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

Skip to comments.

Blogosphere Is Quick to Criticize Ann Coulter (Use of a Certain 'F' Word at CPAC)
various | 3/2/2007 | n/a

Posted on 03/02/2007 3:22:58 PM PST by Pyro7480

Michelle Malkin writes:

Ann Coulter just finished her riff on Al Gore, tossed out some cute jokes ("You can understand why Hollywood is concerned about global warming. You know what heat does to plastic."), and ended with a cheap one-liner about John Edwards being a "faggot." (Paraphrasing) She said she would refrain from commenting on Edwards because "if you say faggot, you have to go to rehab."

A smattering of laughter.

Not from this corner.

Crickets chirping.

Flashback Last year's bomb about "ragheads."

Bryan at Malkin's Hot Air:

I’m no fan of John Edwards, but that’s just a stupid joke. It’s over the line. The laughter it generated across the room was more than a little annoying.

Last year it was “raghead.” This year it’s calling John Edwards a “faggot.” Two years in a row, Coulter has finished up an otherwise sharp CPAC routine with an obnoxious slur that liberals will fling at conservatives for years to come.

Thanks, Ann.

The Captain of Captain's Quarters opined

Yeah, that's just what CPAC needs -- an association with homophobia. Nice work, Ann.

At some point, Republicans will need to get over their issues with homosexuality. Regardless of whether one believes it to be a choice or a hardwired response, it has little impact on anyone but the gay or lesbian person. We can argue that homosexuality doesn't require legal protection, but not when we have our front-line activists referring to them as "faggots" or worse. That indicates a disturbing level of animosity rather than a true desire to allow people the same rights and protections regardless of their lifestyles.

Ann Coulter can be an entertaining and incisive wit. Unfortunately, she can also be a loose cannon, and CPAC might want to consider that the next time around.

Mary Katharine Ham of Townhall.com's one-liner

You shouldn't have to go to psych eval for using it, but it's a nasty word. Just don't.

Sean Hackbarth of The American Mind:

Ann Coulter almost made it through her CPAC speech without looking like a complete buffoon. She wasn’t funny, she rarely is, but she’s an attention whore. Near the end of her speech she said she wouldn’t talk about John Edwards because ” you have to go into rehab if you use the word ‘faggot.’” She’s now on non-speaking terms with any gay and lesbian friends.


TOPICS: Your Opinion/Questions
KEYWORDS: anncoulter; blogs; coulter; cpac; fword; malkin; michellemalkin; moron; nopooftas; ragheadedfaggots
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 101-120121-140141-160161-179 last
To: NCSteve
Whether right or wrong, they have shown themselves to exactly the same brand of prune-faced PC apologists as their left-wing counterparts.

BUMP

161 posted on 03/03/2007 1:22:25 PM PST by Fester Chugabrew
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Tax-chick
"In several countries, you could be arrested for "hate speech" if you told that story!"

America ain't far behind.

Look at this thread for evidence of that.

Im disgusted, not at what Ann said, but at the heat she is taking from so-called conservatives.

162 posted on 03/03/2007 1:24:33 PM PST by expatguy (http://laotze.blogspot.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: Syncro

looks kinda effeminate to me


163 posted on 03/03/2007 1:27:44 PM PST by expatguy (http://laotze.blogspot.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 132 | View Replies]

To: Sir Francis Dashwood

Thanks - Im with you.


164 posted on 03/03/2007 1:28:55 PM PST by expatguy (http://laotze.blogspot.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 139 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Scarpetta

Im beginning to think Michelle Malkin craves attention.


165 posted on 03/03/2007 1:38:24 PM PST by expatguy (http://laotze.blogspot.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 148 | View Replies]

To: FrdmLvr

We must be ignorant.


166 posted on 03/03/2007 4:45:09 PM PST by Scotsman will be Free (11C - Indirect fire, infantry - High angle hell - We will bring you, FIRE)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 157 | View Replies]

To: Pyro7480

Here, in part, is what I wrote on another thread about it (the over-sensitiveness of oh so many, even here at FR):

She has not had a meltdown on TV like Susan Estrich or Lawrence O'Donnell, who shouted down John O'Neill prior to the '04 election.

She has not called the Bush administration a bunch of "liars" and "murderers" like Joy Behar did recently.

She has not foamed at the mouth and yelled that Bush "betrayed his country" like that buffoon Al Gore did at a MoveOn event.

She has not stated that Republicans like to "hide the salami" like Howard Dean did on Chrissy Matthews show.

She did not smear our volunteer Army with a sneer, declaring them to be too stupid not to end up in Iraq like Effin' did in October of last year.

She did not refer to the Alito nomination for SCOTUS as "sloppy seconds" as did a national television news reporter did.

She did not drive Alito's wife to tears unlike the 'Rats on the Senate Juidiciary Committee did.

Politics ain't beanbag. I agree with her Jersey Girls remark in "Godless" and don't think her remark about the Breck Girl deserves all this calumny.


167 posted on 03/03/2007 5:03:33 PM PST by sauropod ("An intelligent man is sometimes forced to be drunk to spend time with his fools." Ernest Hemingway)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: nosofar; Democratshavenobrains

Want me to get you guys a crying towel? How about a fainting couch?


168 posted on 03/03/2007 5:08:42 PM PST by sauropod ("An intelligent man is sometimes forced to be drunk to spend time with his fools." Ernest Hemingway)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: Pyro7480
Every time I think Ann has gone too far, such as this time, I study the reaction, and I think she did the right thing. To call Edwards a "fagot" means he is effeminate. Well, doh! I think we all agree about that. Just check out the You Tube video of him combing his hair plus the pictures in this thread of him and his man, John Kerry, embracing affectionately.

Ironically, this slam was attacked as "anti-gay, homophobic", NOT for the insult to Edwards. I'd say THIS indicates the charge was true, or tacitly accepted, but the WAY she insulted Edwards was unacceptable. Using a derogatory term for homosexuals is unacceptable--politically incorrect.

You need to read her book "How to Talk to a Liberal, if you must". In there she describes exactly why she talks provocatively. It's even in the first chapter. She does that, because they don't listen to logic. She says, unless you leave a liberal spluttering in apoplexy, you're not getting through. I thought that was over the top--then.

Then there was the uproar over the "Jersey girls" who were "enjoying their husbands' deaths". Mark Steyn paid her the ultimate compliment--he said he pointed this out cleverly in a column in 2002--but no one paid attention. Now everyone knows about the "Jersey girls" and how they made money off their husbands death.

I love logic. I love reasonable arguments. But it doesn't always work, and it doesn't always convince people.
169 posted on 03/03/2007 6:59:23 PM PST by Forgiven_Sinner (Your children become what your are.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sir Francis Dashwood
So, the NAZIs (National Socialists) thought the homosexuals were perverts... So?

No. No in two ways. First of all, I wasn't talking about the Nazi's view of perversion. I was saying that Shirer's landmark book used these words almost interchangeably --- homosexual/pervert and homosexuality/perversion. Sometimes you'd see one word used, and sometimes the other. What's more, Shirer's choice of words back then (late 50s, 1960) was not at all unusual. I was pointing this out to remark on just how low our culture has sunk since those days, with regard to what is considered normal and what is not. Nowadays, anyone questioning the homosexual agenda is considered the freak, on the fringes of society, the true pervert. After enough years of solid wall-to-wall propaganda, including thousands of movie scenes and tens of thousands of TV scenes, a message that was initially considered to be laughably wrong by 95% of Americans, is now considered unquestionably true.

Secondly, you brought up the topic of Nazi's and homosexuals with, "the NAZIs thought the homosexuals were perverts". No. That's only a tiny part of the story. The only thing concerning Nazi history that gay agenda pushers want you to hear about nowadays is that at some point in time, the Nazi's persecuted homosexuals. But as Paul Harvey is famous for saying, you don't know "The Rest Of The Story".

It was primarily violent street gangs led by homosexuals who put Hitler into power. Many of Hitler's top aides were homosexual, or involved with other sexual perversions. (Eg, Hitler himself, while middle aged, slept with a teenage first cousin of his, until she commit suicide). Shortly after Hitler got the Chancellorship - though still short of total dictatorial power - his top deputy, Ernst Rohm - the homosexual-in-chief of the Brownshirts ("SA" as opposed to "SS"), made the fatal mistake of publicly bragging that the German Army would be disbanded and replaced with a new type of armed forces with his Brownshirts at the core of it. This was anathema to top German generals. Hitler was worried, knowing that at that point in time the Army was the only force left in Germany strong enough to oust him.

So he made a Machiavellian deal with the army. For years, certain top Nazi sympathizers had complained to Hitler of the sexual behaviors of other top Nazis, and Hitler had always dismissed their complaints with, "I don't care what they do in their sexual lives as long as they do their jobs well for the party". But now, to appease the army, he suddenly professed to be shocked, shocked at the awful behavior of the entire Brownshirt organization. So in one night he had murdered all of the SA leadership. The German Army was grateful, and as their part of the deal they required each and every officer to swear personal allegiance to Hitler himself (rather than to the government, as was previously done). Since Oaths and Honor and Following Orders were a really big deal to Germans back then, this was a major political milestone for Hitler.

And of course after that, the SS Blackshirts methodically wiped out any SA Brownshirts who they felt might be a threat to them. The army realized too late what an awful deal they had made, after the SS replaced the SA as Hitler's personal enforcers. That's when homosexuals started ending up in the death camps in large numbers, wearing the pink triangles in some cases. That very end part of the story is the only one the PC historians will tell you about today.

Another thing they don't point out to you is this: If it's really true that homosexual death camp prisoners were routinely raped, just stop and think a minute. Ask yourself, hmm..... what does that tell me about (at least some of) the death camp guards?

170 posted on 03/04/2007 8:33:41 AM PST by CardCarryingMember.VastRightWC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 124 | View Replies]

To: Pyro7480

They are flipping idiots. Go, Ann, Go!


171 posted on 03/04/2007 8:35:10 AM PST by Maeve (Do you have supplies for an extended emergency? Be prepared! Pray!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CardCarryingMember.VastRightWC
If it's really true that homosexual death camp prisoners were routinely raped, just stop and think a minute. Ask yourself, hmm..... what does that tell me about (at least some of) the death camp guards?

Who ever is pitching or catching is still on the same team...

172 posted on 03/04/2007 8:38:02 AM PST by Sir Francis Dashwood (LET'S ROLL!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 170 | View Replies]

To: Tax-chick

I bow before your excellent post.


173 posted on 03/04/2007 8:38:06 AM PST by Maeve (Do you have supplies for an extended emergency? Be prepared! Pray!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 143 | View Replies]

To: Maeve

Thanks - I'm flattered!


174 posted on 03/04/2007 8:39:55 AM PST by Tax-chick (Every "choice" has a direct object.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 173 | View Replies]

To: BunnySlippers

"Problem here is she was just using the term faggot as an epithet against a man for which there is not even a hint that he is gay. "

Not the first time.
http://mediamatters.org/items/200607280001


175 posted on 03/05/2007 12:53:24 PM PST by nosofar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 104 | View Replies]

To: sgtbono2002
Gee: 64 years old and never knew "faggot" was a profanity.

You don't get out much, do you? 48 years old and I've known it for over 30 years. You don't call someone a faggot unless you want to teeth knocked in. Maybe you wouldn't mind, though.

176 posted on 03/05/2007 1:25:58 PM PST by nosofar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: Retired Chemist
How many Congressional seats did we lose because of Rush's comments about Michael J Fox?

Zip, zilch, nada.

177 posted on 03/05/2007 1:27:42 PM PST by dfwgator (The University of Florida - Championship U)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: Tax-chick

See how effective "Political Correctness" is getting????


178 posted on 03/05/2007 1:29:19 PM PST by Halgr (Once a Marine, always a Marine - Semper Fi)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: nosofar

Have had a few knocked in ,have knocked a few in, getting a little old for it now though.

Faggot may be a vulgar term for a queer but it is far from profanity.

Now talk about a man's mother and that can get upsetting.


179 posted on 03/05/2007 4:39:44 PM PST by sgtbono2002 (I will forgive Jane Fonda, when the Jews forgive Hitler.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 176 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 101-120121-140141-160161-179 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