Coulter Ups Ante, Adds Sympathetic Words for Abortion Snipers to Gay-Bashing; Caledonian-Record Covers Lipstick Costs
If you happened to catch Ann Coulter’s performance at CUPAC, you know that she called John Edwards a “faggot.” Even if you missed her act, you know she called Edwards a “faggot,” because the remark was circulated globally.
And of course, that’s no accident: Coulter ends her speech on the line, for God’s sake. It was meant to be the finale, the take-away, the let’s-have-at-it line.
In other words, it was not an instance of casual speech treated as hate-speech by knee-jerk liberals, but the reverse: hate-speech deliberately deployed under cover of tweaking political correctness.
Three other things you may not know, at this point:
1) Clearly seeking to boost the power of the original outrage, Coulter repeated the slur at a Christian Conference on March 3, adding some sympathetic words for those who shoot abortion doctors: “Those few abortionists were shot, or, depending on your point of view, had a procedure with a rifle performed on them. I’m not justifying it, but I do understand how it happened . . .”
2) Six newspapers carrying Coulter’s syndicated column have now dropped it, for obvious reasons. These include papers in Pennsylvania, Michigan, Tennesee, North Carolina, and Louisiana, hardly liberal hotbeds, any of them.
3) And yes, The Caledonian-Record, published right here in St. Johnsbury, is one of the forty newspapers still keeping Coulter in slit leather skirts.
Yes, the Caledonian-Record is a conservative paper, but we find it hard to believe that any self-respecting publication in the state of Vermont can continue to justify carrying Coulter’s particular brand of poison. Just a few days ago, the editorial board referred to Cindy Sheehan as “a notoriously controversial peace activist who is . . . vicious and non-discriminating in her hate-filled broadsides,” and the board seemed to indicate that this was a bad thing.
Of course, pop out the phrase “peace activist” and insert “shock pundit” and you have Coulter in a nutshell. The Sheehan editorial was titled, “We’d Like Some Answers.”
Well, with regard to Coulter, so would VDB.
So let us suggest the following: Call the Record, or email them at , and ask politely that they drop Coulter’s column. It’s beneath them, and it’s beneath the state of Vermont, frankly.
Especially given that Drs. Bernard Slepian and David Gandell were both shot with high-powered sniper rifles only hours from where the editors of the Record go about their daily business. It is unconscionable that Vermont dollars should still be finding their way into the fat bank account of someone writing applause lines about their murders.
It’s time for Coulter’s intervention, and VDB would like to see Vermont help lead the way.
[Hat tip to reader Ben, for passing on the list of the forty remaining enablers.]
Late Update, 2:12 pm:
The Good news: a seventh newspaper has let Coulter go for cause. And the Bad: no, it wasn’t the Caledonian-Record.
on March 13th, 2007 at 1:11 am
[…] Picking up where we left off Friday: Coulter talking down gays and Presidential candidate John Edwards, and talking up guys who gun down abortion providers with high-powered rifles. Apparently it’s not just VDB who thinks her star is on the wane. […]
on August 21st, 2007 at 9:44 pm
[…] But even with that skepticism noted, we did a double-take when a VDB post showed up in the notes for the entry on the Caledonian-Record. […]