Posted on 10/13/2007 3:40:48 PM PDT by EveningStar
...The issue with Coulter is not whether she can sell books, but whether she helps or hurts the side of the political debate she claims to support. In my opinion, Coulter has never been a big help to the effort to build a conservative and Republican majority. Her most recent comments on the relationship of Christianity to Judaism, made on the CNBC show " The Big Idea" with Donnie Deutsch on Monday of this week , may prove particularly damaging...
At a time when party affiliation is fraying and a third of Americans consider themselves independent, to build a majority of 50% plus one requires persuasion. Independents will not accept all parts of either party's platform or approach but will choose a candidate for office based on which issues matter to them, and whether one or the other party connects with them on those issues. It is a skill to disagree at times without being disagreeable. Ronald Reagan had it, and it is one of the reasons he became so popular and patched together a large winning coalition . Coulter has clearly decided there is no economic advantage for her in this approach...
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
I DON'T pay attention to them. I brought them up because there are a not inconsiderable number of Jews whose fears are nourished by these perhaps well-meaning, but certainly tactless, people.
Thanks for bringing up the Holocaust (I assume you don't mean the TV movie) that automatically makes you the loser of this argument. First person to lean on Hitler, nazis, etc. to make their point...LOSES.
Oh, so my merely bringing up a word or a concept eliminates the need for you to answer my points? Nice try, but no cigar for you.
BTW, if you'd like my opinion, this idiotic rule is more about banning the subject from serious discussion than about anything else. Who made the rule? By what authority? I call BS. Let's try to be a BIT more mature than that, and actually discuss the issue that is the topic of this thread.
I brought up the Holocaust for one reason, and one reason ONLY: to demonstrate to you (and anyone else reading our comments) the extent to which the Jewish People have suffered, and the ever-present fear that a lot of Jews have of a repeat (which the nut in Iran would like to do, even as he denies the original-and this fans the fears even more). I am not blinded by such fears, but that is NOT the point...
...THIS is the point: Ann Coulter has shown that no matter how intelligent, informed or well-spoken she may be, no matter how correct she may be on a whole host of issues, she is a buffoon for phrasing things in this fashion, no matter what her beliefs (to which she's fully entitled, as is anyone).
This answers that question quite nicely, I think: http://www.christian-thinktank.com/2littlepain.html
When you make this sort of accusatory statement: "Where’s the sacrifice in that?" or challenge someone by saying this: "He was not a god with godly powers on Earth as is the claim of the tenant." , you simply do not appear to be the grillee. You appear to be the griller.
My apologizes if I'm wrong. I was just trying to direct you to an answer to your question and perhaps point out that the "heat" in your discussion is unnecessary. Neither is the heat in your response to me. My post was crystal clear and totally responsive to your question.
“you simply do not appear to be the grillee.”
Appearances can be deceiving.
“My apologizes if I’m wrong. I was just trying to direct you to an answer to your question and perhaps point out that the “heat” in your discussion is unnecessary. Neither is the heat in your response to me. My post was crystal clear and totally responsive to your question.”
I accept your apology. I think the problem is that my question is not one I seek an answer to, I already have an answer. My point in asking the question is to get the poster to THINK about what they are saying as it is obvious that they were not doing so.
That’s pretty difficult to decipher from what was posted.
She unnecessarily opened up old wounds at a very difficult time. And she may have hurt the GOP to boot. Watch: the GOP candidates will be asked to comment on her remarks.
But He didn't stop it, so there's the sacrifice.
God's plan of salvation through Christ is the perfect way to fulfill both justice and mercy.
:)
That's almost a given. Thanks, Ann, you fell right into the trap.
Really, this is very disappointing. I expected a LOT more of her. I wonder how much the drug of self-promoting outrageous statements is affecting her thoughts.
and the Freepers who defend her! They shouldn’t. Not this time.
She speaks in a no-nonsense way that regular Americans can relate to... not meaningless phrases, that are deliberately misleading in their efforts to hide the truth, from the politically correct leadership of both major political parties.
The rational middle that is squishy on policy stands, and uncomfortable with bold language knows that Ann Coulter is one of the more aggressive voices on the Right. They can take that into account and balance it with the party overall, and don't see Ann Coulter and then immediately dismiss the party as a whole.
If the GOP isn't big enough to have Ann Coulter's in it, then there is no need for the party at all, because conservatives would rather march arm-in-arm with her, then those who criticize her.
“and the Freepers who defend her! They shouldn’t. Not this time.”
I’m also disappointed that they do. I don’t ask for or expect any agreement on theological disputes - that is, after all, the very reason that people profess and practice different religions, because their beliefs are different. Nope, all I ask is that people who are not Jewish try - just for a few moments - to put themselves in the position of a member of the most reviled group of people in history, a group that has been persecuted, exiled, stolen from, forced to convert or outright murdered by Christians (and others basing their beliefs on some version of Christian replacement theology) simply for the fact of their faith. Worry about such things, even if subconscious, don’t disappear with a few decades, or even a century or 2, of good treatment in one country...not when 1/3 of the Jewish People was slaughtered within the living memory of many, not when there is increasing hostility to Jews in that old hotbed of anti-Semitism, Europe, and not when some mad SOB in Iran threatens a nuclear holocaust of all of Israel (with its 6 million Jews) while denying that the first took place.
Just a few moments of empathy, and maybe these people would understand why Ann Coulter went too far this time, why she threw the bomb in the wrong place. Maybe if they’d read Fr. Edward Flannery’s “The Anguish of the Jews” they’d begin to understand.
I was a big fan and have spoken to her in person. She was very gracious - at an RTL banquet. Now I am steamed at her. She should never have gone on the bozo’s show and she said something that does offend my religious sensibilities. I am a very, very ecumenical person - and I don’t like being told that my religion is “imperfect”. Anne should “perfect” thinking before she offends some of her fans. My relatives did not die so that a skinny blonde can tell her that their religious beliefs are “imperfect”.
Bold language and no-nonsense talk is fine, desireable even - provided that one can recognize that pouring salt into a known and somewhat fresh wound with a group on an issue that has nothing to do with politics is simply stupid, simply over the top.
As I’ve said on many occasions on this and similar threads, I find myself in agreement with Coulter about 95% of the time. But not this time. She’s entitled to her beliefs and to state them - no one (or at least not me) has said or implied otherwise. But if YOUR GOP isn’t big enough to include people who sound off in equally plain talk in disagreement with one other member of the Party who on this ONE occasion may have overstepped the bounds of decency, then maybe your GOP has no purpose.
I must’ve missed the memo that says that we all have to march in lockstep on every issue. My GOP must’ve forgotten to pass it out.
That's the one area where I might disagree with you - sometimes you have to go to the enemy's house and fight him there. But Ann fell into a rather obvious trap. I've read the transcript - he didn't do anything other than goad her into more specifically defining her perfect country. SHE raised the issue of religion, and gave that moron the biggest gift he could have imagined. As you said before, now we can expect that the GOP candidates will have to answer a question about this issue - which is NOT where they want to be.
The most often quoted Scripture for a person to become a Christian that I’ve seen is:
Rom 10:9 That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved.
The only 2 conditions set upon this person before they are saved is to “confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus” and to believe that “God hath raised him from the dead.” Once a person has done these 2 things they become a Christian. There are no other conditions, actions, or beliefs that are attached to this.
Another poster had said that unless a Christian believed everyone should be a (Christian) convert they were not a Christian. Is this a condition mentioned in Romans 10:9? No. As one poster put it the admonition to Christians “to preach the gospel to every creature” is the Great Commision. Salvation or becoming a Christian has to come first before the Great Commision. But going by what the first poster said that a Christian must believe that every person should be a convert or they are not a Christian. How can a non-Christian be expected to carry out the Great Commision when it is not admonished for them to do so?
I hope this helps.
No, the GOP candidates should not have to answer questions about Anne - but if Chris Matthews is ever the moderator, you KNOW he will ask them about her. Yes, there is a doubls standard: and people such as Anne should be aware of it. When she tosses bombs, she should sometimes think about who the targets end up being. Today at my office was ALMOST UNBEARABLE.
But He was God, so how could he suffer? Your comment makes no sense.
Uh, not really.
If Ann is actually as retrograde “Fundamentalist” as her remarks to Donny Deutsch suggest, then the real shock of this is that she is actually that way, and has kept it “hidden” for so long. On the face of it, there was nothing wrong with her remarks, except that they could be construed the wrong way/ That great intellect Donny Deutsch did not give her much leeway, and was not interested in exploring the subtleties of her statements, but instead rhetorically forced the issue, and that was to be expected. She should have learned by now how to turn his “arguments” against him.
He's God, so He could certainly do it if He wanted to. He chose to suffer to pay the sin debt on behalf of those who would receive Jesus as Savior and Lord. The perfect way for both justice and mercy to be carried out.
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.