| NYT | 0 | |
| Miami Herald | 0 | |
| Don Surber | 0 | |
| AP | 0 | |
| WaPo | Obama Urges Groups to Stop Attacks [on Dems who oppose ObamaCare] |
0 |
Audacity of Truth
"Change" You Can Believe In:
"Nixon didn’t try to do that. They couldn't control (the media). They didn’t try. [...] What the hell do they think we are, puppets?"
- Liberal opinion writer Helen Thomas, describing the Obama admin's penchant for heavily scripting public appearances & press conferences - 7/1/09
Conservative debate: when passion turns to poison
There are a lot of conservatives who have been long-time defenders of conservative columnist/author Ann Coulter. Yours truly stopped defending Ann about three years ago, when a fellow conservative helped me to realize that I couldn’t defend Ann Coulter’s increasingly inflammatory remarks while calling liberals to the carpet for similar remarks and still have any credibility on the issue of over-inflated, sometimes insulting and demeaning rhetoric. He was right.
That is not to say that I disagree with everything she says. In fact, I’ve read two of her books and in both found news stories she referenced and discussed both insightful and helpful in debates against liberals. What I dislike about Ms. Coulter’s style is her way of getting her point across. Armchair pundits across the political spectrum have complained for years about the demise in civilized debate and I’ve been among those who’ve wondered what happened to it, and whether or not this country can ever return to that style of debate. Conservatives like Ann Coulter do not help in that regard. In fact, the only thing she helps to do is to further poison the well of discussion already infused with the venom from others on both sides of the aisle who have chosen that same path.
It goes without saying that we are all passionate about our beliefs – heck, my remarks here about how I feel there are liberals like Sen. Jay Rockefeller who I think are undermining the war on terror should show anyone how passionately I feel regarding this bogus NSA ’scandal.’ However, there is a way to go about arguing in favor of your beliefs without throwing in over-the-top remarks about “ragheads” and whether or not you should have taken a “shot” at Bill Clinton when you supposedly had the chance . Whether joking or not it adds nothing to the debate and, in fact, detracts from it. When passionate debating over an issue turns poisonous, nobody wins. I will call to the carpet anyone on the left who engages in this style of the debate, as I will anyone on the right who does similarly. I think we all should.
Joe Gandelman nails it:
The problem is: she’s indicative of the rapid decline of issue-based political discourse in this country. Political opponents are described as evil enemies versus competitors with different ideas and approaches. It’s anti-PC that sells exceedingly well on radio and cable talk shows and on college campuses in particular — but people roaring in laughter at the undercurrent of zingers that jokingly suggest assassination is what’s troubling (and particularly because these same folks would be up in arms if someone such as Michael Moore suggested the same thing about people on their side).
Yep.
In closing, I’d like to repeat something I’ve said often at this blog in the past: this is not about whether or not someone has the right to say something; it’s about whether or not it is right to say. No matter if there are liberals out there who won’t hold other liberals accountable for their over-the-top hateful diatribes, we have to hold our own accountable. In my opinion, that is the right (no pun intended) thing to do.
Others commenting on this: Right Wing Nuthouse, Right Wing News, James Joyner, Jeff Harrell, Sean Hackbarth at The American Mind, Ed Driscoll, Ryan Sager, North American Patriot, Tom Bridge
RSS feed for comments on this post.
Trackbacks
58 Responses to “Conservative debate: when passion turns to poison”
Comments
Blogads
Disclaimer: The views expressed on this blog do not necessarily reflect those of ST's advertisers, nor do their opinions necessarily reflect ST's. Stats
Carl asks:
Well, of course we should! Since libs are so avidly gun control, they won’t know how to use one, and teh conservatives will have a huge victory!
You know, this is an interesting question: as is obvious from the other sites you’ve noted discussing this topic, several conservatives are concerned that One Of Our Own has gone off the deep end. The same type of thing can be found about Pat Robertson’s occasionally idiotic statements.
But where amongst the liberal blogosphere can we find a few of the lefties talking about people like Molly Ivins having said something that’s simply way stupid?
I have never been one to engage in the kind of schadenfreude that is currently passing for political debate. It is distasteful over at DU and it is even more so when Ann engages in it. More is the pity because she often makes some good points that get lost in her style. I am all for reflective respect in debate, that is showing the ammount of respect shown. Unfortunately Ann cuts herself out in the beginning as she all too often uses a Hauwitzer when a fly swatter would have dufficed. The result of too many death threats? Perhaps. Not everybody can respond to that as well as others.
That said, there is no excuse for wishing ill on those who disagree.
“dufficied” should have been “sufficed”
This thread has provided some serious discussion regarding an important issue. Some writers contributed insight and analysis; some brought vitriol and personal attack. All had a chance to voice an opinion -TO A LIMITED AUDIENCE THAT WANTS TO STUDY ISSUES.
There is a much larger group of people who do not examine issues yet freely voice their opinion. Ann Coutler gets that group’s attention.
It may be very informative to have a group of theologians compare and contrast religious beliefs, but the audience would probably fall asleep. While the public sleeps, politicians hesitate to act for fear of offending terrorists. Ann uses rhetorical skills to arouse the public and demand that action be taken. Those who pride themselves on obstructing government actions need to limit her speaking engagements.
I understand sand fuses into really good glass….(Big Bang Chronicles)
- Bang
I’m tired of Ann going over the edge. I deal with adolescents all day, so I want reason and intelligent expression. All this talk of liberals taking the low road is NOT relevant. Some idiots highjacked a funeral recently; does that mean that conservatives should be at liberty to do the same thing? There is a middleground between name-calling and using gushy euphemisms. Ann should be standing in that gap, especially when she’s addressing fellow conservatives.
- True to all of the above omapian. But you have to admit that when you’re trying to game the American public freedom of speech can be a real pain in the butt….
- Bang
Turban: n 1: a traditional Muslim headdress consisting of a long scarf wrapped around the head…Rag: A scrap of cloth…
Now, how was what Ann Coulter said such a “racist” comment @ CPAC?
I thought she was just pointing out the obvious.
- From the desk of the “Friendly advice man” -
- Try to stay away from hunting trips with the VP….
- Bang
Bang: Heheheeee! Notice, the victim was a lawyer. Is it legal to laugh at that?
Don’t care, laughing anyway!
ROFL!
- Well from the current reports he wasn’t seriously injured thankfully, apparently no serious wounds, but more like having his “feathers ruffled”, so I suppose its permissible to chuckle a bit, particularly when as one TV wag put it, “…The late night shows are certainly going to have a “field day” with this one…”… *Heh*
- Bang
Cheney proves just how warlike and violent the rightwing Christians are. See: Islamo-fascists. Peace
I’m trying to figure this out. I’m a very conservative Catholic conservative. I have been called so many utterly disgusting names as a Catholic that I can’t understand the big to do about “raghead”. Maybe I don’t know what it means? Turbin head, right? Why is that bad? I think Ann Coulter speaks like people think, and that’s why there’s a problem in this PC world.
I’m surprised to see people turn against her. I mean, Michelle Malkin said on her site that she refers to extremist muslims as murderers, bastards….. so what’s so wrong with “ragheads”? I must be missing something.
Stevie-wonder troll, hunting is not a war-like culture. Your broad stroke painting leave a trail of falsehoods and lies that just plain make what you say rediculous.
To equate what you say, is similiar to saying all Muslims are terrorists or all jews are bankers or all Democrats are idiots…..there is only a few not all.
Nice try though. No, not even a nice try.
- Amy I’m no expert but I think its a derogetary term, not racist. Something like when someone calls you a “fish eater” or a Jew a “heeb”. Derogetory names inflame people because they are direct attacks on you personally, generally inferring you are inferior in some way. In the case of Islamic Jahidists its unclear why anyone would see them as uncivilized or inferior just because they seem to still be living in the 5th century. Go figure…
- Bang
PC whining and the continued efforts in re-inventing words is about as close to a complete waste of time as we might ever get apart from showing videos to a sightless, earless aliens that clearly lack any abilities for a comprehensive discussion for the distinct purposes of understanding say—–anything. No Steve, this is not about you.
Imagine if you will, 200 years from now, some archeologist sifting through the history, comes across things like the current ongoing cartoon joke and in doing so, discovers the term “raghead”. Was this admittedly derogatory term the reason behind the massive war and why there aren’t any “ragheads” left to answer the question? Or is it because of the historical evidence of an extreme hate filled evil bunch of jerks, that hijacked the Islam faith and brought the ire of all true peace loving people down upon them like mosquitoes on warm sunny day in the swamps of Africa?
Seems to me the really important part of this story, and the part most commentators are missing, is not that Anee “A little local fascism is a good thing” Coulter says stuff like this, it’s that she gets applause, and even standing ovations, from her conservative audiences when she says them…
It’s nice to see a few bloggers finally deciding it’s time to distance themselves from Crazy Annie, but it’s hard to deny the popularity of her violent rhetoric within the conservative movement.
anne came to power as an answer to michael moore. although, i agree she does go way over the top, she is needed as a counterweight to barbara streisand, michael moore, al gore, john kerry, the list is just way too long on the left. but i am glad she is out there, giving the left a taste of thier own medicine.