Last time I checked, treason was indeed a crime. And a much more serious one than child molestation. Kiddie diddlers don’t get the death penalty. Traitors do.
How much of an insult something is depends on how offensive it is to the person giving and receiving it. People who actually did hate their own country, and who lived in an atmosphere in which hating-ones-own-country is a perfectly accepted and common thing to do, would not find that insulting. But that is not at all the case in America. And treason is even worse than America-hating. I’m not saying that hating ones country is as bad as child molestation. I’m saying that as an insulting accusation, it operates on a level which makes rational discourse and response impossibility. Accusations of treason, like (but less so than) accusations of rape or molestation, leave a smear even if they end up being unsubstantiated.
As for hating America, well, it’s become almost a punchline at this point… “I’m not crazy about the new nacho doritos” “Why do you hate America?”. But there are an awful lot of people for whom actually literally hating america is about as nasty an insult as there could be. And it certainly seems to be (admittedly unsupportedly) that there’s a large overlap between that group and Coulter’s audience.
A fair analogy. And when a prominent and successful and apparently not-tongue-in-cheek liberal author writes a book called “grandmother-killers” whose first line is “conservatives have a preternatural gift for striking a position in favor of killing poor defenseless grandmothers”, and sells millions of copies, and makes many other similar statements without ever there being a hint that the initial attack is meant anything less than literally, then I promise that I will never make comment about that author that are as vague as “oh, he’s too strident some times, but some of his stuff makes me laugh”. Rather, I will preface ANY mention of him by saying “his overbroad accusations towards conservatives as a whole are hateful, indefensible, and destructive towards our national discourse” or something like that.*
*At least, that is how I think I should act
Also, what Miller just said.
Treasonous actions, true. But we have free speech in this country, so unless someone makes a specific threat, they can say things that others may consider “treasonous” without worrying about the death penalty.
There’s a big difference though, which is that Ann Coulter is a best selling author, whereas Der Trihs is a lone voice. Now, one might make an argument that having really out-there fringe positions being espoused is good for the discourse as a whole. And, honestly, if there were a conservative equivalent to Der Trihs posting with his level of frequency, it might make the board a more interesting place. Or cause it to explode into little bits. In any case, though, I’m not outraged at the existence of Ann Coulter. Assholes exist. I’m outraged at her apparently non-ironic popularity. And popularity is different from “I never agree with a damn thing that asshole Der Trihs says and wish he wasn’t on my side, but our board is richer for his presence”. Which isn’t necessarily a position I support, but is something like the one I assume you’re mentioning.
I’ve been told on this very message board that, as a conservative, I hate poor people and want them to die. I consider this to be a grave insult, at least to the level of hating America. I believe that it’s an insulting accusation that operates on a level which makes rational discourse and response an impossibility. I believe it leaves a smear even if it ends up being unsubstantiated. And I am no more familiar with Michael Moore’s works than I am Ann Coulters, but if you were to tell me that he said such a thing about conservatives I would 1) not be surprised and 2) still agree that sometimes he is funny.
You, on the other hand, take this stuff a lot more seriously than I do, which I understand and appreciate, especially for saying that you would not be accepting of it from either side.
And now, I think I’ve spent about as much time as I ever want to defending Ann Coutler. As I said, I’m not a fan.
I’m not sure what free speech has to do with it. Whose free speech are we talking about?
Treason is a serious and grave crime. Child molestation is a serious and grave crime. An accusation of treason is a serious insult. An accusation of child molestation is a serious insult.
I assume you have read Treason. I haven’t, so I’m speculating here. What I take it that Ann is saying is that, in her opinion, liberal opinions are treasonous, not that liberals have actually committed treasonous acts that they could literally be prosecuted and hung for.
I poked at wiki, but I didn’t see anything where she said “Liberals are traitors”. I think she’s said it, but I’m not prepared to back that up.
This, on the other hand:
got a laugh out of me. It’s hateful and wrong-headed (aside from the really extreme lefties), but I have to admit she can make a funny when she chooses to.
If you were told that directly, literally and non-ironically, and if whoever said that didn’t later on (ideally) apologize, or (at least) back down from that level of rhetoric; then, well, then you’ve found someone on the sdmb who is as big a dick as Ann Coulter. Uhhh… congratulations? Ann Coulter is hardly the most hateful or evil person out there, or even the most hateful and evil author out there. It’s that she’s so POPULAR that is so disturbing.
There’s a big difference, to me, between someone who writes a long polemic of a book about poverty in America, and the general theme is some general theme or other, and gets very overwrought, and in a few places his level of vitriol reaches level where he starts making broad sweeping hateful statements about conservatives in general; and an entire book whose entire central premise, as emblemized by its one word title, is “All liberals are treasonous”.
(Not that I think that the first example really describes Michael Moore, but it could.)
She gets way too much publicity.
But is that a meaningful distinction?
I mean, there isn’t really a word which is to child molestation as “treasonous” is to “treason”, but if I said “conservatives ideals are the ideals of child molestation” but did not actually say “conservatives have all literally molested children, all 150 million of them”, well, I agree that it’s not quite AS bad. But I don’t see how it’s suddenly OK or non-hateful or non-divisive.
Also, there’s another big difference, which is that it’s prima facie ridiculous to think that all 150 million conservatives in America are literal child molestors, or, for that matter, that all prominent conservative politicians are literal child molestors. But it’s not totally beyond the bounds of reason to think that, say, Bill Clinton did in fact commit acts of totally literal treason (no doubt involving China and Vince Foster), or that Nancy Pelosi literally wants America to fail (in order to prove some weird conspiratorial point or other) and thus is actually trying to achieve that aim. Which makes it that much vaguer what she really means.
For those who like to point fingers at conservatives for unleashing Coulter upon the world, let me remind you that absent a stage, she’d have no part to play. From what I can tell, the liberals use her words to promote their agenda just as much as she uses their words to promote her own.
Oh, the irony.
If you haven’t seen anyone on the SDMB say that, then you are not looking very hard. And no, there are no apologies or retreat forthcoming and I’m quite sure there never will be. No congratulations are necessary…I really don’t care about anyone with those kinds of extreme opinions. They are on both sides, and not really worth being upset over, IMO.
OK, fine. I’ve never read either ones’ books, so I have no idea. I was using Moore as a hypothetical example to show that I really don’t care what these people say. Really, whatever, I am not a fan of hers and don’t wish to defend her. If you want to think I’m evil because I think the quote Bosstone posted above is kind of amusing, then fine…that’s your perogative.
Okay, how about “Conservatives are pedophiles” instead? Does the analogy work for you now?
Yes, and her stage is the hundreds of thousands of people who buy her books. There’s no reason to think that they only buy her books because liberals pay attention to her.
Well, I guess I would say that there are somewhere between one and three people who say that kind of thing, mainly one particular one, and they are frequently denounced by people on their “own side”. (And maybe there are a lot more than one to three who to it regularly and consistently… I certainly may just frequent the wrong threads.) I certainly did not intend to be implying that that had never happened or that you were making something up. The difference, as I’ve said several times, is that Ann is a best selling author. If there was a popular liberal poster who started a weekly thread that was always got tons of responses and was generally viewed as a leader of the sdmb liberal community, and that person frequently made such literally hateful statements, then you would have yourself an analogy there, chester.
Agreed. There are plenty of individual hateful assholes on both sides. I would, however, claim that there are currently, for whatever reason, more right-wing hateful assholes who are popular opinion-setters.
I don’t even in the slightest bit so think. Certainly, you have said nothing to indicate you agree with Ann’s liberals-are-traitors position, and a fair amount (in this thread and others) to imply that you don’t. The worst that I can accuse you of is being insufficiently aware of how personally insulting many people find Ann Coulter to be.
You are making a lot of assumptions about me. They are all false.
I went through all four pages here trying to find at least one example . . . no luck.
Some of us do, however. 