Maybe she got Edwards confused with the ex-governor of NJ (McGreevy?) with an ex male mossad agent lover, and ex wife, and has written his ex pose confession and went on ex slim Oprah.  Or perhaps she just read Edward’s support bloggers who tend to be left wing bigots.  In any case politics has become to absurd to be sarcastic about as reality is far worse than anything even the most creative people can imagine (unless they are engaging in it at the time).

However one of the most memorable lines from one of Anne’s books - and I think it was Slander is where she intersperses “But were there communists working in the US Government” interleaved with excuses.  However the repackaged and relabeled Trotskyites currently in the highest levels are still communists, but I guess if you support Israeli atrocities and commit your own against muslims, arabs, persians, pashtuns, whomever, you get a pass.  But aren’t there (trotskyite) communists working in the US Government Ann?

As far as the GOP, please do, “Out em all, and let God sort it out”.  Or the right wing christians will swoop in like other chickenhawks and do God’s work.  We need a Grand Old Purgative.

Remember, when they are in an internecine war, they will have less time to engage in real war.

Mentioning Coulter and Paris Hilton at the beginning of your piece made me imagine “a more fitting symbol of the Right’s sad degeneration” - Coulter porn.

The last sentence in the article says it all.  It’s difficult to say which is more creepy - Ann Coulter or the fact that there are people who consider her incisive, witty, and even (I’m not making this up) beautiful.

Sorry, but it was the National Review conservative poseurs and the other
neocon ilk who neoconned us into this idiotic, Wilsonian war. Make
the middle east “democratic”?  Sure.  Hold your breath. Russell Kirk
served his purpose but I still prefer Whittaker Chambers.  And I am never
going to get too sensitive about the sensibilities of sodomites.
As if an “insensitive” remark is all it takes to lose all that
Tweedledum has gained in the last six years. Perhaps a bit more reading
and a couple of balls are in order.  Cheers.

And recall Bill Buckley calling Gore Vidal a ‘queer’ in response to Vidal’s having called him a ‘crypto-Nazi?”

“Now listen, you queer,” Buckley said, “stop calling me a crypto-Nazi or I’ll sock you in you goddamn face and you’ll stay plastered.”

Ah, live television back in 1964.

More exciting than Ann Coulter’s rather mild insinuation.

Justin, please--somehow get to the masses--perhaps, MSNBC will spot you, I’m sure. Indeed, Ann’s sassy BS is enough to turn a homophobe’s ambitions deep south. In her defense, however, I felt she was taking a shot at the deep left’s inability to tolerate spicy, free speach for which so many orators find themselves obliged to check-in to a growing array of rehab facilities upon having spoken. Humm..."Gaydar", she’s a blip on my screen.

To Mike Williams: if Coulter wanted to criticize the left’s unwillingness to tolerate “spicy, free speech”, then her use of the word “faggot” was a squalid cop-out. She would have made the point much better if she had said “nigger”.

All the drama and importance as when Captain Lou Albano called Cyndi Lauper a “Broad” on TV prior to Wrestlemania. At least that was entertaining and led to a great women’s match later on!

I really hope she does’nt have kids… for their sake and ours

Hopefully, people like her will hasten the neocon’s demise- their desperation seems to be increasing as the world wakes up to them. They may be stupid, but they remain dangerous.

Jesus, Mark, She’d be forced by intervention into the Sharpton wing at Betty Ford.

As Mike Williams points out, if instead of calling John Edwards a faggot, Coulter had called Barack Obama a nigger, “She’d be forced by intervention into the Sharpton wing at Betty Ford.” Right. So, fearing that fate, she chose to say “faggot” instead of “nigger”, anticipating that the consequences for herself would be milder. That is why I am not particularly impressed by the courage she has displayed in defence of “spicy, free speech”.

Justin,

Sorry to read your obvious attack on Coulter.

Now you, Jonah Goldberg, Neo-con Hugh Hewitt,
and every liberal writer in the world can agree,
Ann Coulter is terrible and should be banned.

Good to know our elites can agree on something be
besides the goodness of illegal immigration &
unconditional support for Israel.

Sticks and Stones”

Editorial license notwithstanding, some of the things we “choose” to say might better be structured in deference to those whom we may only alienate--our goal being to make our opinions more appealing to all, inclusively. In this vein, we highlight the absurdity of labeling and criminalizing various usage of language or thought which the power-brokers themselves have promulgated especially for the purpose of further alienating specific groups, i.e., “Divide and conquer”.

And if public thought is to be regulated, shouldn’t we also have a sort of “equal time” amendment requiring television, publishing houses, government, etc., to neither protect nor portray any one group as more a perpetrator or victim of deed, word or thought over another? 

Miss Coulter’s chosen example, homosexuals, is indeed, a softer variety target but she deftly succeeds in highlighting a decidedly discriminating hierarchy of protection afforded chosen groups, both majority and minority. It’s fairly easy to predict how the media-nurtured masses will react to these otherwise mundane verbal flares.

As a child, you were taught, “Sticks and stones may break bones but names will never hurt”. That was before you went to law school. As far as perpetuating the hierarchical “war between the victims”, we may only have ourselves to blame.

Mark Marshall writes:
As Mike Williams points out, if instead of calling John Edwards a faggot, Coulter had called Barack Obama a nigger, “She’d be forced by intervention into the Sharpton wing at Betty Ford.” Right. So, fearing that fate, she chose to say “faggot” instead of “nigger”, anticipating that the consequences for herself would be milder. That is why I am not particularly impressed by the courage she has displayed in defence of “spicy, free speech”.

Methinks that if John Edwards really were a homosexual that Miss Coulter would not be entertaining the thought of calling him a “faggot” in public. Has she ever used the word to describe Barney Frank? So, in that sense, calling John Edwards a “faggot” (something he is not) cannot be compared to calling Barack Obama a “nigger.” Still, I think you are right that “faggot” is more acceptable—at least among political commentators—than “nigger” or even (say) “mulatto.”

If Edwards has any sense he’ll respond by carrying a torch on stage when he gives his first Presidential campaign speech, while playing the (Canadian comedy troupe) “Kids In The Hall” song titled “Running Faggot” as his fanfare.

I really believe that Coulter has a future in a John Water’s film.  And I mean that as a compliment!