Mar 07 2007

Medved talks Coulter…

And he makes a lot of sense. Michael Medved is rapidly moving up my list. I don’t listen to talk radio – I generally have ruled out looking over what the pundits and talk show hosts say – largely because I’m not sure they really get it.

Medved, though, is rapidly proving to be the exception to this rule. He’s not been afraid to take on conservatives when they have peddled their North American Union conspiracy theories. Nor has he failed to stand up against the Buchanan-Tancredo “conservatives” who seem to be more interested in ideological purity than in either winning elections or solving the problems this country is facing. He’s taken a lot of flak for it, but I, for one, have a lot of respect for him for standing up for civility and doing the right thing.

27 responses so far

27 Responses to “Medved talks Coulter…”

  1. dennisa says:

    Coulter is a vain, primping anorexic. And God help you if you say that in certain conservative circles.

  2. Soothsayer says:

    It has reached the point where it becomes obvious Coulter is more interested in herself, and in outrageously pimping her product line to maximize controversy and sales, than she is in rational or reasonable debate or discourse cocnerning the conservative agenda. Her agenda is HER.

    Her obvious anorexia, her inappropriate behavior, her inability to sustain long-term relationships and her barely submerged anger [what does Ann Coulter have to be so mad about – it’s not like she has had a hard row to hoe in life?] indicate profound unhappiness – narcissism – and probably borderline personality disorder.

  3. SallyVee says:

    Excellent column by Medved, asking a simple question we need to answer, and soon — addition or subtraction?

    Medved is the ONLY talk radio guy I listen to, for a long time now. I stopped subscribing to Rush over a year ago and instead bought the Med Head subscription. Medved is the only Righty with any original content. He is far removed from the echo chamber. He does great interviews with really interesting people — and it’s not about him him him. He has an amazing, broad intellect and he encourages debate and dissent. Oh, and his monthly “Conspiracy Day” shows (always conducted on the day of a full moon) are absolute killers — both gobsmacking and entertaining as hell.

  4. crosspatch says:

    I listen to Medved and Hugh Hewitt. I don’t catch them as often as I would like as Michael is on during my work hours and I often catch only the last hour of Hewitt for the same reason. I find both of those guys refreshing in their reasoning.

  5. kathie says:

    If Republicans don’t learn how to play hardball soon we are in big trouble. The Dems can say anything anytime and we sit all prim and proper and get Scooter going to jail, let our President be called every reprehensible name in the book, let the Dems pretend that they were fooled into a war, when they were incharge of the Senate and insisted that they vote on the war issue not once but twice. Frankly I am sick and tired of the in fighting and would love it if we used our fight to defeat the party that will surely take over this country with Hillary and Bill at the helm again. They have a war machine, we need one too. I may not like the words and would not use the words of Ann, but she tells it like it is, if the Republicans say anything about the Dems we are wrong and mean. But the Dems slander at will everything we value and who stands up……few. The Dems are rotten to the core and would sell out this country for any power they can buy, steal or manipulate. We need a back bone and soon or we will loose it all, elections, and this country. Our President has done everything in his power to protect us and when he is called a liar by a two bit ambassador, who stood up for him? Once they branded him a lair they continued and we did nothing, I’m ashamed of us and a good man has paid a terrible price for us not standing up.

  6. Aitch748 says:

    …And God help you if you say that in certain conservative circles.

    Well, I didn’t say precisely that, but I just reached a certain point today. I frequently visit another conservative forum, but I’m visiting it less and less, and somebody posted a news item this morning about how Tucker Carlson said that Ann Coulter called him gay once but he didn’t cry about it.

    Something about that story just pissed me off.

    This whole meme about how people on the Right who are disgusted with Coulter for calling somebody a “faggot” at CPAC are people who need to grow a spine is really beginning to piss me off. I left a couple of posts expressing my disgust (one speculated that next year Coulter will be using “Obama” and “n*gger” in the same sentence), and I’m at the point where I don’t give a damn if I leave a bunch of former fellow posters with the impression that I’m a weak-kneed bedwetting liberal pansy who deserves no respect from anyone. (If I am spineless, then I should be crawling back to them in a few days begging for forgiveness or frantically trying to explain myself, but then I don’t expect I’ll be doing that, as this disgust I’m feeling has been brewing for quite a long time, at least as far back as the Harriet Miers thing.) I am really, really getting disenchanted with some of the people who call themselves “conservatives” these days, and I’ve decided it isn’t going to bother me much if these “conservatives” think I’m a jellyfish because I’m not a Coulter fan anymore.

  7. The Macker says:

    Ann Coulter’s “over the top” language was not helpful to the conservative cause. But we shouldn’t obsess over it either. It may make us feel good but isn’t helpful.We need articulate spokespeople for our ideas and it’s enough to note her mistake and move on.

  8. crosspatch says:

    I believe Ann’s comment was misunderstood as it was an obscure reference to a previous interview that apparently many never saw. She was joking about the Grey’s Anatomy “faggot” scandal and how every time someone commits a public faux pas, they have to check into rehab. Witness Gavin Newsom with his checking into rehab when his affair scandal broke. She said *if* she called him a “faggot” she would have to go into rehab in a reference to a Fox News interview where she basically said the same thing but no scandal was raised then. The idea was supposed to be how celebrities in entertainment and politics use “rehab” to gain teflon to avoid criticism for their mistakes. Once they enter rehab, the offense can no longer be spoken of in “politically correct” circles. She should now complete the joke and check herself into rehab.

    99% of this is a result of people not understanding the context of the subject matter. This is Ann’s fault for assuming that the people who would hear her say this were familiar with that previous interview and understood the context of what she was saying.

    She didn’t call anyone a “faggot”. More here

    If you are going to say something that is very socially sensative and it is a joke and the joke is in reference to something else that one might have said previously, it is probably good to make sure that your intended audience is familiar with the reference you are using and understands what you are saying in the same context as you. This was a case where most of the people either didn’t see the interview or didn’t make the connection and were left thinking “did she just call Edwards a ‘faggot'”? She was playing with fire and got burned for it. If she had made sure that interview was shown to the audience before she spoke, this would never had happened.

  9. Carol_Herman says:

    Ann Coulter has an audience. Medved didn’t build it. And, AJ can’t do anything, either, to take it away.

    Since it’s a public arena, you’re all free to say what you like.

    Is there jealousy involved in the thrusts at Coulter? Sure. Some man can’t get it out of the pants. And, others out of their heads. That the lady attracts an audience.

    Besides, there’s no such thing as getting a political party to grow without soil. Same with plants. You still need dirt.

    And, the best lesson Ilearned from Coulter’s appearance at CPAC? She out-shown the talent. And, the talent was trying to gain the nomination for 2008.

    Interesting, too, that the donks, who have much less talent, are also not able to produce comedians who can make people laugh.

    What’s stange about the audience Coulter attracts? She gets people from all over. In other words? Her popularity actually comes from the mainstream.

    A place where the social conservatives hold no sway at all.

    Besides, Saturday Nite Live already’s done the “CHURCH LADY” to perfection. You’re just amateurs.

  10. Terrye says:


    Fighting back means being smart, it means getting more votes than the other guy and getting to call the shots. Playing into his hands is not fighting back, it is stupid. And this nonsense about how we have to start calling people names and yelling alot so that the Democrats will stop pushing us around is no doubt music to Harry Reid’s ears. Now maybe you think that alienating and disgusting a lot more people will win you friends and make you popular, but it won’t.

    When Biden called Obama a “clean African American” he took a hit for it. When Obama made a comment about ‘wasted lives” he took a hit for it. Murtha took a hit for his “slow bleed”. Now I agree that Democrats get away with more..but it is not true that they get away with everything…however, if we start letting people like Coulter run roughshod over the party it will be a gift to the Democrats.

    What Ann Coulter said was stupid. After last year she should have known better she just does not care as long as she sells her books.

  11. dennisa says:

    Coulter’s idiot statements aren’t contributing anything to conservativism. That was Medved’s point. I’m all for fighting Democrats and liberal idiots, and would rather spend my time on serious matters.

  12. Bikerken says:

    They play hardball, we play marbles. That is why we lost.

  13. Carol_Herman says:

    Oh, dear. Now we have philosophers accusing Ann Coulter of saying something “stupid.” NOPE. What she said was that “if” she used the word “fag” the nut-o-brigades would dictate that she would need rehab.

    Sort’a like the old Soviets. They didn’t have much respect for truth. But you should’a seen their show trials!

    You are not gonna get away with it. Unless Reggie Walton is your kind of judge.

    Because Ann Coulter actually slammed THE BRECK GIRL. Who is a guy with a penis and a good haircut. Whether he is really gay, or not, I do not know. But Ann Coulter does NOT need rehab!

    As a matter of fact, she earns her money with her mouth and her pen. And, she was hired to bring people into the room when she spoke. SHE DID THAT!

    Even better, as all the assorted conservatives look to get a lock on some candidate, they can then squeeze; it seems they’ve got nothing but ANN to show for their CPAC.

    The threat next year? Is they won’t invite her back. Which doesn’t matter all that much, because next year their whole show can be an exercise in futility. Given that California is gonna have a Febraury primary; we will see if it makes sense to play with the nasty folk on the right? Or to find a mainstream message, instead?

    Is Ann mainstream? Is Drudge? He lets Ann have big chunks of his show on Sunday nights. And, last Sunday night he lamented that he couldn’t find her, anywhere. Though he had been placing repeated calls out to her.

    Just in case you thought Drudge had to wait for people to call him; it turns out not to be true for some. And, yes, I missed not hearing from Ann. Who is quite good at defending herself. And, also quite good at booking speaking engagements that make her rich. At least she doesn’t have to do anything else to make a living.

    By the way, Biker Ken, the left didn’t win much in getting their slops to convict Libby. Those affirmative action neighborhoods have all sorts of reasons most people wouldn’t want to move in.

    And, yes. Libby is now guilty. Just like Martha Stewart. And, she was brilliant! Once she saw the score. She cut her losses. And, moved on. While her black female judge can no longer play with her at all.

    If the trials are FALSE the verdicts are USELESS.

    And, Russert? HE can help OJ now. Both of them can look in mirrors and find the perps.

    My mom used to say that God takes care of everything. In good time.

  14. crosspatch says:

    Carol, did you read the link I provided? In there is also a video of the Fox interview she did long before the CPAC conference.

  15. Terrye says:


    Nonsense. The Democrats lost in 2004 because they played just a little bit too much hardball. They won in 2006 by running Democrats like Brad Ellsworth in Indiana.

    If you look at the link you will note how many black and hispanic votes Bush as well as how many self identified gays. Without them no Republican will win…especially if you add the moderates who are being told to take a hike.

    I remember Kent Starr and his investigation went on for years and years. Now I don’t trust the Clintons, but Bill did not shut that man down the way some conservatives say Bush should have shut Fitzgerald down and no doubt to a lot of nonpartisans both cases look equally confusing and ridiculous.

    So what exactly does playing hardball mean? Making sure that everyone hates you?

  16. Terrye says:

    BTW, there is nothing remotely mainstream about Ann Coulter. If she is your idea, be prepared to be a minority.

  17. Bikerken says:

    Terrye, When I talk about playing hardball, I’m not saying we should all act like Ann Coulter. I was one of the first on this blog to say that her infering that Edwards was a faggot was supremely stupid. It was a nasty insult without any justification or truth to it. Ann Coulter is the GOP’s little pit bull and she bites. I do agree that she is balance for an army of pitbulls on the left and they are far nastier than she is but the nastiness isn’t going to help.

    What I’m talking about is this, When Bill Clinton came into office, he fired nearly all federal prosecutors at the DOJ and put all of his type boys and girls in there. When Bush came into office, he said we are going to learn to get along and there would be no mass firings like Clinton did. This was very nice by very stupid. These same Clintonistas have been trying to bring Bush down since he’s been in office. They have no loyalty to their country, only their party. They are Facists. Bush should have shit-canned these bastards a long time ago! He and this country are suffering because he did not. He didn’t have the nerve to weed out ultra partisans who would stab him in the back. When this whole Libby thing cranked up, he should have done the same thing the Clintonistas did, DEFEND YOUR OFFICE! Instead, they immediately when into thumb sucking mode and retracted the sixteen words, (on who’s advice?) and he made everybody talk to the grand jury. STUPID.

    You seem to be thinking that the GOP will be better off if we strive toward consenses and appease a little bit. The only thing appeasers ever get is a kick in the teeth. Why hasn’t the GOP screamed bloody murder and kicked William Jefferson out of the House of Representatives. If he were a republican, he would have put his tail between his legs and be gone by now. Harry Reid is up to his neck in crooked land deals in Las Vegas, If he we’re a republican, he would be gone by now. Nancy Pelosi inserted an exemption in the minimum wage law for the Samoan Islands where her constituent tuna processing plants are. Barack Obama is up to his neck in real estate favors and stocks purchases from his contributors. Same thing. There are more corrupt democrats in trouble with the law and historically that has been the case, but they get away with painting the GOP with “culture of corruption” because the republicans don’t want to get into a street fight. It is not the centrist that are the strength of the republican party. Democrats expoit centrists as weak links. Trying to deal with the democrats is like trying to do half a drug deal and make it legal. They will screw you every time.

    They play hardball and we play marbles.

  18. Carol_Herman says:

    Terrye, here’s a clue.

    Ann Coulter makes her money from the mainstream. If she were just a right wing flak, nobody would know her name.

    That there are a bunch of prudes inside the nutter circle of right wing social conservatives? Unfortunately, it is a reputation they cannot live down.

    And, all mainstream means in this case is that she is earning her livelihood from people who buy her books and attend her lectures.

    I doubt Ann Coulter actually attracts extremists of any sort! She doesn’t get the Code Pink crowds, either.

    And, she writes her own material, too.

  19. Bikerken says:

    Terrye, I posted a long response to your question but it looks like I’m not getting through. As far as Micheal Medved, he believes in Bigfoot. So I don’t take him as seriously as most intelligent people.

  20. Carol_Herman says:

    Lucianne has this article posted. Showing yet again, the strength of Ann Coulter’s words. And, why she cuts through the muck.

    Shooting Elephants in a Barrel
    by Ann Coulter (more by this author)
    Posted 03/07/2007 ET
    Updated 03/07/2007 ET

    Lewis Libby has now been found guilty of perjury and obstruction of justice for lies that had absolutely no legal consequence.

    It was not a crime to reveal Valerie Plame’s name because she was not a covert agent. If it had been a crime, Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald could have wrapped up his investigation with an indictment of the State Department’s Richard Armitage on the first day of his investigation since it was Armitage who revealed her name and Fitzgerald knew it.

    With no crime to investigate, Fitzgerald pursued a pointless investigation into nothing, getting a lot of White House officials to make statements under oath and hoping some of their recollections would end up conflicting with other witness recollections, so he could charge some Republican with “perjury” and enjoy the fawning media attention.

    As a result, Libby is now a convicted felon for having a faulty memory of the person who first told him that Joe Wilson was a delusional boob who lied about his wife sending him to Niger.

    This makes it official: It’s illegal to be Republican.

    Since Teddy Kennedy walked away from a dead girl with only a wrist slap (which was knocked down to a mild talking-to, plus time served: zero), Democrats have apparently become a protected class in America, immune from criminal prosecution no matter what they do.

    As a result, Democrats have run wild, accepting bribes, destroying classified information, lying under oath, molesting interns, driving under the influence, obstructing justice and engaging in sex with underage girls, among other things.

    Meanwhile, conservatives of any importance constantly have to spend millions of dollars defending themselves from utterly frivolous criminal prosecutions. Everything is illegal, but only Republicans get prosecuted.

    Conservative radio personality Rush Limbaugh was subjected to a three-year criminal investigation for allegedly buying prescription drugs illegally to treat chronic back pain. Despite the witch-hunt, Democrat prosecutor Barry E. Krischer never turned up a crime.

    Even if he had, to quote liberal Harvard Law professor Alan Dershowitz: “Generally, people who illegally buy prescription drugs are not prosecuted.” Unless they’re Republicans.

    The vindictive prosecution of Limbaugh finally ended last year with a plea bargain in which Limbaugh did not admit guilt. Gosh, don’t you feel safer now? I know I do.

    In another prescription drug case with a different result, last year, Rep. Patrick Kennedy (Democrat), apparently high as a kite on prescription drugs, crashed a car on Capitol Hill at 3 a.m. That’s abuse of prescription drugs plus a DUI offense. Result: no charges whatsoever and one day of press on Fox News Channel.

    I suppose one could argue those were different jurisdictions. How about the same jurisdiction?

    In 2006, Democrat and major Clinton contributor Jeffrey Epstein was nabbed in Palm Beach in a massive police investigation into his hiring of local underage schoolgirls for sex, which I’m told used to be a violation of some kind of statute in the Palm Beach area.

    The police presented Limbaugh prosecutor Krischer with boatloads of evidence, including the videotaped statements of five of Epstein’s alleged victims, the procurer of the girls for Epstein and 16 other witnesses.

    But the same prosecutor who spent three years maniacally investigating Limbaugh’s alleged misuse of back-pain pills refused to bring statutory rape charges against a Clinton contributor. Enraging the police, who had spent months on the investigation, Krischer let Epstein off after a few hours on a single count of solicitation of prostitution. The Clinton supporter walked, and his victims were branded as whores.

    The Republican former House Whip Tom DeLay is currently under indictment for a minor campaign finance violation. Democratic prosecutor Ronnie Earle had to empanel six grand juries before he could find one to indict DeLay on these pathetic charges — and this is in Austin, Texas (the Upper West Side with better-looking people).

    That final grand jury was so eager to indict DeLay that it indicted him on one charge that was not even a crime — and which has since been tossed out by the courts.

    After winning his primary despite the indictment, DeLay decided to withdraw from the race rather than campaign under a cloud of suspicion, and Republicans lost one of their strongest champions in Congress.

    Compare DeLay’s case with that of Rep. William “The Refrigerator” Jefferson, Democrat. Two years ago, an FBI investigation caught Jefferson on videotape taking $100,000 in bribe money. When the FBI searched Jefferson’s house, they found $90,000 in cash stuffed in his freezer. Two people have already pleaded guilty to paying Jefferson the bribe money.

    Two years later, Bush’s Justice Department still has taken no action against Jefferson. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi recently put Rep. William Jefferson on the Homeland Security Committee.

    Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, Democrat, engaged in a complicated land swindle, buying a parcel of land for $400,000 and selling it for over $1 million a few years later. (At least it wasn’t cattle futures!)

    Reid also received more than four times as much money from Jack Abramoff (nearly $70,000) as Tom DeLay ($15,000). DeLay returned the money; Reid refuses to do so. Why should he? He’s a Democrat.

    Former Clinton national security adviser Sandy Berger literally received a sentence of community service for stuffing classified national security documents in his pants and then destroying them — big, fat federal felonies.

    But Scooter Libby is facing real prison time for forgetting who told him about some bozo’s wife.

    Bill Clinton was not even prosecuted for obstruction of justice offenses so egregious that the entire Supreme Court staged a historic boycott of his State of the Union address in 2000.

    By contrast, Linda Tripp, whose only mistake was befriending the office hosebag and then declining to perjure herself, spent millions on lawyers to defend a harassment prosecution based on far-fetched interpretations of state wiretapping laws.

    Liberal law professors currently warning about the “high price” of pursuing terrorists under the Patriot Act had nothing but blood lust for Tripp one year after Clinton was impeached (Steven Lubet, “Linda Tripp Deserves to be Prosecuted,” New York Times, 8/25/99).

    Criminal prosecution is a surrogate for political warfare, but in this war, Republicans are gutless appeasers.

    Bush has got to pardon Libby.