I have to admit, when I learned that Chris Matthews on Hardball had a secret deal with Elizabeth Edwards to ambush Ann Coulter on a few “comments” during Matthews’ interview with Coulter to promote her updated paperback version of Godless: The Church of Liberalism, I was immediately affected by this as I again was shown how devious liberals can be and indeed how clueless some “conservatives” are.
In the video posted above, Chris Matthews and Elizabeth Edwards (wife of John Edwards) uses this opportunity to stress to Ann Coulter the importance of sticking to the issues and cutting out the “personal attacks.”
It all started about six months ago when Ann Coulter joked about the pathetic state of our politically correct society when asserting that she would not be commenting on John Edwards because using the word “faggot” would put her in rehab. Immediately afterwards in the same speech when asked about gay rights, Ann said:
“Screw you, I’m not anti-gay, we’re against gay marriage, I don’t want gays to be discriminated against”
and went on to say………….
“In addition to blacks, I don’t know why all gays aren’t Republican because I think we have the pro-gay position which is anti-crime and pro-tax cuts, gays make a lot of money and they’re victims of crime.”
There, Coulter genuinely acknowledged the history of cruelty, bigotry, and crimes against the gay community. Conservatives have acknowledged that same fact for years. But apparently being against gay marriage equals a level of hate directly associated with the types of morons that partake in such awful crimes.
The same weekend that Coulter made that comment, Bill Maher remarked about Dick Cheney being slaughtered by terrorists. Not one liberal came out against him with a fraction of the energy they put into focusing on one line uttered by Ann Coulter.
Say, when will we get a phone call from Lynne Cheney as Maher is being interviewed by Bill O’Reilly or Sean Hannity?
Next, the “Coulter makes Edwards cry like a big girl” drama-fest was extended when Ann Coulter; on ABC, just a few days ago stated her obvious surprise that Maher’s comment about Cheney being assassinated by terrorists got no press attention compared to her joke about John Edwards. In this current interview, Coulter said two funny things.
Holding to her intention that her “faggot” remark had nothing to do with homosexuality and everything to do with John Edwards being a total wuss she remarked:
Then realizing the striking difference displayed by liberals in their reaction to what she said versus what Bill Maher had said, she joked:
Now, a few days later, Elizabeth Edwards and Chris Matthews use this as evidence of a “personal attack” against John Edwards. Nothing she said in this interview on ABC attacked John Edwards personally, other than the cute joke about not comparing all gays to him.
There are a few things I’d like to point out in the midst of the entire hullabaloo raised by liberals and “concerned conservatives.”
First: Every time Ann Coulter makes a joke about a liberal, I get buckets of e-mails and messages from liberal friends, gay friends, conservative friends, etc. wondering if this is finally the moment that I would be willing to denounce Coulter.
Let me be the first to say that I proudly agree with the idea that John Edwards is a total wuss. In fact, my agreeing with Ann Coulter in that respect has been utterly confirmed by the wife of this Presidential candidate when she feels the need to conspire with a liberal talk-show host to insinuate that Coulter stop writing and speaking in a way that she chooses to express herself which is an amusing way that attracts enough folks to score her five massive NY Times bestsellers.
In fact, if I could be mad about anything, it would be because the Edwards people have scored massive amounts of campaign-funding since Coulter’s remarks.
So when Coulter says something that makes liberals go crazy, what is the real message here? While some of my most soft-hearted friends and concerned conservative folk characterize it as:
I seem to be one of the only ones with enough common sense to discover the real message here which is:
Edwards cannot handle jokes, attacks, or criticism from a blond 100-pound writer but he simultaneously wants us to believe that he’s going to effectively combat members of Al-Queda, deal with Iran, North Korea, and pull us out of Iraq in a way that does not portray us as a country full of Barbra Streisands and Rosie O’Donnells.
Is Edwards going to have to his wife call up Mahmoud Ahmadinejad in the case he is so politically incorrect to assassinate Edwards with a “personal attack?” What would conservatives think of George Bush or Ronald Reagan if they had Laura or Nancy calling up talk-shows to do their fighting for them?
Second: While Chris Matthews and Elizabeth Edwards blathered on about “personal attacks” and “debating the issues,” did it occur to them that they never touched on one issue at all in that entire time? The entire interview was a “personal attack” against Ann Coulter. I have read Godless from cover to cover and can personally attest to the fact that Ann Coulter covered many “issues” in her book. If Matthews and Edwards want to debate issues, why didn’t they pick at least one of them to debate Coulter on?
To all the hysterics out there, I ask that you realize the fact that there is a reason why Edwards and Matthews could not stay on the issues and chose to parse Coulter’s language for the entire course of that interview.
Third: The latter part of this interview features Matthews engaging in another personal attack on Coulter by again; avoiding the issues, and scolding her on words that Coulter used to describe Hillary’s legs.
Curiously enough, one year ago on Hardball, Chris Matthews in an interview with Tucker Carlson asked Tucker if he found Ann Coulter attractive.
CHRIS MATTHEWS: “Do you find her physically attractive, Tucker?”
CHRIS MATTHEWS: “Well, she doesn’t pass the Chris Matthews test.”
Utter hypocrisy at its worst.
As a gay man, I was not offended at Coulter’s use of the word “faggot.” I knew what she meant, I agree with her that putting someone in rehab over the use of a word is crazy, and I knew how liberals would respond. But the way conservatives are responding is what is making me sick.
Conservatives are now buying into this rhetoric without understanding the price they are willing to pay which involves compromising everyone’s right to true free speech!
We are selling ourselves out as conservatives by caving into the politically correct madness created by the mainstream media. We are more obsessed now with monitoring the words uttered by Ann Coulter than we are at observing our enemies.
Coulter has been attacked repeatedly on the Senate floor by various Senators including John Kerry. She is the first political writer to ever be called up by the wife of a presidential candidate. Couple these firsts with the fact that she continues to sell massive amounts of books, I’d say that I am ready to make my final point:
Liberals (even the elected ones) are so threatened by Ann Coulter’s ability to articulate political messages that they use their time on the Senate floor and their time as political candidates to test the backbone of the Republican Party. I have to say, by recent actions, I am completely disgusted at Republicans for caving into this utter manipulation. We are reacting just as they want us to.
Being a victim today is like taking a turn on the Ferris wheel. It’s stardom, it’s attention, and it’s a sorry excuse to be indignant and to sound interesting for about five minutes.
If Republicans lose the election because of comments uttered by Ann Coulter, it won’t be because of her comments alone. It will be because of our “wuss” reactions to the mainstream media, the tree-huggers, the anti-war moms, and the political correctness set forth by hypocrites like Chris Matthews and Elizabeth Edwards.
If people don’t want to be characterized as “faggots,” how about they stop giving illustration to the characterization?