Coulter Oblivious to Damage Done
Two days after Ann Coulter’s CPAC f-bomb and the responses continue to accumulate. Bryan Preston, now that he’s not running around the conference doing his Hot Air gig, gets to the damage Coulter’s words have:
There’s a great deal of political silliness and wishful thinking in that letter–it is a political money pitch for a third-place candidate, after all–but at its core it contains a message that’s likely to resonate. That message is, Republicans are just hateful, horrible people and you need to stop them (by giving us your money, now for the campaign, and in the future through taxes). True, Democrats always say that. But Miss Ann gave them a shred of evidence upon which to convict us all.
And, what’s the big headline coming out of CPAC? Is it that Josh Sparling won a much-deserved award? Is it that conservatives remain committed to the war for freedom against terrorism? Is it that this post-blowout CPAC was the largest CPAC ever? Was it that I got to be on a teevee show?
No. The headline coming out of CPAC is that Ann Coulter said an awful thing. Which is what she wants, since it’ll keep her profile up and help her sell books.
“It’s all about Ann. And that’s the problem,” he concludes.
Fausta, a credentialed CPAC weblogger like myself, decries the intellectual damage from Coulter:
Weak thinking is contagious because it’s easy. It’s a heck of a lot easier than looking at the world and trying to find out what is going on, and what the issues are.
One aspect of CPAC is all the college kids running around. Many idolize Coulter. Her lack of intellectual substance sets a poor example for those people to take back to their schools.
What was Coulter’s response to the anger and disappointment? Pure flippancy:
C’mon, it was a joke. I would never insult gays by suggesting that they are like John Edwards. That would be mean.
“G.O.P. Candidates Criticize Slur by Conservative Author”
But Miss Ann gave them a shred of evidence upon which to convict us all.
True, but from the looks of the clip, it looks like plenty of attendees provided some more evidence to the tune of laughter and applause. That shouldn’t be ignored either.
I understand that can be written off as “fringe right-wingers that don’t represent the majority of the party,” but concern that Coulter represents the majority of conservatives is the subject here, right?
Finally, Sean, if you’re going to take anything from this little Coulter dust-up, i’d ask you to consider this: whever you compose one of your posts that selectively samples quotes from fringe-lefties from kos or wherever to show how ridiculous liberal beliefs are, remember how Ann Coulter doesn’t represent you, and try to remember that the same shit happens over on the left.