Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Addition or subtraction?: Ann Coulter and the conservative crossroads
Townhall.com ^ | March 7, 2007 | Michael Medved

Posted on 03/07/2007 6:28:29 AM PST by MadIvan

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 101-120121-140141-160 ... 461-471 next last
To: MadIvan
I don't know why people think that the right to free speech means the right to say whatever you want without any consequence from anyone. People have the same right to use free speech to object to what you say, or to use their right to not associate with you.

No one is advocating that Ann Coulter be put in prison or otherwise prosecuted for what she said. But it doesn't mean that no one can criticize what she said, or to refuse to associate with her or to listen to what she has to say.

We are all responsible for we say- and no, life isn't fair, there are double standards in how people react, but that's reality.

121 posted on 03/07/2007 8:14:32 AM PST by LWalk18
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SoothingDave
Politics is about persuading people to join you.

Marketing is about persuading people to join you. Marketing is used in politics. Your mom is a fine woman for teaching you what she did. I try to teach my kids the same thing.
Problem is that politics is not an arena for gentlepeople. I'm not sure if it ever was?

122 posted on 03/07/2007 8:14:44 AM PST by Ramcat (Thank You American Veterans)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 115 | View Replies]

To: Mr. Silverback

First of all, Ann is not RR and she is not running for any office that I know of. Second, this isn't 1980. Things have changed substantially since then. Third, you don't really understand the point she was making which was about "Semantic Totalitarianism" of which you are either a victim or a perpetrator. If you are offended by the use of the word that's your problem, not the worlds. Ann provided a major service by bringing this issue into clear focus.


123 posted on 03/07/2007 8:15:10 AM PST by PajamaTruthMafia
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 113 | View Replies]

To: Mr. Silverback

You know, to even compare what Ann did to the Leftists idiots is very revealing on your part. To draw some morale equivalence is really an outrage.


124 posted on 03/07/2007 8:17:05 AM PST by PajamaTruthMafia
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 113 | View Replies]

To: PajamaTruthMafia

Good post.. "Ann provided a major service by bringing this issue into clear focus." ..and she put many of the perps into clear focus as well.


125 posted on 03/07/2007 8:18:13 AM PST by SeaBiscuit (God Bless America..Duncan Hunter 2008.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 123 | View Replies]

To: SoothingDave
Just a couple of things here Dave. Without knowing you I'll concede the point that you are probably more politically correct than I. Neither word in our discussion is or was considered a swear word in any community or religious affiliation I've been associated with. Who made them swear words? As far as them being fighting words? Well maybe the N word but the F's (not homosexuals) weren't much for fighting. Vulgar to the high brow society means common or ordinary as in language. If you want to say you're more refined than I , well that's OK too. Just wanted to clean this up a bit Dave as you probably already consider me a cretin.
126 posted on 03/07/2007 8:19:19 AM PST by Ramcat (Thank You American Veterans)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 103 | View Replies]

To: Mr. Silverback
"calling someone a faggot is ludicrous."

And, in the name of "a joke" on top of it, does not change the fact that our society has banned the term as well as its' use.

John Kerry was lambasted twice for calling our troops stupid and later trying to sell it off as a "botched joke".
There is a point where humor or the excuse of it, is no longer acceptable.
127 posted on 03/07/2007 8:20:16 AM PST by PSYCHO-FREEP
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 113 | View Replies]

To: PajamaTruthMafia
So, what's the definition then?

My kids looked it up yesterday because I told them it was a normal word they could use. It means homosexual. It also means a bundle of sticks, because homosexuals used to be burned to death when they got caught. (People didn't have modern medicines back then to stop the eventual disease and plagues brought about by the behavior.)

128 posted on 03/07/2007 8:22:43 AM PST by concerned about politics ("Get thee behind me, Liberal")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 114 | View Replies]

To: LibertarianInExile
The headline ought to be "Gays Shouldn't Be Demeaned By Conservatives." That's all he's saying. And boy, does that sound like a PC thing to say.

Let's try the contra-positive.

"Conservatives Should Demean Gays"

Is that really the message you think should be put out there? Should our platform really include the mandatory demeaning of any group?

129 posted on 03/07/2007 8:24:22 AM PST by SoothingDave (Eugene Gurkin was a janitor, cleaning toilets for The Man)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 119 | View Replies]

To: PajamaTruthMafia
If you are offended by the use of the word that's your problem, not the worlds.

:-D

So if someone you don't like calls you a 'faggot', you aren't offended?

Watching ya'll defend this is too darned funny!

I guess extremist Cs will defend the indefensible just like extremist Ls.

Ann's funny. She smart. She's cute as heck.

She goofed this time.

Amazing to find this so difficult for the 'politics as a team sport' crowd.

130 posted on 03/07/2007 8:25:19 AM PST by Dominic Harr (Conservative: The "ant", to a liberal's "grasshopper".)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 123 | View Replies]

To: LibertarianInExile
Would you care to provide us with a link where Medved said "Bush is Hitler", our Marines are savage murderers, or that America is worse than Pol Pot's regime?

I have listened and read Mr. Medved's material for the last 15 years and I have never come across anything that resembles what you just demagogued to this forum about Michael Medved.
131 posted on 03/07/2007 8:25:59 AM PST by PSYCHO-FREEP
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 120 | View Replies]

To: Ramcat
Problem is that politics is not an arena for gentlepeople. I'm not sure if it ever was?

But voting is. And voters don't like voting for mean and nasty people.

132 posted on 03/07/2007 8:26:03 AM PST by SoothingDave (Eugene Gurkin was a janitor, cleaning toilets for The Man)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 122 | View Replies]

To: SoothingDave
You stereotype grandly.

Let's see, so far you inferred that I'm vulgar, a cretin and a rube and I stereotype?

133 posted on 03/07/2007 8:26:31 AM PST by Ramcat (Thank You American Veterans)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 115 | View Replies]

To: concerned about politics
My kids looked it up yesterday because I told them it was a normal word they could use.

!

I don't know where you live, but here in Texas if you call someone a 'faggot' you better be 6 ft 3 and weight 250 pounds!

Dang, this is funny, you should hear how ya'll sound.

134 posted on 03/07/2007 8:27:23 AM PST by Dominic Harr (Conservative: The "ant", to a liberal's "grasshopper".)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 128 | View Replies]

To: concerned about politics

So. in your book calling somebody a homosexual is a slur then? How about being a homosexual is that a bad thing too?

For the record, Ann's definition of the slang is correct - it's a synonym for Wuss and that was clearly the context in which it was used in order to make a broader point about the insanity of semantic totalitarianism and the political correct culture of word rehab.


135 posted on 03/07/2007 8:27:52 AM PST by PajamaTruthMafia
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 128 | View Replies]

To: SoothingDave
And voters don't like voting for mean and nasty people.

Then Mrs. Clinton doesn't stand a chance?

136 posted on 03/07/2007 8:28:21 AM PST by Ramcat (Thank You American Veterans)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 132 | View Replies]

To: SoothingDave
But voting is. And voters don't like voting for mean and nasty people.

The democrats acted like blood thirsty wolves, and the Republicans acted like sheep. Guess who won the 2006 elections.

137 posted on 03/07/2007 8:30:47 AM PST by concerned about politics ("Get thee behind me, Liberal")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 132 | View Replies]

To: El Laton Caliente

You just (unknowingly) illustrated the whole point of this article.

You did read and understand it didn't you?


138 posted on 03/07/2007 8:30:52 AM PST by PSYCHO-FREEP
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 117 | View Replies]

To: MadIvan

The republicans are not the answer. They are part of the problem.

I stopped voting two years ago.

Who is John Galt?


139 posted on 03/07/2007 8:31:58 AM PST by RobRoy (Islam is a greater threat to the world today than Nazism was in 1938.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dominic Harr
Dang, this is funny, you should hear how ya'll sound.

Ditto.

140 posted on 03/07/2007 8:32:21 AM PST by concerned about politics ("Get thee behind me, Liberal")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 134 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 101-120121-140141-160 ... 461-471 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson