Posted on 06/09/2006 1:05:56 PM PDT by new yorker 77
A member of the Sept. 11 commission on Friday lashed out at conservative pundit Ann Coulter for a "hate-filled attack" in saying the widows whose husbands died in the World Trade Center used the deaths for their own political gain.
In her latest book, Coulter criticizes the four New Jersey widows who pushed for an independent commission to investigate the Sept. 11, attacks. The women also backed Democrat John Kerry's presidential candidacy in 2004.
"These broads are millionaires, lionized on TV and in articles about them, reveling in their status as celebrities and stalked by grief- arazzis. I've never seen people enjoying their husbands' deaths so much," Coulter wrote.
Former Rep. Tim Roehmer, D-Ind., a member of the commission that investigated the Sept. 11 attacks, called Coulter's "hate-filled attack on the patriotic heroes of 9/12 _ the widows of 9/11 _ reprehensible and undignified."
Roehmer urged people not to buy her book. "Americans shouldn't contribute to her profiting from these vicious remarks."
Rep. Rahm Emmanuel, D-Ill., said Thursday on the House floor that Coulter is a "hatemonger" and called on Republicans to denounce her: "I must ask my colleagues on the other side of the aisle: Does Ann Coulter speak for you when she suggests poisoning not Supreme Court Justices or slanders the 9/11 ... widows? If not, speak now. Your silence allows her to be your spokesman."
Among Coulter's previous statements, she advocated the invasion of non-Christian nations after Sept. 11 and the deportation from the U.S. of "all aliens from Arabic countries." She said American Taliban John Walker should be executed to show liberals what happens to traitors. And she said the only real question about President Clinton was "whether to impeach or assassinate."
Among the most quotable Coulter:
_"To expiate the pain of losing her first-born son in the Iraq war, Cindy Sheehan decided to cheer herself up by engaging in Stalinist agitprop outside President Bush's Crawford ranch. ... After your third profile on 'Entertainment Tonight,' you're no longer a grieving mom; you're a C-list celebrity trolling for a book deal or a reality show," Coulter wrote in her TownHall.com column on Aug. 18, 2005.
_"Even if corners were cut, (Iran-Contra) was a brilliant scheme. There is no possibility that anyone in any Democratic administration would have gone to such lengths to fund anti-communist forces. When Democrats scheme from the White House, it's to cover up the president's affair with an intern. When Republicans scheme, it's to support embattled anti-communist freedom fighters sold out by the Democrats," she wrote in 2003's "Treason: Liberal Treachery from the Cold War to the War on Terrorism."
_"My only regret with Timothy McVeigh is he did not go to the New York Times Building," The New York Observer quoted her as saying on Aug. 20, 2002. She clarified those remarks with RightWingNews.com: "Of course I regret it. I should have added, 'after everyone had left the building except the editors and reporters.'"
_"After all other suitable office space in Manhattan had dried up _ and also after spending the weekend golfing at an all-white club in Florida _ Clinton announced he would take an office in Harlem. ... As one of my friends remarked, that should be nice: Having escaped a mugging on the way to work, Clinton's female employees will then have to face an accused rapist in the office," Coulter wrote on Feb. 19, 2001.
_"(Liberals) are always accusing us of repressing their speech. I say let's do it. Let's repress them. ... Frankly, I'm not a big fan of the First Amendment," Coulter said during an Oct. 21, 2005, speech at the University of Florida.
_"We should invade their countries, kill their leaders and convert them to Christianity. We weren't punctilious about locating and punishing only Hitler and his top officers. We carpet-bombed German cities; we killed civilians. That's war. And this is war," Coulter wrote in a column published by the National Review Online on Sept. 13, 2001.
_"The portrayal of Senator Joe McCarthy as a wild-eyed demagogue destroying innocent lives is sheer liberal hobgoblinism. Liberals weren't cowering in fear during the McCarthy era. They were systematically undermining the nation's ability to defend itself while waging a bellicose campaign of lies to blacken McCarthy's name. Everything you think you know about McCarthy is a hegemonic lie. Liberals denounced McCarthy because they were afraid of getting caught, so they fought back like animals to hide their own collaboration with a regime as evil as the Nazis," she wrote in "Treason."
_"Mostly the Witches of East Brunswick wanted George Bush to apologize for not being Bill Clinton," she wrote in "Godless." She was referring to the New Jersey town where two of the Sept. 11 widows live.
_"We need somebody to put rat poison in Justice Stevens' creme brulee," Coulter said in a Jan. 27 appearance at Philander Smith College in Little Rock, Ark., regarding Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens. She later explained she was joking about the justice, whose votes have upheld Roe v. Wade, the landmark decision legalizing abortion.
_"You want to be careful not to become just a blowhard," she said in The Washington Post on October 16, 1998.
Copyright 2006 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
I really love Ann.
Dr Savage is just jealous because Ann's legs are so much better than his!
At the National Press Club no less!
With the possible exception of the Stevens quote, everything she said is justifiable and based on facts. The problem is, we live in the era where how you say things is far more important than what you say. The Holy Faith of Multiculturalism is not to be questioned, and woe to those who do.
I watched her on Hannity & Colmes last evening. Alan must have been working on his questions all day. I can imagine he was thinking, "Oooooh...I have her, now," when he inquired whether John Walsh and Rudy Giuliani (there was one more, but I forget who it was) had capitalized on their tragedies.
It took her seconds to blow his premise away by explaining John Walsh actually brought an unknown issue to the public. The FBI, at that time, was not devoting resources to finding missing children or examining evidence in their cases. She further explained everyone was aware of 9/11.
Colmes tried to press on by saying Giuliani had advanced his political career with 9/11. Coulter responded by saying he was already mayor and has not held office since he left, so what career? She's a bit too shrill for me, sometimes, but she's definitely too smart for Libs.
Yet they all defended Ward Churchill's academic freedom, freedom of speech, yada yada. Ben Afleck calls for Bush to be hung (sic), Randy Airtard for Bush to be shot, etc., etc.
Time to revive some quotes from the left to add some context to the discussion before they make this into an election issue.
I'll take a pitbull over a poodle.
It's a technique we learned from the DemocRATS. Works great! LOL!
Heard her with Lou Dobbs last night and she had him tongue tied.
Somebody... should have laid this stinkin' commie out with a straight right to the snot-locker.
The funniest part was when they were talking about Cindy Sheehan and the Rat that was opposing her said, "But she lost her son", to which, Coulter of course replied, "You just made my point", that the RATs put up these people with sad stories and they say we can't respond b/c of their tragedy.
Kristen Breitweiser blog - Commenting on the NOW PROVEN FAKE KORAN FLUSH STORY
Flush Bush - May 18, 2005
How do we have an Administration lecturing Newsweek about "journalistic standards"--the failure to get on the record confirmation before printing a story -- when we went to war in Iraq on similar sloppy standards. Anybody remember Curveball? Or have we all forgotten the Senate Intelligence Report on WMD that discusses how our entire Intelligence Community and President Bush were duped by one bad allegedly "crazy" source who provided "dead wrong" intelligence?
Oh, that's right, I forgot that when the story of Curveball hit the media we were overwhelmed with steroids in baseball and the Schiavo debate. Remember the Schiavo debate--the "preservation of life" debate. How ironic. We couldn't discuss the fact that we were wrongly taken into a war where thousands have been killed and wounded--a war that has made the entire world less safe-- because apparently we needed to publicly debate a family's private decision whether a feeding tube should be removed from an incurably sick woman.
But, now we find ourselves overwhelmed by the debate over a story written by Mike Isikoff.
Anybody who has looked into some of the allegations floating around about the torture and homicides being carried out by our interrogators must realize that it is a possibility that something like flushing a Koran down a toilet could happen. What do you expect when you have interrogators basically given carte blanche to do whatever they want to detainees.
We all recall Alberto Gonzales commenting that the Geneva Convention was quaint, right? Or did he say it was cute? Doesn't matter. You get the point.
But, instead of immediately stopping these abuses, investigating them and coming up with clear instructions for our interrogators to stop them from re-occurring, what does this Administration do?
Nothing.
No discussion. Swept under the carpet, until journalists like Mike Isikoff write stories.
Now, 17 people are dead in riots stirred up by Islamic extremists for their own ends. And what does our Administration do? Hold hearings? Demand an independent investigation? Nope. Our Administration blames Newsweek for reporting the story and not getting a source to confirm the allegation on the record.
Here is a thought. What if the Administration had thoroughly investigated and cleared up the human rights abuses being committed by interrogators when they first learned of it so that (gasp) there was no story left for Mike Isikoff to write about?
Better yet, what if our leaders had actually sat down years ago and planned what they were going to do with "enemy combatants". Not just sat at a conference table and decided that they would hold people as "enemy combatants" for as long as they wanted and torture them at their own whim. What if our leaders actually thought about the consequences of their actions prior to making those actions?
We have major human rights abuses being carried out by our military and intelligence officers. Such human rights abuses are on their face morally reprehensible and wrong. Moreover, in the long run they put this nation at huge risk. Why? Because every person that is wrongfully held, tortured, and then wantonly released by us, immediately returns to their homeland, tells their story and becomes the poster child for why everybody should hate the Americans.
And these people do not forget.
They have long memories. The truth is that fifteen years from now when the current chain of command is long gone (sitting in the old folks home) people like you and me will suffer the consequences because it will be our kids and loved ones who will be in the wrong place at the wrong time when an emboldened "enemy combatant" or his daughter decides to blow up a building as payback for their treatment at gitmo.
If Newsweek holds Isikoff accountable, then I would like similar accountability in the Bush Administration. Afterall, how many thousands have died as a result of our President's bad executive branch standards--whether they be for taking us into a pre-emptive war in Iraq based on an erroneous source named Curveball or not providing clear instructions and training to interrogators of enemy combatants? All of these issues continue to further alienate us from the rest of the world and continue to make us less safe.
My take? Don't flush the Koran, Flush Bush.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/kristen-breitweiser/flush-bush_b_1215.html
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.