Coulter calls Tiller homicide "termination"

[Al_Masetti]

Hi Al,

What exactly did they do? Was it the whole investigation thing? Was that where Ann took exception? I’m not totally sure, but I didn’t think she meant “enjoy” in the usual sense of the word. Like having a good time. More at “reaping benefits.”

And you’re right, she documents everything. End notes, footnotes.

Hi,

I don’t know if “Googled” is a verb, but anyway I googled “ann coulter firefighter widows”

And here is one of eighteen gigglion hits that came up. I just picked this one at random … too many to read all of them:

jtf.org/america/america.jtf.loves.you.ann.coulter.htm

The only thing I am upset at Ann Coulter about is that she didn’t sequentially number all of her endnotes. So I had to sit there and count them up. I forget which book it was but there were more than 900 endnotes.

She was criticized one time that I recall specifically because she didn’t use footnotes. The criticism was intended as “spin” to imply that she didn’t do research or didn’t document her research in her book. Her reply is that she used endnotes and what kind of “silly” criticism was that.

Which brings up another “issue” … what I have started doing recently is when I pick up a book, I skip immediately to the endnotes and then to the index. Often, if a particular index entry is of interest … like maybe some item that I am already familiar with or a place I have visited … I will jump into the text at each of the entries … AND THEN … FINALLY, after reading all of the stuff in the back, I then start reading the book.

Makes the book more fun.

 

[vz71]

If you had actually read what I posted, it would have been blatantly obvious that the slur I was referring to was f____, and not gay.

Not as obvious as you think.
At no point have I alluded to or used a slur of any type.
And since you did not write in the slur you were meaning but instead wrote in ‘gay’ I took you at your word.

Now I see that you are making assumptions that everyone knows what you mean even though you do not say what you are meaning.

Given the massive assumptions taking place, I wonder how much of Coulter’s writings say anything remotely approaching what you claim.

 

[vz71]

He cited a few examples, but I lost the book long ago (it was in Lies and the Lying Liars Who Tell Them).

I didn’t think Al Franken specialized in substance.

I’m familiar with that book.
My (unfortunately very liberal) father in law has it. Even went to the trouble of highlighting parts of it.

You are correct. Very little substance.
Short on substance, long on distortion.

 

[Lujack]

Not as obvious as you think.
At no point have I alluded to or used a slur of any type.
And since you did not write in the slur you were meaning but instead wrote in ‘gay’ I took you at your word.

Gay is not a slur. Coulter used one slur, and I quoted, and noted it.

Now I see that you are making assumptions that everyone knows what you mean even though you do not say what you are meaning.

Given the massive assumptions taking place, I wonder how much of Coulter’s writings say anything remotely approaching what you claim.

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 “f____”, so I — so kind of an impasse, can’t really talk about Edwards.

I don’t know if Clinton is gay. But [former U.S. Vice President] Al Gore - total f__.

Satisfied?

 

[vz71]

Satisfied?

Well actually it appears that you are now picking and choosing your quotes from this thread just as you cherry picked those from Coulter.

Here is the quote that prompted my questioning the word ‘gay’…

A gay person would not be offended by being called gay. A gay person would be offended, however, by using the word gay as an insult towards a person, whether that person is gay or not.

As can be readily read, there is no type of slur to be found.
Yet you assumed that everyone read it in there somewhere.

Perhaps attention should be paid to what is actually said and not what one wishes was said.

 

[RobbyS]

You know that is really good advise. Behind her pretty exterior is a very tough and vicious layer, but scratch a little deeper and there is an intellectual layer with some very provocative and well-researched ideas. (That became apparent to me just researchign a few of her comments in this thread that we were invited to look at).

I would love to see liberals debate some of the ideas that she expresses rather than just react to her because she knows which of their buttons to push.

Coulter makes a lot of money pushing those buttons.

 

[Victorious]

Coulter makes a lot of money pushing those buttons.

Wish I did! Nothing wrong with pushing the buttons of liberals, since this is most readily done by speaking the truth.

 

[Al_Masetti]

Actions speak louder than words, folks.

Tiller took action … he legally deliberately murdered … took the lives of … 60,000 innocent babies and did so in the most brutal and painful way possible … by chopping them up.

Tiller was a (legal) serial killer. An unrepentant proud boastful mass murderer on the scale of Saddam Hussein or Hitler or Mao or Stalin.

Coulter merely spoke harshly about Tiller.

And some folks seem to “feel” that Coulter is the bigger villain.

Excuse me.

But. some folks need to rethink their sense of priorities.

Or get a better sense of reality.

 

[mkingdomlvr]

Actions speak louder than words, folks.

Tiller took action … he legally deliberately murdered … took the lives of … 60,000 innocent babies and did so in the most brutal and painful way possible … by chopping them up.

Coulter merely spoke harshly about Tiller.

And some of our posters seem to “feel” that Coulter is the bigger villain.

Excuse me.

But. some folks need to rethink their sense of priorities.

Or get a better sense of reality.

I didn’t get the sense that people thought Coulter is a “bigger” villain, only that she has personality traits and a sense of humor that many do not like.

Disliking Ann Coulter doesn’t automatically mean that people liked Tiller.

 

[Al_Masetti]

A HUGE amount of energy has been expended going after Ann Coulter.

If a tiny fraction of that energy had been expended to stop abortion, it would have ended by now.

All Coulter did was inflame some sensibilities with ONE WORD … “termination”. And look at all the fire she has brought down on herself.

If her attackers had gone after abortion with the same level of effort and the same level of passion, then the practice of abortion would have been eliminated by now.

Sorry.

I believe that in their hearts, people who attack Coulter are deliberately misplacing and misdirecting their anger. They need to look inside themselves and see where their sympathies lie. And direct their anger at the right target instead of at the messenger.

 

[mkingdomlvr]

A HUGE amount of energy has been expended going after Ann Coulter.

If a tiny fraction of that energy had been expended to stop abortion, it would have ended by now.

All Coulter did was inflame some sensibilities with ONE WORD … “termination”. And look at all the fire she has brought down on herself.

If her attackers had gone after abortion with the same level of effort and the same level of passion, then the practice of abortion would have been eliminated by now.

Sorry.

I believe that in their hearts, people who attack Coulter are deliberately misplacing and misdirecting their anger. They need to look inside themselves and see where their sympathies lie. And direct their anger at the right target instead of at the messenger.

I think it’s too simplistic and an unfair characterization to suggest that just because someone doesn’t like Coulter it means that they must have liked Tiller. People ARE capable of disliking the actions of more than one person at a time, and I really don’t think a few minutes taken posting on a message board would change the course of abortion rights in this country.

 

[estesbob]

I think it’s too simplistic and an unfair characterization to suggest that just because someone doesn’t like Coulter it means that they must have liked Tiller. People ARE capable of disliking the actions of more than one person at a time, and I really don’t think a few minutes taken posting on a message board would change the course of abortion rights in this country.

Problem is that those who are angreist about her Tiller remarks are,in general, the same people who were telling us that Catholics could support President Obama in spite of his support of unrestriced taxpayer funded abortion on demand.

It is obvious that her comments hit a sore spot-which is exactly what she intended-make people stop and think about what it is they are supporting.

 

[Cracker_Mom]

There are parts of Flannery O’Connor’s writing that cannot be read aloud or quoted in writing] nowadays …

Every other page has the “N” word.

 

[cephas161619]

Tiller was a (legal) serial killer. An unrepentant proud boastful mass murderer on the scale of Saddam Hussein or Hitler or Mao or Stalin.

Give or take a few million? I don’t think he quite rose to that scale. But he killed innocents on a broader scale, that I will grant you, but I would not place him on the same scale. It won’t balance.

 

[Lujack]

Problem is that those who are angreist about her Tiller remarks are,in general, the same people who were telling us that Catholics could support President Obama in spite of his support of unrestriced taxpayer funded abortion on demand.

It is obvious that her comments hit a sore spot-which is exactly what she intended-make people stop and think about what it is they are supporting.

I think that, if you’re referring to me, you’re misrepresenting what I’m saying. I only chimed in once people started praising Coulter in general, and in general, I don’t think there’s much to be praised about Ann Coulter. I can see some irony and satire in her specific comments about George tiller, so I kept silent, but praising Ann as a good model for Catholic political dialogue is a little bit too much.

 

[Joseph_L_Varga]

It was the “pro-choice” people who invented the word “termination”. Then, a lot of Catholics thought it was OK to vote on politicians who supported “terminating” babies inside the womb, and even supported “terminating” babies outside the womb (see Obama’s opposition to the Born Alive Infant Protection Act of Illinois, from 2002 to 2005).

Then comes Ann Coulter, and calls out the pro-choice politicians and their supporters on their use of the word “termination”. A term that THEY invented, not Ann Coulter.

I say, Go Ann! Sure people are mad with you, because you exposed the hypocrisy of the position that “I’m personally against (murder) (abortion) (termination), but I don’t want to impose my morality on others, and I have no problem voting on politicians who stand for (murder) (abortion) (termination).” These are the people who have no problem with the “termination” of babies, only with Ann’s throwing back the term into their faces.

Go Ann!

 

[sauce]

Hi,

I don’t know if “Googled” is a verb, but anyway I googled “ann coulter firefighter widows”

And here is one of eighteen gigglion hits that came up. I just picked this one at random … too many to read all of them:

jtf.org/america/america.jtf.loves.you.ann.coulter.htm

The only thing I am upset at Ann Coulter about is that she didn’t sequentially number all of her endnotes. So I had to sit there and count them up. I forget which book it was but there were more than 900 endnotes.

[She was criticized one time that I recall specifically because she didn’t use footnotes. The criticism was intended as “spin” to imply that she didn’t do research or didn’t document her research in her book. Her reply is that she used endnotes and what kind of “silly” criticism was that.

Which brings up another “issue” … what I have started doing recently is when I pick up a book, I skip immediately to the endnotes and then to the index. Often, if a particular index entry is of interest … like maybe some item that I am already familiar with or a place I have visited … I will jump into the text at each of the entries … AND THEN … FINALLY, after reading all of the stuff in the back, I then start reading the book.

Makes the book more fun.

Thanks Al,

Went to the site and found out a lot. That picture of Helen Thomas really is worth a thousand words. Also, the “silly” criticism remark is hilarious. Thanks for sharing.

Was listening to “If Democrats had any sense they’d be Republicans.”
She made a reference to Stalin being known for torturing flies, and then said
watch out for Obama. Mind you, this was way before Obama made headlines for killing a fly! She was right again.
[/quote]

 

[Cracker_Mom]

It was the “pro-choice” people who invented the word “termination”. Then, a lot of Catholics thought it was OK to vote on politicians who supported “terminating” babies inside the womb, and even supported “terminating” babies outside the womb (see Obama’s opposition to the Born Alive Infant Protection Act of Illinois, from 2002 to 2005).

Then comes Ann Coulter, and calls out the pro-choice politicians and their supporters on their use of the word “termination”. A term that THEY invented, not Ann Coulter.

I say, Go Ann! Sure people are mad with you, because you exposed the hypocrisy of the position that “I’m personally against (murder) (abortion) (termination), but I don’t want to impose my morality on others, and I have no problem voting on politicians who stand for (murder) (abortion) (termination).” These are the people who have no problem with the “termination” of babies, only with Ann’s throwing back the term into their faces.

Go Ann!

Thank you for pointing that out. That’s exactly what comes to mind: hypocrisy re. the euphemism “termination.”
Ann Coulter exposed that hypocrisy in her rather savage humor.

 

[estesbob]

I think that, if you’re referring to me, you’re misrepresenting what I’m saying. I only chimed in once people started praising Coulter in general, and in general, I don’t think there’s much to be praised about Ann Coulter. I can see some irony and satire in her specific comments about George tiller, so I kept silent, but praising Ann as a good model for Catholic political dialogue is a little bit too much.

Actually I wasnt refereing specifically to you-just what i see in CAF in general. The problem is after a Catholic publicly supports Obama it is hard for the rest of us to take their comments on moral questions very seriously.

 

[mkingdomlvr]

Actually I wasnt refereing specifically to you-just what i see in CAF in general. The problem is after a Catholic publicly supports Obama it is hard for the rest of us to take their comments on moral questions very seriously.

So you just assume that anyone who doesn’t like Ann Coulter also is a liberal, is pro-choice, voted for Obama…isn’t it possible that someone who holds the exact positions you do might find her personality grating and her humor insulting? I know more than a few very conservative folks who think Ann is NOT the best spokesperson for their cause.