Here, quoted from an article linked to from a Pizza Parlor thread on the Catholic priest/pedophile problem, is Ann Coulter’s latest screed on political correctness and how gay sexuality is clearly at the basis of most of America’s problems.
I welcome the insight of our members into the brilliant logic and social analysis of Ms. Coulter! :rolleyes:
This woman seems to suffer from a profound case of dementia.
I think she and reality are ships that passed in the foggiest of nights.
To sum up: the bitch is a cracked cauldron of insanity and hatred, spewing forth self-created “facts” and her opinion(such as it is) to foment discord and action.
I’m sure that the KKK wishes they has such a skilled “writer” at their disposal.
You know, I’m not the most intelligent person in the world, but I had a hard time reading through that claptrap. Is it just me, or is that basically incoherent ravings?
It ain’t you, it’s basically incoherent ravings. Nowhere in that screed of hers does she say anything about the guys who are “normal” married men with children by day, and child molesters by night. I mean, wasn’t John Wayne Gacy married? Even if he wasn’t there’s been plenty of cases where heterosexual men have molested young boys.
I wonder if she’s ever been vaccinated for rabies?
You know, I’m glad you brought this up because I thought I was the only one who couldn’t quite get a grip on what she was saying. I started reading it and was struck by (1) how stupid her argument was, and (2) how poorly it was structured. And I’m no anal English major critiquing everybody’s writing style. It was just so bad that it actually distracted me from the stupidity of the opinions.
However, I still don’t think this article quite rivals her “arrest all liberals because they’re either traitors or will become traitors” statement.
Bigots like to blame everything on anyone but themselves. Maybe if wer stop paying attention to her she’ll go away like a bad advertisement, or atleast shut up.
But she IS kinda cute…
So are wolverines, but I’m not going to pet one.
I dunno dude…“she” does have this kinda prominent adams apple…ifyaknowwhatimean…andithinkyoudo
Okay, first off. She completely misses the point.
The large proportion of anger regarding the recent cases of pedophilia regarding the Catholic church is not founded so much in the acts of pedophilia themselves- note that 70 people were just arrested in a major bust of a child pornography ring, but no one is talking in hushed whispers about the problems of school bus drivers because one of them was in that ring- the problem is that there is evidence showing that the Catholic Church knew that the priests were abusing children and did nothin effectual. Priests were transferred to avoid scandal, but discipline was not taken and nothing was really done to prevent further contact with children.
As for the “liberal” point of view that this has something to do with priest’s celibacy, I think Tony Auth’s March 20th political cartoon states that position much better than I can.
Second of all: I love the line “standard disclaimer that all gays are not molestors, just as all Muslims aren’t violent”, which comes across to me with the exact tone of “which we know isn’t true- all fags are molestors and all ragheads want to blow up the US, but they won’t let me keep my job if I tell the truth”.
Third: Lock her and Michael Moore in a room together. Throw away the key. They deserve each other.
Whatever.
I think Ralph Nader is the person she should be shackled to.
Yeah, she looks just like Alessandra Mussolini. :rolleyes:
What John Corrado said.
Put me in the WTF is she saying camp – the column is totally incoherent.
And this really is hateful stuff. John’s right – that “standard disclaimer” line is anything but.
This could have been an interesting column if she had focused on the “abstinence is good for alcoholics but bad for sexual addictions” type analysis. Assuming, of course, that Coulter is capable of meaningful analysis.
In spite of all the above, I’m ashamed to say I was amused by this little passage:
Kinda stupid, but the thought of headlines reading “What’s wrong at Yale?” in the same vein as the recent church revelations sounds like something the Onion might do.
Holy crap, Alessandra Mussolini IS hot too and she is willing to pose nude from what my brief research revealed. I think that I am going to order up an Ann Coulter / Alessandra Mussolini sandwich for lunch tomorrow.
Ummm, whip me beat me make me bleed, facist sex is what I need!!!
Dang…I was reading the linked article then came back here to post and see that John Corrado beat me to it. It was the church’s policy of moving known pedophiles around allowing them to continue their predatory practices that is the real stink here.
I have to look for a cite but I’m positive that child molesters do not consider themselves gay even if they happen to molest children of the same sex. This isn’t from some liberal attempt at redefining the term but from studies conducted with known pedophiles. Also, girls are less present in the church in the form of alter girls or whatnot such that a pedophile has more boys to target than girls.
I too could not quite figure out what she was trying to say. I really tried to decipher it all, but to no avail.
One interesting thing though was the way she equated celibacy to ‘addictions’ like smoking, alcoholism and gambling.
I must admit, I never thought of it in quite that way!
Hmm. I wouldn’t consider Nader to be spefically hateful and billious in the way Moore is. Would Ted Rall act as a suitable compromise candidate? Or, conversely, I can lock her, Limbaugh, Robertson, and Falwell in the right-wing of the dungeon, and you can lock your choices in the left-wing.
Thank God I wasn’t drinking anything when I read that line.
Well, what Coulter is saying is correct (in that the priesthood does not necessarily have any more pedophiles than any other community) but the problem is that she’s not at all addressing the point (that the Church had evidence of pedophilia in the priesthood and protected the pedophiles rather than the children). She’s creating a strawman and beating on it viciously.
I found it generally comprehensible (though it helps if you’ve seen some of her other outrages against gay rights and Norman Minetta) though the paragraph involving “camping fosters sodomy” still doesn’t make any sense to me. Is she saying liberals merely wish to do whatever it takes to destroy camping? If so, then tell me how to switch sides on this one.
The reason the column appears incoherent is that Ms. Coulter neglects to make explicit the underlying axiom of her diatribe: male molesters who target young boys are homosexual.
Once you realize this unstated assumption, the column becomes understandable (though not any more cogent).
Why Ms Coulter felt it best not to explicitely state such an important underlying idea can only be a matter of conjecture. A suspicious person might onclude that it was because she knew the assumption was false. Then again, it might be that she thinks it is true but knows that most other people think it is false. That would, of course, imply that she is more concerned with exerting her influence than with writing the truth, even as she sees it.
Such a quandry. How is a poor cynic supposed to choose?
I figured that was an underlying premise but her argument is still all over the place. Her Yale/Catholic church analogy was an awful use of statistics (1 case at Yale isn’t statistically significant). “Total avoidance, not limited temptation, is the only hope for controlling weakness” is one of the stupidest quotes I’ve heard in a while only outdone by her (slanderous?) parting shot of "Evidently the only men the Times thinks should not be fondling teen-agers are those who purport to believe in God. "
To save bandwidth, maybe there should just be a single Rall/Moore/Coulter/Limbaugh thread?
I have a question. Several times in her repugnant little screed, Coulter implies that because of their anti-gay policies, the Boy Scouts have no problems with child molestation.
Is this true? In my google search I found reference to various numbers of scoutmasters being dismissed after being accused/convicted of molesting their charges, but since they were on unreliable sites, I don’t trust the figures.
It seems to me that in an organization as large as the Boy Scouts, there would have been some such incidents, regardless of the sexual orientation of the scout leaders. Are there any reports about such incidents? Are the Boy Scouts covering up just like the Catholic Church? Or is Coulter right that there is no molestation in scouting?