Want to see what’s up with the Democrat’s latest slow bleed strategy? Check out full text of the emergency supplemental bill at The Victory Caucus !
Note: This letter will appear simultaneously on a number of conservative blogs this morning. It has been scheduled in advance for that purpose. My personal comments appear below.
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.
Thanks to Sean Hackbarth for organizing this effort. In my view, CPAC should have stopped inviting Coulter long ago, and certainly shouldn’t have had her back this year after the 2006 ‘raghead’ remark. Some argue that she draws in a huge crowd for CPAC. But having been there in person, I can tell you that 6,300 attendees this year had the place overcrowded: all the major events were impossible for many people to get into unless they had paid for the most expensive ‘Diamond’ package (or had media credentials). So if next year, sans Coulter, CPAC has only 5000 attendees and doesn’t get hammered with lousy publicity… sounds like a great deal to me.
Greetings from CPAC 2007! On Day Two, Congressman Duncan Hunter kicked us off with a speech that touched on immigration, the war, and global trade.
Hunter is my kind of guy when it comes to the war, and I’ll just leave that as shorthand that he’s on the same page as those of us at class=”textlink”>The Victory Caucus. (It is my hope that we’ll be able to do an in-depth interview with the Congressman for Victory Caucus sometime soon).
The one perhaps newsbreaking item in his speech was when it came to immigration. Hunter went out of his way to cite the now infamous case of the two border agents imprisoned for shooting a suspect. Citing the 10+ year sentences they received, he declared flatly “As President of the United States, I will pardon Ramos and Compean.”
More CPAC news as it comes in…