When a conservative editorial page strives for ‘civility’

July 25, 2006

In recent months, as [tag]Ann Coulter[/tag] has put more effort into being less sane, a few newspapers that carry her nationally-syndicated column have begun questioning the wisdom of giving Coulter an outlet. Earlier this month, The Gazette of Cedar Rapids, Iowa, had seen enough and dropped her column. The paper in Shreveport, La., is apparently poised to do the same thing.

And yesterday, the editors of the Augusta (Ga.) Chronicle said Coulter’s “stridency” had crossed the line and her columns would no longer run in their paper. That’s encouraging — but there’s a catch. In a message to readers, the Chronicle wrote:

“Ann Coulter has long been known for her acid tongue. But much of the hand-wringing by her critics has been, and still is, the result of the fact that she is ruthless in pointing out their hypocrisy and flawed thinking.

“But biting commentary is one thing. A personal attack is another — such as when she slammed several 9-11 widows for backing Democrats and allegedly milking the tragedy for political purposes. That charge alone isn’t necessarily unfair, but to suggest they were ‘enjoying’ their husbands’ deaths and calling them ‘witches’ — well, that’s where stridency crosses a line. […]

“This editorial page stands for many things, and we make no bones about it. But one of the things we stand for is civility.”

Fair enough. If a paper strives for some semblance of civility on its editorial page, Coulter is clearly not the right person for the job.

So, what’s the catch? Coulter’s replacement.

“As of today, we’re opting to go with [tag]Michelle Malkin[/tag], one of the most articulate and exciting young conservative voices out there today.”

Yes, in the interests of civility, the Chronicle believes it needs Malkin on its editorial page.

Oddly enough, at least one other paper already dropped Malkin for the same reason the Chronicle is hiring her.

The public editor of the Virginian-Pilot (Norfolk, VA), Marvin Lake, announced in a November 14 Virginian-Pilot column that the newspaper had dropped right-wing pundit and author Michelle Malkin’s nationally syndicated column from its op-ed page.

According to Lake, “readers often took issue with her [Malkin’s] seemingly mean-spirited rantings and suggested that she be dropped.” The article also quoted Bronwyn Lance Chester, another Virginian-Pilot columnist, who said:

I think [Malkin] habitually mistakes shrill for thought-provoking and substitutes screaming for discussion. She’s an Asian Ann Coulter. I also think that, like Coulter, she says outrageous things just to get TV appearances and book deals. She’s the worst of what’s wrong with punditry today. She adds absolutely nothing to genuine political discourse.

Meet the Chronicle’s new right-wing ideologue, same as the Chronicle’s old right-wing ideologue….

Do they even read what they publish? Won’t Malkin feel insulted for being called civil?

  • They’ve become so inured to thinking of screaming hatred as conservatism that they’ve forgotten when “conservative” used to refer to such civilized worthies as Fulton Lewis, Jr., William F. Buckley, Berry Goldwater, George Will. Substituting one rabid nut-case hater for another changes nothing.

  • “A personal attack is another — such as when she slammed several 9-11 widows for backing Democrats and allegedly milking the tragedy for political purposes. That charge alone isn’t necessarily unfair, but to suggest they were ‘enjoying’ their husbands’ deaths and calling them ‘witches’ — well, that’s where stridency crosses a line.” – Augusta Chronicle

    How exactly does giving money to the Kerry Campaign qualify as a ‘chargeable’ offense. Does losing your husband because of Bushite incompetence mean you can’t support a Democrat for President?

    And tell me how Boy George II has NOT milked 9/11 for four years?

    Me thinks the boys down in Georgia have been drinking a little too much raw moonshine spiked with a little too much wood alcohol.

  • Augusta Georgia, where they used to post signs saying “No (U.S.) Soldiers on the Grass”.

    I suppose Sam Nunn changed all that.

  • “The Augusta Chronicle is run by Bush apologists. That charge alone isn’t necessarily unfair, but to suggest it would not be fit to wrap fish with — well, that’s where stridency crosses a line.”

    People in Augusta need to send in a few LTEs with Malkin quotations, and compare those to Coulter’s screaming idiocy. Don’t let them get away with this BS “improvement”.

    If you want a civil conservative, print Bill Buckley. (oh wait, he just trashed Bush, and we can’t have that, can we)

  • must be the prickly heat and ‘skeeters this time of year. Drives you crazy.

    That’s why I hated the 3 months I was at Ft. Benning.

    This is really in line with the BushCo way of doing business. Claim to bring in “new blood”,then pick someone in the office next to yours.

    As racerx pointed out with Buckley, the echo chamber’s getting smaller and smaller. So Bush-loving rags are really having to scrape the bottom of the barrel.

  • ***…such civilized worthies as…Berry Goldwater…***
    Ed Stephan

    You mean Barry “nuke-’em-’til-they-glow” Goldwater? Barry “resolve-the-Viet-Nam-issue-with-nuclear-weapons” Goldwater? Barry “made-my-hardcore-Republican-dad-vote-Johnson” Goldwater?

    Hay—Coulter…Malkin…it just proves that a rodent is a rodent—is a rodent….

  • Jeez CB, I thought the lack of civility in political discourse was due the the shrill, rabid lambs of blogofacism.
    You should get on the horn with Atrios and get a blogger ethics panel going.

  • Trolls be trolls whether in print or otherwise. Malkin and Coulter are the tribal leaders of the trolls because they can screech the loudest. Their goal is to illicit negative reactions to their drivel and as such should be ignored when ranting and prosecuted when inciting.

  • Steve:
    Yes, THAT Goldwater, and I just missed the opportunity to vote against him in 1964 — I was 18 but the voting age was still 21. But if you followed his later career, you’d see that his basic Libertarian position in social matters brought him aroun to many positions we would also accept. (He was also Barry “You don’t have to be straight to shoot straight” Goldwater.)

    To you and rege in the comments to the post above: there are a lot of authentic conservatives who have come out against the Bushism. We need them as well.

    (Besides, the Republicans are heading for a delightful fratricidal massacre after they lose Congress — assuming we make sure we block hackable electronic voting machines. The Christianists, the ‘ultras’ who think Bush is too liberal, the corruptionists, the RINOs, the Malkin/Coulter crowd, and the ‘down with the ship’ neocons will all be blaming each other. As long as we don’t do something stupid, like nominating Hilary — the only person who can unite the Republicans — their nominating process should be a delightfully fratricidal battle, with every group telling the truth about the others.)

    On the other hand, can’t agree with the inclusion of Fulton Lewis Jr on the list. A true McCarthyite, he was perhaps the nearest thing to the Coulters that the times allowed. (Yes, I heard him on radio many times in the fifties.)

  • There’s nothiing like being banned in Boston or too hot for Augusta. This should increase Coulter’s book sales. Ann and Michele are doing a heckava job in what passes for thoughtful punditry today.

  • Having grown up in Georgia (and still living here), and having voted for LBJ because Georgia has long allowed 18 year-olds to vote, AND having spent 8 summer weeks at Ft. Benning — I can make an informed comment on the Augusta Chronicle. It’s the most right-wing newspaper I’ve ever read. While we may see little difference between Coulter and Malkin, the Chronicle’s inclusion of Malkin is, in its view, as dramatic a change as replacing Coulter with a column by Ted Kennedy.

  • There used to be a principle in political discourse that various viewpoints deserved attention, because it was only through discussion and accommodation that the Will of the People could be fairly represented. i.e., Reasonable compromises were sought along the spectrum of political beliefs. And the Senate in particular (and among the pundits that wrote about it), made a point of entertaining the minority debate. There was none of this ramming legislation down people’s throats, playing games with parliamentary procedure, or having your pundit surrogates bandy around a lot of idiotic (and generally fallacious) propaganda. Someone else mentioned some of the well-known conservatives of the late 20th century that still subscribed to these beliefs, and I seriously doubt any of them would converse with an Ann Coulter. Especially when they are just as concerned about “unitary executive” ideology shredding our Constitution as we are.

  • Perhaps it should be considered proof that in 2006 the mainstream of conservatism has moved so far to the extreme right that civility is an impossibility.

    • Comments are closed.