Howard Kurtz On Coulter

J.J. Jackson* | March 6, 2007

Howard Kurtz is a staff writer for the Washington Post and he has a long way go to call himself anything but a political hack. But then again I understand how hard it is for journalists these days to be anything but biased. It’s one reason why I don’t consider myself a journalist and never have. I don’t want to be thought of as someone that doesn’t have a brain in my head and want to be more known for my opinions which drive the left wacko.

I’m biased, but at least my bias is based on facts and proper use of the English language to promote my agenda of personal liberty and equal rights. Unlike Mr. Kurtz.

Here is what Mr. Kurtz said of Ann Coulter’s remarks about John Edwards and the use of the word “faggot”.

At first, Ann Coulter’s anti-gay crack at a Washington conference Friday drew almost no media coverage, although it was witnessed by hundreds of journalists and political operatives and captured by television cameras.

Anti-gay? Call me crazy but I didn’t hear Ann Coulter say anything that could be remotely considered “anti-gay”. She joked that she couldn’t talk about Edwards because using the word “faggot” meant you had to go into rehab.

Specifically: “I was going to have a few comments on the other Democratic presidential candidate, John Edwards, but it turns out that you have to go into rehab if you use the word faggot, so I’m kind of at an impasse.”

“Anti-gay” is saying things like “I hate gay people” or “gay people should die”.

Apparently the term “anti” has been rewritten now to mean any use of a word that someone doesn’t like instead of meaning against something. If anything her remarks were “anti-Edwards”. But I guess that doesn’t quite have the same shock value to it.

Kurtz ran out and found Edward’s campaign manager to comment:

The idea, says Jonathan Prince, Edwards’s deputy campaign manager, was “to make clear that kind of language is not acceptable in political discourse. It’s important for the right wing to know people are going to stand up against this kind of hateful rhetoric.”

I repeat, too bad that John Edwards and his campaign didn’t think that way when they continued to support people like Melissa McEwan and Amanda Marcotte who were hired to work for John Edwards.

The selective outrage among the left is all too clear.

Can I say again that I think Coulter’s comments were a little over the top? But I also think that it was a perfectly calculated moved to show how the left is ok with their own bomb throwers but have a hissy fit the second anyone who opposes them makes some sort of comment they don’t like.

I think I should to make it clear. But I also reiterate that I never called for Melissa McEwan or her fellow harpy to be punished or forced out of the Edwards campaign. I wanted them right where everything they would say would be out in the open. The problem for the left on this is that try as they might they can’t paint Coulter’s remarks as “anti-gay”. But the remarks by McEwan and other left wing bimbos were clearly “anti-” many things from Catholics to President Bush. They’ll try though … they always do.

Contributor's website: http://www.libertyreborn.com

*Content posted by a user may not be completely written by that user. Content from another source is cited in either block quotes, with quotes or with a link to the original material. Content from other sites is posted for commentary and news purposes under fair use. Each user is responsible for their own postings and a particular posting should not be construed as being endorsed by this site or it's owner.