A Shameful Silence On Coulter's Spewing - Joe Conason

Conason brings up a very good point about Coulter's vicious attack on the "Jersey Girls". He wants to know why the politicians that have publicly benefited and repeatedly thanked the women for their efforts are SILENT about the attack by Coulter. Democrats need to hang Coulter around the neck of EVERY GOP candidate in the upcoming election. Coulter should be injected into every debate by asking whether a candidate agrees with Coulter's assessment. Below is a snippet of Conason article.

*******************************************************************
What is most disturbing about this episode is not that these women can be victimized by a brutal bully like Ms. Coulter, nor even that the mainstream media, which abandoned traditional standards of fairness and decency years ago, would eagerly assist her. That is our hideous political culture. What is most disappointing is the abject dereliction of the prominent politicians who worked so closely with the Jersey Girls.

John McCain and Joseph Lieberman, the Senate sponsors of the bill that created the 9/11 Commission, both believed that an independent investigation was essential for reasons of honor and national security. They both know that they could not have prevailed against the White House—and the Republican Congressional leadership—without the help of the widows.

In the fall of 2002, when their bill passed the Senate and the House, Mr. McCain acknowledged the efforts of the widows and their comrades. “I also want to put in a special word for the families,” he said after thanking his fellow statesmen. “Without their unstinting support and efforts, we would not be where we are today.”

In the summer of 2004, when the commission’s reform recommendations were debated, Mr. Lieberman praised all of the 9/11 families, including a special acknowledgment for the Jersey Girls. “I continue to be awed and inspired by your ability to turn your personal tragedies into better public safety for this nation,” said the Connecticut Senator.
******************************************************************

http://www.observer.com/20060619/20060619_Joe_Conason_opinions_conason.asp

Description should be used every time her name is mentioned. Conason is the man. He chatted about this last week on Franken's show. It is extremely pathetic that not one member of the party of integrity has publicly chastised her. She is clearly a gop spokesperson and she says what the party and their supporters believe.

that the more reasoned tones of the party radicals in power start to sound almost sane.

And that is her real function.

People who are not bat shit insane who support BushCo and the Republicans look at Ann and think BushCo isn't like her at all. Thing is Republican policies and talking points reflect pretty much what Coulter says. They are enacted with honey, not a sledge hammer.

Cindy Sheehan has been demonized quite effectively by the right. Those who oppose Bush's policies are neutralized with much more suble rhetoric, but neutralized just the same.

Ann is the Republican Party platform with the volume turned up as high as it can go.

Mz Pip
:dem:

George Pataki

against coultergeist.

That's about the best name for her I've seen!

as they personally benefitted by those women's efforts. He feels they owe them - and he is right

just ignore her. There's a headline about a guy building a Hitler museum, for instance. Hardly anyone bothers to denounce him because he's just obviously so fringe no one cares. I usually skip the Coulter-bashing threads, partl because I hate the sexist assumptions in them, but mostly because she's just so wacko no one really takes her seriously.

Maybe we are the only ones who read her. Maybe we are the only ones who keep her on television and in circulation by constantly talking about her. I don't hear any serious people supporting her. I feel, and maybe other Dems who don't bother bashing her feel, that if WE quit talking about her, she would vanish , since no one else defends her.

She can't write, she can't think, she can't put together a good argument, and she's so unoriginal that every book she writes is accused of being plagerized. Why does she even get a podium? Only because she's so outrageous she makes us scream about her. I've stopped screaming. I will do nothing to help promote her again. I like Conason's argument, about hanging her around the necks of every Republican, but you know they will just cut her loose, and if anything, it will give them the opportunity to look more sane, and the attacker look more petty. That's my theory--those with different theories should feel free to test them. But I think the less WE talk about her, the more she fades, and no Republican would defend her now, so any attempts to harness her to them will at best fail, and at worst backfire.

"He's just entertainment, don't take him seriously and just ignore him." But many do take him seriously. Very seriously.

The same with Coulter. It's easy to brush her off as a nut job, because -well - she is! But I know of several right wingers that take her as seriously as they do Rush.

The liberal answer of "just ignoring her" doesn't work and I don't know why anyone would think it would. I've seen several members here push for boycotts of her latest book but very few ever seem interested. And why not be interested? They do work when you put enough push behind them. Just ask Whoopi when the Right went after her Slim Fast contract. Or Macy's when the Right successfully shut down the store's pro-gay stance.
The left seems to think these sort of boycotts are a waste of time, but they're not. If the conservatives have shown us anything, it's that if you put enough concentration in your message and push hard enough, you can break just about anyone.
It's time to make like Pit Bulls and push against people like Coulter. Hard. Because if you don't take her seriously as someone that can truely influence. Then she truely has won.

that won't go away just because of the sheer number of hours and radio stations he's on. Coulter works by invitation only, and she's only invited because she gets us mad.

As for boycotts, the next time I see one work for us will be the first time. WHo do we boycott? Barnes and Nobles, Borders (both liberal corporations)? Libraries? Or do we just refuse to buy her book? If so, that's what I'm saying in the first place. Boycott her by not talking about her, not giving her pages and pages of free advertisement on DU and other liberal sites. Boycott her by ignoring her. Publishers give her large advances because they know she will be able to pimp her book on all the nationals, but the only reason the nationals like her is because she makes us mad.

I'm sure she has supporters. Hitler still has supporters. So does Timothy McVeigh. But so what? We won't convince everyone to not like her. Let her keep her fringe. But every time we start these Ann the Mann threads, her advances and her public appearances go up.

The thing that bothers me, I guess, is that when we focus so much on her, we let them set our agenda. We are more than a group of whiners and complainers. We have a positive message, but we let them divert us. We seem to think that the worse we make Republicans look, the more we will win. We can make them into evil Satans in everyone's mind, and if people don't think we can do better, they still won't vote for us. Let people here our message, and then hear Ann's from her, and then the people can decide which they prefer. Instead, most of what they hear from us is outrage. There's plenty to be outraged about, but unless we focus on ourselves instead of the Repubs, there will be even more to be outraged about, and for many years to come.

Just my view of the matter.

they should, to a person, refuse to do so and say why: I refuse to be part of her publicity machine which is just designed to get more people to buy her books. She adds no value to any discussion. All she wants to do is slime people and I want no part of that.

eom

"Shame on the silent Senators. And please, let’s hear no more from either of them for a while about tolerance, respect and decency."

...of Repugs about it

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/michael-smerconish/gop-cut-coulter-loose_b_22955.html

I've never heard or read him to be anything but as vile as Coultergeist.

Bake