The American Conservative Union has answered the Conservative community's request to curb Coulter:

The American Conservative Union and the Conservative Political Action Conference today issued the following statement: The just completed 2007 Conservative Political Action Conference on March 1 – 3, 2007, was the largest in the 34 year history of the event, featuring 33 panels on a variety of public policy issues, 24 stand alone speakers including public officials, writers, student activists, media personalities and comedians. ACU, the event’s primary sponsor and CPAC strive to provide a platform and forum for a variety of differing views and personalities. ACU and CPAC do not condone or endorse every speaker or their comments at the conference. As such, ACU and CPAC leave it to our audience to determine whether comments are appropriate or not. “Ann Coulter is known for comments that can be both provocative and outrageous. That was certainly the case in her 2007 CPAC appearance and previous ones as well. But as a point of clarification, let me make it clear that ACU and CPAC do not condone or endorse the use of hate speech,” said David A. Keene, ACU Chairman.

So... look for Ann to be back in 2008...

Of all the things written yesterday our own Mary Katharine Ham penned by far the most thought provoking response to the matter. It's on the long side - but it reads fast and is the best example of cogent, conservative thinking, and how we should be framing the debate.

Calling Hugh, Dean, myself, and MKHam either "liberal weenies" or "pompous conservatives who eat their own" Mike Gallagher represented the knee-jerk hormonally driven 22 year old male response to the matter perfectly.

Michelle continued to speak out with reasoned logic and even deep respect to Ronald Reagan.

And Ann tried to spin her way out of the mess by...

    1. Pretending that only liberals got mad at her...
    2. Refusing to recognize that she had actually energized the voters of those she opposes...
    3. Refusing to acknowledge that it is actually true conservatives that ticked off...
    4. Claiming she wasn't insulting Edwards manhood...
    5. Insisting that "faggot" isn't a gay slur, but rather a childhood taunt...

(btw... that would have been the one childhood, playground taunt that would have gotten my mouth washed out with soap when I was little...)

And at the urging of my producers - I changed my daily PUNCH commentary to issue a summation of the damage Ann did to both those of us in the trenches, and to the message of the movement as a whole.

Having said, written, listened too just about everything that has been done on this issue. My official capacity to deal with any more Ann Coulter-ness has expired.

Back to the battles that matter! 

Conservatism treats humans as they are, as moral creatures possessing rational minds and capable of discerning right from wrong. There comes a time when we must speak out in the defense of the conservative movement, and make a stand for political civility. This is one of those times.

Ann Coulter used to serve the movement well. She was telegenic, intelligent, and witty. She was also fearless: saying provocative things to inspire deeper thought and cutting through the haze of competing information has its uses. But Coulter's fearlessness has become an addiction to shock value. She draws attention to herself, rather than placing the spotlight on conservative ideas.

At the Conservative Political Action Conference in 2006, Coulter referred to Iranians as "ragheads." She is one of the most prominent women in the conservative movement; for her to employ such reckless language reinforces the stereotype that conservatives are racists.

At CPAC 2007 Coulter decided to turn up the volume by referring to John Edwards, a former U.S. Senator and current Presidential candidate, as a "faggot." Such offensive language--and the cavalier attitude that lies behind it--is intolerable to us. It may be tolerated on liberal websites but not at the nation's premier conservative gathering.

The legendary conservative thinker Richard Weaver wrote a book entitled Ideas Have Consequences. Rush Limbaugh has said again and again that "words mean things." Both phrases apply to Coulter's awful remarks.

Coulter's vicious word choice tells the world she care little about the feelings of a large group that often feels marginalized and despised. Her word choice forces conservatives to waste time defending themselves against charges of homophobia rather than advancing conservative ideas.

Within a day of Coulter's remark John Edwards sent out a fundraising email that used Coulter's words to raise money for his faltering campaign. She is helping those she claims to oppose. How does that advance any of the causes we hold dear?

Denouncing Coulter is not enough. After her "raghead" remark in 2006 she took some heat. Yet she did not grow and learn. We should have been more forceful. This year she used a gay slur. What is next? If Senator Barack Obama is the de facto Democratic Presidential nominee next year will Coulter feel free to use a racial slur? How does that help conservatism?

One of the points of CPAC is the opportunity it gives college students to meet other young conservatives and learn from our leaders. Unlike on their campuses-where they often feel alone-at CPAC they know they are part of a vibrant political movement. What example is set when one highlight of the conference is finding out what shocking phrase will emerge from Ann Coulter's mouth? How can we teach young conservatives to fight for their principles with civility and respect when Ann
Coulter is allowed to address the conference? Coulter's invective is a sign of weak thinking and unprincipled politicking.

CPAC sponsors, the Age of Ann has passed. We, the undersigned, request that CPAC speaking invitations no longer be extended to Ann Coulter.Her words and attitude simply do too much damage.

Fellow TownHall columnist... Lorrie Byrd:

I have cheered Ann Coulter in the past when I have agreed with her. I have also spoken out when I have disagreed with her. Any conservative who does not agree with her recent comments should speak out now, as loudly and forcefully as possible. Ann Coulter knows the power of words and she knows how closely all of her words are scrutinized. Those of us who have any kind of forum to speak on behalf of the conservative movement need to realize that our agreement, disagreement or silence will be scrutinized as well.

Well said...(h/t Sean)

Yesterday as we were wrapping up our time in Washington DC before returning to New York, the Lovely Bride and I were trying to catch up with some friends for some coffee at 17th and L street. On the way all she could talk about was the Ann Coulter mess.

These are her words. Not mine:

"I'm someone who just a couple of years ago just thought nearly everything Ann did was fantastic. But what I'm realizing - and it's very unattractive - is that while Ann puts on the sexy dress, has the flowing hair, and tries to accentuate femininity - which is all a good thing... she's really no lady on the inside."

"Peggy Noonan, Barbara Olson, Phyllis Schlafly - none of these women would have been caught dead saying these things. They were all formidable women, towers of strength, and tough as nails - but never ceased to be winsome, smiling... and actual - ladies."

 

"Such women do exist in the conservative movement today. Next year it would be nice if they gave over the traditional Coulter timeslot to Michelle (Malkin) who truly does carry on the legacy of those other three women pioneers."