Posted on 10/11/2007 10:36:00 AM PDT by Froufrou
Sorry, but I don’t dance on command to confrontational small minds.
Jewish people here in the U.S. overwhelmingly vote for Democrats because they are overwhelmingly Liberals.
Just as Orthodox Jews tends to vote for conservatives, because they are conservative.
Period.
You're either incredibly ignorant or a hateful liar.
NYC GOP Chick wrote:
I dont need to read the New Testament to understand that she believes Jews are inferior to Christians.
X X X X X
The Bible basically says that ALL people are depraved and immoral and so much so that they don’t even realize it.
The ONLY difference between Christians and non-Christians is that the former have placed their faith in Christ to save them from the fate awaiting all persons — eternal separation from God (which is what they want as demonstrated in this life) and conscious torment (after becoming aware of what they have done).
People do not become Christians because they are any better than those who do not become Christians. It’s God’s sovereign choice and in many cases it is obvious that many who become Christians were very much sinners. As Christ said (paraphrased), he came to heal the sick, not the healthy.
I don’t think Ann the Warrior-Pundit does a very good job of expressing Christian doctrine.
So do I. It is almost entirely one-sided, and the Jews are getting the short end of the stick.
...and what Ann said is not going to make them change the way they vote, one way or another.
If/when Democratic Jews are putting together a chart listing "Reasons why I should be a Republican," I sincerely doubt that what Ann said (whether accurately reported or not) is going to be on that list. In other words, it might not hurt, but it definitely won't help.
I suppose it is perfectly fine with you when muslims, such as Osama, say that all infedels should convert to islam? The MSM is fine with that but to have a Christian say all Jews should convert to Chrisitanity this is somehow offensive. Personally I think maybe you should STFU until you learn to read all of the relavent material related to an article and to think about what you have read.
Well, now, aren't we being civil? You know, I didn't offend you, I addressed Ann Coulter. She's a public figure, has to expect criticism, and has a thick enough skin to take it and then turn around and dish it out if she pleases (if she'd ever see or care about my views, that is). You, OTOH, need to learn a bit of self-control.
The simple fact is that I DON'T consider it offensive (what Ann said, even IF she said what the media said she did - which I know not to be the case). My ONE AND ONLY POINT is that she opens her mouth so many times in such a way as to discredit conservative views. She is free to believe as she wants to, and to say what she wants to. As are you. As am I. As is a Moslem. That's what this country is about. But just as she can say what she wants, so can I say that I think that her method of saying things is counterproductive, and advise her to close her mouth.
The funny thing is that I mostly agree with the substance of what she says (though not in this case, of course). I just wish that she'd be a bit less of a bomb-thrower, so that she'd be more effective at winning people who are on the fence over to our side. Otherwise, she's merely an entertainer, someone who will amuse us and infuriate those on the other side. There's certainly a role for people who do that, but somehow I think that she's enough of a believer in her views and enough of a patriot to want to influence people. Doing things as she tends to do them is not a recipe for influencing many people in the direction that she'd like to do.
Perhaps you can name the legislation of which you speak. Give a few examples, by all means.
Perhaps you can name the legislation of which you speak. Give a few examples, by all means.
I love Anne.
I am glad someone like her is at the tip of the spear of the conservative movement
This is war and the Liberals are out to destroy the world...we need more Anne Coulters.
Could she use some coursework in diplomacy....of course
But she spoke the truth as I believe it...I can’t fault her for that.
Remember, we are talking about Ann Coulter here.
What pisses the liberals off is when someone calls their bluff.
What statement could she have made or could anyone make to move the "Leftist Jews" from their position?
Curious?
peace
In all likelihood most Leftist Jews will maintain their political views until they're put into a box (and, in some jurisdictions, for quite some time thereafter).
However, for any of them who are disturbed by the extreme leftward tilt of the Democrats and who MAY be considering voting for Republicans every once in a while, statements like Ann's give them just another reason NOT to do so. Therefore, it is my view that she (unintentionally) hurts our cause...here with a small number of people, other times with more. I believe she means well, but IMHO she needs to learn how to tone down the delivery of an otherwise generally good message.
I assume that means that you disagree with me. Fine, that's your right. Just know that I generally agree with the substance of her statements (generally, as in 95% of the time), but I think that her demeanor as a bomb-throwing type is counterproductive. That is the substance of my position, and you can still disagree if you'd like.
It gives me Chills when Anne throws Bombs
;-)
Heard that a million times before.
But we should not use that cliche to excuse ourselves.
We should be knocking at the door without stop.
“Talmudic Jews”
What’s a “Talmudic Jew?”
jv, I have seen your yeoman's work translating Arabic documents into English so that we might have some idea of what went on in Iraq under Saddam. Which only tells me that you are avid to learn the truth, and that your cultural background could be other than Christian.You see the interview without ever having read the New Testament of the Bible, and you may not notice the true dynamics of that interview. What you see in the interview is a person who is not a Christian (in this case, a Jew) placing a Christian in a position to either affirm or reject what the New Testament says. And, when she affirmed it, you see the nonchristian condemning the Christian for intolerance equivalent to that of a Muslim extremist threatening to murder him for not agreeing with her.
If you reread that interview, you will see that that is plainly not the case and the interviewer was the one who drove the conversation exactly where it went. It took a bit of pushing - and accusatory insinuation - to get to the stage where she said:
COULTER: Well, OK, take the Republican National Convention. People were happy. They're Christian. They're tolerant. They defend America, they I put it to you, jv, that a sincere Muslim would belive, and a candid one would say, that the world would be a better place if everyone was a Muslim. Just so Ann, a sincere and candid Christian, said that the world would be a better place if everyone were a Christian. In response, the interviewer went into high dudgeon:DEUTSCH: Christian so we should be Christian? It would be better if we were all Christian?. . . and persists in taking umbrage at the fact that Ann is a sincere and candid Christian. Well, guess what! The relevant section of the Constitution of the United States states,Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.That means that Christians have the right to be and act as Christians, even if that means saying what the Bible says - when asked! And even if the person who asked wants to hear something else. When Ann invited - didn't threaten to bring him in irons but invited - the Jewish interviewer to come to her church, the interviewer would have been perfectly in his rights to reply by inviting her to visit his synagogue. And no offense would have been taken. But the last thing the interviewer was thinking about was to promote Judaism, or to offer to include her in it. He took the moment to attack Christianity.It was not Coulter but Deutsch who was grandstanding for attention. Ann's discussion was about her ideas and beliefs, and Deutsch's rant was basically only about Deutsch.
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.