(Click on photo to play.)
Posted on 03/04/2007 12:56:27 PM PST by Sam Hill
Come along with me if you will, to a time long ago. Well, actually just a few months ago. But apparently, it was seemingly a more innocent age:
(Click on photo to play.)
On the July 27, 2006 edition of MSNBC's Hardball, host Chris Matthews asked Ann Coulter, "How do you know that [former President] Bill Clinton is gay?" -- referring to her comment the night before on CNBC's The Big Idea with Donny Deutsch that Clinton "show[s] some level of latent homosexuality."
Coulter responded, "I don't know if he's gay. But [former Vice President] Al Gore -- total fag."
She went on to defend her theory about Clinton's sexuality by stating that "everyone has always known, widely promiscuous heterosexual men have, as I say, a whiff of the bathhouse about them."
Coulter claimed she was "just kidding" about Gore, but said of her theory about Clinton, "It's not only not a joke, it's not even surprising."
As the world now knows, Ann Coulter made a similar joke at CPAC a couple of days ago. But this time our watchdog media were looking for dirt from CPAC, so they latched upon her joke, and pretended she was calling Edwards a faggot -- and of course indulging in hate speech.
But where was their outrage last July?
Where was outrage here at Free Republic?
(I believe some of the members of the audience were even Freepers.)
How time flies.
The fact that every Republican (and conservative commentators - see Michelle Malkin on this, to cite just one) candidate has condemned Coulter's gratuitous and slanderous remarks obviously makes no impression on the people who like trash-politics.
Sam Hill always manages to insert in his replies some snide remark or personal attack - he belongs with the Coulters.
The really sad fact is that Coulter's methods disgrace conservatives and lower the level of political discourse to the gutter. Not only that, it gives ammunition to those who
say "you're no better" than the liberals who use these tactics. And in this case, they're right.
After I saw the tenor of the remarks posted and the mindset of the posters I decided not to waste any more time trying to have a rational dialogue. You know the biblical metaphor of "casting pearls among swine."
In any case, I applaud the common sense of decency that you tried to interject. All best,
mmmmmmm, well what if I said, Ann appears to be a transgendered type, in particular, her "Adam's Apple"....would that light a small fire....
master thread baiter bump
So how does one's "opinion" become serious? You hubris is showing.
YOUR hubris is showing
Women use that phrase (he's a total fag) meaning the guy is not worth pursuing as a date or a mate.
Just imagine what they might hear and object to if they followed other women around with a microphone and camera, day after day, minute by minute.
Women use that phrase (he's a total fag) meaning the guy is not worth pursuing as a date or a mate.
Just imagine what they might hear and object to if they followed other women around with a microphone and camera, day after day, minute by minute.
Good point. People are being a little too nitpicky about the usage of this word. It's one of those words for which the definition has changed many times over the centuries.
Yes..... some/many gays SOUND GAY..
"mmmmmmm, well what if I said, Ann appears to be a transgendered type, in particular, her "Adam's Apple"....would that light a small fire...."
I guess not. At least it hasn't with the twenty or thirty thousand times such a clever remark as been made about her on the internet.
And, indeed, it hasn't even raised many eyebrows the two or three hundred times it (or a variation) has been posted here at FR.
But how witty of you to bring it up!
And yes, it is *exactly* like Coulter making a joke about going to rehab for using a un-PC word.
Sheesh.
"The fact that every Republican (and conservative commentators - see Michelle Malkin on this, to cite just one) candidate has condemned Coulter's gratuitous and slanderous remarks..."
What a boldfaced lie.
Actually, I thought my use of the word indefensible was original and exactly correct. If someone else used it, good on them!
If Coulter used the word 'faggot' in reference to an opponent before in one of her talks or interviews or essays, I hadn't known about it--but does prior use somehow make it right? Does she get a pass or credit for being a habitual ad hominem name-caller?
Saying, "they said something awful about our guy too" is like whining to your mother about "Johnny did it first." I don't pretend to defend Liberals' odious statements at all, and but you certainly can't justify any conservative crossing the line of ad hominem attacks with that kind of puerile defense. Getting down in the mud with your opponent only sullies your argument.
I guess I'm too conservative for some in my opinion about what's is right and wrong in political discourse.
Sorry if that bothers you.
I don't take any talking heads very seriously. They take no risks. They do no real work. They have no real responsibility. They just talk.
And sometimes, like Ann has has here, they talk irresponsibly and recklessly.
So I don't have to respect them even if it irritates you that I don't.
Actually, if you look at the cited post, the poster attempted to source the words of 'defending the indefensible' as coming from Sean Hannity. This is as I have shown a complete fabrication coming from the mendacious mind of said poster who is pinged next to you
Thanks for playing; I was waiting for you to come defend your cant. You are quoting a cowardly, deceitful liar who doesn't have the honor to return and admit her innuendo.
"I guess I'm too [intellectually dishonest] for some in my opinion about what's is right and wrong in political discourse.
Fixed it for you.
Audio:
http://hotair.com/archives/2007/03/05/audio-laura-ingraham-addresses-laffaire-coulter/
---
As does conservative talk show host Lores Rizkalla of KRLA 870am in Los Angeles -
Audio:
http://justawoman.squarespace.com/lores-rizkallas-official-site/2007/3/5/addressing-ann-coulter.html
Both Laura and Lores are Reagan conservatives.
I imagine you would be hard pressed to find a liberal who Coulter has not called a faggot at some time or another.
Great post, Stultis!
Perhaps my mendacious FRiend, you will take a look at the top of your own post; your contention there was that Sean Hannity was going to call out Ms. Coulter if she tried to, what was that? Defend the indefensible?
But your risible attempt to move the goalposts is noted. And your continued attempts to change the subject will be countered and noted.
Note away, LOL!
Outraged people need to get a life.
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.