Jun 6, 2007

Coulter says her hate speech is just a joke and a way to make more money

The Livingston County Daily Press & Argus attempted to interview Republican mouthpiece and hatemonger Ann Coulter about the controversy surrounding her appearance at Cleary University’s Economic Club Speakers Luncheon Series.

No luck. Apparently, the only way she will talk to anyone from a community so insignificant as Livingston County is if they ante up $30,000. Instead, she answered questions via email. No word on how much she charged them, and there certainly is no proof Coulter actually wrote the responses herself, other than the disgusting and snarky tone. It looks like a Playboy interview, only much shorter and less interesting. She answers serious, thoughtful questions with flip, glib answers.

I also think the newspaper is missing the point when it says the controversy over Coulter only began when she “used the word "faggot" in March when talking about Democratic presidential candidate John Edwards, her previously scheduled appearance in Livingston County this fall took on a more controversial tinge.” That is untrue. It’s her body of hate, racism and prejudice that is driving the objection. Her appearance reinforces the undeserved reputation that we are racists here, and it reinforces the general perception that Livingston County is a safe haven for racists and bigots of all ilks, like Coulter.

Perhaps the real reason Cleary is not canceling her appearance is because of the ticket sales. “Cleary has already sold more than 300 tickets at $60 each, the largest number of tickets sold for a speech in the series. Sales are occurring faster than for any other speech in the series history, said Janet Filip, development director for the university and coordinator of the event” and wife of the chair of the Livingston County Republican Party.

The rest of her answers are just normal crap from Coulter. It proves the more outrageous and hateful things she says, people like Cleary President Tom Sullivan throw more money at her. I guess that blows away the thin excuse from Cleary that her appearance “enrich(s) the Livingston County community by hosting speakers who can share a broad spectrum of social, political, intellectual and cultural experiences.” Her excuse seems to be her hate speech is really just a joke, and us “poorly-dressed subversives” just don’t get it.

Wasn’t Don Imus’s remark about the Rutgers University women’s basketball team a joke?


Anonymous said...

apparently the "hate speech" of Coulter is more distasteful to you than the bias and lies of the liberal media. What a dumbass.

Shimmy said...

Ann Coulter thinks about dead people when she's making love.

Communications guru said...

I see why you post anonymously. First, the “liberal media” myth is a Republican strategy began by the paranoid Nixon administration. Even if the media was liberal and not conservative like it really is, it has done nothing or said anything nearly as offensive as Coulter does every day. Every week I put up of examples of Coulter’s hate speech on this blog. I suggest you read them, if you can.

Communications guru said...

That's an image I don't want to think about.

Anonymous said...

Ann Coulter is a Republican and she is sometimes harsh. She dislikes liberals like yourself, but she is not racist at all. But most African/American's are Democrats. Why I don't know. Democrats don't do anything more or less for African/American's then Republicans. You really don't know what your talking about.

Communications guru said...

The only thing you said correctly is that Ann Coulter is a Republican. To call what she is saying merely harsh and not racist is ridiculous. You need to read some of her quotes, and you can find some right here. Racism goes beyond the color of someone’s skin. Why does she hate liberals? I don’t hate conservatives. I completely disagree with them, and their positions are ridiculous and frustrating, but I don’t hate them.

Anyway, here are a few of her doozies,

“I think our motto should be post-9-11, ‘raghead talks tough, raghead faces consequences,'“Ann Coulter at CPAC 2006.

"God gave us the earth. We have dominion over the plants, the animals, the trees. God said, 'Earth is yours. Take it. Rape it. It's yours.'"---Hannity & Colmes, 6/20/01

"Airports scrupulously apply the same laughably ineffective airport harassment to Suzy Chapstick as to Muslim hijackers. It is preposterous to assume every passenger is a potential crazed homicidal maniac. We know who the homicidal maniacs are. They are the ones cheering and dancing right now." September 13, 2001.

“We should invade their countries, kill their leaders and convert them to Christianity.”

There is a good reason most African-Americans are Democrats. We support civil rights, voting rights, fairness and support for public education.

Chet said...

So the fact that Mark Brewer represented the KKK and Robert Byrd was an actual member of the KKK isn't a reason that African-Americans should vote Republican? (I agree, it isn't)

African-Americans don't vote Dem because Ann Coulter says something amazingly stupid. If it boiled down to individuals alone, there an (roughly) equal number of corrupt individuals in both parties. They vote Dem because Republicans have pursued a schizophrenic civil rights policy since Richard Nixon pandered to the southern racists in 1968 to avoid losing Wallace delegates. Ironically, Nixon was the first to really embed preferences into national policy, as opposed to outreach and enforcement affirmative action, which are proper. Bush's schizophrenia on the issue is just as bad -- and because he's perceived as insincere, he doesn't gain the votes in the categories.

The only Republican that wasn't schizophrenic on the issue was Ronald Reagan. And he won landslide victories, and did relatively well among minorities because he stood firm on principle. I'm convinced a Republican strategy of selling the principle of true equality, rather than selling out to the superficially-expedient notion that minorities will vote for the candidate that panders to their group, is a winner.

Of course, this means sincere reforms in K-12 education, including greater funding equality to (all) poorer districts and repair of public schools where charters and/or private alternatives aren't practical or politically possible (although there needs to be greater choice available, I appreciate that we can't simply privatize the whole system).

In politics, as with life, it is far easier to sell the truth and principles. In the aggregate, voters sniff out the rest.