Ann Coulter's latest foot-in-mouth
- Thread starter Locutus
- Start date
She represents mainstream "Christian" america....her views ARE what the united states is all about.....ask her...she'll tell ya.
Colpy you are quite right
Moore and Coulter rarely appear on the boober unless they have just completed another moneymaker.
Their difficult styles sell books.... much like we visit animals in the zoo locked in cages, so these two are locked into cages of selling themselves, the weirder, the more controversial, the wealthier they
become.
Moore and Coulter rarely appear on the boober unless they have just completed another moneymaker.
Their difficult styles sell books.... much like we visit animals in the zoo locked in cages, so these two are locked into cages of selling themselves, the weirder, the more controversial, the wealthier they
become.
Don't know anything about Homer Simpson, I've never had any desire to watch that cartoon type show.
Can't comment.
The opposite of Coulter might be Obama. Handsome, polite, fair, intelligent, couragious, not blonde, compassionate, broad minded, a leader, someone I would be proud to know, a parent,
grounded, balanced, level headed, etc etc etc.
"
Friday, October 12, 2007
Ann Coulter: Everyone Take A Step Back
What did Ann Coulter say that was so offensive?
The line to bash Coulter is now longer than the line of those who camped out to see the opening day screening of last Star Wars release. It is also evident that many of the same people who camped out for days in costume are the same people who are now bashing Coulter for her beliefs.
It is curious that those who are so outraged and obsessed with Ann Coulter could not even muster half the feigned outrage directed at Richard Dawkins, a man who derides God, religion and believers of all faiths.
Ann Coulter stated her beliefs- no more, no less. What did she say that was so offensive?
Absolutely nothing.
She did not call for forced conversions. She did not suggest or advocate the persecution of any other religious group.
Non Christians who take take offense when Christians state their beliefs are certainly entitled to do so- just as Christians who take offense to the beliefs of others are certainly allowed to be offended.
While Ann Coulter's beliefs may upset some Jews, it is equally true that some Christians may be upset with Jews who deny the messiaship of Jesus Christ. Would Coulter's critics deny those Christians the right to be as outraged as they? There seems to be no lack criticism directed at Christians!
The Inquisition ended a long time ago. They are no forced conversions and non Christians are not burned at the stake. For decades, religious conciliation and ecumenical concerns have been a priority for Christians of all denomination. John Paul II embodied the spirit and theology that wanted to bury malignant Catholic attitudes towards Jews and replace them with a spirit of brotherhood. Jews warmed to John Paul's overtures and actions.
In doing so, neither faith was asked to relinquish fundamental beliefs. Jews could reject the messiahship of Christ and Christians could embrace Him. The divisions of religious dogma have nothing to do with religious tolerance.
Christian support of Israel as a Jewish state marks a fundamental and foundational confluence of religious beliefs that have nothing to do with dogma. Jews and other non Christians cannot be the arbiter of which Christian beliefs are acceptable and which are not, any more than Christians and other non Jews can be the arbiter of what are acceptable Jewish beliefs.
Ann Coulter can be obtuse, insensitive and an ass at times, but in the end her remarks are no more obtuse, insensitive and an ass-like than the remarks of many of her critics.
When Jane Hamsher published an image of Joe Lieberman in blackface, many on the left found that racism perfectly acceptable- and decried the right's 'lack of sense of humor.'
Hamsher's humor was meant to denigrate. Coulters remarks (what you may make of them) were meant to elevate. There is no possible way that Coulter's remarks could be construed as deliberately malicious or offensive.
Lay off Ann Coulter- it's a glass house thing.
posted by Sigmund, Carl and Alfred at 10/12/2007 09:26:00 AM"
http://sigcarlfred.blogspot.com/2007/10/ann-coulter-everyone-take-step-back.html
Friday, October 12, 2007
Ann Coulter: Everyone Take A Step Back
What did Ann Coulter say that was so offensive?
The line to bash Coulter is now longer than the line of those who camped out to see the opening day screening of last Star Wars release. It is also evident that many of the same people who camped out for days in costume are the same people who are now bashing Coulter for her beliefs.
It is curious that those who are so outraged and obsessed with Ann Coulter could not even muster half the feigned outrage directed at Richard Dawkins, a man who derides God, religion and believers of all faiths.
Ann Coulter stated her beliefs- no more, no less. What did she say that was so offensive?
Absolutely nothing.
She did not call for forced conversions. She did not suggest or advocate the persecution of any other religious group.
Non Christians who take take offense when Christians state their beliefs are certainly entitled to do so- just as Christians who take offense to the beliefs of others are certainly allowed to be offended.
While Ann Coulter's beliefs may upset some Jews, it is equally true that some Christians may be upset with Jews who deny the messiaship of Jesus Christ. Would Coulter's critics deny those Christians the right to be as outraged as they? There seems to be no lack criticism directed at Christians!
The Inquisition ended a long time ago. They are no forced conversions and non Christians are not burned at the stake. For decades, religious conciliation and ecumenical concerns have been a priority for Christians of all denomination. John Paul II embodied the spirit and theology that wanted to bury malignant Catholic attitudes towards Jews and replace them with a spirit of brotherhood. Jews warmed to John Paul's overtures and actions.
In doing so, neither faith was asked to relinquish fundamental beliefs. Jews could reject the messiahship of Christ and Christians could embrace Him. The divisions of religious dogma have nothing to do with religious tolerance.
Christian support of Israel as a Jewish state marks a fundamental and foundational confluence of religious beliefs that have nothing to do with dogma. Jews and other non Christians cannot be the arbiter of which Christian beliefs are acceptable and which are not, any more than Christians and other non Jews can be the arbiter of what are acceptable Jewish beliefs.
Ann Coulter can be obtuse, insensitive and an ass at times, but in the end her remarks are no more obtuse, insensitive and an ass-like than the remarks of many of her critics.
When Jane Hamsher published an image of Joe Lieberman in blackface, many on the left found that racism perfectly acceptable- and decried the right's 'lack of sense of humor.'
Hamsher's humor was meant to denigrate. Coulters remarks (what you may make of them) were meant to elevate. There is no possible way that Coulter's remarks could be construed as deliberately malicious or offensive.
Lay off Ann Coulter- it's a glass house thing.
posted by Sigmund, Carl and Alfred at 10/12/2007 09:26:00 AM"
http://sigcarlfred.blogspot.com/2007/10/ann-coulter-everyone-take-step-back.html
So if Ann Coulter is so Anti Semitic why did she say this?
"As Coulter points out, claiming that you have a Jew in the family or Jewish blood running in your veins doesn't mean anything when push comes to shove: "The Democrats' urge to assert a Jewish heritage is designed to disguise the fact that the Democrats would allow the state of Israel to perish as Palestinian suicide bombers slaughter Jewish women and children." Coulter rightly criticizes the Jewish community for falling for this ridiculous campaign ploy: "And that, boys and girls, is how the Jews survived thousands of years of persecution: by being susceptible to pandering.""
http://www.israelforum.com/board/archive/index.php/t-4416.html
"As Coulter points out, claiming that you have a Jew in the family or Jewish blood running in your veins doesn't mean anything when push comes to shove: "The Democrats' urge to assert a Jewish heritage is designed to disguise the fact that the Democrats would allow the state of Israel to perish as Palestinian suicide bombers slaughter Jewish women and children." Coulter rightly criticizes the Jewish community for falling for this ridiculous campaign ploy: "And that, boys and girls, is how the Jews survived thousands of years of persecution: by being susceptible to pandering.""
http://www.israelforum.com/board/archive/index.php/t-4416.html
goat said:
The fact that she is openly defending a Nazi ideal doesn't bother you?
Oh, I forget that you are a right winger.
No surprise.;-)
Deutsch did seem to bait her.
The zealous overly sensitive 'Jewish-American' (some of them neocon hawks I might add) media can be that way. Antagonize until you get what you're looking for. He got it and played the martyr.
Her beliefs and interpretation of the bible (generally a cause for war in some regions), whether right or wrong, are just that, her beliefs.
Her beliefs and interpretation of the bible (generally a cause for war in some regions), whether right or wrong, are just that, her beliefs.
When Jesse Jackson made his stupid comments about NYC being a ''Hymie town'' he was roundly condemned by both liberals and conservatives from all political parties. In fact, if you recall, he was probably attacked more so by libs than by right wingers.
If you know Nazi history, you would know that those crazed pundits said that cleansing could only be done through fire. Here, Coulter used the same term that the Nazis did and the implication could not be more obvious.
The fact that right wingers failed to condemn her stupidity (which contrasts with the strong condemnation Jackson got from libs) shows their lack of integrity. I would hate to think that her sentiments are a reflection of their ideals. However, I am haivng a difficult time ascribing their silence to anything else.
When Jesse Jackson made his stupid comments about NYC being a ''Hymie town'' he was roundly condemned by both liberals and conservatives from all political parties. In fact, if you recall, he was probably attacked more so by libs than by right wingers.
If you know Nazi history, you would know that those crazed pundits said that cleansing could only be done through fire. Here, Coulter used the same term that the Nazis did and the implication could not be more obvious.
The fact that right wingers failed to condemn her stupidity (which contrasts with the strong condemnation Jackson got from libs) shows their lack of integrity. I would hate to think that her sentiments are a reflection of their ideals. However, I am haivng a difficult time ascribing their silence to anything else.
That's the point. JJ used a rude euphemism to make a disparaging remark. Coulter did nothing of the sort. Ergo, much ado about nothing.
Here's a link to a video of the interview. Perhaps you could be so kind as to point out where she says such a thing.
http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=27487_Coulter_Shocka_Video&only
Ummm, no. Comparing the two incidents and claiming any similarity between them shows a lack of integrity. Or a lack of something, anyway.
I have never been able to figure out a world where everything is divided into right and left on a political plane
It just doesn't work that way.... not with 300 million people many of whom don't vote and many of whom do vote and shouldn't because they aren't legally registered.
I see the future of the U.S.:
Bathrooms: Women/Right - Women/Left..... Men/Right - Men/Left
It just doesn't work that way.... not with 300 million people many of whom don't vote and many of whom do vote and shouldn't because they aren't legally registered.
I see the future of the U.S.:
Bathrooms: Women/Right - Women/Left..... Men/Right - Men/Left
Absolutely Curio...
It doesn't work that way....never has and never will....
Ann is representative of the American ethos. "I want everything MY way and I don't care and won't hesitate to kill everyone to get it....
Sorry that might be the Republican manifesto....can't really tell the difference any more...
It doesn't work that way....never has and never will....
Ann is representative of the American ethos. "I want everything MY way and I don't care and won't hesitate to kill everyone to get it....
Sorry that might be the Republican manifesto....can't really tell the difference any more...
That's the point. JJ used a rude euphemism to make a disparaging remark. Coulter did nothing of the sort. Ergo, much ado about nothing.
I suppose Jackson's comment was also much ado about nothing.
For a more intelligent perspective on the matter, see this:
http://wonkette.com/politics/oh-shut-the-****-up/ann-coulter-will-annihilate-the-jews-309859.php
What you and others fail to understand is that Coulter was actually quoting Hitler in that ''perfection'' only arises from conversion to Christianity which to Jews warrants a death sentence according to Torah law:
The Torah states:
Deuteronomy 13:6-10:
If thy brother, the son of thy mother, or thy son, or thy daughter, or the wife of thy bosom, or thy friend, which [is] as thine own soul, entice thee secretly, saying, Let us go and serve other gods, which thou hast not known, thou, nor thy fathers; [Namely], of the gods of the people which [are] round about you, nigh unto thee, or far off from thee, from the [one] end of the earth even unto the [other] end of the earth; Thou shalt not consent unto him, nor hearken unto him; neither shall thine eye pity him, neither shalt thou spare, neither shalt thou conceal him: But thou shalt surely kill him; thine hand shall be first upon him to put him to death, and afterwards the hand of all the people. And thou shalt stone him with stones, that he die; because he hath sought to thrust thee away from the LORD thy God, which brought thee out of the land of Egypt, from the house of bondage.
perfection = conversion = death sentence
Any Jew could interpret it that way. You as a Christian (assuming you are one) cannot see, however, that this is the way it is viewed by Jews.
I suppose Jackson's comment was also much ado about nothing.
For a more intelligent perspective on the matter, see this:
http://wonkette.com/politics/oh-shut-the-****-up/ann-coulter-will-annihilate-the-jews-309859.php
What you and others fail to understand is that Coulter was actually quoting Hitler in that ''perfection'' only arises from conversion to Christianity which to Jews warrants a death sentence according to Torah law:
The Torah states:
Deuteronomy 13:6-10:
If thy brother, the son of thy mother, or thy son, or thy daughter, or the wife of thy bosom, or thy friend, which [is] as thine own soul, entice thee secretly, saying, Let us go and serve other gods, which thou hast not known, thou, nor thy fathers; [Namely], of the gods of the people which [are] round about you, nigh unto thee, or far off from thee, from the [one] end of the earth even unto the [other] end of the earth; Thou shalt not consent unto him, nor hearken unto him; neither shall thine eye pity him, neither shalt thou spare, neither shalt thou conceal him: But thou shalt surely kill him; thine hand shall be first upon him to put him to death, and afterwards the hand of all the people. And thou shalt stone him with stones, that he die; because he hath sought to thrust thee away from the LORD thy God, which brought thee out of the land of Egypt, from the house of bondage.
perfection = conversion = death sentence
Any Jew could interpret it that way. You as a Christian (assuming you are one) cannot see, however, that this is the way it is viewed by Jews.
BTW, Jackson apologized for his indiscretion.
Coulter NEVER apologizes for the hate filled trash she talks.
Coulter NEVER apologizes for the hate filled trash she talks.