Is she about eight miles past the shark by now? If not, why not? Why do *any *Republicans let this crazy women appear as if she speaks for them?
At any moment, I expect to see Mitt Romney being sorry for saying at the same conference that “I am happy to hear that after you hear from me, you will hear from Ann Coulter. That is a good thing. Oh yeah!”…
… any moment now…
She endorsed him after the faggot remark.
Oh yeah. Also, “our blacks are better than their blacks.”
The term “faggot” for nuts like Coulter seems to mean approximately the same thing it means to the average third-grader: namely, “I’m going to say a naughty word to convey the idea that I don’t like you”.
What worries me more than her choice of terminology is her apparent continuing legitimacy as a conservative spokesperson. I mean, this wasn’t just some under-medicated harpy ranting in a bus shelter: this was an official speech at the annual Conservative Political Action Conference in D.C., featuring such high-profile conservative and Republican figures as Tony Snow, John Bolton, Vice-President Cheney, Senator Brownback, and a host of other leading politicians and pundits.
If most conservatives really feel that Coulter is a loony extremist who isn’t representative of their views, then why does she keep getting these gigs?
That’s what I want to know.
I don’t believe that most conservatives feel that she’s a loony extremist, given the mainstream conservative company that she keeps.
Well, all the conservatives around here seem willing to dismiss her as such; I can’t remember ever hearing from any of them (except perhaps the long-departed Wildest Bill) that they respected her or took her seriously. Are there no “real conservatives” here at the SDMB?
Note that I said “most”, not “real”. The SDMB tends to attract a different type of conservative to it than those typically found in the populace at large.
IMHO, because most don’t feel that way; I believe that Coulter is a fairly good example of what American conservatism is really about.
Not many; they wouldn’t last long. Also, they tend to avoid any place with people whom might seriously argue against them; they prefer either yes men or weak liberals who’ll let the conservatives walk all over them.
.
From http://mediamatters.org/items/200703030002
So, her latest comment isn’t just a mistake. I’m sure she only says things like this to pander to her audience. But, I couldn’t sleep at night if I had her attitude.
[sub]Unless I sold furniture, or aluminum siding, or had an infomercial. :)[/sub]
I can’t say much more than, “Wretched, just wretched.”
What can I say? Conservative activists, like liberal ones, like a little political entertainment, and for some of them Coulter fits the bill. I don’t much like her myself, but there you go.
Even so, these remarks outraged a lot of people present at the conference. Michelle Malkin described the remark on her blog as getting only a smattering of laughter, and not from her. The Captains Quarters folks were outraged, as was Dean Barnett, who blogs at Hugh Hewitt’s site.
Looks like they got more than they bargained for when they booked her.
The Human Rights Campaign responds:
Given that she’s “speculated” about Bill & Hilary’s sexual orientation as well, I wonder what her big hang-up is about the subject.
Anyway, I would really like to believe that this puts the nail in her publicity coffin–the comment she’ll never fully escape, the one that people will continue to pester her about whenever she’s tramping to the press, and the one that GOPers finally can use an excuse to distance themselves from her.
I’d like to believe it. We’ll see…
Given all this “outrage” from conservatives that you list, and Malkin’s assertion that she only got a “smattering” of laughter, i’m wondering where all the cheering and the clapping in the video was coming from.
Liberal foley, perhaps?
Oh, and I guess she had to go after Edwards’ sexuality because she already milked the whole “Edwards exploits his dead son” gambit. Coulter:
*Sensitivity, thy name is Coulter. They should ask Guiliani if he agrees with her feelings about those golddigging 9/11 widows.
I watched the video, much as I didn’t want to. I didn’t hear a roar of approval. I heard a few laughs, a couple of claps, and some boos.
I guess “a few” and “a couple” must mean something different where i come from.
C’est la vie.
I was judging response to that comment against that when she finished her talk a few seconds later, which drew a far greater response.
And don’t you think that “far greater response,” in itself, says something? Especially coming, as it did, only about 10-15 seconds after the “faggot” reference?
If i went to listen to a speech, and the speaker referred to someone in all seriousness as a “faggot,” i wouldn’t be applauding at the end, no matter how good the rest of the speech might have been.
And i’ve seen Ann Coulter speak in person; politics aside, she’s actually not even a good public speaker.
And again, I’m not defending it at all.
All I am saying is that if other conservatives say they are outraged by Coulter, as I am, you ought to believe them.
I’m not going to get into an argument about how many people applauded Ann Coulter. However many did, they were wrong to do so.