The Georgetown Lecture Fund has brought many respected figures from across the political spectrum to campus for free guest lectures. But its latest invitee, conservative pundit Ann Coulter, is a disappointing and worrisome departure from the Fund’s standard of speakers.
Although the College Republicans are footing most of the bill, the Lecture Fund should not have paid $1,000 to bring Coulter to Georgetown. Coulter has made a career out of outrageously biased commentary. She has a worldview in which everyone outside of American male conservatives are either ungodly infidels plotting to destroy our nation or demonic liberals hoping to do the same. Her hateful polemic and ignorant invective have no place in the dialogue the Lecture Fund aims to foster here.
The list of religious, ethnic, and political groups that Coulter has slandered is so long that it seems impossible to recall all of them. Muslims, environmentalists, victims of the Darfur genocide, people with non-straight sexual orientations or non-Christian religious views—all of these have been subjects of her wrath. Her columns and television appearances are not vehicles for ideas or arguments; they are lists of inflammatory punch lines delivered strictly for shock value.
Some might point to the fact that the Lecture Fund also sponsored a lecture by liberal filmmaker Michael Moore, a similarly divisive figure, as justification for the Coulter invitation. But while many on the right took offense to Moore’s critical send up of the George W. Bush administration, Fahrenheit 9/11, it is silly to call Coulter the conservative version of Moore. Moore’s opinions might be politically radical, but he does not paint ethnic and religious groups in broad, slanderous brushstrokes—his motivations are more political and less bigoted.
Georgetown prides itself on being a place where people of different mindsets and political orientations can come together to discuss issues. While the Lecture Fund probably considered its invitation to Coulter as a move toward balancing the on-campus political dialogue and maintaining this intellectual tradition, her presence at a Georgetown podium is a huge step away from this goal.
Coulter’s shtick is not a funny gag intended to expose the hypocrisy and self-seriousness of some liberals, as her defenders might claim. Her work is prejudiced and abusive, and does nothing to further the American political discourse. The Lecture Fund should never have used its resources to bring her to campus. Coulter’s ignorant hate speech has no place at Georgetown.
YEP–get the Iranian president. He is a much nicer person. You people are weird.
Although Ann does engage in “shock value” rhetoric, her arguments are logical, well thought out, and here’s a real shocker, she is EXTREMELY WELL RESEARCHED. She truly does tell it like it is.
This is coming from a Lib Arts major.
I agree with FSM47. You people are beyond wierd. Why don’t you Skype and invite Ahmadinejad to speak at Georgetown about the wonderful things his country is doing for women and minority rights?
Peace Out – Spankx
Every time lefties like whomever wrote this editorial vilify ANN COULTER, they they prove Ann right.
ANN COULTER IS EXCELLENT
what she does is use the left’s tactics to expose it’s own hypocrisy.
Check out everyone of her ‘outrageous’ statements and within them you will find Ann at her best …using hyperbole to expose some loony lefty idea…if you don’t get it, humbly ask a conservative to explain what Ann means in every instance.
The libs and their media minions are just too dumb to figure out Ann’s points …the ‘joke’s on them’
AS WITH MOST INTELLECTUALS WITH ANN’S RAZOR WIT YOU GET SLICED AND STOOGED ALL IN ONE SITTING WHEN YOU CANT FIGURE OUT THAT YOU ARE BEING SET UP. ANN USES WIT AND HYPERBOLE TO MAKE DEVASTATING POINTS WHICH END UP SKEWERING LIBERALS ALONG WITH THEIR LOONY TUNE NOTIONS.
…A WORD TO THE NOT SO WISE….DON’T BLAME ANN WHEN YOU DISCOVER YOU BEEN SLICED UP BECAUSE YOU ARE TOO DIMWITTED TO UNDERSTAND ANNIE’s POINTS.. AND YOU CANT FIGURE WHY YOU END UP …… LOOKIN LIKE A STOOGE IN CRIMSON WHEN AND IF YOU FINALLY FIGURE HER OUT.
I HEREBY WISH ALL STOOGES, A VERY GOOD DAY. HEH HEH HEH.
This article hits the nail on the head. Ann Coulter’s caustic hatred adds nothing of value to political discourse. Her overt racism, violence, sexism, homophobia, xenophobia, religious bigotry, and her lowest-common-denominator rhetorical style has no place on this campus, especially not when students–most of whom are the objects of some form of her verbal abuse–are footing part of the bill.
Perhaps most importantly, she has nothing novel to offer as a thinker or speaker. We’re paying for a few hours of bland right-wing dogma lightly seasoned with a sprinkle of rabid vitriol. Nothing new, nothing interesting. I thank you for this article.
Thank you for a very good editorial.
As a newcomer to live American political debates, the character of Ann Coulter’s rhetoric tonight was an utter shock. I have never experienced any political commentator who was able to alienate an audience as quickly as Coulter did. I am glad that most of my fellow students reacted to Coulter’s speech the way they did.
A speaker who has nothing to offer but slander, insults, and hatemongering does not promote discussion, understanding, or any of the other values that Georgetown University prides itself of. If the Lecture Fund truly believes in “enriching education through dialogue and debate”, as their motto claims, they should seriously consider whether an event such as tonight’s furthers this goal.
This is ridiculous. Anyone who takes her seriously is just encouraging her further. Have you listened to her actually speak, ever? She doesn’t consider herself a pundit or an activist or a commentator or a journalist. She considers herself a PERFORMER. A COMEDIAN. She likes to offend liberals because the more she offends them, the more they’ll pay to heckle her, the more publicity she gets, and the more books she sells. She’s just like Michael Moore–a great capitalist. Moore makes hundreds of millions of dollars denouncing capitalism–doesn’t take all that high an IQ to see the irony in that. Treating her like you would a journalist is completely counterproductive and only feeds her fire.
And for the record, her painting religious groups in sweeping, slanderous brushstrokes is no different than Michael Moore painting certain social classes in sweeping, slanderous brushstrokes.
This is ridiculous. Anyone who takes her seriously is just encouraging her further. Have you listened to her actually speak, ever? She doesn’t consider herself a pundit or an activist or a commentator or a journalist. She considers herself a PERFORMER. A COMEDIAN. She likes to offend liberals because the more she offends them, the more they’ll pay to heckle her, the more publicity she gets, and the more books she sells. She’s just like Michael Moore–a great capitalist. Moore makes hundreds of millions of dollars denouncing capitalism–doesn’t take all that high an IQ to see the irony in that. Treating her like you would a journalist is completely counterproductive and only feeds her fire.
And for the record, her painting religious groups in sweeping, slanderous brushstrokes is no different than Michael Moore painting certain social classes in sweeping, slanderous brushstrokes.
Enjoy your liberalism.