Jim Stillman
M-KazThe Foul Mouth of Ann Coulter
July 16th 2007 15:55
There is a certain irony in having an advertisement for Ann Coulter’s messages being available via e-mail on this site and my homepage! In an earlier post, I complained that the Ann Coulters of the world refused to debate positions on their merits but, instead, engaged in silly ad hominem arguments that added nothing to intelligent political discourse. Ms Coulter has done it again, with the same results.
Leonard Pitts is a syndicated columnist who writes for the Miami Herald. His column the other morning discussed Ms Coulter’s equating Barack Obama (whose middle name is “Hussein”) with terrorists and those who would attack our country.
Addressing the 50th anniversary convention of his own denomination, the United Church of Christ, the Senator said last month that the religious right had “hijacked” faith and exploited issues like same-sex marriage, abortion and school prayer to divide the country. (Parenthetically, Coulter, Bill O’Reilly, and other folks at Fox News, continue to insist that Obama is a radical Muslim who was sworn in as a Senator by placing his hand on the Koran; he isn’t and didn’t.)
Obama added that religion had a rightful role to play in American politics, and he praised people of faith who he said are now using their influence to try to unite Americans against problems like poverty, the health care crisis and violence throughout the world. “But somehow, somewhere along the way, faith stopped being used to bring us together. . . Faith started being used to drive us apart. Faith got hijacked.”
He attributed this partly to “the so-called leaders of the Christian right, who’ve been all too eager to exploit what divides us.” Yet he said that in traveling around the country he had sensed an “awakening” of an interfaith movement of “progressives.”
Ann Coulter was asked to comment on her favorite forum, Fox News. She made light of Senator Obama and then, lamely, added, “Anyone named B. Hussein Obama should avoid using ‘hijack’ and ‘religion’ in the same sentence”.
Ms Coulter is neither the first nor only conservative pundit to mention Obama’s middle name suggesting that, somehow, this implies a connection with terrorism or to Saddam Hussein of Iraq.
As Mr. Pitt remarked, never mind that “Hussein” is a common name in the Middle East and in Africa, that Barack Obama was a teenager when Saddam took power and never mind common sense.
The 2008 presidential election may be one of the most important in our lifetime. George Bush has left us with a number of messes for his successor to fix. Our moral capitol is used up, our leadership among the nations of the world is distrusted, our health care system is in chaos and broken, our people are dispirited, our planet is sick, and our kids are dying in a stupid, useless war. And we are supposed to be concerned with Senator Obama’s middle name?
This is not the first time Ann Coulter has displayed the intelligence of an eggplant and the sensitivity of a slug.
Earlier this year she turned her dubious wit on John Edwards. “I was going to have a few comments on the other Democratic presidential candidate, John Edwards, but it turns out you have to go into rehab if you use the word ‘faggot–so - so, I’m kind of at an impasse, can't really talk about Edwards, so I think I'll just conclude here and take your questions."….’"
That was truly constructive and helpful.
Later, on ABC’s Good Morning America, Coulter said that she had “learned my lesson” and that "If I'm going to say anything about John Edwards in the future, I'll just wish he had been killed in a terrorist assassination plot,"
That’s class.
Suggesting assassination as a political tactic?
Of course, Ann Coulter does not find assassination of people with whom she disagrees very upsetting. At meeting of Reclaiming America for Christ, he said that she understood the killing of physicians who perform legal abortions.
Then was her comment/addition to Jerry Falwell’s statement implying that the 9/11 attacks were God’s punishment. Falwell said, "I really believe that the pagans, and the abortionists, and the feminists, and the gays and the lesbians who are actively trying to make that an alternative lifestyle, the ACLU, People for the American Way, all of them who have tried to secularize America. I point the finger in their face and say 'you helped this happen.'" Rev. Falwell later apologized, but Ms Coulter stated that she disagreed with Falwell's statement, "because Falwell neglected to specifically include Teddy Kennedy . . . “.
Speaking about women whose husbands were killed on 9/11, Ms Coulter referred to them: “these broads are millionaires. . . I have never seen people enjoying their husbands’ death so much.” On a program that Ms Coulter often uses as a platform, Fox News’ Hannity & Colmes, Alan Colmes questioned whether Ms Coulter truly believed that the widows would not give up every piece of celebrity and notoriety to have their husbands back. Her answer was, “Oh, I don’t know. At this point, to give up $2 million . . . to have to go back to cooking meals and not appearing in Vanity Fair. They’re clearly enjoying their celebrity status.” She left off the obvious advantage to having a dead husband: no more picking is socks up where they were dropped.
Atta Girl, Ann.
When challenged by rational people, even those from the conservative movement who find her rhetoric revolting, Ms Coulter resorts to the excuse that she was joking.
It’s not amusing.
Leonard Pitts is a syndicated columnist who writes for the Miami Herald. His column the other morning discussed Ms Coulter’s equating Barack Obama (whose middle name is “Hussein”) with terrorists and those who would attack our country.
Addressing the 50th anniversary convention of his own denomination, the United Church of Christ, the Senator said last month that the religious right had “hijacked” faith and exploited issues like same-sex marriage, abortion and school prayer to divide the country. (Parenthetically, Coulter, Bill O’Reilly, and other folks at Fox News, continue to insist that Obama is a radical Muslim who was sworn in as a Senator by placing his hand on the Koran; he isn’t and didn’t.)
Obama added that religion had a rightful role to play in American politics, and he praised people of faith who he said are now using their influence to try to unite Americans against problems like poverty, the health care crisis and violence throughout the world. “But somehow, somewhere along the way, faith stopped being used to bring us together. . . Faith started being used to drive us apart. Faith got hijacked.”
He attributed this partly to “the so-called leaders of the Christian right, who’ve been all too eager to exploit what divides us.” Yet he said that in traveling around the country he had sensed an “awakening” of an interfaith movement of “progressives.”
Ann Coulter was asked to comment on her favorite forum, Fox News. She made light of Senator Obama and then, lamely, added, “Anyone named B. Hussein Obama should avoid using ‘hijack’ and ‘religion’ in the same sentence”.
Ms Coulter is neither the first nor only conservative pundit to mention Obama’s middle name suggesting that, somehow, this implies a connection with terrorism or to Saddam Hussein of Iraq.
As Mr. Pitt remarked, never mind that “Hussein” is a common name in the Middle East and in Africa, that Barack Obama was a teenager when Saddam took power and never mind common sense.
The 2008 presidential election may be one of the most important in our lifetime. George Bush has left us with a number of messes for his successor to fix. Our moral capitol is used up, our leadership among the nations of the world is distrusted, our health care system is in chaos and broken, our people are dispirited, our planet is sick, and our kids are dying in a stupid, useless war. And we are supposed to be concerned with Senator Obama’s middle name?
This is not the first time Ann Coulter has displayed the intelligence of an eggplant and the sensitivity of a slug.
Earlier this year she turned her dubious wit on John Edwards. “I was going to have a few comments on the other Democratic presidential candidate, John Edwards, but it turns out you have to go into rehab if you use the word ‘faggot–so - so, I’m kind of at an impasse, can't really talk about Edwards, so I think I'll just conclude here and take your questions."….’"
That was truly constructive and helpful.
Later, on ABC’s Good Morning America, Coulter said that she had “learned my lesson” and that "If I'm going to say anything about John Edwards in the future, I'll just wish he had been killed in a terrorist assassination plot,"
That’s class.
Suggesting assassination as a political tactic?
Of course, Ann Coulter does not find assassination of people with whom she disagrees very upsetting. At meeting of Reclaiming America for Christ, he said that she understood the killing of physicians who perform legal abortions.
Then was her comment/addition to Jerry Falwell’s statement implying that the 9/11 attacks were God’s punishment. Falwell said, "I really believe that the pagans, and the abortionists, and the feminists, and the gays and the lesbians who are actively trying to make that an alternative lifestyle, the ACLU, People for the American Way, all of them who have tried to secularize America. I point the finger in their face and say 'you helped this happen.'" Rev. Falwell later apologized, but Ms Coulter stated that she disagreed with Falwell's statement, "because Falwell neglected to specifically include Teddy Kennedy . . . “.
Speaking about women whose husbands were killed on 9/11, Ms Coulter referred to them: “these broads are millionaires. . . I have never seen people enjoying their husbands’ death so much.” On a program that Ms Coulter often uses as a platform, Fox News’ Hannity & Colmes, Alan Colmes questioned whether Ms Coulter truly believed that the widows would not give up every piece of celebrity and notoriety to have their husbands back. Her answer was, “Oh, I don’t know. At this point, to give up $2 million . . . to have to go back to cooking meals and not appearing in Vanity Fair. They’re clearly enjoying their celebrity status.” She left off the obvious advantage to having a dead husband: no more picking is socks up where they were dropped.
Atta Girl, Ann.
When challenged by rational people, even those from the conservative movement who find her rhetoric revolting, Ms Coulter resorts to the excuse that she was joking.
It’s not amusing.
| 33 |
| Vote |
Add To: 
Subscribe to this blog
Comment by Winston
Small Thoughts on Big Questions
She truly does the right no favors, that's for certain. Repugnant does not even begin to describe her. Vile? Nope, that doesn't do her any justice either. I'll have to check thesaurus to come up with the mot juste.
I do find it rather ironic that a woman who clearly feels that she is morally superior and on plays for God's team so frequently employs the worst kind of name-calling, mean-spiritedness, and pure hatred that one could imagine. If the far right wants her, they can have her.
Comment by Jim Stillman
Political Certainty
Comment by S.L. Bradish
Comment by Jim Stillman
Political Certainty