Contrasting Approaches to Dealing with Ann Coulter
Kirsten Powers and Lorie Byrd take two different tacks with Ann Coulter and her verbal bomb throwing. Powers takes the “ignore Ann” approach because writing and talking about her simply feeds her ego (about the only thing she eats by the look of things):
I have long been an advocate of ignoring her, but nobody seems willing to take me up on that idea. Can you imagine the epic depression that would engulf her if she made one of her pre-fab attacks and all she got was a collective yawn? What happens to the caricature when the audience disappears? A few cackles at a conservative conference isn’t going to satiate whatever drives her — the drive that forces her to hike up her skirt, drape her cleavage with a cross and insist repeatedly that she is a devout Christian as she spews her famous brand of hateful rhetoric. No, she needs the world to react to her.
I understand her point, but Coulter’s “jokes” are damaging to the conservative movement. I think it’s too important not to speak out. The movement is at the point where her bad, stand-up routine turns more people away than it brings in. I’m not going to let a scrawny, blond gasbag hijack a proud, thoughtful political tradition for a few yucks.
So I lean to Byrd with her post “Ann Coulter Doesn’t Speak For Me:”
I have cheered Ann Coulter in the past when I have agreed with her. I have also spoken out when I have disagreed with her. Any conservative who does not agree with her recent comments should speak out now, as loudly and forcefully as possible. Ann Coulter knows the power of words and she knows how closely all of her words are scrutinized. Those of us who have any kind of forum to speak on behalf of the conservative movement need to realize that our agreement, disagreement or silence will be scrutinized as well.
Conservatives are better than Coulter. It behooves us to speak out. If not we allow Coulter’s awful rhetoric to be conservatism’s voice while damaging our own credibility.
