Posted on 03/14/2005 7:53:10 PM PST by rface
...she opened with a statement referring to Clinton as a "horny hick." Such spiteful and subjective comments brought laughter from the audience but did nothing to strengthen her opposing argument......I went home that night and tore my Bush-Cheney sticker off my door, and took my Bush "Taking America forward" pin off my bulletin board. I no longer consider myself a Republican, or even a conservative
Wednesday's (March 9th) intellectual exchange between Ann Coulter and Peter Beinart was both stimulating and disappointing, but above all, it was quite unsettling.
Both candidates had significant strengths, and they were surely worthy opponents. And it is always a privilege to witness such free exchange of discourse. However, while the debate was feisty and witty, I was left with an overall disturbing sense of deep hatred and political regression.
Beinart, editor of The New Republic (liberal), relied on many facts, figures and statistics, giving his argument an objective strength. Coulter did not respond with as many tangible figures, weakening her position. Beinhart's weakness, however, lay in his inability to keep the argument impersonal. He directed numerous insults at Coulter, most of which were completely irrelevant to the discussion topic.
This reflected the greatest strength of Coulter. She began her opening statements with praise for Beinart. She lauded him as a worthy opponent, a future leader of his party, and a man of great intellect. Beinart did no such thing. Coulter maintained her composure upon the assailment of numerous attacks and withheld from personal retorts completely. In one of her earlier books, "Slander," Coulter argues that liberals cannot debate without using personal insult as a tool, and Beinart certainly proved her point. She prevailed, in my opinion, as the classier of the two in her ability to maintain the purity of the debate without stooping to personally insult her fellow debater.
However, although Coulter was able to abstain from attacking Beinart, she was unable to debate without using vindictive commentary about others. In response to Beinart's factual discussion of Bill Clinton's presidency and what made it so great, she opened with a statement referring to Clinton as a "horny hick." Such spiteful and subjective comments brought laughter from the audience but did nothing to strengthen her opposing argument.
The lesson that both debaters desperately need to learn is that the very essence of debate is objectivity. The purpose of debate is to match facts, reason, and logic to find the ultimate truth that lies within the framework of the debate topic. It is not about who can coin the wittiest one-liners or appeal emotionally to the most people. It is certainly not about who can draw the most laughter or the loudest applause from the audience. The exchange between the two arguers was entertaining, but fell quite short of debate. The atmosphere in Cabot was that of a show, not a serious discussion.
What was most disappointing and indeed quite disturbing was the reaction of the Tufts audience. There was booing and shouting. Afterwards, I overheard a girl say that "people like her [Coulter] should not be allowed to write books," and the comment was received with emphatic agreement. Albeit a comment made in jest, the feeling of hatred in the debate room made it eerie and made my night walk home much darker.
Another girl made a profanity-laden statement that Coulter is a "neo-nazi." I would challenge her to think more carefully about what exactly neo-nazism entails, and when and where exactly Coulter has fit that highly offensive profile before being so boldly accusatory.
Finally, I heard Coulter referred to as a "nutcase" more than once. If that is true, then she is certainly a nutcase in high demand with several popular books, and one who can gracefully hold her own in a room full of hate.
Above all, this debate cast a shadow on my vision of America's political future. While I fully embrace the freedom of discourse and encourage it wholeheartedly, I believe these highly partisan debates can bring nothing but regression. They breed hate and further solidify political schisms. They make people cry out for censorship. They work in no way towards understanding. How much longer can America stand if its most educated citizens are so deeply divided by misunderstanding and hate?
Every great power has unknowingly induced its own demise. My fear is that Abraham Lincoln has already foreseen ours with his statement that "a house divided against itself cannot stand." My genuine plea to fellow believers in the human mind is to throw off self-righteous mantles of partisanship and to work instead towards a more progressive dialogue. Let us make Tufts a birthplace of objective communication in a world of such disarray. Objectivity is the human's only key to truth and provides the only framework within real progress can be sought.
I went home that night and tore my Bush-Cheney sticker off my door, and took my Bush "Taking America forward" pin off my bulletin board. I no longer consider myself a Republican, or even a conservative. From this day forward I choose the path of true progress. Consider me an objectivist.
Ashley Samelson is a sophomore who has yet to declare a major.
This tells me everything I need to know.
Objective? I thought you were to debate the merits of your position, not be objective like perhaps and audience member could be.
The author if this piece is kind of pathetic.
"From this day forward I choose the path of true progress. Consider me an objectivist."
I think we know what she really was and is: a Progressive, which is really the codeword for a liberal who does not have the balls to embrace the 'liberal' label.
It's highly unlikely that Ashley is or ever was a conservative
Ashley Samelson is a sophomore who has yet to declare a major.
Well, she's young yet so there's still hope.
Objective people can disagree with each other.
No one here is perfectly happy with their party. Sulking in the comfortable corner of a political philosophy that has no participation in the current political sphere is the fashionably cool pose of college rebels. But I don't have to respect it as being anything but what it is: A cop-out.
(Pause while the "Oh yeah, well the Republicans were a minoriity party once!" fussilade falls)
Objectivism is a fine idea, the right's socialism, really, where all those idealists who won't accept anything but an unreachable perfection can join and feel elite and above it all. But it's no more reality than basing one's view of the world on Star Trek utopian dreams would be. I live in the real world, and have no time for those who don't and expect everyone to fawn over them for it.
"Ashley Samelson is a sophomore who has yet to declare a major."
Seems she wishy-washy in more ways than one!
I think we are experiencing a Ward Churchill moment with this faker.
Don't confuse her.
Well, people have already pointed out that it's extremely doubtful that she had Bush/Cheney stickers to tear off, and that she's a flake who can't make up her mind.
I'm not sure if I hold the name "Ashley" against her, because I know several nice girls named Ashley. But it's tempting.
"Consider me an objectivist."
She likes speakers that repetitively drone on for 80 pages.
This is pretty deluded even for a college sophomore. I find it difficult to believe she was genuinely conservative and because of this "debate" abandoned her beliefs.
When she has lived a little longer and has more experience she may see that whenever conservatives try to "work instead towards a more progressive dialogue" they get back stabbed by the liberals. Case in point, Teddy (aka The Swimmer) Kennedy and the "education" bill. Bush foolishly lets him write it and then right after its passage, The Swimmer goes out and trashes Bush and the bill. And nobody in the MSM calls him on it.
One does not have a "dialog" with the left. One defeats them in the arena of ideas, at the ballot box and anywhere else necessary.
Simply put, it is redundant to refer to politics as partisan. And naive to think that it should be anything else.
Ann is old enough to be my mom, I think, but geez, she's so hot.
"The lesson that both debaters desperately need to learn is that the very essence of debate is objectivity."
I wonder how many best selling books Ashley Sampson has written.
We won't have to worry about partisanship too much longer since the Dimocrat Party is in an accelerating death spiral, should impact the ground in about 6 - 8 months. We'll be a much better country and another political organization will fill the void.
OK - so I am gullible and I want to give a pretty name the benefit of the doubt.....so now every single post has stated that Ashley Samelson is about as conservative as ..... hmmmm......Hillary Clinton? Sheeeesh. I am a softy
Good news is she left the Kerry/Edwards sticker on her Bumper! Ann Rox!!
Pray for W and Our Troops
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.