Coulter's book Godless, where are the errors?

I haven't read the book, so I can't comment as to the factual errors. I can comment as to what has been reported about her imflammatory and hateful remarks about the wives of 9-11 victims and her defense of those hate-filled remarks. She states that they were happy that their husbands died on 9-11, that their husbands were about to divorce them and that they should just go and pose for Playboy now. There is no defense for this kind of hateful rhetoric. The defense that she and others like Sean Hannity have offered for this kind of rhetoric is that the liberals do it to Bush and the Republicans all the time. As Christians, we should condemn this type of hate speech because it goes against Biblical mandates to not return evil for evil and does not glorify God in any way, shape, or form. As Republicans, we should have learned the lessons of the 1990's when the GOP went after Clinton and became the anti-Clinton party. America doesn't want to know what we are against, but what we are for. As Republicans, we should have noticed the reiteration of that lesson with the utter defeat of Democrats in the 21st century up to this point. They became the party who hates Bush, but has nothing positive to offer. We should not be imitating the attitudes and actions of Michael Moore, Al Franken, Howard Dean, and the rest of the looney left. We should be setting forth our agenda and ignoring the hatred from the left.

As a Christian and a Republican, I condemn this kind of hate speech and call on Ann Coulter to repent of this hate and to mortify the sin nature (starve it to death) as is the call of the Word of God.

Joseph Botwinick

 

I'm in the middle of it, right now. Despite the twisted attacks & vile hatred spewed forth from the people who choose to demonize, instead of actually reading her, she comes off quite well.

Daisy brought up some points about the education chapter, that says Ann may not have completed her research, but Ann backs herself up very carefully on her chapters about AIDS, & activist judges. I don't buy her constant repeating that Democrats love death, I feel their stance on most issues starts out as good intentions.

But the book is shorter on hyperbole than her others.

I've read a lot of people who say that Ann takes the easy way out, that she's not very bright, and niether are her readers. From what they say, everyone should be able to write four best-sellers.

 

This article points out some of the errors in her book:

http://www.spinsanity.com/columns/20020713.html

 

Wrong book. That's on "Slander".

 

According to the Wikipedia article about Godless, scientists say Ann is misrepresenting evolution. Also check out her definition of Christian. Verrrrry interesting.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godless:_The_Church_of_Liberalism

 

Yes. I heard Al Mohler mention this on his radio show a few weeks back. He also rebuked and corrected this false belief.

Joseph Botwinick

 

Ann Coulter on the Jersy Girls:

There is no evidence that these ladies are enjoying the death of their husbands. This is pure hate speech and should be condemned by all Christians and Republicans.

Again, we have no evidence that their husbands were about to divorce them, and the playboy remark is just pure hate speech meant to be inflammatory. This whole section seems to be borderline gossip, name-calling, and just inflammtory hate speech.

Ann Coulter on the Jersey Girls

Joseph Botwinick

 

On Ann Coulter's central thesis:

This is a false hood. I am a band director in a public school. I am not a clergy member nor a liberal.

Prayer is allowed in my public school and in most public schools in the USA (besides those with the most radical liberal administrators and lawyers). Nobody can stop prayer anywhere. In nine years as a public school teacher, I have never once seen a condom handed out at any of my schools where I have worked. This is a falsehood.

Ann Coulter's Central Thesis

Joseph Botwinick

 

I just started reading about about Coulter. Read the Wiki Article.
Seems she is something of a female Rush Limbaugh.

Some people make a living on being outreageous.
People willl read just to hate, others will read because she hates the ones they hate.

Good recipe to sell book and magazines.

 

Wikipedia is a very poor source for anything because it can be edited by anyone who wants to say anything.

 

The bottom line with Ann Coulter is that she is not interested in principals or morals on either side, she is interested in selling a book and making money. They are a dime a dozen. It is us who gives this kind of nonsense its walking legs by paying attention.

 

One of Wiki's rules is that facts must be attributed. Follow the footnotes.

Some pages are more closely monitored than others. Update the Coulter page with a little fan note or a hate rant and see how long that lasts.

 

I think that Ann needs our prayers, and I think she needs some Christian love to temper down her vitriol.

 

As she said, she likes to stir the pot by making over the top comments deliberately.

As for truth, her comments about the husbands may be absolutely true or totally false. There's no way either you or I can tell which. For her purposes, it doesn't really matter.

She evoked the desired response from you as well as others. What that response is doesn't matter nearly as much to her as the fact you have one. Preferrably a strong one.

 

[derail]Link to musical cartoon on Ms. Coulter

One interesting tidbit in the Wiki article is that Coulter gave a false address when she registered to vote, then voted in a precinct she doesn't live in. Could be a mistake, could be she really is that stupid, I don't know. Voter fraud is a felony, but if the officials accept her explanation, surely the charges will be dropped:

[/derail]

 

It's the exact same thing Micheal Moore was being harrassed about. He moved, and forgot to unregister, re-registered in his new area. (He was shown to be a registered democrat, something he denied, which I thought was the main point.)

Has everyone who has relocated as an adult unregitered to vote at their old residence ?

 

I've never unregistered either, but that's not what this is about. She didn't forget to unregister, she registered under her broker's address instead of her own. Did she forget where she lived? (It's possible, I guess; I couldn't tell you my cell phone number without looking it up).

 

Cell phone, maybe, but address ?

I don't see why she would do that, but I don't believe she's pulling any voter fraud, either. It sure is a wierd one.

The thirty days she was given have elapsed, any updates ?