Coulter Geist

[thedrifter]

Coulter Geist
By Enemy Central
Published 6/13/2006 12:08:08 AM


Finally, an old-fashioned cat fight. Signaling to her handlers that she has not been declawed, Senator Hillary last week laced into slinky Siamese purebred Dr. Ann Coulter for being "vicious" and "mean" toward some of the senator's Jersey girl pals. Whereupon cool cat Coulter hissed back: "Before criticizing others for being 'mean' to women, perhaps Hillary should talk to her husband who was accused of rape by Juanita Broaddrick and was groping Kathleen Willey at the very moment Willey's husband was committing suicide."

That reply proved too strong for one of the referees in this fight, Miss New York Times. This is how she reported the tigress Coulter's response: "'Before criticizing others for being "mean to women," perhaps Hillary should talk to her husband,' her e-mail message said in part." Hate to tell you how to live your life, Ms. Times, but when you leave out the best "part," it's called censorship.

At a decidedly unstag affair the next night, Senator Hillary showed off her scratches. The event was an all-women-in-pants-suits gala dinner for 350 networking gals at which the "socialist single mother" President of Chile, Ms. Michelle Bachelet, was honored guest. It was Senator Hillary, however, who stole the show, though no one expects her to be indicted. Needless to say, Ann Coulter was not invited to the event, despite her decidedly female bona fides, not to mention the networking she'd freshly done on NBC.

"Hey where's Katie? Did she leave or something?" she asked the recently liberated host of the Today show, Mr. Matt Lauer. It's a meaner line than any Coulter has delivered apropos the Bush-bashing widows from New Jersey. How many years did Lauer suffer abuse at the hands of killer Katie? Another unindictable crime, no doubt. These days, men like Lauer are lucky to get work as waiters at such events as the no-men-need-apply dinner for Chile's single mom chief exec.

Still, it was a good question. Where is Katie Couric? When last seen on screen she was reconfirming her emotional qualifications to replace Dan Rather. Crying like a girl, she told viewers on May 31, her last day at NBC, "I'm feeling happy and sad and completely out of control." Dan couldn't have put it more pointedly. We'll know more about her command of his frequency after Labor Day, when she unveils her morning smile on CBS's Evening News.

Meanwhile, who in television is currently qualified to discuss such pressing issues as American obesity and the Bush administration's fixation on 500 pound bombs? Or to congratulate Rep. John Murtha's for his fair-weathered decision to contend for the House Democrats' number two slot, but only if his party wins a majority? Or to commiserate with commencement keynoter Prof. Judith Resnik, who told this year's Bryn Mawr graduates, "I do not think that either the world or my own country has been torture-free since the Renaissance. But I was hopeful enough, patriotic enough, to believe that my government would never justify harming a person just short of when his or her organs were failing"? (Here's one of those times when you wish the "his or her" formulation hadn't come into common usage.)

Now that we know that Mr. Al-Zarqawi's organs were failing before he died, who is left at NBC Today competent enough to interview representatives from The Hague on this denial of an al Qaeda dignitary's basic human rights? And, most critically, who will greet Angelina and Brad on their triumphant return from Namibia? Not since Diana and Dodi's noisome summer of 1997 has there been such a sad spectacle. Might not Ann Coulter write her next book on them? Probably not, since it would never sell. Regardless, we have an upset winner in this week's EOW sweepstakes: Brangelina. Though it's too late to get ourselves booked with Katie, we'll donate their fine to a charity of their choice. Just remind us to do so in Katie's honor.

Ellie

[thedrifter]

Godless
By Jamie Glazov
FrontPageMagazine.com | June 13, 2006


Frontpage Interview’s guest today is Ann Coulter, the New York Times’ #1 bestselling author. Her new book is Godless: The Church of Liberalism.

FP: Hi Ms. Coulter, welcome back to Frontpage Interview.

Coulter: Hello.

FP: Before we get to your book, let me just ask you about your recent comments about some of the 9/11 widows and their activism. It has sparked quite a stir. What is the rationale behind your comments?

Coulter: It was a simple observation of the so-called Jersey Girls, who are "mourning" at fetes thrown by Graydon Carter/Vanity Fair Magazine and on MSNBC every night. This is part of the leftist agenda: Put up "victims" as spokesmen to tongue-tie the opposition.

FP: Ok, well, speaking of the leftist agenda, you have taken on a new challenge in your latest book in terms of liberals and religion. You point out how most liberals often boast they are not religious, yet that they are, in fact, part of a religion. Can you talk a bit about this phenomenon?

Coulter: Yes, they say they are not religious (until they need Americans to vote for them) in order to act like supreme rationalists, slaves to the scientific method, which they claim disproves God. But of course, liberals hate science -- as covered in copious detail in my book. Science is the study of the world as it is, invulnerable to their crying jags.

The point of my book is that liberalism is itself a religion, a godless one, that worships nature and sees man as a morally indistinguishable part of nature - really a blight on nature. They have a whole cosmology, a world view, and a belief in the supernatural. But by denying that liberalism is a religion, they get to promote their religion in government schools.



FP: Can you just expand a little bit on why liberals hate science deep down?

Coulter: The liberal war on science is an entire chapter in my book so you will need to read it for the full exposition, but liberals hate science because it so often contradicts their religious beliefs - that women are no different from men in their aptitude for math and science, that the AIDS virus doesn't discriminate, that there is no such thing as IQ and if there is, it is equally distributed among all genders, races and classes of people. People who subscribe to God-based religions don't need the science to come out one way or another on any of these issues. We consider all human life sacred so it doesn't threaten our world view if it turns out that some humans don't make good Navy SEALs because they lack upper body strength.

FP: Why is the Left is so hostile to the Judeo-Christian tradition?

Coulter: Their beliefs are antithetical to the Judeo-Christian tradition. It gets in the way of their agenda of moral relativism, hedonism, and socialism. You might say they consider the Judeo-Christian tradition to be “an inconvenient truth”.

FP: It is interesting that the Left is adamantly for the separation of Church and State, against prayer in schools etc., but when it comes to Islam, liberals and leftists lose their fervor in being anti-religious. What gives here?

Coulter: By denying that liberalism is a religion, liberalism is able to permeate government institutions, most obviously, the public schools. Christianity and Judaism are banned from government schools, where children are baptized in the liberal religion -- safe sex, recycling, Heather Has Two Mommies, Bush is “like Hitler,” and of course, Darwinism, the last of the 19th century mystery religions. Only once you realize that the official state religion is liberalism does it make sense that the state religion can play favorites with other religions, such as Islam, post 9/11. Liberalism differs with Islam on abortion, homosexuality, women - but both religions view Christians and Jews as infidels.

FP: Tell us what you think about Darwin's theory of evolution and its sacredness in the eyes of the Left.

Coulter: For the full explanation you must read the book - the evolution chapters are fun. Like John the Baptist, Darwin foretold one of the key tenets of the left's worldview, that humans are accidental descendants of earthworms, rather than being the unique creations of an all-powerful God. Darwin's theory is bunk, but mana to liberals, who worship nature and think men are indistinguishable from beasts, contra The Book of Genesis.

FP: How do you think the terror war is going in general and the Iraq war in particular?

Coulter: The war in Iraq was going just dandy until we killed al-Zarqawi. Now they're all mad at us. Way to go, President Bush.

Actually, it's going smashingly well. Congratulations to the F-16 pilots who laser-guided al-Zargawi to Hell. Iraq's government is well on its way to taking control. The threat to our progress comes not from the likes of Zarqawi and his ilk - our boys can handle these savages - but from Fifth Columnists in the West, like Pinch Sulzberger.

Killing the #2 man in al Qaida just means everybody in the organization moves up one notch. The former #3 guy is the new #2 guy, the former #10 guy is now the #9 guy, and the new #48 guy is Howard Dean.


FP: Since you mention Howard Dean, let me ask you: in terms of Zarqawi's death, what do you think of how the Left took the occasion to demonize America and call for American surrender in Iraq?

Coulter: You know what the new definition of a nanosecond is? The interval of time between the news of al-Zarqawi's death and the first liberal saying, “This is just going to enrage the insurgents and make everything in Iraq worse!”



FP: What are your thoughts on Noam Chomsky's recent pilgrimage to embrace Hezbollah?

Coulter: I guess Castro and Kim Jong Il were both too busy to see him.

FP: How do you think Bush has done overall in fighting the War on Terror?

Coulter: Within five years, how many attacks have there been on U.S. soil since September 11, 2001? You know, a ballpark estimate?

FP: What do you think of the Dixie Chicks and their latest song on how they are not ready to “make nice” -- in terms of what happened with their position on Bush and the war etc? I thought it was quite comical. The song is based on the assumption that someone out there even actually cares whether they are ready to “make nice” or not. What was your take?

Coulter: Just so you know, I'm ashamed that the Dixie Chicks are from America.

FP: Um, ok. So, what are your plans in the next five years?

Coulter: Mostly enjoying the continuing disintegration of the mainstream media.



FP: Ann Coulter, thank you for joining us today.



Coulter: My pleasure, any time Jamie.

Ellie

[thedrifter]

Ann Coulter and the Myth of Liberal Tolerance
June 13th, 2006
Marc Sheppard

In the very first chapter of her 2002 book, Slander: Liberal Lies About The American Right, Ann Coulter exposed the duplicitous character of those who “demand[ed] campus speech codes, an end to ‘intolerance,’ and ‘hate speech’ laws” while continually bearing-down on a single target when attacking conservative women – their appearance. Now that Ms. Coulter’s latest book, ‘Godless: The Church of Liberalism, and her defense thereof on numerous television appearances, has put the author, herself, in the cross-hairs of the left, can her personal evisceration be anything less than assured?

In her own prescient words, Coulter described the treatment liberals extend to their female adversaries:

“More than any of their other hate speech, the left’s attacks on women for being ugly tell you everything. There is nothing so irredeemably cruel as an attack on a woman for her looks.”

She then points out that the women constantly being called ugly are not Maxine Waters, Chelsea Clinton, Janet Reno or Madeline Albright. No, the party of inclusion, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, tolerance and Bella Abzug instead target the likes of Paula Jones, Linda Tripp and Katherine Harris. From Slander:

Journalists have called Linda Tripp ‘Barracudaville,’ smelling of ‘gunpowder and garlic,’’ugly and evil,’ and Howard Stern in a Fright Wig,’’a snitch and an ugly one at that.

Exemplifying the innumerable attacks upon her appearance, Newsweek’s Evan Thomas had referred to Jones as “some sleazy woman with big hair coming out of the trailer parks …” Superbly researched, in-depth commentary, indeed.

Additionally, as Coulter points out, referring to Ms. Harris:

“Even polished, wealthy, Harvard educated, attractive women will be attacked for their looks if they get in the Democrats’ way.”

In her December 1, 2000 article, “Liberals’ Art of Trashing of Women,” Marianne M. Jennings writes:

“Katherine Harris, Florida’s secretary of state, who dared halt county election boards’ Carnac routines to divine votes, has brought out the liberals’ caustic best. She has not only seized late-night comics’ insults, she has earned mainstream press bashing. The Boston Herald described her as ‘looking just ghastly.’ The Washington Post wrote Mrs. Harris, ‘seems to have applied her makeup with a trowel.’”

How marvelous is it, then, that when Coulter decides to comment on a particular group of New Jersey 9/11 widows and the previously sacrosanct subject of the women using their grief “to make a political point”, such devices would, ultimately, be turned against her?

Margaret Nagel, writing for the Huffington Post:

“But because she could be considered in some circles attractive ( if you like the dyed blond, anorexic type – which some men in America clearly do) she is continually given a platform on show after show to vent her twisted views on our world and not be challenged or seen as the heartless narcissist that she is.”

On the June 9, 2006 edition of MSNBC’s Countdown with Keith Olbermann, the self-indulgent host discussed the “Jersey Girls” situation with Democratic political analyst, Lawrence O’Donnell. O’Donnell was bloviating on how the Democrats would love for Coulter to step forward and become the Michael Moore of the right, but that she hasn’t quite made it “up to the Michael Moore level.” The snooty Olbermann responded with:

“It’s kind of an uneven fight there. She’s not as talented as Michael Moore and she’s not as attractive.”

Cutting-edge analysis, Keith! Do you suppose Olbermann had ever paused to comment on how Hillary’s choice of pants-suits often make her thighs appear chubby when asked to assess a Rodham Clinton political address?

Another disturbing ploy of the “tolerant” liberals is to question Ann’s sexuality. Steven Leser at OpEdNews.com typifies this particularly vile tactic:

“Then again, there is that persistent rumor in the liberal blogosphere about Ann being a man in drag on account of her prominent Adam’s apple and masculine writing style. Maybe the prison entry physical will produce a ‘shocking’ discovery. Can you imagine a tranny that looks like Ann being sent to men’s prison?”

Putting aside the blatant absurdity and sordid implications of these remarks, Mr. Leser would appear to be as confused about his identity, political, as his words would suggest Ms. Coulter is about hers, sexual. After all, is it not the politically-correct brigade of the left whose globe-improving missions include convincing the world that homosexuality, transsexuality, and any other deviant conduct ending in those same nine letters is, in fact, perfectly normal?

Why then, do we find viscous personal attacks annexed to virtually all condemnations of Ann Coulter’s thoughts and words? Perhaps she, herself, explains it best:

“Liberals need not bother with logical persuasion as long as they can prey on people’s sense of weakness.”

Most pathetically of all, while researching his Sean Penn fluff piece, cynically yet appropriately titled “Citizen Penn,” author John Lahr noticed “a plastic Barbie-like doll propped against the fireplace.” Penn explained it to be “An Ann Coulter Doll” and that “We violate her. There are cigarette burns in some funny areas.”

Sorrowfully, such a disquieting and cowardly practice epitomizes the elite left’s intellectual response to a woman who dares put their actions, language, ideologies and, yes, tolerance to the test whenever she speaks or writes.

Marc Sheppard is a business owner, software developer and writer residing on New York’s Long Island. He is a regular contributor to The New Media Journal, Opinion Editorials and Men’s News Daily. He welcomes your feedback.

Ellie