Ann Coulter uses Homophobic Slur

[Ashlyn]

View Here (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sx9Bi3C4rs8&eurl=http%3A%2F%2Fmissouri%2Efacebook%2Ecom%2Fshar ed%2Ephp%3Fposted%26id%3D15900617%26share%5Fid%3D2 250027181%26comments)

I see this as completely unacceptable. This woman has said some horrendous things in the past, but the fact that she unashamedly uses hate speech is unacceptable. What is even more revealing is the fact that she alludes to the Isaiah/T.R. situation and seems to be of the position that homophobia and hate speech is okay.

I'm curious what you people think of this, especially my conservative friends here at FB.

[oclover24]

I think that's horrible.

Why does everybody feel the need to say this...Isiash Washington, numerous others, and now Ann Coulter.

It looks really lame when you have to resort to calling people names.

[amberdawn]

There's no excuse for her words. She crossed the line. Even though we're apart of the same political party, we apparently have tremendous differences on what we think is the right language to speak in public with.

[Andrew]

Androgynous Ann saying something inappropriate?



Shock. :rolleyes:

[Kari]

Isn't Ann Coulter the frigid conservative who must compensate her own problems by behaving like a bitch?

[lovefool.]

Ugh i hate Ann Coulter.

[Ashlyn]

She certainly has a history of horrific statements. I know her mission is to take down liberals with her books, writings and whatnot, but all she seems to do is make conservatives look like horrible people.

I was absolutely sickened by the people clapping and cheering when she said that. Clearly she isn't one of a few crazies. Hate and discrimination against gay people is still active if a joke like that can illicit reactions like that.

[MitchyMitchy]

It's an odd thing to say but the positive is that Ann Coultier will now be on many more people's radar screen as a despicable person.

[Isley]

oh my god. Who is this woman? She is horrific.
What she said was unacceptable, I mean, believing its okay to say something like that.. really, her head must be filled with air

And after watching a bit on youtube, I can honestly say, she stands for everything I'm against.

[Ashlyn]

Maddy, she's an extremely vocal conservative. Her previous offenses include attacking 9/11 widows.

No, I am not joking.

I don't understand why the Conservatives give her a platform to speak when she only spews hatred.

[BellaBlack]

I don't even want to see the video, I know it's wrong. I don't know how she gets away with it. All this hate speech isn't going to take her anyway. People with brains will know it's not right to do what isiah did with TR, etc..

[Isley]

wow, watching debates with her just makes me more and more sure about her ignorance.
Seems like all she likes to do is bash people, especially democrats.

[Kate]

Saying things like that is unnaceptable

[olivetree]

I'll just get to the point...Ann Coulter is a waste of oxygen. No one likes her, not even Rebulicans (....I'm a rebulican). I feel like she's saying things to get attention and to expand her 15 minutes of fame. Maybe if we all ignore her and her ignorance she'll just disappear....

[oclover24]

I was absolutely sickened by the people clapping and cheering when she said that.

Me too! I couldn't believe it! At first I thought they were booing, but then I realized they weren't and I was shocked.

[OTH man]

really, i odnt know why shes in politics, shes not very good

however, how is it sarah silverman can diss Christians ect. without anyone caring, but make fun of homosexuals and your hated

i'm not saying she was right, im saying neither her nor silverman are right- they're both just a disgrace

[Ashlyn]

Sarah Silverman is a comedienne, she makes fun of everyone and everything with no serious intent. Ann Coulter means these vicious horrible things she says.

Out of curiousity, what did Sarah Silverman say that offended you so much?

[olivetree]

however, how is it sarah silverman can diss Christians ect. without anyone caring, but make fun of homosexuals and your hated

..because it's Sarah's job to make fun of people. That's what she makes her money off of. People go to see her and expect to hear funny/outrageous things. She's a comedian. It's like a black comedian using the "n" word. They get away with it not only because they are black, because it's almost expected from them as comedians.

[Ashlyn]

It might be true that like Sarah Silverman, Ann Coulter makes her money off the outrageous things she says. However, what they're said in is totally different. Sarah speaks in jest, in humor, and Ann speaks from pure vile hatred.

Also, Sarah says these things on tv or at comedy shows, but Ann Coulter said THIS remark at a Conservative convention... and it illicited cheers.

[olivetree]

It might be true that like Sarah Silverman, Ann Coulter makes her money off the outrageous things she says. However, what they're said in is totally different. Sarah speaks in jest, in humor, and Ann speaks from pure vile hatred.

Also, Sarah says these things on tv or at comedy shows, but Ann Coulter said THIS remark at a Conservative convention... and it illicited cheers.

Exactly. It's like Micheal Richards...he said the "n" word out of hate and there was an uproar. I'm surprised people cheered for Ann because seriously, gay people can make the best of friends and there's NOTHING wrong with them. You see gay people on TV all the time acting like NORMAL human beings. I'm always surprised when people hate another set of people based on OPINIONS and not FACTS. I mean, if you're going to hate someone have some facts to hate them with...like hate Osama because it's been PROVEN what he's done not because it's someone's opinion what he has done.

[Heather]

Ok...I just watched the clip, and I do think she was out of line.

That being said, I dont want anyone to think Im defending what she said, because Im not, but she made a name for herself as a political satirist, which is equivalent of what comedians who insult Conservatives are.

And I think I need to point out that Conservatives as a norm are personally bashed from the other side as a matter of course, and no one says anything. I think she should have picked a different way of discussing Edwards, but I dont think its necessarily fair that one side constantly gets attacked, but when they attack back they are wrong. Both are wrong. If you want to disagree, do it without making it personal.

And Ashlyn, the 9/11 widows thing was taken out of context. I read that book where that was mentioned. It wasnt all 9/11 widows she was referring to, but a group of nine from NJ who were basically trying to extort money from the federal government over 9/11. It was all over the papers out here.

[Jon]

I have two issues on which I will comment. Firstly I knew this would be brought up which is fine since it is big news. But my problem with this is as Heather said is very hypocritical and double-standardish. There have been many liberals using slurs these past few months and nobody takes notice, except a certain few. But when it's a conservative, then it's a major issue.

Now the second issue I have is two-fold. Firstly, I don't agree with some of the comments people have made here about Ann Coulter. I won't single posts out, but as someone said in the youtube comments, calling someone a name because they used a slur is just as wrong as the original person. I'm not saying there are necessarily names being called, but there are certain comments that are truly unnecessary in my mind. It's fine to say she shouldn't have said it, but to go beyond that is really unnecessary in my mind.

Now about my own feelings towards this. And mind you, I'm sure my opinion is biased, but I would be the first to admit it simply because I am a fan of hers and have read her books and like her thoughts on things. I think as Heather said, she was not trying to intentionally be mean but to be funny with her comments. If you have seen her other live events which I have, she tends to add in jokes and so forth. With that said, because Sarah Silverman is a "legitemate" comedienne, she can say things but Ann cannot? Ann is known to be a satirist as Heather pointed out. If you take what she said in the exact context especially with the comment about going to rehab. She was TRYING to be funny, thus if you listen to the background many are laughing.

Now I know some of you will disagree with what I said, but that's fine. I understand my opinion will differ, and I'm glad to debate this further.

One final thing however....there was an example of a black person using the n word. I don't like that, just because someone is black it doesn't mean they can use that word. So can a gay comedian use that F word and it's okay? It's to be expected? It's either/or. You can't say black people can use a derogatory word, then go on to claim Ann is this or that. To me it only goes one way or the other. I'd prefer nobody used ANY derogatory comments.

[oclover24]

With that said, because Sarah Silverman is a "legitemate" comedienne, she can say things but Ann cannot? Ann is known to be a satirist as Heather pointed out.

But Ann Coulter expects us to take her seriously, whereas Sarah Silverman does not. That's the difference.

[Jon]

But Ann Coulter expects us to take her seriously, whereas Sarah Silverman does not. That's the difference.

How is that true? Again the audience can be heard laughing in the video. So does that mean she's expecting us all to take her seriously? It depends on what is being said. My point is that comment is not meant to be taken as seriously as you all have here. It's fine like I said to disagree, because I understand where you all are coming from. But I'm just pointing out, she's doing exactly what was said by some of you to be okay because the other person is a comedienne and Ann is supposedly not. Again I've heard many of Ann's speech's and live events and she's not always serious. I guess my main issue is, any comment that someone makes can be seen in a bad manner if someone tries to make it so. I'm not saying it's okay what she said, but she was trying to be funny and obviously many laughed, so it worked.

[oclover24]

How is that true? Again the audience can be heard laughing in the video. So does that mean she's expecting us all to take her seriously?

Okay, I'll admit that, but in other situations, Ann Coulter does expect us to take her seriously. Her sense of humor is going to reflect on her character.

[Jon]

Okay, I'll admit that, but in other situations, Ann Coulter does expect us to take her seriously. Her sense of humor is going to reflect on her character.


Well, I agree that she does expect us to take her seriously at times. I don't think her sense of humor is going to reflect on her character that badly. She's been "attacked" before about her comments and has withstood them and she'll get by this.

I'd like to use examples from her on Hannity & Colmes tonight. But my concern is because it's Fox News she was on some of you won't agree with it. But if someone wants a link to her video or what she said, I can post it.

Also they had a Democratic Pollster and he even said he understood it was a joke. And that many of us are taking it too seriously.

Finally, something Sean Hannity said, since I NEVER saw the entire thing, Ann was apparently making joke after joke and that it wasn't a truly serious speech. They went on to show more segments from her speech, and it was many jokes.

That was my point about taking what she said out of context. I mean we took one line from her. If the entire speech was shown on video, I think it wouldn't be so bad.

[Heather]

Can I ask you guys an honest question? Was anyone this upset when Bill Maher expressed sadness that Dick Cheney hadnt shot (and killed) himself in the hunting accident?

[*Ashlee*]

Isnt that a different situation? Its not right either way but unlike for one person who did a REALLY dumb thing compared to derogatory comments that insults a targetted group of humans is a bit different, at least in my opinion. I will stress again that neither situation is right but its like comparing apples and oranges

[oclover24]

Can I ask you guys an honest question? Was anyone this upset when Bill Maher expressed sadness that Dick Cheney hadnt shot (and killed) himself in the hunting accident?

I was. Even if you don't like Dick Cheney all the much, that is just wrong to say. Wishing death on someone isn't right.

[Jon]

Isnt that a different situation? Its not right either way but unlike for one person who did a REALLY dumb thing compared to derogatory comments that insults a targetted group of humans is a bit different, at least in my opinion. I will stress again that neither situation is right but its like comparing apples and oranges

Actually what you said there is incorrect. Again based on Ann's comments and my own beliefs of what was said, it wasn't targeted at a group of people. See the thing is this. The F word in question is normally associated with gay people correct? But we all know John Edwards is married with children and not gay correct? So how can calling him a derogatory gay term harm him? It can't since he's not gay. And this is the basis of everything. We all know he's not gay. If someone called me that I wouldn't take offense for the fact is I'm not gay either. She knew that, we all knew that. See the title of this thread is Ann Coulter uses Homophobic Slur, but think of it this way. How is it homophobic if the person being called it isn't gay. Right? It's only a slur if the person is in fact gay. Or lets say someone used the n word. Would it be THIS offensive if it were said to a white person? No it would not, certainly not to me because I'm not black. Maybe some others could take offense I guess. But it's not derogatory in my mind if you're using a word which we all know isn't true.

Finally, Ann herself explained what I just said on TV earlier tonight.

[oclover24]

But we all know John Edwards is married with children and not gay correct? So how can calling him a derogatory gay term harm him? It can't since he's not gay. And this is the basis of everything. We all know he's not gay. If someone called me that I wouldn't take offense for the fact is I'm not gay either.

Basically, using the slur is that it is saying that being gay is bad, and in many people's eyes, including my own, it isn't bad.

After all, you can't tear someone down by saying "aw, you're so sweet and wonderful and kind." No, you say, "you're a faggot."

[Jon]

Well neither in Ann's eyes either, because she distinctly said tonight and even in that speech (if we could see the entire thing) about her not hating gay people. But secondly, it's not saying it's bad to be gay. You're just associating that word with gay and that's it. Her comment had nothing to do with gay people and that's the bottomline. Honestly, most of the time when people use that word now, it's always meant to be an insult and not a gay comment. That's not an excuse but simply the truth. I've heard that term used when I was in school growing up and none of those times were that term meant in reference to gay people.

[oclover24]

Honestly, most of the time when people use that word now, it's always meant to be an insult and not a gay comment.

I get that, but the point I'm trying to get across is that why is being gay an insult? Yes, maybe the term has gone beyond being a insult towards gays, but its roots are be demeaning towards gays.

[Jon]

I get that, but the point I'm trying to get across is that why is being gay an insult? Yes, maybe the term has gone beyond being a insult towards gays, but its roots are be demeaning towards gays.

I get your point, and I agree it shouldn't be an insult to call someone gay. I absolutely, wholeheartedly agree with that. Because if someone is gay, they're gay. I have no problems whatsoever with someone being gay. I know the roots of the word, but we havr to look beyond that because honestly, tons of words have roots that demean people. To me the most important thing is was it a homophobic slur? It wasn't. That's the point I am getting across. I agree with you that being gay shouldn't be an insult however. But her use of it wasn't an insult in that manner. She used it instead of say the B word. But that doesn't really go well with a guy, I guess.

[Ashlyn]

On the subject of them laughing, so clearly she was trying to be funny... I disagree. I'm sure she meant to be humorous, but it's underlying message seems to be that hate speech is okay.

She alluded to the Isaiah Washington/T.R. Knight saga and seemed to be out and out wishing for the good old days where hate speech against gay people was entirely acceptable.

As for the 9/11 widow subject, you did a far better job of defending her, Heather, than she did herself on the Today show. Claiming anybody is using their husband's death or enjoying it, despite everything, is sickening.

[BellaBlack]

I don't think it should matter, liberal or conservative..if a liberal had said the same things I would still be very insulted and angry. I see them making comments as a low for being a human..not what political party they are from :drunk:

[amberdawn]

After seeing the video and what context Ann was talking in, it wasn't meant to be a joke about gays or an insult to them. It wasn't even out of hatred for the other side, I don't think. However, I still think she crossed the line and deserves whatever criticism she gets.

[Ashlyn]

I just want to say that if Michael Moore had said this about John McCain, I would have been just as outraged.

... Amber, I really don't understand how the context puts it as anything other than hate speech. I'm curious to know how you're taking her statement, if it's not a joke about gay people.

[Jon]

Ashlyn, the problem is it has nothing to do with gay people. You're associating it with gay people. That's on you, not Ann. To me I didn't take it as a slur because it has nothing to do with gay people. But obviously if you take it as such, you'll find it being derogatory.

[Kari]

Excuse me, but how does what she says there not refer to gay people.
It is like when I go and insult somebody as a homo or a faggot. He must not be gay, but by using faggot as an insult you make it pretty much clear that there is some underlying issue with homosexuality. Maybe Ann Coulter is an open and tolerant person *coughs* but by expressing her self like that she crossed a limit and I hardly find a justification for it.

I do not see why stuff like that is defended?
Why did I not comment about the terrible slur from liberals? Well, I don't live there, there were no threads opened, otherwise I would have.

But seriously, speech like that should be inaccepticle for anybody who is in politics and wants to be taken seriously. We had this political correctness debate before, and I agree. I think it is ridiculous when people start to write s/he everywhere for women might be discriminated and such...but I think there are limits and it is unnecessary to cross them.

And yes, Ann Coulter must have serious problems.

[Jon]

Excuse me, but how does what she says there not refer to gay people.

Because it doesn't. It's pretty simple. Again you all are being close-minded about the word. So everytime someone uses it, it HAS to be about gay people? That's the problem right there. I've already explained the way she used the word, watch her video from last night she explains it as well. There isn't always a connotation about the word being gay. So if I call someone the B word, I'm calling them a female dog all the time? Come on now, it's different in different cases. She used the word as an insult in replace of say the B word or the A word. It was not meant to be anything other than that. Nothing towards gay people, but obviously again, if someone wants to see it that way, then they can.

[Kari]

No, no, no...you are being close-minded there, because you see that woman the way you want to see her.

What you do there is splitting hairs, it is looking for excuses for something that should not be excused because it is outrageous.
Just because the word might theoretically not refer for gay people or be "just as insult" does not make it better. See, I have also heard people at my school use it randomly. I do not think that makes it better. It makes it worse. Because it means that a word we usually associate with homosexuals, that was supposed to insult them is now entering our daily use of language as a "normal" insult.
That does always imply a negative attitude towards homosexuality.

Seriously, it is an excuse because while there is not always the meaning of somebody being gay when you use the word, the connotation is always there. That is what makes it bad.

I mean, hell, she speaks in public, she is in politics. All I am saying is that she could and should definitely have had a closer watch on her choice of words. If by all means, she feels the need to insult people, why must she use a word that has a connotation to homosexuality. I mean, it is not like the English language lacks appropriate insults :)

[Ashlyn]

Honestly, I can't believe anybody is defending her comments.

The word, in our culture, is an offensive term used to insult gay people. There is no way around that. THAT is how she was using it, and if she meant to say coward or some other offensive thing she only needed to consult a thesaraus.

I don't think there is any other way to define this other than hate speech.

[Isley]

I agree with you, Ashlyn and Kari. I seriously don't understand how anybody can defend what she is saying! No matter what context, that word is not possible to justify in my opinion.

I agree Ashlyn, it's downright hatespeech.

[olivetree]

Honestly, I can't believe anybody is defending her comments.

The word, in our culture, is an offensive term used to insult gay people. There is no way around that. THAT is how she was using it, and if she meant to say coward or some other offensive thing she only needed to consult a thesaraus.

I don't think there is any other way to define this other than hate speech.

I agree...I grew up being told the "f" word is pertaining to gay people and that the definition of the word is pertained to gay people. I don't really see how the "f" word could mean something else or relate to something else...If the definition of the "f" word doesn't pertain to gay people and hateful feelings towards them then what is the definition?

Ann just needs to not speak in public. Ann basically in not so many words called John Edwards a *insert "f" word here.* She was being hateful. I don't see any niceness or glamour in those comments she made.

My opinion is the "F" word is hateful no matter how it is used. I don't care what sentence it is put in, it is HATEFUL. It shouldn't be used. By anyone. Ann or not, the word should not be stated. Plain and simple.

[oclover24]

Apparently, this isn't the first time Ann has called somebody that.

http://mediamatters.org/items/200607280001

[Danizinha]

It still shocks me how some people involved in politics feel the need to offend others.

I think it is outrageous coming from either sides. As Kari said, I don't comment on the others because I don't live in the US, therefore not all speeches come to my knowledge.

And I'm pretty sure she didn't mean it in the humorous way. She was being offensive, and that's really ridiculous at this point of history. But people narrow-minded like that will always exist, and they're not worth the time we spend criticizing them.

[Heather]

I really wasnt going to say anything, because I do think she could have been more diplomatic and smarter about it. And I understand that not everyone knows the abuse Conservatives take in this country. But its pretty intense.

A liberal senator equates US troops to Nazi stormtroopers, and nothing is said. A liberal comedian jokes about how his sadness that the VP of the US didnt shoot himself, and no one says anything. Liberal comedian, after liberal comedian bash Conservatives as part of their stand-up routine on a daily basis.

And those are only two examples. My issue with this whole thing is the double standard. Liberals in the US attack Conservatives daily, and we take it with a grain of salt. Once a Conservative steps out of line, its suddenly an issue.

Thats my issue, the double standard. I dont agree with what Ann said, and I dont condone it, but I understand her animosity. You get to a point where you are attacked so much for being on the other side, that you dont care if you offend them right back. Its not right, but it is understandable.

[OTH man]

..because it's Sarah's job to make fun of people. That's what she makes her money off of. People go to see her and expect to hear funny/outrageous things. She's a comedian. It's like a black comedian using the "n" word. They get away with it not only because they are black, because it's almost expected from them as comedians.
not true

shes not Christian, so why can she make fun of them
but when Michael Richards uses the n word is world news?

really, ashlyn, just what she says about Jesus, ect. is distasteful and disrespectful, if she wants to make fun of a religion, she can make fun of her own, at least then its clear its all in good humor

[Jon]

This is taken from the Urban Dictionary with it as the very first definition of the word.

1. faggot

In these times not really used if somebody is really a homosexual mostly used instead of calling somebody stupid or a loser.

Ralph: Chris hasn't been answering his phone.
John: Yeah, he is probably hanging out with those other kids thats why.
Ralph: He is such a faggot.
John: Yeah him and his faggot friends.

Again many of you are using it in reference to gay people, but Ann was not. She was using it as an insult.

[OTH man]

i didnt see heathers post until now:

Bill Mahr- i dont get why anyone can watch him, laugh- and then critisize ann, really they are doing the same thing. i really dont like bill mahr, and i dont like ann's comments, but some people love bill mahr and him saying things about cheney dying ect. but ann saying "faggot" makes her evil?

hmm.. death or a slur?

id say ann's was a bit less serious- out of line by all means, but bill is ALWAYS out of line, yet he is cherished?

[BellaBlack]

Again, I don't see why it has to be divided by what political party. I find what the liberal party said disgusting too. I'm sure if a thread was opened about that, the responses would still be the same..it's degrading and disgusting human behavior and speech. I would look down on the person by their comments, forget if it's Conservative or Liberal.

[Jon]

Well I'm not even looking at conservative or liberal with my comments. I've not once mentioned political affiliation with my comments.

[Ashlyn]

Honestly, I disagree that there is a double standard. Things are made issues by people's concern for them. The reason Ann is being lashed out at is because there are people standing up for gay rights and arguing against her actions. If you guys want to make an issue out of something a liberal politican or pundit says, stand up and make an issue. I seem to remember Kerry's education comment getting a lot of attention (perhaps deserved), so I think this whole it's unfair thing is off.

As a friend of mine wrote in his editorial, can't we all just agree that anything hurled during lynching is unacceptable speech? Secondly, her allusion to the IW/TR situation makes this about more than just "gay" being used as "stupid" or a "loser." Ann's a smart enough girl to have made a ton of money off of her campaign to hate, I see no reason why she couldn't consult a thesauraus.

Lastly, I'm completely against the "that's so gay" being used as an insult thing anyways. First of all, it's completely ignorant. Why have we reserved the right to attack this people group over and over again? My friend also wrote a bit about how it would be obviously unacceptable to say "that's so black" or "that's so hispanic," but for some reason people seem to think that comparing people to gay people is an insult. Even if Ann was using it in that context, I don't think we should pass it off as acceptable.

On Sarah Silverman's religious comments, they're not really rooted in hate, if you ask me. I'm a Christian, I know many Christians who saw it and weren't offended. If it offended you, I am sorry, but there is a huge difference between Sarah Silverman and Ann Coulter. Sarah claims no power or authority. She's in it to make you laugh, not to make a statement.

[OTH man]

True, and I get that. I know that sometimes thoes kind of jokes can be funny, again I'm a Dane Cook fan. he makes fun of Christians a lot, except he's a Christian and often refers to how its just a joke, nothing serious and he always says things like "well, I was raised Catholic"

but sarah is Jewish (i think) so her making fun of Jesus is disrespectful

but we're kinda OT now

[oclover24]

Again many of you are using it in reference to gay people, but Ann was not. She was using it as an insult.

No offense or anything, but you still don't quite get it. She used it as an insult, yes, but the word is rooted in hate. Whether you literally mean to insult somebody by calling them gay, or whether you just use the word to mean 'stupid', it's rooted in gay bashing.

So if you use the word, you're basically condoning being mean towards gays. You would never use the n-word because it is rooted in hate towards African Americans.

[amberdawn]

Even though that word is described as an insult toward gays, it's not always used that way. I heard it on the playground all the time when I was younger. People use it when they're angry at someone or just wanting to be plain mean to an enemy. Hell, my cousin (she was a bully) used to call me a faggot all the time- as an insult toward me, not gays.

I'm not trying to excuse Ann's behavior, because she was completely wrong. It is a disturbing word no matter how it's used. I'm just saying I can see why Ann used the argument that she meant it as just a blatant insult toward Edwards.

Thats my issue, the double standard. I dont agree with what Ann said, and I dont condone it, but I understand her animosity. You get to a point where you are attacked so much for being on the other side, that you dont care if you offend them right back. Its not right, but it is understandable.

I agree Heather. Conservatives are insulted all the time, but is it made as much of a big deal? No.

[*Ashlee*]

Either way the word is rude. i dont understand why it can be explained any other way. My dad has used that word alot lately and he means it in a total negative way. Regardless of whatever political camp one sits at, its disgraceful. I think sometimes comedy goes to far. Just because some people are entertained by something or understand the joke value, doesnt make it right or any less insulting

[amberdawn]

I guess I do agree Ash.

[*Ashlee*]

My idea of comedy and satire may be different then most though, i dont know. Im not into many things so perhaps im not understanding lol

[Heather]

I agree Heather. Conservatives are insulted all the time, but is it made as much of a big deal? No.
It does get a little intolerable after awhile. I really wish both sides would just agree to disagree, and stop with the personal attacks and animosity. I know Ive had my fill.

[Webeh]

^ In relation to this, doesn't it make you feel sad that a lot of the people who make such cruel comments are people who should know better? Politicians who throw outrageous remarks at each other should know better. Ann Coulter because of her position should know better. A lot of people who are given the opportunity say such things in public should know better.

Honestly, sometimes I just think all of these people just need grow up and act their age. Many of these people are supposed to be the "brightest" among society, yet this is what they resort to in their communications? It's disappointing.

I know this is likely a rare position, but I think certain words just shouldn't be used period. Yes, in some tiny contexts it could be interpretted to mean something else, but in the larger one it doesn't and that does matter. If you want to call someone stupid, call him/her "stupid." Don't choose another word that obviously drags in another group completely and victimizes them. By choosing the less direct word, you are launching an uncalled assault at a totally different party. It's careless, classless, and is a sign of a lack of creativity.

If you really must use a different word for "stupid", pull out a thesaurus. There are plenty of words available that do not mindlessly victimize random groups.

Ex. Slow, thick, deficient, dim, doltish, dumb, half-witted, moronic, naive, simple-minded, daft, underdeveloped, feebleminded, vacant, insipid, unsophisticated, asinine, obtuse, oafish, dense, numskulled, ignoramous, etc.

Trust me, if any of the above were used, you're likely to come out looking like less the fool. ;)

[HappyHamster]

Even though that word is described as an insult toward gays, it's not always used that way. I heard it on the playground all the time when I was younger. People use it when they're angry at someone or just wanting to be plain mean to an enemy. Hell, my cousin (she was a bully) used to call me a faggot all the time- as an insult toward me, not gays.


When someone calls someone else a faggot it's neither here nor there whether to person is gay or not. A negative word for gays is used to insult someone, hence implying that it's wrong to be gay, otherwise it wouldn't be an insult.

I find the argument "but liberals do it all the time too" rather pathetic to be honest. We're not discussing a liberal saying something derogatory here. We happen to be discussing a conservative. It's complete misdirection. Because liberals do it we shouldn't judge Ann Coulter for doing it?

[Ashlyn]

Also, the argument doesn't seem to be particularly relevant anyways. You guys keep saying that conservative politicians get attacked all the time, but nobody here is particularly upset on John Edwards behalf. I'm more upset that she seems to think it's okay to use anti-gay hatespeech.

[Kari]

This is taken from the Urban Dictionary with it as the very first definition of the word.

1. faggot

In these times not really used if somebody is really a homosexual mostly used instead of calling somebody stupid or a loser.

Ralph: Chris hasn't been answering his phone.
John: Yeah, he is probably hanging out with those other kids thats why.
Ralph: He is such a faggot.
John: Yeah him and his faggot friends.

Again many of you are using it in reference to gay people, but Ann was not. She was using it as an insult.

How can you not get that? Please, this is exactly the same argument you gave me yesterday and I told you what I think. The fact that it is usually referring to homosexuals makes the word more than a normal insult. This, I do not only refer to Ann Coulter but to anybody who uses it mindlessly.
That is it and I really don't believe my English is so bad that I cannot make myself understood.

Heather, the thing to me is that there is a line between satire and hate. I really can laugh about a lot of things and for me the limit of good taste is hardly ever reached. Actually I had quite a good laugh about all that was said about Dick Cheney when he shot his friend (now, really it is too easy to joke about it.) But I enjoy a good satire whether it insults a conservative, a liberal, a Christian or a Jew. I also find religious humour funny. As long as there is still sarcasm in it.

But some things are inappropriate and that belongs to it. As Ashlyn said...if Michael Moore said things like that I would be just as pissed. I am just as pissed by some of the bullshit he says.
And I don't even know much about Edwards...only after I had read part of this thread I remembered who he was. Just the fact that a woman speaking in public uses speech like that thoughtlessly appals me. And that people cheer because of it.

And yes, I will not take the argument that faggot is also used in daily life as a normal insult. The connotation stays no matter what. It is inacceptable.

[BellaBlack]

I think Conservative and Liberals are always going to lash out at each other, that's sadly never going to end. I'm not entirely sure why people make more of a big deal with one group than the other when both insults should be made a big deal. I agree with Kari, some stuff that is said is funny but when it's a satire people can laugh at..not when it crosses the line.

I read that AC also insulted the 9/11 widows?

[Kari]

well, Heather explained that before...

[BellaBlack]

err what page? I've only browsed.

[OTH man]

earlier, Heather said she was only talking about a group of about nine 9/11 wives from NJ who were scamming to get payments from it..

[oclover24]

If you want to call someone stupid, call him/her "stupid." Don't choose another word that obviously drags in another group completely and victimizes them.

Basically, this is my viewpoint.

[BellaBlack]

Were they really scamming or was that AC's viewpoint?

[Heather]

I think Conservative and Liberals are always going to lash out at each other, that's sadly never going to end. I'm not entirely sure why people make more of a big deal with one group than the other when both insults should be made a big deal. I agree with Kari, some stuff that is said is funny but when it's a satire people can laugh at..not when it crosses the line.
Well put, Bella.

And no, the 9/11 widows thing wasnt her viewpoint. It was nine 9/11 widows from NJ, who were trying to extort money from the federal government over 9/11. I live in NJ, and it was all over the press out here when it was happening. That wasnt artistic license.

She was lashing out at the fact that they would use the tradgedy of that day in such a selfish, a awful manner. And I agree with her about those nine women. Her anger over their actions was justified, because I know I felt the same anger.

[Bely]

first of all,i don't need to say how bad and wrong it was what ann coulter did and that there is nothing to justify it

secondly,this whole debate of comedians versus politics and what they can or cannot say,i think jon stewart said it best on crossfire: "i didn't realize that the news organizations look to comedy central for their accused on integrity" and the same goes for politicians looking for comedians for their accused on integrity.

[Heather]

She's not a politician. She's a political satirist/novelist. She represents only herself.

[Ashlyn]

But she was speaking at a Conservative conference, so in some ways, she was speaking for an entire idealogy when she decided to spew hatespeech. People who SHARE that idealogy should be pissed that she was representing you that way.

[Heather]

Thats like saying the liberal politicians who call soldiers "Nazi stormtroopers" are talking for all liberals, Ashlyn. Actually, the politicians are worse, since they are supposed to represent their constituents. Ann represents no one but herself.

[OTH man]

Ashlyn, you are aware many conservatives have been angry over this and been talking about how bad it is.

However, no matter what you say there is a double standard, Liberals can say things like this, Conservatives cannot without this happening.

Bottom Line: it was a tasteless joke- similar to comments liberals make daily.. sometimes they are offensive and its not a joke- Kerry called the troops stupid for God's sake...

[Heather]

Bottom Line: it was a tasteless joke
Agreed. :)

[OTH man]

Semi-Unrelated:

Ashlyn, will you please watch this?
At least watch the first 3 minutes...

Liberals and their flip-flops... (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-n6gmL3518U&NR)

[Heather]

I was wondering if you were gonna post that. :lol:

[OTH man]

Of course I'm going to post stuff like that...

stuff that proves that liberals are very hypocritical on the whole war-issue

[Ashlyn]

I've actually seen this video before.

First of all, I don't think anybody can watch that and not call Fox unbiased, but I'm not against the Conservatives having a propaganda channel. It makes everybody else know that they can take all of this with a grain of salt. Lying to your guests is not acceptable, regardless.

Listen, I'm not going to deny that Hillary has changed her opinion on the war. HELL, I think I've changed my opinion on the war, as have the majority of the people in this country. If you honestly thing people couldn't change their opinion on the war in 2 years, that's silly. Unless you think that absolutely nothing has changed in Iraq in the past 2 years, then yes, there is room for opinions to change. The study groups are now showing that what we're doing in Iraq isn't FIGHTING terrorism, it's BREEDING terrorism, and considering this is supposed to be a WAR on terrorism, there is no DOUBT that people should change their opinion, unless of course there is another reason, other than terrorism why we're there.

Yes, this is the wrong thread for this, since we've been saying we really should discuss Iraq in threads dealing with Iraq, but we'll link the common thread of Ann Coulter.

First of all, Ann sickens me with her belief that liberals want us to lose the war in Iraq. Perhaps we believe that this is an unwinnable war, which, in my opinion is kind of true. If we leave, we leave the country in ruin, if we stay, we continue to breed terrorism and the belief that America is a self-righteous, imperialistic nation. So no, I don't WANT us to lose this war, but chances are, we're going to, at least under this administration's policies. I love how Conservatives tend to balk at comparisons between Iraq and Vietnam, and in this case, she of course blames liberals for losing that war, and inevitably how we will lose this war.

If these people, and if YOU honestly believe that liberals are such awful people that they would sacrifice the good of the troops, and LIVES of solidiers and innocent Iraqis on the basis of trying to disagree with the president or fighting for power, then i don't see what we can even talk about. I don't understand why we must dehumanize our idealogical opponents, but people with these tactics clearly think it's the only way.

Ann Coulter says we're winning the war. It's untrue. It's a war on terrorism, the war is breeding terrorism, so the only way we're winning the war is if we switched sides. You can talk about liberals flip-flopping, but THAT is the ultimate flipflop, and it has been much more costly.

"You live in never-never land." << I totally agree.

I hate how any time somebody calls Ann on anything she changes the topic, rolls her eyes, and runs through a memory bank of weird comments like "You guys think Dick Cheney runs the white house."

NOW. Lets turn the conversation back to Ann Coulter's homophobic slur, and the conservative audience laughing and chuckling.

*phew*

All in love my friends. I got a bit angry when typing, sorry if it shows.

[OTH man]

*moves this idea to the Bush/Iraq thread*

[Heather]

About Fox being biased...you probably dont realize this, but that show, that the clip was from, was probably the most unbiased political show you will ever find. It is hosted by two men, Alan Colmes and Sean Hannity. One is a true liberal, the other a true Conservative. Its a show that debates the news, not distorts it. There, you get to hear both sides, openly, and honestly.

Sean has had callers on his radio show, attack Alan for his views. Guess what he does? He defends Alan. Because politics aside, they are friends. You should really watch an entire hour of Hannity & Colmes before forming a decision. Because, I cant tell you how many times, while watching, Ive wanted to slap Alan, or berrate Sean for not sticking it to him. :lol:

It really is balanced. Take my advice, and tomorrow, watch it. You see the argument from both sides. I cant think of another political commentary that gives you that as truthfully as they do.

[Ashlyn]

You did make me feel better about it, no lie, but I can't say that I feel comfortable watching any show that gives a homophobic hatemonger like Ann Coulter airtime.

[Heather]

lmao....do me a favor, Ash.

Tomorrow night, watch Hannity & Colmes. You'll probably want to slap Sean as much as I want to slap Alan, but watch it. And after that hour, come back, and tell me if its truly biased.

And with that, Im off to bed. :)

[Jon]

Hannity & Colmes is one of my most favorite shows on TV today. Can't stand Alan, but that's how it is.

[*Ashlee*]

If its on FOXnews, its biased. I have had several media/media ethics courses in university and one of the main things they teach you is FOX news holds an extreme biased. Its uncredible and it will do anything to carry out an agenda.

But since im on the FOX new site this makes me laugh:
COULTER: I'm not anti-gay. We're against gay marriage. I don't want gays to be discriminated against or — I mean, I think we have — in addition to blacks, I don't know why all gays aren't Republicans. I think we have the pro-gay position, which is anti-crime, and for tax cuts.

COULTER: I think they're not as smart as B. Hussein Obama, when he was asked to denounce David Geffen's comments that were much more closely related to him. He said, I don't see why I should have to apologize for what someone else said. And the media was in a swoon. But apparently, our top three Republican nominees aren't that smart.


she seems like quite the bitter person actually lol after reading that transcript

[Jon]

If its on FOXnews, its biased. I have had several media/media ethics courses in university and one of the main things they teach you is FOX news holds an extreme biased. Its uncredible and it will do anything to carry out an agenda.

Whomever taught your university courses to me is very shortsighted and honestly, probably liberal. I mean it's unfair to say Fox News is biased when it doesn't agree with the "mainstream" media. Fox to me atleast tries not to be too biased. I honestly believe that, this was even before I realized I was truly a Conservative.

[Ashlyn]

:lol: Ashlee.

Like I said before, I don't see why the conservatives give this woman a chance to speak. All she does is make you guys look like you are hateful people.

Yeah, gays should be Republican. Who doesn't like having their rights taken away.

Why don't we have an active gay marriage thread? It makes me quite sad, it's one of my favorite debates.


A teachable moment: Coulter calls Edwards a faggot
By Mark Buhrmester, College Democrats President

I debated myself for a while about whether I should write a column regarding Ann Coulter calling former U.S. Sen. John Edwards a faggot. I wanted to ignore her comment but address it at the same time. Then it struck me. This is one of those “teachable moments” my high school teachers always talked about.

For those of you who are unfamiliar with the background of the story, it goes like this: Commentator and author Ann Coulter was invited to speak at the Conservative Political Action Conference in Washington, D.C. During her speech she said, “I was going to have a few comments on the other Democratic Presidential Candidate John Edwards, but it turns out you have to go into rehab if you use the word ‘faggot,’ so I — (laughter and applause) — so kind of an impasse, can’t really talk about Edwards.”

When asked about that comment in her speech to the audience at CPAC, (which included some MU College Republicans. Did they join in the laughter and applause?) Coulter responded, “C’mon it was a joke. I would never insult gays by suggesting that they are like John Edwards.” Oh, boy. It’s another Coulter knee-slapper. To be fair, though, she’s right. She insults gays by calling us faggots.

I grew up in a town where words such as “faggot” and “nigger” were used frequently. But words like that are inappropriate on every level. As someone who has been on the receiving end of words like this, I can say that they can be incredibly hurtful.

Ann Coulter doesn’t shock me anymore, but I am disappointed and appalled by the laughter and applause that was the response.

This response is immature and shows a lack of empathy for people who are often marginalized in our society — not just the gay community, but any group that is often the victim of discrimination.

If we employed even the lowest of standards to our speech, we would not use these hurtful words. Let’s say we used the following standard: “If it’s used during a lynching to refer to the victim, it’s not suitable for common use.”

That’s certainly not a tall order, but it’s enough to cut out racist and homophobic words. Surely that little bit of neighborly respect is not too much to ask.

Dare I take it a step further? Would you use the phrase, “That’s so Hispanic?” or “That’s so black?” Nope. According to the American Psychological Association, people do not choose their sexual orientation just like people do not choose the color of their skin. So why is “That’s so gay” acceptable? Trick question. It’s not.

So, everyone, let’s do each other a simple favor and think before we speak.

That's my friend Mark's article I referred to earlier. It really got to the root of why this pisses me off so much, so I thought i'd post it.

[*Ashlee*]

I give them a little more credit then being that short sighted. Most of them have worked in journalism and were able to share experiences, talk about scandals that do not make it out about Murdoch and his company. Some of them even admitted to being conservative but agreeing that FOX is very biased to the right. Fox certainly wasnt the only company exposed but it was the major one.


i find this article intriguing
http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=1067

[Jon]

See to me I don't and will not even read that. Why won't I? Because I can find you the exact article about say ABC, CBS, or NBC. Have we all forgotten Dan Rather? Aka "Rather Bias?"

There's no point in showing me an article from a left wing organization. Not trying to be mean, but that is the truth to that. People attack Fox News but again why do they? Why don't they attack the liberal media? It's like the pot calling the kettle black. People complain but only do so against Fox News, when other stations do just as much if not more biased reporting than Fox ever has.

[*Ashlee*]

Yes but FOX is sooo huge, especially in America. Im not saying other news companies/media conglomerates arent biased, but we were talking FOX lol

[Jon]

Well CNN can be argued that it's bigger. Same with ABC, CBS, and NBC. And it's not that Fox News is big in America. It's that a lot of liberals hate it and are bashing it.

[Ashlyn]

I made a Fox News thread so we can discuss this in an appropriate place.

http://www.fanbolt.com/forums/showthread.php?t=40879

... so on with the Ann Coulter issue.

[Kari]

Ashlyn, I seem to agree with your friend who wrote that article. It is excellent.

[BellaBlack]

I believe both parties are hypocritical on the war, Kevin. Not just all on the liberals :rolleyes:

[Metaphysics]

View Here (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sx9Bi3C4rs8&eurl=http%3A%2F%2Fmissouri%2Efacebook%2Ecom%2Fshar ed%2Ephp%3Fposted%26id%3D15900617%26share%5Fid%3D2 250027181%26comments)

I see this as completely unacceptable. This woman has said some horrendous things in the past, but the fact that she unashamedly uses hate speech is unacceptable. What is even more revealing is the fact that she alludes to the Isaiah/T.R. situation and seems to be of the position that homophobia and hate speech is okay.

I'm curious what you people think of this, especially my conservative friends here at FB.


I have 3 words for Ann Coulter: She's a fundamentalist (anyone wanna debate why she is, pm me)

[Heather]

Random Question.

I am not saying her comments were right, or justified, in any sense. But why did no one say anything when there was a Canadian independent film outlining the assassination of Bush?

Thats a lot worse then making a stupid comment about a politician.

[oclover24]

^ I have to agree. That's just plain weird and wrong. And I dislike Bush with a passion.

Yeah for voting in '08! My first time!

[Ashlyn]

Both are horrible. I completely agree. That movie... wrong. After I watched "Bobby" I bawled about "The Death of A President," because I couldn't understand how anybody could make light about assasination.

The cheering crowd listening to Ann Coulter, however, illustrates that homophobia and hate speech is being allowed against gay people, which is just sad. Our society really hasn't moved past that hate.

[Webeh]

I am not saying her comments were right, or justified, in any sense. But why did no one say anything when there was a Canadian independent film outlining the assassination of Bush?

Actually, you got the description wrong there. DOAP (Death of a President) was about what would happen in the US if the President was assassinated. Basically, it focused on the social, political, economic, etc ramifications. It wasn't about how you'd go about killing Bush, which is so not what the film was about. That's something totally different.

I actually interned with the film festival that aired it last September. There's been a lot of misunderstanding about what the film was about because of the title.

This film definitely took itself very seriously. In no way did it support Bush's assassination. Rather, it was more of a "You better hope the US never loses a President that way in this time and age because that would be devastating to society." In fact, I think it was filmed in response to comments of "I hope Bush dies" being thrown around lightly.

I'm still slightly miffed that I couldn't get tickets to that film because apparently it was an extremely well done film.

Yeah... I get defensive about TIFF. I've been affiliated with them for the past four years. People keep making assumptions about films without even watching it. Heck, there's even been a few death threats over another film a few years ago. (Another case of people screaming before they even watch the film.) Scary, huh?

[Heather]

Dont be offended, the news coverage over it here, glossed over it, so I didnt really know all the details. But hearing you explain it, makes me understand it more, and makes me more open to the idea of it.

Its just the whole Bush must die mentality of some people in this world gets to me sometimes.

[Webeh]

No offense taken. I just thought that I should clarify what that film was about. :)

DOAP got so much press last September, which was a surprise to everyone. From watching the film, you didn't expect to see such a controversy. I thought that was too bad. A lot of film companies were too afraid to pick up the rights for it and as a result, it got a smaller release than it probably should have.