There were a lot of stories to be told at the 33rd annual Conservative Political Action Conference in Washington, D.C., this week. Conservatives from all over the country gathered to discuss immigration both legal and illegal, the economy, the size and scope of government, national defense and homeland security, all the favorite conservative issues. There were big ideas, big subjects, big questions of policy and basic political philosophy.
Which is why it’s such a crying shame that the big story turned out to be a few intemperate words tossed off carelessly by a speaker more interested in making a buck than inspiring her audience.
On Friday, controversial conservative columnist and author Ann Coulter — on her way to a well-attended book signing on the show floor — addressed the assembled attendees at CPAC 2006 with a speech that blogger Sean Hackbarth called bad stand-up comedy with a conservative schtick. Sean was being too generous. In fact, Coulter sailed right past the bounds of good taste, past her usual tactlessness, past the furthest extent of what could be considered socially acceptable discourse.
During her prepared remarks, on the subject of Iran, Coulter said, “Maybe they do [have nuclear weapons], maybe they don’t, but they’re certainly acting like they do. … If you don’t want to get shot by the police, don’t point a gun at them. Or as I think our motto should be, post 9/11,” Coulter said, “‘Raghead talks tough, raghead faces consequences.'”
Six words. That’s all it took. That’s all it took to derail the entire conference. That’s all it took to confirm every negative stereotype about conservatives. We’re no longer smart, driven, sincere people who are trying to raise the level of public debate and shape the future of our country for the better. Now we’re all just a bunch of bigots. Now that’s the story.
Thanks a lot, Ann.
A prominent conservative blogger who’s covering the conference with me describes Ann Coulter as a “gateway conservative.” Because she’s so controversial, Ann Coulter attracts the attention of people who wouldn’t ordinarily find themselves drawn to conservative political thought. They start out reading her, then they get exposed to columnists like Charles Krauthammer and Michael Barone and George Will, and they “mature a little in their political philosophy.”
I think that’s a valid point. I think that there’s something to be said for appealing to people who respond to vitriol and bile and righteous anger in order to get them thinking about more nuanced issues. But there are two major problems with that approach, and because of them I think figures like Ann Coulter end up doing more harm than good.
Every time Ann Coulter gets up and calls Iranians — or Iraqis, or Jordanians, or Saudis or Pakistanis or Yemenis or Afghans or Sudanese or whomever because really, aren’t they all pretty much the same anyway? — “ragheads,” she gets the attention of people who think she’s right on. She gets thunderous applause from the members of her audience who share her anger at and disgust with the Muslim fundamentalists who are presently waging their diffuse little war against civilization.
But she also attracts the attention of people from both the left and the right who think that there are better ways of expressing anger than flinging outrageous and condescending ethnic slurs around. And at that moment, she’s not just Ann Coulter. She’s an icon of the entire conservative movement. She is the conservative movement. When she says “raghead” live on C-SPAN in front of a sign that says “Conservative Political Action Conference,” she’s speaking for all of us.
And a whole lot of us wish she’d just shut up.
The other problem is even worse, if considerably less obvious. Yes, conservatism is the big tent. Yes, ours is the political philosophy of pluralism and tolerance. Yes, we advocate a marketplace of ideas, where any reasonable position deserves to be heard and included.
But seriously, do we really want to include people who think that the best way to address geopolitical tensions is to throw the word “raghead” around? Are these the people we really want to invite to our party?
There are those out there who think that controversial speech should be controlled by the government. There are those who think that saying things like what Ann Coulter said — or publishing editorial cartoons deemed by some to be sacriligious — should be against the law. These people clearly have the wrong idea. But just because Ann Coulter should be allowed, by law, to say whatever she wants to whichever audience chooses to invite her, so also should she be held responsible for saying things that do more harm than good. And calling people “ragheads” to resounding applause certainly does more harm than good. Harm to the conservative cause, harm to east-west relations and harm to the national discourse.
Ann, seriously. From now on, just stay off our side.
Now that’s an unbigoted statement!
/sarcasm
Yes, Darleen, you do quote scripture. If you can’t remember, you do need those meds
Darleen,
Well, what do you expect from a Socialist pot smoking liberal? LOL. Im the epitome of all that is wrong with mankind!
But really, is it Christian to call people names?
Are you saying that the 4.7 unemployment and 3-4 percent growth rates are fiction?
Don’t underestimate depth of denial of reality that the Left cult members can engage in.
Posted by: Darleen at February 13, 2006 12:31 PM
Darleen:
You just don’t get it. Those numbers for unemployment and growth rate come from the Bush administration. Ånd you’re still dumb enough to believe them? Why is it that the cult of the republitards can’t realize that they’ve been had by your president, and he and Cheney are laughing all the way to the bank?
Would “Little Sheet Heads”, have been better? 😉
Ask yourself, David, WWJD?
Robert
Is it ok for non-Christians to call people names?
You know, even Jesus lost his temper. Humans are not perfect and even Christians know that. Being human is a struggle between learning and defining what is right and then trying to live up to is.
Real easy how not to be a hypocrit
Don’t have any values
As it is, Beth, most of you Republicans are holier than thou Christians.
Oh, really? How many do you actually know? I know a hell of a lot of Republicans, and I HONESTLY (unlike you) wouldn’t call them that at all. Nor would I call 90-95% of them evangelical Christians.
Are you prejudiced or something? Oh, I forgot. It’s OK to denigrate Christianity, but NOT ISLAM!!!!11!!oneone!!
:rolling eyes:
rachel
Don’t you have a MoveOn “support Saddam” rally to attend? You know, with featured speaker Mommy Sheehan, she-who-pimps-her-sons-corpse?
Here goes Darleen again about having “values”. She thinks poor people are poor because they don’t have “values”. Remember Darleeen?
Unfortunately, she doesn’t realize that having values means not throwing stones when you live in a glass house.
WWJD?
Actually, Robert, Jesus would have preached the word of (the REAL) God to them. And then the splodeydopes would have beheaded him.
But then again, nowadays leftards would have tried to make Jesus keep His God to himself, anyway. Can’t have people going around talking about Christianity, after all.
Think about it, mmkay?
She thinks poor people are poor because they don’t have “values”.
Yeah, right, Nick. I see you’re another intellectually dishonest one who doesn’t know how to read. Hilarious!
No, Darleen I have all day to point out what a hypocrite you are.
I love it. MoveOn supports Saddam Hussien? See how easy you make it to prove how ignorant you are? And in typical republitard style – anyone who disagrees with you is a traitor, Saddam-supporter, blah, blah, blah. Where’s your degree from, Karl Rove University?
Don’t you have a John Birch society meeting to attend. One with little Dick “I’m a draft dodger and mistake 6′ tall men for small birds” Cheney as featured speaker?
Hmmm.
1. Well at least Ann Coulter hasn’t pelted a black Republican with oreos, illegally obtained a credit report or called black Republicans “Uncle Toms”.
2.
That is quite possibly THE most ignorant thing I’ve read today. Quite a feat really.
She thinks poor people are poor because they don’t have “values”.
Yeah, right, Nick. I see you’re another intellectually dishonest one who doesn’t know how to read. Hilarious!
Posted by: Beth at February 13, 2006 01:00 PM
Beth,
You should know what you’re talking about before you call people “intellectually dishonest”. It’s so predictable from your kind. Darleen went on a rampage last week about poor people and their “poor values”. Of course, in your Dick Cheney style paranoia, you assumed I was judging Darleen from her posts today. I leave that to the right-wing to be hypocritically judgemental.
I still don’t know what race ragheads are. Can anyone tell me?
Nick:
Yes, Beth is surely paranoid. Anyone who read your post could tell you weren’t referring to Darleen’s posts today. I’m not sure that they even realize that they never actually address the issues, they result to putting people down – just like their heroes in the White House. Pray for them
“I didn’t say we all say nigger, nor do I approve of it out of anyone’s mouth, under any circumstances. It’s funny how YOU immediately thought of “stealing my car” as an example, though. Talk about enlightening.”
Beth, you do need enlightening, because I’m sorry, you’re an idiot. Scott said “It’s no different to using a racial epithet rather than a swear word against someone who is stealing your car.” Which is what I was responding to. Which you’d know if you used your brain before covering your computer screen with angry spittle. And you may be proud of the fact that you said “motherf*cking ragheads,” but as hard as it may be for you to digest, the fact that you said something doesn’t make it the norm (and is that an understatement.) And this notion that using a racist epithet is OK as long as you’re not applying it to the whole race is ridiculous. So it’s OK to call someone a kike, as long as you only mean him, and not all Jews? And the reason I use kike and nigger as examples, is because I get the feeling that to you raghead is OK, while other epithets are wrong. So you’re only racist against certain people, which makes you OK. What a hateful little world you live in.
You guys can stop patting yourselves on the back for the high level of discourse you all engage in (I mean, you have read Beth’s and Darleen’s posts, haven’t you?) Kos is the most popular political blog out there, and gets its share of ranters. There are plenty of left wing blogs where people discuss things in a sane manner. You mention Kos, I’ll mention Little Green Footballs or Ace of Spades, where the right wing rhetoric is just as hateful. So get over yourselves.
It’s especially amusing to see you guys congratulating yourselves on your reasoned conversations, while at the same time rationalizing using racial epithets. And the best you can come up with is that the Left says the same stuff, only under their breath. Well if we’re saying it so no one can hear, how do you know we’re saying it? That’s the most ridiculous argument I ever heard. You “know” we do it, and that’s all that matters. How about backing that up with a couple of examples? Coulter gives us a whole boatload of examples on the right, and don’t forget those standing ovations she gets when she does it.
The only the thing I can’t stand more than the words coming out of Coulter’s mouth is the sound…
Golly-gee-wiz… that voice just makes Susan Estrich sound like a phone sex operator.
No wait.
Scratch that.
Hmmm.
*shrug* I know a couple Sikh gentlemen who wear turbans who might fit the description. I also know a few guys who wear do-rags, also made of cloth, who possibly could fit, but unlikely.
In this context I’d suggest turban wearing middle eastern types. Perhaps anyone wearing a fez is not included. Which would be nice as I wear a fez on occasion. They’re very comfortable actually.
Frankly I don’t mind this sort of nonsense. In fact it might actually be a good idea. People think that by stepping on eggshells that somehow things will be made better. IMHO all that will result is thinner eggshells. The muslim world has a hard time dealing with unintentional insults. Perhaps they need some experience with *intentional* insults to finally figure out the difference.
Chris:
You’re a genius. If even a fraction of what you say penetrates Beth’s and Darleen’s thick skulls, they’ll still be better off. I read Beth’s post too, and got the same impression. She rationalizes her own racism. I lived within site of the World Trade Center and watched it all, and never once muttered anything about “ragheads” on 9/11. She’s pathetic.
And where the hell did she get the “you only mutter it under your breathe” comment? She’s truly delusional, or is watching too much O’Reilly factor.
Beth,
You keep on side-stepping my argument. I am saying that you condone insulting people and calling them names and such, while the Bible is against such behavior. So, how can you call yourself a Christian if you intend on doing things that are very anti-Christian, ie calling people names, and just being as nasty and surly as you are?
In Christianity, it is said that you must love your neighbor. That saying that Jesus lost his temper is just a cop-out. Saying that nobody is perfect is a cop-out. If you are a Christian, you must condut yourself in the best way possible.
When I say “holier than thou” Christians, Im talking about hypocrites. You all probably go out in public and condemn everybody else for being such sinners, but then you all get on here and do this insulting stuff and you show the world what sinners you really are.
Thing is, nobody can see your face as you go out in public and tell people how they should live, but then you all live foul in secret. Just like the Bible says, what is done in the dark will come out in the light.
Perhaps they need some experience with *intentional* insults to finally figure out the difference.
But Ed, is this behavior in line with compassionate conservatism?
Are we not liberating these people? So how can you say that we should insult them? I thought that as a conservative you were suppossed to love all people.
Conservative hypocrites.
Robert:
Darleen and Beth seem to forget that God sees what they do no matter where they are. Darleen says that poor people are poor because of a lack of values.
The bible says Darleen should give the shirt off her back to those very same people. Darleen, He knows you down “to the number of hairs on your head.” It’s amazing how little people who claim to be Christian really know about being Christian.
Nick/rachel/bethright
how “many” of you are using the same ip, eh?
And obviously the whole argument of values behind the line “from shirtsleeves to shirtsleeves in three generations” is beyond your feeble intellect.
No wonder the self-responsibility-denying Left cult is so comforting to you.
I’ll go with the Midrash if “jesus” doesn’t mind
Robert
Thanks for the longer posts that mark your bigotry well.
You call all Arabs (terrorist and non-terrorist) “ragheads” and now Im the bigot?
The backwards logic of Republicans. I guess it just doesn’t feel right unless you are going through a day without calling somebody names.
And being Christian is not a bad thing, Im just telling you what I know about being a Christian. So how am I a bigot? And if you arent a Christian, why not? That might be part of your problem.
Robert
Do you always drink this early in the morning? Where did I call all arabs “ragheads”?
And you make assumptions about all Christians based on your own interpretation of Christianity.
I’d say that qualifies you as a bigot.
Darleen:
You seem to be bothered that so many people disagree with you? Maybe you’re just wrong.
Robert is a bigot because he interprets Christianity in a way you don’t agree? You are a very, very sad person. And obviously a very angry one. It’s no one’s fault but your own that you are the way you are.
Oh, and one last thing: My name is Jesus – I’m latino. Is that allowed in your small view of the world?
Robert, you said:
“What I get out of this discourse is that the Republican Party is filled with angry white males who sit around and resort to childish name calling.”
Um… did you miss the part where the initial remark was made by a WOMAN?
J.
I just want to know if I can start calling people who don’t like Christians or Republicans or Steeler fans racist now, it seems like the term has become pretty damn all-encompassing.
My name is Jesus – I’m latino.
Yeah. Right. Sure. That’s the ticket.
Im not assuming anything. Im just making my basis on what I see…people who are so quick to condemn homosexuals, abortion providers and people who dont see things the way that they do. I didn’t say that was all Christians.
Like, what is up with people who say that “God hates fags”. There just seems to be a movement based on ignorance, anger and prejudice that I see in the Republican movement.
At the same time, the Republican movement today acts like it represents all things Christian. Then I see someone like Ann Coulter. What is that suppossed to communicate to somebody who might consider being a part of the Republican party?
I’d be a part of the part of the great abolitionist John Brown. Now that is a hero. You might think that Ann Coulter is on the same level as John Brown, but she really doesnt do much for me.
Im just trying to also say that if you did pursue being a Christian seriously, you wouldnt have so much hate and anger, and wouldnt fall to this mentality. Thats all that I see from the likes of somebody like Ann Coulter. So, if you think I am a bigot, well, fine, but I find it hard to say that somebody like Ann who says that she would say nasty things about all blacks and hispanics under any circumstances is not worthy of my respect.
B Moe
“Raghead” is better defined as an ethnic slur.
My name is Jesus – I’m latino.
Yeah. Right. Sure. That’s the ticket.
Posted by: Darleen at February 13, 2006 02:00 PM
Darleen:
You’re not even making sense anymore. Lay down and take a nap before you burst a blood vessel
Hey Jesus, you alright with me. Darleen doesnt respect you because she feels you are taking away a minimum wage job that she feels she is entitled to, even though you probably dont need it. Oh well. You can’t make these people like anybody but their small circle of friends.
Yeah, all of you are right. We ALL call everyone ragheads, whether they’re terrorist or not, and we ALL think nobody has any values (except for Us), and we all go around telling everyone else how to live, and we all are cheering on Ann Coulter.
I STG, it’s pointless even trying to discuss anything with you people. Which wasn’t actually even my point in commenting, by the way–I was debating the issue IN THE POST with others on my side, and you may note we did so without insulting one another or each other’s intelligence by misrepresenting what the other said.
Thanks for fucking up what COULD have been an intelligent discussion between people on the same side of “the aisle,” with your idiotic generalizations and ridiculous conclusions. Tell me, do you people actually know any conservatives? Because you obviously think we’re just evil. Sounds like projection to me.
No wonder you veer to the left–the loser mentality side.
Do you really think you’re going to change anyone’s minds here? I mean it’s a BLOG. Nobody ever changes their minds in blog comments, especially when said comments are completely, comically baseless and speculative.
Darleen (and Jeff) and I–and some of the others–do actually know where one another are coming from (and yes, I know you weren’t talking about Darleen’s comments here, dumbass–she’s a friend of mine). Therefore we can discuss things and understand the other’s point of view.
Conversely, TOTAL STRANGERS who think they know another person’s 1) religion, 2) race, 3) motivation, 4) economic status, and 5) beliefs, and choose to use those assumptions as a basis for argument (or more to the point, insults) really don’t warrant my attention, especially when said strangers REFUSE to even bother trying to understand what I say. Why I even bothered responding to any of you nitwits is beyond me. GROW UP.
There was a question of whether or not Jesus would call someone names – not sure if that question was rhetorical, but yes, He would. In the 23rd chapter of Matthew He called the Pharisees and Scribes hypocrites, serpents, and a brood of vipers. But I believe it was out of a broken heart for Jerusalem more than malice. Anyway, just didn’t want to leave that question unanswered.
I just find it interesting that one of the most commented posts I’ve seen on Wizbang is apparently about name-calling. No, Ann probably shouldn’t have called them ragheads, but there is a lot of stuff in the world that is much more worth getting worked up over – I don’t have much left for schoolyard name calling.
No wonder you veer to the left–the loser mentality side.
Doesnt sound very Christian to me. WWJD, Beth, WWJD?
But Gene, would he call Arabs “Ragheads”? I don’t think so.
Hmmm.
@ Robert
1.
How should I know? I’m a *conservative* not a “compassionate conservative”, whatever that means.
2.
No. We’re liberating the people of Iraq and Afghanistan, not the entire middle east. Read what I write, not what you wish I wrote.
3.
What idiotic world do you inhabit where people are forbidden from insulting one another?
4.
Really? On what cereal box did you garner this wisdom?
5.
Your explicit membership in the Jackass Club is irrespective of your politics.
Beth
I’ve been commenting on this blog for quite some time. When did it become your little club that only people you approve of are supposed to comment on? You spewed plenty of insults and hateful talk, and now you criticize others for messing up an intelligent conversation. Get over yourself. Or to quote you from earlier in this thread, “Get your own blog.”
Well, Robert, seeing as the terms “hypocrites”, “serpents”, and “vipers” were terms of derision, I think it’s quite possible He would. But, to state again, I don’t think it was (or would be) with malice, but a broken heart for the people of Jerusalem (including the Pharisees and Scribes).
Chris
Beth was speaking to the trolls. If you aren’t one, then carry on. Otherwise, Beth is right. The bots like rachel/nick/jesus/bethrigh (or singular bot as I believe they are one and the same) and the eager-beaver wannabes like “Robert” (who believes someone who calls him/herself “latino” and immediately thinks “illegal alien” and again betrays himself) have not been here to discuss, just spew.
Hmmm.
@ Robert
1.
So. Are you trying to say that the Democratic Party is representative of Christians? Then why didn’t you reply to my explicit point about the treatment of conservative blacks by liberal Democrats? I.e. throwing oreos, illegally obtaining credit reports, name calling.
Aren’t you rather hot on the issue of name calling?
Hmmm.
@ Robert
Sounds like you don’t know what being a Christian is.
BTW Chris
Beth does have her own blog … an excellent read.
But you knew that.
ed, the oreo thing never happened. They just made that up.
Yes, mantis
the oreos appeared on the floor by way of a disruption in a quantum singularity.