March 5, 2007

The Word That Launched 100,000 Hits

"We're becoming a nation of whining, braying weenies on all sides of the political spectrum." -- Webutante

Left: What goes into your mouth can kill you.
Right: What comes out of your mouth can kill you.

"Dueling blondes," that's what you gotta think, as Anna Nicole is shipped off to be planted at last, and Anne Coulter is set-up to be planted real soon now.

Blogswarms are tedious at best, but the Coultergasm, at this point, is setting new records for tedium.

A google search of "ann coulter" faggot returns over 300,000 hits. Too many as usual for casual reading. Let's assign a Google-deflator of "take away two-thirds" for something like a realistic assessment and round down to 100,000 hits. That's probably a good measure of the frenzy that has whip-lashed both right and left bloggers these past few days. In a way, it really is like the blogosphere's version of the death of Anna Nicole, but with a less zaftig subject.

Unlike Anna Nicole's corpse, however, the almost universal right-left-center desire to turn Ann Coulter's career into a corpse is a teaching moment. It establishes, once and for all, that gay Americans have reached parity with African-Americans. The F-Word is now "right out"
along with the N-Word. Unless, of course, you are a member of either or both the two groups. In that case, its okay if you wish to signify your affiliation(s).

OK, lesson learned. No F-Word. Check and double-check. Oops, wait a minute. That's ambiguous. The classic F-Word is still "in," as can be seen on any number of blogs -- right, left, center, and porn. It is the New F-Word that is out. Errr, sorry, bad formulation. Didn't mean to say "out." Humm, okay, try "Unless gay, no 'FA-word' (pronounced eff-aay word ) ever." Clumsy, but it will have to do.

There. I think I've got the new speech code rule down. After all, it is important, DAMNED IMPORTANT!, to keep track of what you cannot say in America when exercising your right to (almost)Free Speech. By tracking which words are forbidden to all (except to those in the group to which they refer), it becomes ever easier to condemn and seek to destroy anyone who violates the Sacred Speech Codes of the New American First Universalist Secular Church of Agnostic Atheists.

Please do not be concerned that, as Orwell noted, one of the first steps in controlling minds is controlling the language. That's not important anymore. Feelings are more important than freedom. Certainly you've learned that by now. Haven't you?

If you haven't you still need to get it and there is now no shortage of people from all sides of the political spectrum who will be more than glad to give it to you. We cannot, after all, have a society in which people are encouraged to say what they think. Can we? That would make for actual frank discussions, rather than the phony discussions in which feelings always trump frankness. Frankness and speaking your real mind are not important any longer.

What is important is that YOU get it (Whatever it happens to be this week.), and behave accordingly. This is what the hive-mind wants and you will comply. You see, what we're working on here is the importation of current high-school discussion group rules into adult society. Self-esteem and empathy guide these exchanges as they should shape ours. Under no circumstances should our real thoughts be spoken lest they curdle the pap. Got it?

I got it. I hope you've got it too. Ann's got it I'm sure. And at the rate the FA-word hysteria is spiraling out of control, in a few more days every American will get it. With the exception of Anna Nicole Smith. What's wrong with that blonde anyway?

Posted by Vanderleun at March 5, 2007 9:24 AM
Bookmark and Share



"It is impossible to speak in such a way that you cannot be misunderstood." -- Karl Popper N.B.: Comments are moderated and may not appear immediately. Comments that exceed the obscenity or stupidity limits will be either edited or expunged.

More proof that Ann really isn't the sharpest knife in the shed...(see video)

Posted by: Minor Ripper at March 5, 2007 10:51 AM

Well, Orwell had an interesting essay entitled "Politics and the English Language" which always useful to revisit.

And, really, Coulter's comment was pointless name calling. It just gave more attention to Edwards than he deserves, and now generates sympathy.

Way to go, Ann.

Posted by: Eric Blair at March 5, 2007 11:18 AM

Gerard, I have no objection to Coulter spewing out whatever she wants to spew. What I object to is her doing it at that venue.

Posted by: Fausta at March 5, 2007 11:19 AM

Thanks for that, Gerard. I was beginning to think I had been transported to some bizzarro universe where conservatives hate free speech, too.

Posted by: Joe at March 5, 2007 11:23 AM

Fausta, I understand your frustration because it was like handing some grenades to your enemies and telling them to chuck them back in. Still, the stepping it back to the venue doesn't quite satisfy the overall point. When you invite someone to speak, they speak. I've seen the stuff about "We warned CPAC" and the letter writing campaign to CPAC saying "Never Again." All fine and all good and all as it should be. Still, it is not my central point. In a way, Coulter here is quite beside the point. Still the Edwards campaign does seem to be getting both the left and the right into the barrel by turns doesn't it?

Posted by: Gerard Van der Leun at March 5, 2007 11:33 AM

I have been rereading GK Chesterton lately, and this post smacks of his biting wit. We could use another Chesterton these days, but a Van Der Leun will do.

Posted by: DB at March 5, 2007 11:50 AM

Because we commonly accept the eternal drifting stupidity of mankind, one derogatory term will never, ever be politically incorrect. Understandable discourse could not stand its absence:


And as a lifetime member of that club, let me thank you all for your consistent and profitable stereotyping. Ann is no doubt laughing all the way to the bank. Hit count payments alone on this non-issue will keep her in Jimmy Choos forever. For the clueless among you, Ann will tone down her language and turn to some other form of outrage precisely 60 seconds before the maximum profit opportunity for doing so. And 60 seconds before any real damage is done to her career.

Let's be practical, shall we? When gays can laugh at "faggot" and blacks can laugh at "nigger" the way Ann laughs at "blonde", our race and sexual identity problems will be over. And it's never going to happen unless the rest of us, like tough-love parents of a willful child, insist on it.

Straight white Christian males cheerfully accept a hurricane of discrimination, abuse, name-calling and smears every day; and yep, they're the better for it. It's time to expect other minorities to toe the mark.

Jihadists want to kill us all and, by Gerard's count, 100,000 people waste their time obsessing over the use of naughty words in a holy place. Mr. Blair would indeed be unsurprised.

If you listen closely, from behind the "cornsilk curtain" you will hear the soft giggling of the voluntarily underestimated. On the blonde scale, which is in fact the strictest code of all, the only technical error Ann committed was to generate a very small amount of sympathy for Edwards among the terminally weepy and the perpetually outraged. And who cares about them, anyway? If they were a majority, Mr. Ketsup would be president now.

I give Ann a 9.8 for this one. Well played, Ann!

Posted by: askmom at March 5, 2007 11:53 AM

Under no circumstances should our real thoughts be spoken lest they curdle the pap
Our real thoughts should be spoken, for sure, and I'm certainly doing my part.

From the bloggers' point of view (speaking as one who was there and first thought I'd heard wrong when she said it), here's the situation:
The blonde uses the venue to make it all about "me, me, me!"
While at the same time, there plenty of speakers who did have a lot to say, among them John Bolton, who go totally ignored.
That's why I joined in the Open Letter.

Let the blonde speak her real thoughts everywhere she wants, and make as much money as she possibly can. But find someone else for the podium at a major political convention.

Spoken as a brunette,

Posted by: Fausta at March 5, 2007 11:58 AM

Well, okay. No disagreement there. But certainly the organizing committee at the conference had some idea what they might get by making Coulter a speaker, correct? And it is equally certain that having Coulter as a speaker was widely thought of to be a "draw" for the conference too, correct? And given the conference and the blonde in question it cannot be a surprise that what was said would be all about "me." Correct?

Anyway, this is all much of a muchness of which there has been already much too much.

And again, the pain and suffering of the Right after they were forced to fall on Coulter's grenade, is not to the point of the post.

Posted by: Gerard Van der Leun at March 5, 2007 12:30 PM

"Anyway, this is all much of a muchness of which there has been already much too much."

...ado about hilarious!

Posted by: stevesh at March 5, 2007 1:15 PM

Am I the only former history major old enough to remember when faggots were items used to burn people at the stake? (Yes, I know that's an ironic association in the present context).

Posted by: Connecticut Yankee at March 5, 2007 4:25 PM

I couldn't agree with you more. And as nice as Fausta is, I think she exhibits a lack of understanding of the First Amendment.

I was trained as a reporter many years ago by a bman who later founded the First Amendment Center. If he taught me one thing, it was how few people truly understand the FA....(as in First Amendment. Any referece to FA..ggot is purely intentional.)

Anyway, he taught me that people really demonstrate how little they understand the FA when something comes along like Ann's remark at CPAC last weekend. People collapse in hysterical horror at such unmitigated free speech demanding retractions, apologies, resignations etc, rather than just walking away, not buying the book, turning to another channel or turning down the sound.

Whether she should have said it in that venue is a totally separate issue. Fact is, she did say it. Frankly, I find sometimes find Ann over the top and therefore don't pay as much attention to her as a result.

But evidently many others do and give her great power.

I was actually rather shocked by Michelle Malkin's interview with Sean Hannity today telling him Ann would have offended her children, had she brought them and implying, therefore, that Ann shouldn't have said it. Come on. This was a grown-ups conference and didn't need to be child-proofed.

Anyway, what is it with our culture? Are we in a giant regression? Why do we give so much of our power away so quickly to things outside of ourselves that displease us? Why let ourselves be increasingly controlled by the slightest infraction? We're becoming a nation of whining, braying weenies on all sides of the political spectrum.

I honestly think politcal correctness may be the death of this country yet, probably posing a greater threat than Islam.

Finally, once upon a time, I had a piece of politcal art work--a multi-media collage-- censored in an environmental art show Jackson, Wyoming. Anyway, a very famous movie star's sister saw it at the patron preview party and demanded the executive director take it down, as it stepped on the toes of some of her good friends and drinking buddies whom she said would be offended. On the spot, he weanied out and obeyed her commands for political correctness (even though he had told me earlier it was his favorite piece in the this time I was on another continent.)

Anyway when this all came to light and the newspapers called, I gave the following quote, something to the effect: "This organization has the right to censor or reject my art work for good reason, or for no reason at all. It's their First Amendment right, though I question their decision. However, it is also my FA right to find a venue that will show my art so that anyone who wants to see and bid on it can.

Of course, it was the talk of the town and shown in a studio where many more people saw it than would have otherwise. And a copy of it ran on the second page of the newspaper. I got offered much more money than I ever dreamed possible. I gave the profits to another organization and a good time was had by all.

I should have donated a portion to the FA Center.

God bless America and those who still have the poor taste to offend us and show us what grand freedoms we must be eternally vigilant about.

If this is too long, you know, use your FA scroll and delete keys.

Posted by: Webutante at March 5, 2007 5:23 PM

"We're becoming a nation of whining, braying weenies on all sides of the political spectrum."

Has been promoted to the top of the post.

Posted by: Gerard Van der Leun at March 5, 2007 5:37 PM

You said it for me too, Webutante. And no one with a particle of wisdom and a few minutes to spare would scroll past your posts. You're always worth reading and getting better all the time.

Very well done indeed.

Posted by: askmom at March 5, 2007 5:54 PM

Golly gee..... Thanks Mom.

And remember: The First Amendment doesn't guarantee we'll never be offended....rather it assures us we most certainly will.

Bring it on.

Are we as a country Man enough for the First Amendment anymore?

Posted by: Webutante at March 5, 2007 7:06 PM

Now it's the venue. Free speech, don,t make me laugh. The RIGHT what a bunch of moroons as Bugs Bunny would say.

Posted by: jeffersonranch at March 6, 2007 6:42 AM

"We're becoming a nation of whining, braying weenies on all sides of the political spectrum."

We are ALL faggots now.

Posted by: I'm Not Here at March 6, 2007 7:58 PM

This was unexpected?

If you don't want political theater, don't invite David Horowitz.

If you don't want over-the-top rhetoric, don't invite Ann Coulter.

The funny thing about both of them is that they use two of the time-tested weapons of the Left against the left, and it drives them right out of their little collectivist minds.

Posted by: Yanni Znaio at March 7, 2007 7:14 AM

Thank you for not joining that shameful bunch of cowards who sent that embarrassing letter while masquerading as "conservatives", accepting the left's definition of speech.

One of these days the right will understand that we have been losing the culture wars for quite some time and that while we may not agree with the left's goals their methods of fighting work very well. I propose that we adopt their methods to our principals...

Just as I am willing to forgo my morality to administer torture to the enemy so that we can win the war and my children not face the war. I am willing to adopt the odious tactics of the left to finally win the war of culture so that my children will not be slaves to the idiocy that defines the left.

While in games it is ok to say that it is not whether you win or lose that matters, it is how you play the game. In war it isn't how you play the game that matters, but whether you win or lose. We are at war with the left....Coulter is one of our shock troops. I denounce those who denounce her.

Posted by: Pierre at March 7, 2007 6:19 PM

I am grateful for another engaging story it absolutely was a delight to read.

Brian Garcia
honeywell 50250

Posted by: John at August 12, 2010 1:52 AM