Coulter Said What?

[BT]

This discussion is so gay.





Oh......

I mean in the "happy" sense , please don't send me to rehab.

Note to self: Prepare defense for Plane.

[Henny]

Isn't this the "drop the dixie chicks from the playlist" strategy?

I'm guessing it is somehow different. More noble perhaps.

It is probably more of an "advertisers and subscribers complained" thing... and money talks. Anyway, even when it happened to the Dixie Chicks I couldn't fault the system -- it gives the people their "voice."

[Universe Prince]

This discussion is so gay.





Oh......

I mean in the "happy" sense , please don't send me to rehab.

I'm sure to someone that was funny. It reminded me of something Michael Savage said about some sort of gay suicide group: "If they're so gay, why are they committing suicide?" Sorry, that just seems crass to me.

I'm sure someone will now tell me I have no sense of humor. I do have one actually. It's just not the same as yours apparently.

[domer]

"No sense of humor" covers the situation nicely. I, of course, would have been more circumspect: "This discussion is, shall we say, a pain in the ass."

[Stray Pooch]

If you express an opinion with which I disagree, you are subject to, umm, being subjected to my disagreement.  (There must have been an eloquent way of expressing that point, but it escaped me entirely.)

There is no "win" or "loss" associated with that unless it exists in yoiur own mind. 

This entire thread (and I note with dismay that it has gone on for over 100 posts with very little, if any, substantive debate) has been one of arguing semantics.  You argue with UP that you did not say that the first half of Coulter's statement was not related to the second.  Once again, technically you may be correct.  I haven't got the patience to look up the original quote.  But you certainly made the point that the phrases were not necessarily related.  Your protests to UP seem disingenuous.

How about this?  I will ask you some direct questions.

Did Ann Coulter intend to imply that Edwards was a "faggot?"

Was the phrase "I would say something about John Edwards, but . . ." related to the phrase "you can't say "faggot" without going into rehab."?

Do you approve of Ann Coulter's comments?

Do you approve of the word "faggot?"

My answers to these questions are: Yes, Yes, No and No respectively.

As to the rest of the issue, I am glad some papers are dropping Coulter's column.  I do not believe that doing so in any way violates her right to free speech.  It simply exercises those papers' right to editorial control over their own enterprises.  It is not necessary for a paper to subsidize offensive behavior, even if the offense is only in their own eyes.  This is, incidentally, one reason I condemn without qualification the so-called "fairness doctrine."  If I am ever the owner of a movie theater, I will not allow Michael Moore films to be shown there, though I may lose some money - and some patrons - over that choice.  Freedom of expression includes (foremost at that) freedom to criticize - which includes calling people faggots, trashing politicians or refusing to run columns in a newspaper.  But the first amendment only guarantees protection from legal reprisals (with limitations even on that).  It gives no protection - nor should it - from fiscal and social consequences of irresponsible speech.  So if the papers that drop Coulter's column lose some subscribers, that too is fair. 

I have exhausted my interested in Ad Hominem gnip-gnop or putting the "anal" in analysis. 

[Universe Prince]

"No sense of humor" covers the situation nicely. I, of course, would have been more circumspect: "This discussion is, shall we say, a pain in the ass."

Takes one to know one.

[hnumpah]

Ditto, kinda like this defending all the time this loser administration, when I've demonstrated my frequent opposition to many a policy and decision making.  So I'd appreciate it if you'd stop.  I thank you in advance

And I've told you, how many times now, that I was referring to Plane, and not to you?

Which is precisely my point.

Yeesh.

[BT]

Did Ann Coulter intend to imply that Edwards was a "faggot?"

I have no idea.

Was the phrase "I would say something about John Edwards, but . . ." related to the phrase "you can't say "faggot" without going into rehab."?

Not necessarily.

Do you approve of Ann Coulter's comments?

My approval isn't required. Nor is my disapproval. I do agree with her larger point that often rehab is used for purposes for which it wasn't intended.

Do you approve of the word "faggot?"

Faggot is a perfectly good word. Perhaps you are inquiring about its use? I don't use it often, if that is what you are asking.

[Stray Pooch]

So straight answers are lacking as well.  The first two points, being verbal shoulder shrugs, are indisputable.  But of course failing to take a stand either way simply means lacking a basis from which to make the judgement you make in point 3.   That is convoluted logic, but oh well.

But on point three you cop out.  I didn't ask if your approval was required.  I asked you to state your opinion directly.  Then on point four you again deflect.  I asked you if you approved of the use of the word "faggot."  In fairness, since I forgot we were in a semantics war, I should have asked if you approved of the word "faggot" when used as an insult meaning "gay" or having non-masculine characteristics.  If you used it to describe a cigarette or a burning piece of would, I would of course call that a perfectly good word.  But I did not ask how often you use it.  it was a pretty clear and straightforward question.

But again, no straight answers.  And it now occurs to me that THAT was an unintentional pun.

[Universe Prince]

But again, no straight answers.  And it now occurs to me that THAT was an unintentional pun.

See, now, that was funny.

[sirs]

Ditto, kinda like this defending all the time this loser administration, when I've demonstrated my frequent opposition to many a policy and decision making.  So I'd appreciate it if you'd stop.  I thank you in advance

And I've told you, how many times now, that I was referring to Plane, and not to you?

"Plane used to be able to see through all the BS and see that. Now he's just as partisan as, well, you are. I guess when you have to spend all your time defending a loser administration, you lose your objectivity."
 
Riiiiiiiiiight, whatever you say, H       

[hnumpah]

Riiiiiiiiiight, whatever you say, H

About what I figured. Bye, Sirs.

[sirs]

About what I figured.

Ditto

Bye, Sirs.

Bye H.  Have a safe trip, and don't be gone too long

[BT]

But on point three you cop out.  I didn't ask if your approval was required.  I asked you to state your opinion directly.

Why is that a cop out? You seem to think her statement was about Edwrads. I don't.
I think her statement was more about people hiding behind rehab, a point i agree with.

In fairness, since I forgot we were in a semantics war, I should have asked if you approved of the word "faggot" when used as an insult meaning "gay" or having non-masculine characteristics.

Faggot is a perfectly good word. So are nigger, bitch, spic and kike. I don't use them often.

But not because i disapprove of the words, i just don't think the use of those words enhance personal relations. I certainly don't think they should be banned. I don't think they  should be on some list that automatically double prison time because you are now guilty of hate.

[Stray Pooch]

Why is that a cop out? You seem to think her statement was about Edwrads. I don't.
I think her statement was more about people hiding behind rehab, a point i agree with.

It's a copout because I am asking you to take a stand and clearly state your personal opinion on the subject. You avoid doing so by saying "My approval is not required" or words to that effect.  I didn't say your approval was required, I just asked whether you approved. 

Faggot is a perfectly good word. So are nigger, bitch, spic and kike. I don't use them often. But not because i disapprove of the words, i just don't think the use of those words enhance personal relations. I certainly don't think they should be banned. I don't think they  should be on some list that automatically double prison time because you are now guilty of hate.

Neither do I, but 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.)

You have stated that such words do not "enhance personal relations."  In fact, as a good general rule they tend to offend most people.  Of course, when groups who have similar prejudices get together, their use may even enhance those relations.  But generally, reasonable people understand that these words are offensive and understand why.    If you do choose to use such language, you should expect disapproval.  If, as you have stated in this thread, you view such expressions of disapproval as a form of punishment, you ought to expect to be (by your definition) punished when you use such language.  In the case of this thread, of course, you have not used such language (except for purposes of legitmate debate on their own merit).  My criticisms of your posts is based on the merit of your arguments, not your choice of words.