Real.

( “eal” men are, I guess, slippery.  Like Badura.)

Publius

BADura:

eal men can admit mistakes; to wit, my earlier failure to proofread.  Hence, correction:

“I could just as easily have been supporting your position as attacking it.”

Publius

Well, even coin tosses are an even bet.

You were right the first time, Badoora. 

Whoops!  That poor spelling must be contagious.

(Sorry, bub, but even the likes of “U” need to know how to spell.  What if he wanted to order Iran nuked?  If he wrote “Nooked”, others might think he meant, Give ‘em all hickies, for Chrissakes!) ["U" = “Single-U” . . . as opposed to “W” or “Double-U”.  U stands for Usurper.  Yes, Badass Badura, I’m clever.  ANYONE is clever next to the likes of you—illiterate, scarred by his parents,and allergic to any and all reasoned analysis.]

So, to make it amply clear regarding Ms. Coulter:  “C_nt ipsa loquitor.”

Ta-ta, c_ntryman.

Publius

RES IPSA LOQUITOR.

RES IPSA LOQUITOR.

RES IPSA LOQUITOR.

RES IPSA LOQUITOR.

RES IPSA LOQUITOR.

RES IPSA LOQUITOR.

RES IPSA LOQUITOR.

RES IPSA LOQUITOR.

RES IPSA LOQUITOR.

Yes, Badura.  RES IPSA LOQUITOR. Brevity IS the soul of wit, yes?

Yup; The thing speaks for itself. You Google well.

Ya see, lawyers use the phrase a lot. But there are conservative lawyers as well as liberal ones. All judges are lawyers.  Some lawyers have been appointed by Dubya.

QED.

The thing is: You don’t know if I’m friend or foe.  I could have just as easily have been supporting your position as attacking it.  I could also have been mirroring, favorably, your own use of Latin (sort of) in your handle.

Why so quick to assume I’m a liberal (smartass, know-it-all or otherwise)?  You do a disservice to reasoned debate.

Publius.

I think the bleach Ann Coulter uses on the roots of that bobbing head of hers went straight to her brain.
We should pitty the woman. Yes she makes money, but does the woman who is definately to old for the little mini skirts have a private life? She may get rolled in the hay on occasion, but the guy is gone before the sun comes up.( If he is smart)
This narcissistic, self absorbed woman knows what she says is ridiculous, but will sell books. The fools that buy the garbage she writes, giggles like school children hearing swear words for the first time, and pay to listen to this woman are the real ignoramouses.
Do not read, buy, or listen to her diatribe and she will be but a bad memory.

I want a wuss, I want a wimp, I want a faggot, to be the next President—-I want someone sensitive, intelligent, discerning, empathetic and not corrupt; I want someone entirely different than the guy who is now occupying that office.  I want change, this republic needs to be salvaged so that our children will be guaranteed a future, I want an end to the spreading of fear, hatred and terror; I want a country that I can be proud of, that cares about how it’s perceived around the world; I want a country more interested in fighting global poverty than Muslims; I want a country that respects its working-class and middle-class and upholds all social contracts--they’re not entitlements to be capriciously cut, while Halliburton and other war profiteers walk away rich; I want a president that recognizes that they’re 37 million Americans who live in poverty and need help; I want a President who knows that 47 million Americans need healthcare; I want a President who admits he’s wrong and apologizes; I want a decent human being to lead this country; and YES, I hope he is a wuss, wimp and faggot.

Thanks for the reply, Ga. I just want to say that when i first read your post i didn’t understand it because i assumed the word you blanked out was ‘f*ckwit’. Then i read it again and understood my mistake. I hope a lot of other people make the same mistake.
I just don’t consider myself an insult.
That guy at bar using a benign word in a hateful context is just a twerp. Why choose to be insulted by a brainless twerp? Ditto with Coulter. John Edwards could choose to be flattered, if he feels secure about his sexuality.
i have lots of experience with public insults, i used to get into brawls over the gay shit, now i’m zen, because i like who i am. I don’t think it should be any more difficult for people who aren’t gay to deal with, IF they like themselves.

America’s Eva Braun, aka Ann Coulter, should not be the one to frame a debate about Democratic candidates.  When is Truthdig going to run a piece about Dennis Kucinich that touches not only upon his consistent opposition to the war in Iraq, his 12-point plan to extract us from that quagmire; the Conyers-Kucinich, single-payer health care bill, and the fact that the brilliant Congressman from Ohio is the only Democratic candidate for President who stands ready to take on NAFTA, the WTO, media consolidation and the military-industrial complex?  When is Truthdig going to provide its readers with the information necessary for them to make an informed substantive decision on issues that truly matter?

wow !! the Comment #57997 by Publius says “Res ipsa loquitor” which means, or is supposed to mean “ the thing speaks for itself “

your so smart Publius!!  talking in Latin is really cool !!

yes the Dems do speak for themselves, i do agree !!! that’s my point !! just wait and there speech will change

RE: illgramaticus knee o’kaun

Res ipsa loquitor.

in response to the Comment #57498 by Gandersen , there is a huge difference between do nothing pandering Dem’s and the GOP, for the most part Bush doesn’t take a poll to see were he stands !! the Dem’s like Edwards are for the war when the people are, up until the 04 election then about face when the polls show them a different story !! Kerry’s “i was for the 187 billion, before i was against the 187 billion,” it all depends on the audience he is speaking too !! there a reason they are called flip flopper’s!! it not nuance, its sycophant pandering to the poles and libs are easily bamboozled for they are emotional creatures not concerned with the hard facts, only concerned with there gut feeling !! as far as the rest of your comment goes about the crimes of the GOP or the illegal wars ?? your just making my point for the wars are not illegal!! you do not like war,(none of us do) but there you go, taking your feeling and letting them get in the way of your judgment !! 16 resolutions and 12 years of UN sanctions to no avail, and Saddam’s refusal to follow the terms of his agreed surrender in “91” are indisputable reasons for war!!  and 9/11 gives us any reason we need to fight Islamic Extremism were ever it exists !! the truth doesn’t matter to libs how they feel rules all and Edwards and Bill Clinton know this oh so well !!! “i feel your pain” “somewhere in America a girl is going to bed hungry” “ I’m going to build you a bridge to the 21st century” and you guys bought that bridge ha ha ha were is it ??

to the Comment #57689 and Comment #57635 by Ga, sticks and stones Ga !!! if Ann would have said kill all fags then i would agree with you but in the context she used is was a mild insult meant as a joke, !! is Edwards even gay ???  it really doesn’t apply !! of coarse the lib media and the gay rights people who want to piggyback their activist struggle with much bigger true hate crimes of the Holocaust and the segregation and so forth but its just not the same thing thing !! Fag has always been a slight insult until recently when the PC police (emotional libs) want to rank it up there with the “N” word they are not the same !!!

illgramaticus knee o’kaun

Ah, if there were any justice, Dr. Dean would be President, and John Edwards likely the Vice-President. But noooo: from CNN to the DLC to the hard right, that was brought down, and the dubious result passes for “democracy”.

This time around, if something remarkable doesn’t intervene, the “Democratic” candidate who buys the caucuses will be the ludicrous Mrs. Clinton, minstrel-show and all.

To avoid this outcome, real Democrats should decide NOW to write in Edwards for President in the primaries, and Edwards for President and Obama for Vice President—both and in the general.

This has a number of advantages: first, write-in votes may have a better chance of being counted. Edwards first on the ticket keeps Obama from being assassinated. Having Obama second on the ticket keeps Edwards from being assassinated. The DLC, and the Clinton-Bush alliance, withers and dies. The Blue Dog Democrats tuck tail and slink away to corporate cushions.

Otherwise, the Bill Schneiders and Ann Coulters and blustering Bidens will keep the mass of actual FDR Democrats down again—with doctored tape, mysteriously-surfaced caucus remarks, ridicule, etc.

So I say we tie ourselves to the mast, by committing now to Edwards/Obama. Neither of them says all that needs to be said, but with the people behind them, they will.

The spectacle of Clinton buying the nomination is too disgusting to contemplate.

ME:
“The reality is that despite it all, Coulter retains some sort of currency; though I can’t see why.”
Ga:
“Um, perhaps because many people agree with her?”

ME Again:
OK, but I guess I’m still perplexed at what there is to agree with.  Her columns are tangled diatribes filled with unsupported, and frequently conflicting, assertions.  I get upset at writers I AGREE with when they don’t build a solid case.  You can’t really be right if you can’t support it with reliable data.
When one side screams “liberal” while the other yells “wingnut” and no rational discourse occurs, it just becomes a very boring game of insult ping-pong. 
I guess I just marvel that humans can exist without intellectual curiousity, just unquestioningly swallowing easy answers. 
If there is a god that created us (jury still out on that one) then that curiousity and the rational mind to satisfy it were gifts from that god that are at least as valuable as our voiceboxes and opposable thumbs.  Would it not be a great insult to such a god to ignore those gifts?

So it’s terrible to call John Edwards a “faggot”, but OK to say Dick Cheyney should have have been murdered in Afghanistan. I guess that’s why so many of my accquaintences are disgusted with the mental flatulence that pops up here and on TownHall.com. “A pox on both your houses!”

Charles Jeffress, are you the same? I have been looking for you for over five years now. Rick and I kept coming by the school. Where are you?

“can someone explain why the term ‘faggot’ is still considered such an insult? I’m a fag and i’m a nice guy.”

Well, f****t, I guess you are just too much of a f****t to understand, you f****t!

To me the above sentence is REALLY insulting if I were a bigot trying to, um, insult you.

I usually do not star out words like that, but I felt like crap typing that sentence in and felt I needed to “take the edge off” even when I am just using it as an example of hate speech.

How would you and your boyfriend feel, sitting down at a bar, and overhearing some of the patrons talking about “faggot” this and “faggot” that? What if they were drinking and acting all tough? People like that have been know to kill “faggots.”

And guess why that word in that context is an insult and can be considered hate speech?

Because, replace “faggot” with “jew,” “dyke,” “kike,” “wop,” etc., etc., etc., and it is always then simply HATE.

You know, only someone who is either ignorant or naive does not understand this.

“The reality is that despite it all, Coulter retains some sort of currency; though I can’t see why.”

Um, perhaps because many people agree with her?

Let’s face it. To many people—many who label themselves “christian”—really are bigots who hate gays, lesbians, addicts, immigrants, criminals, etc., etc., etc.

The thing is, these self-called “christians” (See Note) do not think of hating gays as bigotry, but think of it as a value!

In their minds they simply can not grasp the fact that with few, rare exceptions such as serial killers/predators, all human beings must be respected and treated with kindness and compassion—ALL human beings not just those “like you” or who share “your values.” These people feel no shame at insulting and denegrating all kinds of people and groups of people, even to the point of hateful speeches and hateful books.

Note: I specifically used the term “self-called/labeled christian” and NOT simply “Chirstian.” For not all Christians are bigots. It is just that many bigots—especially those who hate gays and lesbians and immigrants—consider themselves to be christian.

You’d better watch it Ann the Hate you harbour in your heart has been shown to be conected to Cancer!!!

Forgive me for distracting from the delightful vitriole towards Coulter, but can someone explain why the term ‘faggot’ is still considered such an insult? I’m a fag and i’m a nice guy. My boyfriend’s the best guy in the world. I know a lot of fags and yeah, some of them are the pits, but no more, and maybe less than in the wider population. Most of the fags i know are top people.
Back to the topic: Coulter sucks.

The reality is that despite it all, Coulter retains some sort of currency; though I can’t see why.  I thought we might have been done with her after her “Witches of East Brunswick” comments about activist 9-11 widows. 
That she is still here may relate to her style.  She spews to the choir, without any sort of logical framework.  I’ve read a large enough sample of her columns to feel it is safe to say that she does not rely on any sort of rational discourse.  The fact that her writing has any sort of appeal says as much about her audience as it says about her.  We have cultivated a significant slice of the electorate that is impervious to logic. 
I’m not sure that swaying this crowd will do any good.  The Coulter-Rush-O’Reilly crowd is a group that is swayed by demogogues.  Shall we develop a demogogue to attract them?  I don’t like that idea.  People like that can be more trouble as an ally than as an enemy.  I’d prefer to euthanize them, but that is probably a non-starter.
As long as we have a culture that is amenable people who are drawn like moths to the flame of emotional appear and ignore the cold fluorescent tube of rational discourse, we will continue to get the government we deserve rather than the government we need.

How’s this for the high road:  Coultier and her smarmy ilk are not as vile and despicable as they first appear.  In fact, I’m sure I would enjoy a nice dinner conversation with Ms.Coultier about the state of the world. She would likely be far less grotesque than her persona would seem to suggest. Ms. Coultier is not a true believer.  Her role is identical to that of the distraction that a magician uses to focus the eyes of the marks while he undertakes the slight of hand to play a parlor trick on them.  Of course, the American public is the drunken mark and the magician is the smartly dressed guy in the safe, undisclosed location.

Jeff comment #57165

Even if what you say is true.  How is this different than the republicans?  It is not, so what is your point?
They do the exact same things they just use different words, or different topics.  Every politician from George Washing to poor old george bush have said or done what ever it takes to get elected; then once elected do what ever they want to do.

If you think he “libs” are just suckers, then you have been played too just like all the rest of us.

Or are you saying the republican politicians are honest, “real” Christians, straight forward souls with integrity and morals and ideals who would never say or doing just about anything to get elected???????? (pssssst.. In case you have not noticed, there are more scandals, sex, money, illegal wars, profiteering torture, and illegal wire taps...ect. in the bush admin. than there was in the Clinton admin.)

The truth is both parties could care less about America, Americans or any one else in the world.  All they are concerned about is power and money and keeping the status quo on track.

So, if you really, really think only the liberals are getting played you are worse off than the “libs” you are so poorly trying to badger.

PS:  Clinton’s worst offense was screwing a willing female of age and lying about it.  (How many married guys wouldn’t lie about it?) Bushes biggest offense is screwing 3,000+ American soldiers and their families and countless innocent civilians for a war that can not be won for nothing.  I mean nothing.  Are we safer, is our economy booming, is the billions we have stolen from future generations helped at all?  NO.  And to top it all off when nothing is working he “stays the course” to show he is a man of “principal” right up until the loss in the Mid Term elections then he “changes course” or a “new way forward” ?????? 

We are wasting US lives for political and religious ideology, and of course oil.
Nothing more.

Sincerely,

Proud to be and American, but lately embarrassed to be an American.

Coulter seems to this observer a kind of reincarnation of P.T. Barnum, except without Barnum’s sense of irony. She’s a Post-Modern phenom. Post-Modern in the sense that any irony is unintended. Welcome to Post-Modernism, whereby culture has taken the place of serious politics. It’s about spectacle, not content. Who cares about actual content? If Americans cared about that, GW would never have gotten elected, especially the second time. (BTW, Dan, whether or not conspirators blew up the towers is completely beside the point, aside from the fact there’s zero proof any such thing happened. Any and every “anomaly” can be readily explained by qualified structural engineers.)

Was there ever a guy elected to office so celebrated exactly BECAUSE he’s an empty suit? He goes out of his way to mispronounce “nuclear.” (It’s not THAT hard to pronounce.) Man’s not stupid! He gets that most of us aren’t paying attention while we fear and loathe (thanks to Hunter Thompson for the phrase) anyone who displays an iota of intellect. (Dan and his fellow conspiracy theorists are cases in point. Talk about missing the forest for the trees. But worse: Forest and trees both are imaginary.)

Edwards appears to give a damn, says he gives a damn. Course, it’s not easy being a pol in the Post-Modern world. I’m inclined to believe he means well, but meaning well just doesn’t cut it. Problem is, a person has to get elected first. Once he/she does that, it gets worse, especially when it comes to domestic policy. Good luck with that to anyone who manages to get elected. (Watch C-Span and C-Span 2 if your idea of a good time is stultifying, stupefying “debate.”) Both parties have long agreed on American aspirations to empire. (Again, Dan, so what if they did blow up the towers? Even if ya’ll could prove it—which ya’ll can’t—nothing would result. About a third or half of Americans ALREADY believe it! Next.)

As for Coulter, she’s perfect. Not remotely knowledgeable, and so all the more perfect. She knows just enough to know that garnering media attention by means of pandering to the worst in a population is a guarantee of income, and that’s all she cares about. Loathsome as she is, I actually prefer her open lack of concern for anything or anyone, as well as her blatant greed and lust, to the ersatz “patriotic” concern expressed by Limbaugh, Hannity, O’Reilly, et al. She calls Edwards a faggot, media picks it up, and book sales soar. Woman’s a new kinda thing—a dumbass genius, same as GW—in these Post-Modern times. Given a choice, I want to hear more about Anna Nicole, a sweet, quaint Modernist naïf compared to Reichsführer Coulter. As for intellect, that’s for book-writers, pundits and (most, if not all, Dan) posters at Truthdig, not for those of us who harbor ideas of frontier justice under-girded by, albeit nowadays more disguised, racism, sexism, etc.

Make love, not war

No way am I endorsing Edwards. He still refuses to give lesbians the Federal benefits from marriage equality, including supporting UAFA which will grant permanent residency for my non-US partner for starters.

Mayor Gavin Newsom, Rev. Ted Haggard, and Astronaut Lisa Marie Nowak

Oh the sanctity of heteros and their curious institution of marriage!!  Now is the time to close this club and reopen it under new management: to gays and lesbians. We couldn’t do worse.

Three cheers for Kucinich!

Thank you, Dan Noel #57278, I couldn’t agree with you more.  You hit it right on the nail head.

Remarks about Coulter’s sexuality or appearance only serve to distract from rational discourse. Her appearance is irrelevant to her speech, which is the issue. Anyone who seeks profit from imflammatory rhetoric and hate speech lowers themselves to barrel scrapings. Newspapers long ago should have purged Coulter from their editorial pages without waiting for the blog firestorm to influence their policy. No wonder that paper media is restructuring in an attempt to keep up with digital media.
When a person resorts to name-calling, that person assumes the degraded position of the criticized. If Coulter was beautiful or appealing to the eye, her vitriolic outbursts would be equally contemptible.

THIS EPISODE ONLY HIGHLIGHTED WHAT WE SAW IN THE KERRY/EDWARDS CAMPAIGN.....THAT THESE REBUBLICANS, OR REGRESSIVES, ARE STUCK IN THEIR LATENT PHASE OF ADOLESCENCE.  LET’S JUST DO DAMAGE CONTROL WITH THEM, UNTIL WE CAN ACTUALLY HAVE GROWN-UPS RUNNING THE GOV’T....EDWARDS, GORE, CLARK, KUCINICH.....ALL STATESMAN, AHHH. SORRY, SENATOR CLINTON, I LIKE YOU BUT YOU ARE TOO INCONSISTENT.

“Were you similarly outraged when Coulter called Hillary Clinton a lesbian?”

Um, no.

“Lesbian” is not an insult although one certainly can say or use it as if it were. IIRC Clinton as lesbian was a fairly common refrain when she began running for Senator and it never caused outrage.

“Faggot” certainly is an insult and is fading away from use by everyone not stupid. It seems that there are particular insult words that are starkly and dramatically vicious and hateful. Nigger and cunt for example. People here use the latter term quite readily yet it to—in this context—really should not be used as to label a women.

It is all about context. Gays, blacks and women certainly can use these words in their own context and not as vicious attacks. (Ever hear of the Vagina Monologues?)

Coulter used the word not only as an insult but as a “wink, wink, nudge, nugde” insult used by bigots among mixed company. She implied it in a pathetic way that only fools those who agree with her.

She has also used the word “ugly” in that way to describe several women. (Al Franken quoted her in one of his books.)

Speaking of John Edwards,his campaign announced this:

“Democratic presidential candidate John Edwards won’t participate in a debate co-hosted by Fox News Channel and the Nevada Democratic Party”

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/huff-wires/20070307/on-t he-2008-trail

It seems Sen.Reid is reconsidering the plan too. Thank you, Sen.Reid. 

This along with Barack Obama’s refusal to go on that network, is a step in the right direction.

I hope all Democratic candidates reconsider, and adopt this policy. Stop lending any veneer of creditability to that network.

You people are perpetuating this crusty whore. Three, count ‘em, 1-2-three articles on this page reference Mann Coulter. Don’t pick at it!

Why would anyone pay attention to anything this puke-face (Ann Coulter) says?
She was born straight out of the abyss, the evil hole of hell.
Everyone should know a christian like her....
I’ve never really thought of her as a person, but more like an object of devil worship.
Notice how all the republicans laugh at her sicko humor.

Jerry Reyes writse a cogent argument excusing so many Democrats for voting for war.howver, we elect people to represent us because they promise to use their good judgement and intelligence in making key decisions. So how come Sen. Levin (D, MI) voted no? He was on the Armed Services Committee and was not fooled. I realy like John Edwards and it is to his credit that he admitted it was a mistake.  This is why I have not gone all out for him, even though I have contributed (very modesstly) to his campaign to help keep him alive. I have yet to hear from Richardson and Dodd.  As for Hillary, it is obvious that she triangulates.

It must be pointed out that global warming won’t become apparent until the polar ice caps have melted. It takes a great deal of heat to melt ice. Think of the world as an old fashioned icebox. It kept the food cold until the ice melted. After the polar ice caps have melted, then, too late, the world will finally realize that global warming is real.

Thanks Paul Tracy for the clip. John really should not waste our time as he did in ‘04.

I think John Edwards would better serve the American public by entertaining us with his magic tricks. Remember in 2004 when he suddenly faded and reappeared as a running mate for Kerry?

Goodbye John! See you at the county fair.

John Edwards is a very fine, but also very neutral candidate: his web mentions nothing about investigating the 9/11 farce. Alas, nothing is more urgent than doing just that. Only then will the federal government find the guts to launch a massive witch hunt that will purge its ranks of tens of thousands of malevolent employees and brand a few thousands of them as unredeemable professional criminals. Anything short of them is “business as usual,” issues such as the Iraq war, health care and global warming being little details to distract thet voters from the cancer that has overtaken much of the U.S. government.

The anorexic Barbie doll obviously has an eating disorder.  It would not be surprising if she “purged” by demonstrating the Navy’s new puking device.

Scheer’s column was great as usual, but some of the responses seem “beneath” the usual level of Truthdig readers. To criticize a very thoughtful comment because of a grammar error is being petty beyond belief. And to use language as bad as Coulter’s to attack her, “R,” is stooping to her level. Let’s take the high road in terms of how we discuss these issues.

Poor little Annie.  I love to watch her rant and rave in her nervous quirky voice as her humongous Adam’s Apple bobs up and down in syncopated rhythm.

I still think that, in reality, Annie Coulter is none other than Tucker Carlson in Full Drag....and her/his Adam’s Apple should be proof enough of her Gender (or lack of it).  Funny, you NEVER see them together.

She hasn’t changed one bit from those earlier shows on Geraldo Rivera, when she would sit in her mini-skirt (God! Does she still wear them???)
pulled well beyond her inner-thighs (what do you think Geraldo is looking at?!?!?!), and that lengthy, silken-mess of hair drooped over her left shoulder making her look just like an aged Afghan....Dog!!  Apologies to the Country of Afghan.

Of course, one way to beat little Annie at her own game would be for the MEDIA to Boycott Her....and that means NEVER GIVING HER THE TIME TO APPEAR ON ANY TV’S NEWS SHOWS......with the exception of the FOX NOISE NETWORK.  Seems that the Media Show-biz guys complain about her remarks and yet, they are the same ones who invite her to appear only because of RATINGS.  In truth, THE MEDIA REALLY SUCKS.

Suggestion:  Let’s enter little Annie in the next EUKANUBA DOG SHOW in the Afghan category.

O.K., can we drum up some business for Kucinich?  How about calling him a cradle robber or something?  I agree with Lord Byron; Dennis has maintained a consistency that no other candidate has mustered thus far.  Dennis is a principled man that deserves far more attention than what he’s receiving.  I hope the 2008 election is the year for the long-shots!

re coulter tagging john edwards as being a “faggot”: after reading the different definitions given for that word it seems to me that by an attempt to emasculate edwards she has incorrectly used a word which applies not to him but,indeed, to herself.

In flipping thru the radio stations this AM I
ran across “the rush”..........he was having a
go at John Edwards.......This was the meanest
most hateful diatribe I have heard since he
did his Clinton comments.............Hooooooray
for John Edwards......he one of the few Dems
who seem to be standing up and telling it like
it is..........

Who needs Stephen Colbert when we have Anne Coulter?  Her overwhelming message is “conservatives” have no class.  Thanks, Anne, keep it up!  I think Al Franken made a mistake in dignifying her lunacy with a response that only made her more famous and sold more of her printed ravings.

Dan Campbell (#57140) makes some valid points.  They’d have much more effect, however, if he’d be more careful in his use of grammar.

For when he writes, “As a citizen and a voter it is up to you and I (sic) to decide...” he loses credibility with some of us who believe firmly in the word “me.”

Ultra-conservative groups really soak up Ann Coulter’s venomous dribble. It’s like throwing red meat to a pack of hungry wolves. That’s why she’s so often invited to speak to those groups at top dollar. I do believe, though, that she is causing irrepairable harm to them in the long run. LOL.

I’ve decided the christian thing to do for a needy person like Ann is to be kind to her and look beyond her character flaws, so, I’ve asked her out and she’s accepted.  I don’t agree with name-calling.  We should all try to love one another.  I’d appreciate any suggestions you might have about where I might take Ann and what we could do.  I would like to make the evening memorable for both of us.  Thanks.

Of course Congress was deceived by the Bush Government when they sold the canard that Saddam had WMD, was in cahoots with Al Queda and was responsible for 911. At the start I suspected that the government lied to the American people. But when the most credible and respected official of the Bush Gov’t went before the United Nations live on world television flanked by the heads of the CIA & FBI that had the primary responibility to gather intelligence for the Gov’t,declared that Saddam had in fact WMD and was in cahoots with Alqueda, it is understandable that we would beleive him. After all it is the Executive Dept that had supervision & control over the CIA & FBI and not Congress. Bush and his Gov’t lied and we should not blame Congress for being deceived and misled.

I’m with ‘jmp’ on this one. Ann Coulter has no place in political discussion. She is a cunt. But her statements do shine more spotlight on Edwards, who I feel is a much better candidate than either Clinton or Obama, for many reasons.

We can only hope the “a faggot” comment is a precusor to “I’m melting, I’m melting!!....What a world! What a world!”

Coulter, no words slicing enough to treat her arrogance and stupidity, but interesting that the word faggot used for a male homosexual, came “probably from earlier contemptuous term for ‘woman’ (1591), especially an old and unpleasant one, in reference to faggot (1) ‘bundle of sticks,’ as something awkward that has to be carried (cf. baggage).”

It strikes me that a woman who is easily able to demean people who are gay, or assume “gayness” is the reason for opposing senseless horrific violence, is someone who likes so much to get the approval of the boys in power, that her own attitude towards women is ugly and demeaning as well. Anything for the approval of men in power.

Here’s the word story from etymonline.com --

faggot (1)
1279, “bundle of twigs bound up,” from O.Fr. fagot “bundle of sticks,” from It. faggotto, dim. of V.L. *facus, from L. fascis “bundle of wood” (see fasces). Esp. used for burning heretics (a sense attested from 1555), so that phrase fire and faggot was used to mean “punishment of a heretic.” Heretics who recanted were required to wear an embroidered figure of a faggot on their sleeve, as an emblem and reminder of what they deserved.
faggot (2)
“male homosexual,” 1914, Amer.Eng. slang (shortened form fag is from 1921), probably from earlier contemptuous term for “woman” (1591), especially an old and unpleasant one, in reference to faggot (1) “bundle of sticks,” as something awkward that has to be carried (cf. baggage). It was used in this sense in 20c. by D.H. Lawrence and James Joyce, among others. It may also be reinforced by Yiddish faygele “homosexual,” lit. “little bird.” It also may have roots in Brit. public school slang fag “a junior who does certain duties for a senior” (1785), with suggestions of “catamite,” from fag (v.). This was also used as a verb.
“He [the prefect] used to fag me to blow the chapel organ for him.” ["Boy’s Own Paper,” 1889]
Other obsolete senses of faggot were “man hired into military service simply to fill out the ranks at muster” (1700) and “vote manufactured for party purposes” (1817). The oft-heard statement that male homosexuals were called faggots in reference to their being burned at the stake is an etymological urban legend. Burning was sometimes a punishment meted out to homosexuals in Christian Europe (on the suggestion of the Biblical fate of Sodom and Gomorah), but in England, where parliament had made homosexuality a capital offense in 1533, hanging was the method prescribed. Any use of faggot in connection with public executions had long become an English historical obscurity by the time the word began to be used for “male homosexual” in 20th century American slang, whereas the contemptuous slang word for “woman” (and the other possible sources or influences listed here) was in active use.

Wikipedia agrees that it relates to a pejorative term for old women (info below). Seeing what US action has done to women in Iraq, and what factions in Iraq the US government supports - and their treatment of women—well, it all, as ever, fits together.

Thanks, AA

The origins of the word in this sense are rather obscure.

...homosexuals were supposedly burnt at the stake in medieval England. This, however, was never an established punishment for homosexuality in England, although, according to one source, those accused of homosexual acts were sometimes doused in fuel and used in place of sticks for the burning of supposed witches.[1] However, this practice ended centuries before the word faggot became associated with gay people…

The word has also been used since the late sixteenth century to mean “old or unpleasant woman”, and this would appear the most likely derivation… The application of the term to old women may be a shortening of the term “faggot-gatherer”, applied in the nineteenth century to people, especially older widows, who made a meagre living by gathering and selling firewood.

The most reliable indicator that someone is a well-educated, intelligent, thoughtful, tolerant, practitioner of what Christ actually taught is being attacked by Ann Coulter, Russ Limbaugh or anyone from the Fox Noise Channel.  The best possible endorsement for a presidential candidate like John Edwards should be vilification by the likes of them.

Sheer, you may be correct about “thanking” Ann Coulter, “for boosting the principled but media-neglected presidential candidacy of John Edwards.”

But John Edwards will not have my vote and never will. Kucinich came out against the Iraq invasion and Edwards had to apologize for supporting it. Kucinich is in favor of single payer health care to achieve universal health care coverage; Edwards favors a market based approach which won’t work and does not eliminate private insurance companies. Kucinich favors a decriminalization of marijuana and Edwards is entirely absent from the discussion.

On the great issues of the day, Edwards is not where he needs to be and neither are any of the other Democratic candidates. Vote for Kucinich and make yourself feel good for a change!

what scared me the most was not the inane remark, but the loud approving applause and laughter from the audiance.

I can’t believe the hipocrits on the right, they don’t believe in christianity at all. She writes a book on godless in american, and calls a person who does more for the plight of the poor(just like jesus told us to do)and calls him a “f....."I think she may be gay, all the people who protest the most (remember ted)seem to be the ones who are in the closet. I see her website is not working, is it down for good.  Is she seeing anyone? Maybe someone should hound her on her lifestyle, find out every dirty little thing in her closet, then maybe if the media scrutinized her like she seems to do to everyone else, she would just go away.  I really think this is her demise.  Sean hannity, her only friend left in the world

Edwards has a line he has been using for 5 yrs !! “about a little girl going to bed hungry” (isn’t see 13 by now) Edwards will not eradicate poverty in the USA!  he is using that line to tug on your bleeding hearts !! what is he going to do about bad parents who squander the food stamps the government gives them to buy their children food ????  No children starve to death in the USA !! when one does? its all over the news all day long on FOX and CNN and i think the last one to die of malnutrition in the USA was like 3 yrs ago in Jersey cause the parents locked the kids in the basement and smoked crack for weeks strait !!! Edwards says that line cause you guys get all emotional and then go out and vote for him, hes playing you !!! just like bill Clinton’s “i feel your pain” line its all just emotional marketing and you libs suck it up !!!  Edwards is a sycophant he is pandering to your bleeding heart !! he is a snake-oil salesman he cares squat about poverty, he only cares about his own promotion !! watch for the disingenuous tongue wag he has !!and the look on his face that says “I’m so special” the fake smile, he flip-flops and will say what ever he thinks you wish to here !!!  what did Kerry Say “i pick John as my running mate cause he has nice hair” that was no lie !! its all show for you guys to eat up !! Edwards is a perfect example of a democrat politician talking to his base: the naive, bleeding heart, sucker libs !!

Could’nt be said any better....Its unfortunate that someone chooses a couple of people for the mass’ to choose from.....Its unfortunate that the people have so much misinformation and cannot seperate the truth from fiction…

Sad that the Dem’s give us two loosers....The Grand Oil Party has the dem’s on their side...Neither Hillary or Obama are qualified or deserve to be president....

Ann Coulter uses the ages-old approach of questioning the masculinity of anyone who questions the wisdom of going to war. Of course, most of those who supported the war in Iraq never saw military action, but that doesn’t bother Ann Coulter. And of course Ann, being allegedly female, is in no danger of having to serve in the military.
Psychologically speaking, the American right wing is shot through with weird, repressed homoeroticism. For evidence, look at Terry Dolan, the CPAC founder who died of AIDS, all the while lambasting the dreaded “gay agenda.” Or, see Ted Haggard, the preacher who condemned gays while engaging in gay sex himself, under the influence of drugs. The list goes on and on.
I’m not sure where Ann Coulter’s sexual tastes, if any, lie. But she is definitely one weird, twisted piece of sexual wreckage....

Were you similarly outraged when Coulter called Hillary Clinton a lesbian?

Robert,

You say:

“Thank you, Ann Coulter, for boosting the principled but media-neglected presidential candidacy of John Edwards.”

Huh? Principled candidacy of John Edwards? The guy just made the most outrageous pledge of allegiance respecting Iran! Edwards is oily, oily, oily. Apologies notwithstanding, he supported the war when it began. He’ll never convince me that he was deceived when it came to intelligence. If I knew the intelligence was suspect just following accounts on the web why didn’t he? Spare us the canonization please.

John Lowell

The fact that a vicious “attractive” blonde woman named Coulter is attacking Edwards tells us that the Repubs are terrified of Edwards.

They know he has what it takes. His message is spot on. They are trying to shoot him down even before his plane leaves the airport.

Was Coulter posing as a fueling attendant to blow it up before takeoff? Coulter is recklessly slandering his name. Almost laughable but truly disgusting. We all know she doesnt care about his sexuality one whit and knows nothing about such things.

When will all the rabid dogs running around Cap Hill get put into cages where they belong? where the hell did all the gonads go in teh Democratic party and the press????

Reminds me of a yipping little poodle trying to impress her master with her guard dog skills. Someone needs to yawn and pee on her! LOL

“MacArthur Grant Rant”
http://WWW.ILOVEPOETRY.COM/VIEWPOEM.ASSP?ID=91421
“i’s dunt learnt alls myne objectivitiez ant
modezty frum Jeorge W and Anne Coulters.”

John Edwards appears the most qualified and balanced person running for President. (If you noticed I capitalized the word “President” as an indication of the hope I have of a new President restoring honor, truth and dignity to our country.)
In the time Bush has been in office we have lost these things and more; not just in the eyes of the average citizen here in the U.S. but in the eyes of the world. National Security is not just about who carries the “biggest stick”; it is also about a country’s intentions and how they are perceived by the rest of the world. Bush’s “pre-emptive war” policy and his disregard for the values guaranteed by the Constitution he is charged to protect has caused a mistrust of our government by the very people he is sworn to represent. (I can’t say that Bush is the only one responsible for this image since, both republican and democrats in both the Congress and the Senate could and should have fought his efforts.)
As a citizen and a voter it is up to you and I to decide (with intelligent non-partisan thought) how we as a country are going to be and how we want to be represented to the rest of the world. We are at a critical time in our county’s history! If we choose representatives who have no sense of the values of truth, honor and dignity; we will repeatedly get representatives like we have at the present.
In this coming election; we are not just voting for the future course of our county; we are voting for the course of events that will shape the world. War and distrust drain any country’s resources (natural and human) and the price is paid for generations.
I like what I see and hear of John Edwards and though it is too early to make a final decision I perceive him as a person that will represent all “the People” and concern himself with “TRUTH, HONOR AND DIGNITY” not just for this country be the rest of the world.

Dan Campbell
dan_campbell46 at yahoo dot com

Sen. Edwards is the only true progressive Democrat running for president. He unashamedly supports equal opportunity for all Americans. His clear support for universal health care and elimination of tax breaks for the ultra rich must be commended by all Democrats. Sen. Edwards disavowed his previous vote for the Iraq war. The slurs made by right wing neocons show that they are worried and will do anything to prevent Sen. Edward’s election. We must strongly support Sen. Edwards campaign and vote for him for our next president!

Me thinks she dost protest too much! All political correctness aside, when did being homosexual make one lean to the left? Remember Julius Caesar and his veni vidi vici? Did he mean “give me your tired, your, hungry, your homos”? I’ll tell you I always thought Jerry Falwell was gay after his pasty hugeness approached me in a gay bar in Philadelphia. Is all this besides the point? No matter what Cheney says or thinks or does his daughter is still Pregnant by Science, and Gay. Nobody said she went out and had a one night stand with some Spartan Republican doing his “duty” for God&Country;. But I just KNOW that that audience was rife with the thought that if Mary Cheney just had a giant right wing phallus in her just once all this lesboneyism would puff away like so much smoke&mirrors;. I mean what red blooded woman doesn’t want a tumescence of red blooded Americanisms to make her feel all whole!? Say wasn’t that a rock&roll;band? Maybe Ann Coulter could take her by the hand and show her a night on the town and the right way to have babies when you’re a human being. Oh that’s right it’s all off limits and swept under the rug when it’s too true for words. Maybe writing a check to yourself for billions of Federal Reserve Notes and then stuffing it in your mouth and awaiting blessed suffocation is what those big wigs all have in mind for us everyday folks; but as for me, I’d rather hug the little children and kiss mother nature full on the mouth…unless of course she’s gay….ewww!

I said it in 2004, and I’ll say it again.  I thought John Edwards would have been a far better choice than John Kerry and now he has come into his own.  He Is a moral leader and a true reflection of the soul of the Democratic majority in this country.  He cares about the people!  What a refreshing change from the sociopaths leading(!) the country today.

What most forward thinking people want to expand in both America and the world are the higher levels of thinking from which people like John Edwards operate.  That is why it is important to keep our focus on all the John Edwards type people in our world and move forward with them in their higher levels of reasoning and actions. I have no desire to move my level of thinking backward by giving my focus to the Ann Coulter type people in the world. What you focus on expands.  My focus is on love, peace and justice in our world.

John Edwards has certainly been very principled throughout the course of this campaign and continues to be even in the face of gratuitous comments like that of Ms Coulter and Bill O’Reilly who has suggested that Edwards is a hypocrite because of what he calls “anti-christian” bloggers.

The notion of taking a courageous stand against “political correctness” is also an interesting one.  From a positive point of view, “political correctness” means something like avoiding the use of terms or even pronouns which various groups find offensive or exclusionary.  Many, when they learn that this or that expression is offensive or exclusionary from another’s point of view, are more than happy to accomodate these concerns.  Many of us also sometimes find the sensitivity of others perplexing, bemusing or annoying in part because that sensitivity challenges our conscious or unconscious structure of language and meaning.

Honestly engaging this perplexity can open us to a better and deeper appreciation of others and the world around us.  For example, engaging the difference between saying “mankind” and “humankind” can open us to a more conscious appreciation of both men and women in human life.

Expressions like “faggot,” whose origins rest in a vulgar, demeaning, resentful, predjudicial and fearful impulse on the part of the speaker to the person or group being referred to are not the use of a commonly accepted neutrally nuanced term like the convention of using a male pronoun to refer to all people or using a term that is a by-product of past era but now inappropriate in our time.  These expressions were and are calculated to demean, belittle and ridicule while appealing to the basest of our instincts.

Ms Coulter seems to have a talent for this baseness and is hardly defending us against undue “political correctness” and social sensitivity. Rather, she seems to be attempting to slow the rise of the spirit of understanding, interpersonal sensitivity and appreciation for difference that is bedrock to justice and peace on earth.