Coulter, Edwards, & Mitt Romney’s Faggot Problem
Under normal circumstances, I wouldn’t waste my time jamming a single byte down the tubes of the internets ranting about Ann Coulter. She’s just not worth the expense of energy to bang the keyboards, even as I now write about her latest verbal IED against progressives and liberals. We already know what she’s [...]
Under normal circumstances, I wouldn’t waste my time jamming a single byte down the tubes of the internets ranting about Ann Coulter. She’s just not worth the expense of energy to bang the keyboards, even as I now write about her latest verbal IED against progressives and liberals. We already know what she’s all about.
For as long as Newt’s “Contract on America” has been in force, Coulter has been working the rubber chicken circuit and entertaining conservatives nationwide. Yesterday, at the Conservative Political Action Conference, she crossed a line that even the most rabid right wing foamers would stay away from: she called Democratic Party presidential candidate John Edwards a “faggot”.
With 43 ill-considered words, Coulter once again emerged as the face of the Republican Party, and in the process, probably torpedoed the presidential aspirations of at least one GOP candidate (Mitt Romney). Guilt by association, etc. etc. That’s how radioactive she’s become.
The Edwards campaign responded last night via email:
This is just a taste of the filth that the right-wing machine is gearing up to throw at us. And now that it’s begun, we have a choice: Do we sit back, or do we fight back? …
Coulter’s attack was no accident. It happened on national television at one of the year’s biggest conservative conferences. Dick Cheney and most of the Republican candidates were in the audience. She was even introduced by Mitt Romney…
Absolutely correct that it was no accident. Some would say that crap like this just flows from Ann Coulter’s mouth - but her remarks were well scripted, and intended to incite. As Joe Gandelman from Moderate Voice opines:
In this case, Coulter didn’t just throw red meat. She hurled the entire cow.
There are two pieces of good news in all of this:
- Coulter’s invective is being panned on both the left and right. Visit Moderate Voice for a roundup of blogosphere commentary. When Michelle Malkin has to hold her nose at something that Coulter says, you know it’s bad, and the Republican damage control experts know it’s bad.
- John Edwards’ campaign couldn’t have purchased this kind of publicity, or received better “bulletin board material” to pump up supporters, for a million dollars. For that, the Edwards campaign should be sending Coulter a bouquet of roses via floral backchannels.
It’s widely acknowledged that Ann Coulter lives for this kind of publicity. The fact that someone like me is breaking an unwritten personal rule and documenting her atrocities is testament to her drawing power. Controversey is her bread and butter and paycheck, and sells her books. As long as Republican organizers of events like CPAC continue to pay her engagement fee to shock liberals and conservatives alike, she’s gonna do her schtick.
And Fox News is going to continue to use her as a voice of the GOP.




There’s some sort of bizarre error in your Coulter cartoon, Richard. It shows her with breasts.
Anyway, totally OT, Check this out.
great post–thanks…don’t know if you’ve seen this video of Ann Coulter, but it’s pretty classic:
http://minor-ripper.blogspot.com/2006/12/ann-coulter-gets-owned.html
There’s some sort of bizarre error in your Coulter cartoon
Yeah, I know, Charles. There are a variety of problems with the artist’s rendition - certainly, it isn’t anatomically correct in several respects. The clothing is most appropriate, though. War porn, indeed.
Consider this ASZ’s “Janet Jackson moment”.