Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

National Review Cans Columnist Ann Coulter
Washington Post ^ | 10/2/01 | Howard Kurtz

Posted on 10/01/2001 10:00:14 PM PDT by Jean S

Edited on 09/03/2002 4:49:21 AM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]

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.


(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...


TOPICS: News/Current Events
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 121-140141-160161-180 ... 441-455 next last
To: Conservative til I die
What the heck are you talking about? This is a spirited exchange of views. Don't get a heart attack over it.
141 posted on 10/01/2001 10:57:20 PM PDT by SurferDoc
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 129 | View Replies]

To: JeanS
Here is the location of the NR boycott thread: National Review Boycott
142 posted on 10/01/2001 10:57:28 PM PDT by PrivacyChampion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JeanS
"We should invade their countries, kill their leaders and convert them to Christianity," . . .

A. . .'just kidding'. . .from Ann and a short leave to cure her 'migraines'; and it might have been okay.

From a more practical standpoint, her idea would really take too long. But if we just made valleys where mountains once stood, it might speed up the cultural evolution.

. . .'swarthy males'; well, a little vacation added to her 'leave' . . .

Given the hires, fires. . .resignations et al; these tough times. . .make for a lot of 'coulda, shoulda. . .woulda. . .

143 posted on 10/01/2001 10:57:53 PM PDT by cricket
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ymani Cricket; ValerieUSA
.....it returns US to the dark ages.

We cannot return. We were never there!

Why? Because up until the 1960's, we were a Christian nation. As Ronald Reagan said of us, "You are a city upon a hill." America shined a beacon of hope and freedom to the world because America's foundation was built upon the bedrock of Christianity and its principles, which even dieists and agnostics recognized. And, when America unashamedly declared that heritage, nobody dared do what the bastards did to us on 9-11.

144 posted on 10/01/2001 10:58:09 PM PDT by ppaul
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 120 | View Replies]

To: Critter
I don't know if it was tongue in cheek or not. Have to see the context of the original column. Standing alone though... it looks bad. She's entitles to her opinion. And NR is entitled to drop her. This is America! There are plenty of other places to express her opinion. I never cared too much for National Review anyway.
145 posted on 10/01/2001 10:58:16 PM PDT by Ymani Cricket
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2
JohnHuang2 <---will never again post anything from National Review.

Their hit count just went down 20%.

;^)

146 posted on 10/01/2001 10:59:35 PM PDT by Travis McGee
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 111 | View Replies]

To: BoomerBob
IMO they ignored the issue for 25 years. OK?
147 posted on 10/01/2001 11:00:29 PM PDT by SurferDoc
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 138 | View Replies]

To: PrivacyChampion
Thanks

As the saying goes, we either hang together, or hang separately...

148 posted on 10/01/2001 11:01:11 PM PDT by JohnHuang2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 123 | View Replies]

To: ppaul
Dear Ann Coulter:
I am not a swarthy-type male, but I'm No Girly-boy by a long shot.
I would be willing to demonstrate my fanatical devotion to you at any time, 24/7.
Contact me if you need some one face down in a mud-puddle to enable your dry passage.
Wishfully , C.
149 posted on 10/01/2001 11:01:18 PM PDT by Crowcreek
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: BoomerBob
Yes a big FREEP of them. In fact untill they apologize to Ann and us about their stupid idiot reason for dropping Ann. If not for Ann and Barbra conservatives would be clueless.
150 posted on 10/01/2001 11:01:36 PM PDT by TLBSHOW
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 132 | View Replies]

To: Conservative til I die
Most FReepers happen to be fundamentalist anti-every religion but theirs...

Naah, not only do I think you don't get the gist of Ann's comments regarding "Christianity" (see post #95), but you happen to be wrong about your statement above which infers FR Christians are nothing short of fascists.

151 posted on 10/01/2001 11:02:09 PM PDT by F16Fighter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 129 | View Replies]

To: JeanS
I'll follow her columns regardless of where she works.
152 posted on 10/01/2001 11:02:14 PM PDT by boycott
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SurferDoc
Okay, for arguments sake lets say they did ignore 2nd Amend. issues. Now, besides that and drug legalization where else are they not conservative?
153 posted on 10/01/2001 11:02:34 PM PDT by BoomerBob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 147 | View Replies]

To: JeanS, all Coulter cultists
I can't believe some of the conservatives who are flocking to condemn the National Review. Mere months ago NR ran a cover story in favor of a Constitutional amendment prohibiting gay marriage, but suddenly because they dump Coulter they're "RINOs." NR isn't turning "leftist" because they got rid of one whiny loudmouth who thinks she's entitled to use their magazine, which has contributed more to conservatism than she could ever hope to, as her personal soapbox with no restrictions. What NR did was take out the trash, and I say good riddance.

I will say this about National Review: they were irresponsible for not cutting Coulter's infamous line in the Barbara Olson column ("We should invade their countries, kill their leaders and convert them to Christianity"). I'm not sure how the editorial chain of command works, but if I were the man in charge I'd give whoever edited Coutler's piece holy hell.

As for Coulter crying "censorship" because her editor told her she couldn't use certain language in a column — tough! Maybe no one informed her, but here in America we have something called private ownership. At any publication, just like at Free Republic, the only real free speech belongs to the person or people with final say over content. Coulter's rhetoric was getting too caustic for NR, so they let her go (I suspect after she pitched a fit about an editor cutting her columns). That's their perogative. The fact that she's whining about it proves to me that they made the right decision.

Dumping one hysterical, semi-talented jingoist pundit from the columnist roster is no black mark on NR in my book. I'm keeping my subscription.

154 posted on 10/01/2001 11:02:36 PM PDT by Polonius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: oldvike
If they had such a big problem with it why did they not confront her before printing the article?

Precisely. They owed her that much. If NR had an ounce of integrity, they would have given her at least that.

155 posted on 10/01/2001 11:03:21 PM PDT by JohnHuang2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 126 | View Replies]

To: BoomerBob
"I might suggest to all that National Review has done more for the Coservative cause than Ann Coulter will ever be able to do."

Would agree.

156 posted on 10/01/2001 11:03:53 PM PDT by cricket
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: JeanS
Oooohhhhh Noooooo! Say it ain't so!

Well Anne, if you need anything, a place to crash, anything, let me know. I'm here for you baby.

Kidding aside: Anne was right. This political correctness thing has gone a lot deeper than I would have ever thought. W constantly using the 'justice' crap when anybody short of planet Mars knows it has nothing to do with justice. It's war.

Then there's all this clamping down on ma and pa six pack while we mince around trying to accomodate all the rag-heads.

The political correct crowd (and that may mean YOU Mr. Gung Ho Kill Em All American) refuses to admit that we are neck deep in a religious war with a knife at our throats .... but Anne knows. Netanyahoo knows. Osamayomama knows.

157 posted on 10/01/2001 11:04:16 PM PDT by mercy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Travis McGee
Just 20 percent?

:

158 posted on 10/01/2001 11:04:32 PM PDT by ppaul
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 146 | View Replies]

To: Travis McGee
Their hit count just went down 20%.

Just 20%? hehehe ;^)

159 posted on 10/01/2001 11:04:41 PM PDT by JohnHuang2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 146 | View Replies]

To: TLBSHOW
I guess that I just don't follow the idol worship of Ann Coulter. Personally I prefer the style of Mona Charen or Michelle Malkin (sp?)
160 posted on 10/01/2001 11:04:55 PM PDT by BoomerBob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 150 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 121-140141-160161-180 ... 441-455 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson