OK, Coulter said it, do we have to repeat it?

[11 Bravo]

I'm not big on PC. Shit, I've been torched for even employing the term. Perhaps I'm naive, but I also believe that most of the posts I've read have been attempts to turn Coulter's words against her, rather than thinly disguised attempts to use a homophobic slur. But in this case, what I keep bumping up against is the thought that the word in question is very probably the last thing that Matthew Shepard ever heard, as he hung, broken and bleeding, from a Wyoming fencepost. Even if I had no other reason, that alone would be enough for me to eschew the use of the word. Just a thought.

[matcom]

1. if you don't say it...

sheeple won't HEAR it

[Cha]

2. THe way to get rid of the vile

coulter is to face it head on and make sure everyone knows what she said.

I'm sorry about Matthew Sheppard but coulter was using an homophobic slur to insult John Edwards. John Edwards was not insulted but mainstream America needs to know who was at the "conservative"(read fascist) convention and cheering her vulgar mouth on.

[Rosa Luxemburg]

6. The more Coulter says the more she hangs the GOP by the neck!

The voters don't like cheap and negative comments. The noose around the GOP necks gets tighter. Bring it on Ann lets sink the GOP more!

[Cha]

10. Zactly!

coulter's leading them into the abyss..they're just too crazed to notice.

[CoffeeCat]

3. What bothers me the most..

...is that in this nation---a person such as Coulter is allowed to address groups
of people. She is really classless and immature. I think she's got a severe mental
illness, and yet the Republican party is proud to introduce her.

Something is very rotten. Coulter's words are typical of behavior-disordered children
who are put in special programs to help them behave normally--when they have trouble
controlling their emotions and following social norms.

A grown woman, calling a heterosexual, married man a "faggot"--simply to convey
her hate for him--is embarrassing. Coulter is the aunt that you hide in the attic
when neighbors visit. She's the snotty sister that you avoid---when you bring
friends over.

I just can't understand why the Republicans associate themselves with this woman--who
is clearly lacking in any sort of class, dignity, intelligence or grace. She looks
trashy and she acts trashy.

What is wrong with the Republicans?

[11 Bravo]

4. Exactly. At least by all available evidence (married, kids) ...

Edwards is probably not gay. But Coulter felt perfectly comfortable accusing him, in front of a Repug audience, knowing that it would be perceived as the harshest possible criticism. Fuck, I hate these people!

[SteveM]

5. If progressive response isn't strong enough, What's wrong with us?

I'm not interested in Coulter's adam's apple, her trashiness, mannishness. I am interested in both how folks and the media respond. If she is given a pass (too-often the response by progs and media), then the RW frame will be locked in; I believe in a matter of days. The media expects this crap from the right and they expect Dems to stay above the fray (a cultural conceit they share with late-modern liberalism). The result could be an effective diminution of Edwards. Then, the media will start asking questions of the victim of bully-ism. That would perfect the right-wing strategy.

[Erika]

7. The more Coulter talks, the worse the GOP looks

Her words are so insane that no one takes her seriously and the GOP loses credibility.

Even the right wing sites admit that.

[Lint Head]

8. CNN Reported

CNN has reported Coulters incendiary words.
What do you expect. She's a bigot. Bigot's use bigoted words. She supports fascists. Fascists exterminated homosexuals during WWII. Connect the dots. Bigot = fascism = killing etc. Sort of what we see today. Bigots in power = fascist destruction of rights = using the war on terror to kill.

:dem:

[Uncle Roy]

9. "Make him deny it" is usually the strategy behind these smears.

They use some disposable idiot (sorry Ann...) to make the smear, then a great fuss is made (us?), then the victim of the smear has to either comment or not comment, after which more fuss is made, all of which calls attention to the victim and makes a subliminal association in the public's mind between the victim and the smear. That is their intent.

I'm no political strategical genius, but it seems to me that a non-stop counter-attack against Coulter and her sponsors, featuring exactly what she said, and emphasising who paid her to say it and who was there to hear it, is the way to go here. The focus should be on the right-wing and their hate machine, not Edwards.

This is one faggot who would not like to see our counter-attack dulled by the use of namby-pamby circumlocutions. Let the people see these haters and their sponsors in all their ugliness.