Ann Coulter, You're No Sister Souljah

The Politico ^ | 3 March 2007 | Jennifer Rubin

[llevrok]

Ann Coulter is not African-American, does not sing and never said “If black people kill black people every day, why not have a week and kill white people?” However, she is the closest the Republicans will get to Sister Souljah.

Coulter has made a career of interspersing insightful and cutting political criticism with outrageous and morally repugnant remarks. She attracted considerable attention with her crack about the group of 9/11 widows dubbed the “Jersey girls,” with a line in one of her books, “These broads are millionaires, lionized on TV and in articles about them, reveling in their status as celebrities and stalked by grief-arazzis. These self-obsessed women seemed genuinely unaware that 9/11 was an attack on our nation and acted as if the terrorist attacks happened only to them. ... I’ve never seen people enjoying their husbands' deaths so much.”

Then, there was her crack about Muslims at last year’s Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC): “I think our motto should be post-9-11, ‘rag head talks tough, rag head faces consequences.’” At CPAC on Thursday, in endorsing Republican presidential aspirant Mitt Romney, who needs more bad press like a hole in the head, she piped up with this one: “I was going to say something about John Edwards, but it turns out you have to go into rehab if you use the word ‘faggot.’”

It's about time for a presidential contender, perhaps all of them in the spirit of Newt Gingrich’s crusade for improving public discourse, to say “enough.” Coulter’s never-ending stream of venom is not amusing, unhelpful to Republicans, and not in keeping with the ideals of a party that fancies itself as the proponent of a colorblind society and heir to Lincoln.

It is not “caving” into political correctness to distance and indeed condemn such remarks as unworthy of a political event like CPAC. To the contrary, it is altogether fitting that a group that ostensibly searches for the best in conservative ideas, rewards political courage and encourages intellectual debate, should be able to differentiate the amusing from the offensive, and the clever from the vile.

Conservatives take great glee in condemning ideological opponents who share stages with Al Sharpton or give a convention seat to Michael Moore. It would certainly boost their credibility to toss their own baggage out.

Would it be a stunt to call out Coulter, who obviously revels in the attention of provocative pronouncements? No. Excommunication is not being suggested, just a public rebuke. By clearly stating her comments are beyond the bounds of civil discourse and her presence not a welcome addition to a mature political party, the Republicans could do themselves a world of good. How often does a party have the opportunity to display some measure of dignity, restraint and self-reflection.?

So who will play the role of Bill Clinton to Coulter’s Sister Souljah? It would be a sad commentary on the GOP if the answer is “no one.”

Jennifer Rubin is a writer who lives in Virginia. Her columns appear in the Weekly Standard, the American Spectator, Human Events, abc.com and National Review Online.

[NorCalRepub]

.....only by YOU

[Gene Eric]

>> Because this isn't the first time she's said something this stupid, it's just the most recent.

So for all her positive Conservative commentary over the years, you wish to shame her because of jokes, obnoxiousness, or even the occasional off-color remark?

Understand the high road in politics is very narrow only a few can navigate without veering or getting bumped off the road. You set your standards for political discourse too high and you'll tie the tongue of your own team. Ann Coulter's certainly made biting remarks not all of which I'm familiar with but she's also one to exercise her right of free speech, however colorful, in the combative arena of politics. If you want respect from your adversaries, show it by finding the positive attributes of those in your own party.

[GOPJ]

Then, there was her crack about Muslims at last year’s Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC): “I think our motto should be post-9-11, ‘rag head talks tough, rag head faces consequences.’” At CPAC on Thursday, in endorsing Republican presidential aspirant Mitt Romney, who needs more bad press like a hole in the head, she piped up with this one: “I was going to say something about John Edwards, but it turns out you have to go into rehab if you use the word ‘faggot.’”

Ann doesn't say half the stuff liberals say about Republicans -- liberals can dish it out, but can't take it.

Way to go Ann - keep it up. The one sidedness of thin skinned liberals is getting tiresome. They have hundreds of words we can't use - but where are our banned words? There are none. Try to name a few that are sooooooo offensive by PC standards -- words that apply only to conservatives. Can't do it? That's 'cause there aren't any. They can call us anything.

[presently no screen name]

Removing the shame from those behaviors will only encourage them.

And the shame has been removed and they have been lifted up and been blessed and married. So you are exactly right! The tolerance factor is a lib creation. They have no boundaries except when it comes to Ann's speech. She points out their hypocrisy and all anyone looks at are 'her words'. Ann expects conservatives to get it. Conservatives do, but the CINO's don't.

[Chances Are]

Conservatives must learn how to frame public argument in terms of ridicule.

Its time to start selling life jackets for polar bears to convey our deep concern for these gentle arctic giants.

Without comparable canons such as Colbert and Stewart, the Left will always be able to turn the tables on any power grab. Re-framing of public argument is currently directed by the left via ridicule. This is why Coulter is deemed so threatening. The right is not allowed to ridicule the left. It is the sacrosanct position of rhetorical privilege.

Excellent insight!

For all those on this board, and out there in general, who are weak of knee and weak of heart, this message must be repeated...and repeated...and repeated!!!!!

And never forgotten!!!

CA....

[Mojave]

she'll be lucky if she ever gets to speak there again.

Then she'll be lucky.

[Quick or Dead]

Ann Coulter is one of the few Conservatives with a national voice who doesn't treat the Socialist trash with kid gloves and isn't a token Conservative. She slaps the Liberals with big bags of their own steaming crap and they hate her for it. Unfortunately, many "conservatives" like Ms. Rubin think we need to sit down and talk things out with the Socialists like reasonable people. Equally unfortunate is the fact that Socialists are not reasonable, otherwise, they wouldn't be Socialists. We've tried reasoning with them for nearly 50 years while they have embraced anyone and everyone in the world who hates the United States and committed acts bordering on treason within the United States. The time for calm, reasonable discussion has passed. We need to call the Socialists on their crap and rub the failures of their Statist ideology in their faces as often as possible.

Ann Coulter is planting a much deserved boot in the Socialists' asses. We need many, many more such boots.

[mbraynard]

best post on FR in 2007.

Difference is we can take a joke. If anyone should get an apology it's homosexuals for being compared to John Edwards. Ann should send a letter of regret to the stars of Queer Eye.

[rscully]

omgOSH! Hilarious pic! Thanks for making me laugh so hard I was crying!!!!

[mbraynard]

Let me explain something. She was making a very topical joke. Someone on the cast of greys anatomy recently used the 'f' word to refer to a co-star. MEdia circus ensued, and he went into therapy.

Edwards is a very effeminate candidate and affects a lot of the behavior you might find in Dupont Circle. Note the 10 minute hair prep video.

Might not have been the most tasteful comment, but it was more of a topical humor joke than just shouting 'fag' at a guy. Ann is a polemecist and humourist. She enjoys making people laugh. If she had just called Edwards a 'fag', I would agree with you.

Unfortunately, 90% of the CPAC crowd has no idea what Grey's Anatomy is because they are listening to Michael Savage when it's on. Ann's flaw was overestimating the pop culture IQ of the audience. This is why she lives in NY, not DC.

[mbraynard]

Why would anyone call Malking a RINO?

[Minn]

Wow. She "yelled faggot"? I guess we must have listened to two different recordings of the same event.

Isn’t hyper-literalism like, just totally the greatest debating tactic ever?

[Smokin' Joe]

A conservative make a perceived controversial comment - other conservatives and Republicans are supposed to condemn those comments, which discourages conservatives and allow the Left to move the issues that much further to the left.

You, my Friend, get it.

We desperately need our own "extremists".

The far Left proposes something outrageous and conservatives start handwringing, or even, on increasingly rare occasion, come out in open defiance. The "progressives" step in and go 'Now, now, let's be reasonable, let's compromise...." and the Right caves in, time after time.

We need our own "extremists". Not the Hitler youth neo nazi (real) "hate-groups" the Left has managed to shove under the right wing tent ("National SOCIALISTS" really are the Left on steroids) but people who do unequivocably state they will NOT tolerate routine violation of our laws (The border and illegal immigration), who will NOT tolerate the advocation of buggery and other unnatural acts as "Normal" before our schoolchildren, who will NOT tolerate the murder of helpless developing infants in their mothers' wombs, who will NOT tolerate the relentless assault on those of conventional Judeo-Christian religious faith (nor the attack on the open practice thereof), who will NOT tolerate ignoring the Constitution and the Bill of Rights--especially the right to arm one's self in the face of criminals, brigands, or tyranny.

If the Conservatives would just tolerate their own in-your-face "extremists", just maybe they could frame the argument in such a way that "compromise" would mean the other side gave ground instead of the perpetual moral retreat which has been in progress since Conservatives let the P-C crowd define the very building blocks of debate.

This is not a gentlemanly duel, this is (for now, verbal) trench warfare.

If some have no stomach for the mud, blood, and brutality, they should at least get the hell out of the way and let others fight the fight.

No matter how sanitized the version of the battle, in the end it will be ugly, and the longer we wait to cease capitulation, the more vicious, desperate, and ugly the fight will be.

Ann Coulter's ascerbic wit and biting sarcasm are two of the most effective weapons the Right has. Her words,carefully framed, have unceasingly brought out those (even in our own ranks) who would judge first and listen later, and base that judgement on the enemy propaganda.

That these same voices often call for balance and decency is all the more ironic.

In the end, in warfare, you destroy your enemy by any means, fair or foul--it does not 'have to be nice'. You break their will to fight, and gain capitulation from them.

If Republicans and self-styled Conservatives are willing to throw up the white flag over mischaracterized remarks, this is going to be a tough battle, indeed.

[ScubieNuc]

Glad to be a service. I have to give some credit to "stm" who took the original picture I found, and did the creative Edwards editing.

Here was the original picture as I found it...



Hey, stm, could you change the girls face to that of Gore or Kerry? A female packing fudge with Edwards seems...hmmm..not believable.

[Minn]

I also don't follow the argument that "faggot" is "tone-deaf" talk for a political humorist. She's not running for office, last I checked. You might prefer she refer to Edwards as a "metrosexual twit," but hang on, I'm sure she will.

------------

So you were a supporter of Ms Colter all along, through all the other media manufactured "scandals", and the word "fagot' pushed you over the edge, and now you think she's "selling us out"?

How many people do you know that go around using the word? If you know anybody, what is your opinion of this person's level of sophistication? You don't have to be a gay rights advocate, or a liberal, or even slightly tolerant of homosexuals and their agenda to understand it is a fighting word, usually heard coming out of the mouth of someone who also only takes a break from the f-word to use the mother f-word, and frequently combines his f-words with coughing up loogie. It doesn't look good on anyone. There are a million clever and subtle ways to describe the proclivity. Some pithy turn of phrase concerning loafers or some such thing could have brought down the house and possibly had the desired effect of sending the lefty moonbats into a tizzy of foolishness. What could have been.

If you are proud of your unwillingness to buckle to the PC crowd, and you reserves the right to call anybody you please a faggot whenever you like, well good for you. But would you please shut the hell up so as to not further the agenda you disdain? Inflammatory adjectives never persuade anybody of anything. Their use allows your opponents to easily caricature you.

Ann screwed up. If you can't see that she did, and that she and her cause are worse off for her gaffe, you can't see anything.

[MonTinaGirl]

The thing about this particular word is that it was necessary for Ann to use it to make this joke, because the joke was a reference to an incident that recently made the news. No other word would have worked. (The news story was about this word and an actor who got in trouble for using it, resulting in his going to rehab.)

Of course, she could have opted out of making the joke entirely...but that's not really Ann, is it? Unfortunately, the spatter gets on everyone around her at an event like this.

[Cinnamon Girl]

Thanks. I was up to speed on that. It's still not funny.

[whatisthetruth]

Nothing like preemptive surrender from conservatives to advance the conservative agenda.

The fact is that homosexuals have been referred to with derogatory in virtually any healthy society. There is a good reason for this: Homosexuals lead tragic, self-destructive lives.

All manner of self-destructive behavior has been legitimized simply by accusing anyone pointing out the destructiveness of the behavior of being "mean".

Alcoholics, adulterers, the promiscuous, etc, just like homosexuals are people healthy societies show disdain for in order to discourage people from going down those roads.

Removing the shame from those behaviors will only encourage them.

BINGO! Ding! Ding! Ding! Bears repeating. This is my 3rd Annie Coulter thread today and your post is the first one I read that addresses the 'respectability' issue. Isn't that why we went from homo to 'gay', to try to give them a sort of respectability, something they don't deserve.

Homos, queers, perverts, faggots, sodomites, should these be words frowned upon now when referring to the 'disgusting' behaviors that these people engage in. Won't be long before 'abomination' won't be acceptable either..........