Ann Coulter's latest essay against evolution

[Roadtoad]

Hmm. Somehow I doubt that Linda was claiming there were no left wing idiots. I'd never even heard of this guy and apparently his books and articles don't sell well at all.

I didn't get that from her. Quite the opposite, but that's okay. Google Churchill, and you'll get an eyeful. Trust me.

I'm only saying that I posted before I'd collected my facts; I'm not feeling well, and I'm relying on my memory. I'd rather get it right, if possible.

 

[Paul C. Anagnostopoulos]

I beat you by two posts.

You did, and that's weird. I checked your link to make sure I wasn't duplicating it. So much for trusting my own checking.

~~ Paul

 

[fls]

Linda:

Just recalled: Ward Churchill's claim that 9/11 was justified by American foreign policy. There's others, as I said, I'll need to dig a bit, as I'd rather get it right and in context rather than rely on my very fallible memory.

I don't doubt there are left-wing whacks, but I haven't heard of this guy. Is he given much credence? I thought you were talking about people who are seemingly embraced by mainstream liberals, like Ann Coulter is by conservatives.

Linda

 

[Roadtoad]

I don't doubt there are left-wing whacks, but I haven't heard of this guy. Is he given much credence? I thought you were talking about people who are seemingly embraced by mainstream liberals, like Ann Coulter is by conservatives.

Linda

He tends to be by some. Then again -- and this bears mention -- you generally don't hear much of liberals being in lockstep with one another as Conservatives tend to be. There seems to be almost a mania about "Conservatives" being of one mind, and one mind only. This would tend to shut out the Log Cabins, as well as most pro-choice conservatives. Hell, look at what these folks did to Pete Wilson. (Then again, Wilson had it coming.)

 

[Darat]

I beat you by two posts

This new essay is just as loony as last weeks, and full of lies and twisted logic, which is par for Ann. Her followers think she's really sticking it to those Darwinists. Yep, Ann can certainly runs circles around all the worlds scientists, or as she sees them - LIBERALS!

I wonder did her last "essay" get her more attention than her usual subjects? If so we can blame the free market for the second essay - after all she is just giving the folk what they want.

ETA: By the way has anyone seen a report of her arrest? I presume it must be on the cards since "...(before it was illegal to question Darwinism)..."

 

[tensordyne]

Seems she likes tapping into discredited Inteligent Design ideas as well:

It is a mathematical impossibility, for example, that all 30 to 40 parts of the cell's flagellum – forget the 200 parts of the cilium! – could all arise at once by random mutation. According to most scientists, such an occurrence is considered even less likely than John Edwards marrying Rielle Hunter, the "ground zero" of the impossible.

On the comments, gotta love this little perl of logic -

God said.
Darwin said.
I'll go with God, thanks.

Humans (Stone Age and Bronze Age, murderous, incestuous, paternalistic and drug taking people mostly) said god said.

Darwin studied at length, was confirmed by fossil records, DNA studies, artificial selection, and so on, said.

Uh, I will go with Darwin and modern scientists over some guy wielding a club taking DMT and shrooms living in the desert with 30 wives, thanks.

 

[bikerdruid]

Linda:

Just recalled: Ward Churchill's claim that 9/11 was justified by American foreign policy. There's others, as I said, I'll need to dig a bit, as I'd rather get it right and in context rather than rely on my very fallible memory.

funny that so many people here do not know who ward churchill is.
i do. i have read some essays by him.

churchill is still relatively unknown.
coulter is a media darling.
many follow her blogs and listen to her.
that makes her dangerous.

the 'abysmall right' certainly has cornered the market on whacktards.

 

[Paul C. Anagnostopoulos]

It is a mathematical impossibility, for example, that all 30 to 40 parts of the cell's flagellum – forget the 200 parts of the cilium! – could all arise at once by random mutation.

She's right. Good thing it didn't happen that way.

~~ Paul

 

[TubbaBlubba]

She's right. Good thing it didn't happen that way.

~~ Paul

At least she took the effort to find a random entry in "Encyclopedia of Biological Terminology". A pity she didn't get past "F".

 

[Klimax]

At least she took the effort to find a random entry in "Encyclopedia of Biological Terminology". A pity she didn't get past "F".

F as fail?

 

[Chris L]

So does anyone here think she actually believes this crap or is she just playing to her audience? (I've already stated my opinion.)

 

[Cavemonster]

So does anyone here think she actually believes this crap or is she just playing to her audience? (I've already stated my opinion.)

I really hope she believes this crap.
I hope the same of Rush Limbaugh, and Bill OReilly and all of them.

Because if they really believe this crap, I can have sympathy. That's ignorance, it comes from these ideas being attractively absolute, from these ideas being actively shoved down throats and from the emotional high that could come from embracing them.

If they know how ******* insane these ideas are, then they are nothing less than monsters, sociopaths, throwing their entire country and society under a bus for a measly few bucks.

I'd much rather think they're the victims of a poor eduction. Helps me sleep better at night.

Of course, one of the down sides of being a skeptic, if I see good evidence that they know better, I have to accept it. So far, nothing conclusive has crossed my path though.

 

[Paul2]

I really hope she believes this crap.
I hope the same of Rush Limbaugh, and Bill OReilly and all of them.

Because if they really believe this crap, I can have sympathy. That's ignorance, it comes from these ideas being attractively absolute, from these ideas being actively shoved down throats and from the emotional high that could come from embracing them.

If they know how ******* insane these ideas are, then they are nothing less than monsters, sociopaths, throwing their entire country and society under a bus for a measly few bucks.

I'd much rather think they're the victims of a poor eduction. Helps me sleep better at night.

Of course, one of the down sides of being a skeptic, if I see good evidence that they know better, I have to accept it. So far, nothing conclusive has crossed my path though.

I completely agree. Thinking they really believe also doesn't demonize them, which is a classic means of trying to defeat your foe not on substance. I'm perfectly willing to demonize anyone who deserves it, but in the absence of sufficient information in the case of whether Coulter, Limbaugh, etc. are ignorant or know exactly what they are doing, we have to assume kinda the null hypothesis, they are only stupid, not evil.

Actually, on second thought, maybe it's a bit of both.

 

[Travis]

The thing about idiots on the Left is that "idiots" is all they are. They write stuff and everyone laughs at it. That's it. Unlike the idiots on the Right they don't actually run for office let alone become governors of states the way Perry did.

People actually voted for Perry to lead a whole state. Roll that around in your head and try to not lose all faith in humankind. There's a chance he could lead our nation! Just thinking about that keeps me up at night.

Idiots on the Left are amusing. Idiots on the Right are frightening. Part of this comes from the fact that the radical Left is usually content to just make their own communities of like minded people. On the radical Right they are not content unless they have forced everyone, under penalty of death, to do exactly what they want. The radical Right seems to operate under a "can't suffer a witch to live" attitude of forced adherence to their values. See their efforts to turn women into forced baby factories and just do away with homosexuals altogether.

 

[Roadtoad]

I realize it's great fun to bash the right. But may I take a few moments and remind folks of a few things?

Not everyone on the right thinks Limbaugh is appropriate, nor that he should represent the Right. Truthfully, a man who excoriates Bill Clinton because he didn't inhale while he's dropping fistfuls of "Hillbilly Heroin" doesn't have much of a leg to stand on.

I would say the same sort of thing about Glenn Beck, who couldn't be bothered to vote for the better part of his adult life, and who spent much of his time on television rewriting history.

As to Coulter, I've already said what I have intended to say about someone who denigrates the Jews, maligns atheism, and smears any who dare to question her. They get air time, yes, but the reality remains, just how much impact do they have?

Latest word from the pollsters is that Obama would win re-election handily. So, just how powerful are these people? Not very, it would seem.

That's actually a good thing. I would just as soon pass on Limbaugh's way things ought to be. (Yes, I read the book. Miserable.) These are people who couldn't manage to live a life the rest of America lives, who pretty much started out on third base and think they hit a triple.

There's a lot of us on the right who look at what passes for representing "our side," and cringe, simply because many of us have read William F. Buckley, Charles Krauthammer, and others, and recognize that true Conservatism is not represented by bloated, bilious blather in the name of Ronald Reagan, and (C'thulhu forbid) Richard Nixon.

We now return you to your normal screed.

 

[Travis]

I realize it's great fun to bash the right. But may I take a few moments and remind folks of a few things?

Not everyone on the right thinks Limbaugh is appropriate, nor that he should represent the Right. Truthfully, a man who excoriates Bill Clinton because he didn't inhale while he's dropping fistfuls of "Hillbilly Heroin" doesn't have much of a leg to stand on.

Do explain then why the Right has such a hard time letting moderate candidates stand a chance for the party nominations? The Democratic party has a lot of problems but I can't even remember the last time anyone even remotely "radical" had even an inkling of a chance to win the party nomination. With the GOP it seems to be the standard course to only favor those that scare the hell out of anyone that isn't radically right wing.

 

[Chris L]

Do explain then why the Right has such a hard time letting moderate candidates stand a chance for the party nominations?

You mean like John McCain?

 

[Moon-Spinner]

Do explain then why the Right has such a hard time letting moderate candidates stand a chance for the party nominations? The Democratic party has a lot of problems but I can't even remember the last time anyone even remotely "radical" had even an inkling of a chance to win the party nomination. With the GOP it seems to be the standard course to only favor those that scare the hell out of anyone that isn't radically right wing.

As a registered Republican, I have no explanation why the Right can't come up with a candidate who isn't half insane. I keep waiting and hoping, I can only guess that sane people (or "Smart" people too) wouldn't ever want to run for the presidency. I keep waiting for a Republican who has an inkling of knowledge in science, but that just seems so rare.

I also think that people such as Limbaugh, Coulter, and that absolutely wretched Glenn Beck, are the Republican Party's worse enemy.

So, I try not to pay too much attention, all I can do is roll my eyes, and move on...

As for Ann Coulter - I don't think she's playing to the crowd that buys her crap, I think she actually believes what she spews. She's like any other radical, she twist things to fit her beliefs.

 

[Minoosh]

You mean like John McCain?

McCain was maligned every step of the way. It was very strange to watch. Only when he named Palin his veep (thus throttling his chance of election) was the ticket embraced.

I've never understood it. It will happen again if Romney is nominated.

McCain seemed overall like a decent guy but even with 5 years as a POW in North Vietnam he was attacked as borderline traitorous and I'm not even sure why. Immigration, maybe. Yes he got the nomination but the vitriol around him was extreme. It's like the party didn't want him to win and as the election approached I think he got pretty disenchanted with the "base."

 

[Minoosh]

It's like the party didn't want him to win and as the election approached I think he got pretty disenchanted with the "base."

My own words not strong enough - I believe he came to see the "base" as repugnant.

What is the base anyway? Most consistent primary voters?