ADDED: I intended this post to make fun of Fox News, but I see that Huffington Post goes with "Edwards Hopes To Raise 'Coulter Cash' After 'Faggot' Slur." HuffPo prints email from the Edwards's campaign manager:
This is just a taste of the filth that the right-wing machine is gearing up to throw at us. And now that it's begun, we have a choice: Do we sit back, or do we fight back?
I say we fight. Help us raise $100,000 in "Coulter Cash" this week to show every would-be Republican mouthpiece that their bigoted attacks will not intimidate this campaign. I just threw in 100 bucks. Will you join me? Just click here.
পোস্টগুলি
৬২টি মন্তব্য:
"We must show that inflaming prejudice to attack progressive leaders will only backfire," the [Edwards] site read.
But inflaming prejudice to attack Catholics and "breeders" is not more of the same? Compare the feeble justification and excuses of Edwards re Marcotte against his camp's outrage re Coulter.
Edwards is going nowhere. I hope he draws a ton on money from the Left.
Not sure. His handling of Marcotte shows that if Coulter was a liberal, he would have kept her on staff after "rehab". Kinda hypocritical of him to be playing the victim so soon.
And how exactly is Coulter's stupidity and vulgarity supposed to have harmed Edwards' campaign?
I don't think Edwards is stupid enough to think he's sustained any damage from this, but I can't help thinking he's got a series of bets going with his buddies about how stupid his supporters are. If so, he won money on Marcotte; I bet he'll win money on this one, too.
It's amazing to me how hard "progressives" work at keeping themselves in a permanent state of panic. But I guess when they take a deep breath and let the emotional upheaval die down a bit, well... they start thinking clearly, and then they aren't progressives any more.
Well, I don't any clear-thinking person, no matter how angry they were about Ann Coulter, actually felt sorry for Edwards as some sort of "victim". But if anyone did, I think that his campaign's kneejerk fundraising response should nip that sympathy in the bud. He is relishing this, not smarting from it.
Fox News has no shame whatsoever. Their original headline on the story? "Howard Dean Slams Coulter for 'Faggot' Remark"
From where do the get the huevos to make Howard Dean the subject of that headline? Instead of "Coulter Calls Edwards a 'Faggot' at CPAC, Endorses Romney", say.
This headline isn't so bad. The "Coulter Cash" thing is just a good fundraising ploy and a reasonably face-saving way of handling her madness.
But it's still ridiculous the extent to which they focus on the Democrats' reaction to what happened at CPAC rather than just what happened at CPAC.
mcg -
You don't think you'd feel a little like a victim if Ann Coulter had called you a faggot in front of a large (soon national) audience? I bet you would, and I'd feel a little sorry for you.
Doyle's right. Fox never just covered "Coulter calls Edwards a Faggot" but variations on how Democrats respond to Coulter. Fair and balanced, as usual.
Yes, because other news sources were so fair and balanced in their stories about "Christians slam Edwards campaign."
Conservative Christians did slam the Edwards campaign. The Edwards campaign never slammed Christians, it just (unwittingly) hired a woman who had slammed Christians on her blog in the past. The whole brouhaha was started by noted bigot Bill Donohue.
And what does this have to do with the Coulter incident anyway?
The story isn't "Coulter calls Edwards a faggot." Who is Coulter? A known bomb-thrower who long ago marginalized herself as someone whose words are to be taken seriously. Anybody covering that story is covering yesterday's news. So that's not what the story is. The story is what about the various responses and reactions are to Coulter. Who's distancing themselves from her. Who's defending her. And who is posturing themselves as victims. As usual, FOX News is Johnny-on-the-spot in getting it right. That's why they trounce all their competitors.
Doyle---yes, I hope you would feel sorry for me. But I am not a presidential candidate with a record of shameless opportunism and a campaign machine designed to pounce on any political opportunity that arises to turn it into cold, hard, cash.
Oh, and it's OK with me if you disagree with the "shameless opportunism" bit, I'm willing to drop that for the sake of argument (including his claim that Christopher Reeve will walk again! which I am sure he would concede is a claim he would not now repeat).
Is there any way I can get Coulter to call me a faggot?
It's getting about time to put another addition on the house.
Calling John Edwards a faggot is an insult to faggots, not to John Edwards.
"Who is Coulter? A known bomb-thrower who long ago marginalized herself as someone whose words are [ed note - not?] to be taken seriously."
If she's so marginalized, why was she a marquee speaker at CPAC, and why is she a regular speaker at other conservative confabs? I'll agree that she isn't someone who should be taken seriously, but any conservative who claims that she is just a comedian or someone that isn't taken seriously by many rank-and-file conservatives [both of which are common defenses of Coulter] is a liar. Period. It's been pretty well established that she isn't just hired as a warmup act comedian, and those who continue to claim otherwise should be called on it accordingly.
"Conservative Christians did slam the Edwards campaign."
Howard Dean did slam Coulter.
Some news sources like to highlight the slam and not the reason for the slam. Edwards hired bloggers who used distinctive anti-Christian words, no less offensive than "faggot". Conservatives brought in a loathsome woman.
Not a single person involved in either did any of it unwittingly.
The blame in both cases should be on the people who say the loathsome things, not those who criticize them. Those who hire such people whether it is Edwards or CPAC should be ashamed.
It shouldn't be news that someone criticizes them, but neither should one side cry bias while supporting the loathsome behavior on their own side.
Fox News swings one way, MSNBC etc. swing another. All part of the media fun.
If she's so marginalized, why was she a marquee speaker at CPAC, and why is she a regular speaker at other conservative confabs?
Conservatives find her entertaining mainly because she pushes liberal's buttons, and she evokes such hate-filled vitriol from them in response. She plays the left that way like a fine Stradivarius. The words are just for effect, and nobody of normal mental health takes her incendiary words seriously. Because she sometimes goes over the top in her schtick she isn't regarded by the right as a Serious Thinker. She's more in the order of comic relief.
Meanwhile there's the whole phenomena of the left taking itself so seriously and totally unable to laugh at itself.
Good for him, I am sure he has already raised it.
The dems just need to put the video of her calling him a faggot during the entire campaign and they will receive more than enough money. Make sure they add Mitt's (I am now a social conservative) love of Ann on the video.
It was a dumb thing for these meetings to invite her. As much as some of you may enjoy Ann the majority of the country finds her repulsive.
I prefer Laura Ingram’s label on the Kerry/Edwards ticket of 04.
She would regularly refer to them as “Lurch” (as in the Adams Family) & “Shinny Pony” – Hilarious
Is Fox News' all that biased?
Or the standard media trick of shifting a dead body one inch and acting like it's being resurrected?
Coulter calls...
Dean slams...
Democrats decry...
Republicans repudiate...
And while I'm on the topic, can't the media find one person who knows a damn about Bahamian family law?
Or is that not the point?
doyle: From where do the get the huevos to make Howard Dean the subject of that headline
Not satisfied with regulating Althouse's coverage of Coulter, Doyle et al now issue dictats to Fox News.
Conservative Christians did slam the Edwards campaign.
Lets pretend that Catholic Democrats didn't slam the Edwards campaign.
Fitz: I thought it was Silky Pony.
At first I read it that Edwards was appealing to the Gay community for campaign donations. But possibly what they are doing is using that comment to point out that Coulter takes Edwards seriously, so everyone else, and esp. the campaign donors should too.
But that is the problem with the Edwards campaign - they are struggling for legitimacy, and, IMHO, unless both Obama and Clinton falter significantly, Edwards isn't going to get it. He really has little that the general electorate is going to buy: no relevant experience; hypocracy about his "two Americas"; having made his millions suing OB/Gyns out of business; and a reputation as a light weight.
Hey Zeb, it just doesn't get any more hate filled and vitriolic than Coulter.
And Fen, I didn't comment on Ann (Althouse)'s coverage of the Coulter thing until she did by attacking some shadowy elements who she felt were pushing her to write about it. I wasn't one of them.
And this post is about a Fox News headline related to the Coulter thing, so I'm not coming totally out of left field with this.
"Meanwhile there's the whole phenomena of the left taking itself so seriously and totally unable to laugh at itself."
Yeah, there's nothing funnier or more clever than someone who mocks 9/11 widows, says Tim McVeigh bombed the wrong building, and that President Clinton should have been assassinated. Pure comedy gold. Zeb, you're pathetic. The best part of you dribbled down your mother's leg at the moment of conception.
Also, the "just a joke" defense has been disposed of already by many people. Orin Kerr at volokh.com has this to say about it: "Oh, and I realize Coulter and her suporters deflect criticism with every 7th grade bully's favorite gambit: "It's all just a joke!" "Where's your sense of humor?" etc. I trust VC readers are far enough past junior high not to buy that one." Ilya Somin also had some good commentary over there on the topic. Normally, I'd recommend that you read their commentary, but I suspect it would go right over your flat head.
Oh, and all the "faggot" calls aren't going to win the big swing vote of the tokenly Democratic practicing Catholics for Edwards. And those were his campaign staffers (before working for him), and not the next speaker, out of many, as was the case with Romney and Coulter.
The ties between Romney and Coulter here are: Coulter immediately followed Romney as a speaker at an even where most of the major Republican politicians spoke; Romney made a joke about her speaking right after him; and she seems to support his candidacy.
Slamming Romney for that is ludicrous. Coulter, yes, Romney no. If a politician had to disavow any supporter who said something that offended someone else, many Democrat politicians would run out of supporters. For an example, think of the frequent anti-Semitic remarks of the Revs. Jackson and Sharpton.
Howard Dean did slam Coulter.
As anyone with half a brain would have.
Calling John Edwards a faggot is an insult to faggots, not to John Edwards.
Getting your talking points right from the high priestess herself, eh Palladian? Or are you and she just on the same wavelength?
And Bruce, I don't know, they seem pretty chummy to me. And his spokesman's "condemnation" of her fell well short of a condemnation.
Yes, I mean, after John Edward's performance in 2004 I can't imagine anyone giving him any money nor can I imagine any real candidate considering him for Vice President again.
He was crushed in the debate.
He didn't deliver his state in the election.
I mean, the Vice President doesn't do a whole lot except attend foreign functions that the President can't or shouldn't attend and hang out with the President enough so that he knows what's going on if there's an unfortunate pretzel accident. That's why Cheney was both willing and able to do the job, in his condition, and why he added so much to the ticket - Republicans were reassured that Dubya would have someone like Cheney around to talk to just in case.
In what magic land would Edwards be either the Presidential or the Vice-Presidential candidate? I guess he's just hoping for all the other candidates to pull a Dean and self-destruct, leaving him as the last man standing. (Which is not a bad plan, considering the 2 year runup to this election.)
The fact is Edwards stepped in it when he hired those bloggers. Ann Coulters remarks may revive his chance at becoming the leftist candidate, but his abandoning of those vitriolic blogers has won him no greater chance to actually win, & only hurt the chances of becoming the anti-establishment leftist candidate.
Like it or not Ann Coulter works for no specific Candidate.
doyle:
read these two fragments:
1. Christians slam Edwards Campaign
2. Conservative Christians slam Edwards Campaign
If you don't see the difference then I have a bridge to sell you. errrr. I have a Brooklyn bridge to sell you.
Beth...and when faux noise is "fair and balanced"...will that be the day OReally calls you and wants you to lupha his back?
I love how you guys have suddenly decided to make employment by a candidate the ultimate litmus test to see if a person should be responsible for what they say or ever have said (or, in the case of Marcotte, what she wrote on her blog in the past).
The notion that Amanda Marcotte is to liberals what Ann Coulter is to conservatives is just so stupid it hurts.
Yes, Amanda Marcotte is a lot stupider than Ann Coulter (and that's saying something).
Anyway, shut up, Doyle.
Ruth Ann:
Good catch- Laura calls John Edwards "Silky Pony" and once in a while she may borrow Rush's "Breck Girl".
Anyone know why Edwards statements decried attacks only on "progressive leaders"? Why not all leaders or all people?
It would be hard to get inside the tortured mind of a Republican, but wasn't it a Republican candidate at CPAC that lived with a gay couple, who marched in gay parades, and has a penchant for cross-dressing?
Interesting how Rush Limbaugh and other have been calling Edwards "the Breck girl" and "silky pony" for some time (both clearly either aspersions on his masculinity or suggestions that he's gay), and the Outrage-o-Meter didn't hit the red zone.
Maybe Edwards needs to be photographed driving an ocean speed boat like the first Pres. Bush...to prove he's a real man, or maybe be seen at NASCAR events.
George:
From what I've heard, it was Edwards' wife who gave him the nickname "Breck Girl".
Doyle wrote: "You don't think you'd feel a little like a victim if Ann Coulter had called you a faggot in front of a large (soon national) audience? I bet you would, and I'd feel a little sorry for you."
Why feel sorry for someone who was called a name? This is the height of silliness. She could call him the n word too, and the problem is? An ad hominem attack is best labled and as such and ignored.
Why give the ignorant power that they do not posess?
Trey
http://www.thenation.com/blogs/campaignmatters?bid=45
(Max Blumenthal's video from CPAC)
If Malkin defends internment, she should sign the picture. Something tells me she really regrets writing that book as it will always hold her back from being mainstream.
If you are wearing a confederate pin while holding a Tancredo sign, don't be afraid to show it.
If you are going to attack Al Gore with his personal energy bills as a way of questioning the existence of global warming, don't assert a right to privacy (especially when you don't believe in one) defense when someone points out the inconsistency your promotion of the sanctity of marriage while you are unmarried in your 40s with three failed engagements.
MikeinSC, it's impressive you came back after the comment box butt-kicking you received on the other Coulter-related thread. Nice to see you picked yourself off the ground.
Anyway, the point that NL was making was that it was interesting the people who were cheering Coulter's slurs were also cheering someone who (one would hope) wouldn't countenance such slurs, given his friendships. They may have to make a choice between their prejudices and their hopes for victory in 2008.
Alao, congratulations on the mildly clever use of the word "homophobic" in a sentence. It's always amusing to watch racists, homophobes and the like try to play a little jiu-jitsu by accusing their moral and social betters of the sins that define their lives and politics.
Oops, that should have been "Also, congratulations", not "Alao, congratulations". Although, "alao" sounds like a perfectly good made-up word to start a sentence, and it's snappier than "also" and "furthermore".
Few things are less relevant than the Edwards for President campaign or anything Ann Coulter says about anything.
Nothing is less relevant than anything Ann Coulter says about John Edwards except, maybe, all the nonsense about Anna Nicole Smith's death, burial, and all of the related issues.
The point? Anyone getting worked up over this nonsense should think about getting a life.
I gotta hand it to you, Mike, you are the master of declaring victory and going home.
As far as "over-the-top" goes, my comments are actually pretty tame by blogosphere standards, including on this blog, though I admit my mean comment to Zeb today about what happened to the best part of him is much harsher than what I generally dish out, and somewhat out of character. However, since he was happy to defend Ann Coulter as just a funny comedienne, I thought a little mean humor was appropriate. And it was a great insult, as far as Coulteresque schoolyard taunts go.
Anyway, I'm off to get some dinner. Maybe I'll have a little stew, in Mike's honor.
Your homophobic point is what, exactly?
I'm not, In fact, I think we desperately need a gay President. My point is why Republicans always call liberals faggots - but you don't hear liberals calling Guiliani one, and why he escapes Coulter's barbs.
Rupert Murdoch admitted the Fox promotes the republican war agenda, so much for "fair and balanced or "we report you decide."
Now comes Coulter, telling us how they really thing. Good for her
My point is why Republicans always call liberals faggots -
But isn't that because liberals tend to promote emasculating men?
FYI- calling Edwards the Silky Pony has nothing with his masculinity or suggesting he is gay. It's nothing more than mocking his great hair and his own preocupatiion with his hair.
Have you never seen the video of him combing his hair for 5-10 minutes? Whoever posted this comment should get a grip and stop looking for a devious message in a simple sentence.
My point is why Republicans always call liberals faggots - but you don't hear liberals calling Guiliani one, and why he escapes Coulter's barbs.
LOL... do you really want to link to all the liberal bloggers sniggering about the time Gulliani dragged up - which Coulter definitely had something to say about. (And I guess we're supposed to forget about those charming photos of Joe Lieberman in Photoshpped blackface and/or getting dry-humped from behind by the President that were doing the rounds among the lefty nut-roots last year? Racism and homopbobia!)
And another reality check: When it appears Edwards is getting spanked in the fundraising race by Obama and Clinton, I guess you've got to open those chequebooks and shake loose the credit cards by any means necessary...
Daryl Herbert: How come Republicans never call liberals Christofascists, huh?
When you look up the post on Shakespeare's Sister where the word "Christofascist" is used you find a find a thoughtful post about how, in her opinion, even religious people are getting turned off by the religious right.
McEwan continues in the comments by saying what she feels saves Christianity - and will, she believes, continue to save it - for those religious people who get disillusioned by certain elements within Christianity.
It's impossible to honestly argue that she used "Christofascist" to attack all Christians. "Christofascist" is used to distinguish certain elements from the rest of Christianity.
This context was purposely omitted by the Christianist thugs at The Catholic League and Michelle Malkin, and ignored by all the right wing bloggers and their supporters who were covering the issue. They wanted the scalps of both bloggers out of pure mean-ness and the worst sort of partisanship and didn't mind if one of them was just a bystander who never said anything arguably bigoted. The other post Donohue cherry-picked from was simply an attack on groups trying to ban gay adoption.
None of these right wing bloggers have lifted a finger to correct the record in the spirit of fairness, honesty, and compassion. Talk about lameness.
The thing is, Coulter isn't as popular among conservatives as the left likes to think. Where the Dems will embrace Michael Moore at presidential conventions or attend Kossack Conventions, you won't see many self respecting GOP candidates walking hand in hand with Ann. When you right columns that NRO won't publish, she hardly represents mainstream conservatism.
But as it has been said before, when Edwards hires two Catholic bashing bloggers, it's kind of funny to see him get worked up over this. Maybe Ann can claim it's nothing more than a hit job.
Hoosier Daddy:
Well, indeed - the Coulter-Moore Axis of Stupid will always have it's audience - there are hucksters in every marketplace. But if the GOP and Democrats are beginning to realise pandering to the nut-roots and hyper-partisans with Tourette's alienates more voters than it ever attracts, we're making progress. Baby steps, true, but that's better than nothing.
Hey you neo-con dudes. After you get over the laugh riot on Faux last night with Rush and AnthraxAnnie, let's get serious.
If you want to talk about Michael Moore who has NOTHING to do with this thread, we can do that. First let's talk about the neo-con lovefest with AnthraxAnnie and then, when Ann decides to move on to Michael Moore, we can do that.
otherwise stop with the typical jerky "well Clinton did it...." type of crap you pinheads usually employ when you are backed up against a wall.
Hossier Daddy [good moniker!] says: "you won't see many self respecting GOP candidates walking hand in hand with Ann. When you right columns that NRO won't publish, she hardly represents mainstream conservatism."
Well, you don't generally see many self respecting GOP candidates walking hand in hand with anyone (President Bush's hand-hold with Saudi Crown Prince Abdullah notwithstanding), Mitt Romney didn't seem to mind being chummy with Ann Coulter at CPAC. If she was so radioactive, I suspect Romney could easily have asked that she not follow his speech, and he didn't have to kiss up to her in his speech. Also, as said previously by many, if she isn't a mainstream conservative, why is she a featured speaker at CPAC and other conservative confabs? And don't give the "she's a comedienne" line, that's tired and discredited.
Also, Coulter split with NRO not so much because of what she wrote but because she generally was disrespectful to her editors at NRO and was bad-mouthing NRO. Here's Jonah Goldberg on the topic back in 2001: "So let me be clear: We did not "fire" Ann for what she wrote, even though it was poorly written and sloppy. We ended the relationship because she behaved with a total lack of professionalism, friendship, and loyalty." I'll provide a link below, sorry, I don't know how to do HTML linking. Here is the link:
http://www.nationalreview.com/nr_comment/nr_comment100301.shtml
But if the GOP and Democrats are beginning to realise pandering to the nut-roots and hyper-partisans with Tourette's alienates more voters than it ever attracts, we're making progress. Baby steps, true, but that's better than nothing.
Well, its likely true that Coulter dishing the hate back to the Left will motivate them to stop their own hate. But I can't help but smile when they whine - she is their mirror.
Even though I run the risk of seeming to like AC, did anyone notice the nature of what she said seemed to be as much about "rehab" for calling people faggots as it did about Edwards
Yah, having actually seen her comment, I think Coulter's remark was tame: 1) she didn't actually call Edwards a "faggot", she said she couldn't b/c then she's be forced into rehab, and 2) the joke seemed to be more about how all the foot-n-mouth disease celebs use rehab as an easy out.
But you can't go there. Conservatives hold themselves [sometimes unfortunately] to a higher standard. And Coulter should not have been the one to make that joke.
/edit, should be:
Well, its likely true that Coulter dishing the hate back to the Left will not motivate them to stop their own hate.
Fen said...
Well, its likely true that Coulter dishing the hate back to the Left will not motivate them to stop their own hate."
Well thanks Fen. I can always count on you to find the pony in the horseshit.
let me get this straight...Ann Coulter is purely reflexive...she just potshots back when the GOP is attacked? Is that right?
Fen, little peabrain Fen, the "left" has not sickbitch like her on payroll and you are hedging into minus territory the more you defend her. She is a witch who plays you neo-cons like a drum.
let me get this straight...Ann Coulter is purely reflexive...she just potshots back when the GOP is attacked? Is that right?
Yup. She is your mirror. She jumps in your mudpit and slings it back at you. Its funny how you guys dish it but can't take it.
Fen, little peabrain Fen
See? You can't even remain civil on a thread re Coulter's civility. I'm glad she gets under your skin. You deserve her.
Fen...
I fail to see where Edwards cast the first stone. This was the bitch on wheels shooting first.
Care to comment?
putz.
"...crap...pinheads...horseshit...peabrain...sickbitch...witch...bitch... putz."
Well, dang, you've convinced me with your steely logic and adamantine wit.
একটি মন্তব্য পোস্ট করুন