I’ll be in trouble again on Crawley’s blog Will & Testament when the Brits wake up to read my latest comment to William’s latest post. In a post entitled ‘Ann Coulter’s Dirty Mouth’, Will writes: “Recent comments by Ann Coulter, the right-wing political columnist, continue to excite debate across American political blogs. The best guide to the debate is Andrew Sullivan. … In a speech to a conservative political gathering earlier this week, she described Senator John Edwards as a “faggot”. It’s not the first time this frighteningly influential figure has sullied her nation’s public discourse — last year she dismissed Al Gore as a “total fag”. … An online petition calling on Universal Press Syndicate to cease the distribution of Coulter’s column has been signed by more than 40,000 people in less than a week.”
So far, all the comments have condemned Ann Coulter. Oops. My response is as follows:
——————
Funny; I was just in a car full of people including a Christian conservative, a liberal, a Canadian and a guy from Ireland who all agreed on how much we like Ann Coulter.
William postulates that the “best guide” to the debate is Andrew Sullivan. William, you’re the man, but I’m going to completely disagree with you here. I’m sure in Beebland this definition of impartiality is widely shared (that much is evident from BBC journalism), but outside it’s generally recognised that bloggers do not make the best guide to any debate, since they’re taking part in it themselves! I like Sullivan, but he’s an opinion writer, not a news reporter, and a gay one at that, making him perhaps one of the worst references for an impartial “guide” to this debate. (He’s clearly emotionally involved and is taking this personally as a gay man, a fact easily observed in the way he writes about it; “I would defend her right to do it with my last faggoty breath…” etc. …invested MUCH?)
About Coulter. Her use of the word ‘faggot’ was not used to describe a gay guy. Proof? Edwards is not gay. He’s a straight guy, and therefore to use the word ‘faggot’ as a gay slur wouldn’t make any sense. Coulter was instead using it in a looser way, implying Edwards is flighty, wishy-washy, flakey, etc..
So if it wasn’t a gay slur (because it wasn’t directed toward a gay man….) then why is everyone so upset? I’ll tell you why. It’s because we’ve become a world full of over-sensitive language-nerds. We’re banning words beginning with every letter of the alphabet because we’re so scared of them and now we can add another F-word to the list. Because had Ann Coulter never said that word, the world would have been a much nicer place, right?
Give me a break.
If you ask me, people need to quit being so grim all the time. People who are actually upset about the word ‘faggot’ could use a good night out. We need more people like Ann Coulter who are willing to say what she thinks instead of pussyfooting around everyone else all the time and acting as though the world is one giant game of Buckaroo that might explode at any time.
For those for whom this comment has gone down like a lead balloon (really?), re-read the last sentence. If you still don’t get it….forget it… go back to the grind. Someone’s got to do it.
John Wright
13 responses so far ↓
1 Stephen // Mar 11, 2007 at 6:32 am
Don’t worry my friend…I’ve got your back
SG
2 Stephen // Mar 11, 2007 at 1:15 pm
well, i thought i had your back but the comments feature on Will’s blog is going hay-wire again…
SG
3 S Quinney // Mar 12, 2007 at 5:46 pm
When are you guys going to learn that trying to reason with these people is like trying to get sense from a plant or vegetable of some sort? I’ve been to the BBC blog many times (on your recommendation John) but I refuse to take part in what I see as basically a big leftwing lovefest. You’re never going to win them over! Give it up! As for Ann Coulter, she’s pretty but I don’t much care for her. I think this was a slip of the tongue from her and nobody is accepting it for what it is, least of all Andrew Sullivan.
4 John Wright // Mar 13, 2007 at 9:02 am
Thanks, Quinney. I’ve always perservered with these people no matter how frustrating, but I don’t dosagree with you. Maybe I need some hope? Or maybe I’m a sucker for punishment!
5 Anonymous // Mar 13, 2007 at 10:15 pm
You like Ann? Even her mother doesn’t like her.
6 Anonymous // Mar 19, 2007 at 5:07 pm
So much news recently, and Coulter is all you see fit to write about?
7 Anonymous // Mar 22, 2007 at 7:04 pm
Cant understand why anyone would want to defned this loud mouthed bitch. you embarrass yourself by doing so. for the sake of a perfectly decent libertarian perpective you present here, please stop defending nuts who use abusive language. she has a right t say what she says. I would sign the petition. ive a right to express my views that way in a petition. fuck her, she’s a fool. and ur a fool for supporting her.
8 Anonymous // Apr 10, 2007 at 11:45 am
God I despair at this site. Defending a crazy bitch like Coulter? Grow up guys, you’re making libertarianism look like hair-brained nonsense. For the sake of those who actually agree with Coulter’s right to speak, wake up and smell the stench of what she says.
9 S Quinney // Apr 10, 2007 at 2:08 pm
Anonymous, you really think Ann Coulter is the demon she’s been portrayed as? Unless you do, what John says above is completely reasonable.
10 Anonymous // Apr 15, 2007 at 11:37 am
Just embarrassing that libertarians would speak up for this crazy fool
11 <a href="http://m1.aol.com/phentermine4">Phentermine</a> // Aug 28, 2007 at 12:57 pm
Great Article! Thank You!
12 <a href="http://m1.aol.com/phentermine4">Buy Phentermine</a> // Aug 29, 2007 at 12:44 am
Thanks to author! I like articles like this, very interesting.
13 <a href="http://free-metro-pcs-ringtones.blogspot.com">Free Ringtones</a> // Sep 2, 2007 at 7:34 am
nice blog!
Leave a Comment