Outspoken conservative columnist and author, Ann Coulter, has written many "tributes" for liberals, so I thought I'd return the favor that she so deserves.
The problem with writing this "tribute" is, where does one begin? Well, let me start by proving how much Coulter loves "liberals." Let's check the titles of her books: "Treason (Liberal Treachery From the Cold War to the War on Terrorism)," "Slander: Liberal Lies About the American Right, How to Talk to a Liberal (If You Must)," and "Godless: The Church of Liberalism." Yeah, she sure has paid her respects to liberals.
Coulter went to an Ivy League school and was a lawyer, so she is book smart. If she continued on with her legal career, then she may very well know exactly what she's doing and be very successful. But, there are other types of intelligences. Even though she's written best-selling books and while she may know the ins and outs of the legal system, she appears to be rather clueless when it comes to politics and religion.
Ann Coulter is an extremely black-and-white person. She may be even more black-and-white than mathematics, which is difficult to accomplish. A person is either a good conservative or an evil liberal. There is no in-between. She even noted on the show Beyond the News (Fox News) on June 4th of 2000, "The swing voters---I like to refer to them as the idiot voters because they don't have set philosophical principles. You're either a liberal or you're a conservative if you have an IQ above a toaster."
She consistently refers to liberals as idiots, amongst other things, so according to her, you're either a conservative or an idiot (amongst other things). Black-and-white thinking like her's signifies simple-mindedness and narrow-mindedness. Issues are black-and-white, right or wrong (left, according to her), yes or no. There is no in-between. There is no gray area. There is no room for flexibility. It's my way or the highway is typically their philosophy. It's extremely difficult to engage in conversation with people like her. It doesn't matter if she believed that the capital of New York was Buffalo and another showed proof that the actual capital is Albany, she'd continue to shout and let it be known that she was right and the other was wrong. This is why, many times, when Coulter actually receives doubt about something she said or a follow-up question, she'll resort to name-calling. Why? Perhaps that she has little to no evidence to back up her hate-filled statements.
For those who don't know much about Ann Coulter and feel that I may be exaggerating in my claims that she makes hate-filled statements, I will provide some for you to read.
Coulter wrote the following in her December 21st, 2005 column, "I think the government should be spying on all Arabs, engaging in torture as a televised spectator sport, dropping daisy cutters wantonly throughout the Middle East and sending liberals to Guantanamo."
In the April 25th, 2005 Time magazine article on Coulter, entitled, "Ms. Right," Coulter stated, "It would be a much better country if women did not vote. That is simply a fact. In fact, in every presidential election since 1950 - except Goldwater in '64 - the Republican would have won, if only the men had voted."
In an interview with George Gurley on August 26th of 2002, Coulter said, "My only regret Timothy McVeigh is he did not go to the New York Times building."
In an article written June 7th of this year at CNN, Coulter let her thoughts be known about the immigration situation, "I'd build a wall. In fact, I'd hire illegal immigrants to build the wall. And throw out the illegals who are here. It's cheap labor."
When she worked at MSNBC, the comment that ended her career was when she talked to a disabled Vietnam veteran, who spoke out against the war, via satellite and said, "People like you caused us to lose that war." She was then fired for making that statement.
Need I even mention what she recently wrote and said regarding the 9/11 widows? In her latest book, "Godless," she wrote this about the 9/11 widows, "These broads are millionaires, lionized on TV and in articles about them, reveling in their status as celebrities and stalked by grief-arazzis. I've never seen people enjoying their husbands' deaths so much."
She also wrote, "And by the way, how do we know their husbands weren't planning to divorce these harpies? Now that their shelf life is dwindling, they'd better hurry up and appear in Playboy."
To go along with all these, she's also referred to them as "the Witches of East Brunswick."
Those are only a few examples. I could list off countless others that's she's either written in her columns, books, or spoken.
She not only bothers "liberals," but she bothers conservatives as well. While some conservatives may agree with her approach and her black-and-white thinking, many do not. Many are not false dilemmicists (yes, I made that word up), where they believe there are only two possible options to every question or issue.
Arnold Beichman, of the conservative Washington Times, had this to see when reviewing Coulter's book, "Treason," "I'd tried to read Miss Coulter's book and failed. Life is too short to read pages and pages of rants."
A conservative at the Washington Post, Christopher Caldwell, reviewed Coulter's book, "Slander," and said this, "It's a piece of political hackwork. The deeper into her subject she gets, the more she resorts to the tools of calumny and propaganda she professes to critique."
A site of professed conservatives call her "bin Coulter" and below the name and picture reads a portion of the CNN show Crossfire, from November 23rd, 2001, when Ann Coulter and Peter Fenn spoke to one another:
FENN: "Let me ask you one very simple question. You have written, and I quote, 'We should invade their countries, kill their leaders, and convert them to Christianity.'"
COULTER: "Yeah, that was a good one."
FENN: "Now, I just have one very simple question. Who is 'they'?"
COULTER: "The sentence before that sentence says who they are. And that is the terrorists, the people cheering and dancing in the street."
FIEGER: "Convert them to Christianity?"
COULTER: "The ones we happen to be killing right now. Thank God for the Green Berets."
FIEGER: "What's the difference between you and bin Laden?"
On the site, this interview is followed by several quotes illustrating Coulter's angry and hateful nature.
In an article written the day after 9/11, Coulter wrote this, "This is no time to be precious about locating the exact individuals directly involved in this terrorist attack. We don't need long investigations of the forensic evidence to determine with scientific accuracy the person or persons who ordered this specific attack. We should invade their countries, kill their leaders and convert them to Christianity. We weren't punctilious about locating and punishing only Hitler and his top officers. We carpet-bombed German cities; we killed civilians. That's war. And this is war."
Coulter has shown much hypocrisy in her books, columns, and spoken words. While she claims the Democrats to be using victims, such as the 9/11 widows and Cindy Sheehan, for their own benefit, Coulter has done likewise with her old friend Barbara Olson, who died in the 9/11 attacks. With her hateful words and black-and-white thinking, it'll be easy to see the hypocrisy involved with these next statements she made.
On the Today Show in June of 2002, she said this, "Political debate with liberals is basically impossible in America because liberals are calling names while conservatives are trying to make arguments. It's really all the same lie (that liberals tell), that conservatives are either stupid or scarily weird and therefore you don't have to deal with their ideas."
On page 19 of her book, "Slander," she wrote, "A central component of liberal hate speech is to make paranoid accusations based on their own neurotic impulses, such as calling Republicans angry, hate-filled, and mean."
She also wrote the following statement in the same book, "Slander" (page 91), "Liberals don't try to win arguments, they seek to destroy their opponents and silence dissident opinions."
Coulter's latest book and others are in the non-fiction genre, which is scary, because if one were to research many of her statements, they'd find many lies and inaccuracies. In fact, over 3,000 can be viewed at the following link: http://slannder.homestead.com/. Coulter stands by her footnotes in the books, but when one does some fact-checking, they soon realize that regardless of the quantity of footnotes, there are numerous inaccuracies and falsifications.
Even though Ann Coulter is well-educated, she is an extremely black-and-white, simple-minded individual. With her, that old saying of a narrow-mind and large mouth ring true. She believes that her way is the only way. She speaks out against African-Americans, Arab-Americans, Latino-Americans, homosexuals, Democrats, liberals, moderates, dissenters and women. Oddly enough, she seems to believe in a country where slavery is still in effect and women are at home, serving their husbands, with no rights outside of the home and yet, here she is, making the most of these rights and freedoms given to women. Perhaps she feels that only she and other women like her should be awarded these rights.
People like her divide the nation. She claims that "liberals" don't allow for debate and conversation and resort to name-calling. She should really look in the mirror when she says that, because as she said at a February 23rd, 2003 appearance at Indiana University, "Liberals are wrong about everything" and when she spoke to a crowd at the University of Connecticut, she began the question and answer session by saying, "I love to engage in repartee with people who are stupider than I am."
All Coulter gets paid to do is brainwash her followers into believing documented lies. She wants the world to believe that liberals are wrong about everything, are evil, Satanic and ruining the earth's existence. She's even said, "Even fanatical Muslim terrorists don't hate America like liberals do."
She's defended David Koresh and the Branch Davidians, has not fully admitted to being a Christian Fundamentalist, but did say, it was only for the fact that, "I'm from Connecticut where the term is not frequently used."
Ann Coulter is everything that she writes about. She's full of anger, rage and seems to want the world to know that. Unfortunately, the world is listening (and reading). Her followers will be there, just like any other big-time figure, but I hope that the rest, through research and/or common sense knowledge, remain either certain of her BS that she's dishing out to the public or at least, skeptical. I think I've found the one person I would vote for George W. Bush over and that's Ann Coulter.
Links:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ann_Coulter#_note-24
http://users.rcn.com/skutsch/anticoulter/genelyons.html
http://users.rcn.com/skutsch/anticoulter/evilstupid.html
http://users.rcn.com/skutsch/anticoulter/withfriends.html
http://users.rcn.com/skutsch/anticoulter/quotes.html
http://www.coulterwatch.com/files/BW_2-003-bin_Coulter.pdf
http://slannder.homestead.com/
The problem with writing this "tribute" is, where does one begin? Well, let me start by proving how much Coulter loves "liberals." Let's check the titles of her books: "Treason (Liberal Treachery From the Cold War to the War on Terrorism)," "Slander: Liberal Lies About the American Right, How to Talk to a Liberal (If You Must)," and "Godless: The Church of Liberalism." Yeah, she sure has paid her respects to liberals.
Coulter went to an Ivy League school and was a lawyer, so she is book smart. If she continued on with her legal career, then she may very well know exactly what she's doing and be very successful. But, there are other types of intelligences. Even though she's written best-selling books and while she may know the ins and outs of the legal system, she appears to be rather clueless when it comes to politics and religion.
Ann Coulter is an extremely black-and-white person. She may be even more black-and-white than mathematics, which is difficult to accomplish. A person is either a good conservative or an evil liberal. There is no in-between. She even noted on the show Beyond the News (Fox News) on June 4th of 2000, "The swing voters---I like to refer to them as the idiot voters because they don't have set philosophical principles. You're either a liberal or you're a conservative if you have an IQ above a toaster."
She consistently refers to liberals as idiots, amongst other things, so according to her, you're either a conservative or an idiot (amongst other things). Black-and-white thinking like her's signifies simple-mindedness and narrow-mindedness. Issues are black-and-white, right or wrong (left, according to her), yes or no. There is no in-between. There is no gray area. There is no room for flexibility. It's my way or the highway is typically their philosophy. It's extremely difficult to engage in conversation with people like her. It doesn't matter if she believed that the capital of New York was Buffalo and another showed proof that the actual capital is Albany, she'd continue to shout and let it be known that she was right and the other was wrong. This is why, many times, when Coulter actually receives doubt about something she said or a follow-up question, she'll resort to name-calling. Why? Perhaps that she has little to no evidence to back up her hate-filled statements.
For those who don't know much about Ann Coulter and feel that I may be exaggerating in my claims that she makes hate-filled statements, I will provide some for you to read.
Coulter wrote the following in her December 21st, 2005 column, "I think the government should be spying on all Arabs, engaging in torture as a televised spectator sport, dropping daisy cutters wantonly throughout the Middle East and sending liberals to Guantanamo."
In the April 25th, 2005 Time magazine article on Coulter, entitled, "Ms. Right," Coulter stated, "It would be a much better country if women did not vote. That is simply a fact. In fact, in every presidential election since 1950 - except Goldwater in '64 - the Republican would have won, if only the men had voted."
In an interview with George Gurley on August 26th of 2002, Coulter said, "My only regret Timothy McVeigh is he did not go to the New York Times building."
In an article written June 7th of this year at CNN, Coulter let her thoughts be known about the immigration situation, "I'd build a wall. In fact, I'd hire illegal immigrants to build the wall. And throw out the illegals who are here. It's cheap labor."
When she worked at MSNBC, the comment that ended her career was when she talked to a disabled Vietnam veteran, who spoke out against the war, via satellite and said, "People like you caused us to lose that war." She was then fired for making that statement.
Need I even mention what she recently wrote and said regarding the 9/11 widows? In her latest book, "Godless," she wrote this about the 9/11 widows, "These broads are millionaires, lionized on TV and in articles about them, reveling in their status as celebrities and stalked by grief-arazzis. I've never seen people enjoying their husbands' deaths so much."
She also wrote, "And by the way, how do we know their husbands weren't planning to divorce these harpies? Now that their shelf life is dwindling, they'd better hurry up and appear in Playboy."
To go along with all these, she's also referred to them as "the Witches of East Brunswick."
Those are only a few examples. I could list off countless others that's she's either written in her columns, books, or spoken.
She not only bothers "liberals," but she bothers conservatives as well. While some conservatives may agree with her approach and her black-and-white thinking, many do not. Many are not false dilemmicists (yes, I made that word up), where they believe there are only two possible options to every question or issue.
Arnold Beichman, of the conservative Washington Times, had this to see when reviewing Coulter's book, "Treason," "I'd tried to read Miss Coulter's book and failed. Life is too short to read pages and pages of rants."
A conservative at the Washington Post, Christopher Caldwell, reviewed Coulter's book, "Slander," and said this, "It's a piece of political hackwork. The deeper into her subject she gets, the more she resorts to the tools of calumny and propaganda she professes to critique."
A site of professed conservatives call her "bin Coulter" and below the name and picture reads a portion of the CNN show Crossfire, from November 23rd, 2001, when Ann Coulter and Peter Fenn spoke to one another:
FENN: "Let me ask you one very simple question. You have written, and I quote, 'We should invade their countries, kill their leaders, and convert them to Christianity.'"
COULTER: "Yeah, that was a good one."
FENN: "Now, I just have one very simple question. Who is 'they'?"
COULTER: "The sentence before that sentence says who they are. And that is the terrorists, the people cheering and dancing in the street."
FIEGER: "Convert them to Christianity?"
COULTER: "The ones we happen to be killing right now. Thank God for the Green Berets."
FIEGER: "What's the difference between you and bin Laden?"
On the site, this interview is followed by several quotes illustrating Coulter's angry and hateful nature.
In an article written the day after 9/11, Coulter wrote this, "This is no time to be precious about locating the exact individuals directly involved in this terrorist attack. We don't need long investigations of the forensic evidence to determine with scientific accuracy the person or persons who ordered this specific attack. We should invade their countries, kill their leaders and convert them to Christianity. We weren't punctilious about locating and punishing only Hitler and his top officers. We carpet-bombed German cities; we killed civilians. That's war. And this is war."
Coulter has shown much hypocrisy in her books, columns, and spoken words. While she claims the Democrats to be using victims, such as the 9/11 widows and Cindy Sheehan, for their own benefit, Coulter has done likewise with her old friend Barbara Olson, who died in the 9/11 attacks. With her hateful words and black-and-white thinking, it'll be easy to see the hypocrisy involved with these next statements she made.
On the Today Show in June of 2002, she said this, "Political debate with liberals is basically impossible in America because liberals are calling names while conservatives are trying to make arguments. It's really all the same lie (that liberals tell), that conservatives are either stupid or scarily weird and therefore you don't have to deal with their ideas."
On page 19 of her book, "Slander," she wrote, "A central component of liberal hate speech is to make paranoid accusations based on their own neurotic impulses, such as calling Republicans angry, hate-filled, and mean."
She also wrote the following statement in the same book, "Slander" (page 91), "Liberals don't try to win arguments, they seek to destroy their opponents and silence dissident opinions."
Coulter's latest book and others are in the non-fiction genre, which is scary, because if one were to research many of her statements, they'd find many lies and inaccuracies. In fact, over 3,000 can be viewed at the following link: http://slannder.homestead.com/. Coulter stands by her footnotes in the books, but when one does some fact-checking, they soon realize that regardless of the quantity of footnotes, there are numerous inaccuracies and falsifications.
Even though Ann Coulter is well-educated, she is an extremely black-and-white, simple-minded individual. With her, that old saying of a narrow-mind and large mouth ring true. She believes that her way is the only way. She speaks out against African-Americans, Arab-Americans, Latino-Americans, homosexuals, Democrats, liberals, moderates, dissenters and women. Oddly enough, she seems to believe in a country where slavery is still in effect and women are at home, serving their husbands, with no rights outside of the home and yet, here she is, making the most of these rights and freedoms given to women. Perhaps she feels that only she and other women like her should be awarded these rights.
People like her divide the nation. She claims that "liberals" don't allow for debate and conversation and resort to name-calling. She should really look in the mirror when she says that, because as she said at a February 23rd, 2003 appearance at Indiana University, "Liberals are wrong about everything" and when she spoke to a crowd at the University of Connecticut, she began the question and answer session by saying, "I love to engage in repartee with people who are stupider than I am."
All Coulter gets paid to do is brainwash her followers into believing documented lies. She wants the world to believe that liberals are wrong about everything, are evil, Satanic and ruining the earth's existence. She's even said, "Even fanatical Muslim terrorists don't hate America like liberals do."
She's defended David Koresh and the Branch Davidians, has not fully admitted to being a Christian Fundamentalist, but did say, it was only for the fact that, "I'm from Connecticut where the term is not frequently used."
Ann Coulter is everything that she writes about. She's full of anger, rage and seems to want the world to know that. Unfortunately, the world is listening (and reading). Her followers will be there, just like any other big-time figure, but I hope that the rest, through research and/or common sense knowledge, remain either certain of her BS that she's dishing out to the public or at least, skeptical. I think I've found the one person I would vote for George W. Bush over and that's Ann Coulter.
Links:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ann_Coulter#_note-24
http://users.rcn.com/skutsch/anticoulter/genelyons.html
http://users.rcn.com/skutsch/anticoulter/evilstupid.html
http://users.rcn.com/skutsch/anticoulter/withfriends.html
http://users.rcn.com/skutsch/anticoulter/quotes.html
http://www.coulterwatch.com/files/BW_2-003-bin_Coulter.pdf
http://slannder.homestead.com/
Comments
Post a Comment