The National Jewish Democratic Council (NJDC) called on media to stop inviting Ann Coulter as a guest commentator and strongly condemned her comments that Jews should be "perfected" by accepting the New Testament and that America would be better off if Judaism were "thrown away" and all Americans were Christian.
"While Ann Coulter has freedom of speech, news outlets should exercise their freedom to use better judgment," said NJDC Executive Director Ira N. Forman. "Just as media outlets don't invite those who believe that Martians walk the earth to frequently comment on science stories, it's time they stop inviting Ann Coulter to comment on politics."
Media Matters for America has a complete transcript of Coulter's comments -- and video -- available here.
Similarly, Justice Antonin Scalia turned history on its head several years ago when he attended an Orthodox synagogue in New York and claimed that the Founders intended for their Christianity to play a part in government. Scalia then went so far as to suggest that the reason Hitler was able to initiate the Holocaust was because of German separation of church and state.
The Associated Press reported on November 23, 2004, "In the synagogue that is home to America's oldest Jewish congregation, he [Scalia] noted that in Europe, religion-neutral leaders almost never publicly use the word 'God.'"
"Did it turn out that," Scalia asked rhetorically, "by reason of the separation of church and state, the Jews were safer in Europe than they were in the United States of America?" He then answered himself, saying, "I don't think so."
Justice Scalia and Ann Coulter may well benefit from looking back at the photographs that came out of Germany that were all over the newspapers and news magazines at war's end. The photos that can be seen, for instance, at www.nobeliefs.com/nazis.htm of the Catholic Bishops giving the collective Nazi salute. The annual April 20th celebration, declared by Pope Pius XII, of Hitler's birthday. The belt buckles of the German army, which declared "Gott Mit Uns" ("God is with us"). The pictures of the 1933 investiture of Bishop Ludwig Müller, the official Bishop of the 1000-Years-Of-Peace Nazi Reich. That last photo should be the most problematic for Ann Coulter and Justice Scalia, because Hitler had done exactly what Scalia is recommending - he merged church and state.
Which brings up one of the main reasons - almost always overlooked by modern-day commentators, both left and right - that the Founders and Framers were so careful to separate church and state: They didn't want religion to be corrupted by government.
Many of the Founders were people of faith, and even the Deists like Franklin, Washington, and Jefferson were deeply touched by what Franklin called "The Mystery." And they'd seen how badly religious bodies became corrupted when churches acquired power through affiliation with or participation in government.
The Puritans, for example, passed a law in Plymouth Colony in 1658 that said, "No Quaker Rantor or any other such corrupt person shall be a freeman in this Corporation [the state of Massachusetts]." Puritans banned Quakers from Massachusetts under pain of death, and, as Norman Cousins notes in his book about the faith of the Founders, In God We Trust, "And when Quakers persisted in returning [to Massachusetts] in defiance of law, and in practicing their religious faith, the Puritans made good the threat of death; Quaker women were burned at the stake."
Quakers were also officially banned from Virginia prior to the introduction of the First Amendment to our Constitution. Cousins notes: "Quakers who fled from England were warned against landing on Virginia shores. In fact, the captains of sailing ships were put on notice that they would be severely fined. Any Quaker who was discovered inside the state was fined without bail."
Throughout most of the 1700s in Virginia, a citizen could be imprisoned for life for saying that there was no god, or that the Bible wasn't inerrant. "Little wonder," notes Cousins, "that Virginians like Washington, Jefferson, and Madison believed the situation to be intolerable."
Even the oppressed Quakers got into the act in the 1700s. They finally found a haven in Pennsylvania, where they infiltrated government and promptly passed a law that levied harsh fines on any person who didn't show up for church on Sunday or couldn't "prove" that s/he was home reading scripture on that holy day.
Certainly the Founders wanted to protect government from being hijacked by the religious, as I noted in a previous article that quotes Jefferson on this topic. But several of them were even more concerned that the churches themselves would be corrupted by the lure of government's easy access to money and power.
Religious leaders in the Founders' day, in defense of church/state cooperation, pointed out that for centuries kings and queens in England had said that if the state didn't support the church, the church would eventually wither and die.
James Madison flatly rejected this argument, noting in a July 10, 1822 letter to Edward Livingston: "We are teaching the world the great truth, that Governments do better without kings and nobles than with them. The merit will be doubled by the other lesson: the Religion flourishes in greater purity without, than with the aid of Government."
He added in that same letter, "I have no doubt that every new example will succeed, as every past one has done, in showing that religion and Government will both exist in greater purity the less they are mixed together."
Madison even objected to government giving money to churches to care for the poor. It would be the beginning of a dangerous mixture, he believed - dangerous both to government and churches alike. Thus, on February 21, 1811, President James Madison vetoed a bill passed by Congress that authorized government payments to a church in Washington, DC to help the poor.
In Madison's mind, caring for the poor was a public and civic duty - a function of government - and must not be allowed to become a hole through which churches could reach and seize political power or the taxpayer's purse. Funding a church to provide for the poor would establish a "legal agency" - a legal precedent - that would break down the wall of separation the founders had put between church and state to protect Americans from religious zealots gaining political power.
Thus, Madison said in his veto message to Congress, he was striking down the proposed law, "Because the bill vests and said incorporated church an also authority to provide for the support of the poor, and the education of poor children of the same;..." which, Madison said, "would be a precedent for giving to religious societies, as such, a legal agency in carrying into effect a public and civil duty."
Yet now, in 2007, the religious appear to be on the verge of both corrupting government and being corrupted themselves by the power and influence government can wield.
For example, as Reverend Moon has moved more and more into the political realm - from funding activities of both George H.W. Bush and his son George W. Bush, to funding the money-losing but politically activist Washington Times newspaper, to financially bailing out Jerry Falwell, to setting up numerous charities that now ask for federal funding - we see an increasing and ominous participation of legislators and Moonies. Moon, for example, was crowned by several members of Congress in the Senate Dirksen Office building on March 23, 2004. As the Washington Post noted in a July 21 story by Charles Babington, Moon himself proclaimed to our elected representatives attending the ceremony, "Emperors, kings and presidents . . . have declared to all Heaven and Earth that Reverend Sun Myung Moon is none other than humanity's Savior, Messiah, Returning Lord and True Parent."
Others, like Robertson, who want to use the money and power of government to promote their religious agendas, are making rapid inroads with George W. Bush's so-called "faith-based initiatives," which shift money from government programs for the poor and needy to churches and religious groups.
In some distant place, Adolf Hitler and Bishop Müller must be smiling at Ann Coulter and Justice Scalia's encouragement of the growing conflation of church and state in America. It's exactly what they worked so hard to achieve, and what helped make their horrors possible.
And Thomas Jefferson and James Madison must have tears in their eyes.
Thom Hartmann is a Project Censored Award-winning New York Times best-selling author, and host of a nationally syndicated daily progressive talk program on the Air America Radio Network. www.thomhartmann.com His most recent books are "The Last Hours of Ancient Sunlight," "Unequal Protection: The Rise of Corporate Dominance and the Theft of Human Rights," "We The People: A Call To Take Back America," "What Would Jefferson Do?," "Screwed: The Undeclared War Against the Middle Class and What We Can Do About It," and "Cracking The Code: The Art and Science of Political Persuasion."
Delicious
Digg
StumbleUpon
Newsvine
Facebook
Google
Yahoo
Technorati
75 Comments so far
Show AllIf Coulter turns out to be ethnicly Jewish, it would not surprise me. I believe Hitler was as well. There is a group of Evangelical Christians called Messianic Jews, who believe that their fellow Jews need to convert to American Evangelicalism and work towards that ends. That said, I don't believe that is the only way Christianity can relate with Judaism.
Some Christians ascribe to a Henotheistic approach to religion as hinted at by some of the posts here. They have their religion and Jews have a separate religion. I personally believe that in order to understand and ascribe to a religious system like Christ, you need to understand that he was a first century Jew, not an American Evangelical. This suggests to me, although not to the level where I believe conversion to Judaism is necessary, that a Christian should seek to find harmony with their Jewish heritage and become enlightened as to how Judaism still influences Christianity today.
I don't believe that we should have radically individualistic spirituality. Churches are an expression of a common desire to connect with the divine and find meaning in our lives. By participating in that common fellowship, we both reinforce that desire and search for meaning and help to mitigate radical tendencies in ourselves. No religious belief system truly exists in a vacuum. We learn values from our parents and other teachers, and we desire to pass those values on to our children. Churches is one way that these values passed from generation to generation.
Although at times, churches can become complicit with the crimes in our society, the German Evangelical church supporting Hitler or the Southern Baptists supporting the present war for example, they provide the means to express common values and critique those same crimes. The traditional stance of Just War provides standards that declare the actions of both these governments as immoral. The fact that the first 400 years of Christian history was dominated by pacifism provides another avenue of critique. Historically, most pacifist expressions and liberal activists have not come from atheists and agnostics outside the church, but from people finding justification and incentive from the religious tradition. Karl Barth and Dietrich Bonhoeffer critiqued Hitler from inside the Christian tradition. Just last week, two leaders in the United Church of Christ were arrested doing civil disobedience against this war. The Catholic and Methodist leadership have been especially critical of President Bush and his disregard for traditional stances of immorality. Nondenominational churches are the closest religious expression of individual freedom that previous commentators would prefer and yet they are expressive not of rational consideration of issues, but nearly universally the source of pro-war, anti-minority, anti-poor sympathies. The institutional church is still needed and I believe always will be.
First They Came for the ...
First they came for the Japanese
and I did not speak out
because I was not a Japanese.
Then they came for the Communists
and I did not speak out
because I was not a Communist.
Then they came for the Muslims
and I did not speak out
because I was not a Muslims.
Then they came for me
and there was no one left
to speak out for me.
Not Pastor Martin Niemöller
This is the original
First They Came for the ...
First they came for the Jews
and I did not speak out
because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for the Communists
and I did not speak out
because I was not a Communist.
Then they came for the trade unionists
and I did not speak out
because I was not a trade unionist.
Then they came for me
and there was no one left
to speak out for me.
Pastor Martin Niemöller
I cannot but smirk when many in the media defended her right to berate Islam and Muslims under the guise of "free speech". All of a sudden the "free speech" becomes "hate speech" when directed at faiths other than Islam.
Render unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's, and unto God the things that are God's.
And hope that Caeser doesn't want too much.
umlaut, i'll take that bet. why do you think she is so uptight and frustrated. she could use a little, to take the edge off. any volunteers? i would, but i have a weak stomach.
"Just as media outlets don't invite those who believe that Martians walk the earth to frequently comment on science stories, it's time they stop inviting Ann Coulter to comment on politics."
Well said!!!!!
That being said, I find it a guilty pleasure watching her and folks like Tucker Carlson imploding on the screen.
Put her on Flavor of Love or something but agreed, keep her off anything called news. I guess FOX doesn't technically qualify but should.
P.S. 1000 bucks says she's not celibate and calls herself an unmarried Christian. Love to see her sort that one out in a televised interview.
Those pictures of clergy giving the nazi salute and fraternizing with the nazis is NO different than the clergy today doing likewise with the criminal in the white house.
quite frankly, i could give a shit what any religion has to say. who gave them moral superiority? any religion of more than one is a conspiracy. the sooner we grow up, and keep our beliefs personal, the sooner we will become a civilized society. there has been more violence in the name of one religion, or the other, than any other reason in the history of mankind. and they call themselves loving. it's all about power and control. lets get real here. if there was a god, she would not endorse any of them.
".....Coulter's comments may be shocking and repulsive, but let's face it: all she did was accurately espouse Christian theology. Like it or not, Christians DO believe that Jews cannot be saved until they accept Jesus as the savior. Of course, most of the prominent ones are too polite to mention it."
This is just nonsense. Whoever wrote this makes a blanket statement that Christians do believe this crap. And I'd agree that most do. BUT, not all. Don't make sweeping generalizations please. There are plenty of Christians and Christian churches who accept that the pure in heart of any religion or no religion will be 'saved.'
Coulter is an opportunist, and I can only hope the media heed the request of the Jewish group and stop providing her a platform..
Scalia - he's just an idiot who truly is not qualified to be on the Supreme Court.. He is an embarrassment to this country.
sorry to admit I haven't read each comment, but it may interest you that Coulter is a
member of the Jewish tribe.
At least according to Donnie Duetch & Wolf Blitzer.
Does that change the perspective for any of you?
Since Ann Coulter is an example of a Christian "perfected," I'm ever thankful that I choose to worship at the alter of reason and logic.
i love it that coulter said that. the jewish organizations that were fine with slamming muslims as islamofascists richly deserve this turn of events. they would still love her if she would be hateful only about muslims.
those jewish organizations and coulter so deserve one another.
but i wonder how long until she becomes persona non grata. saying antisemitic stuff is not going to be the walk in the park that saying islamophobic stuff is.
No one mentioned the Israeli government, set up constitutionally along racial / religious grounds, to only give full citizenship rights to those of jewish heritage. The failure to prevent this sort of thing happening at the outset, has lead directly to the problems of today, where the Palestinians reside in concentration camps. Any religious or racial group, which gets its hands on government power, can be relied upon to serve their own interests at the expense of everyone not in the group. Ultimately this leads to extremism of the hate-religious kind, as the government becomes controlled by obsessive nuts, and brings on conflict with the have-nots. If such self-isolating groups don't learn to share and get along with others, it all ends in tears.
Like Reinquist after his death we learn he was a complete drug addict, Scalia's dark secrets will come out but that will be a long time coming.
quark, good luck with that one. these guys take care of their own.
Is there any legal leverage against a Supreme Court Justice who takes a stand against the Constitution he has sworn to uphold?
Ann Coulter did not create all that hate, she uses it as a tool to further another agenda. When she writes another hate book that ignorant people actually believe, there are wealthy right leaning groups that buy large quantities of them and give them away for free. They too have a vested interest in keeping up division and fear, ok hate because it is a good business. It is about power and money.
getting rid of the electoral college would be a good start. also the primarys. one man, one vote for president.
How many Democrats voted for Scalia as Justice of the Supreme Court? Did any Democrat senator on the Senate Judiciary Committee or Democrat representative on the House Judiciary Committee rake Scalia over the coals for what he is-a bigot? Or did none of those Democrats do any research on Scalia's behavior, speeches, & judicial decisions?
Will Democrats ever wake up? Will the people who vote for them ever wake up?
It's time for a two-party system in the U.S. Even better-proportional representation, as is done in democracies.
If you don't know what proportional representation is, look it up on your computer. Remember, republicrats don't want other parties infringing on their lock on the so-called electoral, winner-take-all process. Time for change. Look at all the corporate money behind Hillary, or whoever the Democrat candidate has been, or will be. That's right-the same money that's behind Repugs. Just as a minor example-Steven Spielberg gave $50,000 to the Republicans, and $50,000 to the Democrats, in a recent election. Do people or corporations like him have principles? Of course not. Big money just covers all bets. They aren't stupid.
When in doubt, "follow the money," as they used to say, as I recall, during the House Judiciary Committee Watergate hearings.
"We have to embody much more dignity than those we despise, because in the end it will conquer fear and win over support for the true way forward"
So, the Germans who fled Hitler shouldn't have said ugly things about Goebbels and Himmler or they would have become like Goebbels and Himmler?
when i think of people like her, limbaugh, bush, cheney, pat robertson and jerry fallwell, you can put me in the hate mongerers camp.
I don't know how anybody can even take her seriously, she has no credibility about anything other than spewing at the mouth.
As much as we condemn Coulter's outlandish statements, we need to be careful about attacking her too much. None of us are perfect, and by sending too many hate messages back we become the very thing we despise.
So, just a caution in general. Condemn. But don't become a hate-mongerer yourself. We have to embody much more dignity than those we despise, because in the end it will conquer fear and win over support for the true way forward.
Peace, love, and relentless courage...
Another set of outrageous comments by Coulter has folks up in a storm which is exactly what this cretin wants. With this latest comment concerning "perfected" Jews, Coulter puts on display her massive ignorance of history and facts! Now we see that Scalia (for all his status and law degrees) is just as ignorant.
Jews have suffered mightly at the hands of "Christians" ever since Constantine in 312 had a vision of a cross in the sky at the Tiber River. Why any Jew would wish to align themselves under Christianity is beyond me. A protection? I don't think so when one considers how they were slaughtered by Crusaders crossing Europe on their way to the holy land to slaughter the Muslims. They were the targets of the Spanish Inquisition with many forced to convert (become "perfected") and later killed because they were suspected of secret non-conversion activities.
Driven from Spain by a decree from Queen Isabella in 1492 (we only remember that date as Columbus and his epic voyage)they arrived in Rome tattered, sick and many near death. Later the Church established the first ghetto in the Trastevere area in Rome. Under terrible conditions, the Jews of Rome existed in that ghetto for over 300 years until Napoleon closed it.
History is repleat with continual periods of battering of the Jews at the hands of Christians and the Christians are not to be trusted. I fear anti-semitism is again rearing its ugly head in the U.S. Remember when Jews could not belong to country clubs, reside in certain areas of a city, attend certain universities and were discriminated against in the workplace? Read a little history, folks, and understand the suffering Jews have endured at "Christian" hands. What the fool Coulter is advocating is a return to the exact same things which lead to their long history of subjugation and the "final solution" carried out by "Christian" Germany.
Just as the above article points out, giving religion/churches political control is a prescription for loss of every freedom we cherish. We need to be watchful!
What Coulter is babbling does not come under Freedom of Speech, but advocacy for murder. From now on, write the sponsors of every station she is on and condemn their sponsorship of discrimination, hate and murder. She's a dangerous ignoramus who needs to be called out and exposed.
Ann Coulter has a long record of hate speech against a slew of groups of people, including liberals and Muslims. Then again, the same could be said about a large number of conservative/religious right personalities, that include Pat Robertson, John Hagee and Glenn Beck. The striking thing about hate speech against minorities in the US is that hate speech against Muslims, Arabs, Hispanics and liberals is conveniently sugarcoated as free speech while even the mildest criticism of Israel is lumped into the same catagories as Nazism by accusations of anti Semitism.
The nice thing is that with this attack on Jews Ann Coulter may finally have convinced people that she is not worth taking seriously.
Middle Ground I agree. I pointed out in my post that Coulter said Jews were "better off" in Christian countries that this was actually a stab at the Muslim countries. She was hating on both groups and I am glad to see that their is widespread outrage regarding her anti-semitism directed at Jews but where's the outrage at her comments directed against Muslims also here? There are still Jewish communities in Muslim countries and traditionally in places like Islamic Spain and Morocco Jews thrived under Muslim rule in comparison to their Christian European counterparts at the time.
Do you think Ann Coulter ever read the "Sermon on the Mount" in the New Testament?
pastor,
Thanks for your thoughtful comments. You have earned my sympathy and my support.
I was raised in a mainline church (Methodist), and I also spent some errant time later in what they now call a "mega-church". One of the significant differences I learned is that many of the independent "mega-churches" (though holding non-profit stax status and having weak boards of yes-men) are actually preaching businesses owned and controlled by their founders. This is the reason why we often see sons following their (founder) fathers in the control position, such as Richard Roberts following Oral Roberts at the Oral Roberts Ministries and University.
I've heard we now have 1200 mega-churches in the USA, some denominational, many not. They are, indeed, political forces, and in ways not intended by the spirit of laws passed for tax-exempt organizations.
None of this, though, is reason, to me, to abandon faith in Christ. It is reason, rather, to work to make his teachings come true. With or without a church.
A week ago, I read discussion about how Debra Kagan was too severe looking to say worthy opinions. Now, I read how Ann Coulter is too attractive to say the same. I thought this was a site that brought in people of feminist sympathies, who would not judge a woman based on her appearance. Let's get over the unsubstantial name calling of these ladies and get to the substance of why we really hate them. They are idiots, pure and simple, not whores, not drag queens, and not dominatrices. As someone who is friend to many transgender people, I am offended that that category could be associated with the Republican party. Transgender people are better than Debra Kagan or Ann Coulter.
I found it shocking to discover that Jerry Falwell was associated with the Moonies. I grew up in an Independent Fundamentalist church that revered Falwell, but considered the Moonies to be evil incarnate. It is ironic how swiftly the conservative groups lose their "moral pinciples" when someone offers them money.
I believe the corruption of American religion by its association with politics is already happening. Liberal churches are under direct attack from those who wish to turn all churches into Fundamentalist Republican campaign centers. The Institue on Religion and Democracy is training people to find wedge issues, particularly homosexuality, to break apart the mainline churches and destroy them. My predecessor was an active pro-choice campaigner and the local paper ran an editorial criticizing him and other ministers for supporting the pro-choice position, because it denied "separation of church and state," even though most of these people did this with their own funds not on church property. Ironically, a couple of churches in town advertized on church property their opposition to abortion and there was no comment about people who were pro-life. Ministers are allowed to preach as vehemently as they like on issues that are politically right, but a minister who even THINKS in favor of issues that are politically left takes his job, his career and his life in his hands. Liberal churches that have speakers or organize for political causes are threatened with the loss of their non-profit tax status, while conservative churches are ignored. Already, many left leaning people feel like they can not participate in the church.
This deeply saddens me, because it was the Bible that taught me my Liberal values. The Old Testament as much as the New Testament tells people to be concerned for the poor; the orphan, the widow, and the stranger. The Old Testament criticizes the Empires and their greed for wealth, power, and control. It also speaks of love and mercy. The New Testament struggles with the issue of living faithfully in a world corrupted by Imperial domination and economic suppression.
I urge and pray that you who read these comments and are sympathetic to my views remain active in your local churches. They are under attack and if we give them up to the Republican party, we will give them the single best political means to organize that ever existed. They do not have to threaten and oppress with guns, if they have eternal damnation on their side. We, ministers, need your support.
mr. duncan, please do not disrespect the easter bunny.
any time this piece of slime has a new book to sell, she comes out with some outragious piece of hateful bullshit... guess what?
I heartily agree with middleground.
Where was the NJDC, and all the other organizations when Coulter was smearing gays, muslims, etc.???
If you wait until only your own group is targeted, injustice
gains a foothold.
I guess we most agree how much of a rude person Coulter is. What pains me is that there was no uproar when she insulted Muslims. As someone wrote here, the interviewer expected her to insult Islam instead ... It is perhaps naive to expect Jewish organizations to stand up for the defense of Muslims in these circumstances but at least it is reasonable to expect that they stand up for the defense of human decency whether jews are involved or not.
"With all due respect to those dear people, my friend, God Almighty does not hear the prayer of a Jew." (from above)
What was left out, of course, is that God is too busy playing checkers with the Easter Bunny to hear any prayers whatsoever.
re Ann Coulter: "...her comments that Jews should be "perfected" by accepting the New Testament and that America would be better off if Judaism were "thrown away" and all Americans were Christian."
Snort! Coughs! How do the words 'Ann Coulter' and 'Christian' sit side by side here? The one is diametrically opposed to the other, they are complete opposites! What on earth has Anaconda Vulture got in common with Christ? ...er... they both have two legs, two arms, and a head, - but that's about it.
A key difference between them is that Christ has a functioning HEART, whilst Ann Vulture merely has a stinking dollop of dog mess where her heart *should* have been, and in place of anything remotely resembling wisdom or compassion, she possesses only shards of broken glass with which she daily inflicts pain on others.
Christ was a blessing to the human race, but the Vulture is a sickly carrion-feeder who for some inexplicable reason is given air space so as to further pollute the planet with her repulsive effluent. She's as 'Christian' as Lucifer and as sainted as Diablo himself!
As to that vapid toilet brush, 'Reverend Sun Myung Moon' well, ~ we all know the etymological link between the words 'Moon' ~ and 'LUNATIC' !
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Oh dear, we have been very lax, -to have allowed such foetid beings anywhere near the corridors of power.
We need to decide once and for all, that only SANE and peace-loving HUMANE people are allowed into office, and that anyone smelling of harm towards others of our race be given jobs mopping the floors in their rightful home:
- the asylum.
I appreciate the pre-revolutionary historical synopsis on this side of the Atlantic that influenced the first amendment's first item establishing separation of religions and government. I continue to be dumbfounded at the profound ignorance of supremes who were nominated by Republican presidents. Scalia is just the latest example.
Read some of Scalia's court decisions and see what passes for justice. He is also lazy and repeats his decisions just changing the names and dates.
True spirituality creates wholeness. Jesus taught only one prayer, I guess the rest in practice.
She's like a serial killer...out there for the short term notoriety.
Today we live in fear of Islamic Extremists. Religous Extremism has always been a danger to peace, it does not matter if it is Christian, Islamic or Judeo/Zionist Extremism. The reason is Religous extremists have the following traits that distinguish them from your run of the mill Fundamentalists, and these are characteristics of those who prefer war to peace.
Exclusivity
Anti-Intellectualism
Intolerance
Theocratic Strivings
Militant
Yep, that fits Ann alright.
Thom Hartmann is one of my favorites. Scalia may have it right in an alternative universe, but here on this planet in this reality, religion mixed with government yields a toxic stew of fascism. Conservatives see this clearly in other religions--hence their term "Islamofascist"--but not in their own religion.
Ann Coulter? Well who needs her, anyway? I thought I would like to set her dress on fire, just to watch her dance, but being a bleeding-heart liberal, I would have to douse her with water. At that point she would start melting like the Wicked Witch of the West. Oh well.
Anne is an entertainer. She is very good at what she does and what she does is sell hate. There are actresses who act so well that when they play a dispicable character you know how good they really are as you dispize that character they are playing. Anne is like that, she is an actress. If she could make more money being nice she would be nice. She is just playing to the audience that pays the big bucks. Hate sells. Nice is non profitable. I could be wrong but I don't believe that anyone can naturally be that hateful. It has to be an act.
Scalia is not ignorant. He knows exactly what he's doing - ushering in the fascist United States.
Ignorance is and always has been our worse enemy! it does not concern me much that A. Coulter is an ignorant big mouth, just do not listen to her garbage, but to hear that a supreme Court Justice is so supremely ignorant is truly appaling. HRB
skank. despicable, vicious c**t. will somebody please turn off her microphone and the camera? i hate to resort to just name calling, but she is so tiresome, as are the alleged christians who agree with her....feh.
Coulter's comments may be shocking and repulsive, but let's face it: all she did was accurately espouse Christian theology. Like it or not, Christians DO believe that Jews cannot be saved until they accept Jesus as the savior. Of course, most of the prominent ones are too polite to mention it.
But this is what is so useful about ol' Annie. She says in public what all the wingnuts say in private. The more she talks, the better. But people should know she is NOT an exception.
I don't care about the jabbering idiot Coulter, but, as several people have noted above, to have a Supreme Court justice who calls himself "a strict contructionist" effectively tossing out one of the most important precepts embodied in Constitution is jaw-dropping. Scalia is Opus Dei all the way and should be immediately impeached for his comments.
dbate,
Being a Christian is never, ever a reason for you to be ashamed. And whatever the fringe actions of some in the so-called Christian "right", they have nothing to do with you. Our calling is to believe in Christ, speak well of Him, and try to follow his real teachings.
Our political calling, if we're so inclined, is to work for peaceful justice and promote government policies
that mirror the golden rule to the extent possible.
Religion in politics has been mis-used in recent years, and the pendulum may now be swinging back the other way.
The swingback process is not one of throwing Christ and his teachings away, but actually trying to follow them.
Daniel David
ann coulter is whores faced.
DanielDavid is correct, I think. Coulter is out to make a buck by stirring up hatred and other excitements. But what Justice Scalia is up to is a mystery. He should know better than to utter such nonsense. Maybe he doesn't. And if not what is he doing on the Supreme Court?
The comment someone quoted that God doesn't listen to prayers from Jews is also a baffler. God either listens to prayers or He doesn't or there is no God. But I wonder whose prayers brought the liberation of the concentration camps. It certainly wasn't Christian prayer, as has been noted above.
I am a Christian and I have Christian friends. I also have Jewish, Buddhist and Atheist friends. Given what is going on in this country now among the so-called Christian Right, I am almost ashamed to say that I'm a Christian, because I cannot defend any of it. Sure, it also makes me sick. But more than that it frightens me. If those people got a predominant hold on our government the result would probably be far worse than we can imagine. I mean, if non-Christians are of no use to God then why not just make slaves out of them?
Coulter's remarks are preposterous. But the real tragedy is how many, gullible, non-thinking Americans agree with her.
The fact that we give Coulter ANY voice on this blog is a poor reflection on OUR judgement. She thrives on this attention. Enough said from me. Actually, too much.
Why all the fuss when a sleezy known provocateur provokes?
Why all the media coverage? Nothing newsworthy or even surprising here.
The Coulters of the world abound like the missing link,but to have someone a Supreme Court Judge with a mentality like Scalia is a real worry.
I don't know whether Jews (or any other religious denomination for that matter) is or would be safer with Christians in charge, but I know democracy isn't.
It is highly unikely that Adolph Hitler and Bishop Muller are smiling anywhere. Either they simply don't exist any more, like all the dead, or they are in the afterlife called Hell. In the latter case they wouldn't feel much like smiling! And in the former there isn't any such thing as smiling.
Jesus would have liked the Jews to follow Him, but they are awaiting the true messiah.
If the Jews didn't listen to Jesus, why does Ann Coulter think any of them would listen to her? Such audacity.
Someone should just walk up and punch that Stan Coulter guy in the face.
I'm not sure where Scalia got the idea that Germany had separation of church and state, then or now. The government since the time of Frederick the Great always sponsored the activities of any religion that asked for it. Thus, Germany had multiple state churches, but state churches nonetheless. When I lived there in the 1970s, I paid a "Kirchensteuer" (church tax) to the federal government (from which I could opt out), and when I attended secondary school there during the 1960s in Catholic Bavaria (home base to the Nazi party and second home to Hitler), I attended religious instruction in a public school that had a crucifix in every room. Back in the "bad old days," those rooms had had a photo of Fuhrer and Reich Chancellor Hitler right next to that crucifix, and the teachers who taught me were nearly all veterans of the National Socialist Teachers League ( found out later that that school's first Headmaster had been the father of Recishfuehrer-SS Heinrich Himmler--small world!). Bottom line: so much for separation of church and state in Germany over the last several hundred years, and little wonder that churches in Germany and nearly every other European country are starkly empty on Sundays. Best do your homework, Justice Scalia!
Is anyone 'safer' when christians are in charge?
The Inquisition under Philip and Isabella
The Holocaust under Adolf
The Hegemony under Bush
On the Road to Armageddon under the Neo Cons.
Jews Are Safer with Christians in charge according to Ann.
Umm the Holocaust happened in Europe which was and is predominatly Christian so this statement is ironic. Its also meant as a refernce to Muslim countries which is hate mongering against Muslims also in the same damn statement. It should also be pointed out that if you also add in the history of pograms and the crusades Jews were not safer under Christiandom.
So nasty Ann Coulter's hate speech across the board towards Jews and Muslims both her current statement and past ones are disgusting.
LOL LeeAnnG, I get lots of practice verbally sparring with my drunken customers. I can generally shred anyone in less than two sentences, it comes in handy in my line of work...:)
Many evangelical Christians do not follow the teachings of Jesus, they believe in the primacy of "the Faith". Similarly, many Jews do not believe in following the covenant God made with Moses and his people. Similar dichotomies exist in other religions.
Unfortunately, these people are publicly allowed to base their religious orientation on ritual on dogma rather than following the laws of that religion governing behavior toward others.
Ann Coulter needs a job, preferrably one that keeps her busy 24hrs a day, she has entirely too much time on her hands to inflict pain and suffering.
Thom Hartmann
Excellent report! I looked at all those pictures, and they certainly drive home the point that the Nazi regime was also a "Christian" regime.
And there's this, from "Christianity" in America:
"With all due respect to those dear people, my friend, God Almighty does not hear the prayer of a Jew."
--Bailey Smith, a founding father of Robertson's Christian Coalition, once told 15,000 people at a Religious Roundtable briefing in Dallas, June 26, 1994
It's from this website of rightwing religious quotes: http://moose-and-squirrel.com/bozo/bozo.html
The hatred expressed toward Jews, gays, women, and others is really quite sickening. Jews definitely aren't safer with "Christians" in charge. Nobody's safer! They intend to take over the government.
Coulter also promotes ideological cleansing.
Read her rants concerning what she defines as liberals and what "good" Americans should do to them.
However, promoting ideological cleansing never provoked an outcry in either the MSM or political establishment.
Alas, when the US oligarchs promoted their post-WWI and post-WWII Red Scares, it was only a matter of time before Bush would not name Liberals as Liberals but, instead, he used the term "L" word.
Once an elite successfully successfully demonizes any political movement that attempts to promote peace and expand popular power and well-being, the oligarchy is well on its way to one party rule (through two party means).
Under the rubric of anti-communism/socialism a person could hide their racist, sexist, authoritarian, and plutocratic allegiences.
The Puritan and the British treatment of Quakers was what prompted William Penn to found Pennsylvania with its chief city, Philadelphia, becoming known (as it still is to this day) as "The Quaker City".
Roger Williams similarly founded Rhode Island as a haven for "free thinkers" which back then translated as anyone not of the Puritan persuasion.
Finally, Lord Baltimore founded the colony of Maryland as a haven for (you guessed it!) persecuted Roman Catholics.
The point of this little history lesson is more than agreeing the author's contention of how wrong-headed Scalia and Coulter's notions of the roles of religion and government were to America's founders.
It is to point out that most of those being persecuted were Christians and to realize that none of us have anymore freedom than those esteemed least in our midst. It is nothing for persecution to be turned on the persecuters once such a cycle gets going.
This is heady ground--Bush is "christian" so are antiwaractivist--- The edification here is the exposure of what an ignorant man Justice Scalia is. He has exposed himself at other times as well. He lacks a mature understanding of the U.S. Constitution and basic knowledge of history(esp. U.S.) It is very unfortunate and dangerous that a supreme court justice is so ignorant. But it is a warning to all of us! Being possessed(in love) with an idealogy effects one like too much wine.
lol nigel, everytime I hear her voice I throw up in my mouth little...
When the UK's chief Rabbi Dr. Jonathan Sacks, speaks, I listen - even when I don't agree with him.
When Ann Coulter opens her mouth, part of me merely feels sick.
Funny that Coulter would equate the rights version of Christianity with the New Testament. Their's is the collective voice to the old testament - full of hate, revenge, thou shalt not's, condemnation and separation between the good ones and the evil ones. And their greatest joy is in judgement of others, smearing and ridicule.
Jesus's words from the New Testament are full of healing, love, tolerance, forgiveness and mercy.
Ann Coulter and the rest of her hateful vibration are Maya's agents, sent to derail man's progress on the path of righteousness, that he would stay chained to the wheel of desire, and away from his home in bliss and freedom in God.
Ann Coulter is invited here and there because she's polarizing. She gets the attention of both her friends and her foes. The hosts get ratings and sell ads.
What I've never understood is why evangelical Christians don't take one look at the schtick and the attitude Ann exudes and "get it" that there really is something about Ann that is incongruent with New Testament faith.
I wonder if Ms. Coulter has ever stopped to consider what her world would be like if everyone were exactly like her. I am fairly certain that homocide would perpetuate until there was but a single, misanthropic and emaciated Coulter remaining.
The moonies? Seriously? I remember laughing at them as a kid, never realized they still existed...Yeah, we're doomed...Ann Coulter is a freak show with legs. She is about as repugnant as a human being can get without actually being in a state of decomposition. How any serious news outlet can have her commenting on anything is beyond me.
Hate speech is alive and well in the USA, and always has been, but one must be careful about what targets are chosen. Coulter on innumerable occasions attacked US Muslims and Muslims in general and got away with it scot-free in the corporate media. But now she appears to have stepped in it bigtime.
"The National Jewish Democratic Council (NJDC) called on media to stop inviting Ann Coulter as a guest commentator and strongly condemned her comments that Jews should be "perfected" by accepting the New Testament and that America would be better off if Judaism were "thrown away" and all Americans were Christian."
hahahahahahahahaha. hahahahahahahahahahahahaha! oh stop, such satire! :D :D
wait, she's serious...
Kristina40 - I've never heard it put better! "She is about as repugnant as a human being can get without actually being in a state of decomposition."
How absolutely perfect! If it were not so horrible that this harpy has a voice in the media, I'd be rolling on the floor. As it is, I throw up in my mouth a little everytime I even hear her name.
Well... maybe not quite perfect, because "human being" is a little bit off the mark.
Love your posts!
SCALIA'S remarks are stunning,especially since i understamd that while he considers himself to be a conservative,he feels that JUSTICE THOMAS has veered off into wingnut territory.in any event,i remember the rich irony of freud's pithy comment on the roots of antisemitism.the old professor contended that the jews were hated not for murdering jesus,but for producing him in the first place.after 2,000 years of antisemitism its no accident that they are so well represented in the ranks of psychiatrists.