Apr 27, 2007

Just one more example of Coulter’s discrimination

I guess the only good news is no newspaper in Michigan carries hatemonger Ann Coulter’s column after her last discriminatory outburst, but unfortunately people can still read her slime on line.

Her latest piece of trash is called “Nuts in the crosshairs,” and I can only hope no one really takes this bile seriously. Believe it or not, she’s talking about the tragedy at Virginia Tech University, and its pretty much the standard fare: more then half the U.S. population, Democrats, are evil and more than half the world population, followers of Islam, are also evil.

“Democrats are promoting a mental health exception to the right to bear arms.”

As you know, in December 2005 the district court in Montgomery County, Va. ruled that the Virginia Tech shooter presented "an imminent danger to self or others.” The ruling, more than a year before Monday's mass shootings, was the necessary criterion for a detention order, after he had been accused of stalking by two female schoolmates. So Coulter is saying people who are insane or are judged to be a danger to themselves and others should not be denied the right to buy a firearm? I have to disagree. Whether the 2nd Amendment allows individuals to buy any kind of firearm with no sane restrictions or whether it’s a collective right is also up for debate.

As lovely as it would be, we cannot identify mass murderers before they have broken any law, and mass murder is often the first serious crime they commit. No one can be locked up permanently for being potentially dangerous.

It’s a little scary, but I agree with Coulter in this one. But I don’t think we should allow the mentally ill unfettered access to any kind of firearm they want.

So on one hand, the mental health exception is a feel-good measure that would be largely pointless. But on the other hand, it's no skin off my back. Liberals go to therapy. Conservatives go to church. And I think we'd all sleep better knowing that David Brock could not buy a gun.

Again, those judged by a court to be a danger to themselves and others should be allowed a weapon? I disagree. “Conservatives go to church?” There is no one who listens or reads Coulter’s hate speech can believe this woman is a Christian. It just seems to me that the values of social justice and care for the less fortunate that liberals embrace are much more in line with Christian values. I don’t get the shot at David Brock, other than people like Bill O’Reily and Rush Windbag are on a mission to destroy him because as the head of Media Maters he is exposing their lies and misinformation.

It’s funny, Brock - the author of the rightwing attack book “The real Anita Hill,” and recently the confessional “Blinded by the Right” – was once one of the rightwing conservative attack writers that were in engaged in the GOP character assassination strategy in the 1990s. Now he is a target of the people he once served for doing the right thing. He was a writer for the rightwing magazine American Spectator where he was part of the infamous “Arkansas Project” that was financed by Richard Mellon Scaife to dig up dirt on the Clintons. Brock’s crime now? He is posting entire transcripts, video and audio of the hate monger’s shtick, and apparently O’Reily, Limpbag and the other right wing attack dogs are misquoting themselves and taking themselves out of context.

And it would end the public lunacy of Jim Wallis, the Democrats' Christian. Wallis' first remark on the massacre at Virginia Tech last week was to hail the remarkable "diversity" of the victims. True, Cho murdered 32 people in cold blood. But at least he achieved diversity!

Wow. Apparently, Rev. Wallis is not a Christian and Coulter is. Wallis is an independent, but because he embraces the values of social justice and care for the less fortunate that Jesus Christ preached he must be a liberal. Wallis is a graduate of Michigan State University and Trinity Evangelical Divinity School in Illinois and the author of “God’s Politics.” Wallis was taken completely out of context from a column reflecting on the tragedy of the massacre, and like he said, “This is not a time to seek easy answers or to assign blame.” Tell that to Coulter. Read it for your self.

If the Koreans can do it, why can't the Muslims? What explains the lack of a Muslim guilt impulse — so normal, as seen in the case of the saddened Koreans — after dozens of terrorist attacks on Americans?
How about a Muslim exception to the Second Amendment? That would have prevented the Virginia snipers from killing 10 people within three weeks in 2002. But most important: It would help us achieve "diversity" in our gun law prohibitions.

If you need any more proof of Coulter’s discrimination here it is. It’s like the ridiculous notion of holding every Christian accountable for the Salem Witch killings. I hope Coulter is aware a Muslim is simply a follower of Islam.

No comments: