In accordance with established procedure:
Posted on 06/13/2006 12:47:59 AM PDT by croak
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.
(Excerpt) Read more at frontpagemag.com ...
I'm watching David on a repeat of The Larry King show taped 6/12. 2 conservatives and the rest liberals and anti Coulter folks. Dull when there is no balance, but David rocked.
(Denny Crane: "Every one should carry a gun strapped to their waist. We need more - not less guns.")
In accordance with established procedure:
Give'em hell, Ann.
BUMP
Liberals worship big government,their god. Secularism by definition downplays the role of religion. Therefore, I think calling liberals "secularists" is at odds with the definition of the word.
LOL! They're working on it though -- see global warming, e.g. And I have the impression the big grant money goes to "prove" things the libs want to be true!
Yep. And the lefty/socialist/one world monster keeps getting fed.
. . .a critique delivered perfectly, as well!
No question that Liberals survive and prosper, by their own myth-making talents. . .
. . .and whether the endeavors are mundane; creative or scholarly. . .we know, that the Truth is never safe with a Liberal. .
They have managed as well, to recast (taint) what it means to earn once, universally coveted prizes as in Nobel and Pulitzer. . .. And of course, even 'Oscar' translates to Leftist/socialist myth-messaging. . .
With their survival skills firmly imbedded in the in-authentic; Liberals re-invent life in their own image. . .
They ignore the fact that people will go to extraordinary lengths to get here, even risking their lives to do so.
They ignored the fact that Elian's mother lost her life trying to get to freedom and demanded the little boy be sent back to Castro.
They blame America for every ill in the world and insist that if only they were in charge, the USA would be perfect.
"Liberalism differs with Islam on abortion, homosexuality, women - but both religions view Christians and Jews as infidels."
This dovetails well with Horowitz' contention that Islam and the Left have the same near term goal, the destruction of the US.
Correct.
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
Correct.
Darwin's theory is bunk
Wrong. Darwin's theory is still the best explanation for the facts as we know them. It's the Biblical story of creation which is childish bunk.
Coulter makes two errors; she confuses "political correctness" with "liberalism", and she's as guilty as the former of preferring religious beliefs to decent, but ever-changing and imperfect, explanations of reality as our understanding of it expands.
I watched a tape of Ann's interview with ole Matt, if you haven't seen it...watch for a replay...she, was all over Matt, like a wasp... her mouth was like a machine gun, poor ole Matt, didn't have a chance, she cut him to shreds, so fast that it took him seconds to reply, and then it was with a measure of hostility...
I've seen snippets of Matt's interview with Ann. He looked scared. Ann's intellect threatens too many of the reporters and others vilifying her.
Has anyone else noticed that Nat'l Review Online has not had any comment on "Godless"?
I sent this interview to a friend. He sent the following reply, which I think is pretty good:
"Brilliance comes in many forms and one form is Ann. She perceives underlying themes and puts them into understandable prose better than all the other commentators combined.
Furthermore she puts these insights into books that will remain as references for us all in our battle against the war of destruction against American ideals.
This is much more enduring and beneficial than radio and TV because it becomes part of the intellectual debate's theoretical basis for our point of view. It also gives us average folks some irrefutable facts and understanding that we can use to refute the lies of the left."
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.