Wednesday, March 14, 2007

There's a Reason That It is the FIRST Amendment

I know that this is a couple of weeks old, but I have been asked to opine on Ann Coulter's closing remarks at CPAC. Small surprise, I enjoy reading Ann Coulter's weekly column, as well as her books. I find her to be both entertaining and informative. Some of my more liberal acquaintances believe that the value of her commentary is solely for the amusement of all of us mean-spirited, sexist,bigoted, homophobes who destroy the environment with our SUVs and capitalist society. However, should you doubt her claims, all you have to do is check her references (which are meticulously researched). She, like Rush, is capable of marrying information with entertainment. Bill O'Reilly is fond of lumping Ann Coulter into the same category as Al Franken and Bill Maher. I find this insulting on a few levels.

For starters, Franken and Maher's humor is not derived from wit. Any one with a pre-teenaged brother will tell you that anything from flatulence to watching either of the "Jackass" movies is good for a laugh from the adle-headed youth. Now, I will admit that I you can get a chuckle out me with some well-timed "potty humor", but it must have context! Two guys producing methane a la Terrence and Philip from South Park just doesn't cut it (no pun intended). Unfortunately for Franken and Maher, even a twelve year-old boy (and his older sisters) have limits.

Coulter, while giving a speech at this year's Conservative Political Action Conference, said the following: "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.'" First off, this was in the context of one of the actors from Grey's Anatomy checking himself into anger management/rehab for referring to one of his co-stars with the same word. If you actually pay attention to what she said, Ann did not actually call Edwards a "faggot". It was inferred from her statement. So, where does the bigotry really lie? Semantics aside, Coulter is not the first commentator to question (in jest or in earnest) John Edwards' sexual orientation. Watch "D.C. Land" on jibjab.com; you'll see caricatures of Edwards and Kerry in bed...and not in a Lucy and Ricky Ricardo way.

On a much larger scale, my problem with the criticism of Ann's speech is two-fold. First of all, we still live in the United States of America. One of our greatest freedoms is the freedom to say whatever we please. That is not to say that we are free from repercussions. Just ask the "Dixie Twits" what happened to their relationship with many of the country music stations that used to play their singles. While you (the audience) can be offended by what I say or write, you do not have the right to stop me from speaking or writing (with the expection of slander and libel). Then there is the hypocrisy of Ann's critics. Jesse Jackson is on record as referring to Joe Lieberman as "that Hymie". Michael Richards can call two hecklers "niggers" (more than once), and all he has to do is go on Larry King and blame it on Bush. So, as long as you're a liberal, you are allowed to use the epithets and slurs of your choice. You can even wish death on someone, as long as somebody in your audience finds it humorous.

Bill Maher inadvertently made my point the same weekend that Ann exercised her First Amendment right. While Ann was dropping verbal bombs, Bill was lamenting that al-Qaeda failed to assisinate the Vice President. This is coming from a member of the same crowd that protests our involvement in a war in Iraq because according to them, we are responsible for the deaths of hundreds of thousands of civilians. Considering that the enemy combatants that attack our troops are not actually uniform-wearing members of a standing army (thereby, they are technically "civilians"), can we say "Duh"?

One of the things that goes along with our Freedom of Speech is our freedom to choose that which we read, watch, or hear. If we don't "vote" with our subscriptions or viewer/listenership, publications and programs get cancelled. Unless they're on NPR, but that's government sponsored, so it doesn't count. That is why parents, rather than asking the government to monitor what is on the TV, should do their job and monitor their children's viewing habits. Besides, have to you seen what earns a grant from the National Endowment for the Arts these days? Believe me, you don't what the federal government as your television nanny. So, where do we draw the line? Is it what society deems acceptable? If so, words like "nigger", "faggot" can't be used, so you'd better start removing literary works such as The Adventures of Huck Finn and The Catcher in the Rye, as well as Mel Brooks' early films and all of those Chris Rock HBO specials. They'll have to make a special section for them behind the bead-curtained doorway with the "No Persons under 18" sign.

3 comments:

Christina said...

Some people already want to ban Huck Finn. Ironically, it is one of the best literary arguments in favor of racial equality to come out of American Literature, in my opinion. Through his characters, Mark Twain systematically criticizes the dominant culture of the South (as he experienced it at the time), debunks the ideas that allowed slavery to remain, and presents (in my opinion) plenty of supporting evidence for the humanity and human dignity of all persons.

But, if they still want to ban the book they can go ahead and try.

Michelle said...

That is precisely it. The political correctness movement in this country (and around the world) would have us disregard the message because of the vernacular.

Unknown said...

"I think the government should be spying on all Arabs, engaging in torture as a televised spectator sport, dropping daisy cutters wantonly throughout the Middle East and sending liberals to Guantanamo."

"These broads are millionaires, lionized on TV and in articles about them, reveling in their status as celebrities and stalked by grief-arazzis... These self-obsessed women seemed genuinely unaware that 9/11 was an attack on our nation and acted as if the terrorist attacks happened only to them... I’ve never seen people enjoying their husbands’ deaths so much."

(about 9/11 widows)

"We should invade their countries, kill their leaders and convert them to Christianity. We weren't punctilious about locating and punishing only Hitler and his top officers. We carpet-bombed German cities; we killed civilians. That's war. And this is war."

"Being nice to people is, in fact, one of the incidental tenets of Christianity (as opposed to other religions whose tenets are more along the lines of 'kill everyone who doesn't smell bad and doesn't answer to the name Mohammed')."

(way to be Christian right there, Ann!)

"They're [Democrats] always accusing us of repressing their speech. I say let's do it. Let's repress them. Frankly, I'm not a big fan of the First Amendment."

"I think our motto should be, post-9-11, 'raghead talks tough, raghead faces consequences.'"

"Press passes can't be that hard to come by if the White House allows that old Arab Helen Thomas to sit within yards of the president"

"My only regret with Timothy McVeigh is he did not go to the New York Times building."

(he killed babies. baylee. one year old. he blew up her daycare, and she burned and bled and died.)

"I think [women] should be armed but should not vote...women have no capacity to understand how money is earned. They have a lot of ideas on how to spend it...it's always more money on education, more money on child care, more money on day care."

"If those kids had been carrying guns they would have gunned down this one [teenage] gunman. ... Don't pray. Learn to use guns."

(about a prayer meeting where a gunman stormed in and killed three students)




Honestly, all political affiliations aside...really?

I'm not trying to jump on you, but, really, Ann Coulter? Not the best, for any...religion, person, or human being with a soul, really.