National Review Cans Columnist Ann Coulter

Washington Post ^ | 10/2/01 | Howard Kurtz

[Jean S]

Even by her usual incendiary standards, Ann Coulter's response to the terrorist attacks was something of a jaw-dropper.

"We should invade their countries, kill their leaders and convert them to Christianity," the conservative commentator declared in her column on National Review Online.

Those words created an uproar at the Web site, which refused to run a follow-up piece in which Coulter singled out what she called "swarthy males." She promptly began bad-mouthing National Review, which responded by axing her as a contributing editor.

[JohnHuang2]

I'm not a bit surprise we agree ;^)

[PrivacyChampion]

I join with JH2 and will not post from NR. I encourage all FReepers to join this boycott and let them know it. Jonah Goldberg sucks.

[BoomerBob]

Ignored or did they not spend as much time on it as you would prefer. I don't recall NR ever going against 2nd Amendment rights. In fact, I remember several articles in opposition to the Brady Bill.

[TLBSHOW]

"spineless girly-boys."

LOL

Well at least this will be a coup for the RATS! This NR makes me sick. I say a FReep of them is needed and quick. Either they bring Ann back and apologize to her and us or conservatives drop em like a hot coffee. FReep Freep freep

[oldvike]

National review was still utterly spineless for summarily firing her.

No argument here. They obviously gave in to pressure from the PC Police. Also, the editors had ample time to review Ann's piece. If they had such a big problem with it why did they not confront her before printing the article?

[TLBSHOW]

start a boycott thread

[PrivacyChampion]

Yeah, but that a$$ is sweet...

[Conservative til I die]

I think I get it. I see FReepers being huge hypocrites. If it were Molly Ivins saying "We need to bomb those Christians and convert the idiots to secularism ASAP!" the FReepers would be whining and calling for boycotts. But because its a conservative, and most of the FReepers happen to be fundamentalists anti-every religion but theirs, they go "tee hee, ain't it funny!" about Coulters idiocy.

I like FR, but sadly many of the posters show their asses as nothing more than fakes who would gladly trade freedom and equality for a seat on the throne making up the rules of the game.

[Let's Roll]

"This is absurd for National Review to enact this level of political correctness against Ann Coulter. Clearly, her comments were meant to be somewhat tongue-in-check. But, the PC menatality has infected even National Review. Between this and the idiotic quest to legalize drugs, it's getting hard to call National Review a conservative publication."

I thought it was tongue-in -cheek too. Have to agree with whoever mentioned that this was probably fallout from an internal political war at NRO.

[SurferDoc]

My point exactly, that was after Buckley was no longer active at NR. They began to champion 2nd Amendment issues for the first time at NR after he was no longer involved in day to day matters. [I read darn near every issue from 1960 to 1995]

[BoomerBob]

Honestly, Boycott Threads? Should we have sit-in at NR's New York offices, too? Maybe we could all get together and chain ourselves to Bill Buckley... yeah that will show 'em!

[Alberta's Child]

They obviously gave in to pressure from the PC Police.

Also known as ADVERTISERS. The only way to get Ann back on National Review is to contact the advertisers directly.

[Alberta's Child]

In a related story, dedicated FreeRepublic member JohnHuang2 has checked in at an undisclosed "substance abuse center" for treatment of his Larry Kudlow withdrawal symptoms.

: P

[PrivacyChampion]

OK. I'll do it. Right now.

[Clinton's a rapist]

Yesss!

[BoomerBob]

I understand what your saying but I don't see their not "championing" 2nd Amend. rights as a sign of opposition to those rights.

[TLBSHOW]

LETS ROLL A FREEP OF THEM

[Travis McGee]

I could covert them to atoms in about a nanosecond.

How very diverse of you. ;^)