Ann Coulter Continues to Act Like a Stupid B**ch

Posted: Fri Oct 12, 2007 4:56 am

From CNN:

Quote:

WASHINGTON (CNN) – Conservative commentator and best-selling author Ann Coulter may find herself in the midst of a controversy for comments Monday suggesting America would be better if everyone was Christian.

Asked by CNBC host Donny Deutsch what the U.S. looks like in her dreams, Coulter said it would look like the Republican National Convention in 2004

"People were happy,” she said, according to a transcript provided to CNN by CNBC. “They're Christian. They're tolerant. They defend America."

When Deutsch responded, "It would be better if we were all Christian?" Coulter said "Yeah."

Deutsch, himself Jewish, continued to press Coulter on her remarks, asking, "We should just throw Judaism away and we should all be Christians then?"

"Yeah," Coulter responded, adding "Well, it's a lot easier. It's kind of a fast track."

"You can't possibly believe that," Deutsch responded. “You can’t possibly. You’re too educated.”

"Do you know what Christianity is?" Coulter replied. "See, we believe your religion, but you have to obey. We have the fast track program."

Later in the interview Deutsch asked Coulter if she doesn't want any Jews in the world, Coulter responded, "No, we think — we just want Jews to be perfected, as they say."

"Wow, you didn't really say that, did you," Deutsch said.

The guy sounds a little surprised by her remarks. I guess he didn't read up on his guest.

Posted: Fri Oct 12, 2007 5:04 am

I've honestly never heard of this Coulter woman. She's sounds very much like a Nazi.

Posted: Fri Oct 12, 2007 5:26 am

She is more extreme than Stephan Colbert. And he is pretending to be extreme as a form of satire.

Posted: Fri Oct 12, 2007 5:38 am

Stupid bitch does as stupid bitch is. She seriously needs to get old and ugly in a hurry so people stop paying attention to her.

Posted: Fri Oct 12, 2007 5:45 am

Bissrok wrote:

From CNN:

Quote:

WASHINGTON (CNN) – Conservative commentator and best-selling author Ann Coulter may find herself in the midst of a controversy for comments Monday suggesting America would be better if everyone was Christian.

Asked by CNBC host Donny Deutsch what the U.S. looks like in her dreams, Coulter said it would look like the Republican National Convention in 2004

"People were happy,” she said, according to a transcript provided to CNN by CNBC. “They're Christian. They're tolerant. They defend America."

When Deutsch responded, "It would be better if we were all Christian?" Coulter said "Yeah."

Deutsch, himself Jewish, continued to press Coulter on her remarks, asking, "We should just throw Judaism away and we should all be Christians then?"

"Yeah," Coulter responded, adding "Well, it's a lot easier. It's kind of a fast track."

"You can't possibly believe that," Deutsch responded. “You can’t possibly. You’re too educated.”

"Do you know what Christianity is?" Coulter replied. "See, we believe your religion, but you have to obey. We have the fast track program."

Later in the interview Deutsch asked Coulter if she doesn't want any Jews in the world, Coulter responded, "No, we think — we just want Jews to be perfected, as they say."

"Wow, you didn't really say that, did you," Deutsch said.

The guy sounds a little surprised by her remarks. I guess he didn't read up on his guest.

She's appeared on his show once before, and remarked then that former President Clinton might be a homosexual. No, I'm not making this up.

Posted: Fri Oct 12, 2007 5:51 am

And John Edwards is a fag.

Posted: Fri Oct 12, 2007 1:30 pm

Just proves that religionism is more dangerous than racism.

At least most reasoning adults think racism is bad.

Posted: Fri Oct 12, 2007 4:18 pm

Shayde wrote:

Just proves that religionism is more dangerous than racism.

At least most reasoning adults think racism is bad.

You are on the edge of appearing just as extreme as she does Shayde, tread carefully. Smile

She has an opinion and states it boldly. How is that dangerous? That somebody has opinions that differ from you makes them dangerous? I have yet to see her bring a gun with her and force somebody to accept her beliefs.

What is dangerous is the overuse of the word dangerous by people who disagree with others. It is a precursor to censorship.

Christians are supposed to live their lives by a certain rule: Treat others as they wish others to treat them. I would have to say if everybody lived by that rule, the world would be a lot better than today. If the commentator would ask her what she means, I am pretty sure she would share that, but instead, the anti-Christian media goes immediately on the warpath, dragging the discussion elsewhere and for all intents and purposes flamebaiting.

That being said, her last remark is WAY IDIOTIC! Smile

Posted: Fri Oct 12, 2007 4:41 pm

Coulter, like many other Sensationalist Celebrities, makes a huge living by making controversial remarks. It is a brilliant strategy for those that do not care what others say about them. Not only will she be able to sell books to those that agree with her, but many of those that don't agree with her will buy her books to be able to point at it and say, "See! This is what I am talking about!"

If you don't like hearing what she has to say, I think the most effective thing to do is ignore her. Anything else will just fall into line with what she wants you to do.

Posted: Fri Oct 12, 2007 4:42 pm

jrscott wrote:

Shayde wrote:

Just proves that religionism is more dangerous than racism.

At least most reasoning adults think racism is bad.

You are on the edge of appearing just as extreme as she does Shayde, tread carefully. Smile

She has an opinion and states it boldly. How is that dangerous?

Actually, Shayde is right on as usual. I think you even prove his point with your quick defense. See the issue is not about whether or not Christianity is involved. The issue is that she said that people in other religions need to change to hers because they are not capable of living peacefully.

You said;

Quote:

Christians are supposed to live their lives by a certain rule: Treat others as they wish others to treat them. I would have to say if everybody lived by that rule, the world would be a lot better than today. If the commentator would ask her what she means, I am pretty sure she would share that, but instead, the anti-Christian media goes immediately on the warpath, dragging the discussion elsewhere and for all intents and purposes flamebaiting

That is the religionism Shayde was talking about. My religion is best because ____. Everyone would be better off with MY religion because ____. Other religions aren't capable of attaining the level of civilization of my religion because _____.

Posted: Fri Oct 12, 2007 5:20 pm

Kenshu Ani wrote:

Coulter, like many other Sensationalist Celebrities, makes a huge living by making controversial remarks. It is a brilliant strategy for those that do not care what others say about them. Not only will she be able to sell books to those that agree with her, but many of those that don't agree with her will buy her books to be able to point at it and say, "See! This is what I am talking about!"

I put her in the same group with Limbaugh ... there is no telling what she might actually believe, if anything, but she's found a very good living in telling people who to hate and be afraid of. If the infotainment industry hadn't grown to replace actual broadcast news, she'd need to sell real estate in Florida or used Chevys.

Posted: Fri Oct 12, 2007 5:22 pm

jrscott wrote:

Shayde wrote:

Just proves that religionism is more dangerous than racism.

At least most reasoning adults think racism is bad.

You are on the edge of appearing just as extreme as she does Shayde, tread carefully. Smile

She has an opinion and states it boldly. How is that dangerous? That somebody has opinions that differ from you makes them dangerous? I have yet to see her bring a gun with her and force somebody to accept her beliefs.

What is dangerous is the overuse of the word dangerous by people who disagree with others. It is a precursor to censorship.

Christians are supposed to live their lives by a certain rule: Treat others as they wish others to treat them. I would have to say if everybody lived by that rule, the world would be a lot better than today. If the commentator would ask her what she means, I am pretty sure she would share that, but instead, the anti-Christian media goes immediately on the warpath, dragging the discussion elsewhere and for all intents and purposes flamebaiting.

That being said, her last remark is WAY IDIOTIC! Smile

I agree with ya jrscott, the folks that are supposed to be the epitome of knowledge and reason (folks with Phd's, are professors, immerse themselves in research, etc -- academics...or "academensia's" if you will Very Happy

) can spout stuff -just as bad- as what Coulter just said in the OP, sometimes worse too.

Just because someone is saying something in the name of religion, (especially Christianity...) its bad and far more dangerous than anything ever encountered. That's true if you take a fanatical viewpoint on anything - even reason (however weird that sounds). If you refuse to listen to the other side, or try to shout down the other person (or even just hate the other person for their opinion -- or think the other side is dumb (remember that stupid red-blue state chart that was "released" after Bush's 2nd election win? That red-states had a lower IQ than blue states?), then regardless of what you believe in...you're in the same boat as Coulter's statements above.

And even then sometimes you have to also see why someone would make remarks like that too, I know at least in the past some of Coulter's remarks have been reactionary to the left...so it may not solely appear as "oh big bad coulter is being mean again".

Oh - and this just reminded me of something, remember when Coulter visited that university? Pies were thrown at her in the crowd and refused to let her speak? Meanwhile, people on the left that say just as bad things are invited to speak all the time...shouting down someone because you think they're a racist bigot is not ok, no matter how much you don't like the person or their views. And I say this in regards to various "respect my rights, I can do whatever I want even if its distasteful...because I have a freedom of speech" issues that regularly pop up (biggest thing comes to mind was that bit in NYC where the madonna was depicted covered in feces....NYC later apologized to the group that did that, and paid them compensation. If coulter is offensive to non-christians, well that was offensive to christians big time...).

And to respond to Reach's reply to Jr's...you're right, it doesn't matter if christianity is involved (in this case) because telling other people that they have to change because they dont believe in the right thing is not a good thing. But...liberals say stuff about conservatives all the time too, basically my point I stated above...all folks that have a similar fanatical belief share common characteristics, even if they're on opposite sides of the spectrum. Who was worse? Stalin or Hitler? Neither really (although Stalin killed more, but that's besides the point...an ultra conservative and ultra liberal point of view become very blurred in distinction)

Posted: Fri Oct 12, 2007 5:34 pm

It would be a real shame if she got cancer of the AIDS and died...Limbaugh too.

Posted: Fri Oct 12, 2007 5:35 pm

SODAofBRIA wrote:

It would be a real shame if she got cancer of the AIDS and died...Limbaugh too.

Pot meet Kettle Very Happy

I'm no fan of Anne, but I don't view her as some demon wreaking havoc on society. She's done nothing other than to express her values. Ignore her, it's a simple solution to an obvious attention whore.

Posted: Fri Oct 12, 2007 5:40 pm

Ico wrote:

SODAofBRIA wrote:

It would be a real shame if she got cancer of the AIDS and died...Limbaugh too.

Pot meet Kettle Very Happy

Blah, blah, blah...I'm so sick of hearing from this Conservative's little wet dream.
She is disgustingly ugly, both inside and outside, and she lowers the overall IQ of the human race.

If she were gangraped by a group of AIDS infected truckers, it would be too good for her.

Posted: Fri Oct 12, 2007 5:43 pm

Ico wrote:

SODAofBRIA wrote:

It would be a real shame if she got cancer of the AIDS and died...Limbaugh too.

Pot meet Kettle Very Happy

I'm no fan of Anne, but I don't view her as some demon wreaking havoc on society. She's done nothing other than to express her values. Ignore her, it's a simple solution to an obvious attention whore.

That undersells her a little, because like Limbaugh part of her bread and butter is divisiveness -- lowering the level of political discourse by attacking those she differs with, questioning their patriotism, providing unfounded innuendo about their motivations. She has no allegiance to truthfulness whatsoever. She's about selling a message, the accuracy of the message is clearly meaningless to her, as is the careless damage her message might do to our body politic.

But at the end of the day, in our system, if people are so easily swayed by a shrill voice enthusiastically repeating lies, we get the democracy we deserve.

Posted: Fri Oct 12, 2007 5:44 pm

SODAofBRIA wrote:

Ico wrote:

SODAofBRIA wrote:

It would be a real shame if she got cancer of the AIDS and died...Limbaugh too.

Pot meet Kettle Very Happy

Blah, blah, blah...I'm so sick of hearing from this Conservative's little wet dream.
She is disgustingly ugly, both inside and outside, and she lowers the overall IQ of the human race.

If she were gangraped by a group of AIDS infected truckers, it would be too good for her.

At least you've proven you're no better than her. Maybe you should write books or something! Very Happy

Posted: Fri Oct 12, 2007 5:50 pm

Louis Wu wrote:

That undersells her a little, because like Limbaugh part of her bread and butter is divisiveness -- lowering the level of political discourse by attacking those she differs with, questioning their patriotism, providing unfounded innuendo about their motivations. She has no allegiance to truthfulness whatsoever. She's about selling a message, the accuracy of the message is clearly meaningless to her, as is the careless damage her message might do to our body politic.

But at the end of the day, in our system, if people are so easily swayed by a shrill voice enthusiastically repeating lies, we get the democracy we deserve.

Anne's no different than Howard Stern; both are shock jockies and thrive off controversy. Like Howard, she is supported by those who agree with her and those that rail against her. It's an issue of simple market economics.

Posted: Fri Oct 12, 2007 5:51 pm

Ico wrote:

Louis Wu wrote:

That undersells her a little, because like Limbaugh part of her bread and butter is divisiveness -- lowering the level of political discourse by attacking those she differs with, questioning their patriotism, providing unfounded innuendo about their motivations. She has no allegiance to truthfulness whatsoever. She's about selling a message, the accuracy of the message is clearly meaningless to her, as is the careless damage her message might do to our body politic.

But at the end of the day, in our system, if people are so easily swayed by a shrill voice enthusiastically repeating lies, we get the democracy we deserve.

Anne's no different than Howard Stern; both are shock jockies and thrive off controversy. Like Howard, she is supported by those who agree with her and those that rail against her. It's an issue of simple market economics.

Yeah, but Howard's fans don't consider him an actual source of information on things like how to vote and who to hate .... I mean, if all Anne did was say "Hey, look at the midgets and strippers on my show" I'd probably feel differently about her.

Posted: Fri Oct 12, 2007 5:52 pm

jrscott wrote:

Shayde wrote:

Just proves that religionism is more dangerous than racism.

At least most reasoning adults think racism is bad.

You are on the edge of appearing just as extreme as she does Shayde, tread carefully. Smile

She has an opinion and states it boldly. How is that dangerous? That somebody has opinions that differ from you makes them dangerous? I have yet to see her bring a gun with her and force somebody to accept her beliefs.

What is dangerous is the overuse of the word dangerous by people who disagree with others. It is a precursor to censorship.

Christians are supposed to live their lives by a certain rule: Treat others as they wish others to treat them. I would have to say if everybody lived by that rule, the world would be a lot better than today. If the commentator would ask her what she means, I am pretty sure she would share that, but instead, the anti-Christian media goes immediately on the warpath, dragging the discussion elsewhere and for all intents and purposes flamebaiting.

That being said, her last remark is WAY IDIOTIC! Smile

My point is this.

Someone who believes that their religion makes them better than another person is the EXACT SAME as someone who believes they're better because they're white.

Well, it's even worse to me because religion is a personal choice.

It's not just Coulter who believes this. Christians, Muslims, hell.. just about every religion is based on the principle "We're better than you".

Until we change the paradigm and make religion a PERSONAL choice that has ZERO rammifications on how you relate with others... we're as doomed as doomed can be.