Because we disagree about Coulter’s comment, about how we should respond to it, about whether it’s inappropriate given the venue, about whether it’s funny or insightful. Screw all that. Because here, we can disagree. And I can post a vile version of Uncle ReamUs. And when all is said and done, nobody has to lose face unless they’re dishonest. That, my friends, is what it’s about. There’s never going to
March 6, 2007
Zen and the art of motorcycle maintenance, abridged 29
Those wishing to assert themselves in life’s fast lane without fear that an occasional fierce wind gust might muss their locks would be well advised to don a hairnet and a custom-fitted helmet—both of which are readily available from fine retailers in either of the two Americas.
My Two Cents On the Coulter Kerfuffle (CraigC)
I haven’t taken the time to read every comment in Jeff’s last post on the subject, so if I’m going over old territory, I apologize, but I haven’t seen my take anywhere up to now. I have two problems with Coulter’s comment that sort of tie in together. While I agree in principle with Jeff’s comments about intentionalism, I just can’t buy the “faggot doesn’t mean faggot” argument. It’s like
Pinpoint Searches
I don’t generally agree with Reason’s Julian Sanchez, but when he’s not acting like a polemicist for privacy absolutism, he can write articles that are quite informative. Take, for instance, “The Pinpoint Search,” from January’s Reason: A new wave of advanced surveillance tools is capable of detecting not just drugs but weapons, explosives, and illicit computer files, potentially flying under the Fourth Amendment’s radar all the while. A handheld scanner
Free Speech, Political Identity, and the Post-Coulter Debate (UPDATED and UPDATED AGAIN. And AGAIN! NOW WITH FINAL UPDATE!)
I received an email this morning that I think is worth sharing inasmuch as it—when coupled with my reply—crystallizes certain of my positions on speech and identity politics. Under the subject line “Ann Coulter,” “esmyth” writes: Ah, the irony! When I was a little girl and anti-war liberals and hippies were tearing up the country with their explitive-laced vitriol, conservatives were the ones who stood for decent, respectful speech. Now
Putzpah [Dan Collins]
His Silky Pwn3yness: “I think that Jesus would be disappointed in our ignoring the plight of those around us who are suffering and our focus on our own selfish short-term needs,” Edwards told the site. “I think he would be appalled, actually.” Yes, I clearly remember the part from the Sermon on the Mount where the Lord said, “Blessed are the Ambulance Chasers. Not.” And in the latter days (eschewing
Jameson Observations 1 (cranky-d)
First of all, on the rocks. You might take a first sip, but generally you want to give the ice some time to melt a bit. To me, Jameson tastes better when it’s a little diluted. Second, probably the best of the inexpensive yet very good boozes. I like single-malts as well, but Jameson is still very good, and in my case, very easy on the body even when severely
Channeling Paul Harvey [Karl]
By now, everyone has covered Ann Coulter’s remark at the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) last Friday: “I was going to have a few comments on the other Democratic presidential candidate John Edwards, but it turns out you have to go into rehab if you use the word ‘faggot,’ so I … can’t really talk about Edwards.” Indeed, a number of conservatives have urged CPAC to stop inviting Coulter to
Words that just sound funny, #303: “pandowdy”
eg. “Is that your pandowdy?” “Yes, that pandowdy belongs to me.”
