In Defense Of Ann Coulter

Tonight Ann Coulter will be speaking at the Jorgensen Auditorium at 7 p.m. Coulter's appearance was made possible by the efforts of the UConn College Republicans, with funding provided by the Clare Boothe Luce Policy Institute and the Undergraduate Student Government (USG).

Coulter is arguably one of the most controversial speakers the College Republicans, or the university as a whole, has ever hosted. This, however, has no bearing on whether or not a speaker like Coulter is an appropriate choice to bring to UConn. One of the goals of College Republicans is to promote conservatism on campus. This is undoubtedly difficult at a university in which a staggering majority of the students and faculty are liberal. This goal is also hindered by the growing amounts of apathetic students who do not get involved in campus or seem to care about politics. We, therefore, see it as a good thing to stir up some controversy to draw a crowd. In bringing Coulter, the College Republicans hope to motivate students to intellectual discourse that would not otherwise occur in the advent of a lesser-known speaker. Perhaps it is fair to say we have already accomplished this goal.

Controversy does not mean hate speech or racism. Coulter has no documented history of hate speech at any of her numerous speaking engagements. Hate speech is speech that is designed to frighten its target or incite violence against them and Coulter is guilty of neither. How, then, could Coulter be accused of violating such restrictions? Furthermore, the university has no official designation of what constitutes hate speech and does not impose any restrictions on its speakers.

To define a speech as hateful or racist simply because you do not agree with the point of view is a lowbrow tactic. It is ironic that some preach tolerance and diversity, but cannot practice it well. We must all learn to deal with dissenting voices, and this is just what Coulter is. Disagreement with a voice should never lead to silencing that voice.

It is worth noting that certain groups and individuals on campus have a history of using this political tactic against the UConn College Repulicans. For example, documentary producer and media analyst Roger Aronoff, from Accuracy in Media, was referred to as a "racist bigot" when he spoke last spring. Members of the far left objected to Aronoff's claim that Saddam Hussein's regime had squandered the intellectual capital of Iraq's citizens.

In addition, for all those who feel you will be marginalized or even endangered after Coulter's speech why have you not come to speak with the College Republicans? We are the group facilitating Coulter's speech and no one has come to us for comment or to voice concerns. If students are honestly fearful why have they not come to us, as individuals or groups, and told us of their concerns? Indeed, such a tactic of writing to the paper instead of us seems motivated by a desire to smear us rather than to legitimize fear. In fact, The Daily Campus itself did not even contact the College Republicans for comment. It ran several news articles, more than one editorial mentioning Coulter, and had numerous harsh op eds about her, yet no one ever contacted us for a statement or with questions. The only time a member of The Daily Campus even attempted to get a statement from us was when their Editor-in-Chief was appearing on "The O'Reilly Factor."

Funding was another major issue brought up by Coulter's speaking engagement. Several opponents to Coulter point out that USG has a fixed limit of $10,000 to spend on a speaker. This is false; USG has no such policy. Coulter's usual speaking fee is $30,000 but with the help of the Clare Boothe Luce Policy Institute the cost to UConn was reduced to $16,000. Suzanne Roosen, USG Comptroller, explained to Students Against Hate, an anti-Ann Coulter group, that the funding board of USG decided to approve this amount for Coulter, partially because of her notoriety and partially due to he significant financial contributions from the Luce Policy Institute. Roosen also explained that the funding board is a neutral entity which gets its money from student fees which are considered public money. She elaborated that because Coulter has no history of hate speech at any university she has spoken at the funding board had no choice but to approve funding. The funding board vote to approve money for Coulter was unanimous.

In addition, the allusions to the Ultimate Warrior never seem to cease. I will point out right here, as I mentioned on "The O'Reilly Factor," Ann Coulter is no Ultimate Warrior. To compare the two is sheer lunacy. Coulter is infinitely more educated, and her credentials as an academic are substantial. She has published four New York Times bestsellers as well as earned a law degree from the University of Michigan Law School. She is currently a public figure but began her career practicing law in the State of New York, working for the Senate Judiciary Committee and was a litigator for the Center for Individual Rights in Washington, D.C. The latter of which is a group dedicated to the defense of individual rights, especially freedom of speech, civil rights, and the free exercise of religion. On top of all that, she was born and raised in Connecticut. What better speaker to have at a state university than a successful, educated female native to the state? Lastly, we, the College Republicans, urge and request that those who attend the event remain civil and respectful. To my knowledge, all College Republicans present at the Cindy Sheehan event gave the same courtesy. Our spokesman even spoke to Sheehan on behalf of the group, thanking her for coming. We encourage student to come prepared with difficult questions for Coulter.

If the Warrior event taught us anything about ourselves and our university it was that we as students do not need to resort to violence to solve or argue our problems. Let us use these events as a litmus test, challenging our ability to come together as a student body to celebrate intellectual and political diversity.

Editor's Note: While it is the practice of the Commentary section to not grant guest columns from student groups promoting an event, the Ann Coulter event warrants an exception. Emily Salsibury is the Executive Director of the College Republicans.