Hello, everyone. I should really be studying for finals right now, so unfortunately I’m probably not going to have time for an in-depth discussion of every point in the article. But since RonDog was kind enough to invite me here to defend myself, I thought I should clarify a few points.
First off, I’ve got to correct RonDog at one point—you guys aren’t the first real conservatives I’ve ever talked to. Shockingly, I wasn’t raised on a hippie commune/liberal indoctrination center in the mountains near San Francisco. One of my closest friends is a lifelong Republican, and if I were opposed to having my views challenged in a good faith debate, then I wouldn’t be here right now.
The problem with Ann Coulter, as I tried to explain in my post on NYU Local, is that she’s not a good faith debater. She’s completely disinterested in having a dialogue with people she disagrees with (the last time she spoke in New York City, according to her, was in 1997), and instead prefers to just insult them.
Here’s the problem with that: In this past election, Barack Obama won by the largest popular vote margin for a non-incumbent in American history. So either the majority of Americans are stupid, insane, traitorous, or maybe, just maybe, reasonable, intelligent people had reasonable, intelligent reasons for voting for Obama. That doesn’t make them RIGHT, but it does make the issues that defined this election the sort of thing that reasonable people can disagree on. And if the Republicans are going to win in 2012 or 2016, it’s going to be because they brought some of those reasonable people back into the fold with reasonable arguments; NOT by saying that Democrats love terrorists and hate Jews, or nonsense like that.
So my problem with Ann Coulter is really that she’s bad for the Republican Party, which in turn is bad for the country. I may be a liberal Democrat, but that doesn’t mean I want a one-party system. Someone’s got to keep the party in power honest, and police their mistakes and excesses. Not only that, but we really do need a good faith, public exchange of ideas about how to face the major problems America will face over the next eight years. People like Coulter on the right, just like the Code Pink folks on the left, drag that exchange of ideas into the mud and turn it into a frenzied shouting match.
We understand about the importance of studying for finals, though -- so THIS DISCUSSION can wait -- for a while.In my experience on this forum, the BEST way to have a mutually profitable result from this kind of endeavor is to start with a BRAND NEW thread (when we are ready) and use a very CREATIVE thread title that tells the entire FR community what we are doing.
Something like:
LIVE thread: NYU reporter who blasted ANN COULTER is defending himself on Free Republic RIGHT NOW!And then we HYPE that impending event, to get the maximum possible exposure -- both on FR, and at NYU.
But the MOST IMPORTANT part is, we set the tone for the debate RIGHT AWAY.Ideally, we can foster some VIGOROUS debate -- and maybe even establish some COMMON GROUND between us.This is a PUBLIC forum, and while we are aggressively monitored, there can be some real BOZO comments posted here -- on BOTH sides.
I'm all for PASSION and FIREWORKS -- but I don't want the folks on MY side making us look foolish, and I imagine that you don't either.For now, though, Ned -- you might want to just poke around a bit, on THIS thread, and perhaps on some of the NYU-related threads that have been posted here in the past -- or anywhere else the Spirit moves you -- and then just start posting replies to people, and see what happens.Eventually, we might even do a SERIES of these "confrontational" threads -- with 4-5 of the more articulate guys on each side carrying the BULK of the interactions -- but allowing anyone else to chime in with THEIR input, at any time.
If you like the way this forum works, I will help to co-ordinate the "main event" -- as soon as you are ready.