I Would Talk About Edwards But You Have To Go Into Rehab If You Use The Word f*****

Speaking of Romney (who was gov of Massachusetts for four years), anyone hear his speech today at the conference? He pretty much slandered the state throughout the entire speech.

Yeah, there's a man of honor for you.

 

Speaking of Romney...

“I am happy to hear that after you hear from me, you will hear from Ann Coulter. That is a good thing. Oh yeah!”

http://thinkprogress.org/2007/03/02/coulter-edwards/

 

i guess coulter cant talk about bush anymore than.

 

Well, we fought a three-and-a-half year war against anti-semitism, so if anybody from any party said the second word you used, naturally, they would be in more trouble. Until we stop playing the Gannon card, though, we can't complain.

I guess as long as gays and lesbians are uppity and irrational enough to keep asking for crazy sh*t like fair and equal treatment under the law, mainstream America will be threatened enough to use homophobic slurs; call it Jim Crow lite.

I really wouldn't mind forcing politicians of both parties (the President included), and maybe a televanagelist or two, to respond to this horrific comment and say once and for all that this type of language, and the thinking behind it, is wrong, wrong, wrong. But if they did that, of course, it would be condemned by Laura Ingraham and lampooned on the Daily Show.

Thanks for the heads up, though; not the first time she's used this language to attack a Democrat (although using it to attack anyone is bigoted), but enough for me to back up my preaching with a check to GLAAD and/or LAMBDA, put my money where my mouth is.

 

What did he say? I tried to find an article about it, but all I could find was a bunch of articles about the fact that he thinks he's the most likely to get the Repub nomination. A good friend of mine worked in his administration in Massachusetts (didn' necessariily believe in him, but did believe in his position), and I'm sure he'd be interested to see it.

 

I'll try and find a transcript. Meanwhile josh has some thoughts about it. Sorry to derail your thread giff.




Late Update: Romney's pandermonious speech is really turning out to be a laugh riot. After yakking about the press and how they're out to get him, he bragged that the right-wingers will be around even after the news media is no more. And of course, a scenario like this is something that more than a few of us are worried about.

Half of Romney's speech turns out to be making fun of Massachusetts, which I think just makes him look cheesy and like a jerk, considering he just spent four years pledged to the state. I guess he didn't mention to the voters that he thought the state was an embarrassment.

He even flagged his crack about Dorchester, Mass. from his 1994 campaign against Ted Kennedy. Folks who've been watching Romney for years like I have will remember that moment which came during one of the debates if I remember correctly. It was a churlish and juvenile moment -- making fun of people whose votes he was allegedly campaigning for. It was a small but important turning point in that campaign. And the same part of the guy is coming out now.

Later Update: Watching Romney pander to every line item in the right-wing catechism in this speech is a good window into his character. And the view shows the same shortcomings as the Dorchester comment and the Massachusetts-bashing in this speech. People can think what they want of Massachusetts. It's a liberal state. It's on one end of the spectrum of American political culture. But, not long ago, Mitt Romney was running to be the governor of that state, to represent its people. A month or so out of office, now they're the punchline of his jokes. They're tossed like a tissue after it's used. And of course now he's telling these right-wingers everything they want to hear too even though it contradicts pretty much everything he used to say he believed. He'd drop them in a flash and denigrate them too. That's a window into who someone is. He's dangerous.

-- Josh Marshall

 

Well that wasn't hard. I won't post it here, but it's up at his website.


http://myclob.pbwiki.com/02-02-2007

 

This guy validated Christianity by making a pact with Satan.

 

"There is no place in political discourse for this kind of hate-filled and bigoted comments,” “While Democrats and Republicans may disagree on the issues, we should all be able to agree that this kind of vile rhetoric is out of bounds. The American people want a serious, thoughtful debate of the issues. Republicans—including the Republican presidential candidates who shared the podium with Ann Coulter today—should denounce her hateful remarks."

-- Howard Dean, Democratic National Committee chairman

 

Greenwald writes well...

 

I'm thinking Al Gore lost Tennessee in 2000 for the same reason. Just the shift from a state platform to a federal platform: different stakeholders, different priorities, different views. I've always felt Massachuesetts got a bad wrap, particulary from Bush in the '04 debate; as if it wasn't the birthplace of John and Sam Adams, the American Revolution, the first American university. As if WEB DuBois and MLK weren't getting PhDs at Harvard and BU while James Meredith was getting shot at on registration day at Ole Miss or teenage black girls were getting battery acid thrown in there eyes at Little Rock Central High.

 

These guys have really worked hard to make sure I won't vote for them. Congrats, GOP.

 

with husky voice and false bravado, Annie has demonstrated a most masculine demeanor, time and again.

 

Someone in the Obama slave owning ancestor thread said "Politcs in this country sux." and this is another example of that. Mitt Romney did a pretty good job in Mass. steering a moderate course with some bold initiatives and now he's trashing all of that to pander to activist. I don't totally blame him as if he wants any shot at winning the Republican nomination he's going to have to.

It is stuff like this that gives politics a bad name and drives a lot of principled people out of of politics.

 

Principled people in politics is an oxymoron.

 

I do not hate Ann Coulter, but she tempts me to cross that line every time she opens her big fat mouth. All she wants is attention, so she says the dumbest thing possible. It's pathetic, with crap like that, this country will NEVER heal from probably two of the most consecutive divisive Presidencies in history.

 

Nice...

http://electioncentral.tpmcafe.com/blog/electioncentral/2007/mar/04/coulter_clarifies_faggot_remark

 

peas in a pod- they're both idiots.

 

You may dislike him, but he is nothing like Coulter. He doesn't used bigoted rhetoric, insult the widows of victims of the tragedy of 9/11 or half the stuff that Coulter does.

Basically he just writes from an position with a strong opinion. You may not like the opinion he writes from, but he is nothing like Coulter. It is ignorant for you to link the two.