On Ann Coulter - Idiotic. Disgusting. Stupid. Moronic. (conservatives respond)

Hugh Hewitt Townhall site ^ | Friday March 2nd, 2007 | Dean Barnett

[ajolympian2004]

Idiotic. Disgusting. Stupid. Moronic.

I guess you could say that Ann loves to shock us, but at this point, who’s shocked? She obviously can’t behave well enough to attend a respectable political gathering. It’s not a lack of intelligence. It’s an indifference to self-control and a preening sort of narcissism that compels her to need the spotlight, even if it’s unflattering.

(For those of you who don’t know what I’m talking about, here’s audio of her calling John Edwards a “faggot” at CPAC today.)

---

Michelle Malkin -

***4:15pm update***

Ann Coulter just finished her riff on Al Gore, tossed out some cute jokes ("You can understand why Hollywood is concerned about global warming. You know what heat does to plastic."), and ended with a cheap one-liner about John Edwards being a "faggot." (Paraphrasing) She said she would refrain from commenting on Edwards because "if you say faggot, you have to go to rehab."

A smattering of laughter.

Not from this corner.

Crickets chirping.

http://michellemalkin.com/archives/006976.htm

---

Bryan Preston of 'Hot Air' -

Ann Coulter is speaking at CPAC as I write. As is typical, she gave a brief speech full of her usual witticisms, including a few brilliant attacks on Al Gore’s green hypocrisy. All was good. Untill the last few seconds, when she launched into a joke about John Edwards.

Here’s what she said.

“I’d say something about John Edwards, but if you say ‘faggot’ you have to go to rehab.”

I’m no fan of John Edwards, but that’s just a stupid joke. It’s over the line. The laughter it generated across the room was more than a little annoying.

Last year it was “raghead.” This year it’s calling John Edwards a “faggot.” Two years in a row, Coulter has finished up an otherwise sharp CPAC routine with an obnoxious slur that liberals will fling at conservatives for years to come.

Thanks, Ann.

http://hotair.com/archives/2007/03/02/thanks-ann/

---

My comments... what should have been a day to celebrate a Reaganesque speech by Duncan Hunter, and good speeches by Mitt Romney and Mike Huckabee was overshadowed by an unhinged comment by Ann Coulter. She is an absolute idiot for saying something like this at CPAC.

[Sir Francis Dashwood]

All of my children are educated, have their medical and dental taken care of on my dime, not on the backs of others...

The circumstance of their mothers are none of your concern really. It is a perfectly natural thing for a man to father children and care for them.

But since you think it is weird, and that homosexual perverts are somehow fine and dandy, I question your sanity.

[Sir Francis Dashwood]

I weep for the future.

You should. You have promoted a lot of filth in the world that will haunt you some day.

[Sir Francis Dashwood]

I am tired of these people who try to pass some perversion of nature off as a normal thing. It is a fetish, a religion of deviance and I will not bend my knee in acquiescence to it.

[Sir Francis Dashwood]

Is that a guess?

[Sir Francis Dashwood]

Lord of the Rings - Return of the King...

Eowyn kills the Witch King of Angmar.

Ann Coulter skewers the homo king of Hollywood (David Geffen).

[RunningWolf]

I am with you on that one. And they will employ just about any disingenuous tactic to silence your voice, including trying to browbeat people with their version of the Bible or or inferring that their behavior is above board while yours is contemptible etc, and other such tactics in an attempt to slit off and isolate.

Well at the core of it, there is just not a nice way to deal with some of these people, for they would walk all over one if they could.

This needs repeated.

It is a fetish, a religion of deviance and I will not bend my knee in acquiescence to it.

[soccermom]

"No, she wasn't. Faggot is derogatory term for homosexuals. It's also a derogatory term for heterosexual men who behave effeminately. What do you think she meant concerning Edwards?" It is a derogatory term either way and an ad hominem attack. There are plenty of things about Edward's issues and his hypocritical behavior pertaining to those issues that she could have lampooned.

"No, what she was doing was make a very important and relevant point about a group of phonies who were doing real harm to real people and this country." There is nothing important or relevant about engaging in baseless speculation about the marriages of the Jersey girls. It was catty. But I suppose you think her comments about Playboy are relevant, too.

I recall them very well. They got a lot of attention, and not just for the Kerry campaigning but for their testimony before the 9/11 Commission. They got attention in the pundit circles, but average Americans had no clue who they were and they did nothing to help Kerry. It was Coulter who made them a household name -- and not in the way she had hoped. They got more sympathy and attention than they had before.

In fact, she was the subjects of death threats and at least one physical assault. You ever hear her whine about it? Yes, as a matter of fact, I did hear her complain about such things --- even a pie in the face. I don't know if "whine" is the word I would use, but she has every right to complain about such things. Pointing to their behavior is a good thing. That helped Bush immensely in the 2004 election. I think it was called "Faces of the Left" or something like that. The RNC put together an ad showing all the hatred from the left. Mind you, they didn't respond in kind -- he exposed them for what they were. It was particularly brilliant because it featured a "Hitler" ad from Moveon.org. Kerry raised a hissy fit, thinking the RNC had produced the Hilter ad and then he had egg on his face when it was pointed out that it came from his side.

That's a fair point of view, although I don't agree with it, and regardless Ann, unlike Michael Moore, has not been lying about anything. Certainly Michael Moore grossly outweighs Coulter both literally and on the lie scale, but I disagree with you claim that she's never lied. I consider baseless speculation about the personal lives of public figures to be lies or slander. And then there is the little matter of her providing false information for voter registration. Again, very minor compared to Moore's propaganda, but everyone lies.

"Ann Coulter's book had nada to do with the loss." Again, I disagree. If the book had slid under the radar, you might be right. But I think the coverage surrounding the Jersey Girl comments did, indeed, harm the image of conservatives and I think it helped validate the "Unremitting negative coverage of the Iraq War."

[soccermom]

Sorry, but the results of the last 3 elections disprove your points. You can expose them for what they are without being "nasty". When we did that in 2002 and 2004, we won. When Ann was "nasty" in 2006, we lost.

[Gumlegs]

All of my children are educated, have their medical and dental taken care of on my dime, not on the backs of others...

One suspects that at least some of them have the advantage of not having you around. That's something.

The circumstance of their mothers are none of your concern really. It is a perfectly natural thing for a man to father children and care for them.

You're the one who posted the information about impregnating three women and somehow equated that with masculinity. If I were asked, I would state that REAL MEN (your term), actually, you know, hang around their children and teach them what it means to be a man. But I readily admit your case may be the exception.

But since you think it is weird, and that homosexual perverts are somehow fine and dandy, I question your sanity.

Next time try reading for comprehension.

[Tribune7]

When we did that in 2002 and 2004, we won.

In 2002, Ann got quite a bit of press for her criticism of Max Cleland.

In 2004, she wrote a bestseller in which she implied the entire Democratic Party was filled with traitors and in which she praised Joe McCarthy.

Ann is much more an asset than a liability. Her book had nothing to do with the loss. To think it did even in the slightest is to excuse a whole host of other things starting with the Republican Party.

[Sir Francis Dashwood]

One suspects that at least some of them have the advantage of not having you around.

Two of them are soldiers like their father was...

[Gumlegs]

Two of them are soldiers like their father was...

I was a commissioned officer in the U.S. Navy. It's not necessary for me to comment further.

[Sir Francis Dashwood]

I was a W5...

[BnBlFlag]

The response to her remarks shows just how far we have degenerated as a country.

[Gumlegs]

I was a W5...

In the Army. You wouldn't have qualified as a mess cook in the Navy.

[RunningWolf]

mess cook in the Navy

Sounds like something you evolved into. Did your ape prototype dream of it long ago?

[Sir Francis Dashwood]

You wouldn't have qualified as a mess cook in the Navy.

And I wouldn't care to hear about it from a junior officer...

[Gumlegs]

And I wouldn't care to hear about it from a junior officer...

Your arrogance ranks right up there with your reading comprehension.

[Gumlegs]

Inversely speaking, of course.

[RunningWolf]

Sloppy, but at least you are getting into venues that evos really know something about, arrogance.