Coulter Does NYT a Favor; Reviews Own Book

Human Events ^ | June 7, 2006 | Ann Coulter

[boryeulb]

The long-anticipated book Godless: The Church of Liberalism was finally released this week. If the New York Times reviews it at all, they'll only talk about the Ann Coulter action-figure doll, so I think I'll write my own review.

Get Yours FREE!

Godless begins with a murder at the Louvre and then takes readers on a roller-coaster ride through the Church of Liberalism in a desperate game of cat and mouse in which the hunter becomes the hunted -- with a twist at the end you simply won't believe! It's a real page-turner -- even the book-on-tape version and large-print edition! Who knew a book about politics could make such an ideal gift -- especially with Father's Day just two weeks away!

The main problem with Godless is that I had to walk through the valley of darkness to find it. You will have to push past surly bookstore clerks, proceed past the weird people in the "self-help" section, and finally past the stacks and stacks of Hillary Clinton's memoirs. If all else fails, ask for the "hate speech" section of your local bookstore. Ironically, if you find Godless without asking for assistance, it's considered a minor miracle.

This is not a book about liberals. I stress this in anticipation of Alan Colmes hectoring the author to name names. (For people who resented being asked to "name names" during the 1950s, these liberals sure aren't shy about demanding that conservatives do the same today.)

It is a book about liberalism, our official state religion. Liberalism is a doctrine with a specific set of tenets that can be discussed, just like other religions.

The Christian religion, for example, frowns on lying and premarital sex. That is simply a fact about Christianity. This does not mean no Christian has ever lied or had premarital sex. Indeed, some Christians have committed murder, adultery, thievery, gluttony. That does not mean there's no such thing as Christianity any more than videotape of Rep. William Jefferson accepting cash bribes means there's no such thing as congressional ethics rules.

Similarly, the liberal religion supports abortion, but that doesn't mean every single liberal has had an abortion. We can rejoice that liberals do not always practice their religion.

Godless examines a set of beliefs known as "liberalism." It is the doctrine that prompts otherwise seemingly sane people to propose teaching children how to masturbate, allowing gays to marry, releasing murderers from prison, and teaching children that they share a common ancestor with the earthworm. (They haven't yet found the common ancestor ... but like O.J., the search continues.)

The demand that their religion be discussed only with reference to specific individuals -- who is godless? are you saying I'm godless? -- is simply an attempt to prevent us from talking about their religion. This tactic didn't work with Slander or Treason, and it's not going to work now.

It's not just that liberals ban Reform rabbis from saying brief prayers at high school graduations and swoop down on courthouses and town squares across America to cart off Ten Commandments monuments. The liberal hostility to God-based religions has already been copiously documented by many others. Godless goes far beyond this well-established liberal hostility to real religions.

The thesis of Godless is: Liberalism IS a religion. The liberal religion has its own cosmology, its own explanation for why we are here, its own gods, its own clergy. The basic tenet of liberalism is that nature is god and men are monkeys. (Except not as pure-hearted as actual monkeys, who don't pollute, make nukes or believe in God.)

Liberals deny, of course, that liberalism is a religion -- otherwise, they'd lose their government funding. "Separation of church and state" means separation of YOUR church from the state, but total unity between their church and the state.

Two months ago, the 9th Circuit held that a school can prohibit a student from exercising his First Amendment rights by wearing a T-shirt that said "Homosexuality Is Shameful."

Even the left's pretend-adoration of "free speech" (meaning: treason and pornography) must give way to speech that is contrary to the tenets of the church of liberalism on the sacred grounds of a government school.

How might the ACLU respond if a school attempted to ban a T-shirt that said something like "Creationism Is Shameful"? We'd never hear the end of warnings about the coming theocracy.

In fact, students are actually required to wear "Creationism Is Shameful" T-shirts in Dover, Pa., where -- thanks to a lawsuit by the ACLU -- the liberal clergy have declared Darwinism the only true church, immunized from argument. Ye shall put no other God before it. Not one.

Liberals believe in Darwinism as a matter of faith, despite the fact that, at this point, the only thing that can be said for certain about Darwinism is that it would take less time for (1) a single-celled organism to evolve into a human being through mutation and natural selection than for (2) Darwinists to admit they have no proof of (1).

If only Darwinism were true, someday we might evolve public schools with the ability to entertain opposable ideas about the creation of man.

[lowbridge]

I went to Amazon to check out the reviews. Predictably, the liberals go at it with their usual vitriol.

[TEXOKIE]

bttt

[fish hawk]

So what. Duuuhhhh...she makes her living on writing and selling her books. Is a CPA a numbers whore. I'm a carpenter so I guess I'm a nail whore.

[Texas_Jarhead]

Yea, there ya go. Jerky. I only pinged you because the subject was you. Next time I won't. Have a great day.

[Senator Bedfellow]

A) that's obviously a hypothetical example, and;

B) even if you think he was seriously proposing that, "as monstrous as a whale" is not the same as "is a whale", unless you're going to explain how this is a whale too:

Boeing 737, about the same length as a blue whale - "as monstrous as a whale".

[Right Wing Professor]

Darwin never said whales were descended from bears. He said that he didn't see why natural selection could not accomplish a transformation from a bear to something as monstrous as a whale.

Coulter said, and I quote, "They [evolutionists] say the whale "evolved" when a bear fell in the ocean". No, we don't say that.

[Zeppo]

Although your reply was a clever attempt to change the subject, I will not be distracted from clearly making my point.

You have not succeeded in disputing my original assertion, namely that your arguments are not particularly persuasive or effective when they merely consist of fighting hyperbole with hyperbole of your own...

[Atomic Vomit]

"She didn't call all Muslims "ragheads." You can find a transcript of her CPAC remarks at..."

muslims are at war with us and yet you accept the premise that calling muslims names is wrong??

The Japanese were "nips".

The Germans were "krauts"

We are in a war. muslims started it and are conducting it against all of us.

muslims are our enemy.

muslims are ragheads.

AV

[Right Wing Professor]

I'm sure you think you have a point. You do. Look up.

[Raycpa]

I think Ann needs to write another book about the religion of evolution.

[Atomic Vomit]

"I'm sure you think you have a point. You do. Look up"

Cute, but stupid.

When he looks up, the point you smarmily draw attention to would move and no longer be above him.

He would see Heaven when he looks up.

Or do you profess he would not?

AV

[Tabi Katz]

Are we sure this stickwoman isn't some plant by the left to fully discredit us?

So who's doing the name-calling now?

[WatchYourself]

"One poster defined Coulter's style as "polemical humor." I get the impression from some that one should rarely take anything she says seriously."

Coulter calls herself a polemicist. It always cracks me up how "conservatives" get all cranky over her polemicist ways. She never considered herself to be a boring, dull history writer. To be honestm, as far as political books go hers are of the few I can actually get through without being bored to tears.

[fromscratchmom]

I Corinthians 5:10 covers the fact that Carl Sagan most likely knows God's truth by now, whether or not those who are still living believe it. The only way that he doesn't is if the proper understanding of scripture is that Mr. Sagan is in a waiting situation until we all face God at one time.

As for judging others, I would be curious to know what it is in your copy of the Bible that leads you to believe that we are not allowed to know right from wrong when we see them. The only times I've ever heard anyone try to argue that "judging others" was sinful was when they took Matthew 7:1 out of the Bible because it suited their purpose, of trying to silence those who recognized their sin, and denied almost the entirety of the rest of the Bible. Using the same type of so-called logic and the same level of intellectual honesty you could just as well declare that it is a sin to split wood. "What God has put together, let no man put asunder." You can take any scripture in the Bible or any other book of any religion or any human creed of evolution or...well you get the idea... choose a choice phrase that you think makes a point that you want made and completely ignore the reality of what the text you pulled it from says. Congratulations you now qualify to be a mainstream journalist by todays standards. However if you want to have some intelligent discourse with people who will respect you enough to consider what you say, you would be far wiser to stick to your chosen texts rather than warp them in that way (and just not choose a book that doesn't really make the point you want made).

[pollyannaish]

Ann is very, very good at what she does. And this is very funny.

[Right Wing Professor]

When he looks up, the point you smarmily draw attention to would move and no longer be above him.

Did you figure that all by yourself, or did you need help?

[capitalist229]

Speaking of slander, Coulter was just painted as an extremist by Charlie Gibson on the ABC evening news who quoted several excerpts from her new book.

Vitriol like this just shows that Ann has her finger on the liberals' hot button.

Keep it up Ann !

BUMP

[Fester Chugabrew]

It's not as if you are addressing someone who considers the biblical texts to be either accurate or authoritative. As such you are free to disregard whatever remarks issue forth as if to accuse those who understand where the texts came from and what they mean. It's like a student lecturing a teacher: one doesn't wonder that it's done with fervor, but rather that it is done at all.

[Fester Chugabrew]

No, we don't say that.

Of course not. Like good liberals you dare not say what you really mean and believe. It has to be couched in tomes of scientific certitude, just as evidence contrary to the theory of evolution must be explained away or discarded.

[Right Wing Professor]

Of course not. Like good liberals you dare not say what you really mean and believe.

No, Fester, we don't mean and believe whales evolved from bears. Does your deity know you're lying again?