Oh well. Done and done.

Another translation would be, “I would call Edwards a faggot, but if I did, I would have to go to a rehab.”

Of course, all you Coulter groupies have to twist the facts to fit your own idol worship of her.

To anybody else who’s trying to be provocative and/or explain away Coulter’s remarks, that’s your right. Again, it hurts your credibility here, not mine.

That thing in her throat is a gerbil being suffocated.

An intelligent person might realize that Ann did NOT call John Edwards a “faggot”, in fact, she quite specifically said that she would not be calling him one.

What Ann did was make a satirical, sharply barbed attack on Political Correctness using John Edwards as a foil. The reaction to her remark, just as in the case of the infamous “Jersey Girls” remarks, proves how absolutely correct her point was.

I am sick of weak-kneed, so called conservatives that lack the brains to understand Ann and the balls to back her up.

Ann is intelligent, passionate and unafraid and that’s why I admire her.

You, though, Justin, CONFIRM part of Coultiers point with your hyper-sensitive grand-standing. Trust me, the fags don’t need you to come to their rescue. They’ve go it covered.

I’ll let Ed Morrissey answer this one…

A few commenters compared “faggot” to the N-word, saying that gays use it as a term of endearment and then get hypocritically offended when straights use it to describe them. I’m not familiar with that level of usage, but let’s say it’s true. If Ann Coulter got up and desceribed Barack Obama as a “n—-r” as part of a joke at an event like CPAC, would you think that reflected well on conservatives? Uh, no.

Use the words if you want. But it’s at the risk of your credibility, not mine.

Conservatives have an image problem, and Coulter is its manifestation. Hopefully they will marginalize her after this, but that laughter and clapping certainly didn’t seem like marginalization to me. I bet you anything that Coulter will be on Hannity and Limbaugh’s show soon saying, “Obviously it was a reference to Isiah Washington from Grey’s Anatomy. Come on people! It was a joke.” And then this will all be swept under the rug and she’ll be invited to conservative functions again and again and again. And I do hope I’m wrong, but she’s done this type of stuff before and she still gets invited back to CPAC and is introduced by MITT ROMNEY! It’s not like Tancredo introduced her…one of the leading conservative hopefuls for President intro’d her. If that doesn’t speak to her stature in conservative circles, I don’t know what does.

The guy that cuts my hair — (My favorite Republican fa…homosexual” routinely refers to other homosexuals as “faggots”, “queens”, “bitches”…exc. Very crude — but is he a biggot? Is this like the “N-word”? Can only homosexuals call each other faggot? Man, I get so confused on the words that Justin will allow me say or not say without being a bad guy.

Ann Coulter should not speak at CPAC

After last year’s remarks, calling Muslims “ragheads� and this year’s remark, calling John Edwards a “faggot� at CPAC, Ann Coulter has solidified her reputation as a bigoted, loud-mouthed shock pundit whom true conservatives should ostracize.

As I watched her on C-SPAN today I couldn’t believe what I was hearing. On national television Coulter went out of her way to use a word that has no use, other than to hurt, offend and degrade. It wasn’t funny, and it wasn’t cute. It was stupid. The sad part is that some self-professed conservatives clapped and laughed and cheered for her. Shame on them.

CPAC should not invite Coulter back to speak, and organizations should not promote her as a writer nor as a speaker. I used to recommend her to students as a resource, but I will no longer do so.

Segregation is so fifties… or so I thought

Even more disturbing were conversations I had at a bar in Adams Morgan later on. There were a handful of kids wearing George Wallace buttons who were extolling the virtues of segregation and saying blacks and Hispanics had lower intelligence quotients. Their racism clearly influenced their views on illegal immigration policy. By the way, these guys were the loudest supporters of Tom Tancredo for president.

How, in 2007, anyone could hold such views and proudly display the image of a man (George Wallace) who represents hatred, discrimination and white supremacy is beyond me.

I certainly do not want to be associated with such ideas. Their thinking is tribalist, collectivist and deterministic. It stems from the identity politics and conflict theory that Marx devised and his intellectual descendants promote. How anyone who holds such anti-freedom and anti-individualist ideas can call themselves conservatives is perplexing. The whole reason conservatives should oppose affirmative action and multiculturalism is because we base our judgments of people on their individual merits, and not on their artificial “ethnic group.�

This was the first CPAC I attended and it very well could be the last if Ms. Coulter, Mr. Tancredo and their minions continue to hold center stage.

That being said, other than how it relates to federalism, homosexual rights is not a conservative issue. As an issue, Republicans would be well advised to keep it in the closet and continue to ensure SCOTUS Justices that aren’t on the wing-bat fringe.