Politics of Hate
As chance would have it, I was watching C-SPAN the other day while it was broadcasting the CPAC (Conservative Political Action Conference) proceedings. Some of the speeches were pretty interesting, even though I disagree with most points on their agenda - I was particularly intrigued by Rudy Guiliani - but that is for another post.
To the point: by far the most ignorant and vapid speech given was by Ann Coulter - a conservative blowhard who has exemplified the polarized politics of the past 10 years, and who now exemplifies the vitriolic rage of a conservative base that seems to be unable to stop its slow drift to the fringe of the party (witness the GOP presidential frontrunners.) By now her quote about John Edwards has become infamous, and it certainly took me aback when I heard it. And while it does capture the venomous nature of her attacks, it fails to expose the clear hypocrisy of them - a point which demonstrates the lack of substance of her claims. Two examples will suffice.
First: later on in that same speech, Ann says that "I'm not against gays, I'm against gay marriage. In fact I don't see why more gays aren't Republicans." How on earth can that be a sincere political statement when she clearly considers calling someone gay to be an insult? I don't get it.
Second: when insulting Al Gore from the podium, Ann criticized him for having a large 'carbon footprint' despite his devotion to reducing global warming. The implicit criticism is that he is a hypocrite. About 5 minutes later, she was asked by a reporter from The Nation about how her three broken engagements can be reconciled with her strong position on the sanctity of marriage. Instead of answering the question (and I can imagine possible legitimate answers), she instead invoked her right to privacy and asked the reporter to respect her privacy. Not only is this making her guilty of the same sin, it's also wonderfully ironic since she's vehemently pro-life, and yet the right to an abortion has its constitutional basis in the same right to privacy that she invoked in her defense.
This is not an isolated incident. Ann Coulter has been making similarly racist and homophobic remarks for many years now, often on national TV. For example, last year, at this same convention, she used the term 'raghead' twice in a very insulting manner.
It is heartening to note that Ann's remarks have been widely condemned by conservative political groups and candidates, including Mitt Romney who introduced her and who she supports. However, it is disheartening to have seen the applause and hear the jeers in the auditorium after her comment.
The politics of hate have been present in this country since its inception, and I don't expect them to go away soon. But that does not alleviate the responsibility we have to speak out when such a national and public figure makes such offensive comments.
As chance would have it, I was watching C-SPAN the other day while it was broadcasting the CPAC (Conservative Political Action Conference) proceedings. Some of the speeches were pretty interesting, even though I disagree with most points on their agenda - I was particularly intrigued by Rudy Guiliani - but that is for another post.
To the point: by far the most ignorant and vapid speech given was by Ann Coulter - a conservative blowhard who has exemplified the polarized politics of the past 10 years, and who now exemplifies the vitriolic rage of a conservative base that seems to be unable to stop its slow drift to the fringe of the party (witness the GOP presidential frontrunners.) By now her quote about John Edwards has become infamous, and it certainly took me aback when I heard it. And while it does capture the venomous nature of her attacks, it fails to expose the clear hypocrisy of them - a point which demonstrates the lack of substance of her claims. Two examples will suffice.
First: later on in that same speech, Ann says that "I'm not against gays, I'm against gay marriage. In fact I don't see why more gays aren't Republicans." How on earth can that be a sincere political statement when she clearly considers calling someone gay to be an insult? I don't get it.
Second: when insulting Al Gore from the podium, Ann criticized him for having a large 'carbon footprint' despite his devotion to reducing global warming. The implicit criticism is that he is a hypocrite. About 5 minutes later, she was asked by a reporter from The Nation about how her three broken engagements can be reconciled with her strong position on the sanctity of marriage. Instead of answering the question (and I can imagine possible legitimate answers), she instead invoked her right to privacy and asked the reporter to respect her privacy. Not only is this making her guilty of the same sin, it's also wonderfully ironic since she's vehemently pro-life, and yet the right to an abortion has its constitutional basis in the same right to privacy that she invoked in her defense.
This is not an isolated incident. Ann Coulter has been making similarly racist and homophobic remarks for many years now, often on national TV. For example, last year, at this same convention, she used the term 'raghead' twice in a very insulting manner.
It is heartening to note that Ann's remarks have been widely condemned by conservative political groups and candidates, including Mitt Romney who introduced her and who she supports. However, it is disheartening to have seen the applause and hear the jeers in the auditorium after her comment.
The politics of hate have been present in this country since its inception, and I don't expect them to go away soon. But that does not alleviate the responsibility we have to speak out when such a national and public figure makes such offensive comments.
Labels: Politics
posted by slithytoves at 2:16 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home