Gutter Politics from the She-Pundit

By Jeralyn, Section Media
Posted on Fri Mar 02, 2007 at 06:18:27 PM EST
Tags: (all tags)

Share This: Digg!

The She-Pundit with long blond hair is back in the news. Think Progress reports she called John Edwards "a faggot" at a conservative gathering. Crooks and Liars has the video. Think Progress also notes that Ms. C. has used sexual slurs in the past:

Previously, Coulter has put “even money” on Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-NY) “coming out of the closet,” said Bill Clinton shows “some level of latent homosexuality,” and called Vice President Al Gore a “total fag.”

Human Rights Campaign issued this statement:

“To interject this word into American political discourse is a vile and disgusting way to sink the debate to a new, all-time low,” said Human Rights Campaign President Joe Solmonese. “Make no doubt about it, these remarks go directly against what our Founding Fathers intended and have no place on the schoolyard, much less our country’s political arena.”

More...

“We demand that every single Presidential candidate in attendance at this conference, along with Vice President Cheney stand up and publicly condemn this type of gutter-style politics,” continued Solmonese. “If not, then their silence will be deafening to the vast majority of Americans who believe this type of language belongs no where near the discussions about the future of our country.”

She must have a new book coming out she's trying to promote. It seems to me she is at her most outrageous when trying to make money.

Update: Conservative blogger Ed Morrissey at Captain's Quarters isn't happy with Ms. C either -- and suggests the organization she spoke for may want to rethink its association with her as homophobia is not a winning issue. Even Michelle Malkin calls the comment "a cheap one-liner." And, check out the comments at Pajamas Media. How long before her base starts rolling their eyes at her name, thinking "publicity hound?" Keep it up, Ann.

Update: John Edwards weighs in, asking, "Can you help us raise $100,000 in "Coulter Cash" this week to keep this campaign charging ahead and fight back against the politics of bigotry? "

< Army Secretary Resigns Over Walter Reed Flap | 4th Circuit Dismisses Suit By CIA Ghost Air Victim >

Legal

Nothing on this site should be construed as legal advice. TalkLeft does not give legal advice.

TalkLeft is not responsible for and often disagrees with material posted in the comments section. Read at your own risk.

Gutter Politics from the She-Pundit | 53 comments (53 topical)

Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

Methinks she doth protest too much... (none / 0) (#1)
by David at Kmareka on Fri Mar 02, 2007 at 06:59:02 PM EST

Or at least defame too shrilly with homosexual slurs. Though Coulter might just be rabidly homophobic, I cannot help but wonder if she is consciously or unconsciously grappling with her own sexual identity and then projecting onto others the angry self-loathing that lies (and lies and lies and lies) beneath that brittle exterior. Time will tell. In the meantime, the rumors that she was witnessed doing meth at the local Motel 6 with a female prostitute that vaguely resembled Cheney's daughter are probably unfounded.

A great opportunity... (none / 0) (#2)
by fafnir on Fri Mar 02, 2007 at 08:00:14 PM EST

for Democrats to remind self-identified "independents" that the Republican Party is the party of Ann Coulter and Rush Limbaugh.

Oh please (none / 0) (#8)
by demohypocrates on Fri Mar 02, 2007 at 11:16:52 PM EST

It might vindicate your world view to think that Coulter somehow represents conservatives. But that is ridiculous. She throws bombs. And many of them are offensive and flat out wrong.

So what. I could say the same for Al Sharpton, Democratic candidate for President. He was treated with kid gloves by Dems. I could give you a boatload of quotes and actions which show he is an overt racist. Lets hear about how the DA masturbated over pics of Tawana Brawley. He has never been disavowed by Dems. Instead he has become a legitimate spokesman for the Party and his endorsement is well sought.

Is the same true of Coulter? Are Repubs pandering to Coulter to get her endorsement? Of course not. But it is so easy to tar a party with the words of one.


One difference (none / 0) (#10)
by Molly Bloom on Fri Mar 02, 2007 at 11:50:20 PM EST

is Tawana Brawley's case was what, 20 years ago? Has Al Sharpton said anything similar lately? I don't think so.

Coulter OTOH is still making these offensive statements and shows no sign of changing her ways.

I won't tar all Republicans with Coulter. I will tar all conservatives with Coulter, since they invited her to their little gathering.

Now there is a Venn diagram showing the overlap between the circle of Republicans and the circle of conservatives...


Molly, you know there is a Venn diagram.. (none / 0) (#17)
by demohypocrates on Sat Mar 03, 2007 at 09:48:22 AM EST

that shows anti-war 'activists' that burn American flags, encourage jihad against the West and openly support terrorists, juxtaposed over people that disagree with the President. Do you really want to go down that path?

Hillary makes racist statements, no one listens.

Biden makes racist statements, no one listens.

Dean goes for the Confederate flag vote, no one listens.

Barbara Boxer denounces CAIR but any Repub that does so is racist.

Romney's great grandfather is a polygamist but so was Obama's father. Only the former is an issue.

Stop suckling, Molly, on that hypocrisy milk. And Venn diagrams are your enemy, not your friend.


Specifics please (none / 0) (#25)
by Molly Bloom on Sat Mar 03, 2007 at 10:29:32 AM EST

You just made accusations of Biden and HRC. But you gave no specifics. So far you have Brawley and a 20 year old case on Al. I'll spot you Al.

Dean? Dean said Democrats should appeal for the vote of "Southerners in pick up trucks with Confederate flag decals". He did not say we should make thinly veiled racists comments to do so. I would point out:

Dean WAS criticiszed (unfairly in my opinion as a Southerner, as no coded racial appeals were in that statement AND it was not endorsement of the Confederate flag, e.g. McCain, John) and
the GOP and the conservatives have been appealing to "Southerners in pick up trucks with Confederate flag decals" since Barry Goldwater's day. In fact Nixon had a name for it- the Southern Strategy.

From now on, the Republicans are never going to get more than 10 to 20 percent of the Negro vote and they don't need any more than that... but Republicans would be shortsighted if they weakened enforcement of the Voting Rights Act. The more Negroes who register as Democrats in the South, the sooner the Negrophobe whites will quit the Democrats and become Republicans. That's where the votes are

Lee Atwater (conservative Republican):

You start out in 1954 by saying, "N-, n-, n-." By 1968 you can't say 'n-' --that hurts you. Backfires. So you say stuff like forced busing, states' rights and all that stuff. You're getting so abstract now [that] you're talking about cutting taxes, and all these things you're talking about are totally economic things and a byproduct of them is [that] blacks get hurt worse than whites.
And subconsciously maybe that is part of it. I'm not saying that. But I'm saying that if it is getting that abstract, and that coded, that we are doing away with the racial problem one way or the other. You follow me--because obviously sitting around saying, "We want to cut this," is much more abstract than even the busing thing, and a hell of a lot more abstract than "N-, n-."

(quote cleaned up due to JM's policy of maintaining a work friendly blog)

See also conservative Republican Jesse Helms "black hands" commercial used against Harvey Gantt.

Romney? Show me one Democrat or liberal who said the fact Mitt's grandfather's polgamy is a reason he should not be president? (hint- the MSM is neither Democratic nor liberal).

Boxer and Cair v. GOP and Cair? have to give me context of both before I can comment. However, I suspect based upon your previous statements your argument there is just as specious as your argument against Dean, HRC, and Biden.

The argument everybody does it, therefore it is ok when conservatives do it, doesn't wash- particurally when you have yet to show everybody does it. Its just defining deviancy down.

As for the Venn diagrams, guess I struck a nerve. However,

A Venn diagram "that shows anti-war 'activists' that burn American flags, encourage jihad against the West and openly support terrorists, juxtaposed over people that disagree with the President." When was the last American flag burned on American soil by an American lefist? Name one Americana leftist who has "openly support terrorists, juxtaposed over people that disagree with the President."

: Funny how (none / 0) (#53)
by demohypocrates on Sat Mar 03, 2007 at 05:22:15 PM EST

the "Southern strategy" is only viewed as racist if Republicans do it.
"no coded racial appeals were in that statement"
Why not? Because Howard Dean said it? What if a conservative said it? Again, the logical fallacy that if a liberal said it, it cannot be racist because liberals are not racist.
Biden - "You cannot go to a 7-11 or Dunkin Donuts unless you have a slight Indian Accent"
"I mean, you got the first mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy," he said. "I mean, that's a storybook, man."
Hillary - "He (Mahatma Gandhi) ran a gas station down in St. Louis."
I guess since the Indians (the ones from India, mind you) have not yet been anointed victimhood status, these statements could not be viewed as racist.
Do I think that Dean, Biden or Hillary are racist? Not at all. They just said some dumb things. By the same token, I dont think that George Allen was a racist for an off the cuff 'macaca' comment to a wack job left wing stalker.
Re Romney: Libs dont have to say anything if the media says it for them. Dont you find it curious that the AP feels the need to do in depth reports on Romney's great grandfather? How newsworthy.
Boxer and CAIR - I wont pursue this line. It does require too much background to hash out here.

Here are some friends for ya.
"I love NY even more without the World Trade Center". I attended one of ANSWER's pre-Iraq war protest rallies in NYC, so dont try and tell me that they are just a few 'rotten apples'. There were thousands with their keffiyehs, Che shirts, and Mao caps. They called Bush a Nazi and hung him in effigy. How trite.
Thats why I love Leftists. They are so gosh darn 'edgy'. And me? I still say 'gosh darn'.

Sharpton vs Coulter (none / 0) (#38)
by Electa on Sat Mar 03, 2007 at 01:51:13 PM EST

hahahaha!!!! Pleassssssssse give me a break. The comment Sharpton made about the Tawana Brawley prosecutor has nothing to do with racism....get a life and stop trying to play the race card in defense of Cult Coulter. Wuz up w/you talk show clones and this bogus reverse racism crap.

Sharpton was treated with respect because he raised issues that the other candidates were either too afraid to utter, overlooked or simply unable to comprehend. Sharpton tells it like it is, point blank, right between the eyes.


the she-pundit (none / 0) (#3)
by diogenes on Fri Mar 02, 2007 at 08:25:48 PM EST

At least McCain and Giuliani never hired Coulter to be their press secretary or web specialist, unlike John Edwards, who hired two people of similarly vulgar tongue/blog to work for him briefly.

Coulter... (none / 0) (#4)
by desertswine on Fri Mar 02, 2007 at 09:12:01 PM EST

is a most despicable and vile woman. We can expect more of this.

hmm (none / 0) (#5)
by jarober on Fri Mar 02, 2007 at 09:16:20 PM EST

You might notice that most of the prominent conservative bloggers have condemned that. Which is unlike the left's treatment of their own hate-mongers

: And who might that be? (none / 0) (#11)
by Molly Bloom on Fri Mar 02, 2007 at 11:51:39 PM EST

what statements did they make and when did they make them?

Countdown had the clip on (none / 0) (#6)
by scribe on Fri Mar 02, 2007 at 09:21:22 PM EST

and Coulter got a good laugh - a hearty one - from the Conservative Political Action Committee (CPAC) crowd she was speaking to.

No shocked sounds. They lapped up the manure she spread.

Is anyone surprised... (none / 0) (#7)
by TomStewart on Fri Mar 02, 2007 at 10:24:25 PM EST

...by this? Or by the two righties that brought up the "but Lefties do it too!" thread snatcher?

Coulter has always been beyond the pale, and always will be as long as there's a buck in it, as will Rush. As soon as people turn away and thier royalites start to dry up, the tune will change.

AND THEN..... (none / 0) (#9)
by demohypocrates on Fri Mar 02, 2007 at 11:19:09 PM EST

AIR AMERICA will rise up!!!!!

LOL.


Huh? (none / 0) (#13)
by TomStewart on Sat Mar 03, 2007 at 03:14:12 AM EST

Double huh??


: That's conservative humor (none / 0) (#47)
by Dadler on Sat Mar 03, 2007 at 03:01:56 PM EST

And a solid example of it. Any wonder why Dennis Miller isn't funny anymore?
Here I'll just make up a joke and show him how to do it, while being politically self-deprecating in a manner the right can never even attempt:
How many bleeding heart liberals does it take to screw in a lightbulb?
One, plus two union workers, three government regulators, and four hippy environmentalists to scream solar-power slogans and hurl petroleum filled condoms while the bulb is being changed.
On second thought...

scribe beat me to it (none / 0) (#12)
by cpinva on Sat Mar 03, 2007 at 02:08:58 AM EST

she'll continue as long as someone pays her to, as will malkin, limbaugh, et al. personally (and with no education, training or empirical data to support it), i think it means one of two things: a. these guys scare the hell of out her but, lacking actual facts to argue, this is the best she can do. so much for the law school tuition., and/or b. she's a closet dyke, projecting her self-fear/loathing on to others.

on the other hand, she might just do it for the cash, and could not care less otherwise.

A few things.... (none / 0) (#15)
by Deconstructionist on Sat Mar 03, 2007 at 08:25:34 AM EST

First, "conservatives" are a large and not monolithic group. Second, Coulter would be from the "radical reactionary" sub-group. Third, even within the "rr" sub-group she is extreme in terms of tone and tenor. In fact, I would consider her no more a "conservative" than I consider some of the narrow-minded, intolerant extremists here to be "liberals."

It appears that to her politics is a means to achieve fame and fortune and her behavior is motivated primarily by her own selfishness. Although, you do wondwr if maybe it's not all an act and she does just hate a lot of people.

That said, her antics can fairly be used to malign the larger group to the extent a very large proportion of the larger group displays rejection of her. that requires not merely the expression of disapproval of her very most abhorrent utterances but disassociation with her and disavowal of her as a legitimate voice.

We need to remember the same thing applies to our not speaking out against the unsavory or woerse voices who are closer to our positions.

It's no act.... (none / 0) (#18)
by kdog on Sat Mar 03, 2007 at 09:53:14 AM EST

with this crazy broad. You can't fake that gleam in the eye's of Coulter when she talks about San Francisco getting blown off the map. She means it.

And she sells mad books....scary.


: Well, (none / 0) (#22)
by Deconstructionist on Sat Mar 03, 2007 at 10:12:17 AM EST

I haven't watched her in my life for a total of more than a couple of minutes and almost all of my exposure comes from written excerpts of what she has said in pieces denouncing her so maybe you are right. I still think fame and fortune are her primary goals but maybe she is lucky enough to do that being her true self.

Can anyone tell me (none / 0) (#16)
by jimakaPPJ on Sat Mar 03, 2007 at 09:39:56 AM EST

why when someone makes some idoitic hurtful unecessary shouldn't have terrible statement using the gay tag, they are almost immediately called homophobic, and accused of being a closet gay trying to deny their sexuality amid great internal conflict?

Why don't we just say: "Hey you dumb ignorant bigot, that is completely wrong and I think you are terrible person.

I mean, why give them an excuse for their despicable comment?

Coulter, at one time, had a sharp tongue and could turn a funny phrase. She is now completely out of control and in a self destructive spiral. The Repubs and the Conservatives will eventually toss her out because many will be offended and many will recognize that she has become a liability.

In the meantime let us condemn her statements, and if you are a Demo, take enjoyment in the fact that a huge number of Repubs are cringing at her comments, just as a huge number of Demos cringed when Ward Churchill came out with his "little Eichmans" statement.

Because,it's thought clever... (none / 0) (#20)
by Deconstructionist on Sat Mar 03, 2007 at 10:06:45 AM EST

... to do, because what would likely bother a person with a irrational hatred of something more than insiuations they probably are that something.


Wrongwing talking points (none / 0) (#21)
by Sailor on Sat Mar 03, 2007 at 10:06:49 AM EST

Yes, an obscure professor from CO is just exactly like a national spokewoman for conservatives who is constantly given airtime and invited into their bosom.

coulter, malkin, o'reilly, glen beck, et al make a living from hate speech and rethuglicans lap it up and beg for more.

There is no way conservatives can distance themselves from the stars they made.

And the best they can come up with is commenters on blogs, unheard of professors and other obscure folks.


Sailor, Churchill had his days (none / 0) (#29)
by jimakaPPJ on Sat Mar 03, 2007 at 11:26:27 AM EST

of infamy, difference being he was attacking the American culture per se, Jews in particular....

Thanks for jumping and defending Churchill, who BTW was a tenured professor making his living saying such things.

You just prove the point. Coulter is no better for attacking an individual, but that you never understood the wrongness of Curchuill's comments speaks volumes...

And Dick "They're Nazi's" Durbin could be mentioned as one who mispoke themselves, and John "educate or go to Iraq" Kerry.


jim (none / 0) (#32)
by Deconstructionist on Sat Mar 03, 2007 at 11:36:23 AM EST

Your point about the failure to demounce is fair, however, I do not see any defense of Churchill but merely lame excuses for not denouncing.

Failure to denounce is bad and there is a price to pay for it, but it's not as bad as defending.

I'd really love to find a place where:

-- people denounced all bad things of public interest regardless of the politics of the people responsible for them;

-- either ignored all private things regardless of the politics of the people involved or, failing that, at least were consistent in publicizing and attacking private behavior.

I'm not aware of any that exist.


I find Sailor's defense (none / 0) (#39)
by jimakaPPJ on Sat Mar 03, 2007 at 01:51:19 PM EST

is that Churchill was not a national figure. Note that he didn't condemn what Chuchill said.

That may be lame, or not.


It's lame (none / 0) (#40)
by Deconstructionist on Sat Mar 03, 2007 at 01:55:39 PM EST

The only bearing one's prominence has on whether the content of one's unacceptable speech should be denounced is the obvious fact any given person is less likely to hear the less prominent than the more prominent.

Once you have heard something unacceptable you should denounce it.


: Umm, the rest of us ... (none / 0) (#45)
by Sailor on Sat Mar 03, 2007 at 02:32:36 PM EST

... were talking about coulter's hate speech. coulter is a TIME cover girl and a spokeswoman for conservatives and was invited as a speaker to their national convention.
It's not possible or necessary to condemn hate speech from every obscure person to condemn hate speech in general.
Once again, a rethuglican icon is not the same as an obscure prof who lost his job for his speech. If a guy down at the coffee shop says McVeigh should have targeted the NYT building, that's not news, when a nationally celebrated rethuglican guest lecturer says it ... and not only keeps her job but gets invited to more rethuglican events to preach hate, then that is what defines them.
But it's nice to confirm that both commenters share the same view.
coulter is an icon for the right. churchill is an unemployed professor who never spoke for the left.
BTW, the thread is about coulter, try to stay on topic.

Notice how (none / 0) (#59)
by glanton on Sat Mar 03, 2007 at 07:19:04 PM EST

With Durbin, Kerry etc. you have to interpretively paraphrase (Durbin never said "They're Nazis"), whereas with Coulter you can quote directly.

Anyway, I'm glad everyone on this thread, including GOP sympathizers, seems to at least agree that Coulter is despicable and that this comment was par the course for her. That's one what will hopefully be many good things to come from this. I said the same thing about Tim Hardaway.


The Closet (none / 0) (#30)
by squeaky on Sat Mar 03, 2007 at 11:29:16 AM EST

She is now completely out of control and in a self destructive spiral.

and one of the featured speakers at the annual Conservative Political Action Conference.

ahahahahaha. ppj made a funny, but he left out the punchline.

And as for your feigned naive question:

Can anyone tell me
why when someone makes some idoitic hurtful unecessary shouldn't have terrible statement using the gay tag, they are almost immediately called homophobic, and accused of being a closet gay trying to deny their sexuality amid great internal conflict?

First off stop trying to make believe that this is a one off remark by Coulter.
She regularly accuses others of being a closeted homosexual to the point where it is obsession, or at the very least a trademark.

Often when people hate some part of themselves bashing others that have similar traits is a very common defense mechanism.

Apart from that, to question Coulter's own sexuality, seems natural, given that she does it to others on a daily basis.

Squeaky - Again you miss the point (none / 0) (#35)
by jimakaPPJ on Sat Mar 03, 2007 at 01:29:52 PM EST

in your haste to attack.

Why give anyone, Coulter included, and excuse for what is unexcusable behavoir??

By bringing up the homophobic angle because she has made a uexcusable comment, you have made her a victim of herself and/or society.

Horsehockey. Just condemn the act. Leave the psychobabble out of it.


Thanks dad (none / 0) (#54)
by squeaky on Sat Mar 03, 2007 at 05:36:36 PM EST

For the advice. Seeing that this thread is about the vile pundit, I think it is fair game to speculate, albeit briefly, on her twisted sexuality. I do seem to remember your being charmed by Closet Queen Coulter in the past. Is Malkin now on top?


Oh (none / 0) (#55)
by squeaky on Sat Mar 03, 2007 at 05:39:03 PM EST

And since there is no content to her spew, what else is there to talk about other than her repressed homosexuality? Her sex change operation?


Squeaky, Thanks for making my point. (none / 0) (#60)
by jimakaPPJ on Sat Mar 03, 2007 at 10:37:39 PM EST

Speaking of the ends justifying the means, I see that you are at it again.

I think it is fair game to speculate, albeit briefly, on her twisted sexuality.

By attacking her as a closet Lesbian, something you can not even approach proving, you garner support for her.

And if you were correct, you have made her the victim of her own psychological problems.

So speaking as "dad," why not drop the attempt at smearing her, and just call it like it is.

A despicable uncalled for comment.


: Tranie (none / 0) (#63)
by squeaky on Sat Mar 03, 2007 at 10:48:20 PM EST

By attacking her as a closet Lesbian, something you can not even approach proving, you garner support for her.
Sorry but I never called her a closet lesbian. She is either a transvestite or a freak of nature.
Nice to see that you are back defending poor Ayn Coulter. That did not take long.

And if you were correct, you have made her the victim of her own psychological problems.
And how is that ppj?

I missed this. (none / 0) (#61)
by jimakaPPJ on Sat Mar 03, 2007 at 10:39:49 PM EST

First off stop trying to make believe that this is a one off remark by Coulter.

No where did I say that.


: Notice the singular tense (none / 0) (#62)
by squeaky on Sat Mar 03, 2007 at 10:43:28 PM EST

because she has made a uexcusable comment
Hardly an isolated incident as you imply.

For Molly's edification... (none / 0) (#23)
by jarober on Sat Mar 03, 2007 at 10:19:43 AM EST

Remind me again about the bloggers Edwards hired, and about their glorious use of the English language for hateful purposes.
How many prominent liberals - political, bloggers, or otherwise, denounced them or Edwards for that?

The silence was deafening. As to Sharpton, and the "it was a long time ago" defense - my wife is Jewish, and Sharpton's anti-semitism is not something I'm willing to put aside - he's never apologized for it, so I can only assume that he still stands by it.

Conservative bloggers are condemning Coulter now - as soon as the politicians locate their spines, maybe they'll follow. I still await vaguely similar activity from the left.

No Comaprison (none / 0) (#24)
by squeaky on Sat Mar 03, 2007 at 10:28:39 AM EST

About all you have accomplished here is to show your affection for Coulter. Obviously you are not alone. She represents mainstream Conservatism as it is now.

No wonder so many Republicans and Independents are now voting for Democrats.


no comparison (none / 0) (#26)
by Sailor on Sat Mar 03, 2007 at 10:43:09 AM EST

but nice try at shifting the discourse away from your heroine. Edwards bloggers' comments may have offended christofascists, but they never called for the deaths of Americans and millions of muslims.

Coulter does speak for conservatives, edwards's bloggers were speaking for themselves.

BTW, Your liberal press at work: New York Times coverage doesn't even mention Coulter's remarks:

The conference drew thousands of attendees, many of whom waited in a long line out the door for a late-afternoon appearance by Ann Coulter, the conservative author and commentator.

and coutler is a mainstream representative of conservatives.

Former Gov. Mitt Romney (R-MA), prior to Coulter's appearance: "I am happy to hear that after you hear from me, you will hear from Ann Coulter. That is a good thing. Oh yeah!"

: She (none / 0) (#34)
by squeaky on Sat Mar 03, 2007 at 12:38:17 PM EST

is endorsing him for prez.

Unlike you Walter, (none / 0) (#31)
by jimakaPPJ on Sat Mar 03, 2007 at 11:32:56 AM EST

I believe in the essential goodness of mankind, and understand that the vast majority of people on both sides disapprove of attacks that seek to tar an individual while insulting Gays.

BTW - If you have been around a while you know that I am a registered Independednt and a social liberal who believes in minority rights, including Gay Marriage (and have so commented), drug laws rationalization, tax reform and National Health Care.

If want to I encourage you dig through the archives and find them.

If you are too lazy to do so, I will do it for you. One for every $20.00 you contribute to Talk Left's upkeep and support.

My anti-Iraq-war position... (none / 0) (#44)
by Repack Rider on Sat Mar 03, 2007 at 02:26:58 PM EST

...is a product of my MILITARY SERVICE. The Iraq war is Vietnam all over again, run by people who never served and didn't learn a thing from tens of thousands of wasted lives.

I hate incompetence and corruption, and because Mr. Bush is the poster boy for both of these qualities and in a position to impose his corruption and incompetence on a lot of innocent people, he can't escape being the target of my wrath.

Why should I have anything but contempt for someone who embodies the opposite of every quality I respect?

Ann Coulter RESPONDS (none / 0) (#48)
by raphael on Sat Mar 03, 2007 at 03:17:50 PM EST

She said she misunderstood what she meant.

off topic comments (none / 0) (#57)
by Jeralyn on Sat Mar 03, 2007 at 07:13:08 PM EST

have been deleted. Take them to an open thread please.

Admiration? (none / 0) (#58)
by jarober on Sat Mar 03, 2007 at 07:18:35 PM EST

Sheesh Squeaky, I despise Coulter. When I hear her speak, my main thought is something like "please don't be on the same side of this issue as I am, thereby tainting it".

I would like to see broad shunning of Coulter. I await similar reactions from the left about Bill Maher (wishing Cheney dead), Mike Stark (stalking), Marcotte (hate speech), Sharpton (Anti-Semitism).

I suspect that I'll be waiting a long time. In the meantime, don't tell me I admire Coulter. At her best, she's a buffoon. At her worst, she's radioactive.

Wishing Cheney dead... (none / 0) (#64)
by Dadler on Sat Mar 03, 2007 at 11:16:50 PM EST

...a man who is heavily responsible for the deaths of thousands of innocent people (and that is not opinion), has absolutely nothing in common with Ann Coulter's slur. Unless you want to claim that Edwards has a track record of being in the closet and rendered incompetent as a leader because of it. To even suggest they're on the same page is to defend what she's saying, don't you understand the illogic of your request.

Stark??? He's not even a stalker. Be serious.

Marcotte??? Because she wrote "The Catholic church is not about to let something like compassion for girls get in the way of using the state as an instrument to force women to bear more tithing Catholics"? Or because she also questioned, in explicit language, what would have happened if the Virgin Mary had taken the emergency contraceptive called Plan B. You sound like the teachers and administrators at my evangelical Christian high school who were appalled when I suggested that, with artificial insemination, humans can create their own virgin pregnancies and births.

And Sharpton is about as big in the liberal world as he is in the conservative world. He is entirely a fringe "player". He is no star like Coulter is. Not even close.

Coulter is a bigtime mainstream Republican yapper, a conservative star, the female face of the FoxNews phenomenon. And she is a genuinely mentally ill human being. Lacks the capacity for empathy. A cold, cruel human being. Well, a being anyway.


: And this from last year's CPAC (none / 0) (#65)
by squeaky on Sat Mar 03, 2007 at 11:34:17 PM EST

Then came questions. A young woman asked Coulter to describe the most difficult ethical decision she ever made. "There was one time I had a shot at Bill Clinton," Coulter said.
digby

: Dadler writes (none / 0) (#66)
by jimakaPPJ on Sun Mar 04, 2007 at 12:54:57 PM EST

...a man who is heavily responsible for the deaths of thousands of innocent people (and that is not opinion), has absolutely nothing in common with Ann Coulter's slur
Of course it does. Both comments are despicable.
Tell me again about building consensus and bi-partisanship...

Sigh (none / 0) (#67)
by jarober on Sun Mar 04, 2007 at 12:55:28 PM EST

Marcotte has written far worse than you quoted (as has the other person he hired, whose name escapes me at the moment. Sharpton's career as a race hustler knows no bounds, and no one in the Democratic party will denounce anything he says or does - including the destruction of an innocent man in the Tawana Brawley case.

Stark is a possibly dangerous loon - and if a Republican activist started trailing Hillary Clinton they way he trails Republicans, the (correct) calls for having him stopped would be very loud.

Coulter is a bomb thrower, and I hope she gets completely shunned by the right, and by conservatives in general.

Poster Child (none / 0) (#68)
by squeaky on Sun Mar 04, 2007 at 01:08:34 PM EST

Marcotte has written far worse than you quoted (as has the other person he hired, whose name escapes me at the moment.

Do the 'far worse' quotes also escape you?

Not likely. Her remarks were wildly applauded this year as they were last year where she talked of ragheads, and shooting Clinton, etc.

Like it or not, jarober, she is the poster child of today's Republican Party.

Im glad the Scaifes and Murdochs (none / 0) (#69)
by jondee on Sun Mar 04, 2007 at 02:01:16 PM EST

like her so much and obviously insist that she be given as big a soapbox as possible; glad she warms the cockles of their withered, fascist, billionaire hearts. She gives the slow-to-awaken-but-not-completely-dumb public a glimpse into the right wing id like no one lese.