Blue Mass Group

Reality-based commentary on politics.

Can everyone please, please stop inviting Ann Coulter on their show now?

By

I mean, we hardly needed her to cross any more lines.  But she did it.  Let’s hope Chris Matthews and her other enablers have finally had enough.

Jewish Democrats are asking news networks to drop Ann Coulter after the conservative pundit said Jews should convert to Christianity to be “perfected.”

On Monday, Coulter told CNBC talk show host Donnie Deutsch that her dream America would “look like New York City during the [2004] Republican National Convention. In fact, that’s what I think heaven is going to look like.”

“People were happy,” she said. “They’re Christian. They’re tolerant. They defend America.”

Deutsch, who is Jewish, asked her if that meant Jews should convert. She said yes. Later, she added, “We just want Jews to be perfected, as they say.”

More:

Here’s some of the transcript, provided by Media Matters for America, a liberal media watchdog group:

  Mr. Deutsch: Really?

  Ms. Coulter: Well, it’s a lot easier. It’s kind of a fast track.

  Mr. Deutsch: Really?

  Ms. Coulter: Yeah. You have to obey.

  Mr. Deutsch: You can’t possibly believe that.

  Ms. Coulter: Yes.

And more:

  Mr. Deutsch: Welcome back to The Big Idea. During the break, Ann said she wanted to explain her last comment. So I’m going to give her a chance. So you don’t think that was offensive?

  Ms. Coulter: No. I’m sorry. It is not intended to be. I don’t think you should take it that way, but that is what Christians consider themselves: perfected Jews. We believe the Old Testament. As you know from the Old Testament, God was constantly getting fed up with humans for not being able to, you know, live up to all the laws. What Christians believe – this is just a statement of what the New Testament is – is that that’s why Christ came and died for our sins. Christians believe the Old Testament. You don’t believe our testament.

  Mr. Deutsch: You said – your exact words were, “Jews need to be perfected.” Those are the words out of your mouth.

  Ms. Coulter: No, I’m saying that’s what a Christian is.

  Mr. Deutsch: But that’s what you said – don’t you see how hateful, how anti-Semitic –

  Ms. Coulter: No!

  Mr. Deutsch: How do you not see? You’re an educated woman. How do you not see that?

  Ms. Coulter: That isn’t hateful at all.

  Mr. Deutsch: But that’s even a scarier thought. OK –

  Ms. Coulter: No, no, no, no, no. I don’t want you being offended by this. This is what Christians consider themselves, because our testament is the continuation of your testament. You know that. So we think Jews go to heaven. I mean, [Rev. Jerry] Falwell himself said that, but you have to follow laws. Ours is “Christ died for our sins.” We consider ourselves perfected Christians. For me to say that for you to become a Christian is to become a perfected Christian is not offensive at all.

You know, the last couple of times anyone tried to “perfect” the Jews, it didn’t go too well.

Please share widely!
fb-share-icon
Tweet
0

Comments

    • That 3 was totally deserved. My comment was completely worthless. Unfortunately, I have nothing profound or interesting to say about such a remarkably anti-semitic, totally ignorant, and completely mind-bogglingly stupid and awful remarks.

        • I’ve been trying to think of something witty to say about it and all I can come with is, “Really?” There really is no hyperbole that can describe how offensive these remarks are to me personally.

          • are leaving her now.  I hear that O’Reilly has been flooded with resumes. 

            <

            p>
            That’s the best wit I can think of off the top of my head, but she seem to have an amazing ability to dig a deeper hole for herself without our help.  Unfortunately, I think her base will love this, as noted below. 

            <

            p>
            It’s the Brittney Spears approach to politics: the more outrageous I can be, the more I get to be in the headlines and sell books.  And the less discussion there will be of substantive issues.

  3. …that buys her books.  For normal folk…time to just ignore her–giving her attention just feed the evil in her.

  4. with plenty of horrible things to say, that’s for sure. Clearly, Ms. Coulter is along the leaders of the pack.

    <

    p>
    Bullsh-t like this, however, just strenthens my resolve. Kinda like a year ago, when Healey came out with those awful racist ads…the nasty spectacle just made me want to canvass harder, and make more phone calls.

    <

    p>
    My point: Don’t get mad. Get even, by winning.

  5. Just focus on the fact that this debate, spinning around utter nonsense, is being carried out by influential adults.

  6. I think it’s only fair that she lead the way. Until Ann Coulter starts acting like a Christian (by which I mean, follower of the actual teachings of Christ), I don’t know why she’d expect anybody else to convert.

  7.  Not to mention intelligent, sophisticated, witty and worldly.

    She is a business woman doing her job.  And her job is to keep herself in the news so that people will buy her books.  I don't think anyone here is really surprised by her comments.  She will be front page news for a few days and then she will go away.  You can expect something like this to happen again and again.

     

     

    • I guess we now know where Zombie’s tastes lie.

      <

      p>
      I agree that few people should be truly shocked at what continues to emit from Coulter’s mouth. I think that people are more surprised that her behavior is tolerated by the networks.

        • …and my grandma is dead.

           

          Zombie, are you inclined to put the moves on my dead grandma? 

          • Zombie, are you inclined to put the moves on my dead grandma?

            <

            p>
            Wasn’t that a line from Night of the Living Dead?

            • Can you guess the film from which I found this quote?  No googling now!

               Ra-di-a-tion. Yes, indeed. You hear the most outrageous lies about it. Half-baked goggle-box do-gooders telling everybody it's bad for you. Pernicious nonsense. Everybody could stand a hundred chest X-rays a year. They ought to have them, too. When they canceled the project it almost did me in. One day my mind was full to bursting. The next day – nothing. Swept away. But I'll show them. I had a lobotomy in the end.

        • She is borderline anorexic.

          <

          p>
          Also, believe it or not there are people who are turned off by people with repulsive personalities. I am one of them.

      • yes – I don’t like what she said either

        <

        p>
        but that doesn’t mean she is any less attractive or less accomplished.  I stand by my post

        <

        p>
        “Ann Coulter is sexy
        Not to mention intelligent, sophisticated, witty and worldly.”

  8. Really. I do. I’d like to see her show up anywhere and everywhere. I don’t think Ann Coulter can be on radio and TV enough.

    <

    p>
    The fight is always for the middle. And the more Ann Coulter is seen and heard by the folks in the middle, the more they will view the right with skepticism.

    • One where the other side is so extreme, so vile, so anti-semitic and clueless that your side looks reasonable by comparison? I’d much rather a reasoned, vigorous, honest debate with opponents who have good, but differing, ideas. This kind of talk isn’t productive at all.

      <

      p>
      The National Jewish Democratic Council has a short, simple petition to urge CNN, FOX News, NBC, ABC, and CBS to stop inviting Ann Coulter as a guest to comment on politics. Here’s the full text:

      We are writing to ask you to refrain from inviting Ann Coulter to participate as a guest on your network’s news programming.

      As you know, it has long been documented that Ms. Coulter takes liberties with the facts. Furthermore, her comments — be they about Democrats, 9/11 widows, Jews, or others — often border on hate speech.

      While Ms. Coulter has her freedom of speech, you have the freedom to exercise better judgment. You wouldn’t put people who claim Martians roam the earth to frequently comment on science. It is time to stop putting Ms. Coulter on the air to comment on politics, thus giving her free publicity and attention.
      Signed by:
      [Your name]
      [Your address]

      <

      p>
      Please sign it today!

      • “I’d much rather a reasoned, vigorous, honest debate…”

        <

        p>
        Most of us would, but it takes two to tango and in the meantime the press agree that “opinions differ”.

        <

        p>
        In the meantime I’m happy to let the caricatures speak for themselves.

      • Do you really want that kind of public discourse? (0.00 / 0)

        One where the other side is so extreme, so vile, so anti-semitic and clueless that your side looks reasonable by comparison?”

        <

        p>
        If the other side IS so extreme, so vile, so anti-semitic and clueless that my side looks reasonable by comparison…Absolutely, positively, 100% yes, yes, yes, a thousand times yes,  I’d like them to have a forum to express their views as much as possible.

        <

        p>
        Do I like it when folks on my side of an issue are so crass and offensive? No. But the other side can feel free to alienate people that way as much as they want, far as I’m concerned.

        • I understand what you’re arguing but I don’t think it works.

          <

          p>
          The problem is that it is advantageous to our side to have some kinds of opinion lie over the line of what is acceptable. Today Pat Buchanan’s views sound extreme. He can appear on TV and all but he sounds extreme.

          <

          p>
          If David Duke could appear on the TV though, Buchanan would begin to sound sober, moderate, and measured by contrast.

          <

          p>
          Similarly, Coulter’s views are just well-dressed atavism but she serves to make neo-con jingoism sound reasonable, profiling of Muslims (as opposed to their elimination) sensible, and the blurring the Church-State boundary (as opposed to outright theocracy) uncontroversial.

          <

          p>
          Where the tactic you advocate is most successful is when the right-wing knuckle dragger is somewhat of a buffoon. Republican Vice Presidents (Agnew and Quayle) used to perform this function admirably. Alas Cheney is too grammatical and talks too slowly. Even Coulter is capable of proto-fascism in measured statements with clear syntax.

          • to blunt her usual polemics.  I think Deutch did a good job drawing her out so that she couldnt fall back on claiming she was kidding.  He was nonthreatening enough to get her to say what she said. 

    • I want more Ann Coulter (4.67 / 3)

      Really. I do. I’d like to see her show up anywhere and everywhere. I don’t think Ann Coulter can be on radio and TV enough.

      The fight is always for the middle. And the more Ann Coulter is seen and heard by the folks in the middle, the more they will view the right with skepticism.

      <

      p>
      While you make a sort of epidermal sense, it really ends up being just that thin in the end.

      <

      p>
      You’re acting as though this is a stand-alone thing, when in fact it’s punch one of a very powerful one-two combo:  act extreme and accuse the other side of extremism.  Result, folks in the middle stay home. Seriously. I’ve seen this work again and again and again and again. So many times so, I can’t believe it’s not deliberate.  If people don’t like behaviour, make them think both sides do it and let them sit it out…

      <

      p>
      One-two.  One: George Bush is the most outrageous, bullying, lying manipulative SOB since Dick Cheney… And Dick Cheney is the most outrageous bullying lying manipulative SOB since Karl Rove… Karl Rove is the most outrageous, bullying, lying manipulative SOB since Lee Atwater… rinse lather repeat ad infinitum.  Two:  accuse Al Gore/Max Cleland/John Kerry of being a bullying, lying manipulitive SOB.  People in the middle left with a massive headache from all the cognitive dissonance hitting the fan. People in the middle, honest and earnest people seeking to make the right decisions, can’t see the forest for the accusations.

      <

      p>
      So as soon as people start saying “Ann Coulter is evil” all we hear about is the extremity of Hillary/Dan Rather/Media Matters/etcetera.  Now think about it: if you weren’t at all interested in horse-races and dogfights, but instead were seeking to make an honest decision on a host of important issues, would you be able to do so clearly in such an environment?

      <

      p> 

      • … unless they hang themselves, nobody else will do it.

        <

        p>
        “act extreme and accuse the other side of extremism.  Result, folks in the middle stay home.”

        <

        p>
        The problem is that the refs (4th estate) aren’t calling what actually is extreme.  They have, as Alterman likes to say, done a great job a ‘working the refs’.  In your one-two example, you and I of course see step to as a big lie, but if the audience doesn’t see it and the refs don’t expose it, the middle just takes it as is. 

        <

        p>
        This isn’t a problem of letting the Coulters of the world speak too much, its a problem of the refs, by not calling a spade a spade, giving her more credit and time than her hysterics deserve.

        <

        p>
        The advantage of letting Coulter go on is that eventually they will ratchet up their insanity that it will become obvious to even the middle.  This is how guys like Limbaugh get kicked off of ESPN and guys like Savage get kicked off of MSNBC.  You have to let them hang themselves because the refs won’t do it (their job).

        • The problem is… (0.00 / 0)

          … unless they hang themselves, nobody else will do it.

          “act extreme and accuse the other side of extremism.  Result, folks in the middle stay home.”

          The problem is that the refs (4th estate) aren’t calling what actually is extreme.  They have, as Alterman likes to say, done a great job a ‘working the refs’.  In your one-two example, you and I of course see step to as a big lie, but if the audience doesn’t see it and the refs don’t expose it, the middle just takes it as is. 

          <

          p>
          You are, of course, correct as far as you go, but are still only halfway.  As for middle-of-the-road, middle-class centrists – in temperment as well as outlook – they often don’t particularly care for sports that require a ref to begin with.  Or perhaps think that politics isn’t a sport and journalists aren’t refs.  The sheer effort necessary to get past what they see as superflous piffle is often simply too much.  I can’t say I blame them.

          <

          p>
          For example, I love jazz, but I don’t go to nightclubs. The lines to get in, the prices of food and drink, the crowds and the cigarette smoke (probably less a problem now) as well as the people who are there strictly to party-n-drink make the effort to listen to the music so much more odious.  I’d rather sit it out and play my CD’s at home with a few friends and a meal I cook myself.  I think many people feel the same sort of way when faced with contemporary political discourse: there are a few people, on either side, who live for it to be sure, but others don’t get entry into it without a whole lot of effort and/or discernment.  The result is they stay away. I can’t say it isn’t a sane decision either.

          <

          p>
          So what if the ‘refs’ did call a spade a spade? Would that bring people to the table? I’m not wholly certain but I think not.  It’s still, to a lot of people, superflous to the decisions they feel need to be made.

          • When politician says “the bill includes a provision to exclude illegal immigrants.”, I don’t expect the press to say “opinions differ”… they can and should check it out and, like a ref, make the call.  That is what the press is supposed to be doing because by not doing it the body politic finds “…the sheer effort necessary to get past what they see as superflous piffle is often simply too much.”  I can’t blame the body politic either, I blame the media for enabling the superfluousness in the first place.

            <

            p>
            They are supposed to make getting the facts (in this case about what is and isn’t extremism) easier not harder.

            <

            p>
            “So what if the ‘refs’ did call a spade a spade? Would that bring people to the table?”
            It would do a great deal to clear the air and give a reality context to what the blow-hards spew.

            • I’m not sure we’re in disagreement here. I certainly think clarity would help.  But I also see a futility to appealing to refs in a game where one side so brazenly cheats: It’s like pro-wrestling where many people don’t watch because the purported goal of a ‘sporting event’ is so far removed from the actual staging of ‘entertainment’.

              <

              p>
              And when the truth hurts, the hurt becomes the focus, not the truth.  For example, the clearest call ‘the refs’ could make would go along the lines of “Ann Coulter is cold-hearted bitch who uses pretensions of christianity to beat people senseless..”  Things that would have to be said about Bush/Cheney wouldn’t be nearly as nice.

              <

              p>
              So right there you’ve got something that puts people off.  Honest and earnest people don’t want hear it, and in many cases don’t want to believe it when they do.  It becomes difficult to be honest when honesty is so boldly shocking because the shock becomes the focus, not the truth that’s being told. The same is true in the instance where a paper might be in the position of a headline that says “Candidate X told a direct lie.”

              <

              p>
              The alternative, it seems to me, is to engage ‘euphemisms’ which increases the workload for the journalist and citizen immensely and muddies. I agree with you and decry the use of ‘opinions differ’ argument.

              • … a strategy to fix the problem.  I’m pointing out that in the absence of the refs doing their jobs, the only way to expose the middle to just how crazy the extremists are is to let them demonstrate it themselves.  Your original objection was to the efficacy of letting Coulter burn up on her own.  My point is that, I agree with you that the press won’t do it, thus my point is that leaves you with b) let them hang themselves.  The problem is they have to get really outrageous
                to get their ugliness to shine through the ‘opinions differ’ haze.

                <

                p>
                Note that I do have a small hope that the market could correct the problem.  The only people who I see on the air that are calling a spade a spade are Stewart and Olberman.  By all demographic reports, people do want to hear it.  The moment of clarity was reached when Stuart went on crossfire.  When you can’t call a spade a spade then all you can do say ‘opinions differ’ and invite two people to yell at each other on camera, followed up by some stenography.  The result, as Stewart says (and people seem to agree with) is ‘hurting America’.

                • Does your 6… (0.00 / 0)

                  … indicated that I’ve persuaded you on “the efficacy of letting Coulter burn up on her own”?

                  <

                  p>
                  It means it’s an excellent post.  You’ve not persuaded me, but I like it. And I’m in agreement with respect to your comments on Olberman and Stewart

  9. …the only way to get Ann Coulter off of advertising supported broadcast media (radio and TV) is to complain to the advertisers.  Not the stations.

    <

    p>
    She, and all other “talent” on advertising supported broadcast media are merely filler between the advertisements, to try to induce rubes to watch the ads.  If sufficient numbers of people complain to the advertisers, and threaten to withhold their business, the advertisers will force her off the air or at least substantially reduce her exposure.

    • You could go to http://www.crazyassbigotedbitch.com. I hear they have pictures of Malkin there as well.

      <

      p>
      Sorry, I know that’s really not worthy, but I can’t believe this guy is defending AND drooling over this worthless human being, who makes money by causing people suffering.

      <

      p>
      There’s a lot in politics that gets me angry, but nothing brings out my nasty side than this stupid, crass, exploitive imbecile and the moronic press that keeps giving her credibility by giving her a platform.

      • …do you remember a discussion we had a while ago about how women are treated on the Internet?  How the ideas – good, vile, or in-between – are quickly lost in speculation about sexual prowess?  While Michael Moore, al Franken, Bill O’Reilly and James Dobson are ALL exempt from this sex-baiting?

        <

        p>
        Don’t get me wrong – as I posted above, she’s sold her last book to me.  Still – BMG has not exactly covered itself in glory on this topic.  The sexism is here as well as the net at large.

              • She looks like my grandma, except my grandma has a smaller adam’s apple…and my grandma is dead.

                <

                p>
                Someday, perhaps a trenchant critique will appear on BMG of Michael Moore’s physiology…

                • … Zombie starts a thread inviting us to judge her looks.  Through many replies the subject is avoided.  One guy gives in once… that that’s enough to charge the BMG community with sexism?  Your reaching.

                • You asked a question and PP answered it. Sorry you don’t like the answer.

                  <

                  p>
                  Also – I am a BMG er, and a democrat

                • … I have good reasons not to like it and I said so.  She claimed sexism on behalf of the community and hardly backed that up.  Frankly she should take it back. 

                  <

                  p>
                  I assume your response here is some kind of criticism.  Not sure what about.  Also I didn’t say anything about you being a democrat.  Now your reaching for some reason.

                • …or better yet, why don't you engage Zombie directly on the content of HIS comments?

                • …and was using your remarks as an example when asked to do so.

                  <

                  p>
                  I honestly don’t think it is possible to ‘call out’ EVERY tasteless remark about Republicans or conservatives on BMG – who do you think I am, Wild Bill Hickok?

                  <

                  p>
                  And I would still like to hear from LARUEL, to wom my remarks were addressed.

                • … you calling out whoever you want when you can show it.  Problem is you painted the whole community with that characterization and it was wrong. 

                • You're right P, I apologise.  We don't need that level of discourse here, even when discussing a malevolent waste of carbon like she-who-must-not-be-named.

            • Most of your posts and comments here would lead people to believe you are a Republican or perhaps a Libertarian. Why do you think of yourself as a Democrat? What are the key issues for you that make you identify yourself with the party?

                • If he is not, I really want to hear why he claims to be a Democrat, since everything he has posted so far would seem to contradict that claim.

            •  dood,

                 Ann Coulter is sexy     Not to mention intelligent, sophisticated, witty and worldly.

              The democratic party does not have a tent THAT big. 

               I think you're destined to be a party of one.  It appears that no one wants to claim you.

              • Oh no not that 

                no one at Blue Mass Group will claim me. OHHHH NOOOOO  I want sooo bad to be in the club.  OHHH NOOOO – WEEEEEEE

                 

          • …trolls, such as SchoolZombie, aren’t on anyone’s team, except their own.

            <

            p>
            The point of trolling is to be obnoxious enough to get people to respond and to interrupt and distract substantive discussion.  Not to make a point, and not to engage in substantive discussion.  And the person behind the SchoolZombie handle is obviously doing that quite well here at BMG.

            <

            p>
            It is a mistake to associate the person behind the SchoolZombie handle with the person behind the Peter Porcupine handle.

        • Lynne – after reading upthread… (5.00 / 1)

          …do you remember a discussion we had a while ago about how women are treated on the Internet?  How the ideas – good, vile, or in-between – are quickly lost in speculation about sexual prowess?  While Michael Moore, al Franken, Bill O’Reilly and James Dobson are ALL exempt from this sex-baiting?

          <

          p>
          Ann Coulter is appealing to a certain type of adolescent and this has only a -ahem- loose connection to her looks:  There is a brazen mixture of shamelessness and ruthlessness in everything she does that many a man-child thinks would translate into violently uninhibited sex.

          <

          p>
          Furthermore, Ann Coulter knows this and plays it up like a porn star. Who else wears skin tight minis 11 and a half months out of the year?

          <

          p>
          So, yeah, I do think most discussions involving Ann Coulter devolve into  arguments about sexism and sexual prowess, exactly as she desires…

    • so why is she (Coulter) huckstering for them (Christians)?

      <

      p>
      Moolah.  Money.  The same reason that the Jewess (by conversion of course) Dr. Laura Shitslinger was huckstering for Christians. 

      <

      p>
      I used to listen to Dr. Laura every once in a while in her last few months on WRKO in Boston.  I was struck by the fact that most of the advertising on her show was from entities like christian bookstores, christian hair salons, christians this that and the other. 

      <

      p>
      Christian hair salons?  Who knew they existed.

      <

      p>
      The irony was twofold.  There were no ads directed to Jewish this that and the other.  And its ironic that christians would have been supporting a Jewess.

    • I’ll get downrated for this, but I’m starting to thing a vagina and a pulse is all it takes for Schoolzombie.  This is the poor boy’s idea of a “10”.  I mean, look at the wrinkles in that armpit, and the pastiness that surround them.  Note the cellulose on the arm.  The sagging skin around her upper lip, the pastiness of her skin.  Are you sure the photo isn’t of a drag queen impersonating Ann Coulter?

      <

      p>
      SZ, if you are only going based on looks, you’re still playing in the wrong playground.

  13. Time to use it. 

    <

    p>
    This week is a big one for the anti-semite crowd.  Annie and a anti-semite hate meeting is going on this week-end in Southern Cal.  Let AC be blacklisted if no crime is going to be charged and let the police raid the haters in California and break a few heads.

    <

    p>
    Human rights demand it.

Archives