This has been circulating around for a few days. The final Presidential Debate was not long ago. As many know, Obama took the aggressive stance and Romney tried to come off as the nice guy. 

Not long after the debate, Conservative columnist Ann Coulter tweeted the following:

"I highly approve of Romney’s decision to be kind and gentle to the retard"

In this tweet, she referenced Obama as the 'retard'. Gotta say, I expected nothing less from this intolerant woman. Pardon my language for this. Anne Coulter is the one woman who could stand next to Adolf Hitler, and people would ask "Who's the b****?". 
In my opinion, this word is just as offensive as the N-word. It takes something that a person has no control over, and portrays them as lower than rest of us. It makes us see retarded as bad or insulting, which only insults those who are mentally retarded. 

This tweet from Coulter has stirred up much controversy. People who are parents of mentally challenged people are demanding she apologize. But here is the thing. It isn't the first time she has publicly used the word, it isn't the first time that the public has tried to explain to her the offensiveness of using that word in that context, and it won't be the last. 

There is one person that I admire very much who has spoken out against what Ann Coulter said. John Franklin Stephens, a 30 year old man with down syndrome, wrote a public letter to Coulter:

http://specialolympicsblog.wordpress.com/2012/10/23/an-open-letter-to-ann-coulter/

This letter of his brought tears to my eyes. I think that everyone should be proud of him for the courage he has shown by putting himself out there to stand against this vile woman's intolerance. 

But it doesn't end there. On Thursday, Coulter appeared on Alan Colmes' radio show to actually defend her tweet. She said that her use of the word 'retard' is not offensive. She says "I would never use the word 'retard' to describe a disabled person, but that it was okay to use it on President Obama because he’s not disabled". That is like saying you would never call a black person the N-word, but it is okay to use it on a white person because they are not black. It isn't a matter of using it on people not disabled. The issue is that she is using the word in the context that 'retard' is supposed to be bad. That implies that being retarded = bad retarded people are bad. But she continues to pretend that she does not realize this, feigning ignorance. After all, ignorance is better that intolerance in the public eye.

EDIT- I forgot to add this part about what she said on that radio show. In response to the parents of mentally challenged kids who said she needs to publicly apologize, these were her words: "Screw them".

Thing is, Ann Coulter did this to support Romney. She seems to have the thought that all of Romney's supporters will approve of her tweet. She thinks that all conservatives are as radical as her. But she is actually in the minority of her political party. Her comment made towards this election will not go unheard by Romney supporters. This is the home stretch of the election, and it is publicity like this that can cause the opposite effect that Coulter wants when it comes to those undecided voters.
 
But this is not a political thread about the Presidential Election. My point is that she stepped over the line. If she wants to continue getting TV appearances, she needs to rethink her constant open usage of that word. Many news networks have expressed that what she said is wrong and should apologize. If she refuses to apologize, it is going to get more difficult for her to get networks to invite her to appear on their show. Nobody is going to want to appear to endorse this horrible person. 

That is my rant. Sorry it was long, but I hope that you took the time to read it.

rcarter2 : As someone who has been a columnist for years and is use to incurring the ire of the reader on occasion I can certainly understand being in the line of fire so to speak. With that said, I am offended by her remarks not only as a disabled man who grew up with people who were mentally challenged but also as a writer.

Being a writer I can tell you there are several times where I will write something where I will be thinking as I am writing about reader feedback and am already at that point thinking of my response to such feedback. (I am a boxing writer and I am use to drawing heat merely because I may have a different opinion of that of the reader or, a network with a keen interest on the subject matter.)

I have been called arrogant at times and have even been called things that I cannot say here by readers. Despite some of the comments that have been thrown at me I am always fair with my analysis and always try to be frank, unbiased and straight forward to the reader. I have also had to defend my stance to people on more than one occasion.

Although it is tempting at times to put people who come at me with belligerent rhetoric and have nothing else better to do than spread hate speech and foul language in their place, I always keep a professional manner and temperament. I won’t lie though it does get to me sometimes when the attacks become personal against me when someone chooses to attack me simply because they don’t agree with me. I’m only human and it does bother me when people just choose to spread hate speech rather than reading and comprehending the content of the columns that I write. It does bother me.

I have been writing most of my life and I will be the first to admit that it takes someone with a high tolerance and intense dedication to be a writer. I have been published for years and have yet to find a way to make a solid living. You need to really love what you do and be really dedicated to it in order to really make a go of it as a writer. Especially when you consider the times when you have to contend with people who have nothing else better to do with their time than spew hate speech. It can be demoralizing at times but it’s your dedication that gets you through the rough times. I have certainly been through more than my fair share of hard times not only in regard to my writing but in my life. If I didn’t have a certain stomach for what I occasionally put up with I would have retired from writing years ago.

Although I do not want to judge Ms. Coulter, I will say as a journalist that there are certain guidelines that you have to follow no matter where you are on the media ladder. I myself have social media and when things are normal I spend a lot of time on Twitter and Facebook. I always keep things professional and work related. I never use foul or, derogatory language and always try my best to interact with my readers and followers. It isn’t just a requirement for my writings and for the companies I provide content to, it’s just common sense.

It bothers me that in this day and age especially that someone would actually think using a term like that would be in any way acceptable. It could have merely been a slip of the tongue but it’s still deeply offensive and sends the wrong message. No matter what you’re beliefs, political affiliation, or, social standing there are better ways to get your message across. It is what the whole concept of political correctness was meant to be. To make us more sensitive to each other and able to communicate with each other in a non-offensive manner. I just think it’s very unfortunate and just plain sad that things like this continue to happen and that the concept of political correctness and tolerance continues to often be ignored. Very sad…

Indeed, it is sad. I do understand that when you are a political columnist (especially a famous one), everything you say is under scrutiny and judgement. Often, it is difficult to watch what you say.

That being said, I do not give Ann Coulter any benefit of the doubt anymore. I don't like to judge people I do not know, but this is really nothing new with this woman and I am in no way surprised she said it. This was in no way a simple slip of the tongue. As I have said, this is not even close to the first time she has used that word as a tool to insult someone. She has definitely made a living off of saying some of the most intolerant, ignorant, and disrespectful things. 

What is worse for me is not only that she said it, but she is defending her statement and claiming full justification of it. Even worse, which I forgot to include, there was one thing she said on that radio show in response to the people who said she should apologize. Her words were "Screw them". I don't think she deserves any sympathy of her words always under scrutiny. 

whats scary is people actualy read her crap. On the plus side, when you see a columnist saying things like that you know instantly that its drivel not worth reading

thenumberone : Reading isn't even the worst part. FOX News CONSTANTLY has her on their network. She is kind of a big deal with FOX. So for the people who don't read columns (which definitely more than those who do ) can see her on TV all the time.

I'm not surprised to discover this. It seems that she has to cause a mini-uproar every so often to remain in the public eye.

I don't know how anyone could have the gall to say that they are not being offensive when they have no control over how people react their words and actions. Sadly rcarter2, Conservatives tend to be on the same page. I wouldn't be surprised to learn if most Republican voters love that she tweeted that. Most undecided voters probably won't hear or care about this development.

That was a powerful letter. I wonder if she read it.

NotJon : She did read it. It was brought up in the radio show. As for the conservative liking that she said it, I honestly disagree. For one, a lot of conservatives have mentally challenged kids or relatives, and I can't imagine them being happy with that. But I really think the only conservatives who will see nothing wrong with what she said are the ones on the more radical conservative side. Not saying there aren't a lot of them on that radical side. But even though I am a liberal, I do not see the conservative party as intolerant like that. Just like the liberal side, it is the ones who are on that radical side and highly vocal about it that set the image of the whole party. But I don't believe the conservative party overall will support her comment.

rcarter2; I meant that they were happy that she attacked the president so bluntly and insensitively. There's an awful lot of Conservatives that don't have mentally challenged relatives or friends or just don't care either way. Even if those are just the "radical" ones, keep in mind that in these times, the party is farther to the right than ever before.

According to the Pew Research Center, about 30% of Republicans believe that Obama is a Muslim. That number was only 14% 4 years ago. If anything, the party has grown more ignorant. If you talk to Republican voters, most of them would say that they hate Romney. However, most of them choose to vote Romney because he's white, not-Obama, and not Muslim.

NotJon : Did the Pew Research Center ask what stance the people polled are (Liberal Republican, Conservative
Republican, Moderate?). I'm willing to believe that most of the people who said that Obama is a Muslim are Conservative Republicans rather then Moderate to Liberal Republicans (think Senator Olympia Snow from Maine...before she retired).

Oldschool41 : I don't know what your diagnosis is, but mental retardation is not a mental disease. It is a birth defect. There is a huge difference. So if you were diagnosed with a disease, it might not be accurate to say that. But again, I do not know what your diagnosis is. I'm not questioning you by any means. Just looking for some clarification on that.

NotJon : That is true. Isn't it insane how easily manipulated people can be with their opinions? As a whole, people are so gullible that they will accept anything told to them as truth just because someone puts a cognitive dissonance spin on it.

rcarter2 : I just looked it up and yes mental disease is not the same as mental retardation. My mistake since both sound like they were similar or at least connected.

rcarter2 : Yes it certainly seems that way. I was by no means trying to defend her. As I said I was deeply offended by what she said not only as a writer but also as a disabled man who grew up with people who were mentally challenged. It bothers me that someone, even someone who is considered a controversial figure would deliberately do something like that. It offends me because again the whole concept of political correctness and it’s true meaning seems like it continues to be ignored in situations like this.

It is different from Don Imus’ slip of the tongue several years ago. Although I feel Imus was wrong in what he said I was also part of a group of people who worked to get him back on the air. Everyone including Imus himself admitted he made a mistake however, those who had interest in turning the fiasco into a race war didn’t want to acknowledge the situation for what it was which was a man who simply did not think of what he said at the time and once he realized his error he tired to apologize not only on his show but others as well including appearing on Al Sharpton’s show on his own. It was well known that Sharpton did not have Imus’ best interests at heart and surely did not want to have Imus address his mistake and explain his actions on mutual territory.

Imus indeed made a mistake but it was used in such a manner to turn it into something far more than perhaps it should have been. Myself, I have been a long time fan of Don Imus and I will give him credit in that he knew he made a mistake and was willing to admit it and try to make a mends for it. In the years since he has been back on the air the heat that he had to deal with following the controversy has died down. I truly believe that most people now realize that it was a slip of the tongue and not meant in malice.

The difference here is I feel Coulter is throwing fuel on the fire by refusing to apologize. It bothers me because even if you are a controversial figure you shouldn’t deliberately go and try to make a controversy. It upsets me.

Not long ago I took an awful lot of heat for my stance following the Victor Ortiz-Floyd Mayweather fight. I drew the ire of many readers for my stance regarding Mayweather’s treatment of the legendary Larry Merchant after the fight. Merchant simply trying to do his job was insulted and then physically provoked by Mayweather. After viewing this I more or less stated that Mayweather’s conduct should not be tolerated and that the network which Merchant has worked for, for close to forty years and is in his 80’s should set an example and cut Mayweather from his contract. He provoked an employee of the network and no journalist should be put in harm’s way while simply trying to do their job. I called Mayweather’s conduct classless. I also ended the column by simply saying there needs to be a higher standard.

Well despite the intention of the column, I had readers almost immediately call me a racist and several other things which out of respect for Vizzed I will not say here. Over the course of the next couple of weeks I answered every bit of reader feedback that came my way and did not shy away from those who were trying to drag me through the mud. I called to task those who instead of reading the column in full and comprehending what I was saying chose to use the race card simply because they could not justify any anger toward me otherwise. I am not a racist and I made that known immediately. I also asked those readers who called me a racist if they felt Mayweather was justified in physically provoking a man who is in his 80’s who was simply trying to do his job? Most of them did not answer that question but one reader told me that Merchant was there that night because of Mayweather and not because of the network.

I immediately replied with Merchant has worked for the network for close to forty years, Mayweather is under contract to the network, who works for who? There were also those who tried to state that I didn’t give Mayweather the respect he deserves etc. I said if you actually read the column I gave all credit where it was due. Mayweather is a great fighter, a hell of a fighter however, his conduct after the fight should not be condoned or tolerated there needs to be a higher standard. I also stood firm in my opinion that nothing that Merchant said both before or after he was physically provoked should be used against him. Merchant was there to do his job and he did his job to the best of his ability however, once he was provoked he did have the right to defend himself which he did verbally.

All and all, even though I continued to work as normal it took me nearly two months to answer everyone. I don’t regret writing that piece even though I took more heat than I would like. It comes with the territory of being a writer. As I said before it takes someone who has intense dedication, has a certain stomach for what you do and really love what you do in order to be a writer. Some will like you, some won’t like you and there are some who will only read you to harass and take issue with anything and everything that you may say. But for those who have nothing else better to do with their time then to engage in such activities, there are readers who really look forward to what you have to say. That is why I love what I do.

In Coulter’s case I really don’t know what her motivation was or, what was going through her mind when she said what she said. As I said I wasn’t defending her by no means but I was speaking from the perspective of a writer who has on occasion been in the line of fire. I fail to see any justifiable explanation for her remarks and that is what troubles me. If someone is going to take a stand on an issue, you should at least have some form of a basis behind your remarks. Without a basis it isn’t taken in proper context or at least context that a writer and or commentator intended.

The concept of political correctness was meant to make us as a society more sensitive to each other and able to communicate with each other in a non-offensive manner. No matter what your beliefs or what you do for work that is a standard All should follow. There needs to be a higher standard.

thenumberone: Please don’t feel that what she’s done is in any way an adequate reflection of what a columnist intends to do no matter what genre or field a columnist is in. This does remind me however minus two political columns I wrote almost ten years ago, one a series of columns following Ronald Reagan’s passing and one a brief attempt to cover the California gubernatorial race in which Arnold Schwarzenegger was elected governor, I chose to stay away from politics and remain in Boxing.

As I said before the concept of political correctness and what it’s true intention was meant to be more often than not gets ignored especially when it comes to politics. This is why even if I were offered steady income to become a political columnist that I would turn it down. It just isn’t worth it to me and I don’t see an upside.

NotJon: The main reason why I no longer vote is because I came to the realization that at the end of the day most vote based on political affiliation and not based on actual issues of what’s better for the country. No matter what one’s political affiliation, most should be disgusted by what Ms. Coulter said and the fact that most will stand by her statement and maybe even defend it based solely on political affiliation is in itself disgusting.

Oldschool41: First you’re not that word and please don’t ever think that you are. As I said I grew up with people who were mentally challenged and I myself am disabled. I take deep offense to what she said. I don’t know if she had used the term mentally challenged if I would feel any better about her statement. At best it was a poorly thought statement but her refusal to apologize and saying “Screw them” to people who are calling for her to apologize is troubling to me. We’re all human and we all make mistakes but in order to save face one must admit their mistakes. It’s a practice that I have learned over the years, not so much as a writer but more so in my life.

I do not want to judge Ms. Coulter because I don’t like to judge anyone but it seems like she’s relishing in this because she’s incited controversy. It troubles me and I am saddened by it.

As far as what you said about American society not showing respect to the presidency and those who hold that office well, on one hand so much damage was done for eight years. One political party did absolutely nothing to at minimum curtail the damage that was done. When a different party took the reigns of office the before said party made it, it’s sole intention to stand in the way of any meaningful progress to try and straighten things out. It certainly is not a refined science and there is no perfect solution but people don’t understand that there is no quick fix to the problems that were created.

I would venture to say that you probably couldn’t fix these problems in an eight year term in office. The problems that were created especially economically probably cannot be fixed in under twenty years if you get right down to it. Sure there are quick fixes and little things that can be done which will make things better in the short term however, for real long-term lasting change to take place things take time.


As far as the party who did nothing while one of their own was in office but has done everything in it’s power to more or less stand in the way of anything meaningful happening well, I think part of the problem again boils down to what one’s political affiliation is and the fact that most who belong to a political party vote based on that affiliation and not what is better for the country. It also doesn’t help that there is so much clutter by special interest groups where the lines get blurred and you can’t really tell what’s factual and what’s fabrication.

It also doesn’t help when members of a political party who are not necessarily in power have resorted to childish like behavior and ignore professional courtesy and again political correctness, as one republican rep Joe Wilson said to President Obama during one of President Obama’s state of the union addresses.
It doesn’t help when those who are in elected positions, who are supposedly there to represent the people choose to ignore standard practices of professional courtesy. It’s sad and shouldn’t be looked at as something that should be adopted no matter if you agree with a politician’ policies or not. There are better ways for one to get their points across and doing something like that is not only disrespectful to the office which a politician holds but it’s disrespectful to a country overall. Least that’s how I feel about it.

rcarter2: My apologies for the long post. I wanted to answer everyone.

bvd1022 : First off I had resented my first post as what I had posted in my second post I learned that being mentally retarded is not the same as having a mental illness. Secondly, I only ask you sir that you don't insult me when you say that "I'm not that word and please don't ever think you are", now you might have not intended to insult me and I might have just taken it as an insult (since it can be tough to read what people mean when they post, as the other person can't read body language, pitch of voice, etc). We have to remember that the uneducated, teenagers, and sometimes the media tend to believe that mental retardation = mental illness (as I had though about in my first post), but once people do research (like I did when rcarter2 replyed to my first post), I learned that they are different (hence my reaction in the second post).

That being said I thought your post was very detailed and had lots of information. I agree with you partially as I think the last post involving you stance on "better ways to get a point across". Any politican or person who works in politics would tell you that negative campaign television ads or attack ads get results and work. You can see how Obama's attack ads labeling Mitt Romney a "1% percenter, rich guy" work on Romney's likeability ratting. Plus would you agree that if most of our politicians didn't attack someone's policies, that it would be tougher to decide what person we should elect? What I mean by that is if all polticians do is "here is my plan, here is my idea, vote for me" that we don't hear how his/her opponite's beliefs, solutions, or ideas will negatively effect things like the economy, defecit, or military; that the average American who doesn't tend to watch a lot of politics would not hear whose ideas are more pausable, sense-able, and realistic.

Edit: For some reason I first attempted to post this, but it didn't go through so I would like to apologize for a double post if my first post goes through.

Oldschool41 : When he said "You are not that word and please don't ever think you are", it was not an insult. The word 'retard' was never a positive term. That is a word that was specifically made to insult people. So he was saying that no nobody should think of themselves as 'retard' because it is accepting that label. No mentally retarded individual should have to think of themselves as a 'retard'.

she said it to get a reaction.... and that's what she got. Why do people not realize this? If Ann Coulter got attention for her positions without having to resort to stuff like this then she wouldn't say stuff like this. The fact that it's become a topic of conversation means she is winning.

And rather than talking about real issues regarding the election we're wasting time talking about the word retard.

rcarter2 : Thank you for clearing it up

bvd1022 : I apologize for acting like a jerk in my third post.

geeogree : Which is why I waited about 2 weeks after it was a big deal before bringing it up At this point, the real issues being discussed now won't really do much now. Most who are going to vote know who they are voting for. Had this happened a month or two ago, then I would agree with you completely on discussing the real issues instead of stuff like this.

Oldschool41 : First no offense taken it’s okay. I wasn’t insulting you. The word in question is in itself an insult and it’s extremely degrading. There are some words I do not like in this world that is one of them. Now on to what you asked me.

In regard to political ads like I said before there is so much clutter out there mostly created by special interest groups that blur the lines between factual information and fabrication. This makes it difficult to answer questions regarding this adequately because those said special interest groups only really accomplish one thing and that is to blur the lines often in the hopes of suiting their own agenda not necessarily speaking out on what is good or beneficial for the country. I have never been outside of the United States even though I have covered Boxing cards from all over the world. I hope one day I will be able to afford to travel at least to Canada or the UK so I can adequately compare things among other interests of mine.

I will attempt to answer your question as best as I can being someone with media experience and as someone who does keep an eye on politics but does not vote. I do not know necessarily if things would necessarily be different if there were no political attack ads out there. I do however think if there wasn’t special interest groups or entities like the tea party out there and actual factual information were more easily accessible without having to dig through endless excess clutter to see what’s true, what’s half true and what’s outright fabrication that at the minimum voters would be better informed if nothing else.

I have only voted in two elections and that experience soured me on the concept of voting but I do strongly believe that people should have as much factual information as possible in order to make up their minds. How often have we seen people say I voted for so and so and I really believe I made the right decision but now I regret making that decision and think that I should have gone the other way? I think one basis for that is again too much clutter and people thus make decisions based on what they hear which let’s face it isn’t always honest.

Although my idol George Carlin once said “If honesty were introduced into American life, the whole system would clasp, no one would know what to do. Honesty would screw this country up…” I do feel that some form of honesty is best particularly in our current situation. For years I idolized Mr. Carlin and was so happy that I could see him live before he died. Everything that he use to say about the system breaking down and clasping in essence turned out to come to pass. I just wish he was around to voice his opinion on everything that has gone on since he passed away in 2008, particularly the financial crisis.

There are too many people suffering out there and they deserve to be presented with adequate information and not BS’d about things. I say this freely admitting that I wasn’t the best or most honest person in my youth. I will however say that in this case people need to know where we’re at in terms of what is hoped for an economic recovery and they need to be presented with the whole spectrum of an issue or a candidate’s plan. There are versions of what each candidate will presumably do if their elected sprinkled around online but again you need to dig through far too much excess clutter to figure out what’s true and what’s fabrication. It’s far too confusing for the voter and I think it turns more and more people off.

I will say right now that in terms of my own personal opinion it wouldn’t matter to me what someone’s religious beliefs may be or ideas. For me it boils down to what would be better suited for the country in the long-term not the short-term. One thing that I think would aid greatly in our country’s economic recovery is if companies stopped outsourcing jobs outside of the United States. I, myself have been looking for work for sometime that I can telecommute. Although more and more companies seem to be making telecommuting a standard practice, I come across several ads placing jobs in such fields in India and places outside of the United States. No disrespect to those friends of mine outside of the U.S. but I feel that if jobs and at minimum jobs that allowed people to telecommute were more adequately accessible to people here that it would go a long way in aiding the economic recovery. It would also be good to see factory based industrial jobs return to the United States. I really think that is one thing that would benefit all of us as a country greatly. Far as me I’ve been a struggling writer for years and it is not an easy way to make steady income let alone an adequate living. It can be done but it takes an awful lot of patience and dedication to the craft. I have always looked at the struggles that I have been dealt in regard to my writing as simply paying my dues, hopefully one day all the all nighters that I have put in, the headaches and frustration at times will pay off and I will get a stable gig. If I could physically though I would go work at a place like Wal-Mart or be open to doing construction work if I could physically while still working as a writer.

It’s one reason why I am kind of glad that I am single and don’t have children because it is uncertain in our current economy as to how to adequately support a family, that isn’t just for people like me but it’s for everyone no matter what someone’s physical limitations may be.

geeogree : it’s obvious that she did it to get a reaction and that is one thing that really bothers me as a journalist. Now there are times where I will be working on material as I’ve said where I will almost be hearing the reaction of readers as I am writing it and will also be thinking ahead of time what my response would be to such potential reactions. There have also been times where I have called networks to task over certain issues and that alone I feel is a reason why networks don’t really like me but I hope at minimum they do respect me whether they agree with me or not because I am always unbiased and straight forward with my readers.

I have however never in all the years I’ve been writing ever once wrote something looking to deliberately stir things up or create a controversy. As I said I do not want to judge Ms. Coulter because I don’t like to judge anyone but what she did here gives guys like me a bad name to the point where sometimes I feel like I almost have to defend the job or ethics of a columnist. I have done radio appearances and did my first TV appearance earlier this year for a sports network in England. Although I love my work and really appreciate those opportunities when they are presented to me, I never look to say something to draw attention to myself or to make a spectacle of myself. Although I don’t want to judge Ms. Coulter it seems that her mentality differs from mine.

I do agree with you that this clouds the issues at hand. Ms. Coulter’s comments however did shed some light on the struggles that disabled people have to face on a daily basis. I say this from personal experience that sometimes for a disabled person you can feel somewhat like a second class citizen in society especially when there are those who like to put labels on others. It can be frustrating at times when people only look at one thing and they don’t take time to look at the whole picture and choose to judge a book by it’s cover so to speak. So although I agree with you that this subject does cloud the issues at hand I disagree with you that this is a waste of time because this is an issue that needs to be discussed greatly and adequately addressed among the general populous. Least that’s how I feel about it.

rcarter2 : Thank you for helping clear up what I meant by that comment. There are times when I have to explain things to readers at least three times before they really understand something. Often times they start off all hot and angry with me until they hear my explanation on things. Again my apologies for the long post.