Jonathan posted on the same take on this issue as my new blog friend Luke took me to task for. However, I stand by this position: Ann took her opportunity. She could have responded differently--but she didn't. Her distaste and anger against John Edwards colored her response. She calculated what she wanted to say and said it. Ann's remarks may have been taken out of context and used by the media against her-in a manner of speaking. However, Ann's previous bromides (see my previous post) against the Edwards family does not make up for sniping yet again at the presidential hopeful.Her point was that Bill Maher, a liberal, can get away with saying the most scandalously terrible things about a national leader, so she’ll do the same thing since it is evident that that type of language is acceptable on the public airwaves.
But that language is not acceptable.
That is, if you’re a conservative.
And so the media has been reporting, quite erroneously, that Ann Coulter has stated that she wishes John Edwards was killed by terrorists.
It would be funny if it weren’t so pitiful.
You see, the truth doesn’t seem to matter these days.
The media appear to be more concerned with creating perception than reporting the news.
It sometimes amazes me that members of the mainstream press do not even comprehend the basics of a story. I wonder if they are simply slow-minded or if they are willfully blinded by their political agendas.
It’s got to be one or the other.
Whatever the case, it is increasingly evident that there is no equal playing field in the so-called mainstream media, the great embracers of “diversity.”
Miss Coulter was on the Fox News Channel’s “O’Reilly Factor” on Thursday night and she seemed to be worn out by the continuing dishonest portrayals of her words.
Who wouldn’t be?
So I say this to Miss Coulter: As long as you continue to contradict the policies of the mainstream — which expect us to gullibly accept everything they say — you will carry a target on your back. This is a truth that my dad experienced almost daily throughout his 51 years in ministry.
It is apparent that when you stand up for conservative values, and especially when you stand up for Christian values, you will be ridiculed. But as my dad often said, we are not called to be popular, we are called to be faithful.
Ann, rest assured, there are millions of people in this nation who appreciate your willingness to step into hostile fire in order to point out the inconsistencies of the mainstream. May you be bolstered by our prayers and well wishes.
Laying conservatism aside, when are conservatives going to become examples of the very values they proclaim? Laying Christianity aside, why is it OK for a (proclaimed) Christian to talk this way? This type of language is not acceptable; it isn't even permissible to joke around about someone's death. Conservatives should expect better than this for those who tout that they support our values in the public square. For Jonathan to defend Ann Coulter is disingenuous at best, foolish at worst. My hope for Jonathan was that he would not have trod the same political path as his father. I guess I am wrong.
7 comments:
Tony,
Saying that I "took you to task" is a little over the top my friend. But it is your blog and you are entitled to say what you desire. But if for any reason you detected anger, animosity, arrogance or anything of the such in my post, I deeply regret that because none was meant.
Luke,
I apologize--I didn't mean what you think it did. I simply meant you had a position and you defended it, and that I admire.
I did enjoy our conversation and you are welcome to discuss anything here. There was no anger or hostility and I am glad for that. I hope that we as conservatives can talk reasonably about these things.
Have a great weekend and especially blessed Lord's Day.
It is apparent that when you stand up for conservative values, and especially when you stand up for Christian values, you will be ridiculed. But as my dad often said, we are not called to be popular, we are called to be faithful.
Sad really. Ann Coulter is ridiculed because she stands up for Christian values, right?
Sigh.
This is one issue that I think Coulter, the media, Jonathan Falwell, and practically everyone involved are wrong. (Am I the only one who is always right? :) )
Incidences like this prevent a civil national dialogue. Whatever Coulter's intentions, she does more harm than good, her detractors and defenders all use her "over-the-top" remarks to substantiate their own point of view and/or agenda,(She uses them to draw attention and sell books.) and ultimately no one wins.
While I support Christians being involved in the public arena, the truths we claim to speak for demand a higher standard of conduct and discourse. And speaking the truth does not necessitate the ridicule of the world.
Cameron,
Good to see you! Its been a while.
I wonder who really listens to Ann anymore besides big media outlets. I cannot believe any thinking Christian would support her. I do agree with Mrs. Edwards here--she does nothing but lower political dialogue.
Not only does she make and compound the stereotype that all conservatives are mean and nasty, she seems to enjoy doing it. I think it also reveals the caliber of one's ability to discourse when you have to resort to her level of dialogue.
Glad to see you back. Hope you were refreshed in your time away from blogging.
I wonder. Her books sell so well and her two days on Dobson make me think there are many Christians (the thinking part is still up in the air) who actually read her stuff.
On another note, btw, I am reading Gore's book on reason and think he is addressing some of the core problems that create a market for Coulter.
Streak,
I would agree--that is why I prefaced my comment with "thinking" Christians rather than those who parrot what Ann says.
I'll be interested to take a look at Gore's book, too. Right now I'm in the middle of two that I want to get a lot out of, not just a cursory read--Obama's Audacity of Hope and Horwitz's Confederates in the Attic.
Post a Comment