The Shunning of Shunning.
By Socrates Posted in Republicans — Comments (48) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »
Repeat after me: We must be on offense, or we lose.
I should not have to write this. Why is this my job? I signed up to do thought pieces, big picture stuff about the role of communications technology in forming Man's ability to wage war, and other irrelevancies. That's all worth what you pay me. It's 2:30 AM, and I have to write this. So with all of that you can be assured that this is not my best work.
But this ... this ... kerfuffle over Ann Coulter (again). Haven't we learned? We must be on offense, or we lose.
Coulter stays on offense. Some would say she stays offensive, but many more pretend to be offended either A) for political advantage or B) for political advantage. That is, Democrats largely pretend to be offended by Coulter's remarks because they want to use it as a whip to keep Republicans on the run. Many of those so attacked pretend to be offended so they can use that pretense as a shield against the whip.
But guess what? We must be on offense, or we lose.
Coulter did not imply that Edwards was gay. But suppose she had. What harm is that?
Well, you say, it wasn't what she said, it was how and where she said it. She dared to use a particular word. She moved her mouth in a way that is simply not allowed for her to do. She knew that to move her mouth in that way would bring forth denunciation, calls for her to attend rehab, even the dreaded shunning.
She spoiled our big show at CPAC, you say. No, she didn't, or if she did, it wasn't much of a show.
Defending her is so patently not my job because I don't even care for Ann Coulter's work. She's a clever gal, but she uses her firepower as a loose canon. She mixes argument with humor, so that when I want to laugh, it suddenly stops being funny, and when I want to agree, she sucker punches her own logic. At least, that was the way of the one book, and also her columns.
But defend her I will, because we have some of the same goals. Just as I defend gay Republicans, whose personal habits I abhor. Just as I defend the President, in his role as Commander-in-Chief, even though I don't like some of his policies. Just as I will defend John McCain someday, even though I hypocritically attack him as a rule.
I am not just defending a teammate with enormous talent who sometimes makes a legal play the umpire doesn't like. I am filled with disappointment for the state in which we find ourselves, that this word or that word is acceptable or not depending on who uses it, and how. And that we accept the frame of the debate from the lefty MSM, instead of taking it to them.
Political Correctness is a pernicious evil, far more evil that making an offensive joke. Coulter is not in trouble because she committed a crime, she is in trouble because she used a bad word and described the penalty for using it.
And wanting a shield against the PC whip we accept the frame. The minute we do that, the battle is lost. We're on defense. And the shield is useless, because our backs are to the whip as we flee from it.
And we must be on offense, or we lose.