Posted on 03/14/2005 7:53:10 PM PST by rface
...she opened with a statement referring to Clinton as a "horny hick." Such spiteful and subjective comments brought laughter from the audience but did nothing to strengthen her opposing argument......I went home that night and tore my Bush-Cheney sticker off my door, and took my Bush "Taking America forward" pin off my bulletin board. I no longer consider myself a Republican, or even a conservative
Wednesday's (March 9th) intellectual exchange between Ann Coulter and Peter Beinart was both stimulating and disappointing, but above all, it was quite unsettling.
Both candidates had significant strengths, and they were surely worthy opponents. And it is always a privilege to witness such free exchange of discourse. However, while the debate was feisty and witty, I was left with an overall disturbing sense of deep hatred and political regression.
Beinart, editor of The New Republic (liberal), relied on many facts, figures and statistics, giving his argument an objective strength. Coulter did not respond with as many tangible figures, weakening her position. Beinhart's weakness, however, lay in his inability to keep the argument impersonal. He directed numerous insults at Coulter, most of which were completely irrelevant to the discussion topic.
This reflected the greatest strength of Coulter. She began her opening statements with praise for Beinart. She lauded him as a worthy opponent, a future leader of his party, and a man of great intellect. Beinart did no such thing. Coulter maintained her composure upon the assailment of numerous attacks and withheld from personal retorts completely. In one of her earlier books, "Slander," Coulter argues that liberals cannot debate without using personal insult as a tool, and Beinart certainly proved her point. She prevailed, in my opinion, as the classier of the two in her ability to maintain the purity of the debate without stooping to personally insult her fellow debater.
However, although Coulter was able to abstain from attacking Beinart, she was unable to debate without using vindictive commentary about others. In response to Beinart's factual discussion of Bill Clinton's presidency and what made it so great, she opened with a statement referring to Clinton as a "horny hick." Such spiteful and subjective comments brought laughter from the audience but did nothing to strengthen her opposing argument.
The lesson that both debaters desperately need to learn is that the very essence of debate is objectivity. The purpose of debate is to match facts, reason, and logic to find the ultimate truth that lies within the framework of the debate topic. It is not about who can coin the wittiest one-liners or appeal emotionally to the most people. It is certainly not about who can draw the most laughter or the loudest applause from the audience. The exchange between the two arguers was entertaining, but fell quite short of debate. The atmosphere in Cabot was that of a show, not a serious discussion.
What was most disappointing and indeed quite disturbing was the reaction of the Tufts audience. There was booing and shouting. Afterwards, I overheard a girl say that "people like her [Coulter] should not be allowed to write books," and the comment was received with emphatic agreement. Albeit a comment made in jest, the feeling of hatred in the debate room made it eerie and made my night walk home much darker.
Another girl made a profanity-laden statement that Coulter is a "neo-nazi." I would challenge her to think more carefully about what exactly neo-nazism entails, and when and where exactly Coulter has fit that highly offensive profile before being so boldly accusatory.
Finally, I heard Coulter referred to as a "nutcase" more than once. If that is true, then she is certainly a nutcase in high demand with several popular books, and one who can gracefully hold her own in a room full of hate.
Above all, this debate cast a shadow on my vision of America's political future. While I fully embrace the freedom of discourse and encourage it wholeheartedly, I believe these highly partisan debates can bring nothing but regression. They breed hate and further solidify political schisms. They make people cry out for censorship. They work in no way towards understanding. How much longer can America stand if its most educated citizens are so deeply divided by misunderstanding and hate?
Every great power has unknowingly induced its own demise. My fear is that Abraham Lincoln has already foreseen ours with his statement that "a house divided against itself cannot stand." My genuine plea to fellow believers in the human mind is to throw off self-righteous mantles of partisanship and to work instead towards a more progressive dialogue. Let us make Tufts a birthplace of objective communication in a world of such disarray. Objectivity is the human's only key to truth and provides the only framework within real progress can be sought.
I went home that night and tore my Bush-Cheney sticker off my door, and took my Bush "Taking America forward" pin off my bulletin board. I no longer consider myself a Republican, or even a conservative. From this day forward I choose the path of true progress. Consider me an objectivist.
Ashley Samelson is a sophomore who has yet to declare a major.
sometimes you have to call a Horney Hick a horney hick.....(I was born in West Virginia ---- maybe I am a horney hick too)
I suspect that this author is writing from her heart, and is not writing for an audience, because I don't think she knows who her audience is anymore. I guess I am sorry that she is dissapointed or disillusioned. Her vision of partisian debate is way naive. I guess I am sorry to see her pristine idealism shattered
Based on reading this whole article, I think the author is full of manure. She was not a Republican if one bad speaking engagement was enough to "turn" her.
The polite political debates in the vein of WF Buckley's Firing Line are ancient history, I'm afraid.
"I went home that night and tore my Bush-Cheney sticker off my door, and took my Bush "Taking America forward" pin off my bulletin board. I no longer consider myself a Republican, or even a conservative."
Baloney alert. This "writer" would have us believe she threw an entire party and philosophy away because Coulter called Clinton a "horny-hick".
"I went home that night and tore my Bush-Cheney sticker off my door, and took my Bush "Taking America forward" pin off my bulletin board. I no longer consider myself a Republican, or even a conservative."
Was the writer truely conservative to begin with or is this the typical "I'm a lifelong republican.......but " shtick?
Huh? Hell, I'm not a Republican, but why would an Ann Coulter appearance motivate a Bush supporter to lose it? Something is very, very odd about this author's motivations. Was this author operating under the assumption that Ann was some shrinking violet? This doesn't make any sense. She sounds so weak. Ann's views are news to her? Huh?
Me confused.
Anyone believe that the author actually had pro-Bush/Cheney bumper stickers and pins?
And if so, do you actually believe that she abandoned them because Ann called Clinton a "horny hick?"
If she really is the Republican voter that she claims to be, I find her lack of faith disturbing.
Ashley, Good! I dont want you in MY Party, You cry-Baby!
How long? HOW LONG???? Have the demoRATS trashed US? You are an Ignorant Child. You haven't lived long enough to understand what ROTTEN SCUM LIberals are....
Ann Coulter is a Fantastic Speaker and She only makes those statements to enrage the arrogant elitest snobs of the Left especially in Universitys!!!! If you got upset, it only proves you are weak in your position and havent got the stomach for the real Political battles ahead...you would be better served as a whimpy sheep in the Left wing Plantation.....good luck to you...they will be serving Prozac for lunch today and then you can have a nice nap this afternoon.
Buh-Bye!
"Ashley Samelson is a sophomore who has yet to declare a major."
Hehehehehe...says it all.
Thats just silly. Coulter is a writer and a bomb-thrower - thats her style. Would you ditch the Dems b/c of something Susan Estrich said? LOL.
Her "conservatism" stood on shaky ground, to put it mildly.
"I went home that night and tore my Bush-Cheney sticker off my door, and took my Bush "Taking America forward" pin off my bulletin board. I no longer consider myself a Republican, or even a conservative. From this day forward I choose the path of true progress. Consider me an objectivist. "
====
Be serious, if she was ever a Republican and ever had a Bush-Cheney sticker on her door, I'll eat my keyboard.
I've seen quite a few liberals, who pretend to be disillusioned conservatives to gain credibility.
But, Ms. Samelson, if Bill Clinton was not a "horny hick", then what, pray tell, was he?
Of course, it's demeaning and deeply pejorative. But isn't that what he was? How else would one characterize Bill Clinton?
Ashley has yet to declare a major, but has declared a party, in fact proclaims to have declared a party, rejected a party, and picked up another party. I'm guessing she doesn't have a clue.
Liberals don't like Ann Coulter because she plays by their rules.
Actually, in trouncing the US in televised debates over and over (a few years back) the British showed that sharp humor is what wins the debate.
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.