Posted on 03/09/2007 3:18:12 AM PST by ajolympian2004
Here is what has been said the past week or so that sparked argument: Bill Maher, on HBO, said a lot of lives would be saved if Vice President Cheney had died, and Ann Coulter, at a conservative political meeting, suggested John Edwards is a "faggot."
She was trying to be funny and get a laugh. He was trying to startle and get applause.
What followed was the predictable kabuki in which politically active groups and individuals feigned dismay as opposed to what many of them really felt, which was grim delight. Conservatives said they were chilled by Mr. Maher's comments, but I don't think they were. They were delighted he revealed what they believe is at the heart of modern liberalism, which is hate.
Liberals amused themselves making believe they were chilled by Ms. Coulter's remarks, but they were not. They were delighted she has revealed what they believe is at the heart of modern conservatism, which is hate.
The truth is many liberals were dismayed by Mr. Maher because he made them look bad, and many conservatives were mad at Ms. Coulter for the same reason.
I realized as I watched it all play out that there's a kind of simple way to know whether something you just heard is something that should not have been said. It is: Did it make you wince? When the Winceometer is triggered, it's an excellent indication that what you just heard is unfortunate and ought not to be repeated.
In both cases, Mr. Maher and Ms. Coulter, when I heard them, I winced. Did you? I thought so. In modern life we wince a lot. It's not the worst thing, but it's better when something makes you smile.
(Excerpt) Read more at opinionjournal.com ...
March 6, 2007-10:00pm
Click here to listen
(MP3, about 35 minutes)
Jon Caldara's page at 850am KOA -
http://www.850koa.com/pages/shows_caldara.html
I am getting a little tired of Ms. Noonan's "inside-the-beltway" moral preening. We desperately need more conservatives like Ann Coulter who are willing to come out swinging and keep on fighting.
As soon as they get to Washington most so-called "conservatives" seem to start caring more about whether they are going to be liked by the "in-crowd" than about doing what's right.
Yes and no. I agree we need more conservatives who come out swinging, but even as someone who defended Coulter on this, I have to admit calling Edwards a fag was childish. I'd have prefered she use her humor (and insults) to get people talking about the Dems attempts to cut off funding in Iraq ala Vietnam, rather than calling names.
"Girlie-man" or Breck girl" would have been perfect in place of the word Ann used. Can you imagine how foolish john edwards would look calling for "Coulter Cash' because Ann called him a "Girlie-Man" or "Breck girl"??? LOL!!!
We went through a period in the 90's where the excuse of everyone does it wasn't accepted. What happened?
That is what the people defending Ann Coulter DO NOT get. This was CPAC and all the '08 GOP candidates were speaking from the same stage on that same day. All the national media was there. Wrong place and the wrong time.
I think you can sum Sean Hannity's defense of Ann Coulter up like this, "Friendship over Principle". Sean talks about Ronald Reagan and his principles all the time on radio. If Ronald Reagan had heard Ann Coulter's remark he would have rightfully critcized her right away.
Coulter and Maher both have their schtick that they can't deviate from. If either one dropped the insults and name-calling then they would be failures because neither one is capable of serious discourse. If Coulter had to write a measured column like Charles Krauthamer does she'd fail miserably. If Maher had to appear on FOX as a serious political commontator he'd choke. They are what they are, they both make a ton of money at it, but we shouldn't mistake either for a serious journalist.
That would have been pretty funny. As it is, I'm surprised we haven't heard Edwards cried when he heard the comment.
If this Caldera guy is one of the critics, that says a lot more negative about him than it does about Ann.
As to Peggy Noonan, she ought to get more invitations to left cocktail parties in Manhattan. What a shame, Peggy used to be a contenda. Maybe someday she will be one again.
One thing to mention. Since Ann's appearance on Hannity & Colmes when she mentioned her website on air she has added quite a number of new members to her Chat (Forum) at her website, http://www.anncoulter.com/
Ms. Noonan forgets that Grandma has been pimping more social security and medicare part d and any gumment gimme she can see for the last ten years.
It's not nice.
I'm still trying to figure out where she called Edwards a fag. What I heard was "I was going to have a few comments on the other Democratic presidential candidate, John Edwards, but it turns out you have to go into rehab if you use the word 'faggot'."
Homosexuals use the term to refer to each other, but most schoolkids I knew used it to mean "wimp, mama's boy, pretty-boy", and the like. My stepkids used it the same way, and still use "gay" to describe what we would term "lame".
When referring to a supposed "straight" man, faggot means wimp or pansy. Or she was talking about his 'platform', which resembles another faggot, which is a bundle of small sticks.
This whole controversy is small beer. It's a dog and pony show to distract us from what really matters. If the media is so absorbed in this petty crap, what does that tell you about the surge in Iraq?
Caldara's take on what Ann Coulter said at CPAC was that this was simply a joke gone bad (or misunderstood).
And, it is still true that Edwards has a faggot foreign policy, a faggot ,military policy, a faggot criminal enforcement policy, a faggot domestic policy of soaking us to fund the welfare state, a faggot policy in support of the "arts", and belongs enthusiastically to (what else) the faggot party, etc.
And there are a lot of people who consider Roger Moore to be a serious documentary film maker. I don't, and I son;t think Coulter is a serious journalist, either. She is to journalism what a Big Mac is to gourmet dining. I don't know anyone who is neutral on Coutler. People either lover her or hate her, there is no in between. As a result preaches to her fans. She converts nobody. She teaches no one. She isn't a took for advancing conservatism, just for amusing the already confirmed.
Between the limp wristed apologizing and the holier than thou attitudes we keep falling on our swords and missing the objective which is POWER.
Without it you have nothing. The libs may not do much I like but they don't lose site of the objective, they understand whats at risk. If we keep looking for saints and lead any "controversy" with an apology we might as well roll up the sidewalks and go home. It's politics it will never be pretty but it is the only and best way we have, its time to develope a hard shell and not care if we're liked. Doing the right thing rarely results in being liked by everyone.
Did what they said make me wince? No. I actually laughed at Coulter's remarks. I guess it all depends on the forum. Saturday Night Live did a skit when the Dems took over of Nancy Pelosi and her new aides - which were portrayed as S&M leather faggots. Everyone laughed. SNL also did a skit where the person playing the One Who Must Not Be Name goes on a profanity laced tirade. Was anyone offended? No.
Now, we get to Mahr's remarks. I have to think hard of any conservatives that threaten or wish death or harm on liberals. I have come up with two. Ann Coulter when she said that McVeight should have parked his truck outside of the NYT building. And Jesse Helms when he said Clinton needs to bring a bodyguard down to Carolina when he visited. Off the top of my head, I can come up with lots of Dems who wish death on conservatives. Alec Baldwin. Randi Rhodes. Spike Lee. The guy down in Florida who wanted Rummy shot in the head, against a wall. Those who put a crosshairs on President Bush's head when he first got elected. The guy who made the film showing President Bush assasinated. The writer who wondered where John Wilkes Booth and Lee Harvey Oswald were when he needed them. There are more.
So what is worse. You decide. I will say the only bad thing about Coulter's remarks was her timing. If she had not said them, maybe there would have been more concentration on Mahr's remarks. Okay, that was just a joke.
Bingo.
One of President Bush's big efforts, at the very beginning, was to establish a "New Tone" in Washington. Boy, that sure didn't work. The Democrats just got nastier and nastier.
I never purposefully try to offend anyone, and I do not engage in name calling. But more and more, I tell people exactly what I think. If they have a hard time with it, that's their problem.
I will consider trying harder to be "civil" after I see the Democrats successfully lead Washington to a new era of civility and morality.
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.