|
|
October 11, 2007Now Coulter and the Jews? - UPDATEDI’ve written before about Ann Coulter’s untamed mouth and how she manages to weaken her own arguments (and cause relentless misunderstanding and hardship for “her side”) with her undisciplined “let me be caustic, free-wheeling and outrageous” schtick. I don’t understand other people’s adoration of the woman. To me she has always been a partly exploded roman candle whose remaining gunpowder has seemed at risk to imminent blast, leaving a trail of destruction behind her. Her delayed, back-up blast seems to have blown. This is the bit you’re going to see replayed everywhere, and even trying to put it “in context” won’t help much to those who have no exposure to this reasoning:
Coulter obviously did NOT say Jews should be wiped off the planet, that was her host’s interpretation and the left, of course, will run with it. I don’t think she is an anti-semite at all, she is simply trying to express an idea, and doing it very badly, in an environment that is not going to help her do it better. If you read that transcript to the end, you can see where Coulter tries to clarify her meaning, but she can’t, partly because a sound-bite forum is NO PLACE for that sort of deep and too-easily-misunderstood discussion, and partly because her host is, from his perspective as a Jew, unsurprisingly appalled by what he is hearing, by what he thinks Coulter is saying. This is a discussion best left to someone with a gift for diplomacy, a deft tongue and a loving, civil and collected mien. It is is absolutely not a discussion that should be undertaken by someone who has the deftness of a hammer and the mien of a German Shepherd. Coulter tries to explain, but keeps sinking further because she’s in deep waters, weighted down by time constraints and her own clumsiness; rather than rescuing herself, she’s taking down a whole ship! The damage is done and it is HUGE damage, done very thoroughly; and her clarification is too little, too late and too inarticulate to do the job. And this is going to be red meat all through ‘08, folks. This is going to be the caricature of Christians and conservatives for the next 18 months, (and beyond) and it’s going to stick because people want it to stick and because it’s EASIER to let it stick than to find out what this woman - who is really out of her depths here - was trying to say. What did I just say the other day?
This is one of those stories, one of those flubs, that is going to simply get added to the muck and allowed to settle and become “accepted truth” much like “Bush (but not Clinton) lied about Iraq.” If you don’t like the way Christians are stereotyped these days, well, thank Mrs. Coulter for just making things that much more difficult! If you thought the recent swarms and distortions regarding O’ Reilly and Limbaugh were bad, and the recent pronouncements from some on the left were excessively nasty, well… THIS Coulterian disaster is going to be a whole lot worse, for a whole lot longer. It is NOT going to go away. No one is going to be the least bit interested in “clarification,” here. No one is going to get the chance to get “clarified” in their understanding. Some of my readers keep telling me Coulter is “brilliant,” but for crying out loud, this seems like a pretty dumb, clumsy and inarticulate interview and more importantly, it is a pointless exercise that makes Coulter (and Christians) sound like judgmental automatons who want to walk over you or convert you. This is going to be added to the ever-growing moral equivalence narrative that says “Christians are just like Islamic Fundamentalists!” A narrative that gets served up more often than you may realize by the deliverers of popular culture. I hate to be cruel but as Hamlet says, I am cruel only to be kind. If Coulter can, she should try to make some sort of statement that apologizes for giving offense - because whether or not she meant to, she surely did manage it - and that does NOT sink her any further… and then maybe she should take a sabbatical, somewhere. Maybe go to Israel and hang out with these gals for a while, or something - try a little silence instead of her habitual, tiresome, trouble-making and incessant noise. Deacon Greg says no wonder young people are leery of the faith. I don’t know if I buy that poll, but for sure, this does not make Christianity look attractive to outsiders. UPDATE: Siggy says Lay off Coulter and suggests she said nothing truly untoward. Let me clarify that I never said she did. But as a commenter elsewhere said, Christians can hope that the rest of the world comes into the fullness of Christ without being repelled by the manner in which they are invited. What I have said here is that she was clumsy, unclear and incoherent in her expression of that idea - that a soundbite forum is no place to try to express it well - and in so being she has managed to give handfuls of red meat to people who have absolutely no intention of allowing clarification, are not interested in clarifying for her, and thus she has given Christian caricaturists a heavy dose of “see? See what they’re like” to back them up. Christians can like the message and still wish it had been delivered with a more tactful, empathetic and compassionate voice, and they can be secure enough to say, “this was not that voice.” Re-read the very first sentence I wrote. It’s her schtick that brings down her arguments, every time, and her schtick that makes it difficult for the rest of us. UPDATE II: From To Kill A Mockingbird: I find myself being part Aunt Alexandra, here, and part Atticus. I’m appalled that Coulter gives red meat to those who will gladly grind it, but I also understand that - by her reckless and inarticulate manner - they’ve been given something to grind. So I’ll allow Atticus Finch the last word, here.
Mark Shea says it better than I can Roger L. Simon has more thoughts. Also writing: http://theanchoressonline.com/2007/10/11/now-coulter-and-the-jews/trackback/ 59 Responses to “Now Coulter and the Jews? - UPDATED” |
October 11th, 2007 at 11:54 am
[...] The Anchoress on Coulter: ”[T]his seems like a pretty dumb, clumsy and inarticulate interview and more importantly, it is a pointless exercise that makes Coulter (and Christians) sound like judgmental automatons who want to walk over you or convert you.” [...]
October 11th, 2007 at 12:34 pm
I keep hearing that Bush is not articulate enough, he does not get the message out and all that. But I can not imagine Bush ever saying something this stupid.
October 11th, 2007 at 1:11 pm
[...] The Anchoress: “This is a discussion best left to someone with a gift for diplomacy, a deft tongue and a loving, civil and collected mien. It is is absolutely not a discussion that should be undertaken by someone who has the deftness of a hammer and the mien of a German Shepherd.” Share and Enjoy: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages. [...]
October 11th, 2007 at 2:16 pm
Ah, Ann. Don’t ever change.
October 11th, 2007 at 3:17 pm
[...] an open mouth is not a resting place for your foot Posted on October 11, 2007 by Bookworm Courtesy of the Anchoress, I’ve learned that Ann Coulter has done it again, this time coming out with remarks that are [...]
October 11th, 2007 at 3:53 pm
Coulter The Evangelist…
Read this at Israellycool and it begs for comment although I am in no way as caustic as Ann Coulter.
DEUTSCH: Let me ask you a question. We’re going to get off strengths and weakness for a second. If you had your way, and all of your - forget that an…
October 11th, 2007 at 5:30 pm
[...] Anchoress” is distressed that Coulter has set the right-wing cause back by treading clumsily, but, apparently, for no other [...]
October 11th, 2007 at 6:15 pm
I agree she went too far on this one. A good deal of her stuff is parody anyway, so you can just roll your eyes, or laugh as I sometimes do, and move past it. She is plugging a book this week and I think this maybe was a calculated stunt. I generally like the points she makes about the left because few are really willing to tell it like it is, but this comment is patently offensive to me, as a Catholic.
Jews do not need to be “perfected” and they do not need to be Christians, either. I leave it to a higher power to figure out whose got all their ducks lined up the right way but technically they are our first cousins. We have a long and shared history and finally we live in a time when we can exist side by side, though not without threats to one or both of us.
I sometimes wonder if our biggest test is how well we get along with those along side us, who did nothing to us, and have different beliefs. (I make a distinction from those who do us harm and deserve to be confronted). I also worry that everytime we use the God-bludgeon, we fail the test in the worst possible way; using His name, imagining that we have His desires for us figured out, and I feel the worst when I consider how incredibly disappointing that must be.
October 11th, 2007 at 6:41 pm
hehe…Oh my god Ann is mean. And mean never works. After all look at the Democrats they are nearly the majority in all areas of Government and they were absolutely the nicest people you could meet. I mean look at Hillary reaching out and Pelosi and Reid, pillars of nice.
Ann said that she is the perfect Jew and the world comes to a halt.
Lets hope that one day the Republican party wakes up to the fact that we are in a battle for our country with a bunch of leftists who will stop at nothing for power. Being nice won’t work.
October 11th, 2007 at 7:12 pm
[...] Courtesy of the Anchoress, I’ve learned that Ann Coulter has done it again, this time coming out with remarks that are going to sound anti-Semitic. Here’s what Ann said during an interview with Donny Deutsch: DEUTSCH: Christian — so we should be Christian? It would be better if we were all Christian? [...]
October 11th, 2007 at 7:19 pm
Coulter is well-educated, intelligent, and displays at times a sense of humor. Alas, she wields truth (and her opinions) as instruments of alienation. Her words are weapons aimed to destroy rather than persuade. She’s been compared to Chesterton, but whereas I know people who converted to Catholicism after reading Orthodoxy, I doubt Coulter opens very many hearts and minds.
October 11th, 2007 at 7:53 pm
To think that anything Ann Coulter said will some how enlarge anti-Christian thought , or show her to be anti Jew is laughable. No it’s stupid, and reveals your total lack of scriptural understanding.
Anti-Christian thinking permeates this nation, and it is becoming bolder every year.
If Christians today presented their faith the way it was presented in the first century non-Christians would go absolutely bananas.
Why was Paul so hated by the Jews? Because he made it clear that Jesus of Nazareth was the Christ and the fulfillment of
every Jewish promise. Yet Paul loved the Jews so much he could wish to be separated from Christ for their sakes.
What did Christ Himself say? He who has the Son has Life, but he who has not the Son shall not see Life, but the wrath of God abides on him. Pretty isolationist.
If that was preached with conviction from Christian pulpits today anti-Christians would be running for the nearest lamp post with a rope in their hands looking for the first Christian they could grab..
Anchoress you are living in a fog.
October 11th, 2007 at 9:18 pm
I’m a big Coulter fan (as I am also a big Anchoress fan)…for many of the same reasons. Smart, articulate and humorous women are a wonder to me.
But politics and the related fight over our core values has become something of a bloodsport. And we certainly need warriors who can draw blood and do it with a deft touch. It is impossible to be flawless as you do it, but she has a winning record in my book.
I thank God for her strong voice, just as I do yours.
October 11th, 2007 at 10:14 pm
Oh jeez we are in an existential battle with a corrupt 7th century religion and Coulter says that she is a perfect Jew. Horrors…
Whats next we accuse her of being a Nazi?
I didn’t get a harrumph from that guy.
The media war is the most important war out there and she alienates the one area up for grabs - the center. She sells a lot of books and sucks a lot of air time, but if you want actually to win the war of public opinion, to persuade people who are not on your side or wavering, she’s toxic.
Oddly enough that is not how the left has nearly won this battle of ideas…I mean they haven’t been nice kumbaya sort of folks. They have ripped out throats and stepped on the remains…seems to have worked well enough for them that we are now facing a dynasty of Clinton, Reid, Pelosi…more left wing folks you cannot find and bomb throwers one and all.
But lets continue being nice after all see what it got President Bush with the Democrats.
And I want to add they have nearly reached dynasty stage with ideas that most people find wrong…neat trick. Man, being mean never works.
October 11th, 2007 at 10:44 pm
Of course a Christian would see Christianity as a refinement of Judaism — otherwise, why remain a Christian? I don’t know as I would have put it as Ann Coulter did — but then I am not she.
Nor would I have put it as Benedict XVI did last July that other Christian denominations are not true churches. But he’s the Pope, and I am a Baptist. If Joseph Alois Ratzinger didn’t really believe as such, he wouldn’t be the lead shepherd of the Roman Catholic (from the Latin for “universal”) Church, now would he?
(And while we’re at it, what have you got against German Shepherds anyhow? [rim shot])
Coulter is no less a performance artist than Lenny Bruce or Richard Pryor, only she’s a she and a blonde. [Insert blonde joke here.] In performance, Coulter is candid in an edgy way that strips off all “political correctness” — and tact — and pings on people’s “PC” shell. It grates in the way that Don Rickles’ act did, but further to the right and so close to the political jugular as to be scary.
Brinkmanship — venturing out to the edge of the limb — is part of the art, and there will be times when Coulter goes out too far and falls out of the tree. But until she takes to promoting a new Intifada, inciting a latter-day Krystalnacht, or manning a Kassam launcher (a la Jane Fonda, 1972), I am not going to over-worry about what Ann Coulter says. Rather, I am going to evaluate the opacity and porosity of my own PC shell, and enjoy watching the other turtles in the pond react to the ping.
October 11th, 2007 at 11:39 pm
I think it’s interesting that some of the same people I know who flip out when Muslims talk about converting the world are shrugging shoulders over Coulter’s remarks. As I said, she was in deep waters and has not the deftness of touch to take on the issue. AND, as I said (for those on the left who are shaking fingers at me because I seem - to them - to “only” be concerned about how Coulter’s remarks can affect the right) I invite you to re-read my post. I believe I expressed understanding and empathy for the Jewish host dealing with Coulter, and suggested that she was completely out of her depths. But by all means, pivot and attack me. That will certainly keep the waters muddied and some like it that way…on both sides.
The fact that the far right and the far left are both coming down on me makes me feel pretty good, actually.
October 11th, 2007 at 11:40 pm
I think it’s interesting that some of the same people I know who flip out when Muslims talk about converting the world are shrugging shoulders over Coulter’s remarks. As I said, she was in deep waters and has not the deftness of touch to take on the issue. AND, as I said (for those on the left who are shaking fingers at me because I seem - to them - to “only” be concerned about how Coulter’s remarks can affect the right) I invite you to re-read my post. I believe I expressed understanding and empathy for the Jewish host dealing with Coulter, and suggested that she was completely out of her depths. But by all means, pivot and attack me. That will certainly keep the waters muddied and some like it that way…on both sides.
The fact that the far right and the far left are both coming down on me makes me feel pretty good, actually.
And I’m sorry but I reject the idea that this was “performance art.” Performance artists don’t ask for a chance to clarify, which is what she did try to do…she just did it poorly.
October 12th, 2007 at 12:14 am
Friday Fly Around…
Just a couple of pieces I found interesting and thought I would share:
I wonder how this father would have felt if it were his child that was affected by the actions (or lack thereof) of this daycare center.
One parent said the center’s owners ga…
October 12th, 2007 at 5:42 am
Pierre:
Here of late the right seems bound and determined to drive people left.
This is about Coulter, not the Democrats. The fact that the right seems to think they can justify any kind of behavior by dragging the Democrats into ignores the fact that most people do not consider themselves Decmocrats or Republicans. The largest party is now Neither. And stuff like this is one of the reasonst that is the case.
October 12th, 2007 at 5:58 am
I think some are confusing lefties with Jews. She made a comment about Jews and it was unnecessary. Now, if she was skewering lefties, I wouldn’t think anything of it, because they have led us done the wrong path. I do agree there is an assault on anything Christian.
October 12th, 2007 at 6:32 am
I’m afraid I publicly disavowed Ann Coulter last year over … I forget what it was, but it was something similarly outrageous.
IMO, she’s mean-spirited. And if we don’t like that kind of character assassination, twisted logic, and cruelty from liberals we can’t tolerate it from our own either.
What’s sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander. As far as I can see, Ann Coulter is everything I can’t stand about modern liberalism, but from the conservative viewpoint. I want nothing to do with her.
Respectfully,
Brian P.
October 12th, 2007 at 6:37 am
[...] Courtesy of the Anchoress, I’ve learned that Ann Coulter has done it again, this time coming out with remarks that are going to sound anti-Semitic. Here’s what Ann said during an interview with Donny Deutsch: DEUTSCH: Christian — so we should be Christian? It would be better if we were all Christian? [...]
October 12th, 2007 at 8:43 am
Muslims talk about converting the world
There is quite a difference between Christians running the world as we have been in the West for a few years and when the Muslims run the world. For a graphic illustration take a look at the present divides. Would you want to live in Saudi Arabia, Iran, Pakistan, Indonesia?
We are comfortable with Ann saying what she did because the results of the Christians running the world are all around us. I’m good with more of that…I am uncomfortable with the Muslims running the world because of the results.
The fact that the far right and the far left are both coming down on me makes me feel pretty good, actually.
Ah yes playing the martyr is such a noble profession. You are much better when you avoid that part.
October 12th, 2007 at 8:45 am
Ann Coulter is far too intelligent to make this kind of “mistake”. I actually do know where she was going with what she said but decry absolutely the way she said it because it was insensitive, clumsy and just plain dumb.
Bear in mind, however, that every time Ann Coulter ends in this kind of kerfluffle, her book sales double! I’d hate to think she’s that cynical a huckster - but let the record show, that’s the net result, whatever her intent.
October 12th, 2007 at 10:28 am
Anchoress,
The damage done is not only not huge, but positive. The reason Coulter shocked in this instance is because people aren’t used to logical thinking on religion:
Logic:
1. What I believe is completely true, perfect, in a manner of speaking.
2. What they believe is partially true.
3. Therefore, they are imperfect.
Repeated exposure to these ideas will settle in and accustom people.
http://www.nelsonguirado.com
October 12th, 2007 at 11:05 am
Nguirado - Perhaps you will agree with me that Coulter did not manage coherence, simplicity, clarity or logic in trying to convey these ideas and that a “soundbite forum” was not the place to try to convey them?
I read something in another blog or forum - can’t remember where - and liked it very much: Christians of course join Ann Coulter in wishing that others find the fullness of life in Christ, if only they will not be repelled by the manner of invitation. That about sums it up for me.
Pierre, I’m not playing the martyr, I laughed to read that. But I think it is incredibly interesting that the right is hammering me in email for daring to step out of sync. They were alright when I defended Limbaugh (and I’m not even a fan of his) but egads, now I’ve fallen out of step! Well, I wouldn’t take that from the left and I won’t stand for it from the right, either. The fact is Christians don’t like it when Muslims say “everyone should be Muslim.” They don’t like it when atheists say “Everyone should be atheist.” If they are intelligent Christians they have to know that the rest of the world will not like hearing “Everyone should be Christian” in the sort of sloppy, incoherent way Coulter put it out there. There is no reason that secure Christians should not be empathetic and sympathetic, understanding how her message can and will be received and say “hey, we know that wasn’t said very well,” instead of carrying on and doing the exact sort of “pivot and attack” we see going on everywhere else in the world on every issue. We’re supposed to be a little better than that.
And agree with me or not, this IS red meat for the distorters on the left, so yes, there is damage done, here. The caricature of the Christian was just solidified in many minds. If you don’t mind that, hey…more power to you.
October 12th, 2007 at 11:10 am
Ann Coulter/ perfected Jew redux…
I blogged about this yesterday.
Two anti-Coulter opinions seem to be coalescing. There’s the ignorant shock of the left:
Ann Coulter sank to a new low on Thursday in her comments about Jews and Rep. Jan Schakowsky (D-Ill.) let her have it. from…
October 12th, 2007 at 11:23 am
Anchoress, I don’t get the moral equivalence of Muslim extremists using terror to achieve their goals and what Ann Coulter said. Bin Hidin’ said the war would stop when we all convert.
All she said was that a Christian world is a better world.
By comparison, isn’t that indisputably true? She was asked at the top of the interview what a perfect US would look like to her. She said it would look like NYC during the Republican Convention. “People were happy. They’re Christian. They’re tolerant. They defend America, they –”
Everything about our western culture that makes it superior to any other derives from our common experience as Christians. And Christians do not use airplanes full of innocents as lawn darts to knock over tall buildings full of innocents to force them to convert to a religion that throws rocks at women stuffed into holes in the ground to make them nice propped up, even if squirming, targets.
There’s no parallel.
……..
October 12th, 2007 at 11:23 am
That Coulter can be an ass is a given. It is fair to say she is gold medal material in the ‘I Can Be An Ass’ Olympics.
That said, had Steven Colbert said what she said, everyone would laugh.
Much as I am awed by her stupidity, she in no way deserves the cloudburst of excoriation that has descended on her.
Her words were not offensive, untoward or deliberately condescending.
She is no Richard Dawkins, as I have noted nor is she in any way exclusionary in her beliefs.
Were we able to say the same of some of her critics.
October 12th, 2007 at 11:27 am
H&I* Fires 12 OCT 2007…
Open post for those with something to share, updated through the day. New, complete posts come in below this one. Note: If trackbacking, please acknowledge this post in your post. That’s only polite. You’re advertising here, we should get an……
October 12th, 2007 at 11:44 am
[...] minds really do think alike. The Anchoress addresses the Coulter brouhaha with her usual aplomb. In Now Coulter And The Jews, she notes: I’ve written before about Ann Coulter’s untamed mouth and how she manages to weaken [...]
October 12th, 2007 at 12:04 pm
Well, I’m not going to keep repeating myself. My beef was not with what she said but the forum in which she chose to say it, which was unsuitable toward communicating her meaning clearly, and with the typically schticky way she went about it all - which will be used as a hammer. There is WAY to say things, and a way to not say them.
October 12th, 2007 at 1:30 pm
Friday Reading List and Weekend OTP…
With no further delay, today’s reading list from The Yak:
1. I do not engage in Friday catblogging (really, I don’t…) … but Pet does. We are also glad to see she’s home from the hospital and apparently out of danger….
October 12th, 2007 at 2:10 pm
Why do people keep making excuses for this woman? The only thing she cares about is promoting herself. She has done more harm than good for conservatives time and again. And I gave up defending her a long time ago. If she really cared how she sounded she would not keep saying stupid stuff.
October 12th, 2007 at 2:49 pm
When the liberals came for the Bill Oreilly,
I remained silent;
I was not a big fan of his.
When they smeared and tried to silence Rush Limbaugh,
I remained silent;
I was not a Ditto Head.
When they came for Ann Coulter,
I did not speak out;
I was often offended by Ann Coulter.
When they came for the Christians,
I remained silent;
I wasn’t a Christian.
When they came for me,
there was no one left to speak out.
October 12th, 2007 at 3:26 pm
Yes, well Coffee, that’s all very nice, except I am not remaining silent or telling Christians to remain silent…I’m telling them to put the Christian message out there in a way that is appealing, not repulsive and don’t give the haters a chance to hang their hate on a caricature of one’s own making. And, ummm…I DID defend Limbaugh (even though I am NOT a dittohead). So, kindly send that to someone who needs to read it. Thank you.
October 12th, 2007 at 3:39 pm
My grandfather used to say that God was abundantly generous.
We have all been blessed with oceans of idiots to contend with.
October 12th, 2007 at 4:22 pm
Anchoress–
I’m sorry if you took my version of a poem attributed to Pastor Martin Niemöller about the inactivity of German intellectuals following the Nazi rise to power as a swipe at you. It wasn’t meant as such. But on a more serious note and something I touched on in other venues, I’d like to discuss why I think we should defend Ann Coulter.
Let me explain why this shouldn’t offend you and why we should defend Ann Coulter against the incessant attempts by the left to shut down anybody who doesn’t agree with them (conservatives).
As you know, this episode of faux outrage and in some cases genuine outrage, is being pushed by Media Matters. The same smear outfit that targeted Bill Oreilly and Rush Limbaugh. And the same smear outfit that’s targeting Ann Coulter. The same smear organization who tried to label Bill Oreilly a racist and Rush Limbaugh anti-military. In both cases this campaign was deliberately contrived with out of context quotes from both men specifically intended to marginalize them and silence their voices. We call that a form of censorship.
Media Matters is a dishonest organization whose main mission is to be a watchdog group for Hillary Clinton and to smear those with whom she and they disagree. And the only way they will be successful is if people such as yourself can be persuaded to react to these smears.
If this attempt by Media Matters isn’t curtailed or stopped more people unwillingly will be mislead into believing their propaganda and that’s bad for conservatives and for our cause.
If they can raise the ire of enough people by misleading them into believing Oreilly is a racist and Limbaugh is anti-military they can seriously effect the debate on a number of important issues. Making their point of view the only point of view acceptable. That’s called fascism.
What should be the reaction to this made up controversy is to get to the real truth about what Ann meant and disseminate that truth. Clearly she didn’t mean anything offensive and she stated such in the interview in question.
If you think Media Matters and liberals in general will stop at trying to censor Ann Coulter, Bill Oreilly, and Rush Limbaugh, you are sadly mistaken. If and when Judaism clashes with their agenda, whatever agenda that may be, than Judaism and it’s leadership will be the next target they zero in on.
So if we let this smear organization set the boundaries of what’s offensive and what isn’t the next target could very well be you.
When the liberals came for Bill Oreilly,
I remained silent;
I was not a big fan of his.
When they smeared and tried to silence Rush Limbaugh,
I remained silent;
I was not a Ditto Head.
When they came for Ann Coulter,
I did not speak out;
I was often offended by Ann Coulter.
When they came for the Christians,
I remained silent;
I wasn’t a Christian.
When they came for me,
there was no one left to speak out.
October 12th, 2007 at 4:32 pm
coffee:
Liberals? The liberals are not coming after Coulter. Coulter makes tons of money off liberals. It is the right she hurts.
October 12th, 2007 at 5:46 pm
Thank you, coffee, I was aware of the origins of your take-off in the last post, and I wasn’t offended by what you wrote as much as by the idea so many seem to be presenting that if Christian bobbles the ball, we’re supposed to pretend it did not happen.
I have no particular liking for Media Matters, but the truth is the truth, even if something originates with them. The fact is Coulter still spoke badly, in a venue inhospitable to such fumbling, and it still reflects badly on Christians and the right and makes everything that much more difficult. You will not, I am sorry to say, persuade me by discussing the relative “evils” of Media Matters. Whether they are “good” or “bad” is quite beside the point. If Christians know that there are lions in the den, they had best start learning how to STOP FEEDING THEM.
October 12th, 2007 at 5:57 pm
Terrye–
With regard to the liberals not going after Ann Coulter; I beg to differ. Media Matters isn’t exactly a group of closeted neocons. Media Matters, not Ann Coulter, should be the target of your ire.
I’ve heard and read all the arguments about how Ann is harmful to conservatives. I don’t buy it. And until someone can produce something other than indignant NRO wannabes and show me some real data on how Ann hurts conservatives I’ll take a pass on that bandwagon.
October 12th, 2007 at 6:44 pm
Anchoress–
I see your point. Also you wrote, “If Christians know that there are lions in the den, they had best start learning how to STOP FEEDING THEM.”
When aren’t Christians in the lions den lately?
Sure Ann may be offensive. But when you preemptively start censoring yourself because you don’t know what’s deemed offensive “lions food,” everything, pretty soon, becomes “lions food.”
October 12th, 2007 at 6:51 pm
“Yes, well Coffee, that’s all very nice, except I am not remaining silent or telling Christians to remain silent…I’m telling them to put the Christian message out there in a way that is appealing, not repulsive and don’t give the haters a chance to hang their hate on a caricature of one’s own making.”
Fruitless endeavour, that. The “haters” are not going to be deterred by kind words or neutered explanations of doctrine scripted to avoid giving offense to this, that, or the other flavour of minority group, and anyone else who might have been intrigued will likely be driven off by the lack of spine.
October 12th, 2007 at 7:10 pm
This is not about “silencing ourselves” or censoring ourselves to make nice, coffee - when have I ever advocated that? It’s about COMPORTING OURSELVES in a manner that is pleasing to God and respectful of our fellow humans - not lashing out, not puffing up, not speaking the faith stupidly, clumsily or in ways calculated to garner attention but do little else. A soft answer turneth away wrath.
It’s not about shutting up so as not to “feed the lions” but about speaking the truth in such a way that they have no reason to bare their fangs. And Templar, it is not true that haters cannot be deterred by kind words (and I never suggested neutering anything). To suggest that kindness and clarity, patience and civility cannot work with haters is to both devalue the fellow human you’re dealing with and completely ignore how we are charged to behave - “love the Lord with all your heart…and your neighbor as yourself.” I know that “haters” can be reasoned with because I’ve seen it happen. It’s tougher to see on the internet - there are so many avenues to walk down and peer into, and so many of them are full of distrust and hate - on all sides - but the truth is that the “soft answer turneth away wrath” and Ms. Coulter could have done much better for herself and the rest of us if she’d dropped the “schtick.”
I know Christians have a good deal to be distrustful and angry about with the world. But it’s the world we have…if we want to make it better, we have to DO BETTER than Ms. Coulter did.
October 12th, 2007 at 7:15 pm
[...] Now Coulter and the Jews? - UPDATED [...]
October 12th, 2007 at 7:48 pm
Anchoress:
Now that you put it so brilliantly and with such eloquent panache, how can I disagree?
October 12th, 2007 at 7:57 pm
Heh, I’m not at all brilliant, barely smart, and I have almost no panache (see my remarks several days about about my ‘vulgar deathless pearls’) but I frankly would be happy to see this subject run its course!
October 13th, 2007 at 2:11 am
In #26 TheAnchoress wrote:
“The fact is Christians don’t like it when Muslims say ‘everyone should be Muslim.’ They don’t like it when atheists say ‘Everyone should be atheist.’”
Whereas the latter is somewhat like “Everybody should be tone-deaf,” or “Everybody should be color-blind,” it matters little.
But there’s a subtle and dare I say sinister difference about the former. Because the Islamist does not presume to say “Everyone should BE Muslim”, but rather “Everyone is BORN Muslim.”
As Sheik Yusuf Estes, National Chaplain of Islam Tomorrow.com (Alexandria, VA), writes:
“Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him, said: ‘Every child is born on the fitrah (natural inclination) of Islam (surrender, submission and peace to the Creator on His Terms). And it is their parents who raise them up to be Jews, Christians or fire worshippers.’
“Instead of thinking in terms of ‘converting’ people over to Islam, it is better understood that they are simply returning back to their natural state at birth…”
That’s not presumption, that’s pre-emption.
With this as the point of departure (in lieu of Original Sin, tabla rasa, and/or “created equal [and] endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights”) it’s not so much of a leap to see that each encountered infidel must accept the “invitation” to “revert” else submit to subjugation as a dhimmi (slave) or be slain prima facie as an unrepentant apostate.
It doesn’t take a Christian to not like that.
-30-
October 13th, 2007 at 9:31 am
I guess I have to disagree with you on this one Anchoress.
Do I think Coulter’s remarks were unfortunate? Yes, it would have been better to have been more low keyed. But then I’m looking at it with the gift of “hindsight”.(Given my knowledge today, I probably would not have supported going to Iraq in 2003. But given my knowledge then, it was still the right decision.)
I suspect Coulter would have modified her remarks if she could turn back the clock. But she can’t. And I remember Larry Summers or George Allen trying to clarify their answers. It was just more “Chum” in the water for the sharks.
We armchair critics have to be careful of asking ourselves, given the information available at that time, would we have made the same choices. I can see where she may have been trying to “kid” with her host, not realizing how dense he was.(Do I get offended when the Mormons want to convert me? No. Do I get offended when the Muzzies want to convert me? Yes The difference- one will attempt it by FORCE) Again this is my view with my prejudices. I like listening to Dennis Prager on the radio, and he seems to agree it was not anti-Semitic. If you have the time, about 20-30 minutes, here is a link to Friday’s first hour broadcast. I guess I will trust that a dedicated Jew, has a better flavor of what is anti-Semitic than I do.
Anyway, I enjoy your thoughts about 95% of the time.
http://www.townhall.com/talkradio/show.aspx?radioshowid=3
Prager H1: … Ann Coulter says she’d like to the country to be Christian and she’s accused on being an anti-Semite. Two stories today, two examples of liberal hysteria.
October 13th, 2007 at 9:47 am
Uncle Ralph:
What has that got to do with what Coulter said?
Tell me, when the bible says suffer not a witch to live, does that justify homicide? I don’t think so.
But it is in the bible.
October 13th, 2007 at 10:37 am
“This is not about “silencing ourselves” or censoring ourselves to make nice, coffee - when have I ever advocated that?”
In the previous post I referenced? That’s what I got out of it, essentially, whether that was your intent or not.
“It’s about COMPORTING OURSELVES in a manner that is pleasing to God and respectful of our fellow humans - not lashing out, not puffing up, not speaking the faith stupidly, clumsily or in ways calculated to garner attention but do little else.”
I’m not convinced that the manner of comportment you seem to be suggesting is by definition one pleasing to God, or that Coulter’s was a case of “puffing up”, or “speaking the faith stupidly.”
“A soft answer turneth away wrath.”
“Reason is always a kind of brute force; those who appeal to the head rather than the heart, however pallid and polite, are necessarily men of violence. We speak of ‘touching’ a man’s heart, but we can do nothing to his head but hit it.”
“It’s not about shutting up so as not to “feed the lions” but about speaking the truth in such a way that they have no reason to bare their fangs.”
Again, that’s rather a waste of effort when the fangs were bared sometime ago, and have since remained in that posture.
“And Templar, it is not true that haters cannot be deterred by kind words (and I never suggested neutering anything). To suggest that kindness and clarity, patience and civility cannot work with haters is to both devalue the fellow human you’re dealing with and completely ignore how we are charged to behave - “love the Lord with all your heart…and your neighbor as yourself.” I know that “haters” can be reasoned with because I’ve seen it happen.”
With all due respect, you’re wrong. If one is willing to be reasoned with, one is not a hater. A person who’s been moved to the point where they’re willing to make an investigation of the faith out of genuine interest is not going to be deterred by harsh words; anyone who could be would lack the necessary conviction to be faithful.
“It’s tougher to see on the internet - there are so many avenues to walk down and peer into, and so many of them are full of distrust and hate - on all sides - but the truth is that the “soft answer turneth away wrath” and Ms. Coulter could have done much better for herself and the rest of us if she’d dropped the “schtick.””
Again, I have to disagree. If a simple statement of fact courts wrath, then so be it. There’s no reason to further encourage hypersensitivity in our society.
October 13th, 2007 at 1:10 pm
Nor is there any reason to further roughen discourse.
October 13th, 2007 at 3:43 pm
It will only get worse before it gets better.
October 13th, 2007 at 11:52 pm
In #50, Terrye wrote:
“Uncle Ralph:
What has that got to do with what Coulter said?”
Nothing. As indicated by the first two lines of my comment (#48), it has to do with what The Anchoress wrote about what Coulter said.
In #50, Terrye continued:
“Tell me, when the [B]ible says suffer not a witch to live, does that justify homicide? I don’t think so.
“But it is in the [B]ible.”
Yes indeed it is, in Exodus 22:18. So is Samuel’s meeting with the Witch of Endor (1 Samuel 28:7-25). If you ever meet her like, you might find that what you think and what the Bible portrays is, well, different.
The last time anybody thought they’d seen a witch, and officially did anything about it, was 1692 in Salem — and they were wrong in their suspicions. Indeed, John Wesley wrote in his “Explanatory Notes on the Whole Bible” (1754-1765): “We believe, no witch ever did live! At least, not for these thousand years.”
Of course, none of this has anything to do with what Coulter said, nor what The Anchoress wrote about what Coulter said. Rather it has to do with what you wrote about what I wrote about what The Anchoress wrote about what Coulter said.
I hope I have answered to your satisfaction.
October 14th, 2007 at 12:20 am
O.T.
To Templar:
Are you a traveling man? It may please you to know that “Processus contra Templarios”, a book that will be released by the Vatican’s Secret Archive on 25 October, reportedly exonerates the Knights Templar and Jacques de Molay (burned at the stake in 1314 by King Philip IV of France) of heresy. Someone there at the Vatican misfiled the putative trial record, the Chinon parchment, sometime in the 17th century and it was not discovered until about six years ago. Better late than never, I suppose.
October 14th, 2007 at 2:41 pm
A general rule of thumb: when comments start veering off in to other spheres, the conversation has pretty much run it’s course; that’s when I close the comments.
October 14th, 2007 at 7:06 pm
[...] Ann Coulter opened her mouth again. I think she needs a long vacation. [...]
October 16th, 2007 at 12:19 pm
[...] The Anchoress took it a little further Coulter obviously did NOT say Jews should be wiped off the planet, that was her host’s interpretation and the left, of course, will run with it. I don’t think she is an anti-semite at all, she is simply trying to express an idea, and doing it very badly, in an environment that is not going to help her do it better. [...]
November 1st, 2007 at 1:02 pm
[...] thee to a Nunnery! The Anchoress gets into a wonderful tussle with Ann Coulter apologists, who’ve dismissed her recent interview on Judaism with a shug and [...]