Ann Coulter's F Bomb

[Gemini Cricket]

At least three major companies want their ads pulled from Ann Coulter's Web site, following customer complaints about the right-wing commentator referring to Democratic presidential candidate John Edwards as a "faggot." Verizon, Sallie Mae and Georgia-based NetBank each said they didn't know their ads were on AnnCoulter.com until they received the complaints.
A diarist at the liberal blog DailyKos.com posted contact information for dozens of companies with ads on Coulter's site after the commentator made her remarks about Edwards at the Conservative Political Action Conference in Washington on Friday.

Source
I've always loved DailyKos.

I'd like to see this as a positive thing, but I'm sure companies who don't really care will take their place. Oh well.

[SacTown Chronic]

I love Andrew Sullivan's (America's favorite faggot conservative blogger) response to Coulter:

"I am not a faggot. I am a man."




You go, girl!

[Tramspotter]

Originally Posted by JWBear

I have no problems (and fully support) hate speech laws. They are intended to increase to punishment for violent crimes that are the result of prejudice, bigotry, and hate. These laws do not apply in Ms Coulters case – she did not commit an act of physical violence.

I have a problem punishing motives and mindsets of any kind even if fully understood. And find people who would dangerous

Yes.

As seen by the gleeful tirade against Colter if we were to plug in a name of someone you completely disagree with targeting another group I wonder if your reaction would be the same

Ad hominem? Hardly. To reply to a nasty and inappropriate remark by condemning said remark is not an ad hominem attack.

WB attacked her looks is that germane to the issue at hand or acceptable to you during other political discourse?

And yes, I would react the same way if any other public figure made a remark of that type.

Fair Enough.

Yes.

Doesn't take much more justification to bring governmental power to bear in silencing speech.


No.

well if a mob starts forming or a sufficiency of punishment sub committee is ever put together I hope that they are as generous as you would be

I’m not trying to cast a shadow on you – just trying to interpret your post as best I can. You seem to be (to me, at least) defending her actions; as if you agreed with her and believe there was nothing wrong with what she said. If this is not what you meant, I apologize.

You use the phrase "her actions" and tone of the thought police. I am defending her right to "her free speech" and others their right to make their own conclusions If this is not what you meant, I apologize.

[wendybeth]

I posted a picture which completely backs up my comment. I accept full responsibility for what I said, and I don't intend to spin it any other way. She looks like Richard O'Brien's twin.




I think that she is like the picture of Dorian Grey, only she's the attic version. Her exterior is beginning to reflect her interior.

[JWBear]

Originally Posted by Tramspotter

You use the phrase "her actions" and tone of the thought police. I am defending her right to "her free speech" and others their right to make their own conclusions If this is not what you meant, I apologize.

I never said that she (or anybody, for that matter) doesn't have the right to speak her mind. She can say whatever she wants to. Just as we are free to speak out against what she says. Freedom of speech is a two way street; and freedom of speech does not mean freedom from criticism.

(And what the hell do have to do with the discussion?)

[mousepod]

I don't want to see her get in any legal trouble for misusing her freedom of speech. I also don't see the use in me "piling on" in this argument, especially when I don't exactly understand what the thesis of the pro-Coulter argument exactly is. I just know that Ann Coulter's an irresponsible ****ing ****, whose points are rendered moot because of the fact that she presents herself as a pompous ****.

[blueerica]

IMO, she can say what she wants, but also needs to be prepared for people hating what she says.

Everyone needs to take responsibility for themselves, Ann Coulter included. For example, if I want to sit in West Hollywood and make a comment about anything while including the word faggot - there had better be either context or at least humor (she had neither as far as I could tell) or I should be prepared for whatever backlash I get. I'm sure she had to realize that she was being taped. Common sense should dictate what was expected to happen, so that anyone in her camp might be shocked is surprising. Just gotta see AC for who she is.

Ann Coulter, like her or hate her, is not dumb. She may have some polarizing beliefs, but she's not dumb. She wants attention, she's getting attention - she certainly is doing the majority of conservatives no favor. I see little need to defend her or attack her. I just see her for who she is and who she has always been, a media-hungry attention-craving borderline-lunatic. I mean really, few things she's ever said really make that much sense. I think most of what comes through her lips is just to push the envelope.

At best, she's a satirist - at worst she's a bitch. Whatever.

[Morrigoon]

The right to free speech relates to the right to say something (such as "George Bush is a worthless piece of sh*t") without getting arrested. Doesn't mean freedom from consequences.

[SzczerbiakManiac]

Coulter responds:
Coulter Doesn't Get It, Pt 1 (Hannity & Colmes via YouTube)
Coulter Doesn't Get It, Pt 2 (Hannity & Colmes via YouTube)

I respond:
No Ms. Coulter, the word "faggot" is not just a schoolyard taunt. It does imply the person to whom it's being directed is not only gay, but sub-human. And yes, it is very offensive to gays. What makes you think you're even remotely qualified to determine what gays find offensive? "Faggot" is equivalent to a racial slur. Gays most definitely have been and continue to be legally discriminated against.

When you say "we're against gay marriage" and they in the very next sentence say, "I don't want gays to be discriminated against" you are contradicting yourself.

You also said, "I think we [Republicans] have the pro-gay position..." Are you kidding me? Did you really just say that? Did you even think about those words? Really??? The GOP does not need any help from the Liberally-biased media in describing Republicans--you folks do a fine job of that all by yourselves.

[Alex]

While I can't remember ever using the word (other than in a self referential way), it is a bit of a fuzzy line since "fag" seems to have taken up a cozy place in mostly non-offensive slang vocabulary. I don't know that adding "got" makes it a whole lot more offensive.

But as with so many things, offense is in the eye of the beholder.