Posted on 03/03/2007 11:33:15 AM PST by an amused spectator
On Friday, March 1, 2007, Ann Coulter spoke at the 34th annual Conservative Political Action Conference.
Toward the end of her remarks, she touched on the subject of Democrat John Edwards (former US Senator from North Carolina and 2008 presidential hopeful):
"Oh, and - I was going to have a few comments on the other Democratic presidential candidate John Edwards, ummm, but it turns out that you have to go into rehab if you use the word ‘faggot,’ so, I — so - kind of at an impasse, can’t really talk about Edwards, so I think I'll just conclude here and take your questions. Thank you."
Notice the Jedi Mind Trick that Ann uses here. She talks about Edwards, then segues to a newsworthy current event in the world of entertainment, then segues back to John Edwards.
She never calls John Edwards a faggot - she allows the minds of her listeners to do that for themselves. Now, a person who was actually at the event may be forgiven for momentarily falling for the mind trick, but's what's hilarious is the number of weak-minded or sloppy thinkers who are OUTRAGED, OUTRAGED that "Ann Coulter called John Edwards a faggot!!!". There are actual "hard news" websites that actually repeat this blather (UPI, E&P, and The Nation, among others).
I also read an article on a weblog complaining that noted mainstream media outlets are ignoring the story (among these: The Associated Press, Reuters, The Washington Post and The New York Times). Apparently, the AP, Reuters, the WP & the NYT are on to Coulter's Jedi mind tricks, and are willing for others to make buffoons of themselves before piling on.
Coulter's command of the language reminds one of Clemens or Bierce, and the way she can get her critics to do the work of lampooning themselves is simply amazing (and amusing).
I am assuming the quote is correct.
Ann did in fact call the silk pony a faggot. She didn't say it outright, but she implied it by inferring she was going to talk about Edwards, but calling someone a faggot will get you sent to rehab so I'd take your questions.
Personally, I would have called Edwards a lot worse.
GO ANN, but she did call him a faggot.
I would have called him a a hypocritial slimey preening faggot
You'll have to remember that I have years of experience with parsing Clintonian utterances, so a more straightforward rhetorical device such as the one Ann uses here doesn't overawe me.
In point of fact, every once in a great while, I play the game of "Made You Think It!" with those around me. They usually hate it, so I quickly desist.
There is no comparison between bringing up Cheney's daughter, who has publically proclaimed her sexuality, and Edwards being labeled as something he isn't. He's married in a traditional sense, not in a non-conforming relationship.
So quit labeling Edwards, then. You can stop the twirling of your mind, j. It just takes a little knowledge and discipline.
Actually...that is one of the reasons they hate an despise her so intently. She speaks to them in a language they understand all too well.
President Bush won't do it. Rove won't do it. The Republican party won't do it. Conservatives in general won't do it. (BTW...Liberals are 18 times more likely to use profanity in their discourse than conservatives are...)
To paraphrase an old saying: "If you are taking flak, you must be over the target..."
> I would have called him a a hypocritial slimey preening faggot
Were you among those who got their knickers in a twist over the bloggers Edwards had on staff?
Just wondering how deeply your hypocrisy runs...
You're right, I was wrong for calling him a faggot.
He's just a hypocritial slimey preening liberal
Are you talking about his left wing christian hating, nasty mean spirited progressive bloggers ?
> Are you talking about his left wing christian hating,
> nasty mean spirited progressive bloggers ?
Yes, but to really work up an outrage about them that isn't hypocritical, slimey, preening faux outrage, one kind of has to refrain from gratuitous slurs oneself.
an amused spectator: gettin' gratuitous, but not outraged, since March 1997
I wouldn't have cared if she actually did call him a faggot. BTW, isn't being one a badge of honor for the rats?
Oh' the proverbial self righteous high road.
Yeah, I used to think taking the high road when dealing with liberals was a correct course of action to maintain a sense of self restraint, knowing that getting in the gutter with them would only get me dirty. We could show them it is possible to hold a discourse within the bounds of decency and respect.
That's for suckers, liberals don't care for decency and respect, just power and control regardless how they obtain it.
Why, yes, it is - except when you can beat Ann Coulter over the head with the term like a purse...
9/1998
bttt
Bump.
LMAO!
Have to say I think bringing up Cheney's daughter was far worse.
She wasn't running for anything that I know of and it was a low and tacky blow.
Edwards has put himself out there, and he is a little ... okay ... what can I say.
Better say nothing-you people can turn on a person in an instant.
Are we into sign-up date wars now?
Good. I'll play.
"The point is that SHE didn't say anything about Edwards. She let the minds of her various audiences do that for her." ~ an amused spectator
Exactly. She would have been doing the same thing if she had used this word:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1794517/posts?page=303#303
I actually post very little as to compared to years ago, that post get under my skin.
I'll put my horn away now. It's impolite to toot it.
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.