Posted on 03/14/2007 6:13:17 AM PDT by pissant
NEW YORK Last week, at least seven daily newspapers around the country announced that they had decide to drop Ann Coulter's column in the wake of her latest offensive comment, a reference to former Sen. John Edwards in which she used the term "faggot." An eighth paper has now cut the column: The Herald and Review in Decatur, Ill.
Another paper, The State Journal Register in Springfield, Ill., is weighing that move and is asking readers to weigh in -- and has been swamped with pro and con responses.
Coulter's syndicate, Universal, has said it has no plans to drop her.
One of the first to announce its move was the Mountain Press in Sevierville, Tenn. In a column today, its editor, Stan Voit, explains, "I've been a newspaperman for most of the last 35 years. But I admit I have never encountered anything like the reaction to this paper dropping Ann Coulter's column. You'd have thought we came out against Christmas or SEC football."
In all, the piece announcing the paper's decision drew over 250 comments, with most of them coming from outside the area. The first posted comment on Voit's piece today, however, was positive.
Excerpts from Voit's column today follows. *
From the start I began hearing it from Democrats and Republicans who object to her style and tone. I defended her and our decision to carry her column in the face of a lot of heat generated by those in both parties locally who didn't want her column in their hometown paper.
As I read her column each week to get it formatted for publication, I became more and more bothered by her incendiary one-liners, the lack of depth in her commentary. Her column seemed more about getting cheap laughs than offering analysis.
(Excerpt) Read more at mediainfo.com ...
Guess what, Stan. Most conservatives are not the mealy mouthed wussies like the GOP politicians who trampled each to be the first in line to "condemn" Annie
Stan, you're a blithering idiot. Ann's columns are a little deeper than just the surface punchline. As s newspaperman for the better part of the last 35 years, you sure haven't learned much have you?
Hmmm! Sounds like another liberal case of not being able to examine the bread and finding the side with the butter. Figures!!
Or REAL Reagan conservatives who rightfully criticized Ann Coulter for her assinine comments about john edwards at CPAC.
Well the only REAL Reagan conservative in the race has yet to utter a word about Annie. Hell, McCain was not even there and he was apologizing for her.
Rush, Levin, Larry Elder, Mike Gallagher, Thomas Sowell - no knotted panties.
Hugh Hewitt, Michelle Malkin, Bill Bennett, etc - knotted panties.
I report, you decide.
Or REAL Reagan conservatives who rightfully criticized Ann Coulter for her assinine comments about john edwards at CPAC.
Ann didn't say Edwards was a faggot, she said she would get sent to rehab if she were to say such a thing. She's probably surprised to learn what happens when she even speculates about doing such a thing.
Yep. He'll write a book that collects dust in the bargain bin. Ann will continue her string of #1 bestsellers.
It's not censorship. This is America. The newspaper has the right to publish or not publish whichever columnists they choose. Their readers have the right to continue their subscriptions or cancel them.
American politics, and society in general, needs more people who are not afraid to speak their mind and fewer sissies. It also needs fewer fascists who want to punish other people for telling "offensive" jokes. (Offensive to whom or what? Your white liberal guilt?)
You saved me the effort of posting that. Those are my thoughts exactly. Censorship is about governments silencing the masses, not a newspaper pulling a columnist. Now if they want to silence the mass known as Rosie O'donnell, I probably wouldn't complain.
I don't get these people, the same ones that liked her before the "F" comment still like her, and the ones that didn't still don't. Nothing has changed, just the loudness of the screeching! And the side that likes her is just STARTING to screech!!!!
Did this particular paper publish the mohammad cartoons?
They wont listen to mere emails or letters. Cancel your subscription and stop buying their rag. That will get their attention.
He may CLAIM to be running a conservative paper, but he neither walks nor quacks like a conservative editor of a conservative paper. He uses left's most popular key phrase, "mean spirited" - used to justify almost any means to an end which complies with a liberal agenda - to describe Coulter's column and thereby justify censoring her work. He's obviously unaware that REAL conservatives only use that keyphrase with heavy irony.
He says other syndicated authors are ALSO not published, but that isn't the point. OTHER syndicated authors are NOT being blacklisted by his paper. Their columns therefore COULD be published at any time, like to replace Coulter's censored column. So he's also being intellectually dishonest, in other words LYING, to the public to further justify his action.
No, Voit neither walks or quacks like a conservative. There's no such animal as a conservative paper published by a rabidly liberal editor. He's a rabid liberal.
It is censorship. The newspaper has the right, and obligation, to censor their publication. FreeRepublic has the right, and obligation, to censor this site.
(see: "Zot", "comment removed by moderator")
Now I all I can think about is Michelle Malkin's panties. Thanks a lot!
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.