Islan, you're just flat wrong. ****** IS hate speech it is not remotely comparable to "negro". Get a grip.

The "buttpirates" huh? So, you don't understand homosexual people, you are repulsed by there activities, okay. I get it. I wouldn't propose you change your point of view. What's the purpose of referring to them in as demeaning a fashion as possible? Answer, There IS no point. It's just a milder form of hate speech.

Getting pretty sick of all the haters. I don't much care for GW and the RIght but I think there are a lot of good people I just don't happen to agree with. Some I STRONGLY disagree with. I don't call the names.

So are we upset because Coulter implied that Edwards appeared gay or because she used the term "******?"

The latter.

Classless.

keep reaching for that rainbow, fint...

http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1173043582.jpg

I don't run in gay circles myself, so I am am certainly not an authority on the subject like some here, but it seems to me that the gay community uses those terms (including butt pirate) to identify themselves (tongue-in-cheek I presume). I have heard the term (******) used on the street and in movies by gays to describe openly gay men . A search shows there are even gay websites (blogs) such as *****tyassed*****.com where the blogger has self proclaimed "his loafers are light; his tongue is acid."

I did not hear Coulter say anything derogatory about gays other than use what appears to be a commonly used term...Unless you think that implying that Edwards might be gay is an insult to gays. I could probably buy that argument.

Is that a photo of you or just a "friend?" You seem to know an awful lot about homosexuality. Is there something gay about a rainbow?

it isn't hard. Just round off the corners of the gay pentagons you run in and you'll be doing circles in no time!

It is a strange thing that some words are used among certain groups of people to address each other in a friendly way, and also used by other people to attack and demean that group of people.

"Nigger" is the classic example. "******" is another. "Chink" is one I heard growing up.

I guess you have to decide if Coulter was trying to compliment, or to attack, Edwards by calling him a "******".

I think it is pretty obvious how she meant it, and how the crowd took it, but I guess you can try to spin it however you wish.

just gay for you..

anyhoo, fint?

who's the one with the tranny fetish?

http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1173044675.jpg

looking at her, I can understand gay people.

I'm not sure what the flap is about. She only called John Edwards a piece of firewood.

But I think everybody should say whatever they want -- including slurs and insults as they wish -- without having to take 12-step programs for it. It's called free speech. When did we get so delicate?

And fintstone is right -- the fake tenderness to insult on the Left is laughable. Hate is their stock in trade. Try a visit to Daily Kos or Huffington Post. If they aren't calling Michelle Malkin a "gook slut" the're lamenting the failed assassination of Dick Cheney. And has anyone noticed the charming level of political comity exemplified by the two bloggers that John Edwards recently hired, didn't hire, fired, rehired, denied hiring, and denied firing?

Lovely crowd, what? Let's have faith they can "unite" the country.

I am frankly offended...I am delicate and resent your reference. ;)

Free speech is not for the faint of heart.

The language (although not the words I'd choose) was chosen to elicit a calculated response.
Don't fool yourself into believing that it was some kind of faux-pas..
Anne taunts the left with inflammatory language to expose the hypocracy of the left and the lame stream media.
I would prefer an exchange of reasonable ideas but I think that may be asking too much.

Please try and remember that Anne is not running for anything, not making any policy and has the ear a very few people of influence. Think of her as just another of the many bomb throwers that permeate the airways on the left and right.

I find her rhetoric harsh but often accurate. Political correctness is only required when we all agree it's necessary. Personally I don't agree.

A quick comment on the gay agenda. I don't care what consenting adults do in private. Just take responsibility for your choice. That's right choice. Being gay is the same as liking chocolate ice-cream over vanilla. You can't choose your taste, you're born with it. But you can choose what you put in your mouth.

http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1173050343.jpg

Fintstone is definately a ****** or at least a homo. But it's not offensive so don 't get mad. It's a bundle of wood ******, so relax.

The funny thing is, no one here has attacked free speech or suggested that 1st Amendment rights should be curtailed. That is the purview of the Bush administration, these days. So your argument is specious, IMO. The 1st Amendment exists to protect unpopular and/or offensive speech, period. This would be a prime example of such, and I would be the last one to deny her the ability to expose herself and her defenders for what they are by uttering such garbage.

Having a strong, functioning 1st Amendment doesn't change the fact that something is extremely offensive, however, and it is appropriate for other, better people to exercise their right to condemn it.

Get it now? :cool:

+1

http://images20.fotki.com/v383/photo...9/m6312-vi.jpg

In order to differ it is best to know what the other side utters, garbage or not.

I get it, Denis, so do you. Even though I have a different take on Ann, great post.

There is a recent example of someone who wrote an article which cost him his life's work, his web site, his TV program, and his sponsorships.

It's the strange case of Jim Zumbo, a journalist who used to have a byline in Outdoor Life magazine. He wrote, Remington dropped his sponsorship, and the rest is still happening. Words have meaning, and someone who has written in gun magazines for 30+ years who claims to not have known about this type of firearms, beggars belief.
http://booksbikesboomsticks.blogspot.com/2007/02/boomsticks-who-hell-is-jim-zumbo.html
http://blogonomicon.eponym.com/blog/_archives/2007/2/18/2745942.html
http://www.outdoorlife.com/outdoor/columnists/article/0,19912,1592623,00.html

Cut the guy a break - that's the best he could do whilst typing with one hand...

At least he wasn't jailed, like Abdel Kareem Nabil.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/22/AR2007022201909.html

(this is what happens when a government actually behaves in the authoritarian way you pretend the Bush administration does)

As for Coulter, saying outrageous things is how she sells books and columns. But it wasn't appropriate for her to use that language at that particular event.