home

The She-Pundit Defends Her Joke

By Jeralyn, Section Media
Posted on Mon Mar 05, 2007 at 08:24:43 PM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

The She-Pundit with long blond hair was just on Hannity and Colmes. (Crooks and Liars has video.) She was pretty defensive, not surprisingly, but also very insistent that she was joking in calling John Edwards a "faggot", insisting she was talking about Gray's Anatomy co-star Isaiah Washington going to rehab for using the same word against a co-star.

She insisted she wasn't using the word in the "gay" sense, only in the "wuss, pansey" "schoolyard taunt" sense. She said everyone knows John Edwards, who is married with kids, isn't gay. She said this happens every six months that liberals attack her for something she said and every time it's supposed to be the end of her career and it never is.

She claimed every conservative news junkie knew about Isaiah Washington going to rehab for using the word. Really? They all watch Gray's anatomy?

Isaiah went to rehab for criticizing a gay member of the cast. He didn't use the word in the schoolyard sense. Her excuse doesn't make sense.

< Obama's Credit to Selma Marchers Off By Four Years | Understanding the Separation of Church and State >

  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    The She-Pundit Defends Her Joke | 23 comments (23 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

    No need to worry... (5.00 / 1) (#26)
    by Electa on Wed Mar 07, 2007 at 09:36:20 AM EST
    the Right is imploding like the Roman Empire.  Scooter's conviction adds another nail in their coffin of corruption.  Bush's approval ratings loom at 33% and Cheney, well, he has no ratings, they've fallen off the radar screen.  Scooter is the first White House official to be convicted of criminal activity in 136 years as reported on Wolf Blitzer yesterday.  They truely lead the pack as being the first most corrupt administration in the country's history.  You go George!!!!

    Right. (none / 0) (#1)
    by libdevil on Mon Mar 05, 2007 at 08:56:20 PM EST
    Of course I absolutely believe her when she says she wasn't calling him gay, or implying that there would be a problem if he were gay.  And really, what kind of defense is it to say that she was just using a schoolyard taunt?  That's somehow better, that one of the Republican party's most visible spokeswomen thinks that juevenile bullying is somehow appropriate in politics and the public sphere?

    At least she didn't try to claim she just called him a bundle of sticks.

    Her excuse doesn't make sense. (none / 0) (#2)
    by jerry on Mon Mar 05, 2007 at 08:58:18 PM EST
    Her excuse doesn't make sense.

    If it doesn't fit you must not acquit!

    Your attribution of coulter is offensive ... (none / 0) (#3)
    by Sailor on Mon Mar 05, 2007 at 09:07:42 PM EST
    ... 'she pundit'!?

    The situation with the right wing heroine is too serious to be dismissed with such terms.

    Don't stoop to make schoolyard insults, just quote her reply to Edwards' campaign manager:
    "It's always good to divert Bonior from his principal pastime which is fronting for Arab terrorists."

    Bonior is a 6 term elected member of congress and served in Vietnam.

    Of course I understand your confusion on these matters, you let ppj same the same about us commenters on a daily basis and think we are picking on him.

    Been calling her that (none / 0) (#4)
    by Jeralyn on Mon Mar 05, 2007 at 09:25:31 PM EST
    since I began this blog four years ago.  I'm not going to change now. The purpose of my not using her name is for me not to increase her google hits.

    There is nothing defamatory about the name.

    Parent

    Please forgive my ignorance ... (none / 0) (#7)
    by Sailor on Mon Mar 05, 2007 at 09:45:29 PM EST
    ... I didn't understand that the 'she-pundit with auburn hair' meant no offense with that appellation.

    My point was that she who must not be named also said that a 6 term member of congress and vietnam vet was "fronting for Arab terrorists."

    One would think that that statement was more offensive.

    Parent

    The She-Pundit does not deserve our attention (none / 0) (#5)
    by MiddleOfTheRoad on Mon Mar 05, 2007 at 09:30:00 PM EST
    She thrives on the attention that we and the media are providing her.

    Her foot in mouth may have hit her when it hurts (none / 0) (#8)
    by Nowonmai on Mon Mar 05, 2007 at 10:44:43 PM EST
    Three major corporations have 'asked' her to remove their ads from her spew-site errr website.

    She is also losing conservative adherents.

    With luck, her particular brand of vile will fall to the wayside.

    no, it won't (none / 0) (#10)
    by cpinva on Tue Mar 06, 2007 at 07:10:16 AM EST
    With luck, her particular brand of vile will fall to the wayside.

    not as long as she has an audience. she will continue to have one, as long as there are people (mostly white males) who feel they've been gamed by affirmative action, gender equity, gay rights, etc. she shares this demographic with limbaugh, hannity, et al.

    it's not their fault they aren't all ceo's of fortune 500 companies, it's the clinton's, the feminazis, the affirmative action babies, etc. that they have zero qualifications for these positions will never enter their minds.

    of course it was a joke, it always is, after they get called on it. they are entertainers, after all.

    Al, your attack is unwarranted. (none / 0) (#11)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue Mar 06, 2007 at 09:12:35 AM EST
    And since I am, to the best of my knowledge, the only person who identifies themselves on this blog as a social liberal, I firmly believe it is directed at me.

    I have, on this blog, as you must know, called her comment, among other negative words, "despicable."

    And since only yesterday I gave you quotes and links. and can give you more, of my support for gay rights, including marriage, you can not claim to have not known that.

    What you have done is made a smear because I support the war and you do not. A smear that has no facts regarding this issue, but one designed to try and belittle me and my position on the war.

    Congratulations. Enjoy the gutter. Perhaps you and Coulter can do lunch since you both have the same menu.

    What smear? (5.00 / 1) (#15)
    by Al on Tue Mar 06, 2007 at 11:23:04 AM EST
    The point is, the obscenity of Coulter's insult is infinitesimal compared to the obscenity of that war you support, and the regime that comes with it. Coulter is by now a complete embarrassment to conservatives; even you, whose largesse with insults is well known, realize this. So you run away from her as fast as you can, hoping that everyone will think, what an open-minded fellow that PPJ is, supporting gays. But you can't run away from the war  that you support, and that's infinitely more obscene.

    And Jim, have you really bookmarked every single comment you've made on TL? That's just creepy.

    Parent

    Al, quit smearing (none / 0) (#18)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue Mar 06, 2007 at 06:17:10 PM EST
    I see that your understanding of ethics is very similar to Edger and Squeaky, using their own comments.

    Evidently you believe that because I support the war it is okay for you to make false charges.

    In case you do not understand, consider this.

    1. It is possible for people to support the war, and, at the same time, be for Gay Rights, etc.

    Your failure to understand this reflects poorly on your capacity for critical thinking.

    But I believe that you do understand this. I think your attack is based because you consider me a politcal opponent over the war, and as such, you believe you have the right to say whatever you please.

    That is commonly known as "the ends justifies the means."

    2. I have made my position on Gay Rights known for years, here, on this blog. Yesterday I gave you a quote, and a link, and your reponse was that you didn't want to know about that, but what I thought  of her comment. My reply was specific, and impossible to misunderstand.

     

    Let ne see... (none / 0) (#18)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Mar 05, 2007 at 06:53:47 AM EST

    I said her comment was despicable.

    Want me to whip her dog, too??

    Re-read comments #3 and 7.... Or read them, which seems more likely.

    So even after proof of my position, including a link to a thread that was 14 months old that you were involved with, you make an untrue charge.

    Let me repeat. You know the charge is not true. You knew it was not true when you made it, yet you made it anyway.

    That is a smear. Pure, flat and simple.

    Parent

    Guilty Concience? (5.00 / 1) (#16)
    by squeaky on Tue Mar 06, 2007 at 11:39:35 AM EST
    In bold no less.

    Parent
    read it again (none / 0) (#13)
    by Sailor on Tue Mar 06, 2007 at 10:55:23 AM EST
    Al nailed your position perfectly; you support an obscene war and find yourself horrified at the word 'fa**ot.'

    Parent
    He's trolling for any response again, that's all (none / 0) (#14)
    by Edger on Tue Mar 06, 2007 at 11:13:07 AM EST


    Parent
    Sailor (none / 0) (#19)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue Mar 06, 2007 at 06:25:39 PM EST
    My position on the war is well known.

    My position on Gay Rights is well known.

    and find yourself horrified at the word 'fa*ot.

    That is a complete misstatement. I find her comment despicable because it attacks a group of people who, because of their sexual orientation, have been ill treated for years.

    And the attack is doubly bad because being called a 'fa*ot is supposed to be a total slur against someone who is straight.

    What I find amazing about the Left is that they cannot find common ground with anyone who is not 100% pure over all of their issues. No wonder the Demos use you for elections and then discard you later.

    Have a nice day.

    Parent

    What I fiond amazing ... (none / 0) (#23)
    by Sailor on Tue Mar 06, 2007 at 10:09:40 PM EST
    ... is that you haven't apologised to Al yet for misreading his comment shouting at him.

    Have you no manners!?

    Parent

    There is a world of difference (none / 0) (#17)
    by Edger on Tue Mar 06, 2007 at 12:05:43 PM EST
    between misrepresentative self labelling, and 'identifying' by positions taken.

    Parent
    You have Google. (none / 0) (#21)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue Mar 06, 2007 at 06:32:05 PM EST
    You have the archives here.

    Prove me wrong, or be identified yourself as someone who won't criticize the radical moslems for:

    Killing gays and lesbians.

    Killing women for being raped.

    Killing women for defending themselves.

    Denying women the right to be educated.

    Your turn, edger. Show us where your heart is.

    And tell me. Why? Defense of minorities and education is such an intergal part of anyone claiming to be a Liberal, how can you claim to be one??

    Parent

    Uhh jim, stop dragging thread Off Topic with (none / 0) (#20)
    by Nowonmai on Tue Mar 06, 2007 at 06:28:29 PM EST
    And since I am, to the best of my knowledge, the only person who identifies themselves on this blog as a social liberal, I firmly believe it is directed at me.

    You being a 'social liberal' is definitely news to me.

    As to it being an unwarranted attack directed at you... sorry dude, you aren't that significant in grand scheme of things, and your posts aren't waited for with baited breath, and each word saved/memorised, or haven't you realised this yet? We have better things to do than to draft posts that might rub your fur backwards, or hurt your feelings.

    SheWhoWillNotBeNamed made an unwarranted verbal attack (not)disguised as humor. Then she tried to make light of it, and failed miserably. THAT is the topic, so try to stay with us, ok?

    Parent

    Try using Google advanced search (none / 0) (#22)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue Mar 06, 2007 at 07:00:19 PM EST
    and "social liberal" for this blog and you will no longer be uninformed.

    And as one I do not take smears lightly.

    As for Coulter, read the two other threads on the subject and you also will no longer be uninformed.

    Or do you think that being a supporter of the war and and being a social liberal is mutally exclusive?

    Parent

    Kinda reminds you of Bill Maher, doesn't it? (none / 0) (#24)
    by jimakaPPJ on Wed Mar 07, 2007 at 09:15:24 AM EST


    She is nothing (none / 0) (#25)
    by glanton on Wed Mar 07, 2007 at 09:32:18 AM EST
    like Maher.  

    That's pathetic, Jim.  I mean have you even ever watched an episode of Real Time before?  No?  Didn't friggin think so.

    Parent

    The She-Pundit Defends Her Joke | 23 comments (23 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment