Printer Friendly

Bipartisan Coulterism.

It is unusual for me to find fault with the logic of Cathy Young ("Bipartisan Coulterism," October), but for her to use the much criticized (by conservatives) Ann Coulter as a representative of conservatism while underplaying the influence of Michael Moore, who was given an Oscar for his phony documentary Bowling for Columbine and received no criticism from liberals for his contemptuous acceptance speech, is absurd. More to the point, it isn't the people like Coulter and Moore who reveal the souls of their political ideologies; it is those who agree or disagree with them and the nature of their response.

Conservatives were major critics of Trent Lott after what should have been an inconsequential gaffe. Compare that to the acceptance of Howard Dean's repeated accusation that the president lied in his 2003 State of the Union speech. Read the venomous statements on the signs carried by so called peace protesters and the letters to the editor aimed at anyone who disapproved of the U.S. Supreme Court's decision on affirmative action or antisodomy laws.

When watching a political talk show such as Hannity & Colmes, one can mute the sound and still identify the debaters as liberal or conservative. The one with his mouth wide open and the vein on his forehead protruding is the liberal; the one sitting quietly awaiting his turn to speak is the conservative. Try it if you don't believe me.

Kenneth Dunlap

Afton, MN

Cathy Young replies: Michael Moore may have gotten an Oscar, but he has never, to my knowledge, been invited to speak at a political event by a major liberal political organization--in contrast to Coulter, who has been a regular at Conservative Political Action Committee conferences.

Trent Lott's "inconsequential gaffe" cost him his position as Senate majority leader because it broke modern-day America's ultimate taboo: Lott seemed to express nostalgia for racial segregation (a statement that must be seen in the context of Lott's history, which included hobnobbing with the racist, segregationist Council of Conservative Citzens). On the other hand, conservatives circled the wagons around Rick Santorum after his bigoted comments about homosexuality. There are plenty of examples of even more extreme rhetoric that conservatives have tolerated in their midst.

I assume that Kenneth Dunlap has never seen extremist rhetoric on posters carried by right-to-life protesters, or venomous language in letters to the editor condemning those who oppose the war in Iraq. How lucky for him.
COPYRIGHT 2004 Reason Foundation
No portion of this article can be reproduced without the express written permission from the copyright holder.
Copyright 2004, Gale Group. All rights reserved. Gale Group is a Thomson Corporation Company.

Article Details
Printer friendly Cite/link Email Feedback
Title Annotation:Letters
Author:Dunlap, Kenneth
Article Type:Letter to the Editor
Date:Jan 1, 2004
Previous Article:Liberty Belle.
Next Article:Denial of Service.

Related Articles
AICPA and NASBA presidents set the record straight on 150-hour education requirement.
CounterPunch rolls out on heels of latest news.
Groups advise Bush to drop effort to revive faith initiative. (People & Events).
Legislators hit partisan snag in budget talks.
AFS urges Congress to restore metalcasting research funds.
Budget reform hearing request rebuffed.

Terms of use | Privacy policy | Copyright © 2019 Farlex, Inc. | Feedback | For webmasters