CPAC 2007, Day 2: Ann Coulter, or An Angel Alights

| | Comments (19) | TrackBacks (0)


There turned out to be no chance of getting into position to sneak a photo of myself with Ann Coulter because it turns out Ann Coulter is guarded better than all the gold in Fort Knox.

As she certainly should be.

I could have gotten in line behind like 400 other people to get the book signed and perhaps a perfunctory few words from her, but after seeing her absorb one EXTREMELY rude a-hole's remarks to her during the audience Q and A, and then the unbelievably long line of fans - and poor Ann gamely keeping the smile and soldiering through the ritual - I just wanted her to be able to get out of there and have a scotch on the rocks.

My feelings for her are that pure.

Anyway, here she is. Later in the week I may have video but I think you will enjoy this. Turn the volume up.

0 TrackBacks

Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: CPAC 2007, Day 2: Ann Coulter, or An Angel Alights.

TrackBack URL for this entry:


zimzo said:

This is why I stopped coming around here Joe. You sat through her speech and it never occurred to you that calling John Edwards a "faggot" was disgusting and beyond the pale. Never even crossed your mind.

The last straw for me came when you couldn't even bring yourself to condemn Jack for using the word "raghead." Your defense was that Ann Coulter used it...last year at CPAC.

But I really started to lose hope for you when you slurred the entire gay community for an anonymous comment left here, and never apologized. Then you smeared David and Jonathan for taking pictures. All the while claiming that you're not homophobic (as you spewed the hoariest of anti-gay rhetoric about vague dangers to children), and that your opposition to gay marriage has nothing whatsoever to do with homophobia. Right.

Once again Ann Coulter in her narcissism hijacks CPAC and once again everything else that happened there will be forgotten as all attention focuses on her and her vile remarks. Even Malkin, Captain Ed, Dean Barnett and Dan Riehl are repulsed by her. And all you can do is swoon like a teenage boy.

How embarrassing, Joe.

Here's what Captain Ed (who recently had some very nice things to say about my writing, in another incarnation, by the way) had to say about it:

"At some point, Republicans will need to get over their issues with homosexuality. Regardless of whether one believes it to be a choice or a hardwired response, it has little impact on anyone but the gay or lesbian person. We can argue that homosexuality doesn’t require legal protection, but not when we have our front-line activists referring to them as “faggots” or worse. That indicates a disturbing level of animosity rather than a true desire to allow people the same rights and protections regardless of their lifestyles."

I know you think he's "boring" or whatever it was you said about him, but maybe you should pay some attention to what he has to say. There was a time when you were open-minded and intellectually curious. I even saw flashes of that in the brief time I spent hashing out issues here with you. Well, it was fun while it lasted.

Before I take off again, I just want to explain why I decided it wasn't worth hanging out here anymore. The boyfriend of a male friend of mine had just died of cancer. They were together 25 years. His boyfriend's mother, who is a devout Catholic, never accepted their relationship. For two yers after his diagnosis my friend cared for his boyfriend as he got sicker and sicker. I spent a lot of time with them these last two years. I saw him the day before he died and he was just a shell of himself and never knew I was there. His mother was in the room when he died and my friend had left them alone so that they could have time together. When he died they didn't bother to tell him or come get him. At the funeral they acted like he didn't exist. Finally, at the gravesite, my friend's mother went up to his boyfriend's mother. They had not met in all the 25 years they were together. "It's the most terrible thing in the world to lose a child," my friend's mother said. And they both began to cry.

Life is too short, I realize, to change minds that don't want to be changed. I don't have the time or energy anymore. I'll probably keep on trying anyway, but I have a lot less hope than I did. There's just too much hate in the world.

That's all I've got to say.

You are no less full of crap than you were before, Zimzo. Did you listen to Coulter's speech - specifically what she had to say about gays - or are you, as usual, just parroting talking points from wherever?

This moronic screed deserves to be obliterated point by point ... but it's like arguing with a lying chatty Cathy doll. Even though it is a pack of lies, I will leave it up so everyone can remember what it was like to have Zimzo involved in the discussion.

By the way, sorry to hear about the person who died. And for one last time, Zimzo, I will wonder what the relevance is and say: What the hell are you talking about?

Buh bye.

Kevin said:

Queen Anne's personal insecurity is so shockingly apparent, why anyone bothers in the first place is beyond me. *Yawn*

Jack said:

Considering Zimzo's propensity for dishonesty, I am not inclined to believe his story, anyway. He probably read it somewhere.

I think he stopped coming here because we kept exposing his lies. Of course, when he tells a story like that, there is no way to disprove his claim, so he feels safe telling it.

Jack said:

BTW, Anne has apologized to homosexuals for comparing them to Edwards:

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

jacob said:

Glad to see you are still barking mad. Whats wrong, the cops chase you off your park bench? Go take your meds boy, you lost the sense to filter out the obvious insanity for the dailyKos and Howard Dean.

I think Gays all over the country ought to be enraged. None of them is anywhere near as pathetic or as much of a girlie-man as John Edwards.

You are a fool Zimzo. You would not know a joke if it bit you in the butt and annouced itself with a callng card.

zimzo said:

Yes, I am the one who is "barking mad." And so, I suppose, are they:

From Outside the Beltway:

An Open Letter to CPAC Sponsors and Organizers Regarding Ann Coulter

By James Joyner

Conservatism treats humans as they are, as moral creatures possessing rational minds and capable of discerning right from wrong. There comes a time when we must speak out in the defense of the conservative movement, and make a stand for political civility. This is one of those times.

Ann Coulter used to serve the movement well. She was telegenic, intelligent, and witty. She was also fearless: saying provocative things to inspire deeper thought and cutting through the haze of competing information has its uses. But Coulter’s fearlessness has become an addiction to shock value. She draws attention to herself, rather than placing the spotlight on conservative ideas.

At the Conservative Political Action Conference in 2006, Coulter referred to Iranians as “ragheads.” She is one of the most prominent women in the conservative movement; for her to employ such reckless language reinforces the stereotype that conservatives are racists.

At CPAC 2007 Coulter decided to turn up the volume by referring to John Edwards, a former U.S. Senator and current Presidential candidate, as a “faggot.” Such offensive language–and the cavalier attitude that lies behind it–is intolerable to us. It may be tolerated on liberal websites but not at the nation’s premier conservative gathering.

The legendary conservative thinker Richard Weaver wrote a book entitled Ideas Have Consequences. Rush Limbaugh has said again and again that “words mean things.” Both phrases apply to Coulter’s awful remarks.

Coulter’s vicious word choice tells the world she care little about the feelings of a large group that often feels marginalized and despised. Her word choice forces conservatives to waste time defending themselves against charges of homophobia rather than advancing conservative ideas.

Within a day of Coulter’s remark John Edwards sent out a fundraising email that used Coulter’s words to raise money for his faltering campaign. She is helping those she claims to oppose. How does that advance any of the causes we hold dear?

Denouncing Coulter is not enough. After her “raghead” remark in 2006 she took some heat. Yet she did not grow and learn. We should have been more forceful. This year she used a gay slur. What is next? If Senator Barack Obama is the de facto Democratic Presidential nominee next year will Coulter feel free to use a racial slur? How does that help conservatism?

One of the points of CPAC is the opportunity it gives college students to meet other young conservatives and learn from our leaders. Unlike on their campuses—where they often feel alone—at CPAC they know they are part of a vibrant political movement. What example is set when one highlight of the conference is finding out what shocking phrase will emerge from Ann Coulter’s mouth? How can we teach young conservatives to fight for their principles with civility and respect when Ann Coulter is allowed to address the conference? Coulter’s invective is a sign of weak thinking and unprincipled politicking.

CPAC sponsors, the Age of Ann has passed. We, the undersigned, request that CPAC speaking invitations no longer be extended to Ann Coulter. Her words and attitude simply do too much damage.

Credentialed CPAC 2007 Bloggers

Sean Hackbarth, The American Mind
James Joyner, Outside the Beltway
BoiFromTroy, Boi From Troy
Joy McCann, Little Miss Attila
Kevin McCullough, Musclehead Revolution
Fausta Werz, Fausta’s Blog
Patrick Hynes, Ankle Biting Pundits
Ed Morrissey, Captain’s Quarters
Jane Stewart, See Jane Mom
Alexander Brunk, Save the GOP

Other Right-of-Center Bloggers

Owen Robinson, Boots and Sabres
N.Z. Bear, The Truth Laid Bear
Michael Demmons, Gay Orbit
Mark Coffey, Decision ‘08
Russell Newquist, The Philosopher’s Stone
Marshall Manson, On Tap
Rob Port, Say Anything
Matthew Johnston, Going to the Mat
Timmer, The Daily Brief
Rick Moran, Right Wing Nuthouse
Dustin Gawrylow - Free Republicans
Dan, North Dallas Thirty
Brennan Monaco, The American Pundit

[More signatories to come. If you’re a conservative weblogger who feels the same way I do please post this letter to your weblog. Send me a link and an e-mail, and I will add your name to the list.]

Sigh. Well, I must give you props for tenacity. It's a quality I admire in myself, all modesty aside.

I am well aware of the universal condemnation of Ann Coulter among conservative journalists, writers, politicians, lobbyists, consultants, business executives, housewives, gun shop owners, blacksmiths and slack-jawed yokels named "Clem."

With this in mind, I am currently in the middle of a new post, the working title of which is "Why it's ok to call John Edwards a faggot." I may modify the title ... but I may not.

I think it presents a reasoned analysis of the issue from the standpoint of one who is perhaps a bit ahead of the curve in the "let's take a step back in look at the whole picture" department. One who is not, perhaps, so hasty with the trigger.

When this is finished, I will address your previous post and the untruths that I discern in it. I am going to do primarily for the sake of readers such as those at Equality Loudoun who jumped all over this post and my comment.

I realize my hagiographic portrayal of Ann makes some heads spin, but please rest assured I would never, ever want one of my posts to have such an effect. I can hardly bear it, in fact, and even now am on the verge of tears.

If Ann looked less like Ann and more like you, Zimzo, I would still be writing this post, I will have you know, and would likely have written similar things about her as I always have, minus the photos and valentines.

jacob said:

Well what da ya know. You actually cited conservatives. I guess the ol' the enemy of my enemy is my friend does hold true even with the insane. Was it necessary to cite the post and then copy the whole thing over? BTW, did you find it your self and read it? Or was it listed on the Kos as ammo to use against the evil convervatives? Don't bother answering you never answer anything.

As for the article by Joyner, just because you agree with them about Ann does not mean you are not insane. Joyner's argument has a logic train that is compelling and requires thought. Your blathering usually involves either talking points from the Democratic party, or, outright hyterics. Please.

You have shown yourself to be an empty suit by your inability to answer even the simplest of questions. Your claim that someone else who is conservative appreciated what you wrote under a different nom de plume is at best dubious.

So which homeless shelter have you been hiding out in ol' boy? Oh wait that was another question, never mind. Sorry.

Mr. Mallow Man said:

Ann Colder is an angle? a hatred-preaching angle? I don't know what's up with you guys, but I got wise, she's a devil in disguise!

She's an icon of just how far out of touch Conservatives are from mainstream America, and of how dead the "concervative movement" is -- all that's left of "compassionated conservatism" and "honor and integrity" is a soulless media whore howling hateful madness aimed at about 99.9% of the people of the world (borrowing heavily from the UBL manifesto)

Out of touch: Jacob's complainey-pants post about x-boxes and "confusers" and how every generation since the 1940's has been comprised largely of lame-o's is another nice example. Conservatives don't love America, they're infatuated with a fantasy America that only ever existed in the minds of reactionaries; a fantasy "America" with a population of three: their selves, Ann Coulter, and Michelle Malkin. (sometimes they get their fantasies confused!)

The way I see it, the more conservatives latch on to that psycho bitch-bot's brand of neo-fascism the better. They'll stand less and less a chance of winning any elections, which is a good thing for America, and the world.

so Jack thinks Coulter's snarky little apology to gays is as cute as her ...mechanical smile. Jacob believes the homeless are ignorable, and that calling someone, "Homeless" means, "what you have to say is irrelevant"

by all means, let the epithets fly! Americans are dumb, pompous, arrogant pansies, aren't we? Some of us are fagots, some of us are spics, we're a bunch of lazy, stupid, lying pricks!

Ban the Gays! Build a Wall! Bomb those damn Arabs back to the dark age they came from! They only respond to violence anyway, and we're more than happy to dish it out (war is hell, war is hell)!

Alienate on, o player-haters! Yes! Alienate on, me mateys! Please, lay it on nice and thick till at least 11/08!

and then ask, "Who are you going to vote for, America?"

CLINTON-OBAMA in da House!!!

jacob said:

1. I have said nothing negative regarding the homeless. What are you talking about?

2. Who aside from you used the word spics?

3. Generations was as much in jest as not. Could you not figure that out? If so, you are dumber than I thought.

4. I think you have lost it.

jacob said:

Furthermore, no one here ever said we ban the gays. However, there is a huge difference between banning and affirming their actions. It is you who refuse s to see the distinction.

jacob said:

I am going to disagree with you regarding dear ol' Ann on this one. She has started using shock value comments. Zimzo actually did cite an article I agreed with.

Jack said:

So Ann can't say faggot, but you can call her "bitch-bot"?

Typical liberal double-standard.

stay puft marshmallow man said:

You support Coulter's use of the word "Fagot," and mock zimzo by implying that he's homeless.

I don't know if anyone here has used the word "spic" I suppose I should have said, "whole group of people who you define as 'illegal' and who you blame for everything that you can't pin on liberals, gays, or terrorists, including lower wages and rising crime and dropping property values and the erosion of American cultural values, and who you fear are secretly plotting to reclaim a large portion of the US as part of Mexico of Aztlan or something"

I guess I was paraphrasing.

In your opinion, would gays exist in a "perfect world"

I don't have quite the influence of Ann Coulter. If Fox News wants to do a piece about a guy on a blog calling Ann Coulter a bitch-bot, I'd be happy to give them an interview (and a book would soon follow)!

jacob said:

Take some deep breaths. Go read "Liberal Hypocrisy", you will see how much I support Coulter's remark.

As for the Zimzo-is-homeless line of needling, I have spoken to the homeless. Their fragmented logic, and fits of anger fit him pretty well. Actually, Zim has surprised me with his latest comment.

I do not denegrate the bums on the street, they already have denigrated themselves. There is nothing noble in being homeless. It is a sad existance, while I pity them, and I have fed them, I still do not think well of them. In this country country the opportunities are there to get off the street are many. The city will house you the volunteer groups will cloth you, provide you with food and furniture, I know I used to do that.

I am not making fun of the homeless. There is nothing funny there. I am tryin to get under Zimzo's skin. Apparently I got uder yours.

David said:

Jacob, where exactly do you get your information about the homeless population?

stay puft marshmallow man said:

I'm glad you realize that you're better than everyone.

Coulter's basically a fascist, but it's fine with me if you agree with her. At least we know where you stand.

Kevin said:

Interesting, Jacob, on the homeless.

I guess that's really all I have to say about that. . .huh. I thought there was more there, sorry.

Leave a comment

Type the characters you see in the picture above.

Old Dominion Blog Alliance


Technorati search

» Blogs that link here