3 Responses to “Ha, Ha…”

1. Justin Says:
   March 2nd, 2007 at 11:54 pm

   You have misquoted Gov. Romney. He was actually trying to deal with the fact that Ann is a bomb-thrower by brining some levity in. The line actually is:

   I am happy to hear that after you hear from me, you will hear from Ann Coulter. That is a good thing. …” I think it’s always very important to get the views of moderates.”

   You can watch his speech here:
   http://www.mymanmitt.com/mitt-romney/cpac/index.asp?part=2

2. Bruce Says:
   March 3rd, 2007 at 5:38 am

   He was being ironic, but not in any way that actually challenged Coulter’s status with his audience. And why would he? You heard them cheer when he said that Coulter was appearing next. Far from disparging her, Romney was making a friendly little joke with the people there that said, in essence, Oh yes…Ann’s a bloodthirsty extremist…but we love her anyway don’t we?

   Glenn Greewald sums the event up pretty nicely over at Salon:

   …the single most prestigious political event for conservatives of the year is a place where conservatives go to hear Democrats called faggots, Arabs called ragheads, and Supreme Court justices labeled as deserving of murder — not by anonymous, unidentifiable blog commenters, but by one of their most popular featured speakers.

   And after she does that, she is cheered wildly by an adoring conservative movement that has made her bigoted and hate-mongering screeds best-sellers, all while they and their deceitful little allies in the media, such as Howard Kurtz of The Washington Post, write idiot tracts about how terribly upset they are by the affront to decency from HuffPost commenters…

   This is why I wrote so extensively about the Edwards blogger “scandal” and the Cheney comments “scandal.” The people feigning upset over those matters are either active participants in, or passive aiders and abetters of, a political movement that, at its very core — not at its fringes — knowingly and continuously embraces the most wretched and obvious bigotry and bloodthirsty authoritarianism. They love Ann Coulter — and therefore continue to make her a venerated part of their political events — because she provides an outlet, a venting ground, for the twisted psychological impulses and truly hateful face that drives the entire pro-Bush, right-wing spectacle.

   The more delicate ones will claim to repudiate her comments in the most limited terms, but their actions speak far louder than their cursory and reluctant words. Anyone who went to this event — and that includes Rudy Giuliani, Mitt Romney, and Dick Cheney — knew exactly what they would be getting. Coulter’s face was prominently plastered on the promotional material. The right-wing political candidates who accepted the invitations to speak there knew exactly the type of people would be there – namely, the type who continously cheer on Ann Coulter’s bigoted and nakedly hateful screeds. Anyone who makes themselves a part of that event is purposely associating themselves with those sentiments. That is what this Conference is for.

   All you need to know about Romney is that he not only felt completely comfortable in that crowd, but addressed them as fellow conservatives. They cheered for Coulter, and he made a little joke about what a moderate she is…the lady who said her only problem with Timothy McVeigh is he didn’t go to the New York Times building.

3. Jen Says:
   March 3rd, 2007 at 4:28 pm

   A couple of years ago, Ann Coulter appeared on a ‘discussion’ show on the Fox network. Sorry to be so vague, but I don’t follow this woman’s career with anything approaching interest, and I’ve forgotten the details. What I do remember is that she suggested that the US invade Canada — my country — because Canada had declined to help the US invade Iraq. She also suggested that there was nothing worthwhile in Canada at all, except for hockey players. The rest of us are worthless, simply because we disagree with American foreign policy.

   I’m normally a peaceful person who hates war and violence, but in a heartbeat I went to hoping she would try to invade Canada with her own army, so that I could meet her at the border, take her captive and torture her, to see how she liked it. I learned something about how a person’s normally placid love of their country can change to passionate patriotism. But my patriotism was defensive, not offensive. Ann Coulter loves her country, granted, but why does she have to prove it by hating other countries, and everyone in her own country who disagrees with her. Maybe there’s something twisted about her love for her country?

   Also, some commentators say that she’s just being outrageous as a joke, that she’s not really serious. Others say that she rouses people’s passions, and what’s wrong with that? But who jokes about invading foreign countries as though it were a lark? And what’s good about rousing passions to hate people who are different from you? Both enterprises lead to war, pogroms and intense human suffering. That’s what she stands for, and people go to a mainstream political convention and cheer her on. If I were an American, I’d be worried about that.

Leave a Reply Name (required) Email (will not be published) (required) Website Δ

RSS feed