Coulter has a new best seller

iVillage Member
Registered: 02-05-2011
Coulter has a new best seller
94
Tue, 06-07-2011 - 12:14pm

Ann Coulter has a new best seller. Agree or disagree with Ann, she is provacative. The following is from the linked article, it is part of the ABC news story and part of the first chapter of her new book.

You can read about it here - http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/Politics/ann-coulter-conservative-commentator-takes-liberal-mob-read/story?id=13773013

Ann Coulter on the 'Liberal Mob' of the American Left

New York Times bestselling author and conservative political commentator Ann Coulter's new book, "Demonic: How the Liberal Mob is Endangering America", tackles politics once again, this time taking on the liberal left and what she describes as their "mob behavior."

In "Demonic," Coulter traces the words and movements of groups from the Ku Klux Klan and the SDS to anti-war protesters and Democrats today to argue her point that liberals have "consistently used mob tactics to implement their idea of the 'general will.'"

"Just as fire seeks oxygen, Democrats seek power, which is why they will always be found championing the mob whether the mob consists of Democrats lynching blacks or Democrats slandering the critics of Obama Care as racists," Coulter writes.

"Demonic" is the eighth book from Coulter, also a frequent television political commentator.

Read an excerpt from "Demonic" below, then check out some other books in the "GMA" library

Chapter 1

The Liberal Mob

2 When Jesus got out of the boat, a man with an impure spirit came from the tombs to meet him.


3 This man lived in the tombs, and no one could bind him anymore, not even with a chain.

4 For he had often been chained hand and foot, but he tore the chains apart and broke the irons on his feet. No one was strong enough to subdue him.

5 Night and day among the tombs and in the hills he would cry out and cut himself with stones.

6 When he saw Jesus from a distance, he ran and fell on his knees in front of him.

7 He shouted at the top of his voice, "What do you want with me, Jesus, Son of the Most High God? In God's name don't torture me!"

8 For Jesus had said to him, "Come out of this man, you impure spirit!"

9 Then Jesus asked him, "What is your name?" "My name is Legion," he replied, "for we are many."

-- Mark 5:2--9

The demon is a mob, and the mob is demonic. It is the nihilistic mob of the French Revolution; it is the revolutionaries who seized control of Russia at the beginning of the twentieth century; it is the Maoist gangs looting villages and impaling babies in China; it is the Ku Klux Klan terrorizing Republicans and blacks in the South; it is the 1992 Los Angeles riot that left fifty dead and did $1 billion of damage after the first Rodney King verdict; it is the bloody riots at the 1968 Democratic National Convention; it is the masked hoodlums smashing up Seattle when bankers came to town; it is the 500,000 illegal aliens marching under a foreign flag in Los Angeles; it is throngs of Islamic fanatics attending the Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini's funeral, tearing his body out of its coffin; it is left-wing protesters destroying property and attacking delegates at the 2004 and 2008 Republican National Conventions.

Everything else changes, but mobs are always the same. A mob is an irrational, childlike, often violent organism that derives its energy from the group. Intoxicated by messianic goals, the promise of instant gratification, and adrenaline-pumping exhortations, mobs create mayhem, chaos, and destruction, leaving a smoldering heap of wreckage for their leaders to climb to power.

The Democratic Party is the party of the mob, irrespective of what the mob represents. Democrats activate mobs, depend on mobs, coddle mobs, publicize and celebrate mobs -- they are the mob. Indeed, the very idea of a "community organizer" is to stir up a mob for some political purpose. "As so frequently happens when a crowd goes wild," historian Eric Durschmied says, "there is always one who shouts louder and thereby appoints himself as their leader."1 Those are the people we call "elected Democrats."

The Democrats' playbook doesn't involve heads on pikes -- as yet -- but uses a more insidious means to incite the mob. The twisting of truth, stirring of passions, demonizing of opponents, and relying on propagandistic images in lieu of ideas -- these are the earmarks of a mob leader. Over and over again, one finds the Democrats manipulating the mob to gain power. It is official Democratic policy to appeal to the least informed, most weak-minded and perpetually alarmed members of the public.


Their base consists of soccer moms, actresses, felons, MSNBC viewers (both of them), non-English speakers, welfare recipients, heads-up-their-butts billionaires, and government workers -- who can never be laid off. The entire party gave up on attracting the votes of white men decades ago. It's easier to round up votes by frightening women about "assault weapons" and promising excellent free health care to non-English speakers. Yes, a free health care system that is so superior that they exempt themselves and their friends from having to be in it. Liberals frighten people about their health care in order to stampede through ObamaCare. They claim the Earth is overheating in order to seize taxpayer money for solar panels and compact fluorescent lightbulbs.

They call out union thugs to force politicians to accede to insane benefits packages. They stage campaigns of calumny to get their way on gay marriage. Faddish ideas that would never have occurred to anyone fifty years ago -- or even twenty years ago -- are suddenly foisted on the rest of us by the liberal mobs.

Pages

iVillage Member
Registered: 04-07-2002
Thu, 06-09-2011 - 11:37am
I was responding to your post. Perhaps you should go back and reread what you wrote. I don't 'bait' others...I respond to their comments. That's not 'baiting'. Do you understand that 'debating' is based on questioning the position of another individual? I'm not questioning you...I'm questioning what you wrote.

FYI, I'm not a 'progressive' (a new word for 'liberal', I assume). I'm a moderate liberal who has no party affiliations. Using 'progressive' as a blanket label isn't any more accurate than using 'liberal' or 'conservative'.

If you don't wish to respond, so be it. LOL!

 nwtreehugger  

iVillage Member
Registered: 02-05-2011
Thu, 06-09-2011 - 11:59am

For the past few decades it seems progressives need someone to love (a messianic leader) and someone to hate. Clinton was our first black President, now we have our second per some progressives. Loving Clinton (accused of rape by one woman, and of sexual assault by several) and Obama seems to have no cut off or limits. This could apply to Weiner also. Progressives must love their leaders no matter how bad they are.

At the same time, any hostility toward the hated opponent is acceptable. Attacking Bush, his minor daughters, was fine. Attacking Palin and her minor children is also fine. It is very likely any attack on Obama's beautiful children would be met with great hostility (by both progressives and conservatives).

I heard once heard a person articulate what may be the primary difference between conservatives and progressives. Conservatives consider progressives misguided, and hope one day they grow to understand the world better. While progressives actually hate conservatives and wish great ill upon them. The hatred of Palin is just the current manifestation of progressive intolerance. Eventually whoever becomes the Republican nominee for President will experience progressive hatred in many forms.

The Palin / Bush / Cheney / you name the conservative hate speech prevalent on so many internet forums, including ivillage, indicate a horrific double standard in treatment of political figures based on perceived party affiliation.

iVillage Member
Registered: 02-05-2011
Thu, 06-09-2011 - 12:00pm
Yeah, Weiner is slime, nothing to discuss. But Palin, wow, lets have a few 100 post threads about her a week, and how awful she is.

The double standard is obvious to me, to others, it seems to not exist.
iVillage Member
Registered: 02-05-2011
Thu, 06-09-2011 - 12:04pm
A comedian recently said he'd kill Palin if she were President, the progressive audience agreed and applauded. To kill Palin, is funny, only to progressives. Yet, somehow that didn't get a thread here. I wonder why? Hating Palin, and her family is such sport here, why not discussing the humor progressives see in killing her?

Here is some progressive humor, personally I don't find it funny, but progressives seem to really enjoy it.

http://www.postchronicle.com/news/original/article_212368843.shtml

Here is what Titus said, "You know what man? I am going to literally - if she gets elected president, I am going to hang out on the grassy knoll all the time, just loaded and ready - because you know what? It's for my country. It's for my country. If I got to sacrifice myself, it's for my country."

Shamefully, many in the audience laughed.

This comment came right after the Sarah Palin's Paul Revere discussion. Interestingly enough, I find it rather strange that these comedians think they are history buffs. Have any of them even read Revere's memoirs?
iVillage Member
Registered: 02-05-2011
Thu, 06-09-2011 - 12:06pm
The progressive hypocrisy on many boards, including ivillage, is amazing. One day with any lock an archive of this will be of interest to future readers.
iVillage Member
Registered: 04-07-2002
Thu, 06-09-2011 - 12:13pm
A few 100 per WEEK??? I'm not sure we've posted a few hundred since...whenever! I'll have to go check that out!! Besides, she keeps bringing herself back into the media limelight.... ;)

Sorry...no double standard...but just to make you feel better, I'll post something about Weiner so that we can all post was a slime he is...okay?

 nwtreehugger  

iVillage Member
Registered: 04-07-2002
Thu, 06-09-2011 - 12:16pm
Who in the heck is Titus? I've never heard of him(I'm assuming). I wouldn't have laughed. But, to be truthful, how is that any different than McCain/Palin's backers screaming to hurt Obama? Both sides have those in need of behaving better.

 nwtreehugger  

iVillage Member
Registered: 04-07-2002
Thu, 06-09-2011 - 12:17pm
Can I ask you something...why the sudden use of the label 'progressives'? Are all 'liberals' now 'progressives"? And, if not, what is the difference in 'definition' between the two?

A label is really a hinderance to debate, btw.

 nwtreehugger  

iVillage Member
Registered: 11-13-2009
Thu, 06-09-2011 - 1:39pm
LOL!

I don't think it's any coincidence that libs see Palin as a joke, and often amusing, while conservatives see everything we do as "hate."

After all......

 

iVillage Member
Registered: 11-13-2009
Thu, 06-09-2011 - 1:41pm
Since not even a Democrat that I know of has defended Weiner... I don't know what you find so debatable on the subject.

Can you enlighten us, without bashing all libs or Obama and the rest of us?

 

Pages