The internets are swamped today as America reacts with shock (shock!) that Ann Coulter would say something offensive:
But among liberals, am I truly alone in thinking that Ann Coulter should not apologize? And that we should stop asking her to apologize (I’m talking to you, Ted Kennedy!)? Things are better for everyone if Ann stands her ground.
First off, an apology is, according to my half-assed right-click-enabled on-board dictionary, an expression of regret for something that one has done wrong. Does anybody out there think that Ann Coulter regrets what she said? Perhaps her statement on her website might offer a clue as to her thoughts: “I’m so ashamed I can’t stop laughing.”
No, I don’t think “regret” would be the word I’d use right there.
And what, exactly, has Ann Coulter done “wrong?” She’s pushed herself into a defiant corner, driven a wooden stake into the sternum of the conservative movement, and has furthered my growing conviction that she is, in fact, a man (she has, previously, accused Al Gore and both Bill and Hillary Clinton of wanton or closeted gayness. When you combine this fixation with her unusually large hands, smoky tenor, and prominent Adam’s apple… well, her anger just might be fueled by her inability to get stage time at certain prominent New York piano bars…). Was John Edwards harmed? I’d say he wasn’t. Were the feelings of the gay community hurt? Any gay person surprised or hurt that Ann Coulter would say such things fits that much older and more traditional definition of “queer” (thanks, right-click!).
And look at what a bounty of wiggly, crawly, glistening things Coulter has forced out from under the rocks! Over at FreeRepublic, there’s a healthy debate going on between those who’d condemn Coulter’s remarks, those who don’t agree with Ann but want the condemners to “grow a pair of balls” (and/or “stop being such pussies”), those who applaud Ms. Coulter for being willing to stand up to those godless sodomites, and those few who wonder publicly whether Ann was acting on some real inside information about John Edwards. I hate to send traffic to the freepers, but honestly, this new high in American political dialogue shouldn’t be missed.
And over at the home of my other favorite glamservative, Michelle Malkin, in condemning Coulter, manages to resuscitate (and handily link to!) her bizarre and entertaining reverse spin from last year. See, one year ago, when Coulter uttered her now quaint “raghead” remarks, Michelle offered up this gem in a post entitled “Ragheads and Sambos and Gooks“:
Ann’s comment gives cover to smug liberals in denial about their own pervasive bigotry (I’ll show you 100 liberal hate mails and blog posts referring to me as a “gook” or a “chink” or a “filipina whore” for every 1 “raghead” controversy on the right.)
There’s a lot to love in that classic post (though the omission of the tag “Oh my!” at the end of the post’s title is conclusive proof that Malkin, at least, is not in fact a drag queen): The narcissism, the handy exploitation of one’s own ethnicity, and - above all - the spurious equating of the ravings of a few random internet nutcases with the modern conservative movement’s most prominent, successful, and widely-recognized spokesperson. [Also - Michelle Malkin, meet Free Republic. Freep, Michelle.]
For the past couple of years the right has been fragmenting into its uneasily-mixed component parts: The evangelical right, the “old-school” political right, mainstream Christians, and the neocons. All that Coulter has done is crank up the speed on the ol’ centrifuge a little.
Apologize? Never, Ann. Stand your ground, keep fighting the good fight. Remember “Rose’s Turn,” and how they all laughed at your “solo duet” rendition of “Evergreen?” Remember that? Use it. Carry on!





62 comments
ShayShay
March 5, 2007 at 1:38 pm
1I don’t think she should apologize… but for different reasons.
First, if she did apologize, it certainly wouldn’t be sincere… and what’s the point of apologizing if you’re going to add the lie of being sorry on top of a wrong doing?
Secondly, she might just be doing us a favor by bringing the true sentiment of the conservative agenda “out of the closet” if you will. It’s all hate… and everyday more and more conservatives are proving it. They can no longer hide behind their lies and try to sugar coat it and cover it up. They hate anyone different from themselves…. end of story.
The more this is brought out, the more people will see how much these people hide behind a religion based on the life of a compassionate man… A religion that they don’t actually live by. So keep it up Anne! Finally people will see how messed up you and all the rest of these people really are!
SeattleDan
March 5, 2007 at 2:35 pm
2Max Blumenthal of The Nation visited the Conservative convention and has a little video which can be viewed at: http://www.thenation.com/blogs/campaignmatters?bid=45&pid=171489
There Ms. Coulter can be seen wowing the crowd with her stand-up. What a card!
shawn
March 5, 2007 at 3:36 pm
3Yeah no shit, if we demanded that anyone who said anything someone considers offensive we’d be listening to these pukes 24/7.
The real issue is that very few of the people condemning her could carry an argument with her let alone defeat her. Ann Coulter is twice the man any of the presidential hopefuls could be.
Hot Tub Tommy
March 5, 2007 at 3:45 pm
4Ann Coulter is a bit pissed at me and has been for a number of years. I had a chance to boink her back in 1999 and she was willing (demanding, actually) I thought about it, and I looked at her and thought about it so more and said - “Thanks anyway, ma’am, but uh…nah, I don’t think so…”. After that she started a whispering campaign, casting aspersions upon my manhood. I called a meeting with Shooter. Several of his pals pulled her into an alley late that night, had a “prayer meeting” with her and she got religion. End of the whispering campaign. There were so many quick fixes like that back then in the early aughts. DC’s just not much fun anymore.
Lady_le
March 5, 2007 at 3:45 pm
5I am fine with Ann saying whatever she likes. I just hope that she’s been spayed. A gaggle of skeletal neocon tykes following her around saying “Momma, faggot, raghead, TREASON!” is far more disturbing to me than her alone.
cooper
March 5, 2007 at 3:50 pm
6Lady_le, I don’t guess we have to worry about kids. She 45, so I think the baby train has already left the station.
Ann
March 5, 2007 at 4:39 pm
7I yield the lead to no one in my contempt for this person with whom I, unfortunately, share a name, but still I’m disturbed by the frequency with which attacks on her are based on her questionable sexuality and/or gender. Maybe I’m just disturbed by having to even contemplate her sexuality and/or gender, but still…there’s so much to hate about her, let’s leave her appearance and age out of it!
Adam Felber
March 5, 2007 at 4:40 pm
8ShayShay - I’m pretty sure our reasons aren’t very different at all. In fact, they’re just differently phrased.
Shawn - I tend to agree with you about Ann Coulter being “twice the man.”
–
But as a note on ShayShay’s point and the video that Dan linked to… it’s now an article of faith on both sides of this “culture war” that the other side is fueled by nothing but pure hatred and resentment. Look at what David Horowitz says in that video… about liberals. It’s a mirror image of ShayShay’s comment. And do not doubt for a second that he and many conservatives believe it.
It bears thinking about. My fear, increasingly, isn’t that ShayShay is wrong. It’s that both sides may be right, and may be making each other more right each and every day.
Adam Felber
March 5, 2007 at 4:43 pm
9Ann -
I hear that. But to me, once you start making a living questioning the sexuality and gender-appropriateness of others…. well, that gives me license to break out my best drag queen jokes. [And that “Oh my!” one was a killer, you gotta admit!”]
It's Pat!
March 5, 2007 at 7:08 pm
10My feeling is that the fixation on sexual terms by the likes of Coulter and her ilk is because they are sexually repressed. It is not a coincidence that this is so; when one sees the world around them in terms of black and white, then there is no alternative but to see what is different than as being perverse.
I absolutely agree with Adam. Coulter and the neocons need to be “You Tubed” over and over until she becomes as irrevelant as she deserves.
Ann (our Ann, not that other one), of course your contempt is well placed. I grieve for our country that Coulter’s type of discourse gets applause. It will change - things are getting better, it’s just hard to see it in realtime.
David
March 5, 2007 at 8:06 pm
11“To thine own self be true.” Yes, Ms. Coulter, please do, and the more publicly and frequently the better, preferably as a featured act at every conservative gathering and Mitch McConnell fundraiser. I’d also kinda like to see the Prez book you as his companion act at the next White House Press Corps Dinner.
Adam, “Oh, my!” is the trademark exclamation of the Voice of the Gators, Mick Hubert, every time the Gators score. Just thought you’d want to know.
Too bad, HTT. You could have made any number of people happy.
David
March 5, 2007 at 8:31 pm
12From “Ann Coulter Hates the Troops,” by Joseph A. Palermo (posted on Common Dreams):
Should we respond by calling Ann Coulter names? She would love it. She subscribes to the P.T. Barnum maxim that “there is no such thing as bad publicity.” Just like Johnny Knoxville and his “Jackass” movies, Coulter is a pioneer of sorts, and she has spawned lesser imitators like Michelle Malkin, Dennis Miller, Michael Savage, Glen Beck, and others. Aside from Coulter’s sexed-up persona, her political “Jackass” routine is nothing more than a dumb rehashing of Joe McCarthy’s worst gaffes. “News” people who can’t write, interview Ann Coulter, who can’t talk, for the benefit of people who can’t read.
SeattleTammy
March 5, 2007 at 8:39 pm
13A sweet, gentle book I read last year was Conservatize Me! by John Moe, local NPR dude. Wherein he makes an honest journey across America and talks to people. There are good people out there who don’t scream and screed.
I have a much beloved Aunt and Uncle who are VERY conservative, and we love long arguments with them and still can come back together and enjoy each other’s company. Actually, these are our favorite family members. Much like our Waterfowler.
hedera
March 5, 2007 at 9:16 pm
14Adam, I fear you hit it squarely once again, that both sides are correct about each other (I hesitate to say right, it’s acquired another meaning), and getting more so day by day.
Pause, all, and shed a brief tear for the late, and not nearly lamented enough, Civil Discourse…
Of course, if you go back to the Jacksonian period celebrated in yesterday’s post, I don’t remember any specific details, but I’ve read about allegations printed in the newspapers, about various politicians, that even the mighty Ann might hesitate to use, since they amounted to straight libel…
So maybe it’s just us?? Was Pogo right?
siobhan
March 5, 2007 at 9:42 pm
15Over at DKos, there are a number of comments from transgendered people (and others sympathetic to their situation) saying essentially: please, it’s hard enough already - don’t lump Coulter in with us.
SpottedDog
March 5, 2007 at 9:50 pm
16I think Ann Coulter and her ilk, both liberal and conservative, are great. They seem to have alot of fun. They are the kings and queens of a wonderful playground within which we pretend to take on civic issues and play ‘politics’. Meanwhile those who want to work, as opposed to play, go elsewhere.
tess
March 5, 2007 at 11:01 pm
17I’m still a mite confused as to how to proceed. I’m afraid of ignoring people like Coulter because of the distinct possibility (though not probability) that she’ll head something like the Discovery Institute, and look what that’s done for science education. But at the same time, she gets so much air time to screed and screech that she drowns everyone else out that it seems like we should be screaming at her. So should we just tell her to shut her cakehole in favor of someone with a brain and a soul? Or do we ignore her until we’re deaf? Or do we pretend that we’re actually arguing (substantively, not agressively) and give her screeching merit by doing so?
CaptainBooshi
March 5, 2007 at 11:16 pm
18Well, actually, from what I’ve seen, the biggest fear is that seeing someone prominently and proudly using language like that is just going to encourage the sort of scum that would use not just deregatory language but violence. The more something like this is not seen as nastiness unfit for true humans, the more cowards who would just bitch to their friends now might find it in them to take it further.
Slimpikinz
March 6, 2007 at 12:00 am
19Well what the hey ….. the pendulum will swing as it always seems to do. Neocon jeezoid today, vodka guzzling clod photographed in an S & M threesome tomorrow.
Watch for it. It will happen.
cooper
March 6, 2007 at 4:18 am
20Gee, Tammy, I wouldn’t say ‘fowler is my favorite.
siobhan
March 6, 2007 at 6:03 am
21Well, it appears that this controversy has at least managed to free her from some of her advertisers.
David
March 6, 2007 at 8:58 am
22siobhan, this is the only thing that will bother Ann Coulter. Problem is that this is also how the right helped insure that Air America couldn’t do as well financially as it otherwise might have. I do belong to the let-them-rant crowd, but Captain Booshie makes a very important point. If I understand the phenomenon correctly, it is what authority figures do or don’t say that has the most impact. Thus it is essential that George Bush, and even more importantly, Dick Cheney, condemn this comment by Ms. Coulter. Let her spew venom, but demand leadership anti-venom. Tony Snow should be confronted relentlessly, and Bush should be forced to make very clear that he rejects any and all forms of homophobia, with a specific reference to what Ms. Coulter said. I don’t really expect this from a bunch of chickenshit chickenhawks, but it is what is needed.
Seattle Tammy, we have quite similar relatives, at least as regards political views, and they are anything but hatemongers. They are very conservative, socially and politically perplexed Americans. Some of them can talk about things, some can’t, but what is most frustrating is that at some point I always encounter a rigidly held belief, be it literal Bible based or a need to hold onto what for them is a patriotic belief that America seeks only to do good against the evil in the world, especially in military affairs. They conflate the soldiers with the administration, which Karl Rove understands.
Waterfowler is very much like some of my relatives, except that he seems a bit more hardcore (as do I to him, I suspect).
sasquatch
March 6, 2007 at 9:20 am
23Did it occur to anyone else that Max Blumenthal of The Nation was playing the Ann Coulter game himself? As much as I hate Coulter and what she says, I couldn’t help but think she had the moral high ground during their exchange about her marital history. Maybe Adam should go to the next convention in Max’s place!
Jim (OJNTNJ)
March 6, 2007 at 9:22 am
24Siobhan, thanks for posting the link regarding companies pulling their advertisements from the Coulter web site.
However, there was one line in the article that gave me pause. This could be a sign that it’s possible that the extreme religious right may be correct in that the second coming is imminent:
“Coulter did not respond to CNN’s request for comment.”
Dale
March 6, 2007 at 9:27 am
25Off topic, but you heard it here first: Libby found guilty.
siobhan
March 6, 2007 at 10:19 am
26Sasquatch, I’m with you. He went overboard a few times and weakened his point. The marital status question was one, and another was when he was trying to paint the Tancredo supporters as white supremacists. (Though it was fair to go after the guy hiding his confederate flag pin.) It is possible to support tougher immigration laws and enforcement and not be a racist. (My brother being one example.) When you distort the other person’s position or go ad hominem, you give them license to ignore you.
cooper
March 6, 2007 at 10:35 am
27Dale, I’m thinking Scooter ought to use this time before the sentencing hearing to have the words “Rat-Ass Crazy Muther” tattooed on the right bicep. It may save him some discomfort during his incarceration.
JRM
March 6, 2007 at 10:36 am
28Goooooood - Byyyyyyy
Lib-by.
Soooooooo - Looooong
Lib-by.
David
March 6, 2007 at 10:40 am
29You won the race, Dale. Damned dialup.
Obstruction of justice stuck. Word from my source, who goes by the handle Maximum Suckurity Federal Correctional Institute Mole, or Maximum Suck for short, is that the system is crackling with excitement. Rumor is that there is now a wardens’ pool for betting on who will get the Vespa Virgin. Word in the yard is that the fci which gets him will be the envy of the entire system.
Inmates everywhere are apparently really stimulated by his conviction.
siobhan
March 6, 2007 at 11:01 am
30Cooper, you don’t think that he’s already protected from harm by Darth’s energy field? (cue crackling vertabrae…)
Dale
March 6, 2007 at 11:30 am
31Does anyone else feel sorry by association for NPR commentator Libby Lewis?
Mieke
March 6, 2007 at 11:42 am
32The tactic of being “outraged” and asking some bonehead to apologize in order to stir up attention I find to be a bit disingenuous. In many of these cases, I don’t think they give a hoot about the comments. They just play into the sheeplike quality of much of the American public. If they create a bit of a stir, the bleating will start and a vague recollection of some scandal is then forever planted in their minds. It’s a tactic the neocons use frequently, and unfortunately, our side seems to be increasingly adopting it because they see how effective it is. But Ann Coulter is a poor choice to use that tactic on, because she loves all the attention. Being offensive and getting democrats to respond is her whole M.O.
Besides Ann Coulter, who is best left to her vitriol unchecked (hoisting by own petards and whatnot), I was completely irritated to hear the DNC shouting for an apology from John McCain for saying on Letterman that “we’ve wasted a lot of our most precious treasure, which is American lives.” Um…Isn’t that what WE have been saying? Why would we ask him to apologize? He’s agreeing with us. Asking for an apology simply cuts off our own ability to emphasize that point in the future without having it thrown in our face. No, we ask for the “apology” because it’s the way we now try to muddy someone of the opposing party. Ditto Kerry with his comments that if you didn’t have an education in this country, you’d get stuck in Iraq. Um, I know that’s the elephant in the room, but um, isn’t that the simple truth? Aren’t army recruiters targeting poor, uneducated kids? What does Kerry have to apologize for? The fact that this regime is exploiting the American lower class? THEY’RE the ones that should be apologizing. Their offense is far more grave, sending these kids into an unwinnable mess. God forbid a war veteran should make an observation about that.
The substance or context of these comments is often irrelevant to the people demanding an apology. And constantly asking for apologies actually makes it less serious when an actual apology is warranted in cases of grave injustice (like lying to your country in order to pull them into a war). Ann Coulter is a waste of energy.
As far as Libby, they’re already speculating that Bush will pardon him. Surprise surprise. Because culpability only applies to petty s**t, apparently.
waterfowler
March 6, 2007 at 11:45 am
33Thanks alot, SeattleTammy. I was just about to go off on a wingnut rant…
David, your relatives are thinking it, they’re just not saying it. Did you happen to see Texas vs. A&M last week?
Clean and refill your hummingbird feeders, the ruby-throats are on the way.
Shawn, you stole my word. Even the 8 yr. old redneck can watch the evening news and identify a “puke”. I’m sure our definitions are about 180.
A follow up to SeattleDan’s call for socialized medicine. http://www.gmu.edu/departments/economics/wew/articles/07/medicine.html
wmblair
March 6, 2007 at 12:31 pm
34on the subject of Ann Coulter’s gigantic adam’s apple proving she is a man - I have heard this before - but I have spent little time looking at her or listening to her - I mean what would be the point? But after reading Adam’s reference to her adam’s apple here, I took a look at the clip and - wow - it seems that it is almost too large of an adam’s apple to be an adam’s apple. So she could be a man, or she could just be sort of oddly, hideously deformed.
But otherwise, woohoo! We all know that politics is all about winning and since there are only two teams - something bad happening to one team is good for the other team. So hooray our team. Crazy Ann lost a point for the other team and Scooter just lost them another point and since this is a zero-sum game that is like our team getting two points. Go team!
wmblair
March 6, 2007 at 12:36 pm
35sorry to double post put I just got this pertinent adam’s apple information from a children’s health site,
“When the larynx grows larger during puberty, it sticks out at the front of the throat. This is what’s called an Adam’s apple. Everyone’s larynx grows during puberty, but a girl’s larynx doesn’t grow as much as a boy’s does. That’s why boys have Adam’s apples. Most girls don’t have Adam’s apples, but some do. It’s no big deal either way.”
http://www.kidshealth.org/kid/grow/boy/adams_apple.html
K. Rove
March 6, 2007 at 1:25 pm
36Whew! That was too close for comfort. Now, if Cheney can just get Scooter whacked before he starts spilling his guts…
Harold
March 6, 2007 at 1:33 pm
37My favoritest thing about Ann “Treasonous Godless Freaky Looking Psycho Skank” Coulter is that she portrays herself as a satirist. Everything she says is a joke, she maintains, and if you’re getting all worked up about anything she says, you’re just a thin-skinned little pussy faggot and need to grow up. Ah, I hope she rots from the inside out someday soon. Maybe Karl Rove will give her HPV and she can experience the joys of cervical cancer. Just kidding, Ann!
(See? It works!)
I wonder how many cameras were working the room during her amusing little speech? I’d love to see the reaction shots of the folks who provided her with laughter and applause. With names, please.
On another note, one that does not make me feel in need of a chlorhexidine shower: SeattleDan has kindly provided me with a photo of the FA: Seattle crew which I have posted on my site with his kind permission (and the kind pre-approval of the ever-lovely Ann.) Click on over and check it out!
http://anothermonkey.blogspot.com/2007/03/fanatical-apathy-seattle.htm l
(George’s Sister, I’m still waiting for the photo of Cody’s discovery!)
Harold
March 6, 2007 at 2:07 pm
38(Now, let’s see if I can do this without getting 404d or 403d or whatever the hell the new error message is.)
I missed an obvious joke:
Free Ann Coulter? She ain’t even worh that much.
David
March 6, 2007 at 3:44 pm
39Waterfowler, I missed the Texas v. A&M game. I come down squarely on the side of the ‘Horns in those showdowns. And, yes, some of my relatives do think I’m over the edge, but we are Southerners, and we are all pretty much over some edge. I do love being a Southerner, even including the Snopeses in the family tree.
Mieke, I also did not like my DNC demanding an apology from McCain, and for exactly the same reasons you cited.
Regarding Ms. Reactionary Malignancy, I don’t see her Adam’s apple as particularly of note, but rather an irrelevancy. What she said, however, because of the venue and the way it was applauded by the CPAC rank-and-file, is anything but an irrelevancy. I think Andrew Sullivan has articulated exactly what is so heinous about what she said, and it is heinous, and she damned well knew exactly what she was doing, and why. Yes, it was a schoolyard taunt. And I remember another equally heinous schoolyard taunt from my youth.
http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2007/03/faggots.h tml
Murray
March 6, 2007 at 3:48 pm
40When I saw Ann on TV saying her latest stupid crap, all I could think was, why is anyone paying attention to this nutjob? I guess it’s much the same way we love to rubberneck at a crash, and Ann is certainly one of the biggest train wrecks around.
hedera
March 6, 2007 at 5:36 pm
41Waterfowler, as a Texan you should know this because they’re neighbors, but maybe the word has fallen out of use. The word “puke” isn’t only an insult to someone you don’t like. My father, a born and bred Missourian, used to refer to himself as “a Missouri puke”, and it was in its odd way a claim to being just an ordinary guy. On the other hand, my father was born in 1907 (he’s gone now, God rest him); and a lot of water has flowed down the Mississippi since then.
I found the following explanation for it at www.netstate.com in the article on Missouri:
Jim (OJNTNJ)
March 6, 2007 at 5:51 pm
42David, regarding Ms. Coulter’s “schoolyard taunt” defense, she would do well to remember that she is, in fact, a 40 (50?)ish adult.
Of course, given her previous rants, taunts, and punditating, expecting her to actually act like an adult is apparently too much to ask.
Ann
March 6, 2007 at 6:10 pm
43Yes, the “Oh my” was inspired. Still, one does not want to stoop to her level, does one?
I call for a moratorium on any complaints of persecution based on hostile e-mails received or nasty blog comments posted. Let it go without saying that the world is full of people who are not capable of rational discourse, yet feel compelled to voice their opinions—and that these people exist on all points of the political/moral/socio-economic/sexual-orientation spectra.
The vile public assertions of public people are not outweighed by the vile scrawlings of anonymous people, and Michelle Malkin is, once again, being disingenous to suggest otherwise.
Boomer
March 6, 2007 at 6:47 pm
44OT. I’m a bit reassured by the naming of Bob Dole and Donna Shillelagh to head the commission looking into the Walter Reed scandal - two single minded, junk yard dogs, if there ever were.
It's Pat!
March 6, 2007 at 7:15 pm
45Have you noticed that if you put one of those weird colored eyeballs in Ann C’s head, she would look just like Marilyn Manson, who has the same skill sets?
Just sayin’.
Rebecca
March 6, 2007 at 7:46 pm
46It’s Pat, no, I never noticed, but whereas I used to think she was just creepy, now I think she’s REALLY creepy. Thanks for that.
dee
March 6, 2007 at 8:26 pm
47What Ann said.
dee
March 6, 2007 at 8:26 pm
48Both times.
David
March 6, 2007 at 8:39 pm
49Alphabet Jim (sorry, couldn’t resist, and meant absolutely no insult by it - it was not intended as a schoolyard taunt), Ms. Coulter seems to me to qualify as 40-something going on poorly socialized 12. A schoolyard taunt is a quite powerful thing, all too often genuinely viscious, and calling what she did a schoolyard taunt does not in any way lessen its import. Schoolyard taunts have driven kids to commit murder when repeated over and over without effective intervention by school authorities. The schoolyard taunt burned into my memory, even though it was so often tossed off as “just a schoolyard taunt” by white adults (but not my mother, God love her enlightened Southern soul) doesn’t even have to be named at this point, nor does its incredible destructiveness when used as a taunt, however apparently “harmlessly,” need to be argued. As I said earlier, I think Andrew Sullivan does a marvelous job of putting what Ann Coulter did in its proper social/political perspective. And this ain’t about political correctness, it is about an “insignificant, harmless schoolyard taunt” that is anything but either insignificant or harmless. Under no circumstance would I advocate for censorship of Ann Coulter (or anyone else), but I expect what she did to be called what it was, and by people whose condemnation of it will mean something.
Ann, I think the greater problem is the people who simply are not interested in rational discourse because it might stand in the way of their objectives. The nutcases we will always, of course, have with us e-mailing away like diarrhetic ducks decorating the grounds by the pond.
Max S
March 7, 2007 at 6:57 am
50New wardens’ pool with betting running 5:1 yes - will the Vespa Virgin be pardoned? Second level pool, which getting more action, is betting on what day. Guys in the yard are pissed about the probability of a pardon because they were convinced our fci would get this guy, who they think is guilty of treason for outing a CIA operative. They don’t give a shit about “no stinkin’ no law was broken in revealing Valerie “Man she’s hot” Plame. Inmates can be surprisingly patriotic, as well as socially conservative, and don’t even get them started on child molesters.
Jim (OJNTNJ)
March 7, 2007 at 9:49 am
51David, no offence taken, though a more accurate nickname would be “Acronym Jim.” The letters stand for “Old Jim Not The New Jim,” and were referring to a point when there we’re several Jims posting comments.
I agree with you whole-heartedly about Mr. Sullivan’s article. I too (as have most of us), have been the target of schoolyard taunts, and I believe that Mr. Sullivan laid her comments bare with a succinct analysis.
My point, however, was that the “schoolyard taunt” was the defence offered by Ms. Coulter herself, and as a grown adult, she has exposed outed herself, as you so adroitly put it, as having the maturity of a “poorly socialized twelve year old,” and should be dealt with as such (intensive counseling, perhaps?)
Jim (OJNTNJ)
March 7, 2007 at 9:53 am
52Forgive me for the double post, but the word “exposed” was meant to be
stricken.Maximum Bob
March 7, 2007 at 10:53 am
53Michele Malkin is being disingenuous? Must be a month with a vowel in it.
Rachel Maddow got off a good Ann Coulter line on Countdown–she said that Ann Coulter needs publicity the way a tapeworm needs a large intestine. Funny, if a bit unfair to tapeworms.
Ann
March 7, 2007 at 11:10 am
54Oh rats, I misspelled “disingenuous.” Must be because I took the day off from my editing job and worked in my garden. Without a jacket! It’s spring! I’m giddy!
David
March 7, 2007 at 6:17 pm
55Acronym Jim - Cool.
Ann, I swear it’s either the keyboard or the cybergremlin. I used to win spelling bees, for chrissake, and I come up with some doozies when cyberkeyboarding, although it’s certainly easy to see how spring could do that to you as well.
The Crawford Brushman
March 8, 2007 at 5:34 am
56Ann Coulter and Matt “The Rod” Sanchez are so hot together. Who says reactionaries can’t swing? It’s party time!
Ann
March 8, 2007 at 6:41 pm
57TCB: Don’t…just…just don’t.
cooper
March 9, 2007 at 4:20 pm
58Michelle Malkin said Ann’s (Coulter) comment gives cover to smug liberals in denial about their own pervasive bigotry (I’ll show you 100 liberal hate mails and blog posts referring to me as a “gook” or a “chink” or a “filipina whore” for every 1 “raghead” controversy on the right.) Hmm… maybe, Michelle, you just assume these are smug liberals in denial. Maybe the hundreds of e-mails that call you those epithets just come from people who hate you. Lord knows there plenty of them.
The Crawford Brushman
March 10, 2007 at 7:27 am
59‘Berto makes it a really hot, bicultural threesome. Love the gender ambiguity, even though I don’t do nuance. Just a-swingin’…
Carol
March 12, 2007 at 5:03 pm
60No doubt about, John Edwards has won the right to bitch slap ‘er.
You know, her day will come…yep, one day Karma will side-swipe her silly, and she won’t know where she is or who she is, and we’ll be all the richer for it. She’ll be in a town she’s never visited before on the day they are celebrating Gay Pride Day, she’ll turn a corner, and splat - flattened by a huge float in the shape of a Louis Vuitton hand bag.
A person such as Ann Coulter, one who thoroughly believes she’s above others, and especially, above reproach - well folks, it comes back to bite you on the bum no matter who you are in this world.
Just ask Leona Helmsley.
David
March 12, 2007 at 7:35 pm
61Well said, Carol.
“Gen. Pace calls homosexuality immoral.” (Today’s Yahoo News)
Do Big Peter and Ann C. have something going? Voyeurs everywhere really, really want to know.
Murray
March 13, 2007 at 3:59 pm
62The worst thing that could happen to Ann Coulter would be if EVERYONE ignored her. With out constant media attention she would just shrivel up and blow away, vacuum cleaner hose neck and all.
I do my part to ignore her (and Rush and O’Riley, and Hannity, etc.)