Addition or subtraction?: Ann Coulter and the conservative crossroads

Townhall.com ^ | March 7, 2007 | Michael Medved

[Mr. Silverback]

See post 155. This oughta be good.

[RobRoy]

>>You forgot the part where you dig yourself a bunker and shoot anyone you don't know, who comes near it.<<

That is in the "it's ok to shoot the bast**ds phase. ;)

[PSYCHO-FREEP]

Sometimes, speed reading to keep up on a fair volume thread has it's risks. If I misread what you said, I firmly apologize. And, I was not attacking you. I was merely keeping up the discussion.

We all share due respect here.

[subterfuge]

Her right to say it is in no way infringed by, nor does it preclude, our right to say that she's a self-inflated moron who does the conservative agenda more harm than good by behaving like a left-wing stereotype of a knuckle-dragging conservative bigot.

Yet you, with your so-called intellectualism and smugness, see no irony in that statememt. Kind of funny actually.

[kabar]

The American Conservative Union and the Conservative Political Action Conference today issued the following statement:

The just completed 2007 Conservative Political Action Conference on March 1 – 3, 2007, was the largest in the 34 year history of the event, featuring 33 panels on a variety of public policy issues, 24 stand alone speakers including public officials, writers, student activists, media personalities and comedians. ACU, the event’s primary sponsor and CPAC strive to provide a platform and forum for a variety of differing views and personalities. ACU and CPAC do not condone or endorse every speaker or their comments at the conference. As such, ACU and CPAC leave it to our audience to determine whether comments are appropriate or not. “Ann Coulter is known for comments that can be both provocative and outrageous. That was certainly the case in her 2007 CPAC appearance and previous ones as well. But as a point of clarification, let me make it clear that ACU and CPAC do not condone or endorse the use of hate speech,” said David A. Keene, ACU Chairman.

I can live with that.

[Mr. K]

I say let Ann be Ann- I bet far more people laughed at her comment then those who disliked it. (except for democraps)

[Mr. Silverback]

Don't worry...I suspect a house cleaning is coming.

[sam_paine]

[Ann]'s a self-inflated moron who does the conservative agenda more harm than good by behaving like a left-wing stereotype of a knuckle-dragging conservative bigot.

Right. A single word, and under-the-bus you go....at least for Republicans.

Ann Coulter - "faggot." -- ????

George Allen - "Makakka." -- FIRED.

Trent Lott - "Strom Thurmond." -- FIRED.

Newt Gingrich - "Gingriched." -- Remember that term?

Dan Quayle - "Murphy Brown." -- FIRED.

OTOH-------

Jessie Jackson - "Hymietown." -- Black Leader.

etc.etc.

[MadIvan]

That's a perfectly reasonable response.

Regards, Ivan

[PajamaTruthMafia]

In all seriousnes, do you not see how you're contradicting yourself? You say we "can't allow [the] enemy to fight by his rules while [we] fight with mittens on and expect to win" (post 53) but then you say that she is not using the same tactics as the enemy, and in fact it is outrageous that I've said she is. Well, which is it, should we fight like the enemy, or should we be like Ann who (accoriding to you) would do no such thing? I know it's probably hard to read your computer screen from up on your high moral horse, but pick a position, wouldyaplease?

I think you miss the point. The rule is, the Left has no rules and the Right must follow some strict code of conduct that is constantly changing. The Left gets to define, on the fly, what the Right can and can not say. Too many on the Right accept this game and these rules and they will never, ever win that way.

[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?

It's not a slur. If they're a faggot, then they're a faggot. They chose their behavior, remember? Faggot is a valid word to describe their behavior.

Homosexual behavior is a bad thing. Love the sinner, but hate the sin.
I object to their over use of antibiotics from ingesting bile and using strange, foreign instruments in their bodies( My sister in law is a nurse, and you wouldn't believe some of the stuff the hospitals pull out of these people).

I object to their incurable plagues. My kids have to grow up in this world, and homosexual behavior is like a walking petri dish, with more plagues yet to come.
When you play in the sewer too long, you get sick. You can also spread that sickness to the innocent people around you.

Yes, I object to their behavior because of the health issues associated with it. AIDs is a mutating disease. No one knows how it will eventually end - if it ever does. A simple change of behavior could eradicate the disease overnight, but no one wants to discuss that idea. Instead, they pay billions to find a cure.

What has homosexuality ever done that was good? We've seen the damage the behavior has done over and over, but what good has ever resulted from it? Why should I just look the other way and call it "normal?"

[Non-Sequitur]

bump

[Mr. Silverback]

So let me get this straight...you think it's intellectualism and smugness to say it doesn't do the conservative movement any good to go around calling a faithful husband a faggot?

[SoothingDave]

May I refer you to a dictionary?

[El Laton Caliente]

And the other side doesn't understand the mind-set. We've tried the RINO approach, it didn't work. We're getting close to the "water the tree of liberty" stage.

[Mr. Silverback]

No, I didn't miss tha point. Answer the other two questions in the post, please. I suspect you left them out because honest answers to them will directly contradict your stated position.

[LibertarianInExile]

A quote:

"...I have never come across anything that resembles what you just demagogued to this forum about Michael Medved."

'Demagogued' is a pretty harsh word to use about someone with whom you're 'sharing due respect.' I'm demagoguing nothing, nor is the prior poster to whom I responded.

[concerned about politics]

I'm sure if we all teach our children to use the dictionary to look up swear words and encourage them to use them

C'mon. I don't allow my kids to swear. Faggot is a normal word. It's just an un-politically correct word forbidden by the left wing , but I'm not brainwashed into being politically correct, so I don't worry about it.

[Rutles4Ever]

It seems to me that lately you don't have to leave this very website in order to experience the type of name-calling and inflammatory speech that typical of DU.

It's an unmistakable sign of weakness. The Reagan Revolution was won with ideas, not invective. If we're really this bankrupt of ideas that hurling insults somehow improves our game, then we're a party in decline. You know, it's very interesting - Edwards' campaign appeared so grossly incompetent (if not malignant) in supporting its feminazi, papist-hating bloggers, and calling him a "faggot" makes him look like the victim now.