Well, you might be a bit "sensitive" perhaps. If the word bothers you, you might want to check your "thinking" vs. your "feeling". Trying to convince someone of the "rightness" of your beliefs might require that you hurt a few "feelings" now and then. If you cannot bring yourself to man up, then I suggest you might want to follow a different path. Your fight suggests that you will not actually fight. I don't need you in my fighting position. Seek life elsewhere where your feelings are more appreciated, you might be happier with the kumbayya type of folk.
In any case, it was not a true "name calling". If she had paused to call him a fagot in some kind of formal debate, then that would be silly name-calling. But she didn't- she used the term correctly and in her speech.
The "outrage" being expressed (largely false outrage meant only to impress oneself in the eyes of others) is that she broke PC Law.
It was a thought-crime... one that frequently gets everyone from Christians to Satanists beating themselves in comical, guilt-ridden penance.
In what universe? Ask yourself, how many people are going to decide they favor limited government or vote Republican because of Coulter's stupid stunt ? I've been at FR for a long long time and that more or less means I have very thick skin. So I'm not concerned in the slightest about getting hurt by anybody's debate. I just find name-calling useless other than as a means of making people feel better about themselves really cheaply.