Coulter Cancelled Part IV

100 posts / 0 new
Last post
Unionist
Coulter Cancelled Part IV

More...

Unionist

From [url=http://www.huffingtonpost.com/michael-rowe/sorry-ann-coulter-canadas_b_5... Rowe at the Huffington Post[/url]:

Quote:

The enduring irony of Coulter being driven off like a vampire bat in some Hammer horror film by 200 Canadian kids exercising not only their free speech, their right to lawful protest, but their right to assembly, is rich indeed.

So are her subsequent complaints about being "suppressed."

So, some U.S. commentators can see more clearly than some of our own "progressive" libertarians. Bravo!

 

A_J

Thank you for this.

This article and Kady O'Malley's write-up (which is referenced) are pretty much the only solid reports that I've seen on this whole foolish thing.

EDIT: actually, Neil Macdonald had a column at the CBC that wasn't half bad, though still fell into the trap of hand-wringing about how "bad" this makes the University of Ottawa look.

How many interviews did she do while here, by the way? I'd love to see someone sit down to interview her and treat her like a Colbert-esque parody: praise her for staying in character so well, for so perfectly mimicking a racist and ignorant extremist. You'd think that would have happened by now. She goes around being called a "journalist" by some, so you would think some self-respecting real journalist would hit back.

Wolf Preserver

Unionist wrote:

From [url=http://www.huffingtonpost.com/michael-rowe/sorry-ann-coulter-canadas_b_5... Rowe at the Huffington Post[/url]:

Quote:

The enduring irony of Coulter being driven off like a vampire bat in some Hammer horror film by 200 Canadian kids exercising not only their free speech, their right to lawful protest, but their right to assembly, is rich indeed.

So are her subsequent complaints about being "suppressed."

So, some U.S. commentators can see more clearly than some of our own "progressive" libertarians. Bravo!

 

If she's so hateful and foolish why not just let her sout her nonesense and show the world she's a mean buffoon?

Unionist

Because then some people will say that Canadians support her or are indifferent to her Islamophobia and homophobia.

Much better for young people to lead, stand up, exercise their freedom of speech, and tell Coulter to get her hateful ass out of our country, because our society does not tolerate her raving.

I posted from Huffington to show how our youth are earning admiration even in the U.S.

Wolf Preserver

Then what's to stop a howling mob of neo-Nazis from shouting down Jack Layton?

Unionist

Wolf Preserver wrote:

Then what's to stop a howling mob of neo-Nazis from shouting down Jack Layton?

There aren't enough.

This is Canada.

Our youth are good. Only those motivated by fear want to fetter them.

If a howling mob of 3 neo-Nazis ever dared to gather, they would be shown the meaning of "freedom of assembly" by a polite gathering of 3,000 anti-fascists. That's how it works in Europe. That's how it worked last week in New Westminster. We don't fool around.

 

j.m.

Wolf Preserver wrote:

Then what's to stop a howling mob of neo-Nazis from shouting down Jack Layton?

Nothing, but if they did it would be an issue of legitimacy as most people find their messages illegitimate and not worth listening to.

Going public is about negotiating one's interest amongst other interests. Fortunately for us, identifiably leftist interests in the public realm are more legitimate. Isn't it grand that people have gone public and challenged societal beliefs and practices that were oppressive and imposed - and legitimized -  their interests for equality, anti-racism, anti-colonialism, collectivism, feminism, etc.?

Wolf Preserver

Unionist wrote:
This is Canada.

Our youth are good. Only those motivated by fear want to fetter them.

If a howling mob of 3 neo-Nazis ever dared to gather, they would be shown the meaning of "freedom of assembly" by a polite gathering of 3,000 anti-fascists. That's how it works in Europe. That's how it worked last week in New Westminster. We don't fool around.

 

The trouble with that reasoning is that you better hope that you're always in command of the levers of force. G-d forbid you guess wrong. Without the rule of law, and with the rule of force prevailing some anti-Nazis could wind up with bloody noses, literally.

Unionist

Wolf Preserver wrote:

 

The trouble with that reasoning is that you better hope that you're always in command of the levers of force. G-d forbid you guess wrong. Without the rule of law, and with the rule of force prevailing some anti-Nazis could wind up with bloody noses, literally.

You seem to think that someone called for an end to the rule of law?

You seem to think that the rule of law prevents a mob from "shouting down Jack Layton"? Whose law would that be?

You seem to think that someone shouted down Ann Coulter? What parallel universe did that happen in?

You seem to think that Ann Coulter had to call in the authorities to protect herself against a howling mob - which country did that happen in?

I have a feeling you're going somewhere, but your train is awfully slow. It may actually have been diverted onto a siding. Oh, and what is G-d - another victim of an uncontrolled vowel movement?

 

Wolf Preserver

Unionist wrote:
Oh, and what is G-d - another victim of an uncontrolled vowel movement?

 

The Jews, including myself, don't like to spell out the name.

Unionist

You're a Jew, and you're afraid that anti-Nazis could end up with a bloody nose, if they don't have the "rule of law" to protect them?

How very sad.

Fidel

Wolf Preserver wrote:

Then what's to stop a howling mob of neo-Nazis from shouting down Jack Layton?

A howling mob of paleoconservatives or even "neo-Liberal" louts shouting louder?

Wolf Preserver

Unionist wrote:

You're a Jew, and you're afraid that anti-Nazis could end up with a bloody nose, if they don't have the "rule of law" to protect them?

How very sad.

Yes I'm a Jew. And I'd fight to my death for the right of a Neo-Nazi to make a clown of himself.

Unionist

Wolf Preserver wrote:

Unionist wrote:

You're a Jew, and you're afraid that anti-Nazis could end up with a bloody nose, if they don't have the "rule of law" to protect them?

How very sad.

Yes I'm a Jew. And I'd fight to my death for the right of a Neo-Nazi to make a clown of himself.

Ah - so the anti-Nazis would get their noses bloodied by you, while you were fighting to the death to protect the neo-Nazis' rights.

I needed to draw an actual picture, but I think I get it now. Thanks.

 

Wolf Preserver

Unionist wrote:

Ah - so the anti-Nazis would get their noses bloodied by you, while you were fighting to the death to protect the neo-Nazis' rights.

I needed to draw an actual picture, but I think I get it now. Thanks.

The point is that my belief in free speech extends to far right views as well as my own progressive views.

Mike Stirner

Unionist wrote:

Because then some people will say that Canadians support her or are indifferent to her Islamophobia and homophobia.

 

No my dear collectivist some people will simply say that some canadians support annie just like some support her in the US.

 

Sad how far the left has fallen on being stewards of voltairian free speech. Chomsky defeneded Faurisons right to speak back in the day and got in a lot of trouble from the right. The post 68 crowd are a bunch of losers in comparison.

Unionist

Good. So you vigorously support the Ottawa, Calgary, and London students who boldly stood up and challenged Coulter's racist and homophobic rants. You should consider joining [url=http://www.facebook.com/home.php?ref=home#!/group.php?gid=10676512267936... Facebook group[/url] and express your encouragement to the youth for exercising their freedom of speech and assembly.

 

Mike Stirner

I don't much care for them or annie, I don't give a fuck about annie, her whole thing is bothering people and making the right look like those who push the limmits of expression, I'm not fooled by it.

There's actually a Jay Leno episode where Jay had annie and george on the same show, carlin came on first and did the classic modern man material then ann came on and talked her bs and you know what happened when annie came to sit next to george...he didn't say a thing, which says it all.

See carlin along with chomsky comes from a more classical era of leftism where pushing the limits of speech was the name of the game and hate speech did not exist, somewhere along the line this changed and that libertarian edge was lost, people like you found an existence.

milo204

it seems some people on here can't get past the idea that vocally protesting hate speech isn't censoring it, its just publicly showing opposition.  what's wrong with that?

bagkitty bagkitty's picture

While I do respect those who protested, I think a "Don't Feed The Trolls" approach to this entertainer would have been a better tactical response. That or cream pies... I realize that runs the risk of being charged like the woman who managed to connect with King Ralph here in Alberta, but since the nature of the assault is such that it subjects the target to humiliation rather than physical harm, I think it might be worth running the risk. The debate, though, is over tactics... it is not a free speech debate to me - this entertainer already has a platform to pontificate from, and any protestations from her that she is being deprived of a chance to be heard are purely ludicrous.

 

Unionist

Mike Stirner wrote:

Unionist wrote:

Because then some people will say that Canadians support her or are indifferent to her Islamophobia and homophobia.

 

No my dear collectivist some people will simply say that some canadians support annie just like some support her in the US.

I am no longer a collectivist. I sold all my coins when I was 13 after my diligent efforts to procure a 1936 dot penny proved fruitless. But I'm flattered that you remember!

Quote:

Sad how far the left has fallen on being stewards of voltairian free speech. Chomsky defeneded Faurisons right to speak back in the day and got in a lot of trouble from the right. The post 68 crowd are a bunch of losers in comparison.

It's rather lamentable how you ooze contempt for "the left" which you scorn, just for praising the youth who express their abhorrence for Coulter's opinions without touching her, threatening her, or even calling for corporal punishment. I don't recall Chomsky issuing a fatwa against those who woult demonstrate against deniers of the Nazi genocide, but you seem more familiar with the tactics of Popes and Ayatollahs than I. You would do better to adopt Chomsky's appreciation for the enthusiasm and conscience of our youth than to try to misappropriate his name in service of your vendetta.

 

Tommy_Paine

Wow still talking about this.

 

I think most miss the point about Coulter, and her ilk.  Essentaily, Coulter is unsubstantive, famous for being famous, and is actually on the same plane as Paris Hilton.   Although, having said that, I perhaps have done injustice to Ms Hilton:  though my knowledge of her is scant, I've never known her to lie-- so she's at least a cut above Coulter.

 

And Coulter uses her outrageous statements as a smoke screen for her weak intellect.   People get bent out of shape about the racist things she says, and lose sight of the fact that she is an out and out, documented fabricator.   

The fact that any University would pay her to speak is certainly an indication of low academic rigour and standards for those particular institutions.

Unionist

Tommy, I do not personally care one whit about Coulter or her speeches. She's not a threat to our way of life. But what I do care about is our youth. When so-called "progressives" lecture them about freedom of speech of turds like Coulter; when they berate them for standing up and noisily proclaiming their loathing of racism and homophobia; when they tell them to behave themselves and ignore the massive media and educational tolerance of things that are wrong; then I stand with the youth. That's the most (I think the only) vital issue at stake here.

 

Tommy_Paine

 

No, I think the vital issue here is anyone who would give someone like Coulter a podium.   That's the free speech issue; that the media and learning institutions give someone like Coulter a podium, taking the space away from reasoned voices-- that you or I may agree or dissagree with.

 

Yeah, I stand with the students at Ottawa, but I wish they protested Coulter less, and the intellectually dishonest people who invited her more, and made life uncomfortable for the busineses and others who financially support places like UWO, for example.

 

Unionist

I agree with your wish, Tommy, but movements have their own logic. If Coulter's inhuman racist taunt of a young female at UWO was enough to spark a couple of hundred students to mobilize against her at Ottawa, then that is what it is. If we support them, stand up with them, maybe they'll stay mobilized and protest the things you think they should be protesting. But belittling their struggle, as some here and many elsewhere have done, is not the way.

Around 150 years ago or so, someone said (pardon the gender bias of that time):

Quote:
Men make their own history, but they do not make it as they please.

Still true.

 

al-Qa'bong

Atta go, Tommy.  Folks like Coulter and Limbaugh are entertainers disguised as politicos.  Mind you, the distinction has become quite blurred since the Reagan presidency.

Quote:

See carlin along with chomsky comes from a more classical era of leftism where pushing the limits of speech was the name of the game and hate speech did not exist, somewhere along the line this changed and that libertarian edge was lost, people like you found an existence.

 

I have a quibble with this. I just read Carlin's autobiography a couple of weeks ago. He said he didn't become a conscious leftist until the early 1980s. He was raised an Eisenhower Republican in a pretty well-off household, and didn't question his mother's politics until relatively late in life

remind remind's picture

Unionist wrote:
Ah - so the anti-Nazis would get their noses bloodied by you, while you were fighting to the death to protect the neo-Nazis' rights.

I needed to draw an actual picture, but I think I get it now. Thanks.

Personally unionist, I find it pretty damn amazing that people, such as this to whom you responded, say they will fight to the death for pro-Nazis free speech, against others who are merely exercizing their right to free speech, also.

It boggles the mind actually to perceive the tragic discontinuity of their thoughts and rationalization processes.

Unionist

Likewise, remind, I think the word "tragic" captures it perfectly.

 

remind remind's picture

But you know unionist, really one has to take those sociopathic "fight to the death" comments seriously...me thinks.. as those who espouse such things, all the while wanting to deprive others of their rights, are so far out in their perceptions of reality, that it may be tragic,  however they are still dangerous, as they are  basically levelling threats, against an identifible group.

In fact, I took it as such in one of the comments above, by said person to whom you responded.

 

Do you think the tea baggers and their Canadian equivalents have come here to level threats against us a subtley as they can?

Because  the white supremist viking77, was also basically levelling threats in the rascists want to march thread.

j.m.

remind wrote:

Unionist wrote:
Ah - so the anti-Nazis would get their noses bloodied by you, while you were fighting to the death to protect the neo-Nazis' rights.

I needed to draw an actual picture, but I think I get it now. Thanks.

Personally unionist, I find it pretty damn amazing that people, such as this to whom you responded, say they will fight to the death for pro-Nazis free speech, against others who are merely exercizing their right to free speech, also.

It boggles the mind actually to perceive the tragic discontinuity of their thoughts and rationalization processes.

I will go as far to say that any interest group engages in the same mechanisms of trying to exclude other peoples views so that their own appear.

I agree that this should occur or else we wouldn't be able to take our messages to other people. I think the fact that people have the ability to exclude and contest other people's views is what makes free speech possible. I won't defend a neo-nazi's ability to participate but I only expect that they will engage in a struggle to be heard... and that we will also do so to silence their position with our own.

NDPP

Keddy Denies Coulter Connection:

http://thechronicleherald.ca/NovaScotia/1174246.html

"From organizing speeches to putting on cocktails, the Conservative Party's dirty little fingerprints are all over her Canadian tour"

margot66

Good link, nodiff,  We definitely need to pay more attention to who signed what for her tour, who sponsored what.  And for starters, is Ashley Scorpio a real name?  OK, it may be.  There's a D Scorpio in Ottawa-Hull, in canada411.

Rex Murphy introduced the discussion this afternoon by calling Coulter a "pundit".  "Trained seal" and "puppet" would have sprung to my lips but I chose to walk my dog a few miles in the rain.

And Ashley Scorpio, by any other name, would still have Keddy tossing her fish.

 

NDPP

the national political culture continues to be pushed hard right and largely goes along with the push - they ate AC up in Calgary and reportedly cheered loudly when the puppet/pundit suggested the west become the" 51st state". We'll get lots more of these US proto fascist messengers mark my words. I only hope their invasions will be met with maximum protests and resistance. You chose correctly dog over rex.

http://www.citytv.com/toronto/citynews/news/national/article/73156--ann-...

remind remind's picture

msm in Canada is going far right, and even rabble/babble lets white supremists like viking77 post here.

 

someone in Halifax going to challenge the Chronicals comment "on the advice of the police Coulter organizers cancelled"?

 

because the police have denied that.

Mike Stirner

Unionist wrote:

 

It's rather lamentable how you ooze contempt for "the left" which you scorn, just for praising the youth who express their abhorrence for Coulter's opinions without touching her, threatening her, or even calling for corporal punishment. I don't recall Chomsky issuing a fatwa against those who woult demonstrate against deniers of the Nazi genocide, but you seem more familiar with the tactics of Popes and Ayatollahs than I. You would do better to adopt Chomsky's appreciation for the enthusiasm and conscience of our youth than to try to misappropriate his name in service of your vendetta.

 

 

I don't think chomsky would waste much energy shouting people down and trying to set certain conditions for what is "reasonable" debate. People like him are more concerned about pushing the limits of negative conceptions of liberty. You should hope there is no such thing as a postitve litmus test for "reasonable" debate, you do know about the red scares in the US don't you, Chomsky lived through that period and it shaped THE way he and others from his generation looked at speech. 40 years ago you had things like the free speech movements in places like berkeley that pushed limits, now you have leftists who talk about speeches which should not offend anyone, what a sad fall that is.

George Victor

Look again at the concern for Coulter's bile, MS. It is a concern for the younger set being exposed to Coulter's poisoning of the social well. You see her schtick as only giving offense, which makes  you sociologically naive and unaware of the implications for tomorrows' society. Probably you were only offended by the Teabagger's carrying on, there being no indication there of social sickness or pathology.

Wolf Preserver

George Victor wrote:

Look again at the concern for Coulter's bile, MS. It is a concern for the younger set being exposed to Coulter's poisoning of the social well. You see her schtick as only giving offense, which makes  you sociologically naive and unaware of the implications for tomorrows' society. Probably you were only offended by the Teabagger's carrying on, there being no indication there of social sickness or pathology.

In Canada, how much damage can Anne Coulter really do to "tomorrows' society"? How much "poisoining of the social well" can she accomplish by talking to a few audiences of 900 in Canada?

takeitslowly

Ann Coulter is a comedian isnt she? I would go to her show for a laugh.

j.m.

Wolf Preserver wrote:

George Victor wrote:

Look again at the concern for Coulter's bile, MS. It is a concern for the younger set being exposed to Coulter's poisoning of the social well. You see her schtick as only giving offense, which makes  you sociologically naive and unaware of the implications for tomorrows' society. Probably you were only offended by the Teabagger's carrying on, there being no indication there of social sickness or pathology.

In Canada, how much damage can Anne Coulter really do to "tomorrows' society"? How much "poisoining of the social well" can she accomplish by talking to a few audiences of 900 in Canada?

How about highlight reels on the camel comment? Talk about MSM normalizing racism: it's not fully unacceptable if Ann Coulter says it.

Ktown

"How about highlight reels on the camel comment"

Have you seen the entire quote unedited?

Stargazer

Why, would that make it any better? The quote is in these threads on this sociopath. Dig it up yourself. We have read the quote.

Joel_Goldenberg

A four-part thread on Ann Coulter — she must be loving the attention.

Ktown

It seems her quote was taken out of context.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pGjB2oq9o8Q

 

Michelle

I just watched it now, and it wasn't taken out of context at all.

What are you doing here, anyhow?  Did you take a wrong turn when looking for a site that endorses racism and Islamophobia?

Seriously.  Why are you even here?

remind remind's picture

There can be NO context that would excuse such a comment.

Ktown

The young lady asked her 2 questions. When she was answering the first question the crowd started yelling at her. Why were they their if they did not want to here her?

remind remind's picture

shifting talk parameters now you have been called on your erroneous "context" commentary?

And thinking that she should respond that way because she was getting yelled at, is not a "context" if you think it is.

In answer to your last question; because they have every right to be there.

 

VanGoghs Ear

A book recomendation for Remind and Unionist

 

http://www.kansaspress.ku.edu/strwhe.html

 

"In the Chicago suburb of Skokie, one out of every six Jewish citizens in the late 1970s was a survivor--or was directly related to a survivor--of the Holocaust. These victims of terror had resettled in America expecting to lead peaceful lives free from persecution. But their safe haven was shattered when a neo-Nazi group announced its intention to parade there in 1977."

...

In response, the American Civil Liberties Union took the case and successfully defended the Nazis' right to free speech.

...

Forcefully argued, Strum's book shows that freedom of speech must be defended even when the beneficiaries of that defense are far from admirable individuals. It raises both constitutional and moral issues critical to our understanding of free speech and carries important lessons for current controversies over hate speech on college campuses, inviting readers to think more carefully about what the First Amendment really means.

 

ACLU attorney David Goldberger, caught in the ironic position of being a Jew defending the rights of Nazis against fellow Jews.

it's getting off topic but do you respect his princples even if you disagree with his stance.

remind remind's picture

LOLOLOLOLOL

VanGoghs Ear

Just realizing you think they should be allowed to march but others(not acting through the state) should be allowed to stand in the way and block them.

Not sure what's so funny Remind - I'd still love to see a response from you in the thread on North Korea.

Pages

Topic locked