Siteadmin, Check users, nsTeam1RO, nsTeam1RW, nsTeam1_talkRO, nsTeam1_talkRW, oversight, Administrators
30,650
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 251:
Line 251: + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
→Jersey girls: If you want to help, here is an assignment for you, User:PF Fox
:::Still looking forward to your vigourous defense of the...uh..."arguments" presented by Coulter in that quote. Remember, Ed -- use "straightforward unambiguous terminology" while you're offering us all what you know about these women's personal lives and appearances, and be sure to explain to us how it's relevant. --[[User:PF Fox|PF Fox]] 13:17, 18 May 2007 (EDT)
:::Still looking forward to your vigourous defense of the...uh..."arguments" presented by Coulter in that quote. Remember, Ed -- use "straightforward unambiguous terminology" while you're offering us all what you know about these women's personal lives and appearances, and be sure to explain to us how it's relevant. --[[User:PF Fox|PF Fox]] 13:17, 18 May 2007 (EDT)
You seem to misunderstand the purpose of this web site. I'm not about to "defend" anyone, any more than you would be justified to "attack" them. We have already agreed that personal attacks are out of place here. Or at least I have '''decreed''' them to be out of place, and I have fairly consistent backing from senior staff on that. Whether you agree or not, I'm not sure.
Your strategy seems to be to attack Coulter and then challenge me to refute your attack. What you hope to accomplish by this strategy is beyond me. If it has any connection with writing the [[Ann Coulter]] article, I'll allow it, though.
Perhaps you find Coulter's remarks insulting. If so, you might want to add something to the article about her writing and/or speaking style. Does she pepper her comments with personal attacks? If so, how often? And how does the frequency or percentage of this compare to other pundits, authors, or public figures? Do politicians ever do this?
Or maybe it is [[Personal attack]]s in general you disagree with. That's a red link, which as you know means that you are free to start an article on that topic. Are personal attacks always out of place? Is it wrong to accuse people of personal faults? Or is it only wrong when you do so to distract attention from what-they-are-saying to who-they-are?
What do you think of [[Double standard]]s? Should one standard of conduct be applied equally to all people and all nations? Or should our political opponents be held to a substantially higher standard than our political allies? How much slack are we entitled to cut our friends? Or, to put it another way, how much wrongdoing must we overlook in our friends before we finally have to say, "You have crossed the line. I just can't cover for you any more."?
Back to the matter at hand: you have repeated in some additional detail that Coulter attacked the "Jersey Girls". I'm not sure why you added all this detail, because I read a lot about it when the flap occurred. There's no question that her comments constitute a [[personal attack]]. Same as her swipe at Edwards:
*At the end of her speech ... Coulter said: "I was going to have a few comments on the other Democratic presidential candidate, [[John Edwards]], but it turns out that you have to go into rehab if you use the word faggot, so I'm kind of at an impasse." [http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/03/05/AR2007030501610.html]
Would you like to write something about the way Coulter attracts attention to her message with sarcasm and insults? The JG and JE cracks certainly look typical. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] 15:01, 18 May 2007 (EDT)