Coulter Said What?

[Plane]

It was a nasty, bigoted, pejorative thing to say regardless of whether or not it was structured as a joke.


[][[]][][][]][][][]][]

Ok , I can't argue that Ann Colter has earned any reputation or refinemnt and gentleness.

But if she deserved praise for her manners how would she play in the league she belongs to?

[Plane]

But you are not clear on my thoughts because you are makeing assumptions.

No, that is not at all true. I am not clear on your thoughts because you have not answered my questions. I have been forced to make deductions based on what you have been stating as your positions. If my deductions are incorrect, then you have been lying to me. In any case, your replies have grown increasingly nonsensical and have made apparent that you are not willing to engage in a rational exchange. If you're going to play some sort of guessing game about what you really mean, then we're done. You win. You wore me down with asininity. I'm out of patience. Congratulations.

Ah no , I am not trying to ruin your mood  , nor are my answers actually evasive , they just did not fit the template you expected.

This would all be  lot easyer if you had understood the questions you were asking.

[Plane]

Wow. I am astounded by the last few posts.    Plane, tell me you're kidding here. 

First tell me who is he exact opposition counterpart to Ann Colter.


Then I will decide whether I am kidding.

Takes a litte thinking doesn't it?

[Plane]

 I probably would not have said anything in this thread, except that I was struck by the absurdity of the suggestion that the phrase "but it turns out that you have to go into rehab if you use the word 'faggot,'" was somehow completely unrelated to the rest of the sentence.

Hmmmmmmmm......

I never considered his point to be central , tho I can't speak for BT , I agree that the two parts of the sentence conjoined with "but" are directly related , I disagree that this is important to the meaning or the joke.

The second part of the statment is a change in direction , a reveiling of an unepected idea , a surprise .

This is a common comedic tecnique.

The use of "Faggot" by Colter set up her punhline in a very simular way to Stray Pooch using the N word o set up his point.


Stray Pooch , I hope you undrstand, was not actually speaking to or about "Naggars".

[Stray Pooch]

Yes I was speaking about naggers.

It was a deliberate and pointed reference to a joke from an episode of South Park where a character was on Wheel of Fortune and had the word N [blank] GGERS with the clue "People who annoy you."  He gave the vulgar answer and Vanna - shocked - turned over the letter A.

Further, my use of the "N" word was in no way similar to Coulter's use of the "F" word.

[Lanya]

Plane,
I give up.  I can't think of anyone who is Ann Coulter's opposite.  None who have columns in about 100 newspapers a week (well, she lost  7 at last count), who is asked on to major "news" shows and who is a darling of his/her party's rank and file.  None who are as vile, as nasty, as full of lies as she is.
No one has called for people in the audience to come and beat up hecklers. No one who has wished that the 9/11 attacks had also taken out the NYTimes (if I recall rightly). No one who's "joked" that maybe someone should go poison one of the Supremes' creme brulees.  None who called the widows of some 9/11 victims horrible names. 

Nope, can't match you  guys on that kind of stuff.   

[Plane]

Plane,
I give up.  I can't think of anyone who is Ann Coulter's opposite.  None who have columns in about 100 newspapers a week (well, she lost  7 at last count), who is asked on to major "news" shows and who is a darling of his/her party's rank and file.  None who are as vile, as nasty, as full of lies as she is.
No one has called for people in the audience to come and beat up hecklers. No one who has wished that the 9/11 attacks had also taken out the NYTimes (if I recall rightly). No one who's "joked" that maybe someone should go poison one of the Supremes' creme brulees.  None who called the widows of some 9/11 victims horrible names. 

Nope, can't match you  guys on that kind of stuff.   

Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!

We win!

[Plane]

I still disapprove of the use of such words.  I have never said that someone who uses such language should be subjected to legal action.  I have said, however, that people who DO use such language ought to be criticized and must deal with the consequence of their offensive behavior.   I believe people have been banned from this website for being offensive.  I know we have used many "bad" words (like the big, bad F) here but there is a limit - however arbitrary - to how much a poster can get away with.  If I started posting topics like "N*GGERS ARE THE CAUSE OF THE DOWNFALL OF AMERICA!" I am sure I would be invited out without much delay.  (Though frankly, I never did like NAGGERS.)

..........................................................

Yes I was speaking about naggers.

It was a deliberate and pointed reference to a joke from an episode of South Park where a character was on Wheel of Fortune and had the word N [blank] GGERS with the clue "People who annoy you."  He gave the vulgar answer and Vanna - shocked - turned over the letter A.

Further, my use of the "N" word was in no way similar to Coulter's use of the "F" word.

No no ... let me tell you what you were talking about.

You were speaking of words  , their meaning and their consequences.

The little tale of Naggars was not central to your theme, it was illistrative of the larger idea.

Should Naggars all round the world be offended in me untill I apply opprbrium to you ?


By the way Pooch, ticking off a minority is bad enough , you might be takeing on a majority with this .

[Plane]

Borrowing this from Sirs .




 As summed up by the distinguished social scientist who writes humor columns under the name of Dave Barry, residents of Red states are "ignorant racist fascist knuckle-dragging Nascar-obsessed cousin-marrying road-kill-eating tobacco-juice-dribbling gun-fondling religious fanatic rednecks," while Blue-state residents are "godless unpatriotic pierced-nose Volvo-driving France-loving leftwing Communist latte-sucking tofu-chomping holistic-wacko neurotic vegan weenie perverts."



All right, although Dave Barry is a genius , should we cut him this much slack?

[Universe Prince]

This would all be  lot easyer if you had understood the questions you were asking.

I understood them just fine. They were my questions, after all. And yes, your answers were actually evasive. I'm not a sage, but I'm not a moron either. I'm sure you thought you were making a point, but you were not answering my questions. And please don't start telling me that I didn't know what I was asking. I'm not stupid. I know exactly what I was asking. I asked straightforward questions. You pissed around, and now you're telling Pooch and me that we didn't know what we were saying. You're either high or more sanctimonious than I ever gave you credit for being. Either way, I'm done. You win. I refuse to keep correcting your asinine, bull---- assumptions about what I mean, and I refuse to continue pointing out to you that the offense in Coulter's comment is not in its parts, but in its mean-spirited sum, its pejorative meaning. You win. I concede that you can keep disgorging more nonsense than I have patience to counter. Your subtle and enlightened wisdom in defending vile and loathsome bigotry as a humanizing force for mankind is beyond my ken. You win. I hope you're duly proud of yourself.

[Plane]

This would all be  lot easyer if you had understood the questions you were asking.

I understood them just fine. They were my questions, after all. And yes, your answers were actually evasive. I'm not a sage, but I'm not a moron either. I'm sure you thought you were making a point, but you were not answering my questions. And please don't start telling me that I didn't know what I was asking. I'm not stupid. I know exactly what I was asking. I asked straightforward questions. You pissed around, and now you're telling Pooch and me that we didn't know what we were saying. You're either high or more sanctimonious than I ever gave you credit for being. Either way, I'm done. You win. I refuse to keep correcting your asinine, bull---- assumptions about what I mean, and I refuse to continue pointing out to you that the offense in Coulter's comment is not in its parts, but in its mean-spirited sum, its pejorative meaning. You win. I concede that you can keep disgorging more nonsense than I have patience to counter. Your subtle and enlightened wisdom in defending vile and loathsome bigotry as a humanizing force for mankind is beyond my ken. You win. I hope you're duly proud of yourself.

If the offense is in the sum and not the parts , then why the emphasis on the word "faggot"?

With this single word replaced by one you liked better he offense would be entirely gone wouldn't it?


Please be paitent with me , I am not trying to frustrate you , I just think you are not accustomed to being so wrong.

If you ask me what are the limits I set , I have a practctly Zero Zero tolerance , I try not to cause or receive offense I would not use a word like this myself nor take umbrage when someone elese used it. I am still not sure that this answers your question , but in the terms you ask it is very hard to apply it to myself.

[Universe Prince]

If the offense is in the sum and not the parts , then why the emphasis on the word "faggot"?

The emphasis from beginning has been on the meaning of the entire sentence. This is something you have apparently not comprehended despite the fact that I have said it many times over. I've explained the why before, but I don't intend to do so again.

With this single word replaced by one you liked better he offense would be entirely gone wouldn't it?

It might be lessened, but no, it would not be entirely gone. If you think it would, then I suggest you have not understood both the sentence and my criticism of it.

Please be paitent with me , I am not trying to frustrate you , I just think you are not accustomed to being so wrong.

Adult male bovine excrement. You have had plenty of opportunity to explain why I am wrong and to answer my straightforward questions. You have done neither. In lieu of proving me wrong and answering questions, you danced around with comments and examples that had little if anything to do with my complaint about Coulter's comment. You've made entirely wrong statements about my position and suggested I was too ignorant and/or too stupid to understand my own questions. My patience is near the end of its limit. I have just enough left to finish this post.

If you ask me what are the limits I set , I have a practctly Zero Zero tolerance , I try not to cause or receive offense I would not use a word like this myself nor take umbrage when someone elese used it. I am still not sure that this answers your question , but in the terms you ask it is very hard to apply it to myself.

Very hard to apply? Either there is something Coulter would say that would offend you or there is not. My question was not esoteric or technical or subtle. It was a simple, straightforward question. If there is nothing she could say that you would consider worth of opprobrium then that is all you had to say. How could that be hard? If it was hard, perhaps it was so because you, not me, kept focusing on the word 'faggot' as if somehow the issue was whether or not 'faggot' was an insult to homosexuals. In any case, your pseudo-Socratic attempts to trick me into agreeing with you so you could show me the error of my ways was okay at first, but more recently it became insulting. I realize I don't get a lot of respect here because I'm one of those crazy libertarian guys who supposedly doesn't understand how the world "really" works, but I'm not a moron. I know how words and grammar work. I know what a pejorative statement looks like. I've dealt with enough English language in my years to have more than a clue as to what I'm talking about. If you expect to convince me I'm wrong, then address what I say. If you can't address what I say, don't ever expect to convince me that I'm wrong.

And I have to say that if you cannot grasp the basic, straightforward meaning of what I say, then I cannot see any reason to believe that you have some how grokked the supposedly subtle meaning of what Coulter said.

That's all. I'm done.

[Stray Pooch]

No no ... let me tell you what you were talking about.

No no, unless your name is Jesus Christ, I will go ahead and retain ownership of my thoughts.

You were speaking of words  , their meaning and their consequences.

The little tale of Naggars was not central to your theme, it was illistrative of the larger idea.

Should Naggars all round the world be offended in me untill I apply opprbrium to you ?


By the way Pooch, ticking off a minority is bad enough , you might be takeing on a majority with this .

No, I am sure that naggees are in the majority. 

Nevertheless, you are right to say that the "naggers" joke was a spot of humor in an otherwise larger context.  But I did not, at any time, use the word nigger (or nagger, for that matter) in a perjorative fashion - like Ann Coulter did.

Your analysis of Coulter's comments is incorrect.  As such, to compare my comments (which you also misinterpret) to them is unfounded.

I'd argue with you more, but using the phrase "blithering idiot" might offend you.

[domer]

Scintillating discussion, chaps.

[Stray Pooch]

Nope, can't match you  guys on that kind of stuff.   

Yeah.  The left never had anyone who said he would like to see a million Mogadishus.  The left never had a Hollywood moron call for the killing of a Congressman's children.  The left isn't planning to take away the rights of workers to have a secret ballot in union votes or for people to express their opinion on radio or TV without having to create some sort of false "balance"  (thereby forcing those who make money to lose money by wasting airtime on something nobody wants to hear or sponsor).  

Al Franken is another Ann Coulter. He spits as much vitriol as she ever did. Jimmy Carter is another Ann Coulter.  His own staff has been quitting over his antisemetic stance.  Hillary Clinton is another Ann Coulter - with power, which makes her far more dangerous.  

You can match us.  You just can't see the crap on your own side.  While we're talking about criticizing Coulter, when do YOU ever criticize anyone on the left?