Coulter un-plugged

[Mulhollanddose]

FP: Hi Ms. Coulter, welcome back to Frontpage Interview.

Coulter: Hello.

FP: Before we get to your book, let me just ask you about your recent comments about some of the 9/11 widows and their activism. It has sparked quite a stir. What is the rationale behind your comments?

Coulter: It was a simple observation of the so-called Jersey Girls, who are "mourning" at fetes thrown by Graydon Carter/Vanity Fair Magazine and on MSNBC every night. This is part of the leftist agenda: Put up "victims" as spokesmen to tongue-tie the opposition.

FP: Ok, well, speaking of the leftist agenda, you have taken on a new challenge in your latest book in terms of liberals and religion. You point out how most liberals often boast they are not religious, yet that they are, in fact, part of a religion. Can you talk a bit about this phenomenon?

Coulter: Yes, they say they are not religious (until they need Americans to vote for them) in order to act like supreme rationalists, slaves to the scientific method, which they claim disproves God. But of course, liberals hate science -- as covered in copious detail in my book. Science is the study of the world as it is, invulnerable to their crying jags.

The point of my book is that liberalism is itself a religion, a godless one, that worships nature and sees man as a morally indistinguishable part of nature - really a blight on nature. They have a whole cosmology, a world view, and a belief in the supernatural. But by denying that liberalism is a religion, they get to promote their religion in government schools.



FP: Can you just expand a little bit on why liberals hate science deep down?

Coulter: The liberal war on science is an entire chapter in my book so you will need to read it for the full exposition, but liberals hate science because it so often contradicts their religious beliefs - that women are no different from men in their aptitude for math and science, that the AIDS virus doesn't discriminate, that there is no such thing as IQ and if there is, it is equally distributed among all genders, races and classes of people. People who subscribe to God-based religions don't need the science to come out one way or another on any of these issues. We consider all human life sacred so it doesn't threaten our world view if it turns out that some humans don't make good Navy SEALs because they lack upper body strength.

FP: Why is the Left is so hostile to the Judeo-Christian tradition?

Coulter: Their beliefs are antithetical to the Judeo-Christian tradition. It gets in the way of their agenda of moral relativism, hedonism, and socialism. You might say they consider the Judeo-Christian tradition to be “an inconvenient truth”.

FP: It is interesting that the Left is adamantly for the separation of Church and State, against prayer in schools etc., but when it comes to Islam, liberals and leftists lose their fervor in being anti-religious. What gives here?

Coulter: By denying that liberalism is a religion, liberalism is able to permeate government institutions, most obviously, the public schools. Christianity and Judaism are banned from government schools, where children are baptized in the liberal religion -- safe sex, recycling, Heather Has Two Mommies, Bush is “like Hitler,” and of course, Darwinism, the last of the 19th century mystery religions. Only once you realize that the official state religion is liberalism does it make sense that the state religion can play favorites with other religions, such as Islam, post 9/11. Liberalism differs with Islam on abortion, homosexuality, women - but both religions view Christians and Jews as infidels.

FP: Tell us what you think about Darwin's theory of evolution and its sacredness in the eyes of the Left.

Coulter: For the full explanation you must read the book - the evolution chapters are fun. Like John the Baptist, Darwin foretold one of the key tenets of the left's worldview, that humans are accidental descendants of earthworms, rather than being the unique creations of an all-powerful God. Darwin's theory is bunk, but mana to liberals, who worship nature and think men are indistinguishable from beasts, contra The Book of Genesis.

FP: How do you think the terror war is going in general and the Iraq war in particular?

Coulter: The war in Iraq was going just dandy until we killed al-Zarqawi. Now they're all mad at us. Way to go, President Bush.

Actually, it's going smashingly well. Congratulations to the F-16 pilots who laser-guided al-Zargawi to Hell. Iraq's government is well on its way to taking control. The threat to our progress comes not from the likes of Zarqawi and his ilk - our boys can handle these savages - but from Fifth Columnists in the West, like Pinch Sulzberger.

Killing the #2 man in al Qaida just means everybody in the organization moves up one notch. The former #3 guy is the new #2 guy, the former #10 guy is now the #9 guy, and the new #48 guy is Howard Dean.


FP: Since you mention Howard Dean, let me ask you: in terms of Zarqawi's death, what do you think of how the Left took the occasion to demonize America and call for American surrender in Iraq?

Coulter: You know what the new definition of a nanosecond is? The interval of time between the news of al-Zarqawi's death and the first liberal saying, “This is just going to enrage the insurgents and make everything in Iraq worse!”



FP: What are your thoughts on Noam Chomsky's recent pilgrimage to embrace Hezbollah?

Coulter: I guess Castro and Kim Jong Il were both too busy to see him.

FP: How do you think Bush has done overall in fighting the War on Terror?

Coulter: Within five years, how many attacks have there been on U.S. soil since September 11, 2001? You know, a ballpark estimate?

FP: What do you think of the Dixie Chicks and their latest song on how they are not ready to “make nice” -- in terms of what happened with their position on Bush and the war etc? I thought it was quite comical. The song is based on the assumption that someone out there even actually cares whether they are ready to “make nice” or not. What was your take?

Coulter: Just so you know, I'm ashamed that the Dixie Chicks are from America.

FP: Um, ok. So, what are your plans in the next five years?

Coulter: Mostly enjoying the continuing disintegration of the mainstream media.

FP: Ann Coulter, thank you for joining us today.

Coulter: My pleasure, any time Jamie.

[IROC]

Even though I don't agree with alot of what Coulter spouts (I think she mostly likes to push people's buttons), I always figured she was probably pretty intelligent.

I guess I was wrong. What an idiot.

Mike

[BlueSkyJaunte]

So she took her perpetually installed butt-plug out for this interview? Interesting.

Explains why she's full of *****...

[notfarnow]

At least the interviewer was unbiased. Very balanced.

[techweenie]

Mul will no doubt be signing autographs tomorrow over in Burbank as he stands in line for the Jay Leno show with guest Ann Coulter.

[Mulhollanddose]

Originally posted by IROC
Even though I don't agree with alot of what Coulter spouts (I think she mostly likes to push people's buttons), I always figured she was probably pretty intelligent.

I guess I was wrong. What an idiot.

Mike

Intellectual allergy to truth...interesting...Do you break out in hives, or are your only symptoms denial and bile infused emesis?

[kang]

Originally posted by Mulhollanddose
Intellectual allergy to truth...interesting...Do you break out in hives, or are your only symptoms denial and bile infused emesis?

Do you actually believe your signature line?

"Whether they are defending the Soviet Union or bleating for Saddam Hussein, liberals are always against America. They are either traitors or idiots, and on the matter of America's self-preservation, the difference is irrelevant."

"While the form of treachery varies slightly from case to case, liberals always manage to take the position that most undermines American security."
Ann Coulter

Quoting Ann Coulter in you signature line makes you guilty by association.

[Mulhollanddose]

Ann Coulter's assertions, that I quote, are backed up with historical accuracy...Guilty as charged.

If you do no agree with her assertions, it is you that is in the dark.

[IROC]

Some of Coutler's "assertions":

"Christianity and Judaism are banned from government schools..."

False. If she really believes this (which I doubt) then she's an idiot or extremely misinformed.

"the evolution chapters are fun. Like John the Baptist, Darwin foretold one of the key tenets of the left's worldview, that humans are accidental descendants of earthworms, rather than being the unique creations of an all-powerful God. Darwin's theory is bunk, but mana to liberals, who worship nature and think men are indistinguishable from beasts, contra The Book of Genesis."

She's an idiot. It's obvious she's talking about a subject that she knows nothing about. Maybe that works for Dittoheads, but everyone else is a little more critical, usually.

Mike

[Moneyguy1]

Fellas.....

Mul has the right to say what he wants. At least for now, this is a "free country". Even myopic, one dimensional views like his should be welcomed here.

I am waiting for unbiased sources for the historical accuracy.

[kang]

I would like to see some examples of this as well.

Let’s take the first quote:

"Whether they are defending the Soviet Union or bleating for Saddam Hussein, liberals are always against America. They are either traitors or idiots, and on the matter of America's self-preservation, the difference is irrelevant."

First, I have yet to see a liberal defend the Soviet Union or bleat for Saddam Hussein. OK, maybe someone way, way out on the left, but they are so far out there it’s ridiculous. Perhaps someone as far to the left as Mul and Coulter are to the right. Likewise, I don’t know of any liberals that are against America. You certainly can’t say that liberals are “always” against America. The word “always” is a huge claim that’s so easy to shoot down it’s not even funny. “Always?” Come on, one example of a liberal that isn’t against America shoots this claim down. I’m a liberal and I’m for America. Likewise for the claim that they are either traitors or idiots. Again, only those on the extreme left could be considered traitors, but then again, so can those on the extreme right. And idiots? There is certainly an intelligence bell curve, for both left and right, and a few of each are idiots. A few of each are also brilliant.

The second quote is just as ridiculous as the first.

[Moneyguy1]

John

Thank you for a cogent and relevant analysis.

All the publicity given only enhances her bank account. People read her stuff because it is human nature to watch a train wreck. Stories of boy scouts helping old ladies across a busy street do not sell. There are people who will believe anything as long as it fits into their tiny one dimensional world. I would rather see someone actually address the problems, suggest reasonable solutions and work to implement them rather than a bomb thrower out ony for the money.

As for people of noteworthy achievements, Where are they today? We lionize race car drivers, sports stars and the like while those who do "good works" are on the back page. Sensationalism runs the world, not the "left" or the "right". Both are guilty of attempting to appear more than they are.

"A successful 'politician' is one who sees the direction in which the crowd is moving and runs to the front as if he was always in the lead".

[techweenie]

Coulter is just one of those who tell you what "liberals" think and feel and then deride those thoughts and feelings.

It's called a strawman argument. She cannot point to actual sources; she just makes up ludicrous positions and lampoons them. It's shooting fish in a barrel.

The thing to be aware of is that the neocon pundits for the past 6-8 years or so have taken to accusing the opposition of what they themselves are guilty of. So for instance, Coulter can call liberals "anti-science" with a straight face only because she has practiced so long.