Posted on 10/02/2001 9:14:04 AM PDT by truthandlife
Conservative columnist Ann Coulter, fired from her contributing editor perch at the National Review Online, blames it on free-speech hysteria in the wake of the Sept. 11 attacks. In a recent online column, Coulter opined that the United States should respond forcefully to the terrorist attacks: "We should invade their countries, kill their leaders, and convert them to Christianity," she said. The comment provoked an uproar, and the National Review Online subsequently refused to run another Coulter piece in which she referred to "swarthy males." When Coulter complained, she was fired. Tuesday's Washington Post quotes Coulter as saying she doesn't need friends like that. "Every once in awhile they'll throw one of their people to the wolves to get good press in left-wing publications," she told the newspaper. National Review Online Editor Jonah Goldberg told the Post, "We didn't feel we wanted to be associated with the comments expressed in those two columns." Coulter told the Washington Post she's getting great publicity as a result of the flap.
Well said!
Kindly point out one of my posts where I used the word "satire." There aren't any! I said that she was not speaking in the literal sense, but more symbollically. Never did I use the word "satire." Please know what you are talking about when addressing me, because I don't have time to bother with people like you who assume! Thank you very much!
That's it. It's the quintessential No Big Deal. It's not even necessary (or wise, in my opinion) to take sides.
But Coulter has decided that publicly attacking NRO will get her publicity and money. That's fine. I've lost some respect for her, but I'm certainly not going to throw a hissy fit and suggest that we should all boycott her. In fact, I'll keep reading her column myself.
Which neatly sums up the one mistake Ann apparently did make, which was overestimating the intelligence of many of her critics.
*sigh*
I think having to explain the distinction between a "joke" and hyperbole as a literary tool takes all the fun out of the exercise...
You do know how to pick a screen name! Rational Antiwar dittos to you!
LOL
Sounds like the prototype for the "BORG", doesn't it.
You are parsing words to say that these sorts of actions do not constitute forced conversion. How many generations passed before "forced conversion" resulted in a total loss of Jewish identity among many conversos? Arab Muslims conquered and converted many Christians and Jews at swordpoint, too. What was "forced" in the first generation became real generations later. Do you wish to argue that this was okay in the case of the Inquisition, but wrong in the case of Jihad?
And to base your attacks upon the actions of one nation during a relatively brief period of time of all Christian history
I gave one example. There are others in the history of Christianity. Including "forced conversion" from one variety of Christianity to another.
is indicative of your anti-Christian bias.
If you knew me at all, you would know how absurd that accusation is. My father is Catholic, and my mother is a Jew. I was baptized and raised Catholic, before returning to the Judaism of my heritage. My wife is Catholic. I have many friends on FR of all variety of Christian backgrounds. Please refrain from making baseless accusations against me.
Apparently not appreciated enough to need to go ahead and use it as an example of Christian behavior today.
On the other hand... today's Muslims blow up buildings with thousands in them without even the opportunity for the weak to convert.
Shown them your muscles, Ann!
caution: pictures may be copyrighted
No dearie; I am deriving her intent by a host of different means -- familiarity with all of her work (not just this one column), familiarity with the process of writing editorials, familiarity with the tools used in writing any opinion piece or creative work, familiarity with the complexities of the English language, and a couple of other things I needn't publicize on this forum.
Okey-dokey?? ;-p
My guess is that the Christian conversion put it over the top.
My dear SLJP, I said that Coulter was not being satirical. You then implied that I was wrong. By implying this, you implicitly asserted that she was being satirical. Simple logic. A <> -A. If this is not what you meant, then I thank you for your clarification.
she is right about the "throw to the wolves" thing - many on the right love to score points with the libs by attacking their own.
Thank you, SLJP, somewhere along the line that needed to be said.
So many here love to misinterpret statements and then write 20 chapters of criticism about the misinterpretation, and then feel smug that they have actually done something useful!
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.