An Open Letter To Ann Coulter

Conservatism treats humans as they are, as moral creatures possessing rational minds and capable of discerning right from wrong. There comes a time when we must speak out in the defense of the conservative movement, and make a stand for political civility. This is one of those times.
Ann Coulter used to serve the movement well. She was telegenic, intelligent, and witty. She was also fearless: saying provocative things to inspire deeper thought and cutting through the haze of competing information has its uses. But Coulter’s fearlessness has become an addiction to shock value. She draws attention to herself, rather than placing the spotlight on conservative ideas.
At the Conservative Political Action Conference in 2006, Coulter referred to Iranians as “ragheads.” She is one of the most prominent women in the conservative movement; for her to employ such reckless language reinforces the stereotype that conservatives are racists.
At CPAC 2007 Coulter decided to turn up the volume by referring to John Edwards, a former U.S. Senator and current Presidential candidate, as a “faggot.” Such offensive language–and the cavalier attitude that lies behind it–is intolerable to us. It may be tolerated on liberal websites but not at the nation’s premier conservative gathering.
The legendary conservative thinker Richard Weaver wrote a book entitled Ideas Have Consequences. Rush Limbaugh has said again and again that “words mean things.” Both phrases apply to Coulter’s awful remarks.
Coulter’s vicious word choice tells the world she care little about the feelings of a large group that often feels marginalized and despised. Her word choice forces conservatives to waste time defending themselves against charges of homophobia rather than advancing conservative ideas.
Within a day of Coulter’s remark John Edwards sent out a fundraising email that used Coulter’s words to raise money for his faltering campaign. She is helping those she claims to oppose. How does that advance any of the causes we hold dear?
Denouncing Coulter is not enough. After her “raghead” remark in 2006 she took some heat. Yet she did not grow and learn. We should have been more forceful. This year she used a gay slur. What is next? If Senator Barack Obama is the de facto Democratic Presidential nominee next year will Coulter feel free to use a racial slur? How does that help conservatism?
One of the points of CPAC is the opportunity it gives college students to meet other young conservatives and learn from our leaders. Unlike on their campuses—where they often feel alone—at CPAC they know they are part of a vibrant political movement. What example is set when one highlight of the conference is finding out what shocking phrase will emerge from Ann Coulter’s mouth? How can we teach young conservatives to fight for their principles with civility and respect when Ann Coulter is allowed to address the conference? Coulter’s invective is a sign of weak thinking and unprincipled politicking.
CPAC sponsors, the Age of Ann has passed. We, the undersigned, request that CPAC speaking invitations no longer be extended to Ann Coulter. Her words and attitude simply do too much damage.
Sean Hackbarth
The American Mind
Rob Port
Say Anything
James Joyner
Outside The Beltway
More signatories at this post.
If you want to add your name to the open letter, just post it to your own blog and add your name to the bottom.

Tags: ,


«
»
  • http://Array robert108

    I’ll ask you again, since you didn’t answer it before:
    If Ann promised to go to rehab, would you forgive her?

  • http://SayAnythingBlog.com The_Whistler_ofnd

    I am sure that we can all agree that John Edwards may be likened to a bundle of sticks.

  • http://www.freerepublicans.com/ FreeRepublicans.com

    Also, and I don’t know if anyone pointed this out, but only the government can practice censorship. Anything else is the free market determining which ideas and people are valid.

  • Rally

    I just wish there was this much outrage in the media when someone on the left makes a controversial comment. Keith Olbermann says worse things every night, but he is hailed by the left. All semantics aside, he basically called Coulter a transvestite on his program last night. He does this on a nightly cable news show, Coulter made her statements in front of a CPAC convention, hardly reaching the same audience.

  • Dave

    You’re all a bunch of faggots. Every single commenter at this blog.

    If you’re offended by what I just wrote, it’s because you’re a liberal and are caving into their demonic PC ideology.

  • Mark D

    Good thing she didn’t make a “Jew” joke. She would be in the same boat as Mel

  • robert108

    Right R108, that sounds like God is everthing and therefore American.

    “Everything” includes Americans.

  • Neiman

    Oh, by the way my comments were directed at HG not his friend, so I guess his Christ hating friend here is now answering for him in all things? Maybe they are both the same guy, they certainly sing the same songs!

  • Ronald Walter

    Ann Coulter wanted to have a baby with Mary Cheney, but Dick Cheney said no.

    So much for ‘Republicans.’

    Their stock is being sold short. Every single share is on the auction block.

    In the end, they’ll be ashes. Absolutely nothing left of them because of people like Ann Coulter and Dick ‘I shot a lawyer’ Cheney.

  • http://proof-proofpositive.blogspot.com/ proof_positive

    You’re all a bunch of faggots. Every single commenter at this blog.

    Since Dave is a commenter on this blog, and the only one, presumably, with whom he has intimate knowledge… Welcome out of the closet, Dave!

  • http://www.willisms.com/ Zsa Zsa

    A bigot is one who is obstinately intolerant or devoted to his own church or party, belief or opinion. Websters dictionary

  • http://SayAnythingBlog.com The_Whistler_ofnd

    Ann is smart enough to realize that saying that will maybe get her headlines it hurts the conservative movement.

  • Ronald Walter

    It should be painfully obvious that ‘Republicans’ are bad for the conservative movement, whatever that is.

    Fact is, stupid ‘Republicans’ like Ann Coulter, along with all of the stupid ‘Republicans’ are bad for America.

    The sooner they are gone, the better.

    Purdy obvious this attention on Ann Coulter is a ploy to divert attention from the doofus in the White House.

    Nobody could be any dumber than he is.

    Here come the ad hominems.

  • http://SayAnythingBlog.com The_Whistler_ofnd

    CPAC should be about advancing the conservative cause, not about getting a certain columnist headlines.

  • Pilgrim

    I could kick a rope’s ass at pool

    ha!!! Good comeback, Sparkie. Now, on to Ann. Hey Ann…relax, take a pill, have a drink. In fact, take a pill and have a drink. If you’re going to be vicious do it with class and not like a low rent bar fly.

    I’d work on that vocabulary if I were you, Ann. Oh, and….eat something. Please.

  • robert108

    What’s wrong with virtual fences? They aren’t real fences.

  • Paulie B

    Wow… I missed the whole conversation here. There’s a lot to comment on, but I’d like to reiterate some comments that made a lot of sense to me.

    robert108:

    You see, the lefties are caught up in a lockstep ideology, and one thing conservatism has to offer people is freedom from that. We don’t buy into PC, and we generally don’t govern by pressure group, so we don’t have to be paranoid about insulting some bunch of victims whenever we express our ideas. That is one of the things I like about being a conservative. I apologize for getting facts wrong, but never for hurt feelings. I don’t think Ann used any sort of “gay slur”, btw. In case you don’t agree, what is the bad content of the word “faggot”? It’s just a word. If it only implies that someone is gay or maybe a bit unmanly, what is wrong with that?

    Concur.

    2H9:

    Ann Coulter can do no harm to the “conservative movement”, because its members refuse to stand up and fight the left. Go along to get along. THAT is what is hurting the “conservative movement”. Since 1994 we have been putting these lying pieces of crap in office, and they have done every single thing we did NOT want done.

    That is what is killing the “conservative movement”, lying assed scumbaglawyerfuckpoliticians doing the exact opposite of what American voters put them in office to do. Go along to get along, compromise, bipartisanship. The Left never compromises, only the center and right are required to compromise.

    Exactly why is that?

    Concur.

    Proof:

    I have a question: Ann Coulter is in trouble for calliing someone a derogatory term for a homosexual.

    We are taught in the public schools that homosexuality is not bad, but merely an alternate lifestyle.

    So why is it, that when Ann Coulter refers to someone who is not bad, but in a bad way, she gets in trouble, but someone who refers to George Bush as a Nazi, in a bad way, is not?

    Nazis killed and imprisoned Jews and homosexuals and the physically and mentally challenged. Pardon the understatement, but they were really bad!

    Does anyone else see the irony here?

    Or, another common tactic of the left is to refer to conservatives as somehow less than human. When Ann referred to Edwards as a homosexual, she at least credited him with humanity. What of those who liken conservatives to cavemen? Or our President to a chimp? Which is worse, to have your sexuality impugned or your humanity?

    Anyone else have the sense that this is blown (apologies to Ms. Lewinsky) all out of proportion?

    Concur.

  • http://www.willisms.com/ Zsa Zsa

    Nancy Pelosi is not bad looking… Until she opens her mouth. If you check out CNN and FOX News??? FOX News has by far the best looking women if you ask me. AND they can actually speak without irritating the ears!

  • MikeAdamson

    2H9…do you seriously think H Clinton wants socialism or is this another part of your schtick?

  • Andrew

    That stereotype has been around a lot longer than Ann has. Nothing will change leftie minds, especially trying to “make nice” with them.

    So instead of doing everything we can to break that stereotype, we should just confirm it?

    It wasn’t even a “homosexual slur”; instead, it is commonly used to refer to a man who is somewhat less than manly, an accurate description of Edwards, btw.

    So it would be alright to call someone who’s cheap, a dirty Jew? And what does Edwards’ masculinity have to do with politics anyway? We should be focusing on what really matters.

    Honestly I don’t care that Ann said what she said, afterall, it’s what everyone has come to expect from her. However, I don’t think it helps our cause, and the venue she chose to say it at was very innappropriate.

  • robert108

    Andrew/Free: I disagree with both of you, but even if I had the power to do so, I would not in any way try to deprive you of a venue to speak because of what you say. That would be de facto censorship.

  • http://sayanythingblog.com/readers/author/Anna/ Anna

    BTW 2Hotel9, I spent years in Unreal Tournament and don’t need anymore wasted life attributed to my being. ;-)

  • http://www.freerepublicans.com/ FreeRepublicans.com

    I’m with Rob on this one.

    It’s not censorship.

    There is a right to speak – there is no right to be heard.

    She can go on a public street somewhere or on FoxNews and spew venom.

    She’s bad for the Movement Conservative and she’s bad for the party.

  • HG

    Joel,

    Thanks.

  • 2Hotel9

    I started last Christmas, before that all I had played were games on disc. Will probably drop in tonight for a couple or 3 hours.

  • HG

    I think what irritates both the lefties and the timid conservatives about Ann is the truth of what she says

    If by timid conservatives you mean those who disagree with Ann’s lack of decorum, then maybe you ought to listen a little closer to what they actually have been saying. It is the attitude and tone that Ann takes that is irritating, not so much the content. As for me, I agree with her most of the time, even when she is saying it in an offensive manner. Should see attempt to speak the truth a little less rashly, she would be much more influential and persuasive. As it is, she alone is single handedly shrinking the size of her audience.

  • http://sayanythingblog.com/readers/entry/white_folks_greed_runs_a_world_in_ Joel

    Embattled Oral Roberts University president Richard Roberts is granted temporary leave of absence amid accusations of lavish spending at donors’ expense and illegal involvement in a local political campaign. [and his wife having an affair with under grads]here
    and….
    An examination of states’ vaccination records and data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention found that many states are seeing increases in the rate of religious exemptions claimed for kindergartners.
    here

  • HG

    It is not timidity that the enemy might be offended, the truth is often offensive. It is the offensive attitude that unnecessarily offends not only the liberals but conservatives alike.

    I really get a kick out of your efforts to define people as timid for disliking Ann’s style while agreeing with most if not all of her content. It really doesn’t matter what you think about it though R108, you are not the one offended or irritated by Ann’s attitude and therefore to mischaracterize those who are, as timid, does nothing but demonstrate you inability to discern the difference between unassertive and civil.

  • http://sayanythingblog.com/readers/entry/white_folks_greed_runs_a_world_in_ Joel

    I love being preached to be an atheist and blasphemer, great stuff!
    Neiman

    Woe unto you, you blind guide…

    You fool.

    Woe unto you Neiman, for you are like a whited supulchre…full of dead men’s bones, and of all uncleanness [lies,hate & intolerance]

    Woe unto you, You serpent….

    You Viper…

    Woe unto you, hypocrite!

    It is “YOU” who blasphemes!!

  • HG

    Since monotheism and pantheism aren’t the same thing

    no kidding? /sarcasm

    I just said that.

  • http://www.willisms.com/ Zsa Zsa

    Uh oh! What is in it?

  • MikeAdamson

    I ate it with pineapple as a kid…can’t stand it now though.

  • http://www.willisms.com/ Zsa Zsa

    Janet Reno is a good example of how hot the Dem women are.. Chelsey Clinton is another real beauty!

  • HG

    Neiman, re:#2. Americans are so because of their love, and loyalty to, liberty which flows from the unalienable rights of every human being. I know many Christians who are liberals and are therefore not the best Americans. I know other individuals who are not Christian, yet share the same love and loyalty to liberty and therefore are better Americans than the Christians I mentioned. I could say the same thing about a some Americans morality… actually I did on another post.

  • HG

    Neiman, your perception of my position is inaccurate and has lead you to faulty conclusions. There is a lot to address here, but if you’re willing to take the time, I’d be glad to address them one at a time.

    Like others commenting here, including the post after your last two, you appear to me to want a complete, irrevocable divorce based on irreconcilable differences between the state and the Church, something not thought particularly good for this country by most of our Founding Fathers.

    I’m not sure what irreconcilable difference you are referring to. Please explain.

    You appear to always want to categorically reject your fellow believers and prefer to join yourself with those people that are openly hostile to people of faith in their wanting a wholly secular society,

    This is a wrong conclusion. As I said earlier “I am willing to join with fellow citizens [Chritian or not] to promote a healthy society which respects the liberty and rights of our citizens.” A christian society is not the objective. A free society where people of faith are free to worship and practice, is.

    with Christians being denied access to the public square, Christians being denied the right to influence our laws and Christians being denied the right to try and elect Christians as their political and governmental leaders.

    This is jumping to a wrong conclusion. Christians have the right to speak publicly and express their opinions in a free society. Influencing laws will require the ability to communicate the wisdom of those ideas, not just the faith behind them. Christians have the same right and privelege to run for office as anyone else. I don’t think my position leads to the dilemma you stated.

    Neiman, I only addressed the first paragraph because I’m sure you already have questions about these comments. Again, if you willing to discuss them, let’s take them one at a time.

  • HG

    Neiman, I appreciate your concern and I mean that. I have a feeling if we ever had a sit down conversation you would come away with an understanding of where I’m coming from and you’d probably find yourself much more in agreement than you may currently think.

    Regarding Van Impe and Lindsey. I am glad they tell others about what Christ has done for all. I do not agree with their approach to end time events and the emphasis placed on them in particular.

    I believe the purpose of government is not to fulfill any prophetic time table, but to secure the rights of people. Gov’t should operate solely upon this premise. This requires a very pragmatic, not prophetic approach to governance. Gov’t should never concern itself with the prophetic.

    I am never willing to join with the enemies of the church against any Christians right to believe or act on those beliefs in accordance with the law of the land. I am willing to join with fellow citizens to promote a healthy society which respects the liberty and rights of our citizens.

    I am uneasy with the “redeeming the culture” doctrine of New Evangelicals which attempts to christianize all thing secular and create a phony christian culture. I am uneasy with end times prophetic events which cause Christians to look for signs instead of the Savior. I am uneasy with Christians who order their lives around future prophetic events for which no time table is given and would elect a leader based upon a persons ability to handle some perceived prophetic crisis in accordance with their beliefs. None of these are good for America or for Christians.

  • robert108

    God is not an American.

    Do you know what “Omnipresent” means?

  • HG

    Right R108, that sounds like God is everthing and therefore American. AT least that is how it came accross even if you meant something else.

    In other words the monotheistic understanding of Omnipresence means God is everywhere present. That in no way implies God is an American in any sense.

  • HG

    If a person is a genuine, sinere Christian why wouldn’t they believe that America and the world would be better off if everyone were Christians?

    Like I said, to be a great American and subsequently making America better off does not hinge on everyone being a Christian. America was the vision of many, some of which were not Christian. I would love to see everyone become a Christian, but that doesn’t make them American. America is not heaven nor was it intended to be. God is not an American.

    Lastly, would you suggest that Jews accepting Salvation through Christ and thus becoming part of His Body would NOT make them perfect in Him?

    No. I am suggesting this.

  • robert108

    R108, it doesn’t mean God is an American.

    Actually, it does. God is Everything. What you might have meant to say(but didn’t) is that God isn’t exclusively an American. That’s obviously false, but then, no one said that, not even you.
    Now, in case you get your back up again, even if you don’t recognize the reality of God, the concept of God includes Omnipresence, whether you believe or not. It’s part of the concept of monotheism.

  • http://sayanythingblog.com/readers/entry/white_folks_greed_runs_a_world_in_ Joel

    The resemblance is uncanny. an·thro·po·mor·phise

  • Neiman

    HG:
    1. I do not follow the ministries of the people you mentioned, although I am acutely aware of them and what they teach; but I am a bit concerned that you so often seem so completely willing to join with enemies of the Church in condemning these men and women. Jesus made it clear that if these kind of people are not against Him, in other words they do present the Truth about HIM, then they are for Him and the Christian community are to leave them alone, He will deal with them at the proper time. How do you know whether or not, despite their many faults, they might be instruments of the Spirit to bring some to the faith and eternal life? If you do not know, I would respectfully suggest you deal more kindly with people that proably share Christ with more people in their daily lives than either of us.

    2. It is of concern that you seem so willing to completely want to divorce the Christian faith of many of our political leaders from their daily duties to advance a wholly secular society. This system of government, according to our Founding Fathers was designed for people or morals and religious faith and was not of value for any other kind.

  • HG

    Jeez R108, your cited, but single definition doesn’t even match your own, “Everything is God”.

    But the definition I cited and is broadly accepted in both philosophical and theological circles is implied in the following: a “doctrine that equates God with the forces and laws of the universe”.

  • HG

    Pantheism: “the belief that God is everything and that everything is God, thus confounding God with nature, matter with Spirit, and the Creator with things He has created.” (Chafer, Systematic Theology Vol.1)

    Sorry R108, I didn’t manufacture anything.

  • HG

    Neiman you are off course, Jews believe in God and Ann said America would be better off if they were not Jewish but Christian.

    R108,

    Omnipresent doesn’t mean “God is everything” but God is everywhere, to Christians at least. Your definition sounds like pantheism not monotheism.

  • http://sayanythingblog.com/readers/entry/white_folks_greed_runs_a_world_in_ Joel

    I am sure he sees Jesus as a self-hating liberal.
    Screamin’-Neiman

    You are a hateful and crazed religious fanatic.
    A Pharisee….yea..that’s it..a pharisee.

    JESUS WARNS AGAINST SELF-RIGHTEOUSNESS

    You should remember the words of Jesus and Paul –
    Lk 17:10—–Ep 2:8-10; Tim 3:3-5

    JESUS WARNS AGAINST ARROGANCE…

    You should remember the words of Jesus and James –
    Lk 14:11— Ja 2:1-9

    JESUS TEACHES THE VALUE OF HUMILITY.

    Lk 14:7-11–Lk 1:46-55

    IN short, he warned us about people like you!!

    Your ignorance of the Bible [and Jesus' teaching] is astounding!!

  • robert108

    Sounds to me like God is everything and everything is God.

    Actually, you are confusing cause and effect. God is the Cause, everything else is the effect. Pantheism doesn’t recognize cause and effect. That’s the difference. Sorry I had to tell you that.

  • robert108

    The use of the term “perfected” as it relates to Jews, in political discourse, on national television, implies that there is something lacking in them that makes for an imperfect American citizen.

    Actually, it doesn’t “imply” anything; Ann was clear that she meant something very specific by it: her belief is that Jews become “perfected” when they accept Christ as the Messiah. Nothing she said had anything at all to do with American citizens in general, despite what you want to think.

    The term “perfected” also brings many Christian doctrinal nuances to a public political discussion. This is sure to be misunderstood and taken the wrong way by those who are not Christian and likely even by Christians given the doctrinal nuances.

    There you go again, assuming what others might think, supposedly on Ann’s behalf. She isn’t afraid of being misunderstood, so why should you be so “concerned” for her?

    It was a very poor choice of words IMO.

    You have made this quite clear.

    For another view of Ann’s comments by an American Jew, go here:

    http://sayanythingblog.com/readers/entry/on_coulter_christians_and_jews

  • http://sayanythingblog.com/readers/entry/white_folks_greed_runs_a_world_in_ Joel

    The continued intrusions of eschatology into modern politics suggest that the dangers of religious extremism can scarcely be overstated.

    Millions of Muslims [&Christians] now organize their lives around prophetic traditions that will only find fulfillment once “rivers of blood” begin flowing from Jerusalem.

    It’s not at all difficult to imagine how prophecies of internecine war, once taken seriously, could become self-fulfilling.

  • HG

    Ya Joel, you have a point. Eschatology has no place in politics. Christian fundamentalist eshcatological doctrines are of no threat, they have no political application being that they cannot come to pass without the literal presence of God Himself on earth reigning as Supreme.

    However, I hear a mixture of the two coming from Van Impe, Hal Lindsey, and other New Evangelicals on TBN. The only thing keeping it at bay is the lack of zeal or extremism.

  • Neiman

    Millions of Muslims [&Christians] now organize their lives around prophetic traditions that will only find fulfillment once “rivers of blood” begin flowing from Jerusalem.

    While there are exceptions to most things in this life, Christians as a general rule and that almost totally, do not organize their daily lives around End Times prophecy. Christians use/observe the signs of the times that they might be aware of the season wherein they can look for the soon return of Christ, which is a prophesied End Times event; but they know not the day or hour nor are they instructed to do anything whatsover to bring it about, and that includes the false doctrine of Dominion Theology.

    Christians are to be aware of the Signs of the Times which herald the season wherein the 7 years of Tribulation will occur that will precede Christ’s return; but that too is solely that they can know God is true through these events occuring exactly as He told us (prophesied) they would, it is a confirmation of His existence and power, it is not a blue print for action.

    We hope to have leaders that are aware of End Times prophecy that they might be wise in their decisions on behalf of our fellow citizens; but that in no way implies Christians want or expect their leaders to take any actions to avert, lessen or delay these events, as God, Whom sees everything in time and space as a single story has told us what will happen, meaning humanity will not change what will happen during that time.

    Lastly, it is important for Christians to seek to evangelize their loved ones and as many people as possible before these times come upon the earth, out of love for their eternal souls; while otherwise occupying until He comes (going to work, taking care of our families, paying bills, etcetera) and keeping our spiritual lives in order that we are prepared for His coming.

  • http://www.willisms.com/ Zsa Zsa

    HA! The Tennessee Valley Authority? Has it had alot of work done? That is too funny!

  • http://sayanythingblog.com/readers/author/Anna/ Anna

    HaHa 2H9,

    kill and loot to your heart’s content.

    Only if a certain someone is there for me to brutally torture
    ;-P

  • http://sayanythingblog.com/readers/entry/white_folks_greed_runs_a_world_in_ Joel

    Neiman writes:

    HG, I am a bit concerned that you so often seem so completely willing to join with enemies of the Church in condemning these men and women.

    It is of concern[ to me] that you seem so willing to completely want to divorce the Christian faith of many of our political leaders from their daily duties to advance a wholly secular society

    HG responds to this ridiculous [us Americans vs. them Americans] accusation with patience, decency and kindness. [which is something I would do well to emulate]

    I am ‘won over” by the reasonableness of what HG writes and [IMO]those words seem to more accurately reflect the teachings of Jesus.

    People that don’t practice any particular religion need to work with the large number of religious folks who are “political” secularists out there who do not want to impose their faith on others and are willing to keep faith out of public affairs.

    Even Jesus is quoted as saying “render onto Ceasar what is Ceasar’s and unto God what is God’s”

    I believe the purpose of government is not to fulfill any prophetic time table…

    This requires a very pragmatic, not prophetic approach to governance. Gov’t should never concern itself with the prophetic.

    [But] I am willing to join with fellow citizens to promote a healthy society which respects the liberty and rights of our citizens.

    I am uneasy with the “redeeming the culture” doctrine of New Evangelicals which attempts to christianize all thing secular and create a phony christian culture.

    I am uneasy with end times prophetic events which cause Christians to look for signs instead of the Savior.

    I am uneasy with Christians who order their lives around future prophetic events for which no time table is given and would elect a leader based upon a persons ability to handle some perceived prophetic crisis in accordance with their beliefs.

    None of these are good for America or for Christians.

    Well said!!!!!!!!

  • robert108

    Sorry R108, I didn’t manufacture anything.

    No, you shifted that responsibility to someone else, with your appeal to authority.

  • robert108

    AT least that is how it came accross To you. even if you meant something else. This is exactly in line with your justification of judging Ann on what you think she said, rather than what she actually said. Good going. /sarcasm

    Since monotheism and pantheism aren’t the same thing, you are obviously mistaken in your attempt to manufacture your own conclusion about what Omnipresence means. God is an American, but not only an American, as I have already explained.
    Hint: Find something in His Creation that is not derived from God.

  • robert108

    Omnipresent doesn’t mean “God is everything” but God is everywhere, to Christians at least. Your definition sounds like pantheism not monotheism.

    Pantheism is “Everything is God”. Big difference.

  • HG

    Hence, Omnipresence does not mean God is everything and therefore American in a monotheistic sense of the the word.

  • robert108

    Right on the mark, Neiman!

  • http://sayanythingblog.com/readers/entry/white_folks_greed_runs_a_world_in_ Joel

    She’s a die-harg Christian HG. Just not “your” kind of Christian eh?

    According to “you,” she’s uncivil. Please quote the chapter and verse [& your source] of what’s to be considered civil and what’s not.

    Your smug, condescending, Sunday-school-teacher bullshit never ceases to amaze me.

  • MikeAdamson

    God is a Marxist…not exclusively of course.

  • robert108

    Not only mine, and apparently the opinion of many and likely most.

    That makes it right?

    So when you do it, it is honest, but when others do so it is dishonest and timid? Wow R108, talk about your double-standards.

    I don’t pretend to criticize anyone for their style, but I do for content. No double standard at all.
    BTW, since you don’t seem to care if you offend either me or Ann, aren’t you the one with the double standard?

    Hey, like I said, Ann can continue to shrink her audience and subsequently her power to influence and persuade all she wants to by speaking as she does.

    She just published her fifth best-seller. Good luck trying to sell your inaccurate opinions.

    No, but I think the choice of the word “perfecting” was not wise at all.

    So, this is all about one word, then? You read an entire “attitude” from that one word? Now you’re starting to sound silly.

  • 2Hotel9

    Come on, Anna! I’ll walk you through the first few hours, get you squared away with good weapons and a balanced skill set. From there you are free to roam and kill and loot to your heart’s content.

  • robert108

    It is the attitude and tone that Ann takes that
    is irritating, not so much the content…

    That’s exactly what I mean by “timid”; those who are afraid the enemy might be offended.

  • HG

    R108, it doesn’t mean God is an American.
    And, yes I know what it means to Christians.

  • HG

    Actually, it doesn’t “imply” anything;

    Really? Saying that America would be a better place if everyone was Christian wasn’t the context? Whether or not Ann intended to imply “perfection” of the jews would make a better America we can disagree on. But, no doubt many inferred that from the context and use of “perfection”.

    assuming what others might think, supposedly on Ann’s behalf.

    I don’t have to assume, there are three posts on SAB proving it.

  • http://sayanythingblog.com/readers/entry/white_folks_greed_runs_a_world_in_ Joel

    HG-My apologies-I badly misunderstood your position at first. I agree with you on this one.

  • HG

    From Merriam-Webster unabridged:

    1. A doctrine that the universe concieved of as a whole is God.

    The rest of the definition that follows this, is exactly as you quoted. Sounds to me like God is everything and everything is God.

    No duel, just saying the same thing in their own words.

  • robert108

    It is the offensive attitude that unnecessarily offends not only the liberals but conservatives alike.

    It is only your opinion that her attitude is “unnecessarily offensive”, isn’t it? Why are you so afraid of how she presents her ideas? I have already said that I also find her ideas offensive sometimes, but I am honest in saying so, not in trying to hide behind the “style” criticism. I also have no wish to silence her, or anyone else, for that matter. That’s the part of your position I find offensive.
    I ask again: Do you disagree with the substance of what she said?

  • robert108

    I don’t have to assume, there are three posts on SAB proving it.

    It only “proves” that there are some fearful conservatives out there, and it has a lot more to do with feeling than with thinking, due to the lack of substantive argument on this subject.

    Ann, as well as other commenters on this blog have exhaustively proven that Ann didn’t “imply” anything resembling what you create in your own mind. She carefully explained what she meant, which was to wish the best for Jews, in her view. I don’t think she restricted it to only American Jews, btw.
    Deutsch was trolling her, and she handed him his head.

  • http://www.willisms.com/ Zsa Zsa

    My friend from Louisianna brought some of her katrina food rations because my son wanted to try them. He liked a particular meal. BUT I forgot which one it was…

  • Neiman

    HG: If a person is a genuine, sinere Christian why wouldn’t they believe that America and the world would be better off if everyone were Christians?

    I have no doubt that will never happen until Christ returns to judge and rule the world, but the idea that everyone being genuine Christians would make for a better world is, I think, a natural extension of the Christian faith. Christian do not believe in forcing anyone to accept Christ, as that would not produce genuine Christians, only phony Christians, which would not produce the desired result.

    Lastly, would you suggest that Jews accepting Salvation through Christ and thus becoming part of His Body would NOT make them perfect in Him? Of course it would! So isn’t such spiritual perfection in Christ {Their long awaited Messiah] a most loving thought for Christians to express towards Jews?

  • 2Hotel9

    Spam and pineapple!!!! I forgot that one. Have to get a can of rings tomorrow. And in the spirit of full disclosure we do not buy Spam. We get the store brand. $1 cheaper and made by the same company. VIVA LA ALDI!!!!(that is a discount grocery in the States)

  • robert108

    And, yes I know what it means to Christians.

    The Omnipresence of God is common to many religions, not just Christians.

  • Neiman

    HG: Like others commenting here, including the post after your last two, you appear to me to want a complete, irrevocable divorce based on irreconcilable differences between the state and the Church, something not thought particularly good for this country by most of our Founding Fathers. You appear to always want to categorically reject your fellow believers and prefer to join yourself with those people that are openly hostile to people of faith in their wanting a wholly secular society, with Christians being denied access to the public square, Christians being denied the right to influence our laws and Christians being denied the right to try and elect Christians as their political and governmental leaders.

    Did you notice how your dear friends here, those mostly hostile to people of faith, love to quote Scripture, then apply a wholly secular interpretation to use against Christians? I suspect by your support of these people that, you support that dispicable tactic as well. This friend of yours wants people to believe that by this passage Jesus was commanding His children to stay away from the political process entirely and surrender their civil rights to the state in favor of the religion of secularism. I am sure he sees Jesus as a self-hating liberal.

    When Christians in trying to appear loving and humble willingly abandon their sincere love for one another, compromise their Christian beliefs to appear to be tolerant and reasonable and they walk in fellowship with people of the World; the people of this world will almost without exception, sooner or later, attack and seriously harm the faith of the Christian and the Christian will always be polluted by the people of the world.

    Already you appear to feel that the ministers you hate for their love of prophecy are beneath you and that your fellow worldly travelers here are likewise superior to them. The fact that despite their faults they do present Christ to the lost appears to be of little or no importance to you, as it appears by your words that the real evil in the world, as you and your friend here suggest, is prophecy and belief in prophecy as proof of God’s existence; and that any Christian interested in prophecy and watching the signs of the times are deranged and anti-Christian in nature. Very strange indeed! But I sincerely defend your right to prefer fellowship and partnership with people hostile to Christ and the Church and reject fellow believers if they do not walk in lock-step.

  • MikeAdamson

    lik…you do a good job with the spam. I subscribe to this thread so i get email on it sometimes but the spam is always gone when i actually visit the site. You’re wrong on pretty much everything but your efforts at SA are much appreciated.

    2H9…it is time to change the sig. I’m no fan of Mr. N but I agree with that quotation.

  • http://www.willisms.com/ Zsa Zsa

    HA! You know,2Hotel, Spam is very popular in Hawaii? I think there is a BIG Spam fest every year & they have a contest that is worth lots of cash IF you have the best recipe?

  • HG

    Well said!!!!!!!!

    Joel,

    I appreciate everthing you said. Thanks.

  • http://www.willisms.com/ Zsa Zsa

    I don’t recall ever eating Spam? Is it good?

  • HG

    I realize you are unaware of this, but that’s one of the funniest things I have ever read from you.

    You’re welcome, glad I could add a little humor to your day.

  • http://www.willisms.com/ Zsa Zsa

    He said it was surprisingly good. I think he had an omlett come to think or it?…I guess if you were reallly hungry out in the trenches somewhere it would be pretty nice to have.

  • robert108

    …and therefore to mischaracterize those who are, as timid, does nothing but demonstrate you inability to discern the difference between unassertive and civil.

    I realize you are unaware of this, but that’s one of the funniest things I have ever read from you.

  • robert108

    What is it about her use of the word “perfected” that you object to?

  • MikeAdamson

    or is it? ;)

  • MikeAdamson

    I think what irritates both the lefties and the timid conservatives about Ann is the truth of what she says;

    The “jokes” about killing people aren’t well received either. I know it’s an act and she’s done well by it but her commentary shouldn’t be taken seriously IMO.

    Now if you’ll excuse me I have to gab some of that WOW gold.

  • 2Hotel9

    Oh, and I have already garnered quite the reputation for reporting spambots in the 3 realms I play in. I actually scan through the trade, general, and defense comment threads looking for spambots. It is rather satisfying and relaxing.

  • HG

    It is only your opinion that her attitude is “unnecessarily offensive”, isn’t it?

    Not only mine, and apparently the opinion of many and likely most. Hence, it is unecessarily offensive.

    Why are you so afraid of how she presents her ideas?

    Nice try, but your premise is completely off. There is nothing to be afraid of, just irritated by.

    but I am honest in saying so, not in trying to hide behind the “style” criticism.

    So when you do it, it is honest, but when others do so it is dishonest and timid? Wow R108, talk about your double-standards.

    I also have no wish to silence her, or anyone else, for that matter.

    Hey, like I said, Ann can continue to shrink her audience and subsequently her power to influence and persuade all she wants to by speaking as she does.

    Others here are simply irritated at having to uneccesarily explain themselves and defend against allegations of bigotry and homophobia when such stereotypes could be avoided with a more civil tone that doesn’t compromise the content. That’s not silencing Ann, that is bringing her back into the acceptable social norms of civil discourse.

    Do you disagree with the substance of what she said?

    No, but I think the choice of the word “perfecting” was not wise at all.

  • HG

    R108,

    The use of the term “perfected” as it relates to Jews, in political discourse, on national television, implies that there is something lacking in them that makes for an imperfect American citizen. This is not true. Many of the greatest advocates and defenders of liberty have not been Christian. Take Jefferson for instance. To be a great American does not mean one has to be Christian. This is unecessarily offensive, and I’m sure where others like Pilgrim claim bigotry. Joel should take this as offensive as well given his disdain for such displays of smug, arrogant, condescending, Sunday School B.S.

    The term “perfected” also brings many Christian doctrinal nuances to a public political discussion. This is sure to be misunderstood and taken the wrong way by those who are not Christian and likely even by Christians given the doctrinal nuances.

    It was a very poor choice of words IMO.

  • 2Hotel9

    I think it is save to say this thread is dead.

  • Neiman

    HG: I am off to spend the day with three of my grandchildren and one daughter. But, for now.

    Like I said, to be a great American and subsequently making America better off does not hinge on everyone being a Christian.

    First, I for one never argued God was an American. Are saying that if everyone was a true, sincere, devoted Christian America would not be better off? Are you saying that non-Christians would be as good for American as sincere, true people of faith? By the way, Jefferson was a Deist, but he penned ‘Our Creator’ and “Nature’s God,’ and he was not hostile to the Christian faith, having suggested it should be taught in every public school in America.

    Democracy as Adam’s and others of our Founding Fathers suggested was made for people of morality and religion and it is good for no other. The question is, as many will challenge here, can men/women be of truly good morals and not believe in God?

  • HG

    Just not “your” kind of Christian eh?

    Your smug, condescending, Sunday-school-teacher bullshit never ceases to amaze me.

    Show me Joel where I made this a religious issue. I don’t recall ever accusing Ann of being unchristian just offensive to some and irritating to others — a point proven by this post and many of the comments of others.

    I don’t think I’ll ever understand why you take everything I say to be motivated by a need to conform everyone to a Christian standard. Why is it the author of this post and every other conservative irritated by Ann’s attitude is not exihibiting this “smug, condescending, Sunday-school-teacher bullshit” attitude you attribute to myself? And, what the hell happened to the “Peace” you offered?

  • robert108

    The continued intrusions of eschatology into modern politics suggest that the dangers of religious extremism can scarcely be overstated.

    Especially those “eschatologists” wearing suicide vests, hiding among women and children and triggering IEDs. /sarcasm

  • robert108

    Rob: I also reject the notion that there is some sort of conservative “movement”. That’s a leftie thing. Conservatives are individuals who want to fight the totalitarianism of the left, which seeks to overwhelm us and to make us conform to their ideology. Ann speaks for herself, but a whole lot of people agree with what she says, and I consider that immensely more important than any petty differences with the way she says it. She tells the truth, which is the most important thing.

  • http://www.ktalks.com/meba.htm Jack

    I always thought Coulter looked like a drag queen lost at an apparel overstock sale. But I’m not sure what looks have to do with talent. I think she’s great, but I’m very conservative.

  • robert108

    MikeA: She said nothing about killing anyone in this conversation.

  • http://sayanythingblog.com/readers/entry/white_folks_greed_runs_a_world_in_ Joel

    ….on the outside you appear righteous, but inside you are filled with hypocrisy and evildoing.

  • 2Hotel9

    Mike, I have go and mine enough tin to smelt some bronze for a guild member. And kill some humans and night elves and dwarves, oh my.

  • http://sayanythingblog.com/readers/entry/white_folks_greed_runs_a_world_in_ Joel

    in the early 80′s I heard with my own ears as Reverend Jerry Falwell made a similar proclamation [as Anne Coulter] on network television.

    The talk show host asked Jerry whether he believed all Jews who refused to convert to Christianity were going to hell.

    Without so much as the blink of an eye, or a moment to consider, the Reverend boldly proclaimed that “Yes!” indeed the Jews are bound for hell.

  • HG

    Now, you say that one word sums up everything for you, but what is the “attitude” that you get out of that word?

    Sucker punch #2: I never said this, in fact, I said just the opposite in my last post. You must really want to make this connection badly.

    An answer to even one of my questions would be interesting.

    Sucker punch #3: I answered your question about substance, you acknowledged such, and now you say I haven’t answered even one of your questions?

  • 2Hotel9

    I was so looking forward to purchasing some wowgold! You beat me to this one, Lik.

    Mike, you need to back away from Nietzsche, the syphilis had almost as much to do with his vapid stupidity as did opium and absinthe.

  • robert108

    But I’m not sure what looks have to do with talent.

    Exactly. I think what irritates both the lefties and the timid conservatives about Ann is the truth of what she says; she doesn’t sugarcoat her messages, and some timid souls are very threatened by that. Her truth makes them uneasy, and they try to either change her or silence her. The comments on this thread are a perfect example of just that.

  • http://sayanythingblog.com/ likwidshoe

    or is it?

    I think that 2Hotel9 said that because of all the spam that this thread attracts. Every couple of weeks I’m here deleting some prescription drug or Wowgold (the World of Warcraft MMORPG game) crap.

    No matter. It makes it easy to fill up the spam blacklist.

  • 2Hotel9

    MREs are ok for the most part, after eating them for a couple of weeks my Mom came to the realisation that they are FATTENING. They are designed for people who have high activity and stress, if you are just living your normal daily life and eating them they really pack the weight on you.

    I like the omlet and penapasta, and the vegetarian ones are pretty good. The coffee leaves a lot to be desired but the cold beverages are good, just don’t mix them in a plastic canteen cause you can’t get the taste out.

  • http://ndgoon.blogspot.com/ goon

    I agree. Right wing women tend to be either hideous (looks and personality) or brainless religious fanatics. I guess that is why Rob married a liberal. Maybe this is why many righties (Robert108, Move_Zig, 2Hotel9 etc.) seem so angry all of the time, they only have ugly or stupid women to go home too.

    Really, so how do you explain the agry ugly masses of women in the Democratic party, Hillary, Nancy Pelosi, Barbra Boxer. Sorry not many of them look like Laura Swartz.

  • http://SayAnythingBlog.com The_Whistler_ofnd

    Rosie, poster babe of the left.

  • 2Hotel9

    Yes, Mike. Every position she puts forward is socialist.

  • robert108

    HG: I guess I expected more substance than just one word, but if that’s all you have, let’s get into it.
    Now, you say that one word sums up everything for you, but what is the “attitude” that you get out of that word? If that’s all there is to your judgment, how is it “always present”, if she just used the word “perfected” in this particular dialogue.
    Sounds like you are generalizing from one word, and into the past, at that.
    An answer to even one of my questions would be interesting.

  • 2Hotel9

    The BBC thread is still alive and well, as Friend of USA has discovered. He was shocked that it was still live, so many places have auto-kill dates on comment threads. And the Gateway Sucks thread is quite active! Several Gateway employees have hit it saying, in effect, yes. And they are looking for other jobs. And a lot of people that have switched to Dell and HP. Only a couple supporting or defending Gateway.

  • Neiman

    I love being preached to be an atheist and blasphemer, great stuff!

  • 2Hotel9

    I have 3 Orcs active. I let the Humans and Night Elf drop off, once you go Orc you never go back! . Horde Rulz!!! Alliance bloats&rots.

  • HG

    So, this is all about one word, then? You read an entire “attitude” from that one word? Now you’re starting to sound silly.

    Funny R108, you ask about substance and I give you the only word (ie, substance) I thought was a poor choice, then you paint my answer as the entire offense… talk about your sucker punches.

    The attitude is almost always present when Ann speaks, especially when she goes off on something or somebody.

  • http://sayanythingblog.com/readers/author/Anna/ Anna

    :roll:

  • Neiman

    In the Coulter-Deutsch interview, I think some context is important:

    Deutsch said that “Ann said she wanted to explain her last comment,” and asked her, “So you don’t think that was offensive?”

    Coulter responded: “No. I’m sorry. It is not intended to be. I don’t think you should take it that way, but that is what Christians consider themselves: perfected Jews. We believe the Old Testament. As you know from the Old Testament, God was constantly getting fed up with humans for not being able to live up to all the laws. What Christians believe — this is just a statement of what the New Testament is — is that that’s why Christ came and died for our sins. Christians believe the Old Testament. You don’t believe our testament.”

    Coulter later said: “We consider ourselves perfected Christians. For me to say that for you to become a Christian is to become a perfected Christian is not offensive at all.”

    David Horowitz, a Jew, said about Ann’s Comments:

    “If you don’t accompany this belief by burning Jews who refuse to become perfected at the stake why would any Jew have a problem?” he writes. “Why do some Jews think that Christians should not really believe what they believe while it’s okay for Jews to really believe they are God’s Chosen People? I don’t get it. Whatever happened to the pluralism of ideas?”

    Outside a Christian group, I suppose Ann’s terminology appears a bit odd, but she did carefully, more than once, explain what she meant and why her remarks were not meant to condemn or judge Jews.

    As Shakespeare might say, this is “much ado about nothing.” Deutsch was looking for a way to attack Ann Coulter as the left must marginalize all conservative and Christian leaders that they might then somehow claim a higher moral ground. Ann said nothing racist or bigoted in my opinion, she might have chosen a better word or expressed her thoughts differently and the outcome would have been identical. Deutsch would have manufactured a controversy, this helps his ratings and makes him into a conservative killer on behalf of liberalism.

    If you can rationally debate the substance of what Coulter said, then by all means do so and that can be discussed. But, some of the personal attacks on her looks and style are, IMO, rubbish!

  • MikeAdamson

    r108…that is one point in her favour I agree.

    2H9…say it isn’t so. ;)

  • http://ndgoon.blogspot.com/ goon

    I think the only nice about Nancy is her rack.
    Nancy is definately not all that bright.

  • MikeAdamson

    Most of my kids play but the last thing I need is more computer to play so resist.

  • Pilgrim

    I agree. Right wing women tend to be either hideous (looks and personality) or brainless religious fanatics.

    Yeah, the left has some hotties:

    Janet Reno looks a bit like Frankenstein in drag. On a good day, that is. Women like Rosie O’Donnell probably explains why there are so many gay men (picture her in a thong – yeesh.) Chelsea Clinton is the poster child for the chin-deprived.

    And let’s not even bring up the harpies who fester on the lefty web-sites.

    Ann Coulter is a loose cannon, granted, and she could use a couple of square meals. BUT….the right hardly has a corner market on those type of things.

    The above quoted statement was imbecilic at best.

  • robert108

    Andrew: By definition, stereotypes are not based on fact, but on prejudice. Careful, now.

  • http://www.indymedia.org/en/index.shtml Angry Vertebrate

    i also think its funny that ann coulter is out trashing on all these dem dudes like clinton and edwards, calling them fags, but she is about the most hideous thing in print. –Sparkie

    I agree. Right wing women tend to be either hideous (looks and personality) or brainless religious fanatics. I guess that is why Rob married a liberal. Maybe this is why many righties (Robert108, Move_Zig, 2Hotel9 etc.) seem so angry all of the time, they only have ugly or stupid women to go home too.

    (Insults are far more fun than rational debate. Many thanks to Ann for this revelation.)

  • http://www.willisms.com/ Zsa Zsa

    Rob… I see your point as far as Ann saying “faggot” to a ultra conservative audience. I suppose she could have used affeminate, fop, dandy, sissy, pretty boy, narcissitic, vain, primpy????? BUT she really wasn’t too far off. IF conservative groups reeeeeally want to embrace homosexuals that is one thing. BUT as far as saying Ann’s time has passed? Hmmm, I think she is still has alot to offer conservatives.

  • http://www.willisms.com/ Zsa Zsa

    IF you get to the core of this conversation? The real issue is how people feel about homosexuals. As far as Ann saying John Edwards is a “faggot” goes. She probably could have chosen a better word? Personally, I think this entire topic reveals more about how we accept or do not accept homosexuals in our society. Most conservatives and many liberals don’t believe Homosexuals should be married. I truly believe that this is the real issue. Not that Ann called John Edwards a “faggot”…

  • 2Hotel9

    I love Spam! did you slice it thin and fry it! Toasted wheat bread, onions and lettuce and tomato and it is GREAT!!

    Yea. Those been showing up for awhile. I’d blame me, but they were coming in before I started playing Warcraft.

  • Bat One

    Zsa Zsa,

    Spam is considerably more tasty if one avoids reading the label on the can.

  • http://www.willisms.com/ Zsa Zsa

    Anarchist Veg…Not according to WILLisms.com babe theory!

  • 2Hotel9

    TD, keep that “self respect” firmly in mind as the leftards drive America further and further into socialism. I hope it feeds your children and keeps them warm after Commissar Hillary decides you need to be “rehabilitated”.

  • 2Hotel9

    There is a label on the can? LOL!

    I also love C-rations Ham&Eggs, so you have to consider the source.

  • http://teacherdave.blogspot.com/ TeacherDave

    We don’t make any more than the usual racket when the Left comes up with an asinine and insulting comment (Nazi, caveman, tranny, whatever), because we’ve come to EXPECT IT from them.

    I don’t know, guys, maybe we on the right should try to expect BETTER of our own spokespeople. But I guess not, if so many of us are more than willing to abandon mature and honorable discourse for the sake of scoring the almighty WIN.

    I’ll take “Queensbury rules,” thank you. I value my self-respect too much, I guess.

  • robert108

    Rudy’s pro-choice, so are 85% of the rest of the country (only 15% of the populace is against abortion in all cases).

    Very tricky, Carrick. In fact, if they asked the real question, which is: “Do you support feticide as a method of birth control?”, the numbers would be vastly different, which is why the abortionists try so hard to keep it off the ballot. They know abortion on demand is against the wishes of at least 70% of the country. They slipped it through the Supreme Court, remember?

  • http://proof-proofpositive.blogspot.com/ proof_positive

    Nobody could be any dumber than he is.

    Here come the ad hominems.

    Does this clueless doofus realize he just committed the very thing he accuses his opponents of doing?

  • Paulie B

    In all of this anger and such… I think we need to get back to the actual statement.

    “I’d say something about John Edwards, but if you say ‘faggot’ you have to go to rehab.”

    She WOULD say something, but…
    She WOULD, BUT [she won't]
    She would, but she won’t because…?
    Because…?
    Because IF…
    IF YOU SAY
    If you say ‘faggot’
    IF you say faggot…
    rehab
    She WOULD say something, BUT IF she said ‘faggot’ she would have to go to REHAB.

    “I’d say something about John Edwards, but if you say ‘faggot’ you have to go to rehab.”

    I know that this is all semantics, but since this is such a big topic, I figured I’d bring it back to the root. In our debate, let’s not forget what she said.

    All of the libs are loving this. And by ‘this’ I mean that they can pat conservatives on the back for trying to destroy a conservative. Seriously… do the libs denouncing AC on this thread denounce their own when they say something that’s not politically correct? Of course not. Conservatives are doing all of their work for them. They can take a vacation on this one.

  • Dave

    2hotel9:

    Dave. I been called far worse, and am so far beyond your pale of comprehension as to be incomprehensible.

    What do you mean by “far worse”? I thought calling someone a faggot was an action worthy of praise, judging by the support Coulter has received thus far. Or is it only a good thing if conservatives call liberals “faggots”? Would I deserve praise if I’d called just Sparkie a faggot and not you? This is all so confusing; I wish we could go back to the day when it was always bad to resort to useless name-calling in place of substantive discourse.

  • http://SayAnythingBlog.com The_Whistler_ofnd

    why couldn’t she have just called him a ‘towel-head’ or a ‘sand-n*****’ or sumthin.

    Once again it’s the liberals on this site using the “n-word”. I think that keeps the every single time streak alive.

  • wowgolds104

    Welcome to our website for you World of Warcraft Gold,Wow Gold,Cheap World of Warcraft Gold,cheap wow gold,buy cheap wow gold,real wow gold,Power Leveling sell wow gold, …Here wow gold of 1000 gold at $68.99-$80.99 ,World Of Warcraft Gold,buy wow gold,sell world of warcraft gold(wow gold),buy euro gold wow Cheap wow gold,cheapest Power Leveling wow gold store … buy euro gold wow wow gold–buy cheap wow gold,sell wow gold.welcome to buy cheap wow gold–cheap, easy, wow gold purchasing.World of Warcraft,wow gold Super …
    We can have your wow gold,buy wow gold,wow gold game,world of warcraft gold, wow Gold Cheap wow, Cheap wow gold,world of warcraft gold deal,Power Leveling Cheap WOW Gold …Welcome to our website for you World of Warcraft Gold,Wow Gold,Cheap World of Warcraft Gold,wow gold,buy cheap wow gold,real wow gold,sell wow gold, … Here wow gold of 1000 gold at $68.99-$80.99,World Of Warcraft Gold,buy wow gold,sell world of warcraft gold(wow gold),buy gold wow lightninghoof instock Power Level Cheap wow gold,cheapest wow gold store … wow gold–buy cheap wow gold,sell wow gold.welcome to buy cheap wow gold–cheap, easy, wow gold purchasing.World of Warcraft,wow gold Super …Power Level Wow gold- Gold for buy gold wow lightninghoof instock EU-Server: …wow Gold EU: starting from 84,99?; 3000 WoW Gold EU: starting from 119,99?. wow Gold- Leveling Services: …We can have your wow Gold,buy wow Gold,wow Gold game,wow gold, Cheap wow Gold, Cheap World of Warcraft Gold,Power Level world of warcraft gold deal,buy cheap wow gold,Cheap WOW Gold …Here wow Gold of 1000 gold at $68.99-$80.99,World Of Warcraft Gold,buy wow Gold,sell world of warcraft gold(wow gold),Cheap wow gold,cheapest World of Warcraft Gold store

  • 2Hotel9

    Dave. I been called far worse, and am so far beyond your pale of comprehension as to be incomprehensible.

  • robert108

    Ann Coulter is in trouble for offending some girly men, a portion of whom are Republicans afraid of hurting the feelings of the Dems. Sheesh!

  • robert108

    Carrick: Your ad hominem aside, it remains to be seen if there is any net damage to CPAC. I’m willing to bet that there is not.
    Of all the supportive and pro-conservative words Ann has written, you want to throw her under the bus for two. Nice going.

  • robert108

    Carrick: That doesn’t mean that 85% of the population supports abortion in its present form. I like my question better, since it tells the truth about the matter.
    Even if the question was the one you stated, it is well known to pollsters that both the age and the gender of both the poller and the pollee are quite an influence on the final answer.

  • MikeAdamson

    What I do know is the majority of conservatives are appalled by Coulters poor behavior…

    Because a majority of conservatives deplore rude behaviour. It sounds old fashioned but Coulter’s comment was rude and turns most people off just as similar comments by leftist loons do. This isn’t a right versus left issue, it’s a polite versus impolite issue and I’m glad that so many conservatives recognise it.

  • http://sayanythingblog.com/readers/entry/white_folks_greed_runs_a_world_in_ Joel

    Andrew Bryant

    Good stuff Mano!!!!

  • rachel

    I don’t condone the Democrats using Ann Coulter to make Republicans look bad anymore than Rob condones Ann Coulter’s “joke.” Not everyone has subordinated every thought in their heads to an us-versus-them.

  • Andrew Bryant

    Freerepublicans.com–

    You said:

    Serious, what do those of you defending Coulter not understand.

    There is a Freedom to Speak.

    There is no Freedom to Be Heard.

    I know the difference between “a Freedom to Speak” and the non-”Freedom to Be Heard.”
    So please stop patronizing me with your sloganeering if you would.
    What bothers me is the arrogant elitist chicanery that’s infesting the right side of the blog-o-sphere.
    Something you’d find at the huffingtonpost or daily-kos but not at a well respected conservative blog like sayanything.

  • carrick

    Rally:

    This is just another example of “RINO’s” caving in to the pressure from the left.

    You’re completely right Rally.

    I think next time, the Republicans should all dress up in brown shirts and swastikas… ha! ha! ha! that’d be a great joke wouldn’t it? And it would show those liberals that conservatives don’t cave into pressure from the left!!!

    Or have simple common sense about how you behave in public, apparently.

  • http://www.willisms.com/ Zsa Zsa

    We should be consistent across the board & not engage in gay sterotypes or gay slurs at anytime. AND that includes calling women sluts, whores, militant lesbians, etc.

  • Andrew Bryant

    Rob,

    Do you feel better about yourself now? Pat yourself on the back. Your “right” guilt is clearly alive and well and on display. Another pansy arss “conservative” falling pray to the censorship of their liberal Masters.

    It is sickening to watch so many on the right who undoubtedly claim to be sort of like a “moral squad leader” fall all over each other in distancing themselves from anything they think their liberal Master will punish them for. BARRRFFF…

    Rush is right. There is a testicle lock box and your Huevos are well ensconced.

    Sure Ann was over the top but damn, calm down. An Open Letter? Geez…

    I am so sick of reading the blogs on the right try and sound rational and morally grounded with their usual condemnation of anyone who offends their precious little conservative censorship sirens with, “Ann Coulter surely has a right to say whatever she wants and I champion the first amendment just as much as the other guy, BUT…….”

    Please cork it. Give me a break.

  • Ronald Walter

    Speaking of Bill O’Lielly, he was hounding a woman for sexual favors.

    He can’t even act like a civilized human being, just another crass political lackey with no clue.

    He kept his job over there at Fix News, though.

    ‘Republican’ morals and values at work.

    Much like Bill Bennett’s gambling habits, you know, the guy who wanted ‘moral clarity.’

    Stupid ‘Republicans’ at work with their vitriole and child like antics.

    They’re toast.

  • http://SayAnythingBlog.com The_Whistler_ofnd

    In the end, they’ll be ashes. Absolutely nothing left of them because of people like Ann Coulter and Dick ‘I shot a lawyer’ Cheney.

    Speaking of hateful people.

    Yet Coulter, O’Reilly, Hannity, Limbaugh, Robertson, & Falwell constantly make statements tantamount to calling for Krystalnacht.

    Lies.

  • rachel

    People care about the word “faggot” because those who use it are so often the same ones congratulating themselves for not dragging the “faggots” to the edge of town and stoning them. The same way people care about the word “nigger” because until about 40 years ago it meant some one it was acceptable to lynch. Maybe it hasn’t been long enough for these “victims” to stop associating the language of mob violence with the actual mob violence.

    Robert1108, you can’t just kill off the faggots and the niggers and the lefties or whatever cute name you have for people who aren’t just like you. And saying you COULD (even though you very graciously don’t) only proves the lefties’ point about what “faggot” really means to some people.

    And Rob, you’ve earned yourself a liberal reader. I’m always interested in ideas that lie somewhere between PETA’s and the KKK’s.

  • Dave

    Ann Coulter is braver (Is that a word?[braver] Anyways…) than any mainstream male commentator that I know and I respect her for that even if she says things that aren’t PC and are sometimes crewed.

    Her calling John Edwards a “faggot” reminds me in many ways of Rosa Parks refusing to give up her seat on a bus. They’re both brave freedom fighters! Thank you Ann Coulter for standing up for my right to call people I don’t like “faggots”!

    Andrew Bryant, you are a faggot…. Wow, that’s soooo liberating! I just want to shout it from the rooftop!

  • http://www.willisms.com/ Zsa Zsa

    I think I just recieved some spam?

  • gpkeenan

    As all good competitors say when they encounter their opposition blundering, “Your doing just fine…don’t change a thing.” Ann needs to speak more often.

  • Andrew Bryant

    Dave–

    You said:

    Andrew Bryant, you are a faggot…. Wow, that’s soooo liberating! I just want to shout it from the rooftop!

    I know you are but what am I. Nanny nanny poo poo…

    Are you sure I’m not a “nazi,” or a “fascist,” or a member of the “SS,” or a bigot, sexist, homophobe?

    “Faggot?” That’s all you got–Dave?

  • Andrew

    my friend john just came out of the closet dave. want his number? and you’re an ass

    I’m not sure if you’re trying to be sarcastic or not, Sparkie (too hard to tell on the net). Dave’s actually on your side of the arguement. He’s just being sarcastic and trying to turn around the arguement made by some of the conservatives in this thread.

  • *

    Whistler:

    Lies.

    I’m very busy today and do not have time to retrieve the numerous quotes calling for death, internment, treason, etc. etc. etc.

    But rest assured that 1) these are not lies and 2) movement conservatism is very closely associated with these personalities.

    What Rob is doing is trying to bring the voice of movement conservatism back to the timbre it had during Goldwater or Reagan’s time, and some of y’all are calling him to the mat and siding with the least common denominator. Many people chose sides not on what one person or party says but in spite of what the other said. Just because you choose not to listen, Whistler, does not make it untrue.

  • carrick

    Sparkie:

    virtual fences, abortion, no guns…

    First, exactly what’s wrong with the virtual fences, except the concept is too highbrow.

    Rudy’s pro-choice, so are 85% of the rest of the country (only 15% of the populace is against abortion in all cases). Even within the Republican Party, something like 80% agree that abortion should be legal in some cases. So trying to paint Rudy as non-Republican on that basis is kind of a weak argument.

    As to “no guns”, since when is Rudy running on an agenda of repealing the 2nd Amendment? I must have missed that memo (as well as the one on always avoiding alliteration apparently).

  • robert108

    No, it isn’t. Otherwise denying Michael Moore the right to speak at CPAC would be censorship as well. Bad analogy. Michael Moore hasn’t spoken at CPAC before, so taking it away from him to punish him for saying something you don’t like would not be possible. However, that is exactly what you propose to do to Ann for her rather humorous and pointed remark.

    Robert, you seem to be setting aside all logic and reason just to play defense for Coulter. You admit that you would not forgive her, and you accuse me of setting aside logic? Look, I have personal animus for Hillary, and make no secret of it. I suspect you have personal animus for Ann, which is why you won’t forgive her. If you can’t be level headed about this there’s no use even talking to you about it. If that’s you best solution, it’s your call. I am simply disagreeing with you, and for logical reasons which I have explained in great detail. If you can’t handle that, so be it.

  • *

    Rob-

    Even though you are the host of the only conservative site that I’ve ever visited that allows for open, uncensored discussion allowing other viewpoints to be addressed, I am nonetheless surprised by your thoughtful, professional, and mature reaction to this woman’s slanderous and bigoted comments.

    Although we’ll disagree almost all the time, it takes someone very certain of their core beliefs to allow for dissent. And I know if anyone knows the difference between censorship and free speech, it is you Rob.

    Like it or not, Coulter is the right’s Hillary & Howard Stern all rolled into one. She’s made the cover of Time magazine by playing the shock jock and purveyor of the least common denominator.

    Ann Coulter’s shrieking, hateful nature represents all that is wrong with polemists in the information age. To my knowledge, no major media figure on the left has called differing opinion treasonous. Yet Coulter, O’Reilly, Hannity, Limbaugh, Robertson, & Falwell constantly make statements tantamount to calling for Krystalnacht. Some of it clearly for entertainment purposes, some of it not.

    Compare what Safire, Will, Friedman, & Buckley have to say to those I just listed. Compare the media reaction to obscure liberal commenters on equally obscure websites to the ubiquitous Coulter. There has been an errosion of maturity that is plainly obvious to anyone who would open their eyes.

    You have done the right thing here, Rob. There is a very wide gulf between intelligent political discourse and infantile attention grabbing. The only way for our nation to rise to its many challenges is to get its political discourse out of the gutter.

    Children do not lead, adults do. It is very refreshing to see you take the appropriate response to this childishness.

    Kudos.

  • http://www.freerepublicans.com/ FreeRepublicans.com

    Serious, what do those of you defending Coulter not understand.

    There is a Freedom to Speak.

    There is no Freedom to Be Heard.

    There is no Freedom to Not Be Criticized.

    She has a history of saying stupid things, and we as conservatives must realize that is not helping us.

  • Dave

    r108:

    That is one of the things I like about being a conservative.

    That you get to call Democrats “faggots”?

  • Mickey

    egads…I for one do not want to be recognized as a wimpy PC conservative.

    Ann called a spade a spade. Get over it. If the Conservative platform is going to fall apart over this trivial little event then it didn’t have much to begin with.

  • Ronald Walter

    The only honorable act that stupid ‘Republicans’ can possibly do to exonerate themselves from their plight is to commit apostasy.

    They won’t do it though, they are more committed to their idiotic party than communists are committed to the Communist Party.

    So much for stupid ‘Republicans,’ they have ruined America. They will never be forgiven for what they have done to the US government and the American people.

    They are toast. Bushevism in its finest hour.

  • Dave

    Andrew Bryant:

    I know you are but what am I. Nanny nanny poo poo…

    Are you sure I’m not a “nazi,” or a “fascist,” or a member of the “SS,” or a bigot, sexist, homophobe?

    “Faggot?” That’s all you got–Dave?

    Oh God, here come the PC Police. :roll:

    You’re so wrapped up in liberal dogma that you can’t see the bravery in calling someone I’ve never met a “faggot.”

  • Andrew Bryant

    FYI:

    The word “faggot” has 2 meanings:

    Meaning #1: offensive or derogatory terms for an openly homosexual or effeminate male.

    The word “effeminate” means:

    having qualities or characteristics more often associated with women than men.

    Meaning #2: a bundle of sticks and branches bound together, or a bundle of pieces of iron or steel to be welded or hammered into bars.

    I think I know what Ann meant, however, can you be sure?

  • robert108

    I stand up for what I believe in. I think what Coulter said was wrong. And as a principled, individualist conservative you aren’t going to be able to brow beat me away from criticizing her for what she said.

    I have no problem with that, as you should know. What I haven’t heard yet is a reasoned explanation of what was so bad about what she actually said. I have heard all the stuff about her being bad for the conservative movement(?), not why that is so, except that it will cause lefties to hate us and not believe us. They already hate us and don’t believe us, so I have yet to hear an explanation that makes a convincing case that her one word has changed anything in that respect. I hear that we are insensitive to the feelings of lefties, and applaud that absolutely.
    The case can be made that she was at least somewhat accurate in her inference about Edwards, and was right on target with the rehab reference with regard to the use of the word “faggot”. You and others then demonstrated your solidarity with the lefties on that issue. The anti-Ann reaction to this statement seems rooted in fear of disapproval to my perception, and that certainly isn’t my version of conservatism.

  • Andrew Bryant

    Rob–

    You said:

    You’re saying I don’t have backbone?

    Clearly my criticism of Coulter’s comments are bucking the opinions of a majority of my readers.

    I stand up for what I believe in. I think what Coulter said was wrong. And as a principled, individualist conservative you aren’t going to be able to brow beat me away from criticizing her for what she said.

    First off, I never said you didn’t have a back bone and criticism is fine. However, I may revise and extend my remarks at a later time. I do think you portray too much “right guilt.” You know, the equivalent to “white guilt” that is so common on the left.

    And I’m not trying to brow beat you away from anything. I’m simply writing things that I believe in and I think many of the bloggers on the right who speak for many of us whether you intend too or not should hear what we think. If you don’t like it, tough. Deal with it.

    How many readers has signed your ‘”Ban” Ann’ drive? That should speak for itself. Although, I would have much more respect for you if you didn’t come across as beating up on a poor helpless female who always catches it from both sides. And I mean always.

    Ann Coulter is braver (Is that a word?[braver] Anyways…) than any mainstream male commentator that I know and I respect her for that even if she says things that aren’t PC and are sometimes crewed. And that hits on another point that no one has addressed.

    That is how the right is getting sucked into this PC vacuum. Some call it self censorship. It’s a censorship of what you think the left-wing thought police expect of you. Don’t believe me? Why do you have a petition on your website to “Ban Ann” Coulter from CPAC? How many conservatives has advocated banning Coulter from CPAC next year?

    Do you think the liberal-sphere will give you kudos for “doing the right thing?” Hell no, and you should know better.

  • http://www.willisms.com/ Zsa Zsa

    Rob, You definately have backbone! As a matter of fact, you are the type of person who should run for Congress or SOMETHING! You really are the kind of republican that all conservatives would appreciate in Washington DC. No Lie!

  • Rally

    This is just another example of “RINO’s” caving in to the pressure from the left. I’m loving the “kudos” and pats on back from the left on this one Rob, good for you…..lol

  • 2Hotel9

    Ann Coulter can do no harm to the “conservative movement”, because its members refuse to stand up and fight the left. Go along to get along. THAT is what is hurting the “conservative movement”. Since 1994 we have been putting these lying pieces of crap in office, and they have done every single thing we did NOT want done.

    That is what is killing the “conservative movement”, lying assed scumbaglawyerfuckpoliticians doing the exact opposite of what American voters put them in office to do. Go along to get along, compromise, bipartisanship. The Left never compromises, only the center and right are required to compromise.

    Exactly why is that?

  • carrick

    Rob, it doesn’t appear to me that you are that much in the minority. On issues like this, there really isn’t much to argue about. I don’t see any movement whatsover by either side on this issue. What I do know is the majority of conservatives are appalled by Coulters poor behavior, just as there is a vocal minority who think shooting yourself in both feet by calling the opposition “faggots” is apparently a good strategy for influencing people and making friends.

  • http://sayanythingblog.com/readers/entry/white_folks_greed_runs_a_world_in_ Joel

    in addition to criticizing her, you want to stop her from speaking at CPAC. I just think that’s over the top….for conservatives. It’s par for the course for lefties, though.
    robert108 on March 5, 2007 at 01:36 pm

    Ditto!!

  • carrick

    Paulie B, to be technical I’m not really a “lib” nor am I really “denouncing” AC, which would imply to me that I was shocked, shocked at what she said. Like Rob, I just think it was a moronic thing for her to have said. And as I said, a betrayal of trust of those who invited her to talk at CPAC.

    If you can’t see how making a stupid statement has diverted attention from the otherwise positive message,then I guess we won’t see eye-to-eye. But it’s really demagoguery on the part of the people who are shilling for her to claim that anybody who thinks her statement was stupid is either a RINO or a lib.

    Words having meaning. Uttering them also has consequences. AC has been given more chances than most, and if she is destroyed, she did it to herself.

  • http://SayAnythingBlog.com The_Whistler_ofnd

    that includes calling women sluts, whores, militant lesbians, etc.

    Does that include tramp and hussy?

  • http://proof-proofpositive.blogspot.com/ proof_positive

    I agree. Right wing women tend to be either hideous (looks and personality) or brainless religious fanatics.

    I wasn’t sure about posting the picture here, so I put it on the Reader’s Blogs: Why Men Vote Republican

  • Francesca

    Actually, as always, if you look at Coulter in context she normally makes a brilliant point AND she is most often merely responding to or giving the left a taste of its own medicine. As for the faggot comment, it was a pointed wake up call to the thought police measures being taken during all the truly toubling Grey’s anatomy drama.

    Seriously, Washington being sent to a reeducation, er rehab camp, for saying the word faggot?! (Which is now the new “f word.”) If this doesn’t bother you, you are certainly not a conservative, at least not one concerned with free thought and free speech.

  • http://sayanythingblog.com/readers/entry/white_folks_greed_runs_a_world_in_ Joel

    Personally, I’m going to go out and purchase all of her books and subscribe to her newsletter..as well as try to catch her on whatever radio or T.V. talk show she happens to be on at any given time…she’s got guts…. hell yes… Ann Coulter !!!!!!!!

  • http://proof-proofpositive.blogspot.com/ proof_positive

    Nancy Pelosi is not bad looking

    She should! Dollar for dollar, she’s had more work done than the Tennessee Valley Authority!

  • robert108

    We should refrain from being bigots and hurling insults and instead engage in educating the public about conservatism.

    I don’t agree, but Ann did neither of the things you mention. I don’t let the lefties define me, and calling a weasely man a “faggot” is not bigoted, although it is a mild insult. If you see the tape, she didn’t “hurl” anything, btw. You just seem real overheated about this, Rob.

  • robert108

    Not providing someone a venue for their speaking is not the same as censoring him/her.

    It is de facto censorship, and you know it.

    If I called you a faggot would you think that was appropriate?

    Since it wouldn’t be true, it wouldn’t bother me at all. In fact, she didn’t call him a faggot; she made what would be regarded as a nuanced joke at his expense, if John Kerry had said it.

    Or in keeping with the sort of level-headed political speech conservatives should be engaging in.

    Should be? Are we all in lockstep now?

    Personal attack aside, I am proud that I am conservative enough to support her right to free speech, and that I support a fellow conservative against some hysterical overreaction.

  • http://proof-proofpositive.blogspot.com/ proof_positive

    One nice thing about Nancy…she’s had her face lifted so many times, when she raises her eyebrows, she pulls up her socks!

  • http://sayanythingblog.com/readers/entry/homosexuality_is_wrong_-_a_compendium move_zig

    Rob, my friend, I still have to disagree with you on this.

    Judeo-Christian beliefs have long held that homosexuality is an abomination. I too hold to that conviction. I am practicing tolerance by not doing what the Bible commands Christians to do — taking them to the edge of town and stoning them.

    I don’t buy into the position that if you think homosexuals are wrong, that makes you a bigot. Homosexuality is wrong, and it has been for a long time. The Conservative movement does itself no favors by kowtowing to the Leftist party line — that you can’t call perverted behaviour perverted.

    I will give that Polite (e.g. Conservative) Society holds to the belief, that if you can’t say anything nice, don’t say anything at all. If the Left bought into that belief, they would be absolutely silent, since their tactic is complete vitriole and personal destruction of whomever happens to be their target.

    Ann is simply one of the few Conservative voices that dishes back out at the Left what they have been spewing for years, but with a great more deal of wit and accuracy.

    One other point:

    stereotypes would die a quick death if there weren’t an element of truth to them. Classical musicians cannot be stereotyped as one typically found to be diddybopping down the block, blasting Chopin’s Concerto for Piano in D Minor from a boom box, because there is no basis for it.

    The Leftist Worldview is filled with stereotypes, skewed perhaps, but there ARE Rednecks and there ARE Capitalists, just as there ARE Gangstas and Queers.

  • robert108

    Right, robert. Because the problem is the criticism of Ann’s comments, not what Ann herself said.

    Give me a break.

    I said no such thing. I am not critical of what Ann said, and there are quite a few who agree with me, if that matters. You are critical of what Ann said, and in addition to criticizing her, you want to stop her from speaking at CPAC. I just think that’s over the top….for conservatives. It’s par for the course for lefties, though.

  • carrick

    Robert108, when you ask questions, it should be done in a value neutral fashion. For example, Abortion should a) always, b) mostly, c) sometimes d) never be legal is a perfectly reasonable way to frame the question.

    When it is framed in these terms, only about 15% of the general population and about 20% within the Republican Party would pick “d) never legal”.

  • Hue Mann

    Listen to’m screaming and bemoaning to any and all willing to be bored by their whining.

    This is simply a case of the Right borrowing a tactic from the Left. Tactics practiced by the mahrs and frankels in their ranks.

    As for Edwards . . . everytime I see him I can’t help but think of the story of ‘Dorian Grey’.

  • robert108

    Headline of article from “Newsbusters” today:

    CBS Blogger Slams CPAC Over Coulter; Ignores Conservative Bloggers Who Criticize Her

    So, all the attacking of Ann and the mea culpas from some conservatives hasn’t made any difference in what lefties think of us. What a surprise!

    Actually, it is the nature of prejudice to pay special attention to any behavior that reinforces the prejudice, and to ignore completely any information that calls the prejudice into question.

  • http://sayanythingblog.com/readers/entry/white_folks_greed_runs_a_world_in_ Joel

    Oh my, my, my…aren’t we precious!

    Image Hosted by ImageShack.us

    What a Faggot!

  • http://proof-proofpositive.blogspot.com/ proof_positive

    Coulter made her statements in front of a CPAC convention, hardly reaching the same audience.

    Since all of Ann’s audience was in the same room, it might qualify as the same size as Olbermann’s!

  • http://SayAnythingBlog.com The_Whistler_ofnd

    You’re all a bunch of faggots. Every single commenter at this blog.

    Why should anyone care what you think?

  • http://proof-proofpositive.blogspot.com/ proof_positive

    I have a question: Ann Coulter is in trouble for calliing someone a derogatory term for a homosexual.

    We are taught in the public schools that homosexuality is not bad, but merely an alternate lifestyle.

    So why is it, that when Ann Coulter refers to someone who is not bad, but in a bad way, she gets in trouble, but someone who refers to George Bush as a Nazi, in a bad way, is not?

    Nazis killed and imprisoned Jews and homosexuals and the physically and mentally challenged. Pardon the understatement, but they were really bad!

    Does anyone else see the irony here?

    Or, another common tactic of the left is to refer to conservatives as somehow less than human. When Ann referred to Edwards as a homosexual, she at least credited him with humanity. What of those who liken conservatives to cavemen? Or our President to a chimp? Which is worse, to have your sexuality impugned or your humanity?

    Anyone else have the sense that this is blown (apologies to Ms. Lewinsky) all out of proportion?

  • Andrew Bryant

    Rob–
    I was pointing out the similarities of the “Ann Coulter lynch mob.” In high moral form, they (yourself included) reassure all of their readers that they believe in the basics. You know, freedom of speech, the first amendment, the right to say whatever you want, yada, yada, yada…then comes the dreaded “BUT” and a long connotation scolding her for saying what she said and then a long drawn out moral confession about what harm she does to conservatism and how she should be shunned. I get tired of reading about how we, conservatives must prove we aren’t this or we aren’t that. Stop already with the self-righteous scoffing. It is all too familiar and I’m sick of hearing it from the right. I expect it from the left. But and Open Letter?

    Have some balls and write something that starts like this:

    Ann Coulter has a back bone of steel and should be congratulated for pointing out the absurdity of the thought police and their brown shirt brethren in the media.

    Or something like:

    A-men, Ann Coulter finally says what many are afraid to say. That is that one wrong comment can get you lynched. Figuratively speaking.

    And another thing:

    I wanted to point out a part of this whole issue that isn’t being talked about. What she meant when she said if you say the word faggot you have to go to rehab.

    Greys Anatomy actor Isaiah Washington was excoriated for using the word “faggot” to refer to co-star T.R. Knight while backstage at the Golden Globes. Washington later apologized to T.R., the shows fans, and to the gay and lesbian community for using that word. He later checked into rehab:


    Grey’s Anatomy star Isaiah Washington has entered a residential treatment facility in an effort to quell the controversy surrounding his anti-gay remarks — and save his job, Life & Style has learned exclusively.

    According to an insider, Isaiah, who issued an apology for his statements on Jan. 18, agreed to undergo a psychological assessment after talks with ABC executives.

    The married 43-year-old father of three was spotted entering the facility at 9 a.m. today (Jan. 24). (Life&Style Magazine)

    So you see, Ann Coulter wasn’t saying anything that wasn’t true. She just said something some people didn’t like. Oh well!

  • robert108

    …for her to employ such reckless language reinforces the stereotype that conservatives are racists.

    That stereotype has been around a lot longer than Ann has. Nothing will change leftie minds, especially trying to “make nice” with them.

    …referring to John Edwards, a former U.S. Senator and current Presidential candidate, as a “faggot.”

    She certainly implied it, on the way to making fun of lefties’ addiction to rehab as their method of penance, but she never called him a “faggot”.

    Coulter’s vicious word choice…

    It was a mild epithet, at best. It wasn’t even a “homosexual slur”; instead, it is commonly used to refer to a man who is somewhat less than manly, an accurate description of Edwards, btw.

    Denouncing Coulter is not enough.

    We, the undersigned, request that CPAC speaking invitations no longer be extended to Ann Coulter.

    Censorship is usually the province of lefties; this example of political cowardice on the part of those who claim to be “conservative” sickens me.
    No matter how much you attack Ann, or debase yourselves in front of the lefties, they will continue to hate you with undiminished ferocity and viciousness. The writers of this letter demean conservatism, IMO.

  • Rally

    Ann has said several things in the past that although many on the right were thinking, none of them had the guts to say them publicly. Sometimes I agree with her and sometimes I don’t, but to try and say her time has passed is laughable.

  • http://sayanythingblog.com/readers/entry/homosexuality_is_wrong_-_a_compendium move_zig

    Zsa-Zsa, Rally,

    Thank you, well said. Now Rob, what I am about to write is in all due respect, but the problem here is exactly the problem we have in Washington, albeit on a much larger scale.

    We send Republicans (since we have no Bull Moose, Federalist or Libertarians to send) to Washington, to represent our views.

    Simple enough.

    In the good old days (not that I remember those), I can only imagine that the debate was more civil (was it?). But, as the late columnist Balint Vazsonyi pointed out, there is a new level of visciousness that wasn’t here before.

    This isn’t just politics anymore… the ground rules changed after Radical Leftists seized control of the Demoncratic Party leadership in 1968. The John F. Kennedys and Zell Millers might be found in a museum, not in the State Houses and halls of Congress any longer… this is war by another means.

    Meanwhile, our guys are still playing by the Queensbury rules. For 12 years they finally had the long-sought perfect alignment of planets, yet they persisted to operate as if they were in the minority.

    The Demoncrat minority continued to beat them up and defeat Republican measures — it’s like trying to play pool with a rope!

    We need the gloves off. We need to call a spade a spade and if it takes some off-color language, have at it.

    We can’t shrink from the fight and we shouldn’t be afraid of offending the Left, who hate us anyhow.

  • http://SayAnythingBlog.com The_Whistler_ofnd

    I’m always interested in ideas that lie somewhere between PETA’s and the KKK’s.

    The KKK was very influential in the Democrat party in certain parts of the country.

  • robert108

    Robert, please explain to me how anyone is censoring Ann Coulter?

    It’s quite clear; I quoted your article. Here are the two statements again:

    Denouncing Coulter is not enough.

    We, the undersigned, request that CPAC speaking invitations no longer be extended to Ann Coulter.

    What part of that don’t you understand? If denouncing her “is not enough”, then what is enough?
    Isn’t “no longer extending CPAC speaking invitations” the same thing as censoring her?

  • carrick

    Robert108, I disagree that calling Ann Coulter an asshole is an ad hominem. I think it’s called a “personal judgement” in this case. I used it in a sense that most people would recognize and understand immediately, and, I think, a fair label.

    I’m not a member of CPAC so at some point it’s not my business whether they invite her back. I guess neither are you, though you certainly are willing to shill for her over this. I’m a bit surprised about this actually…. even to the point of you using liberal tactics to accuse anybody who criticizes her of censoring her. Usually your command of the English language is better than that.

  • robert108

    One question for you, Rob: If Ann promised to go to rehab, would you forgive her and lift your call for censoring her?

  • http://www.kneejerkcity.com/ Brandon

    Ann is provided a privlege, and not a right, by CPAC to speak at their event. And as always, all privleges are subject to revocation due to violation(s) of certain conditions.

    Last I checked, she can still write articles and books. And as long as Sean Insanity has a radio and television show, she’ll have an outlet to spew her viewpoints.

  • robert108

    Rob: I can see that I didn’t explain my reference to censorship as a tactic to punish those who step out of line, which is something the lefties use all the time. I didn’t make the distinction clear enough, apparently.
    I doubt that cutting Ann out of the CPAC speaker’s role would harm her in any way, and it would probably be a newsworthy item for the MSM. I just hate to see conservatives using denial of speakership, based purely upon one statement, as illustrative of conservative principles. I don’t think we should be playing to the lefties in any way.
    Once again, Michael Moore has never spoken at CPAC, and Ann has been the “star of the show” for several years now, to the benefit of CPAC, in terms of publicity. Now, she has done something to offend some of you, and you want to discard her. The double standard here is certainly not mine. It’s more like, “what have you done for me lately?”

  • carrick

    Robert108:

    What’s wrong with virtual fences? They aren’t real fences.

    I haven’t seen any “virtual fence” system that doesn’t include physical barriers as well.

  • Dave

    Coulter’s vicious word choice tells the world she care little about the feelings of a large group that often feels marginalized and despised.

    Is this “large group” conservatives or gay people? Please tell me it’s the latter…

  • http://proof-proofpositive.blogspot.com/ proof_positive

    Everyone who cut John Kerry some slack for his “botched joke” should do the same for Ann.

    Ater all, she did apologize much quicker than he did. She told the NYT in an e-mail:

    “C’mon, it was a joke. I would never insult gays by suggesting that they are like John Edwards. That would be mean.”

  • carrick

    No, Robert, it’s what I said. She’d f’d over the CPAC people who invited her to talk at their convention. Coulter’s an asshole, it’s that simple.

  • http://SayAnythingBlog.com The_Whistler_ofnd

    I’m very busy today and do not have time to retrieve the numerous quotes calling for death, internment, treason, etc. etc. etc.

    When you get time find where those folks were advocating this.

    Kristallnacht, also known as Reichskristallnacht, Pogromnacht, Crystal Night and the Night of Broken Glass, was a pogrom[1] against Jews throughout Germany and parts of Austria on November 9–10, 1938.

    Jewish homes and stores were ransacked in a thousand German cities, towns and villages,[2] as ordinary citizens and stormtroopers destroyed buildings with sledgehammers, leaving the streets covered in smashed windows — the origin of the name “Night of Broken Glass.” Jews were beaten to death; 30,000 Jewish men were taken to concentration camps; and 1,668 synagogues ransacked or set on fire.

    What Rob is doing is trying to bring the voice of movement conservatism back to the timbre it had during Goldwater or Reagan’s time, and some of y’all are calling him to the mat and siding with the least common denominator.

    I know you didn’t say that I was, but I’ll point out that in this I agree with Rob. Coulter is smart enough to skewer Edwards without resorting to calling him by a homo slur.

    I agree that she shouldn’t be invited back to CPAC, but I’ll keep reading her stuff because she often does get it right.

  • robert108

    You see, the lefties are caught up in a lockstep ideology, and one thing conservatism has to offer people is freedom from that. We don’t buy into PC, and we generally don’t govern by pressure group, so we don’t have to be paranoid about insulting some bunch of victims whenever we express our ideas. That is one of the things I like about being a conservative. I apologize for getting facts wrong, but never for hurt feelings. I don’t think Ann used any sort of “gay slur”, btw. In case you don’t agree, what is the bad content of the word “faggot”? It’s just a word. If it only implies that someone is gay or maybe a bit unmanly, what is wrong with that?

  • carrick

    Proof:

    I have a question: Ann Coulter is in trouble for calliing someone a derogatory term for a homosexual.

    No, Ann is in trouble for screwing things up for CPAC, just like she did last year with her raghead comment.

  • carrick

    Sparkie, Ann stole the headlines, which is what the CPAC people are complaining about. She put her selfish interests in front of the group, and still gets plenty of conservatives who will shill for her.

    As to … “pathetic choices for pres in 2008.” I wasn’t aware that Obama or Hillary spoke at the convention. Label me surprised!

  • http://SayAnythingBlog.com The_Whistler_ofnd

    Dave’s actually on your side of the arguement.

    Good luck with that.

  • http://SayAnythingBlog.com The_Whistler_ofnd

    all the repubs that advocate them actually want an illegal underclass working for them. that’s what’s wrong. its not that the fence won’t work

    You’re such a liar. It’s the Republican/Conservative base that’s for border security. The leftie Democrats want as many illegals in here as can be.

    The voting records in Congress prove this.

    Do you never not lie?

  • robert108

    You’re missing Andrew’s point. If we are charged with being anti-gay bigots shouldn’t it behoove us to avoid comments which tend to indicate, rightly or wrongly, that we are bigoted? Or avoid defending those sorts of comments?

    Should we let protecting the feelings of leftie pressure groups determine our behavior? As I said before, stereotypes aren’t based on reason, so you can’t reason with them.

  • http://sayanythingblog.com/readers/author/sparkiearbuckle sayanything-81

    gawd. why couldn’t she have just called him a ‘towel-head’ or a ‘sand-nigger’ or sumthin.

  • http://sayanythingblog.com/readers/author/sparkiearbuckle sayanything-81

    i also think its funny that ann coulter is out trashing on all these dem dudes like clinton and edwards, calling them fags, but she is about the most hideous thing in print. damn. i wouldn’t do that lumberjack dyke with someone else’s dick. even if she had a bag over her head I don’t think that would do it. i would still know what’s under there.

  • http://sayanythingblog.com/readers/author/sparkiearbuckle sayanything-81

    She would be in the same boat as Mel

    If you are referring to the USS Mouthy-Dumbass, I think they are both on deck and at attention.

  • http://sayanythingblog.com robport

    Censorship is usually the province of lefties; this example of political cowardice on the part of those who claim to be “conservative” sickens me.

    Robert, please explain to me how anyone is censoring Ann Coulter?

    Honestly, for all your bluster about the tactics lefties use you sure don’t mind using their “if you disagree with me you’re censoring me!” schtick.

    Dave,

    Is this “large group” conservatives or gay people? Please tell me it’s the latter…

    Well, from a certain perspective, both homosexuals and conservatives are often marginalized and despised. Often it’s the religious conservatives who marginalize the gays, and it’s the liberals (especially in the media and in the entertainment industry) who marginalize and despise conservatives.

  • http://sayanythingblog.com robport

    Right, robert. Because the problem is the criticism of Ann’s comments, not what Ann herself said.

    Give me a break.

  • http://sayanythingblog.com robport

    You’re saying I don’t have backbone?

    Clearly my criticism of Coulter’s comments are bucking the opinions of a majority of my readers.

    I stand up for what I believe in. I think what Coulter said was wrong. And as a principled, individualist conservative you aren’t going to be able to brow beat me away from criticizing her for what she said.

  • http://sayanythingblog.com robport

    What I haven’t heard yet is a reasoned explanation of what was so bad about what she actually said.

    Because calling people “faggot” isn’t acceptable. Maybe it’s fine with you, but it isn’t with me. I think it’s hateful and has no place in mainstream American politics.

    I mean, we all criticized that blogger the Edwards campaign hired for her cursing and what not on the internet. Are we really going to then turn around and claim that Ann Coulter calling Edwards a faggot is ok?

    C’mon guys. Put the partisanship aside and use your heads.

  • http://sayanythingblog.com/readers/author/sparkiearbuckle sayanything-81

    As to … “pathetic choices for pres in 2008.” I wasn’t aware that Obama or Hillary spoke at the convention. Label me surprised!

    at least they are on the right ticket. what about rudy! virtual fences, abortion, no guns… need i go on?

  • http://sayanythingblog.com/readers/author/sparkiearbuckle sayanything-81

    If you’re offended by what I just wrote, it’s because you’re a liberal and are caving into their demonic PC ideology.

    you’re an ass

    Once again it’s the liberals on this site using the “n-word”.

    Where? Those commies!

  • http://sayanythingblog.com robport

    What part of that don’t you understand? If denouncing her “is not enough”, then what is enough?
    Isn’t “no longer extending CPAC speaking invitations” the same thing as censoring her?

    Not providing someone a venue for their speaking is not the same as censoring him/her.

    One question for you, Rob: If Ann promised to go to rehab, would you forgive her and lift your call for censoring her?

    If I called you a faggot would you think that was appropriate? Or in keeping with the sort of level-headed political speech conservatives should be engaging in.

    I know, I know. You don’t care because all the leftists hate us anyway, blah, blah, blah.

    I just don’t see America’s political breakdown as black and white as you do. You’re flat-out wrong on this, and you make yourself look like an idiot defending Coulter.

  • http://sayanythingblog.com robport

    Bad analogy. Michael Moore hasn’t spoken at CPAC before, so taking it away from him to punish him for saying something you don’t like would not be possible. However, that is exactly what you propose to do to Ann for her rather humorous and pointed remark.

    It’s not a bad analogy. Speaking at CPAC is a privilege, not a right. We were talking about some leftist claiming that they’d been censored simply because a group decided not to have them as a speaker you’d be saying the same thing.

    This double standard is appalling, robert. I expected better from you.

    You admit that you would not forgive her, and you accuse me of setting aside logic?

    If she apologized sincerely for making such a hateful statement I would forgive her. But don’t turn this on me, your illogic on this issue has to do with the double standards I just highlighted above.

    If that’s you best solution, it’s your call. I am simply disagreeing with you, and for logical reasons which I have explained in great detail. If you can’t handle that, so be it.

    Oh, I can handle it just fine. Your reasoning on this is bogus.

    You remind me of the Dixie Chicks who claimed that they were being censored simply because people a) chose to criticize some comments they made and b) chose to stop buying their albums.

  • http://sayanythingblog.com robport

    Andrew, I don’t think there’s anything all that “brave” about Ann Coulter’s schock stick. She’s doing it to draw more attention to herself, and it adds little to the political debate in this country.

    Rachel:

    And Rob, you’ve earned yourself a liberal reader. I’m always interested in ideas that lie somewhere between PETA’s and the KKK’s.

    Thanks.

  • http://sayanythingblog.com robport

    Andrew: By definition, stereotypes are not based on fact, but on prejudice. Careful, now.

    You’re missing Andrew’s point. If we are charged with being anti-gay bigots shouldn’t it behoove us to avoid comments which tend to indicate, rightly or wrongly, that we are bigoted? Or avoid defending those sorts of comments?

  • http://sayanythingblog.com robport

    Should we let protecting the feelings of leftie pressure groups determine our behavior?

    We should refrain from being bigots and hurling insults and instead engage in educating the public about conservatism.

  • http://sayanythingblog.com/readers/author/sparkiearbuckle sayanything-81

    Toot

    Rosie, poster babe of the left.

    Beehave. We all know you want to pressed up against all that woman!

  • http://sayanythingblog.com/readers/author/sparkiearbuckle sayanything-81

    Women like Rosie O’Donnell probably explains why there are so many gay men (picture her in a thong – yeesh.)

    that description is worse than the pictures of the 70 year old men fellating each other that the spammer was posting. jesus!

  • http://sayanythingblog.com/readers/author/sparkiearbuckle sayanything-81

    av

    I agree. Right wing women tend to be either hideous (looks and personality) or brainless religious fanatics.

    I was only talking about Ann Coulter. She’s ugly and she obviously needs to get laid like woah!

  • http://sayanythingblog.com/readers/author/sparkiearbuckle sayanything-81

    my friend john just came out of the closet dave. want his number?

  • http://sayanythingblog.com/readers/author/sparkiearbuckle sayanything-81

    The Demoncrat minority continued to beat them up and defeat Republican measures–it’s like trying to play pool with a rope!

    I could kick a rope’s ass at pool. I don’t understand why any human couldn’t, but I guess those repubs can figure it out.

  • http://sayanythingblog.com/readers/author/sparkiearbuckle sayanything-81

    move_zig

    We need the gloves off. We need to call a spade a spade and if it takes some off-color language, have at it.

    You hate faggots too? Wow, there certainly is alot of you. Or is it just that you really love a good little bit of grandstanding from a celeb that totally detracts from the stated purpose of whatever function they decide to grandstand at? If the latter then how about Britney’s shaved head? Can you believe it? Her poor parents! Or do you just hate fags? If you don’t, why would calling Edwards one achieve anything? For your fight I mean? Is this the homophobic cause here or what move_zig?

  • http://sayanythingblog.com/readers/author/sparkiearbuckle sayanything-81

    exactly what’s wrong with the virtual fences

    all the repubs that advocate them actually want an illegal underclass working for them. that’s what’s wrong. its not that the fence won’t work, its more a matter of the actual wishes of the people advocating the virtual fence.

  • WOOFX

    Ann gets paid to speak.
    Don’t know about CPAC hiring her
    or her volunteering her time.

    You can do it for love
    You can do it for money

  • http://sayanythingblog.com/readers/author/sparkiearbuckle sayanything-81

    ann stole the spotlight from all the pathetic choices for pres in 2008. what were all their names again? that mormon that talked her up right before she said, “faggot” must be a faggot-hater too eh?

  • WOOFX

    THe Disingenuous

    Defending the Indefensible

  • WOOFX

    Ann’s

    nuanced joke

    offends American voters.
    Gay ones , straight ones, in between ones.
    You want to drive the bus of government , you don’t offend voters.
    Lots of voters.

    If you think what she said is a

    nuanced joke

    try it the next time you sit down at a bar.
    See if you get some laughs.

  • http://sayanythingblog.com robport

    I’ll ask you again, since you didn’t answer it before:
    If Ann promised to go to rehab, would you forgive her?

    No. What does rehab have to do with it? She said something stupid, and she deserves to be criticized for it.

    It is de facto censorship, and you know it.

    No, it isn’t. Otherwise denying Michael Moore the right to speak at CPAC would be censorship as well.

    Robert, you seem to be setting aside all logic and reason just to play defense for Coulter. If you can’t be level headed about this there’s no use even talking to you about it.

  • http://sayanythingblog.com robport

    Andrew Bryant, are you suggesting that I can’t support the 1st amendment and disagree with Ann Coulter?

  • Liger62

    I think she’s just acting, The more I see her rediculous responses to people when she gets called on her psycho statements , you can see she doesn’t really believe what she’s saying. I think this may be a ploy to expose the Right for what it really is.

  • Anonymous

    No, it’s just another lying leftie whining and crying upon getting smacked with the truth.

Create a SAB Readerblog


Recent Comments

Powered by Disqus

Blog Advice and Support
Installs and Upgrades
Theme Modifications
Custom Plugins
Theme Design
Conversions and Relocations
Hacked Site Recovery
Mobile Apps Development