2.14.06 @ 12:02AM
NOT YOUR FATHER’S CONSERVATIVE
Re: David Hogberg’s Not Funny:
Thank you David Hogberg for saying what has long needed to be said about Ann Coulter from the conservative perspective. I have spent my whole life as a conservative living down the presumption of many liberals that all conservatives are insane racists. I have watched the left fall from dominating Washington to minority status, in no small part because they lost the ability to make cogent arguments and could only resort to abuse. The last thing conservatives need to do is to follow the same path, or to give liberals fodder for their cheap shots.
To those who think there’s something macho about Coulter’s
antics: Ronald Reagan never said things like that. Neither did
Barry Goldwater. Neither did Jim Buckley. They used ideas and facts
to fight. And they weren’t exactly wimps.
— Paul Windels III
Scarsdale, New York
Long live Ann Coulter!! Who is this Hogberg, anyways?
— Jack Hughes
You missed the important part of Coulter’s remark, which was “after 9/11.”
I understand your point, but I am not sure you understand Ann Coulter’s. When you are in a fight for your life — which we are — you have to be careful about being too polite to your enemy. Politesse can look very much like cravenness.
How is the U.S. referred to by our enemies? The Great Satan. Just how polite should we be about that? They call the Jews monkeys. How polite should we be about that? Coulter is making the point that you shouldn’t be too polite when dealing with a bully because anything other than a punch in the nose is taken as weakness.
Ahmadinejad has said in public that Israel should be wiped off the face of the earth. And he holds high office; he is not a commentator like Coulter. How polite should we be about that?
Coulter is, I think, making a point about attitude. She pushes the envelope just in case politesse is REALLY cravenness, as, for instance, it seems to be in a lot of the Western press in the Danish cartoon affair. Most papers in the US are too delicate to publish the Danish cartoons but were not, for instance, too delicate to publish the Abu Ghraib pictures. Why do you think that was? Because they KNOW that Bush is NOT Hitler; and whatever they may SAY, that there is NO CHANCE of a midnight knock on the door. But the chance of being accosted in the street by a knife-wielding fanatic? Hmmmm….that could ruin your whole day. We don’t want to be THAT provocative.
Coulter is making THAT point. And I think you missed it.
— Greg Richards
David Hogberg: Chill. Sentient Republicans know that RagHead =
[M]uslim. Further, that Islam is not a race; but an ideology. So
chill. Laugh a little. Insult a Muslim — to his face. We’re going
to deport all of them.
I cannot help but recall a passage from the memoirs of G.M. Fraser’s historical-fiction rapscallion, Flashman:
“… but what should I call them [natives], grampa?”
” Anything you like, my boy, it’s nothing to what
they’ll call you.”
— Martin Owens
Perhaps because of the venue, Ann Coulter should have elevated her rhetoric. But in general, I share her sentiments.
We spend a little too much effort on being sensitive because some “nice Muslims” might get their feelings hurt. But you should think about the following.
Most Muslims are:
-Anti everybody else (Christians, Hindusï¿½.)
-Hate the West
-Sympathize with the radicals
Islam is the main source of turmoil and terror in the world today.
Given all of this, I think that “rag head” is a rather mild appellation. Caricatures are naturally crude and perhaps not always technically accurate. They mean to insult. But one must make generalizations if a discussion is to go anywhere. Western societies have been so sensitized to racism that to a degree they self-censor for fear of offending. The reality is that behavior (sometimes very bad behavior) does occur along broad ethnic and racial lines and it should not be denied.
Ann Coulter was separated from NRO because of her “intemperate” reaction to the events of 9/11 (“kill their leaders and convert them to Christianity”). For my money, I find her reaction more appealing than the house broken milquetoast introspective philosophizing we are getting lately.
I am a big fan of the Spectator (love Emmett Tyrrell)
and shall continue to be.
— Imre Kiss, Jr.
I just love Ann Coulter, I also wish she hadn’t used the rag head
remark last weekend. It sure seems to me that David Hogberg is
correct. Ms. Coulter is clearly smart enough to know it. Incredible
frustration at the lunacy of these violent Islamofascists
notwithstanding that remark is indeed “Low hanging fruit” for the
lefties. BUT, the other reference to her speech is truly funny, it
seems to me, and when it comes to humor it has what it takes to be
humorous and points the attention back to Ms. Coulter not to the
former president. That said, it sure sounds like a bit more time
could have been spent on her presentation and consideration of the
remarks she prepared to make. That’s my two cents worth.
— Roger Ross
I take it that The American Spectator will no longer
complain about cowardice and hypocritical support of free speech in
the MSM’s failure to publish the Danish cartoons. If you can’t get
the MSM to challenge the “sensibilities” of Muslims who want to
impose sharia on the rest of the world, now you want to make sure
that no conservative should either? What a bunch of wimps.
— John Gridley
Sioux Falls, South Dakota
David, get over it. Coulter is right on.
So tell me Dave, What’s worse? Calling camel jockeys “rag heads,” referring to Christians “infidel pigs,” or libeling Jews for “killing Arabs to use the blood for baking matzos?
What’s worse, Dave? Showing a cartoon about the prophet Mohammed, a rapist of little girls, or showing these Arab scum chopping off the heads of Danny Pearl and Nat Berg on Al Jazeera?
What’s worse, Dave? Making points in a cartoon or burning down embassies and having Muslim rioters killed during ensuing demonstrations?
What’s worse, Dave? Condoning Arab sexual mutilation of young girls or shutting up about it so as not to offend Arab sensibilities?
What’s worse, Dave? Accepting Arab honor killings or looking the other way because of multiculturalism?
I’m not here to defend Ann Coulter. She’s quite capable of doing so herself. I’m here to take you to task for your knock-kneed, shaking in your boxer shorts response to a politically incorrect insensitive remark.
What’s worse, Dave? Freedom to make disparaging remarks or kowtowing to Muslim demands for curbs on American’s free-speech?
You’d better decide in a hurry before CAIR and other leftists join together to decide for you.
Time to “get real,” Dave!
— Wolf Terner
Fair lawn, New Jersey
I was away all weekend but I have not read one bad press item regarding Ann Coulter. David Hogberg wrote with the same style that the liberal press uses such as “a number of conservatives…” or “Many people applauded him,” etc. How many is that? Would that be two or three or ten? The liberal press has sparred with Coulter and lost every time. So Mr. Hogberg need not be concerned about her career. To his credit he did use a disclaimer when a number (again how many?) claimed to cringe.
Okay it’s not a hard argument to make that Ann crossed some lines but if the Muslim conservative is going to run into a road block in his recruitment efforts because of one person’s humor then maybe he should reconsider his conservative credentials. He should ask himself what is a conservative.
This is a country where everybody from everywhere settles and
right or wrong humor will challenge your ethnic pride. If you are
secure and proud of your heritage then the occasional joke should
not be a source of obsession. Tender hearted Muslims should talk to
those of Italian heritage. We are forever characterized as
screaming, criminal, face stuffing, buffoons in the media. Even
Bill Clinton himself said Mario Cuomo belonged to the Mafia.
Italians do not take these caricatures seriously because we are
proud of our heritage and those of us who are conservative are
proud of that too. David should also be proud and not be afraid of
the liberal media.
— Diamantino Sforza
Sounds like another David Brock, Just what you do not need at the
Re: Ann Coulter and others of her ilk: it is incredible to spew
such hatred in the name not only of conservatism, but also
— Michael H. Brown
Palm Coast, Florida
Memo to David Hogberg: Stand by your Ann. I certainly do. I find
nothing offensive in her CPAC remarks, which cannot in any way
shape or form be construed as “racist.” “Religionist” maybe, but
not “racist.” Anyway, who gives a rip? Like it or not, we are at
war with a sizable faction of Islam; we are locked in a death
struggle with a mentality straight out of the 7th century. Calling
scum who want us dead “ragheads” is probably the least offensive
term I can think of to use for them. Ann Coulter — you go,
— Rich Smith
Yucca Valley, California
If we must once again use precious ammunition to attack our own, let us examine some excerpts from the article:
“[Ann Coulter] has a side that is vile and uglyï¿½ How stupid are such remarks?… Coulter’s idiocy… Coulter seems willing to drag conservatives down into the same muck… Snippy. Immature. Typical…. she ruined an otherwise great event.”
Ruined? Just exactly who here is passing on vile and ugly
vitriolic hyperbole? At least Ms. Coulter’s comments are directed
towards the enemy.
— R. Trotter
Hogberg needs to stop taking himself so seriously. The politically
correct Multi-cultis have really gotten to him. If a Muslim is a
Republican, someone saying “raghead” isn’t going to make him a
Democrat. The idea that you must not say certain things in order
for the Muslims to like you is a problem. Hogberg has the dhimmi
mentality. Coulter doesn’t.
I’m sorry Mr. Hogberg’s delicate sensibilities were so crushed by
Ann Coulter’s remarks at CPAC. He does make some very good points
about how the media will run with this “low hanging fruit” but
really, who cares? Isn’t it about time we all start calling a spade
a spade? If his claim that “the vast majority of Muslims are not
Islamists” is true then isn’t it time they (the “moderate” Muslims)
start proving it? Silence has always been considered agreement, and
on virtually every outrage committed by some jerk with a vest-bomb
and attitude, their silence has been deafening. There’s an old
saying that goes, “If you lie with dogs you’re bound to get fleas.”
(Sure looks to me like they sleep awfully close together.) Well
maybe those members of “the peaceful religion of Islam” ought to do
more to prove that to the rest of us. Until then I don’t think I’ll
worry one damn bit if their feelings get hurt.
— Wes Parry
Brandon, South Dakota
Spot on!! I am becoming as uncomfortable with Ann Coulter as I am
with Pat Robertson’s religious extremism and Pat Buchanan’s
isolationism. Their type of rhetoric hurts the conservative
movement that many of us have spent decades building. Ann needs to
chill it a bit.
— Ed Cunn
So, according to Mr. Hogberg, Ann Coulter should have made a distinction between Muslims and Islamists. Help me understand. Do not the Muslims follow the religion of Islam? What makes a Muslim a non-Islamist, an atheist of Arab descent?
Listen to what the pundits are now saying. Don’t print certain cartoons, because it offends the Muslims. Don’t handle the Koran improperly, because it offends the Muslims. Some Muslims are even demanding that countries enact laws making it illegal to depict Mohammed in pictures or cartoons or else the rioting will not stop.
What other demands will they be making soon?…
In defense of Ms. Coulter, I can think of even stronger language than “rag head” to describe a people who riot, destroy property and even kill people when you accuse them of being violent. Where are all these outraged peaceful “Muslims” that criticize Mr. Hogberg’s so-called “Islamists”?
Remember, respect is something earned, not given on demand.
— Steve S.
New Castle, Delaware
During her standing-room-only speech at the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) last Friday, Ann Coulter made some rather blunt remarks about Muslims that have offended listeners on the left and alike.
Yesterday on The American Spectator website, in an article by David Hogberg entitled “Not Funny,” Ms. Coulter was even tarred as a “racist,” and castigated for damaging the “conservative movement” with her incendiary rhetoric. She also was blamed for “ruining” this year’s CPAC.
As someone who attended CPAC and heard Ms. Coulter’s speech, let me begin by flatly denying that Ms. Coulter’s speech “ruined” CPAC. There were a multitude of intelligent and informative speakers at this year’s CPAC — including Dick Cheney, John Bolton, George Will, Phyllis Schlafly, Mark Krikorian, John Fund, Oliver North, Gov. Rick Perry (Texas), Sen. Mitch McConnell (Kentucky), Newt Gingrich, and many others — whose contributions to a robust political debate were not lessened in the least by what Ms. Coulter said, or how she said it. CPAC is not a one-woman show. To suggest otherwise is, itself, a denigration of the conservative movement.
Moreover, the expressions of shock! shock! at Ms. Coulter’s incendiary remarks ring especially hollow, given that Ms. Coulter is the author of the most (in)famous commentary on 9/11: “We know who the homicidal maniacs are. They are the ones cheering and dancing right now. We should invade their countries, kill their leaders, and convert them to Christianity.” Nothing she said on Friday — in which she referred to our Islamic enemies by the derogatory term “rag heads” — compares to this statement.
I agree, of course, that it is not nice to refer to people with crude ethnic epithets. I also agree that Ms. Coulter’s remarks, if broadly construed, are potentially unfair to Muslims who do not share our enemies’ values and ambitions.
Nevertheless, only the most abstruse, self-righteous person (which includes the two young men who challenged Ms. Coulter during the question and answer period) would believe that Ms. Coulter was referring to “all” Muslims in her remarks. She quite clearly was addressing the radical Islamists who have declared war on the United States and its allies ï¿½ and who are aggressively fighting that war, while we in the west debate the “limits” of free speech.
Indeed, Ms. Coulter’s speech is the latest example of western political humor deemed offensive to Muslims that “sensitive” westerners — including conservatives who should know better — rush to criticize, so as to demonstrate what decent, “reasonable” people they are. Apparently, these westerners believe that the way to “win the hearts and minds” of Muslims is to show them how willing we are to demonize the very people who are standing up to the radical Islamist bullying and terrorism that is going on across the globe. How utterly naÃ¯ve.
At the risk of being labelled a “racist” myself, I confess I find it very troubling that conservative commentators like Mr. Hogberg are so offended by a few harsh words for our sworn enemies. Let us not forget that these enemies, who are committed to a way of life that is antithetical to our own, have killed thousands of our fellow citizens and would gladly kill millions more.
How can it be that calling these enemies “rag heads” is so
intolerable, but killing them by the hundreds and thousands in Iraq
and elsewhere is deserving of plaudits? After all, we on the right
(and center) loudly applaud President Bush whenever he speaks of
“destroying” our enemies. But Ann Coulter calling them “rag heads”
is going too far? This is a ridiculous example of political
correctness run amok. But “politically correct warfare” is an
oxymoron, and a foolish and self-defeating way to fight a war.
— Steven M. Warshawsky
I couldn’t agree more with David’s article regarding Coulter’s
egregious lapse of good judgment and good taste. She’s like Pat
Robertson in that she seems to spend more time giving her opponents
ammunition than actually helping her own ostensible friends.
David’s reaction to her remarks was not only well-said but it
needed to be said. The conservative movement can — and should —
rethink giving Coulter a platform.
— Sean Higgins
Nope, it’s not funny, David. We’re at war with the ragheads. War
chants work! My favorite uncle, a Marine in the Pacific, always
wrote in his letters home something about “the yellow-bellied
japs.” This is not tiddly-winks, David. This is the battle
for civilization. Where do I sign up, Ann?
— Elizabeth Doheny
I agree 100%. Those remarks are worse than without merit, and make
a good thinker look like a petty dope. Unacceptable is the word
that comes to mind. I have great respect for Ann Coulter, but she
makes it a challenge. And it’s shameful that more people didn’t
call her on it.
— Geof Narlee
East Walpole, Massachusetts
I used to read David Hogberg’s blog but boredom finally overcame me and I removed its bookmark; at present I even skip most of his articles at TAS Online, despite the fact that they generally just ooze wisdom. Ann Coulter, however, I never fail to read. Her columns accurately skewer the leftist frauds we are faced with domestically, and the unfriendly alien creeds that we face internationally. Coulter’s columns are full of truth and insights, and her hyperbole performs two functions: it helps to make her points and is highly entertaining to boot.
Hogberg and Coulter have different functions in the conservative movement; he’s the stodgy but knowledgeable professor whose class you ought to attend every day — she’s the football coach. Judge for yourself whom you’d rather listen to at halftime during the big game.
A fair number of Americans, it seems — even including Dubya — lay great store by the idea that we ought to speak sweetly about our sworn enemies and at all costs avoid insulting them. Does this approach gain us anything? If it does, I fail to see it.
While people like David Hogberg are running around apologizing for any harsh words directed toward those who wear unusual headgear, even our “friends” among the Muslim nations engage in the most vicious and inflammatory propaganda about us and our beliefs and interests. While we strive to protect Muslims in the U.S. and liberate Muslims overseas we are continually abused by the tyrants of Arabia and Egypt — among many others — and defamed by imams and ayatollahs without number, including many who shelter in our nation.
I have the feeling that George Patton and Vince Lombardi would
have liked Ann Coulter’s approach to encouraging the good guys. Is
that such a bad thing, Dave?
— Richard Donley
New Lyme, Ohio
Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. However, I think most who heard and/or read Ann Coulter’s speech at CPAC would be surprised at Mr. Hogberg’s analysis of the crowd reaction. Ann Coulter was being Ann Coulter — cutting through the political correctness nonsense and calling it as she sees it.
The left, along with their media, criticize and attack the right no matter how sensitive Republicans try to be. And even though it was done more gently, Mr. Hogberg was insulting Ms. Coulter in the same breath he was admonishing her for doing the same thing!
I’d never heard of David Hogberg before reading this article. Does he have any New York Times-bestselling books? (Ann Coulter has several.) Does he appear on television? (Ann Coulter does — frequently) Does he speak at any major conventions? (Ann Coulter does.)
I absolutely love Ann Coulter. No, she is not gentle or
sensitive, but she is one of the premiere voices the conservative
party has right now. She is not ashamed to be a conservative, she
is strong voice for the right of the unborn, and she says it in a
way that leaves no question as to what she believes.
— Margee Riggle
Did that wittew foul-mouthed meanie, Annie Coulter, muss up the
nice wittew conservatives night’s booze and stuff meeting wif a bad
wittew jokie? Ewwwww. If we don’t get her under control soon, she
could start insulting Islamists next with phony little girl tales
about kidnappings, beheadings, homicide bombings of innocent women
and children, air liners hijacked and flown into buildings, threats
of nuclear extermination of Israel and endlessly murderous hatred
of all things Western…all apparently sanctioned by their most
fervent religious beliefs. We must leave the nice wittew
conservative boys alone in their happy and contented wittew room
with their harmless Islamic palsies who don’t like to hear
mean-spirited inferences about the…you know…stuff their
co-religionists do. Or that really gauche meanies like Annie
Coulter say they do. Allegedly. If they ever found out that the
stuff that is allegedly going on is actually true, they,
themselves, might have to, you know, start thinking about it. Maybe
even speaking out against it. Providing it were all true and not
just some bad wittew Annie Coulter fantasies.
— Gene Wright
Who can’t believe what he just read by David Hogberg in Laguna Niguel, California
Well, Ms. Coulter is one sharp weapon in our arsenal against the Islamofascists in this war on terror, as she is against liberals in this culture war. I would not toss her away as useless because she missed her mark. She may have tripped in using a racial epithet but her point in all of this should not be missed. Those who speak against us need to feel the consequences of their words. From the everyday Muslim (75% of which support the terrorists aims in bringing down the western world and thus their methods) to the university professor calling on American troops to kill their officers.
Mr. Hogberg states that the racist epithet “raghead” would have been acceptable if it only referred to Islamicists. If “raghead” is racists, how can it not be when referring to a small part of the Muslim population? Is “nigger” okay when only referring to the small part of the African-American population that he believes are truly “niggers”?
Ann Coulter needs to be around to help fight the constant
spewing of what The American Spectator calls the
Kultursmog. She needs to be around to illustrate Ted
Kennedy for the drunken, (wo)man-slaughtering low-life that his is.
To call out the New York Times for the fifth column of the
fourth estate it truly is. And she needs preach to the choir once a
year at CPAC to help us all keep in focus who our enemies are with
or without epithets.
— Oscar Araiza
San Diego, California
What this conservative writer seems to miss is that Ann Coulter should make remarks like the “towel head” remark.
Why do conservatives have to be so sensitive, afraid of their
own shadows? It is about time we conservatives started speaking up.
Thank God American conservatives have an Ann Coulter.
— Miles Hession
Hogberg misses two points in his claim that “the vast majority of Muslims are not Islamists.” First, any remedial study of the Koran reveals that Muslims are granted the right to deceive their enemies while engaged in jihad. Those of us who know this, (and I assume Coulter does), make little-to-no distinction between Muslims and Islamists. All we need is another conservative columnist (Hogberg) going politically correct, or worse yet, coddling an enemy which is clearly leading us into World War III. At least Coulter is willing to call a spade a spade.
(Pardon my insensitivity, as Hogberg will most certainly take
offense to that last sentence as well.)
— Steve Baker
Raleigh, North Carolina
Ann Coulter’s a better man than this Hogberg character. I’d much
rather share an entrenched position with her than him. Need
somebody who will actually aim a weapon at the enemy and pull the
trigger. It’s a pity that even men who call themselves conservative
have been so thoroughly feminized.
Islam isn’t a race…
— David Fabricius
Hogberg is a politically correct idiot.
As a big fan of Ann Coulter, I felt compelled to respond to Mr. Hogberg’s article. I’m not sure if Ann will dignify this assault on her with a response — because contrary to the what the author thinks, she is quite capable of taking the high road.
I did not hear the speech, but from the quotes of the article it is blatantly obvious that she was referring to Islamic terrorists that want to cut our heads off.
CPAC had the foresight to invite Ann because of her courage and honesty in facing the issues and ideological differences that make itself newsworthy today. She wears the insults and mischaracterizations of her as a badge of honor. It would be hard to believe that Mr. Hogberg would be naive enough to think that the political left and MSM needs ammunition to smear all of us: they just make it up! See Dan Rather, CBS.
I wonder if the gentleman at the Islamic Institute or anyone at
the Institute cringes when the latest Jihad is cast upon us
infidels. I doubt it. Until then, they are ragheads as far as I’m
— Anthony Mastroserio
Princeton, New Jersey
It might be helpful if we all take a deep breath and relax. Ms. Coulter is not vile. She is inflammatory. Her raghead remarks were not racist, they were insensitive.
It is perfectly fine to be offended by Ms. Coulter’s ways. However, do not overlook her wisdom. She is correct to say that if Islamofascists make threats, we must take them seriously. She is spot on about this. About 72 hours prior to Ms. Coulter’s unfortunate remarks, we learned that England had finally gotten around to convicting a turban-clad radical cleric for his vile, racist, and murderous speech that issued daily from his London mosque. This conviction came after seven years of previous limp-wristed attempts by local authorities to jail the man. In those seven years, the 7/7 Tube bombers, the shoe bomber, and the 9/11 20th hijacker (plus who know knows what future bombers) all found their way to his mosque to soaked up the wisdom of vile man of The Prophet.
Now, just some 60+ years ago after the Nazis exterminated 6+ million Jews, the President of Iran has declared that the Jews must be destroyed and Hamas is maintaining that Israel must be destroyed. We cannot, and must not ignore these threats. We must deal with them accordingly.
As far as the liberal media using Ms. Coulter’s remarks against conservatives… OK, I’ve stopped laughing. The liberal media is offended by anything a conservative says. Once a conservative is able to absorb this fact, he or she is surely on the path to higher wisdom.
I wouldn’t worry too much about Ms. Coulter’s plans for next
year’s CPAC. Since her raghead remarks (once those Danish Imams
learn of them) have insulted The Prophet, chances are very good a
fatwah will be issued against her. She will probably be lunching
with Salman Rushdie at the Savoy Grille instead.
— Name withheld in case The Prophet has been insulted by my defense of Ms. Coulter
Thanks and congratulations to the Spectator for running
David Hogberg’s article on Ann Coulter’s remarks at CPAC. I’m sure
there are many of us who felt relieved to see that we are not alone
in conservative circles in deploring Ms. Coulter’s approach to
— Cathy Windels
It should also be noted that even if all Muslims deserve the slur “raghead” (which they do not), the epithet is also used against turban-wearing Sikhs, who are not Muslims.
I am a big Coulter fan who is deeply disappointed.
Really enjoy Ann Coulter’s sense of humor overall, but found her
recent joke cringeworthy for all the reasons that David Hogberg
pointed out. Thanks for the article.
— Ted Angell
Republicans often still act like the minority party in Congress, more than a decade after coming in to the majority. They are still cowered by the media, the ridiculous liberal politicians who they spotlight and the political correctness they espouse instead of standing up and flexing their well-earned muscle. Mr. Hogberg’s criticism of Ann Coulter is a symptom of this disease.
Does Mr. Hogberg believe that if we are nice and act like ladies and gentlemen, liberals will suddenly become honorable, tell the truth and behave better at funerals? Or perhaps if we are exceedingly careful not to offend the “religion of peace” they might come together with us in mutual understanding and forget all that car bomb nonsense? Not only does he ignore the Koran and most of the Muslim world by trying to create a fictional (but seemingly popular) difference between Muslims and Islamists but he is simply repeating the worst politically correct mythology espoused by the liberal media he so clearly fears.
Coulter’s “rag-head” remark does push the envelope but in the context of her speech, and in the context of her work, it does not make her a racist. Normally it is a Democrat who throws up the racist charge in order to divert attention from any real discussion. It is name-calling and Mr. Hogberg apparently feels that he needs to do it first since the media will ultimately will and he doesn’t want to be cast in any bad light by them or lose their approval.
I am sometimes embarrassed by conservatives who back-pedal and retreat from arguments when vigorously confronted by the liberal media. I am ashamed when a Republican won’t stand up and publicly show the courage of their convictions. I am offended by the apologetic attitude that many conservatives take in to the marketplace of ideas. Calling someone a raghead and unapologetically criticizing a group of people, the vast majority of who root for the destruction of America and the death of Americans, does not offend me in the least.
For those of us who believe we are in a culture war, we need
more conservatives who are fearless fighters and it is ironic that
the one with the biggest balls is a woman.
— Pat Bruen
I may not have said what Coulter said, at least not in public. But I sure do think it a bunch. The only people that respect Americans less than Democrats are that collective known as the: “Arab/Islamic Street.” Where is the so called: “Moderate Arab/Islamic” collective that has publicly denounced the Sept. 11 Attacks? Where is that “Moderate Arab/Islamic” collective that seeks a peaceful relationship with Israel? Where is that “Moderate Arab/Islamic” collective that speaks of respecting other countries freedoms of speech and religious practices?
Where is that “Moderate Arab/Islamic” collective that criticizes the Arab/Islamic governments that persecute those of other religions, opinions, the rights of women, and non-believers in those Arab countries? Where are those “Moderate Arabs/Islamists” that denounce the pronouncements of the madman of Iran?
There’s plenty of ugly speech coming at us from the Arab/Islamic countries and their leaders overseas. Yet we always preface that vitriol with: “…but it doesn’t represent Islam or Arabs as a whole”, or allow their apologists here to get away with it.
It’s about time we quit apologizing for being outspoken as
Americans. It’s about time we started sucker punching these punks
with some bunker-busting attitude.
— P. Aaron Jones
Huntington Woods, Michigan
I’ve argued for quite some time that Ann Coulter is one of the worst things that has ever happened to conservatives; she acts and talks like a liberal. Rather than provide an intellectual heaviness to her arguments she resorts to vitriolic name calling and snide remarks. In short, she often behaves in a manner that portrays the worst traits of the Left; hurling blanket, and often unfounded, accusations that do much to inflame an audience but does little to support an underlying argument.
Thank you for finally taking her to task for her truly tasteless
remarks and pointing out that she has probably hurt the
conservative movement much more than she has helped.
— Jason Miyares
Virginia Beach, Virginia
David Hogberg replies:
Three quick points:
2. Some letters make the legitimate point that we have no need to be polite when describing the enemy. Fair enough. But there are plenty of terms — murderer, terrorist, thug, etc. — that are “impolite” but don’t cross the line into racial epithets. Coulter’s use of the term “rag head” will do nothing to advance the War on Terror. If anything, it will hurt the cause by giving the opponents of the war a weapon (the charge of racism) to use against its supporters.
3. While some of the comments were ad hominem, they were remarkably free of the vitriol associated with a barrage of emails from the political left. I wonder, though, how long that will remain the case with a leader like Coulter setting such a lousy example. For conservatives to maintain higher standards than the opposition requires that we occasionally police our own — even those who have appeared on TV a lot and write best-sellers.
Sign up for our weekly newsletter:
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
By John Corry
By Mark Steyn
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
By Mark Steyn
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
By Brit Hume
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
The American Spectator Foundation is the 501(c)(3) organization responsible for publishing The American Spectator magazine and training aspiring journalists who espouse traditional American values. Your contributions are tax deductible to the extent permitted by law. Each donor receives a year-end summary of their giving for tax purposes.
Copyright 2013, The American Spectator. All rights reserved.