Roundup

Ann Coulter files hate speech claim against Canadian university —  where you can speak your mind as long as no one (on the Left) gets offended.  Coming soon to a country near you!

Hillary Clinton is OK with abortions, just not gender-selection abortions — but if they don’t kill innocent human beings, why does the motive count?  (hat tip: Chance)

Great summary on the health care debacle by Marshall.

I should be overjoyed at ACORN calling it quits, but they are obviously just changing their names and reorganizing.  They won’t go far, and they’ll still get their funding.

Bart Stupak and the myth of the “pro-life Democrat” — I can’t tell you how many “pro-life Democrats” I know who voted for Obama, the most pro-abortion President ever.

False teacher considers taxpayer-funded abortions to being part of a “beloved community” — no surprise there.

Did everyone sign the health care bill? You know I did!

Seriously,  I will grant that Obama & Co. do a much better job of influencing people than the Republicans.  It is proven — though not that well known — that even getting people to do small gestures like signing a document or donating $5 dramatically increases their commitment to a candidate or program (even a horrible, horrible candidate/program like this one).

0 thoughts on “Roundup”

  1. YES! You finally linked to BibChr! Woot! :-p

    Love how the Canadian university immediately starts in on promoting hatred against various groups. I always think it’s just precious that to the Left, disagreeing with someone can only and always=hatred. (Take an unsaved acquaintance of mine, who referred to a book I gave him on the unbiblical teachings of Roman Catholicism as “bashing.” Mmm-hmm.) I heart Ann Coulter.

    Somehow I don’t think Dr. King would agree with said teacher. I am even more certain he would not appreciate such a wonderful descriptive term being hijacked by someone who wants to end “the dream” in the womb. Painfully ironic.

    Like

  2. Ann can stay that heck out of my country. Her hateful comments in the past have offended plenty of people in this country, just as many on the right as the left. She has said disgraceful things about our military men and women, mocked our sovereignty, our values, our intelligence, and our beliefs. Yet she has no problem swinging by to sell some books.

    The university warned her about our hate speech laws as a courtesy, since her past statements could be cause for prosecution in Canada. She inflames people for a living, so she can’t complain if that backlash from that impedes her speaking engagements.

    Personally, I would have let her speak, and then challenged her with words, but it’s probably better that she stay home.

    Like

    1. Boo-hoo. That shows how thin skinned Liberals are. We have critics of the U.S. that are far more shrill and mean than Ann. We call them college professors.

      Sent from my iPhone

      Like

      1. That’s even assuming that the purpose of the law is to ensure that people are not offended.

        “Hate speech laws” can only exist in a country that lacks free speech protections. Once upon a time, Ryan, a lot of things would have been considered hateful and offensive speech, such as promoting racial equality or atheism. The only difference is the person who is doing the oppressing; many of us happen to think that it’s wrong, either way.

        Like

      2. Canada places restrictions on free speech, so yes, hate speech laws cannot exist with completely free speech.

        Our experience and tolerance of Olympic protestors has proven that Canada allows a very wide scope of free speech. I’m trying to write up an article for Neil touching on some of those things.

        You should look up the amount of people prosecuted under our hate speech laws. I found three cases in the past 20 years where it was used, and the biggest penalty was a small fine. To violate our hate speech laws you need to say something that brings real harm to a person or group, not just hurt feelings. You practically need to advocate genocide or lynch-mobs.

        Many hate speech complaints have been filed to protect religious groups from criticism from other religious groups.

        Like

      3. The Olympics example seems less than compelling. Govts tend to behave a little better when people are watching.

        Someone thought the threats were real enough to warn Coulter.

        Sent from my iPhone

        Like

      4. That’s true, and was definitely a factor. It was a bad idea to warn Ann, since everyone knows that’s exactly what she wanted.

        We have our share of holocaust deniers and white supremacists, and they don’t seem to have many problems with free speech.

        Like

      5. Doesn’t sound like it if Ann Coulter troubles you so much. She only speaks her mind, doing so in a manner not considerate of the gentle sensitivities of her opponents. The fact of the matter is that for too long now those sensitivities have resulted in a variety of bad behaviors being tolerated when truly honest people of character wouldn’t stand for them for even a second. What’s worse than anything Coulter says are those who claim she is inciting violent behavior. That’s completely idiotic.

        Like

      6. No, she doesn’t trouble me so much. I know that much of what she says is tongue in cheek, but many Americans take her completely seriously. I know she means every bit of what she says about politics, but her comments about certain ethnic groups are extremely distasteful and have served to incite racism. That’s what I don’t like about her. She’s not a very nice person.

        Like

      7. “Many Americans”, Ryan? Have you taken a poll? I doubt you could even say the “some” Americans take her seriously in the manner you seem to believe. Can you provide an example of comments of hers you find particularly distasteful?

        Like

      8. I happen to know many Americans, and some people in my own family “take her completely seriously”. Forgive me if I’m wrong, but I don’t know of a poll to check my data on this one.

        Here are some distasteful comments.

        “Muslims shouldn’t be allowed on airplanes and should take flying carpets instead”

        ” We should invade their countries, kill their leaders and convert them to Christianity.”

        “God says, ‘Earth is yours. Take it. Rape it. It’s yours.'”

        “[Canadians] better hope the United States does not roll over one night and crush them. They are lucky we allow them to exist on the same continent.”

        Like

      9. You guys really don’t have a problem with these comments do you? What about her stand that women should not be allowed to vote? She reiterated that point in Calgary a couple of hours ago, and she’s serious. A friend of mine there, who is a very conservative evangelical Christian, is extremely disgusted with many of her comments.

        And no Marshall, I have not seen any violence incited specifically by Ann Coulter. So I guess that means you win.

        Like

      10. As with anyone else that says ridiculous things, inclduing you Ryan, I would defend that right to the death. Whetehr or not I agree with the sentiments expressed or not.

        Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s