Those who are not capable of firing a gun to defend our freedoms are given their freedoms to be extra good by those who man the weapons of war.
On our side we have people who stand by ad tut-tut when our president is called a liar, a war criminal, a Nazi and worse. It is now evident that their problems with this slander are a matter of taste. Calling George Bush a Nazi may be wrong, but more importantly, its low class. It’s just something “we” don’t do.
But like the innocent victim whose sole reaction to being beaten to death is a pitiful “please don’t,” it would be useful if someone came along and put a bullet into the would-be murderer’s head.
What does this have to do with Ann Coulter? Very simple, the simpering ninnies on the Right (or Libertarian) side of the debate in this country are trying to distance themselves from a few well chosen and blunt words Ann has spoken about one group of people who 'can't be criticized'. And she does it in a way that can’t be mistaken and that brings headlines. See here, and here.
Kevin McCullough, writing in Townhall.com makes the point well when he says:
Liberals in America have been staging a new strategy on winning public policy debates. Simply provide spokespeople that no one is allowed to respond to. Ann Coulter had the gall to challenge that and let loose with some direct observations in her newest best-seller "GODLESS" and true to form liberals have been fomenting in response.
The reason they do is not because it breaks some sacred respect that one should have for a grieving mother, wife, or relative. Rather the reason they are so outraged by this is because it simply stabs through the heart the strategy of hiding behind spokespeople who 'can't be criticized'.
Matt Lauer, Hillary Clinton, and Alan Colmes have been laughable in the trumped up outrage that they share for the statements Coulter makes in GODLESS in reference to the 'Jersey Girls'. The Jersey Girls are four wives who lost their husbands on 9/11, they jumped into the 2004 election debate early on, they cut commercials for John Kerry, and they are on record for saying some rather hideous remarks about Condoleezza Rice and Karl Rove, not to mention President Bush.
In recent years liberal spokespersons have grown infamous for self destruction when they are put into arenas where free debate, give and take response, and actual dialogue take place. As Ann argues rather convincingly in her new book, this sets up the structure of "liberal infallibility." In other words liberals use of victims of tragedies would never be criticized. So the plan is to find as many victims to become the mouthpieces for the left as possible.
An interesting point, when the GOP invited widows of 9/11 to participate in their national convention, the memes went up from the left of "pure political posturing." Yet any observer of those who participated would be hard pressed to know of a single critical thing they said about the President's opponents. The presentation they made dealt with the need for America to remain strong in its stand against terrorism. Kerry's name was never even invoked. And their involvement in the public debate ended that night.
The Jersey Girls on the other hand have consistently spoken out and advocated on behalf of leftist interests through the 9/11 Commission’s findings, to the operation of the global War On Terror, the elections of 2004, etc. In other words - they chose, or the liberal Democratic Party chose for them - to enter the fray, to don the gloves, and to mix it up.
One of the problems the Left has is that they don’t really believe we are in a war. They believe 9/11 was not an act of aggression but a crime; a crime, by the way, which we have brought on ourselves. The problem for the Right is similar. A large part of the Right does not believe we are in the middle of a serious culture war in this country. They are wrong, and their reaction to Ann Coulter’s truth-speaking differentiates those who take this culture war seriously, and those who don’t.