Obama Defends Edwards, Dean Denounces Coulter

DNC Chair Howard Dean denounced Ann Coulter, suggesting there was no room in politics for such "vile rhetoric," except perhaps from the people who work in the kitchens of those swanky hotels.

Meanwhile, Barack Obama said he wouldn't allow campaign politics to get in the way of his defending Edwards, stating, "John Edwards is not gay, though he did look at me sort of funny once in a Senate chamber men's room. I am aware of the rumors surrounding Hillary over the years, not that I believe them, but I've never heard a thing about John. Kucinich is the one I wouldn't turn my back on, if you know what I mean."

Comments

[Jeff]

Just as wrong as Kerry was, as wrong as Obama saying troops lives were wasted... Ann Coulter was just as wrong.

The difference is that Coulter wasn't elected.

[w3]

After the initial shock and a few hours crying into his puffy pink pillow, the Breck Girl has decided to turn adversity into opportunity. For all of you who feel like you must DO SOMETHING about what that evil, sexless woman did to Johnny, you can give him money.

https://johnedwards.com/action/contribute/coulter

Praise the Lord. Pass the plate.

[Layer Seven]

Hey, how does one economically refer to an effeminate, fetus channeling, thief?

[kerry_zaputz]

What else do you call a 54 year old man who colors his hair and dyes his eyebrows?

[Cindi]

Elvis?

[Legalize]

Only Jeff has the sense to concede that Coulter was wrong (albeit backhandedly)?

Hypocrites and cowards.

[Cindi]

I will not concede to what she said, but then again, I use the word faggot a good bit myself. Of course I would never stand on a soap box and blurt it out.

[Jeff]

Go check the Conservative blogs, so far

-Riehl WV
-Ace of Spades
-Hotair
-Newsbusters
-imao.us
-Volokh conspiracy
-Right Wing News
-Instapundit
-And Drudge is flashing some less than flattering stories

The only blog that I subscribe to (RSS) that haven't denounced the comments is LGF.

[Jeff]

Oh, the above blogs have denounced the comments.

[templar knight]

Dan said she was wrong, Legalize.

[scarshapedstar]

"Just as wrong as Kerry was, as wrong as Obama saying troops lives were wasted... Ann Coulter was just as wrong.

The difference is that Coulter wasn't elected."

And yet I'm told that in a tit-for-tat sense there's no difference between Coulter, who has a free pass to the entire "Liberal Media", and Ward Churchill, who nobody gives a shit about. Makes perfect sense.

[Jeff]

LGF just posted that what she said was "stupid."

So pretty much every mojor Conservative blog has disagreed or denounce her comment.

Now on to something that the left agrees with that they won't denounce:

"You know, education, if you make the most of it, if you study hard and you do your homework, and you make an effort to be smart, uh, you, you can do well. If you don’t, you get stuck in Iraq.”

And

If Cheney died America would be a better place.

I challenge you to find major blogs (Daily Kos, MyDD, Democrat(ic) Underground, etc.) where they denounce those comments and thoughts.

[Jeff]

Really Coulter has a free pass? I consider that a challenge ;)

**Friday’s Law & Order: Coulter Character 'Causes' Murder, Has Drinks With Limbaugh
http://newsbusters.org/node/10564

**Vile Left Gets a Pass
http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2006/6/14/165338.shtml

Lauer Offended By Ann Coulter; Delighted by Al Franken
http://newsbusters.org/node/5701

**Keith Olbermann Attacks Ann Coulter and Michael Savage
http://newsbusters.org/node/6483

**Los Angeles Times Columnist: Ann Coulter Is A "Pornographer"
http://newsbusters.org/node/5805

I would hate to see how the MSM treats someone who doesn't get a pass... I even had to delete some because Typepad doesn't allow many links in a post...

[Phoenix]

Considering the tone of her delivery, she should have said "lawyer" instead of faggot. "Faggot, which morphed from a 'bundle of sticks' to gay guy, should be saved for Kucinich.

[Legalize]

Gimme a break, calling her comments "stupid" isn't the same thing as saying her comments were per se and substantively "wrong." Just like her "raghead" and "lets rat poison Justice Stevens" comments weren't criticized as being "wrong" by the right; they were criticized for being impolitic. It's one thing to say that she should not have said what she said, and quite another to say that she should not have said what she said because what she said is disgusting and wrong.

And you know it.

You also know that the difference between anonymous posters on blog joking about Cheney's death is miles apart from CPAC INVITING Coulter to speak at an event that ostensibly REPRESENTS conservatievs, KNOWING that she will say something along these lines as a means of tossing out some red meat. CPAC knows who she is and what she says, and they invite her back because of it.

You know this.

And Jeff, look at the comment sections of the rightie blogs. Tell me that their views don't represent conservatives generally.

[Papertiger]

Does an efiminate poseur necessarily have to be a swish?

How many girls do you think have never once called a guy a faggot in public?

[Papertiger]

How about Bill Mahr in a rounnd table discussion with a democratic congressman saying the world would be a better place if Cheney were dead?
Would that be comparable?

[Legalize]

"How about Bill Mahr in a rounnd table discussion with a democratic congressman saying the world would be a better place if Cheney were dead?
Would that be comparable?"

Obviously they are not comprable. When Bill Mahr is invited to THE PREMIRE DNC (or comperable) event of the year because he says such things, then you have a workable analogy.

[Papertiger]

Oh I gotcha. We only count important events umm like Micheal Moore at the DNC.
Course Moore didn't call anybody a fag. He only called the Pres a murdering war profiteer.

[Jeff]

Legalize, I think that you are forgetting, that this wasn't a politically motivated event, rather an ideological event, if she said this at the RNC - then yes, she should be cast out, and not forgiven...

So how about Hillary Clinton "this place is run like a plantation - and you know what I mean" Nancy Pelosi saying George Bush was a "criminal"

Ann Coulter isn't a politician! If what Bill Mahr said was excusable, then what Coulter said was more than excusable.

I believe Joe Biden went to the Daily Kos and guest blogged, and at the Daily Kos they have said things far worse than calling someone a faggot. Maybe Joe Biden should denounce DK.

The left is so irrational, I find it easier to explain calculas to a 4th grader, than to use logic with a liberal.

[Purple Avenger]

"Obviously they are not comprable. "

Media personalities in public venue. Seems pretty comparable to me.

[Buzzy]

Guess that since Edwards didn't denounce his official bloggers freedom of speech nobody on the right should have to denounce Coulter's statement either.

Of course the difference is that Edwards pit bulls were made "official" while Ann Coulter was speaking as a private person and I seriously doubt any Presidential candidate would hire her as an official spokesperson.

Will the left denounce Bill Maher for stating that the death of Vice President Cheney would somehow be a good thing? Should they? If not, then exactly how would the left expect us to limit Ann Coulter's freedom of speech?

Ann Coulter is no more nor less snarky than any number of the left's commenters.

[BobInStamford]

Speaking of faggots, whats Condi up to these days? Is she out looking for those pesky wmds?

[BobInStamford]

" Iwill not concede to what she said, but then again, I use the word faggot a good bit myself."

Cindi= Nasty White Trash

I can only imagine what a pig she is...

[Jeff]

EAT IT!

http://hotair.com/archives/2007/03/03/giuliani-romney-mccain-camps-denounce-coulters-attack-on-edwards/

So... I guess this means we win... again.

[Legalize]

"EAT IT!

So... I guess this means we win... again."

I'm dying to know how old you are, Jeff. No, it means that the 3 leading GOP candidates did the responsible thing ... finally. YOU didn't "win" anything.

[Sherlock]

The constant flow of hateful bile from lefty celebs about conservatives, Republicans, the President and VP, etc. has de-sensitized all of us. That is why Coulter's remarks are getting so much reaction - they are unusual coming from the right, and completely normal coming from the left.

How many "progressive" media personalities are there that make the slagging of conservatives their stock-in-trade, and ratchet up the invective in an effort to out-do each other in vilifying Republicans?

Care to guess what would happen of Bill O'Reilly implied on the air that Nancy Pelosi's death would be a good thing? He would not have a job pretty quick. What did Bill Maher just say about the VP? He'll be on tomorrow just like always, and his network probably thinks his remarks improved their ratings.

So why is it that we only ever hear about Republicans making insults? Simple, the media are in bed with the Dems, so the Dems can say anything they want, any time they want, and get away with it. You don't have to worry about playing fair when you own the refs.

[Legalize]

"Oh I gotcha. We only count important events umm like Micheal Moore at the DNC. Course Moore didn't call anybody a fag. He only called the Pres a murdering war profiteer."

Which, of course, is not the point I just addressed. You tried to make a comparison; the comparison was without merit. If Michael Moore slurred the president in a comperable manner at a DNC event, then yes, that would be the same thing. On the other hand, I'm just dying to see the quote you are refering to - unless you are just making it up, which wouldn't surprise me.

+++

"Legalize, I think that you are forgetting, that this wasn't a politically motivated event, rather an ideological event, if she said this at the RNC - then yes, she should be cast out, and not forgiven..."

Now it's my turn to impugn your sobriety, Jeffery. Are you fucking stoned or what? Not a politically motivated event? It doesn't have to be the RNC to be politically motivated; it has to be the RNC to be Republican-sponsored. CPAC is one of the biggest political gatherings of the year. It is inherently political.

"So how about Hillary Clinton "this place is run like a plantation - and you know what I mean" Nancy Pelosi saying George Bush was a "criminal""

When did Nancy Pelosi call Bush a "criminal," Jeffery? In any event, both of those statements are arguably true, and neither is a slur. Just because you disagree with the statement as a substantive manner, doesn't mean a "slur" has been uttered. By your logic, any critique of the president is a slur, tantamount to calling him a "faggot."

"Ann Coulter isn't a politician! If what Bill Mahr said was excusable, then what Coulter said was more than excusable."

So what if she's not a politician. She was granted the credibility and platform of a MAJOR POLITICAL ORGANIZATION AT ITS BIGGEST EVENT, and she called John Edwards a "faggot" in lieu of substantively. Bill Mahr has not been lended the credibility or platform of ANY POLITICAL ORGANIZATION. There is no comparison. He's a schmuck with a television show on HBO.

"I believe Joe Biden went to the Daily Kos and guest blogged, and at the Daily Kos they have said things far worse than calling someone a faggot. Maybe Joe Biden should denounce DK."

Do you even know what you are agruing, Jeffery?

"The left is so irrational, I find it easier to explain calculas to a 4th grader, than to use logic with a liberal."

Jeffery, you and "logic" don't even reside in the same zipcode, I'm affraid.

[Legalize]

"The constant flow of hateful bile from lefty celebs about conservatives, Republicans, the President and VP, etc. has de-sensitized all of us. That is why Coulter's remarks are getting so much reaction - they are unusual coming from the right, and completely normal coming from the left."

Unusual? This is Coulter's trade; this is Rush's trade; this is Savage's trade (oh wait his agent dropped his sorry ass). Point to me any statement, remotely rising to the level of calling someone a "faggot," made by someone as high-profile, at a comperable political event.

"How many "progressive" media personalities are there that make the slagging of conservatives their stock-in-trade, and ratchet up the invective in an effort to out-do each other in vilifying Republicans?"

You mean criticizing the GOP for its record?

"Care to guess what would happen of Bill O'Reilly implied on the air that Nancy Pelosi's death would be a good thing? He would not have a job pretty quick."

No, he just invites terrorists to attack San Fran, stating that we don't need it. And, detectice, speculating about the merits of Pelosi is precisely what Riehl defended on CNN not to long ago, when local D.J.s "joked" that she should be killed.

"What did Bill Maher just say about the VP? He'll be on tomorrow just like always, and his network probably thinks his remarks improved their ratings."

I can't believe you guys are still trying to trot this out as remotely comperable.

"So why is it that we only ever hear about Republicans making insults?"

We rarely hear about it. What we hear about on a weekly basis is the likes of Michelle Malkin getting in a tizzy because she is offended by naughty language. That makes the news every time. We hear about are idiotic stories about John Kerry and Brack Obama "hating teH TR00Pz!!!!111" whenever they say something you don't like, albeit probably factually accurate.

"Simple, the media are in bed with the Dems, so the Dems can say anything they want, any time they want, and get away with it. You don't have to worry about playing fair when you own the refs."

Yes, the media is the reason why the public has rejected what the conservatives are selling. It can't have anything to do with calling political opponents "faggots" or anything.

[Buzzy]

I still don't remember Edward's denouncing his vile bloggers, Marcotte and McEwan's, vile words or that he chose them to represent his Presidential campaign. But you'll find plenty here and elsewhere on the right who have spoken out about Coulter's stupid and nasty remark.

Actually I can't remember anyone from the left denouncing Marcotte's and McEwan's divisive posts.

Legalize, would you care to go on the record and denounce Marcotte and McEwan's stuff, we'll give you a chance to catch up with us if you're keeping score on the "good guy" scale.

[Jeff]

Hey Legalize, get you and your research team to find out how many Americans consider themselves conservative. I know the exact number accord to a Zogby poll (hint: 5% above the amount that consider themselves liberal).

Here's a little latin for Mr "lawyer" - Ipso facto (I am being ironical)

"Yes, the media is the reason why the public has rejected what the conservatives are selling."

So Ann Coulter (a commentator, at a politcally unaffiliated event) calls a pretty boy a faggot... the whole GOP is screwed...

Major political commentators on the web and on cable wish for Cheney's death and... well... nothing really happens... Should we be demanding the "Hile Hillary" and Barrack Hussein Obama apologize? If we follow the left's "logic," yes. But I am not willing dumb myself down to that level...
Where are the calls for apologies? If it were the other way around, and Bill Clinton had an assassination attempt, the leftards would be going nuts. Even if someone sounded unsympathetic to the former President, the American Communists would be up in arms.

[Papertiger]

Who is this Coulter? Come on Legalize you are amoung friends here. You can call her Lady Adam's Apple if you want.

[charles]

let me get this straight - some dorky broad in a quite roundabout way calls edwards a faggot and the left goes batshit crazy??

bwahahahahahaha

what a bunch of loser crybabies

[LOL]

it's just a game the right plays. The pols will denounce her and watch she'll be speaking at other large events, getting upset when she gets driven off campuses as if there's no justification for doing so, among other things. She'll be denounced today, but next year, she'll be just as big--if not bigger--as she's always been.

Furthermore, calling someone a war profiteer is not the same as calling someone a faggot. War profiteer as least points to some damaging policy positions, faggot? how is that any different than calling someone a nigger?

it isn't

[LOL]

addendum:

what's even weirder is that everyone is getting upset at this comment of hers. Where's was the outrage with "raghead"? Where was it with "let's poison Supreme Court justices"? Where was it with "let's kill 1.4 billion peoples' leaders and convert them all to christianity"?

Ann coulter's rhetoric over the years has been viler than any other major personality left or right. But guess what, she is one of the most famous conservative celebrities around. She is representative of the thinking of many conservatives. It's sad, conservatives are so hateful towards academia, mainly because they lack any deep thinkers. The philosophers of the right: Limbaugh, Hannity, Coulter, Malkin, O'Reilly, it's shameful really how Entertainment Tonight the discourse of the right has become.

[Phoenix]

LOL,

Allow me to show you a smidge about deep thinking using your own words:

"She is representative of the thinking of many conservatives."

This is fine.

"It's sad, conservatives are so hateful towards academia, mainly because they lack any deep thinkers."

This is ignorant.

Can you do some deep thinking and note the difference in the two statements?

[Legalize]

"I still don't remember Edward's denouncing his vile bloggers, Marcotte and McEwan's, vile words or that he chose them to represent his Presidential campaign."

Then you are either a liar or have a grossly inept memory. He did it the day after the "controvery" surfaced.

"But you'll find plenty here and elsewhere on the right who have spoken out about Coulter's stupid and nasty remark."

I've heard "stupid," but not "nasty" or the like. I concede that you have termed it such.

"Actually I can't remember anyone from the left denouncing Marcotte's and McEwan's divisive posts."

Again - lying or bad memory. Plently of left-ish folks did just that. It's all on the record.

"Legalize, would you care to go on the record and denounce Marcotte and McEwan's stuff, we'll give you a chance to catch up with us if you're keeping score on the "good guy" scale."

Frankly, I don't know what they said, which would make me guilty of having a pretty shitty memory as well. I hadn't heard of them before the "controversy" was manufactured - er arose. Do me a favor. Link to what they said that was considered so offensive, and I'll tell you what I think about it.

*****

"Hey Legalize, get you and your research team to find out how many Americans consider themselves conservative. I know the exact number accord to a Zogby poll (hint: 5% above the amount that consider themselves liberal)."

Hey, Geoff, remind me again why your little inqury is remotely relvant? In any event, I always thought "conservatism" was about limited government, lower taxes, and individual choice, not about spewing bile, bigotry, and hate at political opponents - well, there was Pat Buchanan. He's pretty relvant now.

"Here's a little latin for Mr "lawyer" - Ipso facto (I am being ironical)"

Wow, "a little Latin" used in a completely erroneous light. Do you even know what "ipso facto" means in the legal context?

"Yes, the media is the reason why the public has rejected what the conservatives are selling."

"So Ann Coulter (a commentator, at a politcally unaffiliated event) calls a pretty boy a faggot... the whole GOP is screwed..."

No. Anne [sic] Coulter (a champion of the loony right, repeatedly invited to VERY political events) repeatedly engages in the lowest form of frat-boy screeds, along with Rush, Savage, Hannity, O'Really, et al. All of whom are gleefully welcomed into the winger fold with open arms BECAUSE of the hate they spew. Such hate and irrationality have de facto (that's a little more Latin for you. Google it.) become the face of "conservatism," which would be why you got trounced in '06, and the public, by a VAST sum, sees what "conservatism" has become - disaster for this country, and a bastardization of what the Reagen era represented.

"Major political commentators on the web and on cable wish for Cheney's death and... well... nothing really happens..."

Really? Who? Have any of them been invited to speak at major events like CPAC?

"Should we be demanding the "Hile Hillary" and Barrack Hussein Obama apologize?"

For?

"If we follow the left's "logic," yes. But I am not willing dumb myself down to that level..."

Geoffery, it's way too late for you to disavow dumbing yourself down to any level. You're well past that point.

"Where are the calls for apologies?"

Um, for what exactly? Mahr? Is he a left-of-Hitler hero I haven't heard about or something? Did he speak at major political event and advocate the slaughter of a people, or advocate the poisoning of Justice Stevens, or call Rudy a "faggot," or accuse 9/11 widows of being happy that their husbands were dead? Who the fuck is Bill Mahr? *Yes, the Keith Richards poster where he is wearing a t shirt that says "Who the Fuck is Mick Jagger" is cooler*

"If it were the other way around, and Bill Clinton had an assassination attempt, the leftards would be going nuts."

Well, that's a fair enough point. The man doesn't deserve to be assassinated. Nor does Bush.

"Even if someone sounded unsympathetic to the former President, the American Communists would be up in arms."

Please. We lived through 8 years of his presidency, and another 6 following his presidency. We're pretty used to the loony right lying, smearing, and hating the greatest president since Eisenhower. We really don't give a damn about what the Undergradate Repuglicans think of Bill Clinton.

+++++

"Who is this Coulter?"

Anne [sic] Coulter. She spoke at the CPAC event last night. She's authored many books, and regularly appears on Sean Hannity's show, among others.

"Come on Legalize you are amoung friends here. You can call her Lady Adam's Apple if you want."

Why would I do that? Does she have an Adam's apple? Is she a man? Is she a transexual? This is news to me.

[LOL]

amazon.com top nonfiction books is illustrative about what i'm saying that is "ignorant"

lots of self help and memoir books to wade through, but let's move on to the pundit type books.

you've got friedman's "the world is flat" at #5 but he's really a centrist, can't speak for representing liberals or conservatives really. Perhaps you'd disagree. I'd say his work is scholarly though.

Then you've got the "politically incorrect guide to global warming" written by an attorney, out to disprove global warming. The flap description gives you an idea of what the book is about: Global warming alarmists are socialists who are 'anti-human' gee, that sounds like some scholarly work there. Why isn't the conservative book debunking global warming written by a scientist? hmmm... Really this is just a smear machine from a budding opinion factory. No scholarship. Is anyone going to cite this book in a graduate thesis? Doubtful.

at #9 you've got Freakonomics written with a liberal point of view. A very scholarly work written by a Chicago professor of econ. score one popular leftist scholarship. See the difference? A leftist writes a book about a subject he's an expert in. The right, above on global warming, writes a book about a subject he has not formally studied AT ALL.

at #10 you've got "Power, Faith, and Fantasy" a history book about the mideast mostly. It's scholarly. Good reviews. History books written by a man with a MA and PHD in middle east history from princeton.

at #12 you've got a Boortz "Somebody's gotta say it" which is basically a slam at liberals. Again the test is, would someone cite this book in an academic essay? While boortz's book may be entertaining, it is just that. It is not scholarship.

at #14 there's Chalmers Johnson's "Nemesis ..." which doesn't seem that scholarly and definitely seems polemical. He has some good credentials in political science and economics. This is a smear book though, not an academic book. That being said, it is one level of scholarship above the aforementioned Boortz trash.

#15 im not sure if this guy's a genuine conservative but S. Fred Singer wrote "Unstoppable Global warming" which basically says warming is purely natural. He is a scientist, credentialed, and this is scholastic work.

#19 Mark Steyn's "America Alone..." From the book's flap: "the Supreme Court decides sharia law doesn’t violate the "separation of church and state," " Ya, I'm sure this is scholarship of the highest level. Another boortz level smear novel. Wrong too, because "the world" went along with the US on many things and still does.

#21 Carter's book Palestine. Perhaps a smear book. Filled with real facts however. I do think this book will be cited academically, maybe not the high standard of Freakonomics or the mideast history book, but definitely above any conservative book i've seen so far on this list except S. Fred Singer's.

#24 Chris Hedges smear on "christofascists". Boortz/Steyn level rhetoric. Not scholarly

There you go, a brief canvass of amazon's top 25 nonfiction. make of it what you will.

[Papertiger]

Legalize said, "When did Nancy Pelosi call Bush a "criminal," Jeffery? In any event, both of those statements are arguably true, and neither is a slur. Just because you disagree with the statement as a substantive manner, doesn't mean a "slur" has been uttered. By your logic, any critique of the president is a slur"

So if the Breck Girl is just the tiniest bit faggitty in anyway then Coulter's comment is "substantively" true and not a slur. According to Bill Murray in The Life Aquatic with Steve Zissou "supposedly every one is" part gay.

Case dismissed.
NO APOLOGY FOR YOU

[LOL]

huh? faggot is to gay what nigger is to black. It is a hateful epithet, what don't you get about this? If someone called Obama a "nigger", even if "substantively true" in some sense, it is a slur of the highest degree. Are you at all rational?

Don't forget ann receiver roaring applause for her joke

[TheSpartan]

What else do you call a 54 year old man who colors his hair and dyes his eyebrows?

Posted by: kerry_zaputz | Saturday, March 03, 2007 at 10:28 AM

Umm...change the age and you've got Ronald Reagan, not to mention the gallon of lube he kept in his hair.

[Phoenix]

LOL,

Is this in response to what I asked you to note in your two statements?

"amazon.com top nonfiction books is illustrative about what i'm saying that is "ignorant"

Good work, but that's not what I was talking about. You guys (libs) have a tendency to lump all conservatives into one pile. Generalizing in the face of logical debate, in other words. You can't do that and expect to be taken as credible. In your first sentence, you didn't generalize. In your second, you did.

On this blog, there are a lot of 'conservatives', but I daresay you could not plunk all of us into one category no matter how hard you tried. Neither could we lump all the libs on the blog into one category with the exception that at some time you have all been rude. On Dan's blog, I daresay you have more independents than true conservatives, so your whining and caterwauling about us 'dimwit right-wingers' is misplaced.

[LOL]

the top conservative non-fiction books are with one exception trashy romance novels, with zero scholarship

[eliXelx]

Our sweet Ann is known to wield words with scalpel sharpness and bulls-eye accuracy.
She did emphatically did NOT say that JE is a screaming poofter; she said that saying the words "screaming poofter" could get the user into trouble.
Is she right or is she right?
I think she really meant that John Edwards is a piece of deadWood whose only function is to be thrown onto a roaring fire! (C'mon guys; we all know about homonyms!)