Posted on 01/27/2005 12:03:46 PM PST by pissant
In those rare moments where I’m actually embarrassed, I have a standard quip that eases the burden: “I’m used to being embarrassed. I’m a black conservative.”
Well, it’s pull-the-paper-bag-down-over-my-head time again, courtesy of Ann Coulter, who for the purposes of this column is Miss Ann Coulter, and I give not a tinker’s dam whether she pardons the pun.
Coulter is the conservative author and columnist who can match wits and words with the best of them. She’s fairly good-looking, but she’s no Halle Berry (More on that later.)
I pondered whether I should pick up Coulter’s latest work — How To Talk To A Liberal (If You Must) — when I saw it in a local bookstore recently. I’ll have to admit, I hesitated. As a black conservative, I do indeed have trouble talking to liberals. It’s almost as vexing as talking to white conservatives who are totally clueless on the matter of race.
In How To Talk To A Liberal, Coulter unleashes her inner clueless white girl, and lets her run buck wild for well over 300 pages. Oh, it’s not all bad. Her pieces on the 2000 presidential election, and how the U.S. Supreme Court got it right while the Florida Supreme Court got it wrong, are classic. So much for President George W. Bush “stealing” that election.
But on matters of race, Coulter couldn’t get a clue if it pimp slapped her.
“(Halle) Berry successfully mau-maued her way to a Best Actress Award … ” Coulter wrote of Berry’s winning the Oscar in 2002 for Monster’s Ball. Then, after that gratuitous bit of race-baiting, Coulter accused Berry of some race-baiting of her own to win the Oscar when the sultry actress pointed out — correctly — that black actors and actresses still have trouble getting some roles.
You see what’s going on here, don’t you? Coulter had no problem with Denzel Washington winning an Oscar the same year. His was “deserved,” according to Coulter. It was Berry — despite a near unanimous consensus that she did indeed turn in the best performance by an actress that year — who “mau-maued” her way to an Academy Award.
This is nothing but catty hater-ation. What bothers Coulter is not Berry’s “mau-mauing,” but the knowledge that she’ll never even come close to being as fine as Berry is. Memo to Miss Ann: put your claws back in, dear.
Coulter really got buck wild on the issue of the Confederate battle flag, which still bugs a lot of black folks. It doesn’t bug me as much. I’m more concerned that Coulter all but accused Berry of terrorism, probably the better to increase her street cred with the David Duke wing of American conservatives (How this slight escaped those black folks who vigilantly ferret out every offense to the race is beyond me.). But Coulter said enough things wrong in defending the Confederate battle flag that are worthy of correction.
“Man for man,” Coulter wrote, “the Confederate army was the greatest army the world had ever seen.”
That would actually be the Zulus under Shaka, and any military historian worthy of being called one would tell Coulter that.
Southerners fly the Confederate battle flag, Coulter contended, to commemorate their glorious military heritage, not because of racism. But then she slipped and let in a little truth.
“The Ku Klux Klan did not begin using the Confederate flag until the fifties,” Coulter wrote. That’s true, but the total truth is that it wasn’t just the KKK. Southern state legislatures, schools and plenty of non-KKK folks found new love for the Confederate battle flag in the 1950s. If Coulter wanted to be honest, she could have given the precise date.
May 17, 1954.
Yes, the Confederate battle flag flew highly and proudly after the Supreme Court ruled segregated schools unconstitutional. Wherever the forces of integration clashed with those of segregation there were good ol’ Bubbas waving the Confederate flag and yelling about how they’d die before they let nigger boys into their schools and rub up against white gals like, well, like Ann Coulter, for example.
That was the battle the neo-Confederates wanted to wage when their precious flag made its reappearance in the 1950s. It would be refreshingly honest if they — and Coulter — would simply admit that.
Why are the left and Spike Lee amongst others so obsessed with jungle fever?
1. I don't get it about Halle Berry. She's just not all that good looking. I'll take Queen Latifah any day. A little on the plump side, but it's all prime!
2. I don't get it about Ann Coulter. She might actually be good looking if you slapped on an extra 20 pounds. Will somebody please feed her?
3. I feel about Coulter much the same as Kane does. When she's on, she can be brilliantly incisive and hilariously funny. But she's so eager to press people's buttons that she routinely goes too far, writing all manner of spiteful, mean-spirited nonsense. When USA Today dumped her coverage of the Democratic convention and replaced her with Jonah Goldberg, the newspaper did a public service. Jonah's no looker either--and I'va actually met the guy. But he's thoughtful, well-read and serious--and still manages to be screamingly funny. Ann Coulter, on the other hand, is good for the occasional laugh, but no sensible person would take her seriously.
Actually, we'd know who she is cuz she's "loud-mouthed", a rarity in conservatives.
Personally I'm glad to see some1 who ain't afraid to mouth off on "our" side for a change.
I find generally any movement that lacks a good helping of both rationality and passion usually fails. Republicans have exhibited too much rationality. Not enough passion to spark any interest.
As for Ann's looks, I don't think she's as good-looking as Halle (altho I doubt as our author thinks that that's why Ann goes off on her out of some kind of jealousy - why are women always accused of this "cattiness"? typical male). She's OK, but basically I think Ann's on the plain side of good-looking.
I'd do a bit more research before I take this guys version of Confederate Flag history to heart.
Gregory Kane should remember it was democraps who fought against the civil rights act.
If you prefer Goldberg's scribblings to Annie's, methinks you may have a few too many RINO genes. Not that there is anything wrong with that.
According to James Mitchener, the only thing Shaka did militarily was to put sandals on his army (so they could travel further), give them longer spears, and order them to fight to the death instead of just fighting to take prisoners, as had been the custom. Later, Shaka forbade all sexual activity not involving himself, got furious for being disobeyed, rounded up all the illegally pregnant women and cut the babies out of their stomachs. Soon enough, he was murdered by his own army. That's brilliant?
Feh!
this guy isn't MUCH of a black conservative, is he...
Double nonsense. It is not possible to directly compare military performance between widely divergent military technologies.
It is likely that if it were possible, the Mongols and Romans (of several different periods) would be right up there in the top ten with the Confeds.
The Zulus wouldn't even be in the top 100. For instance, they didn't have anything remotely resembling a Service of Supply. When on campaign, they often had entire armies starve to death. That is not an effective army.
The Zulus were probably individually as brave as any soldiers in history, but that is an entirely different question from whether their army was an effective instrument with which to apply military force.
According to James Mitchener, the only thing Shaka did militarily was to put sandals on his army (so they could travel further), give them longer spears, and order them to fight to the death instead of just fighting to take prisoners, as had been the custom. Later, Shaka forbade all sexual activity not involving himself, got furious for being disobeyed, rounded up all the illegally pregnant women and cut the babies out of their stomachs. Soon enough, he was murdered by his own army. That's brilliant?
I think our current military force is the greatest..but I could be biased with two cousins and a best friend currently deployed..
"I didn't realize that particular fact about the chronology either and will also offer that it does, indeed, undermine the purity with which some hold the flag so dear."
Actually it's almost the opposite. It shows people in the '50s were more uptight about race changes than possibly the people w/the original purpose of the flag. It's the '50s people who turned it into something fearful to many.
Never mind the fact that that battle flag hardly made it onto the battlefield at all, much less on any flag pole.
Why, because he doesn't worship at the altar of Ann Coulter?
Read more of Greg's work, then get back to me.
Right on Ann!
And Ghengis Khan routinely surpassed Shaka in barbarity before he died of injuries sustained from getting rip-roaring drunk and falling off his horse. Care to argue that the Mongols weren't one of history's most terrifying armies?
I think the white belt is a little over kill. Especially after Labor Day. Meow!
Maybe I'm wrong, but isn't this the same usage of the term "buck" as in "buck naked", i.e. "as naked as a buck"? Definition "Buck" was a racist term for a male black or American Indian.
So, this black conservative writer uses a racist term twice without knowing it.
The year Berry won the Oscar, I thought she deserved it for "Monster's Ball," even though a lot of folks didn't. But it wasn't a big deal to me. It was just the Oscars.
The other thing that bugs me is the venom reserved for those conservatives (black, white or otherwise) who do not fall prostrate from the words of Ann Coulter. (see the statement above) We don't have to agree with everything any "annointed" conservative says. Or do we?
Black conservative ping
If you want on (or off) of my black conservative ping list, please let me know via FREEPmail. (And no, you don't have to be black to be on the list!)
Extra warning: this is a high-volume ping list.
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.