is about the equivalent of speaking at an al Qaeda conference"—Coulter, in her own style, stood for something that conservatives are supposed to believe in: the free exchange of ideas. Few, of course, have exercised that particular privilege with more vigor than the woman who famously labeled Katie Couric "the affable Eva Braun" of the liberal movement.

Lately, in fact, Coulter has been making a habit of getting on the bad side of the right’s Dwight Schrutes, even at the risk of alienating some of her book buyers and website subscribers. She was, for example, an early and outspoken opponent of the Obama birther movement, calling its adherents a collection of "cranks." And in response to commentator Bill Kristol’s haughty demand that Republican National Committee chairman Michael Steele resign because Steele criticized the military surge in Afghanistan, Coulter turned the tables. "Bill Kristol Should Resign," she wrote, thus fearlessly taking on one of the Grand Poobahs of today’s GOP and provoking a needed debate within the conservative movement over the dangers of supporting every military action at every time under every circumstance.

Tolerance for differing viewpoints...willingness to stand up to the GOP’s titans...is this the Ann Coulter that liberals loathe and Republicans love? That is exactly her. But you’re not supposed to tell anyone. In fact, one of the carefully guarded secrets of Ann Coulter world is how much she is not hated and—dare one say it—even liked by many within the dreaded liberal elite. Well-credentialed members of the mainstream media privately extol her. Among her friends is the decidedly unconservative talk show host Bill Maher, on whose cable program she frequently appeared. "Unlike so many people in America, she was not afraid to get booed," Mr. Maher once said of his pal. But at a quasi-debate with Maher, Coulter showed the limits of her affection. "Bill wants me to behave like a wife who laughs each time she hears her husband tell the same story," she told her audience. (Predictably she did not oblige.) To the shock, awe, and dismay of many on the left, Coulter even has dated a number of liberal acolytes, including a one-time aide to Joe Biden and the former president of the New York City Council. There are even anecdotal cases of—brace yourselves—actual kindness.

I can attest to this unsettling phenomenon. Some years ago, a geeky political nerd from Michigan came to Capitol Hill with grandiose dreams and a debilitating shyness. Few among the great potentates and perennial climbers of the United States Senate had much time for the lugs at the bottom. But Ann did. Though a senior aide to a U.S. Senator, she took the time to get to know the rest of us, ask our opinions, share stories, and be a friend. Even then I knew that Coulter would not be long for the dreary rituals and bloviating self-absorption of Capitol Hill. Instead she became a media star.

More than a decade later, when I wrote a book about my experiences in Washington I asked my publisher if Ann could read it. I figured she wouldn’t remember me and expected a polite rebuff. Instead Ann got to it quickly and wrote a generous blurb. When the book received criticism from prominent Bush aides and some conservative friends waited out the deluge from a comfortable distance, Ann Coulter stood by with her support, even appearing on Fox News to lend a hand and correct the facts.

I jokingly told her that from here on out I’d punch anyone who attacked her in my presence. "You’re going to be pretty busy," she instantly replied.

None of this is to say that Ann Coulter hasn’t deserved the animosity or opposition she has received over the years—and which she sometimes has shrewdly cultivated. She knew well what she was doing when she boldly criticized the 9/11 widows or poked fun at Senator John Edwards before that particular sport became a national pastime. And most likely she wouldn’t take back a single offending word she has ever uttered.

But there is a reason why all the latter-day Coulter imitators on cable news channels have been about as cutting edge as a J.C. Penney commercial. People—at least those who matter—usually are more complicated than their caricatures. It’s too bad that politics doesn’t allow us to see more public figures that way.

Matt Latimer is the author of the New York Times bestseller, SPEECH-LESS: Tales of a White House Survivor. He was deputy director of speechwriting for George W. Bush and chief speechwriter for Donald Rumsfeld.

[little jeremiah]

Thank you.

And the only thing that makes homosexuals any different from anyone else is their methods of sexual gratification.

To make an entire identity and platform around that is to me mentally ill. And absolutely unworthy of support.

As you know, I do not hate individuals who are homosexual (at any given time - they can change!). But their agenda is anti-Constitutional and against all the principles that make this country great.

[whatisthetruth]

Thanks pretty eye-opening stuff no doubt about it. It’s no wonder the homo agenda is making such great strides in this country, many conservatives are weakening and submitting to the constant leftists’ pressure that homosexuals deserve equal rights too.

[whatisthetruth]

Oh yeah, love the sinner, hate the sin.

"Go and Sin no more", that's how you love the sinner, you don't hold their hand all the way down into hell.

[DJ MacWoW]

Their lives revolve around deviant sex. That is very unhealthy. Mentally and physically. When I hung around with my brother and his friends I found that most are depressed and eaten by guilt. Forcing others to accept them as normal won’t change that. The guilt comes from knowing they are wrong and the rampant promiscuity.

[buschbaby]

"What do you think of the GOProud’s legislative agenda posted right above - comment 72#?"

Ofcourse I cannot agree with the majority of their agenda. Gays know their activities are sinful, or against nature if they are not religious. The militant attitude is a protective armor they wear so they don't feel so crappy about themselves. If they can force everyone to accept the lifestyle as "normal" then they can feel normal (they incorrectly assume).

Sorry if I didn't explain that well. For me the issue is very complex. In the end, I usually end up feeling sorry for gays, wishing they could lead normal hetero lives.

[little jeremiah]

The battle lines are being drawn. Many of the famous people are surrendering.

Too bad for them.

[little jeremiah]

There are many organizations that help homosexuals leave the “gay” life. THere are many former homosexuals.

Their agenda is all about dominance and destruction. Their agenda is about eliminating the rights of free speech, religion, and association. And access to kids. It’s a very broad agenda.

[DJ MacWoW]

Seems I was absent the day we Conservatives voted to hate all gays.

I haven't seen any hatred for an individual. I see distaste for a lifestyle and it's consequences. I see anger because a mental illness is being touted as "normal". It's not.

Tell me this is normal.

Folsom Street Fair

[whatisthetruth]

It’s a very broad agenda.

Silencing christian conservatives and indoctrinating our youth is but one of them. CONSERVATIVES WAKE UP!

[jellybean]

What say YOU?

I say that I find it particularly disturbing to read the comments of some on FR who feel the need to start rumors and make false assertions ("she's gay", "she supports the gay lifestyle", "she was never a conservative") rather than state their opposition to her making a speech to this group. It's not enough to just disagree with her decision, she must be destroyed! I thought it was only liberals who did that sort of thing. Guess not.

What's next? Will they be picking through her trash and renting an apartment next to hers so they can spy on her every move? Disgusting behavior!

Let me know if you'd like to be added to the Ann Coulter ping list.

[onyx]

What say YOU?

Here's what I say, at long last, since I have remained virtually quiet whilst the issue just seems to get uglier by the day.

I think most of you know that I am firmly, unmovingly, resolutely, against the homosexual movement in our country. There is nothing conservative about it, so let's drop that pretense right now.

During CPAC's convention, I posted the original thread that outed GOProud's agenda and took some heat for the posting from well meaning members who questioned me for posting from their site, until I explained I was trying to show precisely who this group's officers were along with their political agenda.

This takes us to Ann's scheduled appearance. I have always liked Ann Coulter; her rancorous character and wit whenever "I've" seen her appear on TV. Many times I've posted on her threads that I've liked: "Annie's thee best. I love Ann!" etc. Does *that* make me a follower or a fan? A fan, yes. A follower certainly not. I only have one book of hers and that was given to me as a gift.

Were I a follower or hardcore fan, I suppose I would be expected to be upset about Ann's friendship with Bill Maher, (whom I think is a scumbag) her dating some libtard, and her appearance before this homosexual group, but I'm not.

Ann is an excellent pundit, writer and author, with a legal mind that's hard to match, and a beautiful TV celebrity. She makes her money through appearances, her weekly, syndicated columns, her books and whatever else she has going for her. She doesn't owe anyone who's upset anything.

Like I wrote to jellybean the other night on a Coulter thread, "Coulter for SCOTUS - she's already talking to gays - so why not Kagan!" Har!

[bd476]

Onyx, you absolutely rock! So does your very cogent post.

Big bump to the top!

[onyx]

Thank you, dear bd476.
Your kind words make me glad I posted.

[hosepipe]

[ As for Ann...The "crank" comment and using the KKK to make her point did it for me. Ann, GO POUND SAND! God will raise up someone else (with even greater talent than yours) to help save our nation. ]

Ann does ride rough shod over RINOs...
Digging her stelleto heels in as she goes over..
Thats WHY? some of us JUST LOVE her to bits..

All pain to RINOs.. is good progressive activity..
And the lamentations of their women is music..

[jellybean]

Thanks, onyx!

I don't understand the the tendency to viscerally attack someone we mostly agree with, but who says or does something that we don't. Is it necessary to ostracize them, vilify them and try to destroy their reputation?

When my son was younger and did something I didn't approve, my first reaction wasn't to kick him out of the house. I let him know my displeasure and applied discipline as appropriate until the behavior was corrected.

I don't believe Ann speaking to this group means she endorses their agenda nor legitimizes it. Ann's a speaker. It's what she does - she speaks to groups of people whether they agree with her or not and whether she agrees with them or not. I think this whole thing has been blown way out of proportion by those with ulterior motives (Josheph Farah for one). I consider it a non-issue.

[runninglips]

To those that KNOW the left and the right on some level are colluding in the destruction of individual rights in this country and the world, the distractions are nothing but false flags. Leaks to enslave the brain, while the body sits in front of flickering screens. This bickering over birth certificates, vacations, oil spills, non tax paying treasury secretaries, health care etc, is a waste of time, we all need to sharpen our focus. The nation is being run by an upper crusted entrenched class of corrupt individuals. The plan to turn us into a society of TRUE haves and have nots is set to be implemented in a day. We will be left with nothing but "cake crumbs" to feed our children. Transformation is nearly completed, yet we rearrange the deck chairs of the most Titanic economic collapse the world has ever seen or will see.

We NEED to save the country, but only a complete turnover in the House and Senate can do this. There is something like a thousand lobbyist for each elected official, no one reads what is written for them to sign and they are all figure heads, so let's talk again about something.....a birth certificate.....that would change NOTHING if proven that Usama bin Barack is not a natural born citizen. He will be President until January 2013 or 2017. . . . and yes I have been drinking, but boy are we royally screwed.

Dad is upstairs sleeping, mom is in the basement pouring gasoline with a candle in hand, and us "kids" are arguing over the remote control.

Come quickly Lord Jesus, we can use that victory now.

[whatisthetruth]

I think this whole thing has been blown way out of proportion by those with ulterior motives (Josheph Farah for one)

Aah I see using Coulter's talking points to make your point, surely you can do better than that. I think whoring before a group of homos to make money just might also be considered an ulterior motive to some, since that's not in the best interests of conservatism imo. I liked both Farah and Coulter, Coulter attacking birthers and now this, well I'm not so sure where she is coming from or where she is going anymore.....

[jellybean]

I think whoring before a group of homos to make money just might also be considered an ulterior motive to some...

Yes, imagine that! She's getting paid for engaging in her chosen avocation. She's a speaker and is getting paid to make a speech. I presume she's being paid well to do so.

As I said, this is a non-issue to me.

[whatisthetruth]

As I said, this is a non-issue to me.

Yea well the homos will thank you, I for one will never support or condone appeasement of homosexuals or their destructive perverted agenda or will look kindly upon those who do nor will I 'sneer' at those fighting to uphold our Constitutional principles. You are known by the company you keep. Thank God for people like Joe Farah.

[Candor7]

It’s not enough to just disagree with her decision, she must be destroyed! >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

This is why Americans accept fascism from their government these days.American culture is wrongly learning to accept the fact that destruction is a viable and neceaasary alternatie. It all starts with dehumanizing the individual, and the logic is , since the subject is not human, then he or she is worthy of destruction..People are turning into unthinking zombies, a far cry from thinking patriots who may want to fight the left.

Zombies! Please think before you post.