where are the hate-mongering christo-fascist theocrats?
This past week the pro-gay, pro-choice, twice-divorced Republican from a Northeastern state received just two less votes than the highest vote getter in a straw poll conducted in one of the most conservative Southeastern states. Also, at the American Conservative Union’s CPAC convention over the weekend, this “moderate” candidate, again came in second to a different primary opponent. And when you factor in “second choice” votes, he resoundingly carried the field. Meanwhile, at the same conference, a very conservative pundit makes an anti-gay remark and is denounced for it–not just by Democrats, but by most Republicans as well.
I thought that the GOP was supposed to be the hate-mongering christo-fascist theocratic party. What happened?
The conventional wisdom was that a convention that would invite an Ann Coulter to speak would never select the most “liberal” man in the bunch. And yet, slightly more than a third of the convention goers named Mayor Giuliani as one of their two best picks.
The conventional wisdom was that a New York Republican could never carry the very religious South, and yet, the most politically active of the most Republican part of one of the most Republican states nearly selected Rudy, who didn’t even try to win the straw poll.
The conventional wisdom also says that the meanness and anger that often comes forth from Ann Coulter’s lips is characteristic of Republicans.
The truth is that Ann Coulter has never been as popular with Republicans as she is with Democrats who need her to remind Americans why they shouldn’t be Republicans. The truth is also that pro-military, optimistic leaders like Rudy will always have a home in the party of the big tent. And the truth is that Republicans can’t be neatly pigeon-holed into being what some on the left and in the media would like you to believe. Because if half of America really was as ugly and mean as some have made them out to be, there’s no way that their opponents wouldn’t have already left the country after six years of them being in charge.
UPDATE:
In order to gauge Ann Coulter’s “popularity” I used the Newsbuckit Methodology and determined that she is mentioned by “left” leaning internet pundits and their readers nearly two-and-a-half times as often as her name is mentioned by bloggers on the “right”.
2nd UPDATE:
Just to be fair, I used the “Newsbuckit Methodology” to compare how a divisive figure on the left is viewed by both sides. For better or worse, I selected Jesse Jackson. What I found was that Rev. Jackson was mentioned nearly 40% more often on leading right-leaning blogs than he is by those on the left. (14,959 vs. 10,703)One curious thing, though. Wizbang was responsible for 13,100 (88%) of the hits on the right.
Bottom line: Each side has divisive opposites that they prop up as cautionary examples.
3rd UPDATE:
Joe Carter at the Evangelical Outpost added this in a comment below: “. . . the 114 times that Coulter is mentioned on my blog (Evangelical Outpost) it is to denounce her.” There’s probably quite a bit of that in the 20,000+ pages about her on right-leaning blogs.
Related:
Shots Across the Bow: “Conservatism has never been dominated by the religious right the way liberals have always pictures them to be.”
Noemie Emery: ” . . . a pro-life party, faced with a pro-choice candidate it finds compelling on other grounds, is doing things differently.” (ht:JT)
Bill Hobbs: ” . . . perhaps GOP voters are ready to separate the personal from the political. Giuliani’s political weaknesses . . . are well-known. And they’ve become more well-known, not less, as his poll numbers have risen.”
March 5th, 2007 at 12:51 am
Hate-mongering theocrat Ann Coulter sure got a warm welcome at the GPAC conference.. hmm.
Wonder why she keeps getting invited to these conservative Republican conferences, and sells millions of books calling liberals traiters, Muslims “ragheads”, and liberals “faggots,” and calls for a military crusaide to “Christianize” muslim countries.. sounds a lot like Sean Hannity and Rush Limbaugh.. and the Republican Party!
March 5th, 2007 at 6:27 am
Indeed, Jim. And wacko leftist Cindy Sheehan sure sounds like the voice of the left. But here’s the difference: Unlike Coulter, who I’ve seen regularly disavowed and criticized on perportedly “right wing” sites such as Instapundit, there’s never been anything but applause for Sheehan on Kos et al. And for all your bitter yowling, the fact is that Guiliani, who supports abortion, gay rights et al, is in fact getting support across the board from the right, which is the poster’s point.
Since you cannot dispute this (and you certainly cannot bring yourself to acknowledge it, either), you change the subject, hoping no one will notice. You’re something of a ‘hate-mongerer’ yourself, aren’t you?
March 5th, 2007 at 6:37 am
“The truth is that Ann Coulter has never been as popular with Republicans as she is with Democrats who need her to remind Americans why they shouldn’t be Republicans.”
Not so sure that’s the truth Bob. Maybe I’m shooting from the hip here, but I’m pretty sure Coulter has never gotten invited to a DEMOCRATIC convention. And yet, she seems to be a perennial fixture at Republican events.
So tell me…where is the secret portal to the alternate universe where Coulter is more popular with DEMOCRATS than Republicans?
March 5th, 2007 at 6:43 am
Jim is gay. Not that there’s anything wrong with that….
March 5th, 2007 at 6:51 am
So Craig Kilborn showing a picture of the president with the caption “Snipers Wanted” was just a little joke that got taken the wrong way?
Pious double standards don’t impress me much.
March 5th, 2007 at 7:05 am
“The truth is that Ann Coulter has never been as popular with Republicans as she is with Democrats who need her to remind Americans why they shouldn’t be Republicans.”
Apparently, Mr. Pearce has a reading-comprehension problem.
March 5th, 2007 at 7:15 am
Hmmmm.
A lot of solid conservatives have basically given up on the GOP. Having been stabbed in the back over and over again by a GOP determined on emasculating conservatives on policy issues many conservatives have really just written off 2008 just like they wrote off 2006.
You can see some of this in the viewership of right-wing bloggers and the lack of any sort of real energy in that part of the blogosphere.
March 5th, 2007 at 7:22 am
James,
It would help when you try to make your points that you actually read more carefully what you are trying to rebutt.
The previous poster was comparing Cindy Sheehan’s reception amongst democrats vs Coulter’s reception amongst republicans.
Just goes to show that Liberals hear what they want to hear
March 5th, 2007 at 7:27 am
sorry, posted too quickly,
and the article’s author never refered to Coulter being invited to a Democratic convention, just that they use Coulter as straw man for all of the Republican evils. I never listen to Coulter, Limbaugh or Hannity. They represent an extreme wing and view of conservatives. On the other hand, the Sheehan/Moore wing of the liberals, is warmly embraced by the Democratic party.
March 5th, 2007 at 7:29 am
Ann never was a Republican leader. She’s more like that little fantasy you get when a guy cuts you off in traffic – part of you wants to rip his guts out and feed them to him, but you know that’s not the response of a civilized person, and you let it go. Yes, she’s mean, but she’s also funny, and makes points that others won’t. That’s why she sells books. I thought her “faggot” remark was way over the line, but I understood the point she was making about Edwards.
March 5th, 2007 at 7:31 am
Jim is gay. Not that there’s anything wrong with that….
OK, funny (true or not).
This kind of thing is said a lot and meant, I am sure, to show diversity and the kind of thought that gave rise to the famous saying about your ability to say anything, whether or not I agree with you. However, this is not true. The fact is that there is something wrong with that. If it were true, and if homosexuality became more prevalent in society, then the race would not survive. Period.
March 5th, 2007 at 7:35 am
I find it bemusing that Rush Limbaugh is always raised as ‘hate-mongerers’. All of the examples that Jim states as evidence of Coulter’s hate-mongerering are then used as used as evidence that the Republican party then must also feel this way. When has Rush even made these charges (discussing Coulter’s books on-air doesn’t count since one can approve of portions of a book or citations in the book without approving of the overall theme of the book). Or, better yet have prominent Republicans made these assertions without being challenged by other Republicans.
There seems to be some strange blinkers on the eyes of some liberals when it comes to hate. Simply ‘google’ Julian Bond and read what he says about Republicans or black conservatives. Is that hate? This list can go on and on, but is essentially unacknowledged that such speech is ‘hate’ (as defined by liberals) but is always absolved since, according to liberals, such desrciptors are undoubtedly true. It is a very thin-skinned approach.
March 5th, 2007 at 7:59 am
Michael Moore and Cindy Sheehan were laughed out of the liberal establishment a LONG TIME AGO. The only, and I repeat, ONLY people you hear talking about them anymore are conservative Republican sympathizers using them as cudgels to beat liberal Dems.
Please tell me the last time Moore or Sheehan were invited to give featured speeches at the big yearly liberal confab.
On the other hand, Ann Coulter was a featured speaker at CPAC THIS WEEKEND, and when she emitted her slur, she was CHEERED! And now look at all of you rushing to defend her.
Face it, the truth is that Ann Coulter says out loud what a lot of conservatives are privately thinking.
Like I said, show me the portal to your alternate universe so we can actually have a conversation about the same reality. I beg you.
March 5th, 2007 at 8:02 am
Coulter says many things designed as humor with an especially rapier-like point of truth— like all good comedy it’s the truth part that makes what follows so deliciously amusing
March 5th, 2007 at 8:17 am
James, the Democrat National Convention, the one that selected JF Kerry as the presidential candidate in ’04, wasn’t that long ago. I recall Michael Moore being an honored guest there, seated right next to Jimmy Carter.
March 5th, 2007 at 8:22 am
Moore’s got a film coming out this year which attacks the U.S. health care industry, which jibes nicely with the efforts by Hillary and other Democrats to introduce a government-run National Health Care system if elected in 2008. Let’s see what type of reception Moore receives this summer from the Democratic hopefuls, if they think his movie can help their agenda.
March 5th, 2007 at 8:39 am
So what you’re saying is “If you don’t support Guiliani, you’re a christo-fascist.” and a big meanie from the raging fanatic wing of the R party which is practically non-existent?
I’ll agree that the raging fanatic wing is practically non-existent. But, the True Conservative probably outnumbers the other parts of the Republican coalition by a significant margin.
And if you want to lose in 2008 like you lost in 2006, just go on dissing them.
If instead, you show a willingness to accept leadership, and vision, and say put someone like Duncan Black who came within two votes of the top in a vote on the other side of the nation, despite what the MSM is saying about his invisibility, and we could gladly compromise with making Guiliani VP. Because the Republican Party is a Big Tent. I just hate it when supposed moderates try to shrink the tent to exclude the people who win elections.
Or you can disdain a sound theory of government, the conservative theory, and try to be pragmatic and visionless, and join former Senator Robert Dole and George Bush Senior as they go on their “How I won my second term in office” speaking tours.
March 5th, 2007 at 8:40 am
Hell the whole Congressional Democrat leadership made it a gala event to show up at the screening of Michael Moore pitiful little kite flying crockumentary. Not one Democrat leader has ever had a Sister Souljah moment with the rotund one. And when many of them talk, I swear its Michael Moore throwing his voice.
March 5th, 2007 at 8:40 am
[...] Bob Krum (via Instapundit) [...]
March 5th, 2007 at 8:42 am
Nobody here even seems to be aware that Bill Maher last week expressed regret that Al Qaeda had not succeeded in assassinating Dick Cheney. In my mind, that’s a hell of a lot worse than referencing someone else’s characterization of a man as effeminate.
March 5th, 2007 at 8:44 am
“Face it, the truth is that Ann Coulter says out loud what a lot of conservatives are privately thinking”
Well none that I know of! In fact, I was at a hotel this weekend, which was FILLED with Republican women.
I spoke of Coulter to one of them women in the elevator.
This was her comment:
“I hate to tell MS. Coulter…but we have plenty of – ahem – FAGGOTS in our own party… and that is NOBODY’S DAMNED BUSINESS, IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH RUNNING THIS COUNTRY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!- And now she wants to call it a JOKE…well what is next – will she call Obama a N*GGA? With comedians like THAT – who needs BIGOTS to be ashamed of?”
She is a disgrace, and any subset of this party which invites her
to speak OR defends her words should be voted off the island.
March 5th, 2007 at 8:46 am
Jim is a vemous, hate-spewing bigot himself. Unfortunately he’s blinded himself to his own prejudices which makes his hypocrisy even more loathesome since he believes himself to be so enlightened. This is the typical state of those in moonbat land … the blind leading the blind into that deep dark abyss of hate. If people like Jim would excoriate Islamofascists half as much as they do conservatives and Christiandom, the war against radical Islamism would be a lot further down the road. In the 21st Century I don’t see Catholics beheading the heathen or Evangelicals ramming jetliners into mosques in Mecca, rather what a person sees (except for liberals who see no evil, hear no evil, and speak no evil with respect to Islam) is Muslims conducting their jihad against Christians, Jews, Hindus, Buddhists, animists, atheists, garden-variety “infidels” and even other Muslims!
So what’s all this bilge about Christo-fascists and Bush is Hitler? This is why its far too dangerous having liberal Donks in control of the White House as long as the GWOT is being fought.
March 5th, 2007 at 8:50 am
Capn Dan – you said “but I understood the point she was making about Edwards”
Please – tell me what point you understood – I must have really missed it.
I think Coulter and her ilk (Michaedl Moore…Maher…and 80% of Hollywood, and at least 50% of “Focus on the Family “Godly Men”) have trashed our political system to the point of no return. No decent person will subject themselves, AND their family to these nastyfests for very long.
March 5th, 2007 at 8:53 am
James, liberal Wacademia here in our campus town warmly embraced Cindy Sheehan this last weekend as she continued besmirching the honor and memory of her son Casey who willingly and ethusiastically embraced his part in the noble cause of liberating Iraq. The whole place was filled with DEMOCRATS who fawned over this hate-spewing hate-Bush/blame-America activist. She has used terms like “Christo-fascists” and has most certainly described President Bush as Hitler even as she sucked up to a bona fide leftist despot, Hugo Chavez of Venezuela.
Something doesn’t compute here given what you’re trying to deny. Ward Churchill, Michael Moore, George Soros, Cindy Sheehan and radical leftist 527s like KOS and democraticunderground.com are far and away out of the mainstream and are increasingly defining the Democrat Party. You can’t handle the truth.
March 5th, 2007 at 8:53 am
“as she is with Democrats who need her to remind Americans why they shouldn’t be Republicans”
Which reminds me of how, during the debate over California’s anti-race-preferences Proposition 209, liberals invited David Duke to speak, hoping to confuse voters into thinking that conservatives had invited him.
March 5th, 2007 at 8:57 am
Ed,
Good point…but ’04 is 3 years ago. Anything more recent?
Also, is it possible that Moore’s banishment could have occurred AFTER that? (I’m just saying…I’m a liberal who follows these things closely, and Michael Moore has been curiously silent since the Republicans named a wing of the Democratic party after him.)
John,
It also sounds Moore’s new movie gibes with the latest from Walter Reed, too, huh?
March 5th, 2007 at 8:58 am
ed — less energy on the right-wing blogs? You mean less f*** useage?
Humor only seems to run one way in the liberal line — Bill Maher anyone? And he wasn’t even making a joke. Where are the Democart denunciations?
That being said I have never heard Limbaugh or Hannity make quite the over the top personal “slurs” that Coulter does. (Being an occasional listener — definitely some times for entertainment with Limbaugh. I believe Michael Savage is more who you are thinking of. He appeals to a certain group … just like PETA appeals to a certain group.)
Coulter can be very funny and she does make good points, (and sometimes says things people think but discard before crossing lips). But the way she does it is does not always sit well with conservatives. Does she sell books? Of course. Michel Moore sells movies. Do conservatives think she represents them well? Certainly not on all things.
Many of us shift and discard, look past black and white … oh no, wait … that means we can think! We might be able to prioritize what’s important (re Guliani — let’s see — What’s the question here? Should we worry about being killed as infidels — or debate how many wives can a secularist have?)
As for the Republicans, if we are going to look past some of the so called “litmus tests” we might take another look at Newt Gingrich.
Now that man can think.
March 5th, 2007 at 9:00 am
Also, John, I gotta give credit where credit is due. This:
“Let’s see what type of reception Moore receives this summer from the Democratic hopefuls, if they think his movie can help their agenda.”
is a great point. From Fahrenheit 9/11 to An Inconvenient Truth, movies are more and more becoming blatant political tools.
March 5th, 2007 at 9:10 am
I agree with all the points of the post except for one.
As a evident centrist in the political spectrum, I can’t understand why Coulter is constantly invited to speak at such prominent events. I don’t question her columns or media appearances but why would the Republican party allow itself to be caught up in the backlash of yet another of her outrageous comments.
I’m not even questioning whether people in the party agree with her. I’m truly concerned that party leaders don’t have the common sense to know what to expect from Ann Coulter and plan accordingly, like not inviting her.
March 5th, 2007 at 9:15 am
National Health Care?!?! What a terrible idea. Then how would we waste all our government’s money and time arguing about which wounded veteran needs to sit in urine for two year’s before he can have his physical therapy paid for?
I think liberal’s hate ann coulter cause she hates. I think it helps them that she is out there stereotyping the republican party (which I think is what the poster is arguing). I also think liberals would prefer she wasn’t out there as opposed to her being out there and them using her to try and stereotype republicans as hateful. I think they feel they could win a fair argument without coulter and I think most of them genuinely dislike her and think she is a bad role model and a bad human, they will use her if they have to – but they’d prefer she wasn’t around and they could go after persons with similar opinons who were filled with bigotry (or at least not outwardly…who knows what is inside some people’s heads).
think its also safe to say that their is a significant portion of the right that does agree with her and wants her out there calling people ragheads, etc. I also think she is more well respected and supported, and given more speaking offers, etc than michael moore or sheehan, so I don’t think one can acquaint the left supporting fringe people with the right supporting coulter by using moore and sheehan (although I think there probably are other examples that would work to make that comparison…maybe the comparison works with michael moore 4 years ago or so…but even then he was speaking with green party candidates for president, not giving remarks after democratic candidates – totally different level of power / respect).
The country would be better off with Coulter out of the way, even if she is ‘useful’ in voter turnout and fundraising for the left (she probably is for the right as well). The left would rather her faux-humor bigotry goes away. The right has the power to make this happen (they pay her, by her books, etc), so I’m afraid its on them.
Mostly, she wastes time, wastes money, and raises the anger on both sides to a level of back and forth temper tantrums instead of us all fighting over something useful, like health care systems. Anyhow…a bunch of conservatives in relative seats of power can straw poll Giuliani first if they want to 16 mths before the election….they still have to convince the base at home to pull the lever…and despite how well they’ve duped the base into pulling the lever for class ‘a’ morons like our president, i think giuliani might be too much to ask of the supposed few ‘hate-mongering christo-fascist theocrats’ hiding amongst the conservative base.
March 5th, 2007 at 9:19 am
I notice there’s no link to the statement “Michael Moore and Cindy Sheehan were laughed out of the liberal establishment a LONG TIME AGO.”
I’d be interested in seeing any link, even one, that helped back that statement up.
March 5th, 2007 at 9:20 am
Plenty of prominent conservatives have repudiated Coulter; I’m not aware of any prominent lefties repudiating Sheehan/Moore.
Personally I don’t have a problem with Coulter. About the only thing she seems to be guilty of is being mean, and there are a lot worse things than being mean. If she’s the worst monster under the GOP tent, that speaks pretty well of the GOP.
March 5th, 2007 at 9:32 am
“Michael Moore and Cindy Sheehan were laughed out of the liberal establishment a LONG TIME AGO”
??????? Please link these denouncements. Just the big boys please: Kos, Drum, TPM. Thanks.
March 5th, 2007 at 9:51 am
I really do have better things to do, but it’s been a boring morning. You want links? Try this one:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/cindy-sheehan/
Those are Cindy Sheehan’s posts on Huffington Post. What I want you to notice is that up until January of LAST YEAR, she was a fairly regular poster at Huff Post and quite the darling of Huff Posters everywhere. (There was a time when Huff Post went thru their all-Sheehan, all-the-time mode, but that quickly died down after she revealed herself to be, um, less than heroic.)
So why no posts since January of last year?
Maybe this news item from February of last year could explain why:
http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/01/31/sheehan.arrest/index.html
Bottom line is this: Cindy Sheehan is a joke, and she’s been treated like one from the liberal establishment for at least a year. Conservatives should catch up if they have any interest in having an honest debate.
Until then, they’re just stringing up straw men to knock down. Pardon me if I’m not impressed.
March 5th, 2007 at 9:54 am
Ann’s game is to say something totally over-the-top, then get invited on the cable news shows to smile and laugh and toss her pretty hair around while explaining she either never meant what people claim she meant, or what she said was true, or both.
It’s all very planned and mendacious.
March 5th, 2007 at 9:59 am
It’s sort of an ingenious judo, actually. The MSM never get upset about ANYTHING people on the left do (e.g., that ACLU leader), but they feel exposing the perfidy of the right is their holy mission. So Ann can always be sure her antics will get attention and thus sell more books.
March 5th, 2007 at 10:40 am
…not that there’s anything wrong with being “tolerant.”
March 5th, 2007 at 10:52 am
Hey Jim maybe you should take a stab at basic logic sometime… Cindy Sheehan no longer posting at the HuffPo sadly =!= her being “laughed out of the liberal establishment.”
Here’s another explanation that is totally unsupported like yours: the liberal political establishment, whoever they are, think they no longer need Cindy. They got both houses of Congress. She served her purpose for them.
It has nothing to do with her being “laughed out” of anything. It’s also a far more plausible explanation than your laughably weak attempt to show that the “liberal establishment” doesn’t embrace psychos.
Depends on what “liberal establishment” you mean of course. Academic liberal establishment? Loves her still, just like they love any anti-American nutjob. Netroots? Take a look at the top “liberal” blogs, looks like they’re still channeling the Sheehan spirit. What about the places like MoveOn?
But what about the Democratic Party? Was it only three months ago that they ran a political campaign on the Sheehan theme of malicious intent and criminal incompetence on the part of the GOP, but used that framework for every issue instead of just Iraq? Aren’t Jack Murtha and other still using Sheehan-esque rhetoric? Or maybe the New York Times is inventing all those quotes from the Left.
March 5th, 2007 at 11:02 am
Jim’s an example of why I can’t get too excited over excoriating Coulter. Yes, she occasionally feeds from the verbal bottom. Yes, she needs a good spanking sometimes. No, it’s not folks like Jim who are candidates for making that correction (see the dictionary definition of hypocrite).
March 5th, 2007 at 11:41 am
Let’s get something “straight”, I’m NOT a “liberal” or a Democrat, I am a SOCIALIST, and despite the right-wing nut propaganda, the Democratic Party is NOT a socialist party..I wish it were. I don’t see many, if any “liberals” or “mainstream” democrats defenindg Michael Moore or Cindy Sheean, to the contrary, they have kept their distance, unfortunately, since at least they have spoke “truth to power”, unlike milk toast democrats like Kerry who lost to one of the dumbest, incompetent “presidents” in U.S. History! I don’t agree with everything Sheehan or Michael Moore, but they are right on the central issue: the Invasion of Iraq was ILLEGAL, and George W. Bush is a LIAR who has violated the law, the U.S. constitution, and internal law, and he MUST be impeached. Not even the “liberal Democrats” you all hate so much are even talking about impeachment, since they are so afraid of offending anyone with the truth.
Impeach Bush
http://www.impeachbush.org
March 5th, 2007 at 12:15 pm
I have not yet seen any defense or other explanationby Annn Coulter of her words.
BUT… I don’t think, based on the sentence itself, that the claimn she was calling Edwards *himself* a “fa**ot” necessarily holds up. FWIW, I
I think the “joke” was that, hey, she can’t say what she really thinks of him [insert *other* implied choice words here], because, well, using a normally insulting /offensive word like “fa**ot” is treated like a mental illness.
Logically, she would not say there’s a word she won’t say and then turn around and say it. She used the example of what happened to the Grey’s Anatomy actor, punished as for an Orwellian thought-crime, rather than being castigated for being rude/mean in the normal sense as a comment ont he PC zeitgeist.
She definitely had her head up her a$$ in saying something so potentially offensive/inflammatory, but I totally agree with the larger point about the overreaction (to the extent thoughtcrime again) to some of the recent embarassments coming out of Hollywood.
March 5th, 2007 at 12:28 pm
“Michael Moore and Cindy Sheehan were laughed out of the liberal establishment a LONG TIME AGO.”
But not out of the Democratic party, where Moore shared a box with Jimmy Carter at its 2004 convention.
March 5th, 2007 at 12:28 pm
Jeez. 40 posts and no one mentions Amanda Marcotte.
I don’t approve of what Ann did, but I am savoring the irony that:
1. John Edwards steps in it by hiring two very potty mouthed bloggers for his campaign
2. Gets raked over coals for their vile insulting of Catholics and religion
3. Supports them at first, but then lets them go when the heat goes up
4. Now will be all righteous about Ann’s remark and try to use it to pump some life into his campaign
Pot. Kettle. Black.
March 5th, 2007 at 12:31 pm
Not to nitpick your methodology, but the 114 times that Coulter is mentioned on my blog (Evangelical Outpost) it is to denounce her. I loathe the way that Coulter has been propped up as a representative of conservatism and have never had a nice word to say about her on my blog.
March 5th, 2007 at 12:38 pm
Well, I’ll be darned. I agree with a Socialist on something. The Democraticic (or however they want it spelled now) Party is a bunch of milk toasties who are afraid of offending anybody. (who isn’t a conservative)
March 5th, 2007 at 1:05 pm
Little Annie C. needs to be spanked. I volunteer.
This cowardly attitude toward Ms. Impolite is one reason you clowns now have Nanny Pelosi within two aortas of the presidency.
What conservative movement? What conservative power? Your odds-on favorite for GOP prez nom is a NYC liberal (pro-abort, pro-gun control, wrong on terror until 9/11 11AM, pro-gay privileges, high tax, etc. go to the record – he appointed no strict construct. judge in NYC). And, you think the so-called conservative movement’s biggest problem is little Annie Coulter’s rough language! WTF!!
Fat Mike Moore is laughing at you all! You conservatives are going to nominate Rudy Giuiliani I mean, WTF!! Hillary is more conservative than Rudy.
Ms. Coulter is the Howard Stern of the moribund conservative movement. You cowards have the problem, not Ann.
March 5th, 2007 at 1:08 pm
What Ann said was crude, sure. I wouldn’t have said it. So what?
Ann Coulter is not running for office, so the outrage is a bit much.
People say and do worse all the time, but this is super-duper bad. Why is that? She offended gays? I get offended every day.
It seems to me, many “conservatives” are all too willing to give the gay community victim status. How many more of you will liken this to calling Obama the original forbidden word? Gay is not a race, or a religion. Gay people have never been treated like black people were. Whether you see it or not, there is a huge difference between the f and n words.
So, what Ann said? Bad. Acting as if it’s some sort of ultimate sin? Worse.
Just my rambling opinion.
March 5th, 2007 at 1:36 pm
“Michael Moore and Cindy Sheehan were laughed out of the liberal establishment a LONG TIME AGO.”
Well, Jimbo’s lying again. “Laughed out” means Moore and Sheehan’s stances and policies were found wanting, and they were thrown off the island. That NEVER happened. What happened was that Moore and Sheehan were PLAYED out, as myself and many, many others predicted. They lost their shock value, they lost traction, and they got thrown on the scrap heap.
It takes more work to be a demagogue than Sheehan, for sure, was willing to put in. She got her free ride, and went as far as it would take her, She’d take another, if someone would just pick her up. But to keep up the rant, year after yer, you have to bring something to the party – mostly cash, and an ability to consistently attract the media. Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton are the masters there, always getting themselves out in front6 of cameras, whether it’s Tawana’s racial accusations or James Brown’s funeral.
Anyway, Jimbo has a blogful of predictable rants. He’s just extending them to this blog. No insight, just callow bluster. Glancing through it, I found gems like this one:
“Why is it that when you go to banks asking for money, you’re lucky if they give it to you for less than 10%, and yet when you put money into a bank, either through a certificate of deposit or an interest bearing account, you’re lucky if you get a rate that approaches 4%?”
I dunno, Jim. It must have something to do with paying one’s bills, covering overhead, making a profit. The bastards.
And there’s this:
“I hate snow. Hate it. With a passion, with a vengeance.”
Guess Jimbo didn’t see this coming when he bought his home in Denver. Yup, here’s just the man to seek out for advice.
March 5th, 2007 at 1:57 pm
[...] Bob Krumm: The truth is that Ann Coulter has never been as popular with Republicans as she is with Democrats who need her to remind Americans why they shouldn’t be Republicans. The truth is also that pro-military, optimistic leaders like Rudy will always have a home in the party of the big tent. And the truth is that Republicans can’t be neatly pigeon-holed into being what some on the left and in the media would like you to believe. Because if half of America really was as ugly and mean as some have made them out to be, there’s no way that their opponents wouldn’t have already left the country after six years of them being in charge. [...]
March 5th, 2007 at 2:00 pm
*Michael Moore and Cindy Sheehan were laughed out of the liberal establishment a LONG TIME AGO*
Um. Like last year ? I remember the 4 year love affair with Michael Moore prior to the 2004 convention- dont play dumb. He’s not prominent because he’s not doing anything that would either help the liberals or hurt the administration. And Sheehan ? Well, whiel Coulter makes inappropriate remarks, you’re unlikely to find her sucking face with Hugo Chavez.
And this is what all republicans are thinking ? That John Edwards is a faggot ? Well, the evidence (wife, kids, etc) points towards hetero though the hair points towards metero- is there a slur for that ? If so I’ll use it.
March 5th, 2007 at 2:54 pm
They’re probably hiding under a big rock in Montana. Or Arizona. Or West Texas. Or maybe there are fewer of them than the lame stream media and the Democrats would have one think.
March 5th, 2007 at 3:15 pm
Capn Dan – you said “but I understood the point she was making about Edwardsâ€
Please – tell me what point you understood – I must have really missed it.
Then you haven’t seen the satellite feed that Harry Shearer of “Spinal Tap” fame recorded of John Edwards preparing for a debate. The guy must have used, err accepted a half can of hairspray while alternately covering his eyes or leaning in with eyes closed for touch-ups. It was humorous, then ridiculous, finally creepy. Shearer likened him to an adolescent female being primped, and that is how the monikers “Silky Pony” and “Breck Girl” arose.
March 5th, 2007 at 3:35 pm
Please don’t go too hard on my friend James. He does have a reading comprehension problem. Perhaps due to a lack of education, perhaps due to a confirmation bias. He tends to evaluate evidence based upon his predetermined conclusion (You are either with me or against me, and being with me, you must agree that all people with any conservative belief whatsoever are evil, evil I tell you! In fact, all you here, you form an axis of evil! It’s an axis! The right wing smear machine axis. Blah, blah blah….Where did I leave my bong?).
Please, follow the link to his blog. That is, if you don’t already know what it says, and you do. Very predictable.
What I find funny though is this:
“the only, and I repeat, ONLY people you hear talking about them anymore are conservative Republican sympathizers using them as cudgels to beat liberal Dems.”
Wasn’t that sort of the point of Bob’s post to begin with? That group A uses the worst examples of group B to prove that all people in group B are idiots? Didn’t James pretty much just repeat the point Bob was trying to make?
Oh jeez, I need to go easy on the poor guy.
And let’s not bring up logic! Logic is just code for “not thinking for yourself.” Jeez, where did I put that bong?
March 5th, 2007 at 3:38 pm
“Cindy Sheehan is a joke, and she’s been treated like one from the liberal establishment for at least a year.”
I would be more inclined to agree with your second point if I could recall even a single prominent Democrat publicly denouncing her and the innanities she utters. I am more inclined to agree with Mr. Snitch, that they had been used by the Democrat establishment to appease and mobilize the left base and have since been ignored as not quite as useful in creating a “moderate” image now that the party has taken Congress.
The big difference, of course, is that unlike Sheehan and Moore, who are both quite seriously and, at least in their time, taken seriously, Ann Coulter, especially at events like CPAC, is seen and presented more as an entertainer. It was in that vein that I understood her “faggot” remark, and as such was a dual dig at both Edwards and the PC climate that goes so nuts over a single word.
There are countless stereotypes used for humor (the lazy Mexican, the thugish black guy, the uptight white guy, the redneck southern, the effeminate gaye, etc.). There seems to be a pattern that when a stereotype is used as a base for a joke by an accepted “liberal” everyone knows it’s humor and takes little offense. On the other hand, should a “conservative” make a similar joke using the same stereotype it is assumed that this is in some way deeply revelatory about how conservatives really feel and it is therefore deeply offensive.
Believe it or not, a conservative can joke about Endwards’ apparent preoccupation with image and appearance by using the stereotype of the preening gay man without it necessarilly being some form of pejorative about gay men in general.
March 5th, 2007 at 5:21 pm
I love the fact that under the very post that states that Coulter doesn’t speak for Republicans, many of the commenters are still attempting to justify Coulter’s rudeness or attempting to explain it away.
The fact is, she was invited to speak at a important conservative confab. If she is marginal, why was she invited, and why was the audience clearly cheering her rudeness? I don’t think many Democrats were in attendance at the conference.
The fact that, oh yeah, those lefties are rude too (see, they do IT too!) excuse was not accepted as an excuse from my kids when they were 7 and it still is the refuge for adults who should know better.
The deal is, rudeness and incivility is rudeness and incivility no matter what the stripe of the purveyor.
I understand that the ‘tent’ appears to be expanding. The day that the Coulters (and the Sheehans) of this world are not invited into the tent will be a better day for all of us.
Re Sheehan being laughed out of the tent, I can tell you that I read a lot (way too many) blogs on the left (and the right) and I haven’t seen any serious discussion or reference to Ms. Sheehan in months. Once again, I believe Bob’s point is valid…Sheehan is a crutch used by the conservative to point out the foibles of the left.
It’s easy for us on the left of middle side to denounce Coulter. I’d be more impressed if the people in the audience had booed her.
March 5th, 2007 at 5:23 pm
PS. When counting the use of words or names in blogs, it seems to me to be much more fair to use only the blog post itself. I control what I write, but try to let commenters say whatever they want to say (short of utter rudeness, spam or filth).
March 5th, 2007 at 6:32 pm
I let this one go by earlier, but how in the hell can you people even compare Cindy Sheehan with Ann Coulter? Where has Cindy Sheehan called anyone racist, sexist or homophobic names? Where has she espoused “hate” for anyone? Calling George Bush a LIAR and a war criminal is NOT bigotry, it is the TRUTH. So lets see if you boys have ANY facts at all.. where has Cindy Sheehan attacked any race, religion, etc. the way Ann Coulter and the rest of the neo-fascist conservative right has????
Calling for George Bush’s impeachment for war crimes is NOT bigotry or hate, it is the duty of Americans who really do respect the U.S. Constitution.
Impeach Bush
http://www.impeachbush.org
March 5th, 2007 at 11:51 pm
Jim, anyone whose blog has a post titled ” “Lesbian Gang” Out to Sodomize Your Daughters” can be called homophobic by those who ignore context, humour, irony etc.
Personally I have little time for Anne Coulter, the only genuinely funny thing I’ve seen her do was that short movie with Rush Lambaugh, another person I detest.
Cindy Sheehan has said a number of racist remarks, about the Evil Zionazis. Calling your political opponents the “neo-fascist conservative right” doesn’t help your argument either. Such people exist on the right, but if you think they’re a significant majority, look at how many right-wingers have blasted the precious Anne for her oafish attempt at humour.
But I can tell you where the genuine honest-to-goodness hate-mongering christo-fascist theocrats are. And I’m not talking about former Democratic Luminary Fred Phelps and the rest of his inbred family either, I’m talking the serious, mainstream, politically powerful genuine article.
Largo, Florida.
Specifically the Lighthouse Baptist Church and two others. You see Jim, while you’ve been constructing fantasies of discrimination and Fascist Amerikkka, the real thing has been quietly festering in out-of-the-way corners. Some of us on the right do not consider your shrill posturing relevant when there’s real work to be done.
Though I’ll say one thing for the ChristoFascist’s favour: They want someone Terminated, not EXTerminated like the IslamoFascists do.
April 7th, 2007 at 12:47 pm
[...] Where are the hate-mongering christo-fascist theocrats: I barely read the article, it’s just a great headline • Man tells court he has six kids on [...]