March 7, 2007
-
when sensationalism proves her point... again.
I have a lot of friends that really despise Ann Coulter and think she's crazy, along with looking at me like a quantum formula and asking if I have a poster of Rush Limbaugh up on my bedroom wall [chuckle goes here]. I say, no, but thanks for the compliment.
There's a lotta hoopla about her comment made at CPAC, though, and for my less than savvy friends who take one comment out of context as yet more grounds to propagate hate, I've seen the entire speech (not just max blumenthal's splices) and thought I should mention it here. But on the whole "the other f-word" issue, doesn't anyone get it that she's just making reference to Isaiah Washington's ordeal after the Grey's Anatomy bruhaha and how free speech is now lost to de facto censorship? And no, the response she received was not the said "collective groan". No one really seemed all that butt-hurt at the jab, but then again, what else do you expect from an exchange between a very intelligent/witty speaker and a highly savvy audience, as conservatives tend to be.
But come to think of it, without all the publicity of Ann's comment, I probably wouldn't have heard about what she actually said in her speech. (Or maybe democrats would have found something/anything else to make a fuss over) In fact, I was a bit confused as to why Michelle Malkin made such a big deal about it because she tends to be more contextual when dealing with incendiary comments, but it does show that when something reflects poorly onto the party, conservatives/republicans are more prepared to condemn/reprimand it than democrats/liberals who immediately justify it or rationalize/excuse it away.
Coulter @ CPAC - Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, Part 4 for the entire speech
but here are some splices I found interesting:
But my bigger point in all of this is: in America, Bill Maher can desire the assassination of the Vice President, Keith Olbermann gets his own show and acting bits in movies because he calls the President an idiot, and Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert can use the REAL f-word in characterizing everything and all are commended as "great satirist comedians", and yet Ann is criticized more harshly because she's saying it of her own right instead of getting paid by HBO/MSNBC/Comedy Central to be incendiary? W-H-A-T-E-V-E-R. Can you spell double standard, kids?
And yes, College Republicans are brave warriors, "right-wingers in the middle of North Korea". Well, I actually AM.
(Yes, I know I'm in South Korea but I'm pretty close, and North Korean spies have been so successful over the years that pro-North is more welcome than pro-US in this country) But South Korea has really dropped the ball on "their brothers to the North" and all but put Kim Jong Il's name into the constitution. Is it any wonder that LiNK isn't well received and gaining the popularity it should, or that when I interviewed the ROK Human Rights Commission, they kept telling me my questions were "wrong" (How can a question be "wrong"? Simple, silly. You don't ask questions. You just pay your taxes and we give it to North Korea in the name of "humanitarian aid" so they can turn around and sell it for money to continue making nukes. duh.) What, did you think that poverty and famine were natural disorders? This is why Kim Jong Il needs to die, after which I will make celebratory cupcakes for all of you. Anyway, I could care less about all of these people. But I could also care more. Listening to anyone too much is annoying, but I still enjoy biting commentary from Ann Coulter or Stephen Colbert's jokes and Jon Stewart's self-deprecating humor, and I recognize that there are bigger things to life than talking heads going at it. But kudos to all you pundits and bloggers and activists who've made a career of this, to those fighting a cause bigger than themselves. Well, have a great day, y'all~!
Comments (5)
I don't think she's crazy, I think that's her marketing strategy. Without her being how do you say... "belligerant." Nobody would buy her books or pay any attention to her. Beyond that, Democrats should treat her like that crazy drunk aunt and ignore her. You can say whatever you want about Democrats, but you have Pat Robertson and he's just made of crazy.
Normally one to cringe at the sight of her platinum blonde locks, I'd have to agree with you on this one. It is a double standard--I think that most people, though, were a little shocked that she would say that when it's a politically sensitive issue at the moment (well, it IS politics
). Nary a good time for well-publicized taboo subjects for Republicans and Democrats alike(even if it is a reference to Isaiah Washington...which was weird. Most random man ever.)After all, no one became POTUS after randomly referring to a well-known political figure as a "faggot." (Unless i'm missing something here; well, no one out in public anyway 
).
Now, a question about Colbert and Stewart (I love them, btw, but yes, they do get by on a double standard): do you see them as comedians or as political commentators? Just a random straw poll.
Alright. And Pat Robertson...he not crazy, he just got his gospel all mixed up...haha...I think...wait...
hello Hannah,
i often listen to Bill Maher from his weekly podcasts, his real time on hbo, i also often find myself outraged by his blasphemies toward the Lord and his often predicatible punch lines...you seem to groan as you hear another of his jokes coming from a mile away from something someone said on his panel, i guess it's just a sign of the times...it's also funny how conservatives are often cornered by the elite and enlightened of hollywood and the government carefully selected on his panel (intentionally in that order) i hope you are doing well Hannah
God bless,
Christian
thanks for your comments, guys. you rock. and just to get back to you on some points that were well made.
I think you're right on on that whole "belligerent" characterization, but interestingly enough the definition means "hostile and aggressive, such as when engaged in war". How true of Ann, whose goal is to wake up conservatives to engage in battle (in manner of debate or conversion) with liberals. And yes, I think they should just ignore her if they want to take her spotlight, but again... easier said than done... and if they did, I consider it a loss to the left, because I personally think you should know your enemies and their influence, and to ignore Ann would only do greater harm to their strategy for gulags of world domination, later.
Because a lot of people do listen to her.
About sensitive topics, Ann's never shied away from 'em. She even went after the 9-11 widows that the media were using to attack the Bush administration, causing a huge stir after her book "Godless" came out. But it gets people to read her books/columns for more, and if you read em you see that the rest of the stuff is not just incendiary, but biting because it's true (just like jokes are funnier when true).
And yes, I love Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert, too. I think they're very funny guys, Jon's probably more sincere, but I think that their politics definitely come into play albeit not as much as Ann or Bill Maher. But it's more prevalent when you've been watching for a long time, as a right-winger. Because I see their politics come out when they are selectively deriding the same people(conservatives) and going "easy" on democrats, but hey, they know their audience and are only playing to the crowd, like comedians. So yeah, they get by on a double standard, but less so b/c they're on a channel called "Comedy" Central and the nature of comedy allows certain behavior that politics does not, but they found that niche that meshes the two together.
They don't get as political as Bill Maher. He and Keith Olbermann should be considered the same as Ann, but Ann isn't being paid by a station with her own show (nor does she swear). But I don't think all is lost with Bill either. I like comedians because they have to be smart/quick, and they see reality with a grain of salt that allows them to criticize it sharply. They just don't think much... or don't do as deeply as a pundit or scholar would, so I think that's their limit. But even Bill Maher analyzed Islam correctly when he had Ayaan Hirsi Ali on his show recently, so I do think there's hope yet.
I feel y'all on the groans, but I'm encouraged to see that we haven't lost (all) hope yet. =) And I'm glad to have this kind of forum with you guys, it's refreshing and really hits the spot.
hanners
hey hannah! long time no see. i hope all is well with you.
just thought i'd drop in my 2 cents on this discussion..
first of all, full disclosure: in true berkeley fashion, i'm one of those crazy left-wing liberals with san francisco values but don't worry.. like yourself, i'm not into having shouting matches with people who don't think like i do.
OK.. so yes, i do watch stewart and colbert almost daily. however, i also catch at least parts of what o'reilly and hannity have to say every week. the key difference is that, and i think you were starting to get at this in your reply to the comments, stewart and colbert follow a show about inept cops whose shorts are hilariously too small for them while o'reilly and hannity are on a news channel whose slogan is "we report. you decide." and claims to be "fair and balanced." it's true that stewart and colbert are left-leaning but it's very obvious within 5 minutes of listening to them that, although it is often brutally honest commentary on the state of affairs, it's still a comedy show. when a kid watches TDS or the report, he understands that it's on the same channel as south park. when a kid (or ill-informed adult) hears o'reilly or hannity say outright, without even blinking an eye, that "the democrats are legislating defeat in iraq" it's a whole 'nother story.
about ann, i agree with charles. she's a self-serving, pseudo-intellectual that overestimates both her ability to reason and her physical attractiveness. the worst part about her, to me, is that i KNOW she knows she's being ridiculously one-sided/irrational, unnecessarily belligerent, and sometimes straight up deceitful but she does it anyway for the media attention. like the whole faggot thing. there was no other reason for her to say that except for the sole purpose of getting people to talk about her just like we are.
here's something to consider: would it have been OK if she had called john edwards a nigger? cause he's obviously not black so it was clearly in reference to the whole kramer thing at the laugh factory.
Comments are closed.