Daily Kos

UT Ann Coulter Event

Thu May 05, 2005 at 08:01:20 AM PDT

I'm sure most of you guys have heard about the kid who asked Ann Coulter a question and got arrested. Well I emailed him and he replied. Very grateful for all our support. He needs it. Anyway he sent me an essay he wrote on it. It is hysterical. And here it is in its entirety.
AJAI RAJ
04/05/05

Open Letter to Anyone Who Gives a Shit About Justice

    I'm writing this in response to the spectacle that occurred in the LBJ Library on Tuesday, May 3rd, 2005, when Ann Coulter, a diabolical, ignorant, but nevertheless charismatic right-wing pundit, came to speak at UT.  Ms. Coulter- yes, Ms, I'd personally think such a vocal female conservative would be making Bubba a meatloaf instead of addressing a politically-minded collegiate audience, but whatever- is the author of relentlessly mendacious anti-liberal books, such as Slander: Liberal Lies About the American Right and Treason: Liberal Treachery From the Cold War to the War on Terrorism.  She's famous for having an ass that stores so many lies it makes clown-car designers envious.  Like her or not (and if you do, I'm surprised you can read) she's a Big Fucking Deal.
    The title of the front-page story covering Ms. Coulter's in the Texan was "Arrest Made at Coulter Speech".  You could also have caught it on CBS or in the Austin-American Statesman.  The general idea is that some jackass made a scene, and Ann Coulter was also there.
    I am Ajai Raj, and I am a jackass.
    In his article, which I enjoyed and commend him for, Mr. Sampath quoted the former president of the Student Events Center, the organization which arranged the event.  He wrote:
"The person had been disruptive the entire event," said Matt Hardigree, former Student Events Center president. "He took the opportunity to say something lewd and offensive and then made masturbatory gestures as he exited."
And what do I have to say in rebuttal?  Not a goddamn thing.
    Matt Hardigree got it spot-on!  From the beginning I was yelling obscenities along with my friends, roaring at Ms. Coulter's right-wing bullshit festival the way no one else had the balls to.  Mr. Sampath writes in his article that (and this is my take) the protestors were told to be good all along.  They were told to sit in the back and hold their signs and leave quietly.  No wonder hippies get such a bad rap nowadays; protestors today might as well be ornaments on the Rightmobile.  When I want someone to know I'm pissed off, I'm going to throw down and give them a good shit-ruining.  I wanted to show Ms. Coulter that people are down if she wants to hold a circle-jerk, but we're not gonna do it her way.  Not me, at least.
    So yes, the Q&A session came around, and it was pathetic.  Her slack-jawed fans got up and licked her face so she could pat them on the head- one schmuck offered to be her bodyguard, and she smiled, doubtlessly making a mental note that she wouldn't touch his nether regions if she were King Midas; liberal protestors posed well-intentioned but woefully timid questions and got shot down in a hail of ignorant shitfire from the She-Dragon.  Standing in line awaiting my turn, I watched her send a moderate Republican, who had questioned the sheer incendiary magnitude of her rhetoric, walk away in tears when she tore him apart for daring to question her.
    So yes, I saw my "opportunity to say something lewd and offensive."  And I took it.
    She had just said something about gay marriage, the typical rightwing bullshit spiel that is still convincing people that the Bible is really the Constitution.  Knowing that taking the time to say something insightful, specific, or even slightly critical would get me a lame comeback and a ticket back to my seat, I realized that the only way to win this battle was to fight fire with fire.  Or bullshit with bullshit.  So, as reported in yesterday's Texan, I fired:
    "You say that you believe in the sanctity of marriage," said Ajai Raj, an English sophomore. "How do you feel about marriages where the man does nothing but fuck his wife up the ass?"   
    And the crowd fell silent.  Ms. Coulter stood stunned atop her stage, unprepared for a jackass to say something so utterly crude and to the point.  Her pompous and mean air is enough to stump questioners into timidity, I wasn't about to let her stop me.  The audience members looked at me with raw disbelief; later, even friends who know me well admitted that they'd been surprised at how vulgar I'd been.  The others in line for Q&A, mostly liberals, looked at me like I'd set their cause back forty years.
    Did I give a shit?  No.  If I had a message, it's that the whole thing was a joke- hell, our whole political scene today is a fucking joke.  Everyone's out to either pat themselves on the back for being right or whine about how they're being wronged without ever lifting a finger to fight for it.
    So rather than dignify anyone else, I "made masturbatory gestures" as I exited.  Again, bingo!  I danced a jig and set my hand a-jerkin' at crotch-level, sneering for the crowd and letting them know I was ready to roll.  I yelled to my friends that we were gonna split and made for the door.
    Two cops approached me.  I figured they were going to tell me I had to leave, so I said "You can't fire me, because I quit!"
    "You're under arrest."
    It was my turn to be shocked.  I tried to ask them what for; saying "fuck her in the ass"" at a college isn't a crime, last time I checked.  They apparently mistook my inquiries for aggression, and grabbed me roughly and slammed me into the door.  Within seconds the backmost two or three rows was surging forward, following the scene as the cops dragged me out the door.  They yelled and chanted; my friends were more outraged than I'd ever seen any of them before.  As they pushed me into the car, I heard my good friend Jeffrey Stockwell scream, "THIS ISN'T A JUSTICE SYSTEM!  YOU CALL THIS PROTECTING AND SERVING?!"  The crowd took up a chant at the UTPD officers: "Shame! Shame! Shame!"
    Shame is fucking right.  When I asked the cops why they thought I needed cuffing, they told me that they didn't even see anything that happened, they were just doing as told.
    As a good friend pointed out to me, it's a scary thought that people who are given weapons and the authority to forcibly detain people can act without knowledge of a situation.
    I'm writing this at 7:15 A.M. Wednesday, having recouped over a few cigarettes and some coffee after being released from jail around 3 A.M.  I had a party waiting for me- twenty or so friends and supporters, who showered me with gifts such as a card, sodas, cigarettes, food, and a Blondie CD (go figure).  Several civil rights-interested associations approached me, offering pro bono legal representation and showing their support.
    I have no regrets.  Was I jackass?  Yes.  Oh Christ, yes.  But here's the question people ought to ask themselves.  Did I deserve to be arrested?  Did the cops need to rough me up for saying bad words at what was at least masquerading as an open dialogue?  Do the people of Texas- hell, of America- feel that "potty mouth" belongs on the list of punishable crimes along with "aggravated assault" and "armed robbery"?
    As stated in the Texan article, I am charged with Disorderly Conduct, which is a Class C Misdemeanor.  Other Class C Misdemeanors include DWIs, possession of drug paraphernalia, and speeding tickets.  Without getting into the justification for all of those, were my naughty words and crude hand motions as imposing a danger?
    This isn't about politics anymore, however it might have come about.  Either you think it's an absurd outrage or you think swearing is a crime.  Trey Parker and Matt Stone are Republicans, for Christ's sake.  Raise your hand if you watch South Park.
    This is about drawing a line in the sand.  It made me proud to see people standing up and calling bullshit when bullshit needed to be called.  All politics aside, people ought to ask themselves, how far should our representatives of "justice" be allowed to go?  Do the American people believe in censorship rights for the rich and famous?
    I know I didn't slay the insidious evil that is Ann Coulter, but I did give her pause.  She can easily go to another college or hoedown or whatever and spew her tired rhetoric without worrying about me.  But I'm not the only one who feels this way.  Other people will call her on her shit.
    And hey, Ann, don't come back to UT.  We're better than your bullshit here.  And I can think of at least one jackass here who can dish it out better than you.

Tags: (all tags) :: Previous Tag Versions

Permalink | 338 comments

  •  This is prime. (3.55 / 9)

    I have a new hero, at least for the rest of the day.
    •  flame me now (4.00 / 5)

      You have two reasons to flame me, both because I am replying to the top post in order to actually get my comment reason, and because I am going to be a wet blanket, but I just have to clear up a misconception.  Mr. Raj's comments and actions are unprotected by the Constitution.

      Under existing First Amendment doctrine, the government may designate public property as a "designated public forum."  This means that the government may designate certain public property to be used for a certain purpose, and may criminalize actions which disrupt that purpose.  While the Constitution does forbid "viewpoint discrimination" in designating a forum (i.e. the government cannot designate a forum for the sole purpose of opposing abortion, or supporting John Kerry), UT did not engage in viewpoint discrimination under current Supreme Court precedent.

      One purpose which government may designate a public forum for is to allow groups or individuals of diverse viewpoints to each temporarally use the forum to express their viewpoint.  That means that UT can allow one of their buildings to be temporarily designated for the sole purpose of letting Ann Coulter express her hateful opinions, so long as they also let people with other viewpoints use the same or similar facilities, in the same way, but at a different time.  So long as UT has a viewpoint neutral means by which diverse speakers can be booked to use its buildings, what UT did was NOT unconstitutional.  Furthermore, since Mr. Raj's actions placed an unreasonable burden on the designated purpose of this forum, the government was justified in bringing a criminal action against him.

      Again, sorry to burst people's bubbles here, but I say this only because it is important for us to know the law before we try to use it as a weapon.  It is also important that we don't unintentionally commit crimes believing our actions to be constitutionally protected.  First Amendment law is one of the most complicated doctrines under the Constitution, and the GOP has done much that is in opposition to it, but this action is not such a case.

      •  That logic didnt apply when Michael Moore (4.00 / 2)

        came to tucson.

        He sold out a 15,000 seat arena. (giving a tidy profit of around 30 k back to the students I might add)

         about 100 or so very loud republicans were in attendance. They were sitting not far from me. they screamed back in unison at everything he said. They were allowed to keep this up for almost an hour.  I was sitting near enough that I could barely hear moore over their screams.

        I got up to talk to one of the University Police who were stationed inside the arena. I said - all these people paid to listen. cant you get them to be quiet or get them to leave?   His answer
        "Its their right to have free speech"

        Yeah right, I'm gonna go to the movies this weekend and scream my head off, and see if it takes them an hour to get the police involved, and if I get out without arrest.

        Moore was quite calm in his responses (I thought too much)

        Eventually a few of the protesters were escorted from the hall, but none were arrested, as far as I know.

        http://www.defeat200.org/articles/12Oct04.htm

      •  Why You're Wrong (3.00 / 2)

        Because this fellow spoke during a Q&A session he was not disruptive. His language was questionable, but so is Coulter's language.

        You say he "placed an unreasonable burden on the designated purpose of this forum". That is doubtful. Asking a question during a Q&A session doesn't seem to be a burden. The language used in that forum really couldn't be perceived as burden and certainly isn't cause for arrest.

        •  Rabid Coulter (none / 1)

          ..should have been frog marched out of several news programs for her lewd Clinton-cumming-in-the-sink comments.  God knows how many times that fucking ass-bite would have and should have been arrested for her nasty rhetoric.  Queen of the Fascists is her well-earned title.

          Those fucking pig cops are going to regret that.  There are pig cops and there are Democrat cops, just like there are pig repubs and just regular everyday folks, the Democrats.  Their audacity amazes me everyday.  At least Dems are out there swinging these days.

        •  According to the original post... (none / 0)

          the guy had been disruptive the entire evening.

          From the beginning I was yelling obscenities along with my friends, roaring at Ms. Coulter's right-wing bullshit festival the way no one else had the balls to.

      •  No Flame (3.00 / 3)

        the issue is not his constitutionally protected speech, there is  none of that anywhere in America any more.

        The point is that Raj has the balls to take back his freedom from the noise machine.

        I assume he thought he was protected, but that is a mistake for everyone in America today. Only Coulter and her hate mongers are protected, everyone else is a zero and all the zeros in the world still add up to nothing in their eyes.

        This guy deserves a medal.

        The Number of the Beast 78-22

        by Deep Dark on Thu May 05, 2005 at 03:46:25 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  I don't question that (3.50 / 4)

          I don't question that, but its important that we understand when we are ingaging in illegal civil disobedience, and when we are engaging in protected speech.

          To respond to the two other posters, the Constitution does not create any crimes (except for maybe treason), so when something is unprotected by the Constitution, the legislature has the right to make it illegal, but they are not required to.  Thus what is legal in Tucson can be illegal in Austin.  Not to mention the fact that a police department in one town might choose to enforce some laws and leave others alone, while the police in a different town may selectively enforce others.  It's not a perfect system, but it is our system and we would do well to learn understand it so that we can tell true fascism from laws we just don't like.

          "Unreasonable burden" is a legal term of art.  I have no doubt a court would find a person who yelled obscenities at a legally present speaker, taunted her with lewd gestures and otherwise disrupted a legal designated public forum would be found to have acted beyond the scope of the First Amendment.  Mr. Raj's actions were civil disobediance, which is a noble practice with a noble history, but they were not protected by the Constitution.

          •  huh (none / 0)

            _I have no doubt a court would find a person who yelled obscenities at a legally present speaker, taunted her with lewd gestures and otherwise disrupted a legal designated public forum would be found to have acted beyond the scope of the First Amendment. _

            well thats exactly what the bushies did at michael moores talk, - they shouted, yelled obscenities, and insults, waved large signs, obstructing peoples view.  They so completely disrupted things that michael spent an inordinate amount of time talking to them.

            If the cops refuse to do their job, what right does a citizen have?  The cops were standing right there. I think the fix was in.

            Course dont know why I should be shocked at lack of justice when it comes to police. Blacks have known that a long time.

            I'm not saying all cops are that way. But some are.

      •  Raj's Question Was Legitimate, If Crudely Put (3.40 / 5)

        Allow me to rephrase it for him:

        "Ms. Coulter, if marriage is to be between one man and woman, and sex therein presumably reserved solely for procreative purposes, what are we to make of a heterosexual marriage in which anal intercourse is the preferred means of conjugation? Should this marriage be banned, along with gay marriage."

        However, I believe Raj used a pretty choice phraseology to get the bitch's attention.

        The moral arc of the universe is long, but it bends towards justice. - Martin Luther King, Jr.

        by easong on Thu May 05, 2005 at 04:50:04 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  Wrong on First Amendment (none / 0)

        Your interpretration of the First Amendment and the US Constitution are inaccurate.  You state, "Mr. Raj's comments and actions are unprotected by the Constitution."  The first fatal flaw of your analysis is made readily apparent when you used the word "comments."  I'm not sure how much work you have done in the area of First Amendment law, but you don't seem to understand the legal terms of art involved in it.

        The First Amendment protects content, though it does not protect conduct; Mr. Raj's "comments" are indeed protected by the First Amendment.  The legal issue is whether Mr. Raj was arrested for the content of his statements or his conduct - was it what he said or how he said it?  The state cannot arrest a person for saying "fuck his wife up the ass," just as the state cannot arrest a person for saying, "Vote Bush."  Neither the First Amendment nor the Supreme Court distinguishes between these two statements.  Your entire discussion on "viewpoint discrimination" is entirely irrelevant to this issue.  The words he used and the views they expressed cannot be viewed under the constitutional framework unless they constituted a credible threat, which is not the case with Mr. Raj's words.  

        The real First Amendment issue presented is whether Mr. Raj was arrested for his acts rather than his statements and that the arrest further some sort fo legitimate government interest.  Assuming the facts present by this article, Mr. Raj patiently waited his turn to speak, received permission to speak, and then asked as instructed.  His acts did not differ than the acts of every other student who came before him; it only differed in what he said, not how he said it.

        There's a reason it is termed disorderly conduct - the question is the legality of Mr. Raj's conduct, not the content of his speech.

        •  The real First Amendment issue... (none / 0)

          The real First Amendment issue presented is whether Mr. Raj was arrested for his acts rather than his statements and that the arrest further some sort fo legitimate government interest.  Assuming the facts present by this article, Mr. Raj patiently waited his turn to speak, received permission to speak, and then asked as instructed.  His acts did not differ than the acts of every other student who came before him; it only differed in what he said, not how he said it.

          Not correct. Refer back to the original diary post:

          In his article, which I enjoyed and commend him for, Mr. Sampath quoted the former president of the Student Events Center, the organization which arranged the event.  He wrote:
          "The person had been disruptive the entire event," said Matt Hardigree, former Student Events Center president. "He took the opportunity to say something lewd and offensive and then made masturbatory gestures as he exited."
          And what do I have to say in rebuttal?  Not a goddamn thing.
              Matt Hardigree got it spot-on!  From the beginning I was yelling obscenities along with my friends, roaring at Ms. Coulter's right-wing bullshit festival the way no one else had the balls to.

      •  In support (none / 0)

        I though since no one else had I would post the applicable law.  From the Texas Penal Code:

        Sec. 42.01. DISORDERLY CONDUCT. (a) A person commits an offense if he intentionally or knowingly:
        ~ ~ (1) uses abusive, indecent, profane, or vulgar language in a public place, and the language by its very utterance tends to incite an immediate breach of the peace;
        ~ ~ (2) makes an offensive gesture or display in a public place, and the gesture or display tends to incite an immediate breach of the peace;

        I think considering the reaction that occurred and the reaction Mr. Raj intended to occur he is guilty of the above-described crime.

        I like his actions.  They turned an entertainer into entertainment.

        My views do not represent the opions of my service or the United States government.

        by UTstudent on Mon May 09, 2005 at 07:05:04 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  kos should...air america..anyone (3.50 / 6)

    air america/or some blog should do an interview with this guy..he is the real deal, and is probably pretty funny to talk with..

    if this were the right wing and a similiar event the other way, they'd make this guy a celebrity

    those were good times, as far as we knew --colbert

    by AmericanHope on Thu May 05, 2005 at 08:05:00 AM PDT

    •  olberman should be all over this (none / 1)

      This young man has plenty moxy. I continue to be puzzled by the wonders of this great nation that is deemed home of the free and the brave. What happened to freedom of speech in this country?

      This is something I would expect to happen in communist china or even in my part of the world. But here in Amercia, can't a young man have the freedom to speak his mind.

      When last did curse words become a crime? Here in Georgia, a serial killer is on the loose due to law enforcement ineptitude. But a young man speaking his mind is hurled off to jail. As vulgar as his comments were, so has Ann Coulter been diabolical in her statements about others.

      Surely, Olberman (the only sane one I know) should be clued in on this so that he can have the young man tell his story.

      That woman is the epitomy of hate and greed. I bet she did not see that coming.

    •  How DARE Ann Coulter!! (none / 1)

      That pesky 1st amendment!! Dammit! Why can't all campus speech parrot what my professor tells me?!
      Why are dissenting opinions allowed at UT?! It's an outrage I tell you!!
      Why hasn't Noam Chomsky been interrupted once?
      The left needs to criticize clowns like this guy because he becomes YOUR posterboy.
      Disagree with the message...so prevent the message from expression. That's real American.
      •  I couldn't agree more (none / 1)

        Raj pretty much summed up his own persona when he wrote:

        I am Ajai Raj, and I am a jackass.

        I am at a loss as to why acting in such a childish fashion makes anyone a first amendment hero.

        Ann Coulter is an idiot, if you can not debate her straight up and have to resort to profanity and just walking out, then you are an even bigger idiot than she is.

        •  The thing is... (4.00 / 2)

          taking the high road with her won't work. I've seen her (in the few tortured moments I've managed to force myself to watch her) manage to twist even the most civilly phrased statement into something the speaker clearly never intended to say. I really do think the only way to debate her is to drop BELOW her level. Anything even remotely nuanced is a complete waste of time with her.

          conscietious objector in the battle of the sexes

          by plymouth on Thu May 05, 2005 at 05:13:26 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

      •  So Anyway (none / 1)

        what do you think of the sanctity of the marriages of guys who fuck their wives up the ass?

        Now please, step this way, please do not make a noise, it is unseemly and disrespectful.

        Yes, I know it looks like a shower, but there is no need to take off your clothes.

        The Number of the Beast 78-22

        by Deep Dark on Thu May 05, 2005 at 03:49:49 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  I guess (2.50 / 2)

        your not a big Abbie Hoffman fan...

        Too bad - it's called political theater & it was used to great effect in the 60's.

  •  how do i recommend (3.50 / 2)

    how do i recommend a diary?

    those were good times, as far as we knew --colbert

    by AmericanHope on Thu May 05, 2005 at 08:06:04 AM PDT

  •  "...with a baseball bat" (3.42 / 7)

    To me, Ann's preferred method to talk to liberals seems more vulgar than a question about private sexual practices.
  •  we need to get (3.76 / 17)

    someone in every audience that sees her to ask this same question.
  •  What's his email? (3.57 / 7)

    Seriously. The guy has balls, and I'm proud of him for that.

    Just one thing though:

    Did I deserve to be arrested?

    Damn straight you did. Look, this is part and parcel of civil disobediance: you do things that are against the law to make a point. And when you break the law, you have to expect to get treated like a criminal. The whole idea is to make the system realize its own hypocrisy.

    My advice? Treat it as a badge of honor. You'll be telling your grandkids about it.

    •  ajairaj@mail.utexas.edu (none / 1)

      needless to say he's been getting a lot mail. I know the freepers have it and are using it
    •  Why should he be arrested??? (3.25 / 4)

      I agree that he was foul, but since when do you get arrested for speaking in a foul manner?  This is BS and I hope he retains the offered legal services and sues the police and Ann Couter, just for fun.

      My new bumper sticker: Cheney-Satan '08

      by adigal on Thu May 05, 2005 at 08:29:55 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  What law did he break? (none / 0)

      Seriously, before you can attack him on this point, you need to answer the obvious question.

      George Bush is the architect of his own destruction.

      by lalawguy on Thu May 05, 2005 at 08:39:53 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  By the by... (4.00 / 3)

        When I wrote that comment, I forgot that he said he was charged with disorderly conduct. My bad.

        However, my understanding of the law (at least as it is phrased in several states) is that the person has to pose a "consistant or immediate" threat or annoyance to the public (and, in this case, the right to meet peacefully). The fact that he was arrested while leaving the auditorium seems to negate the fact that his conduct was a continuing threat to anyone. So it still does not appear that he broke any law.

        George Bush is the architect of his own destruction.

        by lalawguy on Thu May 05, 2005 at 08:45:29 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  wrong (none / 0)

          Disorderly conduct is pretty much a blanket charge that police can arrest you for just about anything you do in public.  My friend (who is now a cop) got arrested at a bar in Iowa City for arguing with a bartender about how many drinks he could buy at a time.  I'm sure plenty of people on here have similar stories that they have seen as well.  The fact that he got arrsted is neither surprising or that out of ordinary.  If police are talking to you and you don't basically kiss their ass, you might be arrested.  It is wrong, but it is how the system works.
      •  Affadavit for arrest says... (none / 0)

        He was charged with Disorderly Conduct #1 and #2(abusive, profane and vulgar language and obscene gesture).  Document is on the Smoking Gun site. I didn't know simply using gestures and vulgar language was a crime--there's a veritable crime wave going on around me during my commute to and from work!  

        The affadavit says the police officer arrested him based on personal knowledge, which doesn't seem to jibe with what Raj said he was told at the time of arrest.  

        I thought it was interesting the affadavit specifically mentioned there were children under the age of 10 present at the event. I'm shocked the parents of said children weren't arrested for child abuse for subjecting them to the hateful rhetoric MS. Coulter spews.  

  •  You Rock! (none / 1)

    We need ten million more liberals like you.

    I'm getting sick of the timid, cowardly liberals going around with a stick up their ass.

  •  I would think that if he is actually charged (none / 1)

    That his lawyer would be entitled to ask that Ms. Coulter be called as a witness.  That could be great fun.
  •  Hero (3.72 / 11)

    Ajai Raj: Amazing, good stuff.

    We are too timid.  We are afraid of looking like hippies, we are trained to see things from others perspectives, we try and understand that people who disagree with us politically may well be good people.

    But, at some point, that makes us lambs to the slaughter.

    So, cheers to Ajai Raj, for standing up, and calling bullshit in a crass, vulgar, but necessary way.  It also points out, to me, that what people like Ann Coulter represent is obsenity of a far deeper nature, ultimately corrupting what is truly great about our nation.  The police who back her up by inimidating the opposition need to be checked, as well, or the pretense of freedom will be stripped away.

    Personally, I know I need to be less timid in my opposition, and Ajai is a great example of it.

    "Agitate . . . Agitate . . . Agitate" - Frederick Douglass

    by Fides on Thu May 05, 2005 at 08:15:06 AM PDT

  •  Me (3.73 / 15)

    I would HAPPILY take a Class C Misdemeanor for the honor of being able to shut that whore up for just one second.
  •  Your actions during this event remind me of... (3.62 / 8)

    ACT UP.

    The time to be polite has passed. Attack on all fronts. Take the high road with them and debate them the entire way, but get in the gutter with them too don't give them any ground.

    This is our country and way of life we are talking about, don't give up without a fight.

    Thank-you AJAI RAJ for your courage.

    Those who are willing to sacrifice liberty for safety deserve neither. (Paraphrasing B. Franklin)

    by p a roberson on Thu May 05, 2005 at 08:18:12 AM PDT

    •  They are ridiculous (3.00 / 3)

      We should continue to assist in making them look as ridiculous as they are.  Ms Coulter provides good entertainment for the money, we should all feel free to get in on the shtick.  I'm all for asking this question at every single Q&A she has.

      "The state has no place in the bedrooms of the nation." - Pierre Trudeau

      by fishhead on Thu May 05, 2005 at 12:07:29 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Johnny Knoxville Nation (3.26 / 15)

    How the fuck does acting like a half-assed Johnny Knoxville and/or Ashton Kutcher make one a hero?  

    Heh heh, I'm cool, I said "ass" and "fuck" in front of a whole room full of people, dude!  And then I pretended to play with myself!  

    No, the cops shouldn't have arrested the kid.  But what he did lowers the discourse of an already low "conversation."  

    •  oh (3.50 / 8)

      I suppose we shoud try to engage Ann Coulter in a civil conversation over tea and crumpets? He askes a vulgar question to call her out on her BS.
      •  It enobles a mean, nasty bitch. (3.83 / 6)

        He gave her the opportunity to play victim.  That's not a smart way to move people away from her side.
        •  I disagree (4.00 / 5)

          Giving this nasty, divisive woman a public forum lends ill-deserved legitimacy to her rhetoric. It's the people providing her official opportunities to address the public and the "repectful" people interviewing her, and asking questions at her fora, who are lifting her spewings from the sewer in which they belong.  

          I say what Mr. Raj did was appropriate.

          We must raise the cost of tyranny.

          by zyx zyx on Thu May 05, 2005 at 08:43:27 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Disagree also (none / 1)

            And this issue is going to be one of the things that cracks this lunatic hold this bunch of bastards has on our personal rights right now!

            "People die. Strategies fail. Blame is laid. And we, as a nation, are made to look like assholes." - Brandon Friedman

            by Militarytracy on Thu May 05, 2005 at 09:25:24 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

        •  Actualy I think it was a legitimate question (3.00 / 3)

          The gay bashing is about sex.

          So let's call a spade a spade and ask these people exactly where they stand.

          •  it was (none / 0)

            a very valid question. it could have been phrased in a different but I don't care, he said what needed to be said in a language that everyone understands...we should be calling them on their BS everyday in whatever manner necessary.

            "The ultimate measure of a person is not where they stand in times of comfort and convenience but where they stand in times of challenge" - MLK

            by rickpolitic on Thu May 05, 2005 at 12:48:06 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  I think that if he would have phrased it (none / 0)

              differently she would have pounded him in the ground with it.  The completely exposed why he asked it just flattened her in my opinion.

              "People die. Strategies fail. Blame is laid. And we, as a nation, are made to look like assholes." - Brandon Friedman

              by Militarytracy on Thu May 05, 2005 at 04:08:33 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

        •  If Coulter wants to have a vulgarity fest (none / 1)

          Why can't the audience join in?  She's the one who creates the condition for such a spectacle - we only empower her when we treat her like a serious pundit.  She isn't.  She makes her money off being vulgar and inflmmatory.  If that's the atmosphere she wants to create, well, let her enjoy the fruits of her labour.

          "The state has no place in the bedrooms of the nation." - Pierre Trudeau

          by fishhead on Thu May 05, 2005 at 12:09:30 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  I... (4.00 / 4)

      ...probably would've asked the question without those two words. But it's a good question. And, in the end, it got actions, articles, etc. And maybe even a spot on the news between runaway bride and michael jackson.

      Sadly, the media will always be blind in its right eye, and will trumpet Ajai's lewd statements instead of Ms. Coulter's raving facist looney statements. But maybe it can help to start the discussion on what she says as well.

    •  As opposed to her... (4.00 / 6)

      constant use of violent and murderous references and imagery?  

      "We can have democracy in this country, or we can have great wealth concentrated in the hands of a few, but we can't have both." - Louis D. Brandeis

      by VA6thDem on Thu May 05, 2005 at 08:35:17 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  He makes a point (4.00 / 8)

      About the absurdity, vulgarity, and worthlessness of AC herself.  What he did was crude, and probably to the point of a misdemeanor, but he's spot on in talking about making her into a joke.  If all she got was a steady stream of people asking her the same question, rather than well meaning college democrats trying to engage her in a substantive debate, then it would make her less relevant.  Lowering the discourse is a valid tactic when the discourse can't be raised.

      Just another 2L in the court of life...

      by BrodyV on Thu May 05, 2005 at 08:35:41 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  I disagree (3.50 / 2)

        If somebody did this at every appearance she'd move from being the darling of the far, far right to an object of sympathy to all but a relatively small minority of voters.

        I'm all for engaging in loud, even shrill debate, but the point of this action will be lost.  It fosters pro-Colter sentiment, not the other way around.

        •  Totally Disagree (3.50 / 6)

          If this were Bill O`Rilley, I'd agree with you.  But it's not.

          She's gotten plenty of good press, all the while advocating the murder of liberals for no other reason than their political views.  She gets support simply because most people don't realize what she actually says.  There is no way in the world that continued exposure of her can foster sympathy.  And at some point, she becomes a joke.

          She wins in any debate- If we get loud, she'll get louder.  If we get shrill, she'll call for our execution (and be loved for it).  The only way we can beat her is by mocking her.  A reasonable discussion just won't happen.

          Just another 2L in the court of life...

          by BrodyV on Thu May 05, 2005 at 08:52:00 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

      •  I agree completely (3.40 / 5)

        Engaging her on her terms gives her legitimacy.

        Using "bad" language in a legitimate question doesn't come anywhere close to being as offensive as Coulter is.

    •  So what happens when you act with civility (4.00 / 14)

      to AC?  A friend saw her in a restraunt in NY.  He first thought about saying something caustic but decided she was just having brunch so that would be rude, he did go up to her and had the following brief conversation.

      Him:  "I just wanted to say hi Ms. Coulter as a few of my conservative co-workers would be thrilled to know I met you."

      AC: "So your not a republican"

      Him (lauging):  "No, I am a liberal Democrat"

      AC (serious):  "Well then Fuck You"

      At which point she turned away from him.

      Yea, she really deserves our respect and civility.  Aand after the vile and nasty things she has said directly about liberals, and thus about many of us, I would have phrased the question "...when You are getting fucked in the ass"

      McCain = "A whine, a swear word, and P.O.W."

      by ETinKC on Thu May 05, 2005 at 08:53:10 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  No, she doesn't deserve civility from me. (4.00 / 2)

        She deserves tobe ignored.  And I'm apparently not making my point effectively.  The only non-progressive blog press that's going to be generated from this is that some "jackass" wannabe was arrested for causing a disturbance at an Ann Coulter speech.  That doesn't bring people to our side.
        •  ignored (4.00 / 4)

          "If you ignore them they'll leave you alone"

          That's what parents tell their kids when they're getting picked on in kindergarden.

          It's a lie then too.

          It's probably one of the most harmful lies that parents tell their children.  I'm not too keen on repeating that lie with my country at stake.

          Just another 2L in the court of life...

          by BrodyV on Thu May 05, 2005 at 09:02:55 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  asdf (3.50 / 2)

            I just don't see this turning in our favor.  Student makes self-admitted jackass remark, runs away jerking off.  How exactly does this look bad for HER?
            •  and by the way (none / 1)

              I'm of the "punch the bully back" school of thought.  But this isn't punching.  Find something to sue the bitch on.  Punch her in the wallet.  This is more like pissing your own pants, not fighting the bully.
              •  If you punch a bully (3.00 / 3)

                you are using the Bully's tactics.

                That is what this kid did.

                I've seen question sessions with this harpy, this kind of tactic works with this kind of person. If you can not recognise that, I must assume you have not been in alot of actual fights with bullies.

                This guy drew blood.

                •  Our opinions differ. (none / 0)

                  I've been in plenty of streetfights, political and otherwise.  I think this guy had an opportunity to land a punch, but chose to piss himself instead.  Just my opinion, I don't mind it being unpopular.  I'm sure we'll agree on more than we disagree on, just not this topic.
            •  It doesn't make her look bad. (4.00 / 2)

              But it does make a mockery of the forum.  Does anybody, left or right, now believe that this lecture was a serious discussion of anything anymore?  Was anything she said more newsworthy than what our new favorite jackass said?
               He took the spotlight off of ann, and that is good enough for me.

              See you at the debates, bitches!

              by God loves goats on Thu May 05, 2005 at 11:59:45 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  Lightbulb just went on (none / 0)

                So right!  It makes a mockery of the forum and nothing she said was more newsworthy than my favorite Jackass.  Good enough for me too!

                "People die. Strategies fail. Blame is laid. And we, as a nation, are made to look like assholes." - Brandon Friedman

                by Militarytracy on Thu May 05, 2005 at 03:08:52 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

        •  You are making your point effectively (none / 0)

          it is a weak point.
        •  Ann Coulter has reserved for herself (none / 0)

          the most heinous comback I can possibly ever muster, which is to answer any of her rebuttals with:

          "Well I never had a dick in MY mouth!"

          Let me tell that this does not win arguments with your wives and girlfriends.

          Say No to Spineless Democrats!

          by roboton on Thu May 05, 2005 at 05:21:03 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

      •  "fighting words" (none / 0)

        I'm a little removed from my undergrad conlaw, but wouldn't the doctrine of fighting words justify a physical assault?

        Just another 2L in the court of life...

        by BrodyV on Thu May 05, 2005 at 08:59:36 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  what we need is this on tape (none / 1)

        We don't need to be yelling obscenities in public, because that gives them ammo.

        I'd love to see an mpeg of Ann Coulter saying "fuck you". We could send that to every rightwing moron with a Jesus complex, and fry their circuitry.

        "we must make the rescue of the environment the central organizing principle for civilization" - Al Gore

        by racerx on Thu May 05, 2005 at 11:55:11 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Remember (none / 0)

          What several senators said when Cheney said "Go f--- yourself" to another senator (Leahy? Can't remember): "I think it needed to be said."  That was Orrin Hatch, I believe.

          Needed to be said!  Well, I think this guy's question needed to be asked.  

          War is not an adventure. It is a disease. It is like typhus. - Antoine De Saint-Exupery

          by Margot on Thu May 05, 2005 at 11:27:23 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Listen to yourself (none / 0)

            Do you really think you're on the same level as the slimeball Orrin Hatch?

            I'd love to smash the Coultergeist in her lying mouth, but if that happened, it would only help her side. Every time we let our emotions get ahead of our brains, this kind of thing happens, and it doesn't help us.

            I'm pretty sure Cheney's "fuck yourself" outburst cost him some votes, since most of his base thinks the word "fuck" is "below" a person with such "credibility". (cough)

            But Cheney's fuckup was our gain, there were tons of great cartoons that made him look like the evil bastard that he is.

            When a progressive speaks in public, whether they like it or not, they represent the progressive movement. We don't need to hand more ammo to the rethugs, they have plenty already.

            "we must make the rescue of the environment the central organizing principle for civilization" - Al Gore

            by racerx on Fri May 06, 2005 at 06:35:43 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  All you had to say (none / 0)

              Was, "Listen to yourself."
              I got it....you're right.  I'm not kidding. I really don't want to be a Cheney or  any of his ilk.  Mea culpa.

              War is not an adventure. It is a disease. It is like typhus. - Antoine De Saint-Exupery

              by Margot on Fri May 06, 2005 at 01:04:39 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

    •  He asked the natural question (3.25 / 4)

      ``How the fuck does acting like a half-assed Johnny Knoxville and/or Ashton Kutcher make one a hero?''

      Because he didn't pretend that Coulter's points were serious.  Or that anything other than fear of man on man assfucking is driving the whole ``defense of marriage thing.''

      So he asked her the natural question: What about men who fuck women's asses?  Can they get married or not?

      People were shocked because there are some things we're not supposed to talk about.  Instead we're supposed to pretend that Coulter is trying to make a serious point and debate her seriously.

      This guy didn't pretend, and for that he should get a lot of credit.

      Manny goes to Hollywood :(

      by theran on Thu May 05, 2005 at 01:30:27 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  question was appropriate (2.50 / 2)

      he may have been less clever with vocabulary, but the his question was right on par with the tone and content level of the bulk coulter's "work." i think the question was appropriate, when presented to a hack who has made her career doing nothing more than kicking people in the crotch.
  •  okay, I'll (3.57 / 7)

    be the take-the-high-road prude. :-)

    Yes, it's kind of funny, but it's also pretty lame and when that's the story in the paper it does make St Ann's critics look like raving gutter-divers. To me if this says anything, it highlights how impotent we are against ann and her ilk and their hate-schtick. Our basic response is a. boiling anger and b. she can't say that, can she????

    Not only can she, she can kick your ass out of the auditorium for backtalk.

    What would be an effective response to Ann??

    •  Effective response? (3.00 / 3)

      This is it.

      You can't win by taking the high road.  Demolish her on facts and she'll twist them.  Call her on style and she'll label you a "Pansy Liberal."  She plays to sterotype.  So you've got to hit hers.  Make her react.  I think that intentionally lowering her level of discourse is a good way to do that.  She loses some of the initiative that she gains by "going there" first.

      Put it this way- I'm not a fan of going negative in a campaign.  UNLESS you know that your opponent is going to go first, and go lower.  Then you pick situations to highlight the absurdity of it.  It's very hard to beat a negative campaign with one on the issues- people would rather talk about blowjobs in the oval office than health care for everyone.  I think what this kid did could turn Coulter into a joke, disrupting her appearances, destroying her characterization of liberals as weak and easily offended.

      Now, some caveats.  

      1. It would have to be repeated, and more than once an event.  It would have to be disruptive to the point that the disruptions were covered, not the specifics of individual events.  

      2. It could not be done under official auspices.  If a college YD group were doing it, that's too easy to spin.  Kids like this would be perfect.  

      3.  It would need to be followed up by legal action against police, the venue, Coulter herself.  Someone had the perfect idea in calling Coulter to the stand during a forced jury trial of a class C misdemenor.

      This was intended to expose AC as the farce she it.  It just needs to be played out larger to work.

      Just another 2L in the court of life...

      by BrodyV on Thu May 05, 2005 at 08:46:18 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Why was Raj effective? (4.00 / 2)

        He ends up looking like a dope.  No one sitting on the fence is going to put one and one together.  I don't particularly care about his use of vulgarity- but for what purpose?  His point was opaque, at best.
      •  I agree (2.50 / 2)

        When she lowers the discourse, lower it further.  Call her bluff.  She'll end up either looking more and more ridiculous or having to back off.  Ajai didn't play her game, and she was flummoxed.

        "The state has no place in the bedrooms of the nation." - Pierre Trudeau

        by fishhead on Thu May 05, 2005 at 12:12:36 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  When you know that you cannot debate... (none / 1)

      someone who's mind is made up, then why debate her or engage her followers in a debate? They have already made up their minds. I would suggest a MacArthur maneuver. Isolate her and attack on a different front. Become a speaker of a different viewpoint, speak out against her ideas, but never ever engage her directly. She will win, because her supporters will be there in numbers and you will never ever be heard. Voice of reason? Who cares he who shouts loudest gets heard.

      Those who are willing to sacrifice liberty for safety deserve neither. (Paraphrasing B. Franklin)

      by p a roberson on Thu May 05, 2005 at 08:48:34 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  When you know you can't win the debate (4.00 / 2)

        Don't show up for it.  This gives her the publicity edge, not us.
        •  No, do show up for it (3.00 / 3)

          In very large numbers.  Pack the place with liberals, democrats, moderates and sane republicans (I know, oxymoron) - then when she begins to speak - everyone stand up and walk out en masse.

          When the power of love overcomes the love of power, the world will know peace. -- Jimi Hendrix

          by gnutpnut on Thu May 05, 2005 at 09:17:25 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  I think I didn't make my point... (none / 1)

          Any event that she appears in she is speaking to like minded people and they could care less what you have to say. I say choose a different venue, because whatever you have to say will have no impact on her or the people who came to hear her speak. She speaks into an echo chamber and nothing you say will change that. If you have a counter event to hers then you will be able to say your piece and if someone is disruptive at your event then you can engage that person in debate or just have them arrested for diorderly conduct. Bottom line, engage her at an event that she is a guest at and you are on her turf, get your own turf and speak about her lies and inaccuracies. Just my point of view.

          Those who are willing to sacrifice liberty for safety deserve neither. (Paraphrasing B. Franklin)

          by p a roberson on Thu May 05, 2005 at 09:23:33 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  You're missing the forest (3.40 / 5)

      for the trees.

      Read the letter. Say what you will about his on the spot decision, that is one informed, clever, wily, passionate, pissed-off-in-the-right-way gentleman.

      How do we respond to Ann Coulter? With intensity, passion, and bravery. The actual tactics can be debated, and in the sho