On Ann Coulter - Idiotic. Disgusting. Stupid. Moronic. (conservatives respond)

Hugh Hewitt Townhall site ^ | Friday March 2nd, 2007 | Dean Barnett

[ajolympian2004]

Idiotic. Disgusting. Stupid. Moronic.

I guess you could say that Ann loves to shock us, but at this point, who’s shocked? She obviously can’t behave well enough to attend a respectable political gathering. It’s not a lack of intelligence. It’s an indifference to self-control and a preening sort of narcissism that compels her to need the spotlight, even if it’s unflattering.

(For those of you who don’t know what I’m talking about, here’s audio of her calling John Edwards a “faggot” at CPAC today.)

---

Michelle Malkin -

***4:15pm update***

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.

http://michellemalkin.com/archives/006976.htm

---

Bryan Preston of 'Hot Air' -

Ann Coulter is speaking at CPAC as I write. As is typical, she gave a brief speech full of her usual witticisms, including a few brilliant attacks on Al Gore’s green hypocrisy. All was good. Untill the last few seconds, when she launched into a joke about John Edwards.

Here’s what she said.

“I’d say something about John Edwards, but if you say ‘faggot’ you have to go to rehab.”

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.

http://hotair.com/archives/2007/03/02/thanks-ann/

---

My comments... what should have been a day to celebrate a Reaganesque speech by Duncan Hunter, and good speeches by Mitt Romney and Mike Huckabee was overshadowed by an unhinged comment by Ann Coulter. She is an absolute idiot for saying something like this at CPAC.

[ajolympian2004]

I saw it LIVE on C-Span.

[Rastus]

Silly faggot. Breck is for girls!

[Gator113]

Although not artful, I sure hope that you found my last post to but a joke. It was sure meant to be.

If I had anymore disgust for dems/libs, I would no doubt be in prison.

[Maeve]

Unfortunately for your tag line, you wet your pants with that post.

Go, Ann, Go!

[The_Victor]

Unfortunately for your tag line, you wet your pants with that post.

You misunderstand. I was responding to the democRAT assertion that Ann is the "mouthpiece" for the GOP. She isn't, and I doubt she wants to be. Most of the time, I think she's spot on.

[The Spirit Of Allegiance]

Philippians 4:8
Finally, brethren, whatever is true, whatever is honorable, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is of good repute, if there is any excellence and if anything worthy of praise, dwell on these things.

Psalm 141:3
Set a guard over my mouth, O LORD; keep watch over the door of my lips.

Proverbs 4:24
Put away perversity from your mouth; keep corrupt talk far from your lips.

Proverbs 12:18
Reckless words pierce like a sword, but the tongue of the wise brings healing.

Proverbs 18:21
The tongue has the power of life and death, and those who love it will eat its fruit.

Colossians 3:8
But now you must rid yourselves of all such things as these: anger, rage, malice, slander, and filthy language from your lips.

http://www.biblegateway.com/

[hosepipe]

[.. So you are really that stupid? ..]

Well I voted for George Bush and his Daddy several times..
So YES I guess I am that stupid..

[RunningWolf]

John Edwards is a big boy. He can take it, can't he?

[freepr flame suit on] I could take it, so I give him that much credit.

I mean, how much of John Edwards or Ann Coulter is in this tempest in a tea pot?

ZZZIIiinnnGGG!! We've all been on a ride.

'Wolf shake off that tiny hook

[Maeve]

I hope it makes it impossible for Mitt Romney. I wouldn't vote for that impostor for all the tea in China.

Like most elitist bastards, John Edwards is after all a sissy elitist bastard. I hope he appreciates the boost Ann gave his lousy campaign as she momentarily diverted attention from the the BarakHusseinObama terror-machine and the Hillary-for-Empress campaign.

[Chances Are]

Yeah, I can't wait to see all the rushing to the defence of the first idiotic talking head who calls Obama a "ni***r".

Why don't we nominate you as that first idiotic talking head?

Anyone with thought processes like this shouldn't be taken seriously be anyone here.

Talk about moving from the sublime to the ridiculous...

CA....

[jonrick46]

However, what Ann Coulter demonstrated to those who are behind the curve is an example of PSYOPS:

Name Calling or Substitutions of Names or Moral Labels. This technique attempts to arouse prejudices in an audience by labeling the object of the propaganda campaign as something the target audience fears, hates, loathes, or finds undesirable.

* Types of name calling:
-Direct name calling is used when the audience is sympathetic or neutral. It is a simple, straightforward attack on an opponent or opposing idea.
-Indirect name calling is used when direct name calling would antagonize the audience. It is a label for the degree of attack between direct name calling and insinuation. Sarcasm and ridicule are employed with this technique.
-Cartoons, illustrations, and photographs are used in name calling, often with deadly effect.

We are engaged in a political war and Ann Coulter is showing the girly boys how it is done. The Left can throw out every name in the book and I will eat more popcorn and laugh myself silly. They have been swilling muck in the gutter and spewing their vile for years. How else did they earn that apt name I give them: DemonRAT?

Calling John Silky Pony Edwards a faggot is a good one. Silky Pony was getting old anyway.

[jonrick46]

"I'll defend her all day long. Only politically correct faggots attack Ann Coulter."

Ditto to that and I add: Only politically correct faggot girly boys attack Ann Coulter.

The term fag comes a 1785 British public school term fag: "a junior who does certain duties for a senior" (1785). As Howard EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEOOOOOOOOOOOOOOW! Dean's running mate, John "Silky Pony" Edwards will never lose the image he received as the go boy for his Alpha Male running mate.

[Sir Francis Dashwood]

[HEY4QDEMS]

Where do you think she said it?

[Arrowhead1952]

A bit inappropriate, sure, but a joke nonetheless, and less of a concern than when Joe Biden called Obama "clean."

Sam Alred of KVET's Sam and Bob show is on a one week suspension for the discussion they were having on the show last week. He is a flaming lib and one reason I quit listening to their show. The day they were talking about that incident, he replied "Clean Darky!" and got the timeout from management.

The NAALCP was besides themselves and several people called and complained. That was not the first time he has insulted a group of people. He has slammed the President, gays and others.

[Dante3]

What they heck is everyone complaining and apologizing - reacting like trained seals? Just look at not only the names Ann has been called but the disgusting lies about her, even physical attacks.

Ann speaks for Ann. She is not an elected official nor a judge. The reactions to her have proven her point.

[Tribune7]

You can spin that comment any way you want,

I'm not spinning anything. She was not implying Edwards was gay nor was she implying those husbands were preparing a divorce.

Can you imagine an insurance agent preparing to hand over a death benefit to a grieving spouse

But that's not at all germane as to what happened. They were getting $1.6 million apiece in government money -- to which they had no legal claim --without contest.

But then they said it wasn't enough. At that point, it would have been perfectly appropriate to start asking "what ifs". What if your husband died from some other cause? What if he divorced you? What about military wives who aren't going to get a fraction of what you got in death benefits?

Due to the emotion of the moment, however, these questions weren't asked and, IIRC, they got what they wanted.

Which would have been fine and quickly forgotten. BUT they then got involved in politics. They cited their deceased husbands as giving them authority and started making accusations about others that I think crossed the line of slander.

So Ann wrote what she wrote which was a bit mean but still needed to be said. And it appears to have worked somewhat. The Jersey Girls have piped down quite a bit.

Thank you, Annie!

[billbears]

Seems like you really get upset when someone go after the Democrat party.

Sigh...you're missing my point. I don't fall under either party. But I do point out when one has completey lost their argument and has nothing better to do than call names (such as Coulter and Franken)

Bush wants the United States to win in Iraq.

And I want a pony for my birthday. What one wants is irrelevant. What will happen is not.

Why would the Democrats want us to lose you may ask? First they say, "We support the troops, but not the mission". It is impossible to support the troops, but NOT the mission.

And yet so many Republicans were able to do so during the European interventionism of the 1990s. They supported the troops but felt Clinton's military actions. Would they be considered 'traitors' to you? FWIW I did not support those.

That means you hope we (the United States) lose. When you or your organization wish the same thing as our enemy (no matter what your motives are).

What I hope has no matter in this. What I know will happen (based on historical evidence of the past 400 years in the region) is an entirely different matter. You are looking at the situation through partisan eyes. If the Democrats hold one view, then you must hold the opposing view. Anyone that doesn't fully agree with your vision of the situation by default must agree with the Democrats.

I am really having a hard time believing your even a conservative. You sure LOVE...to defend the rat bastards Democrats.

I do so love partisan politics. I'm not defending anyone but rather pointing out the stupidity of Coulter. By default if I'm not up with the 'team' screaming 'go Ann, go' I must be supporting the Democrats. I realize this is going to come as a shock to you, but there are quite a few of us that support neither party. If you were to label me I suppose the closest that you could get would be Old Right Anti-Federalist (with some Federalist leanings)

[RadioAstronomer]

I say to you 'get fisted'. Yes, you know who you are.., 'bitches'

Awwww. did poor widdle wuning wolfie get his delicate feelings hurt?

ROTFLMAO!

[SuzyQue]

Ann is ridiculing them, not joining them!

Ridiculing them by doing the same thing. And, how is that different from joining them?