Funmurphys: the Blog

But the problem in today's political culture is that it takes the Coulter voice to be heard. Nobody in Washington is reading Confederate Yankee, but some of those pompous asses WILL see video of Coulter.

Yes, they'll see the video of Ann, and it will only confirm their opinion that Ann is not to be listened to and the Jersey Girls were right.

I do appreciate the problem that if you are a rightie a whole different set of rules apply to get attention in the national media - and it usually means you have to be a bomb thrower. On the other hand, what does it say about us righties that we are the one's buying her books?

It says we enjoy a rip-roaring good read.

So let me ask you Jeff, do you think the Jersey Girls are enjoying their husbands death? Are they happy with the trade of husband for temporary fame? Do you think either you or Ann Coulter are in a position to determine that?

For the sake of argument, let's say the charge is true - they are enjoying their husbands death. Does this change the accuracy of what the Jersey Girl's were saying? Or is such a claim by Coulter an attack on their motives while ignoring their content - a pretty standard method by leftists?

Or how about her claim that Tim McVeigh should have blown up the New York Times? Or her claim that Max Cleland didn't deserve his Silver Star. The trouble is they are wrong, repugnant, and allow the left to discredit all the stuff she is right about.

I made no charge that the Jersey Girl's are "enjoying" their husbands' deaths. It is, however, clear beyond the possibility of mistaking, that they are using their grief as a political weapon, claiming a moral authority they simply do not have. I don't want the clouded minds of grief-striken widows to dictate national policy. They have every right to vote how they see fit, but they have no right to expect a platform from which to spout their beliefs that the rest of us are not also given. Let me and a half dozen other conservatives with differing viewpoints from theirs make the round of news shows and talk shows to counter their nonsense, then I'll call it even. But not until.

Other people are using their grief as a political weapon. I agree that I don't want grief stricken widows to dictate policy, and the way to counter that is to point out that grief stricken people often lose perspective (rightfully so), and to counter their use by others for political purposes keep asking what other wives and relatvies of 9/11 victims think. Point out how we only hear about those who agree with a particular political viewpoint, don't bash the widows.

As far as countering nonsense, I don't think you do it with people who go too far and spout offensive nonsense of their own -- especially somebody like Coulter who can be counted on to slit her own rhetorical throat on cue. I think people like Pat Robertson gets used by the media as a spokesman for Christianity for the very same reason - he can be counted on to reliably act the boogey man. Coulter is in the media rolodex for that reason -- she can be used to discredit conservatives.

Well, it appears we're closer to agreement than to disagreement. I do, however, want to say finally, re: Coulter being a magnet for criticism:

Truth will always be attacked by those who live a lie. That the truth is spoken plainly, or even harshly, does not mitigate it's truthfulness.