Rules are in fact ... Rules!
There. Much better.
Posted on 06/15/2006 10:12:05 AM PDT by Kitten Festival
Let me ask you this: when, prior to last week, was the last time you heard of the Jersey Girls? I can’t give a definite answer, which in itself is telling. Not that I was paying any large amount of attention, but there was a lot of noise in between the Afghan and Iraqi campaigns, intense media play building up to the 2004 election, which they did their damndest to throw to Kerry, and then… nothing.
They’d shot their bolt, they had their fifteen minutes and more, and that was the end of it. Until last week when Ann Coulter, acting unilaterally, put them back on the front pages with an attack so obnoxious that it immediately (and unjustly – it was the Girls themselves, after all, who debased their victim status for political purposes) threw all sympathy in their direction. A free ticket to a second act. Not to mention providing Madame Hillary with an opportunity to pose as, of all things, the defender of civility.
Thanks a lot, Ann.
Conservatives used to be known for this kind of thing. Much of this was the media’s doing – at any conservative gathering, be it a gun show or a political convention, reporters will make a beeline for the guy in full camo gear or wearing two dozen anti-UN buttons. But conservatives played their part.
The classic figure here is Coulter’s idol, Joe McCarthy. Bellowing about Communists you couldn’t produce (and it cannot be repeated often enough that McCarthy bagged nobody – the Party infiltrators had been cleaned out by the time he showed up) was bad enough. Doing it in an ill-cut Chicago gangland suit with a five-o’clock shadow and fifth of Jim Beam under your belt simply turned it into a circus.
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
I respectively disagree. Ann Coulter does NOT hurt her cause or our cause when she restricts herself to going after people as well-deserving of meciless condemnation as the Jersey Girls or Murtha. Even if you quibble with her particular choice of words, you'd have to be INSANE to feel any sympathy for the Jersey Girls or Murtha because Ann might have been SLIGHTLY too mean to them, and the insane are going to vote the straght Democrat ticket anyway. It is IMHO useful to be reminded occasionally just exactly how scummy the Jersey Girls were and are even if you wish to stipulate that Ann exaggerated it a bit. After all she is NOT an elected official, like her hero Senator McCarthy, who can justly be held to a higher standard.
Only when she goes after the clearly UNDESERVING with such savagery, like for example SCOTUS nominees Myers and Roberts, does she hurt her cause and our cause.
The more I think about this, the more I realize that Coulter had to go as "far" as she did in order to make her point -- her absolutely 100% correct point. Nothing less would have done it.
It took a startling, no-nonsense statement to expose how victimology plays a major part in the Left's arguments. If Coulter had pointed this out in any less bold a way, it wouldn't have had an impact. It might not have been mentioned at all.
But now, everyone's talking about "victims." Even the drive-by media. And as Coulter pointed out last night on the Tonight Show, the next time leftists want to trot out a victim, it's going to be a little tougher. I think Ann did us all a great service.
True, but at least she's prettier than Michael Moore.
There. Much better.
Halfway through her book right now. Simply put - this guy is WRONG!
I didn't have a problem with her going after the scotus nominees. She wanted conservative appointments. They jury is still out, but I'm still hopeful Roberts is going to be good, though I have a feeling he's going to become the new swing vote.
And this... did you support Myers? Did you think she was an appropriate nomination? Did you really want to be dragged through the mud during confirmation hearings and then face the President's own party rejecting her? Puhleaze. She had to be one of the weakest nominees in history.
Acting unilaterally?
and it cannot be repeated often enough that McCarthy bagged nobody – the Party infiltrators had been cleaned out by the time he showed up
Really? Venona cables anyone?
blah blah blah.....
The rest of the article barely mentions Coulter. Be nice to them, yeah that's worked so well for so long.
Concur.
By the way, it's pretty much all over now. The left has dashed itself against the Rock of Coulter and expended it's energy.
WHo's J.R. Dunn and why should I listen to him?
"It took a startling, no-nonsense statement to expose how victimology plays a major part in the Left's arguments. "
Excellent point Glenmerle! Right on the money.
Ann did indeed incorporate her usual thoughtful delivery strategy, she can be my lawyer anytime. Nice to see the truly clever ones manipulating the liberal media for a change, instead of the other way around. Brilliant!
Giving her untold amounts of free publicity in the process. Idiots.
Guess what I'm getting for Father's Day.
Yeah, that's why the State Department is STILL lousy with them, and now they've compromised the CIA too. Ought to just disband both of those orgs now. They're just money pits with no possibility of anything good coming out of them. Esp. CIA.
Ann still calls a spade a spade and not a spoon.
Good for her and I hope she shouts it from the Mountaintops.
Most conservatives begin and end the day on the defensive, and get suckered into trying to act like nice guys which detracts from the seriousness of the message.
The left accuses the right of religious bigotry, theocracy, etc. Ann doesn't try to unpack that argument. She says, no, you freaks are the religious zealots who impose your beliefs with government power, and here are hundreds of pages showing just how so.
Most libs when hearing mealymouthed conservative defenses walk away thinking that convervatives are just playing a rhetorical game, and trying to justify the unjustifiable. The right needs lots more Ann Coulter and a lot less David Brooks, and other dweebs who feel compelled to nuance and apologize for every stance they take. Offer no quarter, no apology, no rhetorical points, and no excuses or understanding for the outrages of the left.
Right....By the way..what cause are they referring
to....Candidaes..agenda..philosphy??? Ann can hold
her own..without the wobblies worrying about her
liberal bashing...last time I looked...Bush was being
bashed by many pundits, including the ones for the
cause..whatever the hell that means?? Jake
They weren't on the front page because the MSM had put St. Cindy on there instead.
Oh, now. Let's not ask that question. After all, there are loads of high-minded moralists, craven infiltrators, and other nitwits about who insist that handing political and economic control of the United States to a bunch of Stalinist fanatics should, you know, be handled with the utmost delicacy.
Now, now. One must never, ever go on offense with the Leftist fanatics. One must, out of due courtesy, always be on defense. One must always be ineffective. Politeness demands it, don't you know?
That is the message the infiltrators and nitwits promote. The real reason Coulter is so "controversial" on FR is because she is effective, because she doesn't accept the Leftist template for conservative defeat.
I wouldn't have had a problem with her legitimately criticizing the SCOTUS nominees; I DID have a problem with her calling Roberts a "closet Souter" and with her treating Harriet Myers basically like the Left treats Paula Jones, Linda Tripp, Juanita Broderick, Katherine Harris, and Ann Coulter. Even if you disagreed with the choice to nominate them, they didn't deserve to be treated like pond scum because they aren't. Actual pond scum, like for example the Jersey Girls or Murtha, is a different matter.
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.