Posted on 10/07/2001 10:41:03 PM PDT by ouroboros
Welcome to FR. Now....you don't have your facts straight.
You indicated that the comment you referred to was "(written by 'ouroboros')". That is erroneous. evolved_rage's comment was deleted by Jim Robinson.
Ourboros made a disparaging comment about evolved_rage's racist remark. Ourboros agreed with you.
Here's a link to MY comment on this thread. One of the things that new Freepers have to endure is the shock of occasional unacceptably stupid remarks. My policy is to smack down such cyber pollution whenever possible. You did good. ;)
I blew it myself. BUT...let that be a lesson to you! Now you see how easy it is to screw up! : )
No, I was quoting "evolved rage" those are not my words. Italics = quote.
I'm the editor of Enter Stage Right where this article was posted and I wanted to clear something up. At about 3:00am I added the following paragraph to the article:
Editor's note: Some questions have been raised by readers about the title of this piece apparently referring to Ann Coulter as a "bimbo". In this magazine's opinion, when Mr. Wong's title described Ann Coulter as a "bimbo," he was referencing a quote in his piece by Boston Globe columnist Alex Beam who referred to Ms. Coulter as a "bimbo". He was not, in my opinion, referring to his personal opinion of her which is why I let the title stand. -- Steven Martinovich
For the record, Barton titled his piece and I was the one who captioned the picture.
While we are at it, I changed the "Ku Klux Coulter" link to the specific column referenced as opposed to the URL where Raimondo posts his newest column. I also changed the Houston Review to the Texas Mercury in Wong's ID as it seems that publication has gone through a name change.
By definition tounge in cheek remarks are made half in jest with a twinkle in the eye and irony as the intention. Coulter was in a blind rage when she made her comments, which is not the same thing at all. Immature individuals like Coulter lash out when angry and say whatever pops into their shallow little minds. It was that combination of emotion and personal quality which produced the staggeringly dumb column she wrote.
People either understand that or they are frighteningly stupid.
[me]: Her career is toast.[you]: LOFL
Laugh all you like. Coulter has damaged herself very badly in this episode. For her bad behavior and unconscionable public mockery of the good people who employed her, she was canned by the premier conservative publication in the nation, earning the ill-will of many of the most influential conservatives in Washington. Their memories will be long.
Over their heads FR conservatives, apparently flattered that a half-way decent looking blonde (claims that she is a great beauty are hilarious) says stuff they like, may not have the political antennae to figure out she's toast, but that doesn't mean she isn't.
And with her particular specialty (constitutional law) not in demand during a military campaign, Coulter's appearances on Geraldo and Hannity and Colmes will decline was well.
She will continue to be featured by Maher, however, whose PI is the media graveyard for former superstars, such as Arianna Huffington.
I wanted to placate the dull-witted. Way too many people who respond without reading first. I wanted to make sure I didn't get the same damned email over and over again on how mean I was for running the piece.
I believed it. I agree with it.
We are doing the first two parts now.
After it is over there will be many missionaries doing the third part.
The "we" of the last part will mainly not be Americans, though.
What she wrote is 100% on the money.
The most surprising thing to me is that I never thought of Ann Coulter as a Christian.
Well, you shouldn't placate them. Let the talking monkeys send their email. Just keep deleting it and go about the business of running your magazine.
And you have never said anything in anger?
She didn't sound like she was joking.
Some people use humor in dealing with anger. In this case, one ought to look not so much at the words, but the intensity in which they were said. She's a writer for crying out loud, and hyperbole is a tool of the trade. She has always been a bit 'irreverant'. That does not change simply because she is expressing outrage at the unjust death of a good friend. Get a grip.
I turned off the radio. I couldn't believe I heard a writer I admired say something like that.
Even if your interpretation was accurate, and I have no reason to believe it is, you would let a single uncharacteristic outburst affect your respect and admiration of someone you previously held in high regard? If so, you would not be much of a friend and wouldn't have any if you were held to the same standard. This may seem like an overly harsh condemnation of what appears to me to be a somewhat self-righteous attitude on your part, but for you to take an 'incident' and turn it into a conclusion about her overall character is way out of line.
Have you never regreted something you have stated?
BUMP the attack dogs are here to stay Wong Way spewer
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.