An Open Letter re:Coulter
Found this at Captain Ed’s, and felt it was good enough to reprint in its entirety. It’s an open letter from many conservative bloggers to the organizers of CPAC:
Conservatism treats humans as they are, as moral creatures possessing rational minds and capable of discerning right from wrong. There comes a time when we must speak out in the defense of the conservative movement, and make a stand for political civility. This is one of those times.
Ann Coulter used to serve the movement well. She was telegenic, intelligent, and witty. She was also fearless: saying provocative things to inspire deeper thought and cutting through the haze of competing information has its uses. But Coulter’s fearlessness has become an addiction to shock value. She draws attention to herself, rather than placing the spotlight on conservative ideas.
At the Conservative Political Action Conference in 2006, Coulter referred to Iranians as “ragheads.” She is one of the most prominent women in the conservative movement; for her to employ such reckless language reinforces the stereotype that conservatives are racists.
At CPAC 2007 Coulter decided to turn up the volume by referring to John Edwards, a former U.S. Senator and current Presidential candidate, as a “faggot.” Such offensive language–and the cavalier attitude that lies behind it–is intolerable to us. It may be tolerated on liberal websites but not at the nation’s premier conservative gathering.
The legendary conservative thinker Richard Weaver wrote a book entitled Ideas Have Consequences. Rush Limbaugh has said again and again that “words mean things.” Both phrases apply to Coulter’s awful remarks.
Coulter’s vicious word choice tells the world she care little about the feelings of a large group that often feels marginalized and despised. Her word choice forces conservatives to waste time defending themselves against charges of homophobia rather than advancing conservative ideas.
Within a day of Coulter’s remark John Edwards sent out a fundraising email that used Coulter’s words to raise money for his faltering campaign. She is helping those she claims to oppose. How does that advance any of the causes we hold dear?
Denouncing Coulter is not enough. After her “raghead” remark in 2006 she took some heat. Yet she did not grow and learn. We should have been more forceful. This year she used a gay slur. What is next? If Senator Barack Obama is the de facto Democratic Presidential nominee next year, will Coulter feel free to use a racial slur? How does that help conservatism?
One of the points of CPAC is the opportunity it gives college students to meet other young conservatives and learn from our leaders. Unlike on their campuses—where they often feel alone—at CPAC they know they are part of a vibrant political movement. What example is set when one highlight of the conference is finding out what shocking phrase will emerge from Ann Coulter’s mouth? How can we teach young conservatives to fight for their principles with civility and respect when Ann Coulter is allowed to address the conference? Coulter’s invective is a sign of weak thinking and unprincipled politicking.
CPAC sponsors, the Age of Ann has passed. We, the undersigned, request that CPAC speaking invitations no longer be extended to Ann Coulter. Her words and attitude simply do too much damage.
Even better, and much in line with my own sentiments regarding this event, is the following from Amy Ridenour (again, hat tip to the good Captain Ed) of the National Center For Public Policy Research:
It would be better, in my opinion, to not have a CPAC at all than to have one that presents conservatism as a hostile, people-hating ideology. We conservatives have enough trouble overcoming the false things that are said about us without paying for a platform upon which we shoot ourselves annually in the foot.
I agree with that sentiment wholeheartedly…
An Open Letter to CPAC Sponsors and Organizers Regarding Ann Coulter
Conservatism treats humans as they are, as moral creatures possessing rational minds and capable of discerning right from wrong. There comes a time when we must speak out in the defense of the conservative movement, and make a stand for political civil…
[...] Robinson, Boots and Sabres N.Z. Bear, The Truth Laid Bear Michael Demmons, Gay Orbit Mark Coffey, Decision ‘08 Russell Newquist, The Philosopher’sStone [...]
[...] Other Right-of-Center Bloggers Owen Robinson, Boots and Sabres N.Z. Bear, The Truth Laid Bear Michael Demmons, Gay Orbit Mark Coffey, Decision ‘08 Russell Newquist, The Philosopher’s Stone [...]
[...] Owen Robinson, Boots and Sabres N.Z. Bear, The Truth Laid Bear Michael Demmons, Gay Orbit Mark Coffey, Decision ‘08 Russell Newquist, The Philosopher’s Stone Marshall Manson, On Tap [...]
[...] Mark Coffey, Decision ‘08 [...]
[...] Owen Robinson, Boots and Sabres N.Z. Bear, The Truth Laid Bear Michael Demmons, Gay Orbit Mark Coffey, Decision ‘08 Russell Newquist, The Philosopher’s Stone Marshall Manson, On Tap Rob Port, Say Anything Matthew Johnston, Going to the Mat Timmer, The Daily Brief Rick Moran, Right Wing Nuthouse [...]
I like the endorsement Mark (cheap shot at liberals excluded), and so I genuinely commend you. Yesterday I referenced how it was a very small step from using slurs like “faggot” to excluding civil unions in Republican platforms. Your response indicated that you thought it was a state’s rights issue. In the interest of a productive discussion, allow me to respond and explain why it is difficult for me and many other reasonable liberals to accept this argument and the spirit of your condemnation of Coulter. Efforts to withhold decency, compassion, and empathy should not be framed within a constitutional argument. That’s not cool at all. Morality demands that the interests of majority should not shut out such basic rights in the minority. I am not making a gay-marriage argument here. I am talking about civil unions. You cannot hold the moral highground and say that a homosexual can be restricted from making medical decisions for their partner if the majority of the community says they think it’s OK. I assert here that this is why it is so easy for a prominent conservative group to invite the likes of Anne Coulter and then applaud her slurs. I look forward to your consideration of this.
Well, I didn’t write the open letter, I just endorse its conclusions – but I, too, would have preferred that the cheap shot at liberals be left out – just ‘cheapened’ the overall argument, in my view.
Gay marriage is not that big an issue for me, either way, for the same reason that abortion isn’t. I’m not motivated by social issues, but by national security and economic issues. I still prefer that both civil unions and gay marriage proper be imposed or denied at the voting booth, rather than by judges. I also understand that there are issues here about majority rule vs. minority rights, etc. I’m not trying to oversimplify…but when judges impose these things by fiat, it leaves a bad taste in the mouth. It’s hard to change the mind of the majority, but it’s not impossible, and gay rights advocates, it seems to me, are slowly winning (though too slowly for their own tastes, I’m sure). Society is much, much more accepting of homosexuality than it was even five or ten years ago.
I’m also quite aware that much (most?) of the hostility towards civil unions and gay marriage comes from people who, if not outright bigots, are extremely uncomfortable with the whole idea of homosexuality, and then, of course, there are the outright bigots on one extreme and the states’ righters on the other. So, yeah, it’s an easy subject to oversimplify, but a mistake to do so.
Interesting. You and I are more alike than I realized. I propose that your party has left you however. Rudy G. would be a move in the right direction. Watch how your party rips him to shreds as the nomination period approaches. I would hope that you will not support Newt G when he becomes your nominee. Senator Clinton and Bill Richardon would seem to good matches for your ideology. I do appreciate your tone and take your words at face value….and I will call you out if I see you engaging in the kind of hypocracy that has infected the former-conservative movement. (didn’t mean to sound so harsh on that)
Scott
Newt will not be the nominee – I can promise you that. Way too polarizing. It’s really a two-man race at this point, in my view. McCain has the slight edge because of organization, but Rudy gets all the excitement. Everyone else is running for Vice President (even Romney, but he just doesn’t realize it yet).
Either nominee I can live with, though I prefer Rudy. Don’t get me wrong, though, I’m a conservative through and through – it’s just my conservatism has different points of emphasis that most SoCons…
Bill Richardson has never impressed me, though I can’t exactly put a finger on why – and Hillary, I’ve been hot and cold on. She’s been a much, much better Senator than I would have thought – but she’s wavering a bit on her national security bona fides under pressure from the progressives…
[...] Mark Coffey, Decision ‘08 [...]
[...] Follow any comments here with the RSS feed for this post. Post a comment or leave a trackback: Trackback URL. « Late primaries going to getcanceled? [...]
[...] As Glenn Greenwald writes, “Several right-wing bloggers have created and signed onto a commendable petition which, among other things, calls for the CPAC to cease inviting Coulter to speak. Several of the more decent pro-Bush bloggers have signed on, though, at least as of now, most have not (and Sean Hannity expressly refused to condemn Coulter when asked about the remark).” [...]
[...] Owen Robinson, Boots and Sabres N.Z. Bear, The Truth Laid Bear Michael Demmons, Gay Orbit Mark Coffey, Decision ‘08 Russell Newquist, The Philosopher’s Stone Marshall Manson, On Tap Rob Port, Say Anything Matthew Johnston, Going to the Mat Timmer, The Daily Brief Rick Moran, Right Wing Nuthouse Dustin Gawrylow, Free Republicans Dan, North Dallas Thirty Brennan Monaco, The American Pundit Nate Nelson, Reality Mugged Me Christopher Fotos, PostWatch Joe Carter, Evangelical Outpost Amy Ridenour, National Center Blog [...]
[...] Mark Coffey, Decision ‘08 [...]