Ann Coulter

[iagainsti]

I'm sure this isn't the first thread about her.

To sum up my feelings about Ann Coulter...I feel the world was a much better place during the time her jaw was wired shut (even though she could still write, unfortunately). And I don't even consider myself a liberal!

Here's an excerpt from the back cover of "Godless: The Church of Liberalism":

Though liberalism rejects the idea of God and reviles people of faith, it bears all the attributes of a religion. In Godless, Coulter throws open the doors of the Church of Liberalism, showing us its sacraments (abortion), its holy writ (Roe v. Wade), its martyrs (from Soviet spy Alger Hiss to cop-killer Mumia Abu-Jamal), its clergy (public school teachers), its churches (government schools, where prayer is prohibited but condoms are free), its doctrine of infallibility (as manifest in the "absolute moral authority" of spokesmen from Cindy Sheehan to Max Cleland), and its cosmology (in which mankind is an inconsequential accident).

And an excerpt from the book itself:

"Liberals love to boast that they are not 'religious,' which is what one would expect to hear from the state-sanctioned religion. Of course liberalism is a religion. It has its own cosmology, its own miracles, its own beliefs in the supernatural, its own churches, its own high priests, its own saints, its own total worldview, and its own explanation of the existence of the universe. In other words, liberalism contains all the attributes of what is generally known as 'religion.'"

Unfortunately, as I don't want Ann Coulter to earn any money from me, I haven't purchased this book or any of her others, even though I would be very interested to read them.

So, I'd love to hear from someone who has read this book and agrees with (and can possibly offer further evidence and/or reasoning to support) the claim that "liberalism" can be considered a religion, because I for one think this has to be one of the stupidest things I've ever heard (and I've heard some pretty stupid things).

 

[JenT]

I love Ann Coulter



and I can help ya out but it's late, good night

 

[veritas]

I don't even want to waste bandwidth on the ho. Just go with your initial description [very good one, btw] and be happy. The premise put forth is a bastardization of the "Atheism IS a Religion" conceit. Nothing original. Just more fodder for the sheeple.

 

[JW Frogen]

Fuck me, do you know how badly I want to make love to Ann Coulter.

It would be like the perfect storm, the sex would kill thousands, nay I say it would kill hundreds of thousands, the passion would ignite a new ideology capable of making humankid rant in orgasmic bliss.

Where are you Ann?

Where are you?

 

[iagainsti]

I love Ann Coulter



and I can help ya out but it's late, good night

I don't but I'm looking forward to discussing her with someone who does! Whenever you've got the time, I'd be interested to hear your take on this.

I don't even want to waste bandwidth on the ho.

I had to think not twice but three times before starting this thread, I wasn't sure I wanted to either.

The premise put forth is a bastardization of the "Atheism IS a Religion" conceit.

That was the first thing that came to mind for me too. She basically used that concept and just replaced the word "atheism" with "liberalism", since she has apparently decided that they are now the exact same thing. Never mind that one deals with political beliefs and the other with religious beliefs, or that - holy shit! - there are liberals who believe in God...this is Ann Coulter we're talking about, she can twist those terms to mean whatever she wants them to! Also, liberal theists and conservative atheists no longer exist because she said so. In Ann Coulter's narrow-minded world, there are only conservative Christians and liberal atheists.

Fuck me, do you know how badly I want to make love to Ann Coulter.

It would be like the perfect storm, the sex would kill thousands, nay I say it would kill hundreds of thousands, the passion would ignite a new ideology capable of making humankid rant in orgasmic bliss.

Where are you Ann?

Where are you?

Best response ever although I have to say that I'm a little grossed out by it because I find her unbelievably unattractive.

 

[MarcATL]

When that book first came out I used to go to the libray and read it.

I think I read about the first 4 chapters.

After that I skimmed the rest.

Very vile, although in an entertaining manner.

People who are actual fans of Coulter are the most hateful people in the world IMO.

 

[Zona]

I think I could take that dude in a fair fight. Ann is pretty tough though.

 

[MarcATL]

Tough?

Pretty tought talking...yeah.

But let any, more than hard breeze blow shim's way and shim will tumble.

 

[Avatar4321]

What is with you guys? Are you just completely opposed to rational discussion? All you do is villify those who speak ideas you don't like. Ann Coulter, Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, etc. You dont actually deal with a single solitary argument you make. It's all personal attacks.

What's even more amazing most of you hate these people without listening to a single word they say or reading a single word they wrote. So you dont want to give your money to them. Go to the library. I didnt want to give my money to Ann, i went to the library. I didnt want to give my money to Obama, I went to the library.

You have to read things you dont necessarily agree with to actually speak intelligently on the subject. Ive read countless points of view from various people good and bad. Some of the ideas have been vile. But even being well read, I am not going to pretend fully understand what they are saying. They are the only ones who ever will. Yet you guys know what they say and villify them without knowing a thing. It's mindboggling.

So call Ann all the names you want. Call anyone else whatever names you wont. They arent going to make you any smarter. They arent going to convince anyone that you are correct. They will just make you look cowardly and stupid.

 

[iagainsti]

What is with you guys? Are you just completely opposed to rational discussion? All you do is villify those who speak ideas you don't like. Ann Coulter, Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, etc. You dont actually deal with a single solitary argument you make. It's all personal attacks.

What's even more amazing most of you hate these people without listening to a single word they say or reading a single word they wrote. So you dont want to give your money to them. Go to the library. I didnt want to give my money to Ann, i went to the library. I didnt want to give my money to Obama, I went to the library.

You have to read things you dont necessarily agree with to actually speak intelligently on the subject. Ive read countless points of view from various people good and bad. Some of the ideas have been vile. But even being well read, I am not going to pretend fully understand what they are saying. They are the only ones who ever will. Yet you guys know what they say and villify them without knowing a thing. It's mindboggling.

So call Ann all the names you want. Call anyone else whatever names you wont. They arent going to make you any smarter. They arent going to convince anyone that you are correct. They will just make you look cowardly and stupid.

Wow, way to turn it around. The whole point of this post was that, since I haven't been able to read it (side note: I looked for it at my local library, they didn't have it nor any other Ann Coulter books), I want to hear from someone who has so that I CAN have a rational discussion about it.

I haven't dealt with a single solitary argument yet because no one has yet offered up a summary and/or defense of Ann Coulter's assertions in this book, but I plan to when someone does. Thanks for bringing me one step closer to that goal by going off on how cowardly and stupid I am for villifying Ann Coulter "without knowing a thing," rather than offering up a defense for or further explanation of what she proposed.

 

[veritas]

Some of us have been around the block and can assess what the deal is without reading an entire screed based on previous mantras, dressed up to look like something new.

If you haven't been to that rodeo, go for it. Enjoy. Time is finite, I prioritize.

 

[DiveCon]

I think I could take that dude in a fair fight. Ann is pretty tough though.

i'd almost be willing to pay to see that
i doubt you could fight your way out of a wet paper bag

 

[midcan5]

Ann is part of the conservative echo chamber. It would be an interesting study to know the roots of the wingnut chamber, but basically it is wealthy conservatives who support ideas that support them but keep the conversation on the inconsequential.

These are the people who support and buy her books. Think tanks - SourceWatch

You don't have to buy her books, her web site is pretty much all that is needed to understand a writer whose intellectual depth is that of a puddle.

I think anyone with an open mind would/could criticize her ideas as simple propaganda or partisan nonsense. I can't imagine her on TV news when I was young, not can I find anything that she has done that would be classified as positive for society. When all you do is find fault with another, one's whole existence seems wasted.

Welcome to AnnCoulter.com

This is a accurate picture of Annie and funny.

Ann Coulter - Dickipedia - A Wiki of Dicks

 

[code1211]

What is with you guys? Are you just completely opposed to rational discussion? All you do is villify those who speak ideas you don't like. Ann Coulter, Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, etc. You dont actually deal with a single solitary argument you make. It's all personal attacks.

What's even more amazing most of you hate these people without listening to a single word they say or reading a single word they wrote. So you dont want to give your money to them. Go to the library. I didnt want to give my money to Ann, i went to the library. I didnt want to give my money to Obama, I went to the library.

You have to read things you dont necessarily agree with to actually speak intelligently on the subject. Ive read countless points of view from various people good and bad. Some of the ideas have been vile. But even being well read, I am not going to pretend fully understand what they are saying. They are the only ones who ever will. Yet you guys know what they say and villify them without knowing a thing. It's mindboggling.

So call Ann all the names you want. Call anyone else whatever names you wont. They arent going to make you any smarter. They arent going to convince anyone that you are correct. They will just make you look cowardly and stupid.

Wow, way to turn it around. The whole point of this post was that, since I haven't been able to read it (side note: I looked for it at my local library, they didn't have it nor any other Ann Coulter books), I want to hear from someone who has so that I CAN have a rational discussion about it.

I haven't dealt with a single solitary argument yet because no one has yet offered up a summary and/or defense of Ann Coulter's assertions in this book, but I plan to when someone does. Thanks for bringing me one step closer to that goal by going off on how cowardly and stupid I am for villifying Ann Coulter "without knowing a thing," rather than offering up a defense for or further explanation of what she proposed.

With respect, it is you who said both that you are against her and her ideas and also said that you have not read the book. As I have not read the book either, we are in an ideal postion to debate its merits. No?

Since neither of us has any idea what she may have said or not said, what better way to put our personal stamps on her thinking than to ignor whatever she might have said and either endorse or condemn ideas we already posess without review of her thinking.

This is a very efficient method of debate. Your's is a superior intellect.

 

[code1211]

Ann is part of the conservative echo chamber. It would be an interesting study to know the roots of the wingnut chamber, but basically it is wealthy conservatives who support ideas that support them but keep the conversation on the inconsequential.

These are the people who support and buy her books. Think tanks - SourceWatch

You don't have to buy her books, her web site is pretty much all that is needed to understand a writer whose intellectual depth is that of a puddle.

I think anyone with an open mind would/could criticize her ideas as simple propaganda or partisan nonsense. I can't imagine her on TV news when I was young, not can I find anything that she has done that would be classified as positive for society. When all you do is find fault with another, one's whole existence seems wasted.

Welcome to AnnCoulter.com

This is a accurate picture of Annie and funny.

Ann Coulter - Dickipedia - A Wiki of Dicks

Coulter and Bill Mahr are good opposites in that they use the same style to convey points and they are irrationally devoted to their own party. Both elitists. Both sarcastic. Both attack dogs for their own political views.

Niether wishes to start a discussion. Both strive to silence the opposition and undermine the spokespeople of the opposition.

Both are non-serious entertainers who operate on the fringe of constructive discourse. In that they explain by distortion, they do bring some who would not ordinarily be in the discussion closer to the table, but they do so using the worst methods and gain an audience of the mob.

Idealogues like these are more hurtful to the debate of any issue than enlightening. They definitely provide more heat than light and really need to have disclamers hung around their necks while on camera.

 

[Zona]

I think I could take that dude in a fair fight. Ann is pretty tough though.

i'd almost be willing to pay to see that
i doubt you could fight your way out of a wet paper bag

Brilliant retort.

 

[wvpeach]

I'd never buy the book for the same reason you stated.

Try the library though. Most will track it down and have a copy for you even if they have to borrow it from another library.

Although fair warning! Nothing that immoral woman has to say is worth the time for reading.

I'm sure this isn't the first thread about her.

To sum up my feelings about Ann Coulter...I feel the world was a much better place during the time her jaw was wired shut (even though she could still write, unfortunately). And I don't even consider myself a liberal!

Here's an excerpt from the back cover of "Godless: The Church of Liberalism":

Though liberalism rejects the idea of God and reviles people of faith, it bears all the attributes of a religion. In Godless, Coulter throws open the doors of the Church of Liberalism, showing us its sacraments (abortion), its holy writ (Roe v. Wade), its martyrs (from Soviet spy Alger Hiss to cop-killer Mumia Abu-Jamal), its clergy (public school teachers), its churches (government schools, where prayer is prohibited but condoms are free), its doctrine of infallibility (as manifest in the "absolute moral authority" of spokesmen from Cindy Sheehan to Max Cleland), and its cosmology (in which mankind is an inconsequential accident).

And an excerpt from the book itself:

"Liberals love to boast that they are not 'religious,' which is what one would expect to hear from the state-sanctioned religion. Of course liberalism is a religion. It has its own cosmology, its own miracles, its own beliefs in the supernatural, its own churches, its own high priests, its own saints, its own total worldview, and its own explanation of the existence of the universe. In other words, liberalism contains all the attributes of what is generally known as 'religion.'"

Unfortunately, as I don't want Ann Coulter to earn any money from me, I haven't purchased this book or any of her others, even though I would be very interested to read them.

So, I'd love to hear from someone who has read this book and agrees with (and can possibly offer further evidence and/or reasoning to support) the claim that "liberalism" can be considered a religion, because I for one think this has to be one of the stupidest things I've ever heard (and I've heard some pretty stupid things).

 

[iagainsti]

What is with you guys? Are you just completely opposed to rational discussion? All you do is villify those who speak ideas you don't like. Ann Coulter, Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, etc. You dont actually deal with a single solitary argument you make. It's all personal attacks.

What's even more amazing most of you hate these people without listening to a single word they say or reading a single word they wrote. So you dont want to give your money to them. Go to the library. I didnt want to give my money to Ann, i went to the library. I didnt want to give my money to Obama, I went to the library.

You have to read things you dont necessarily agree with to actually speak intelligently on the subject. Ive read countless points of view from various people good and bad. Some of the ideas have been vile. But even being well read, I am not going to pretend fully understand what they are saying. They are the only ones who ever will. Yet you guys know what they say and villify them without knowing a thing. It's mindboggling.

So call Ann all the names you want. Call anyone else whatever names you wont. They arent going to make you any smarter. They arent going to convince anyone that you are correct. They will just make you look cowardly and stupid.

Wow, way to turn it around. The whole point of this post was that, since I haven't been able to read it (side note: I looked for it at my local library, they didn't have it nor any other Ann Coulter books), I want to hear from someone who has so that I CAN have a rational discussion about it.

I haven't dealt with a single solitary argument yet because no one has yet offered up a summary and/or defense of Ann Coulter's assertions in this book, but I plan to when someone does. Thanks for bringing me one step closer to that goal by going off on how cowardly and stupid I am for villifying Ann Coulter "without knowing a thing," rather than offering up a defense for or further explanation of what she proposed.

With respect, it is you who said both that you are against her and her ideas and also said that you have not read the book. As I have not read the book either, we are in an ideal postion to debate its merits. No?

Since neither of us has any idea what she may have said or not said, what better way to put our personal stamps on her thinking than to ignor whatever she might have said and either endorse or condemn ideas we already posess without review of her thinking.

This is a very efficient method of debate. Your's is a superior intellect.

Yes, I am against her and her ideas. I have seen her on television, heard some of her radio interviews, read articles both by and about her, and read other of her materials. Anyone who has experienced Ann Coulter in any one of those mediums should be able to get the gist of where she stands pretty easily. I just haven't read this particular book.

And I do have some idea of what she said in the book, based on the summary I gave above. However, I don't claim to know every point she made in the book or all the reasoning she gave for her assertions, which was the point of starting this thread - to find out from someone who has read it and agrees with it. Maybe if someone can offer me up some good points, I will change my opinion that her assertion in this book is ridiculous. I didn't start this thread with a closed mind...what would be the point of that?

And it actually WOULD be an efficient method of debate, if I could find someone who is willing to back her up.

I shouldn't even be bothering to defend my reasons for starting this thread to two people now, when I explained them pretty clearly in the first post.

 

[iagainsti]

Try the library though. Most will track it down and have a copy for you even if they have to borrow it from another library.

I didn't think of that...I did a search on the library computer and looked around for it myself, but I didn't think of asking someone there to look for it at another library. Thanks for the idea, I'll give it a shot.

 

[MarcATL]

What is with you guys? Are you just completely opposed to rational discussion? All you do is villify those who speak ideas you don't like. Ann Coulter, Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, etc. You dont actually deal with a single solitary argument you make. It's all personal attacks.

What's even more amazing most of you hate these people without listening to a single word they say or reading a single word they wrote. So you dont want to give your money to them. Go to the library. I didnt want to give my money to Ann, i went to the library. I didnt want to give my money to Obama, I went to the library.

You have to read things you dont necessarily agree with to actually speak intelligently on the subject. Ive read countless points of view from various people good and bad. Some of the ideas have been vile. But even being well read, I am not going to pretend fully understand what they are saying. They are the only ones who ever will. Yet you guys know what they say and villify them without knowing a thing. It's mindboggling.

So call Ann all the names you want. Call anyone else whatever names you wont. They arent going to make you any smarter. They arent going to convince anyone that you are correct. They will just make you look cowardly and stupid.

So what's this slick?

When that book first came out I used to go to the libray and read it.

I think I read about the first 4 chapters.

After that I skimmed the rest.

Very vile, although in an entertaining manner.

People who are actual fans of Coulter are the most hateful people in the world IMO.

I also watch FOXNews...a lot (actually watching it right now) I know what's coming from The Right. Its MOSTLY fear and hate peddling. And lies, lots and lots and lots of lies. This has been proven time and again.