 |
|
Add to My Group
|
December 30, 2008 at 00:57:36
Promoted to Headline (H3) on 12/30/08: by Mary MacElveen Page 1 of 1 page(s) |
|
 
|
In keeping with the holiday spirit, Christmas in particular: Do you remember as a child asking Santa Claus for one particular present which was number one on your list? After all, you stated to him as you sat on his lap that you had been at your best all-year-long. You stated to him that you had not been naughty during the year and he assured you that under your Christmas tree, a special present would be delivered to you. For many our Christmas gift came early and that was the decisive victory of President-elect Barack Obama over his Republican challenger, Senator John McCain on Election Day. The moment it was revealed to all who supported Obama that he was declared president-elect, we said thank you to Santa Claus. So we assumed that we would not have to put up with miscreants like Ann Coulter during these next four years. How wrong were we? Very! It has now been reported by MediaMatters.org that none-other than Ann Coulter is scheduled to be interviewed on January 6, 2009. I would say instead of a present, this is tantamount to a lump of coal being placed in our stockings. But, that singular piece of coal through this invite grew exponentially. Her words and appearance on any network, is as toxic as the waste that coal creates as evident in the sludge-spill that occurred in Tennessee. The coal-filled sludge was reported to consist of, “1.8 million cubic yards or more than 360 million gallons of sludge. By Friday, the estimate reached 5.4 million cubic yards or more than 1 billion gallons -- enough to fill 1,660 Olympic-size swimming pools.” I would say that letting Ann Coulter speak of her new book is as toxic-filled and just as devastating as this sludge-spill was reported to be. In fact the crap she spews can fill up just as many pools if not more.
When MediaMatters.org reported Ann Coulter stating, "we could get all of his aliases before he’s sworn in on the Quran," All I have to say to that is, "Geez, Ann, get a brain to pay attention to the numerous reports citing that President-elect Barack Obama will be sworn in using the 'Lincoln Bible'.” Exactly what aliases is she citing? Oh yes, she is referring to his middle name which is Hussein. To me, his middle-name Hussein is just his middle name. If there is any toxicity in a name, it is none-other than Ann Coulter.
If we are to believe which we will not that Hussein had weapons of mass destruction when it was proven he did not, her words to NBC’s viewing audience are provable weapons of mass destruction. At this critical juncture in our nation’s history where we have an economic meltdown, two wars still be waged overseas and the new war between Israel and Hamas, we need pragmatic voices and not destructive voices.
I am left to ask NBC, “Exactly what are you thinking by inviting her to present what misguided ideas she has?” Invite people that are of high-minded thinking who can add something to our nation’s dialogue to help solve the immense problems we are all facing. Voices like Coulter only seek to destroy this nation.
Lastly, I ask all of my readers to call up NBC and tell them you do not approve of them giving this hateful ideologue a podium by calling this number, (212) 664-4444. Also report back to MediaMatters.org how they reacted to the call placed.
Author’s email address is, xmjmac@optonline.net
http://www.mary-macelveen.blogspot.com
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author
and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.
 Contact Author |
Contact Editor |
 View Authors' Articles |
|
|
|
|
| 22 comments |
|
Coultergeist
Although I couldn't agree more with you about the witch from hell spelled with a 'b', I think the biggest lump we got was not of coal, but of crap by Obama himself with the invitation to Warren. I'm still trying to get over that one, and think it was a mistake that does not bode well for the future...and I hope I'm wrong. by Sandy Sand (198 articles, 0 quicklinks, 227 diaries, 1548 comments [2 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Tuesday, Dec 30, 2008 at 4:38:48 AM  (0+)
|
|
re: Ann Coulter
TV runs on ratings. Not quality. Not educational value, but ratings. Coulter will bnring in ratings. Now, the question is -- are there more intelligent conservatives out there? Absolutely?! Are there better pundits from the rgiht wing? Of course! (Even Rush Limbaugh can be fun.) So, the ONLY reason the bobble-heads at NBC even agreed to this was -- a misguided belief they are being (uh) (a) fair and balanced and (b) because they're idiots. Probably both. by Brasch (87 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 70 comments) on Tuesday, Dec 30, 2008 at 5:13:43 AM (0+)
|
|
WTF???
Unfortunately maybe our citizenry has been dumbed down enough to want to hear Coulter's rants of one liner zingers.... I for one refuse to do so. As for Warren. I, too, was in wonder as to how he became so prominent politically... after all, he had just given Bush the first annual International Medal of PEACE, and then was named by Obama for the inauguration. It turns out he is a member of the Council on Foreign Relations! That is the frightening thing about Obama's announcement as it signals that the kind of change we have all hoped for isn't really on its way. We are in for more of the same. Buckjle up! by Dennis Kaiser (20 articles, 0 quicklinks, 35 diaries, 730 comments [137 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Tuesday, Dec 30, 2008 at 6:36:20 AM (0+)
|
|
Reply: WTF 2.0
In case you haven't heard, it is my understanding that Michelle Obama has been a member of the CFR for many years. Oddly enough, the Chicago branch of the CFR changed its name to the Council on International Affairs just months before Barack made his bid for the White House. Are we screwed? You betcha! by Sonny Knox (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 11 comments) on Tuesday, Dec 30, 2008 at 7:46:02 AM (0+)
|
|
You still watch TV?
If this isn't another example of why you should turn your television into something useful, like landfill, I don't know what is? Television is perhaps the most dangerous mind-altering drug we have today. It should come with a warning label: Caution: watching programs on this set runs the risk of turning you into a misinformed hypnotized zombie. Turn on at your own risk. by Mr M (8 articles, 0 quicklinks, 66 diaries, 2845 comments [654 recommended, 27 rejected]) on Tuesday, Dec 30, 2008 at 7:30:32 AM (0+)
|
|
Reply: It is important to monitor the propaganda
that is being put out there. It helps you to understand why your neighbor thinks that Obama is a muslim babykiller and Bush is the word of God made flesh (or something akin to this). You have to know the enemy. But you don't have to believe his bullshit. Which is why I watch the evening news, but get most of the information upon which I form my opinions from the internet, foreign press and various radio sources. I can see exactly how the propagandist media twist things, the words they use to spin the stories in their direction and how the choice of which stories they tell and which they don't also affect the common American thought. The lesson: never trust "common wisdom" or "common knowledge" as it usually tends to eminate from propaganda. by Paula Sayles (6 articles, 0 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 204 comments [78 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Tuesday, Dec 30, 2008 at 3:39:09 PM (0+)
|
|
Reply: Danger
Mary, TV is very dangerous, like Mr. M was saying. It is dangerous to "monitor" a mind control device that works on the subconcious levels of your mind. It is not a matter of dealing with whether the "arguments" are "rational", of whether there are "lies and distortions"--when the true danger is in the medium itself...in the electronic transmission itself. Mind control is much more sophisticated than the mere Bernaysian propaganda issue. with TV it is the hypnotic nature of the entire paradigm. by William Whitten (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 4880 comments [1686 recommended, 28 rejected]) on Wednesday, Dec 31, 2008 at 2:04:31 PM (0+)
|
|
GE/NBC is not Your Friend
Anybody who believes Brian Williams is a newscaster can certainly find a space in his heart for Anne Coulter. At least she expresses her prejudices and crackpot ideas openly. Anyway, my wife is skinny and her Adam's Apple is prominent. Since 2003, Brian Williams has paraded a host of 'military experts' who mouthed the Pentagon and military/industrial complex lies. GE/NBC is not your friend. by Jason Paz (68 articles, 88 quicklinks, 112 diaries, 1386 comments [97 recommended, 1 rejected]) on Tuesday, Dec 30, 2008 at 7:39:25 AM (0+)
|
|
NBC = what?
It is General Electric GE, and how much money have they pilfered from these illegal and horrid wars in both Afghanistan and Iraq? Listen to Mr. M. and "STOP" watching these over paid, corpstream media bastards, who are there for one reason and one reason only, and that is to keep you dumbed down and misinformed. Tune into the I.N.N. World Report with Lenny Charles or Amy Goodman if you must watch news. By the way I loathe each and everyone of these media shills. Especially Brian Williams with his monotoned cadenced voice, and Charles Gibson. Between the two of them they wouldn't make a pimple on a real journalist's (Robert Fisk and John Pilger to name a few) arse! by Munich (1 articles, 86 quicklinks, 14 diaries, 1125 comments [86 recommended, 1 rejected]) on Tuesday, Dec 30, 2008 at 12:18:25 PM (0+)
|
|
Reply: I have written of John Pilger.
I was glad that you brought to light the words expressed by John Pilger. I did take the time to write of him and you can read it by going to this link, http://www.opednews.com/articles/opedne_mary_mac_071128_john_pilger_3a_a_profi.htm Best, Mary MacElveen! by Mary MacElveen (371 articles, 0 quicklinks, 7 diaries, 52 comments [1 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Tuesday, Dec 30, 2008 at 1:04:49 PM (0+)
|
|
Ann Coulter
With Brokaw and the new Tim Russert replacement - what surprises anyone - they have to infiltrate and try to over run the network with sick republican garbage-- so more garbage by James Mc Shane (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 10 comments) on Tuesday, Dec 30, 2008 at 2:48:22 PM (0+)
|
|
watch C-Span
the last of the balanced news. Full of congressional rhetoric, one is given the chance to figure it all out on one's own. The best show is Washington Journal(call-in and email in) with various speakers. Objective moderators and shown everyday, 5am-8am (MDT), gives a viewer a wide persepective of the issues. Democracy Now is not so balanced per say, but an excellent show for true news at all levels featuring the best of authors and spokes people. Ann Coulter is by far the bimbo of news...'nuff said. She created the "godless liberals" in term. She pulls crap out of her own annie dictionary...a book owned solely by her types. I don't view mainstream media for the most part. I think watching them is a touch of supporting them. Albeit, I do like to drop into a keith show now and then just to get that rush from his "worse worser and worst" segment! by shirley reese (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 592 comments [98 recommended, 1 rejected]) on Tuesday, Dec 30, 2008 at 4:44:02 PM (0+)
|
|
What a travesty!
The nerve of them to air an opposing viewpoint! Write your congressperson! Demand that all non-liberal voices be silenced from the airwaves! Support the fairness doctrine and stop this darn freedom of speech before it destroys us all. Or..you could just turn it off. by Starbuck (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 71 comments [2 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Tuesday, Dec 30, 2008 at 7:50:21 PM (0+)
|
|
Reply: If I'm remembering right,
and I may not be, freedom of speech doesn't apply to hate speech that's designed to incite and provoke. Most of the slime that oozes out of her hormonally-modified face probably qualifies. Anyway, weren't her jaws supposed to be wired shut? What happened with that? We were hoping it was permanent... by annavanz (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 38 comments) on Tuesday, Dec 30, 2008 at 10:30:13 PM (0+)
|
|
Reply: Careful now
Be careful of bring in the subject of "Hate Speech", that phrase is as politicized as any other in this post Orwellian crackerjack box we call the world. by William Whitten (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 4880 comments [1686 recommended, 28 rejected]) on Wednesday, Dec 31, 2008 at 2:10:34 PM (0+)
|
|
Reply: What I find most ironic...
...is a comment referring to hate speech within one of the most hate filled threads I've ever seen on Op-Ed. Below are some very vicious quotes, including one from your own comment, that could be defined as hate speech under many of the hate speech standards we have seen today. You see, hate is something that permeates more hate. To succumb to it puts one on the same level as the alleged hater they are responding to: "I would say that letting Ann Coulter speak of her new book is as toxic-filled and just as devastating as this sludge-spill was reported to be. In fact the crap she spews can fill up just as many pools if not more." "Most of the slime that oozes out of her hormonally-modified face probably qualifies" The sad reality is, to define a view as "hate filled" and demand that it be silenced just because it differs from one's own seems to be a predominently left-wing tactic. How often do you hear voices from the right demanding that left leaning commentators be silenced? Yet the predominant theme here is not that people should not watch, but that the voice should not be heard in the first place. by Starbuck (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 71 comments [2 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Wednesday, Dec 31, 2008 at 4:54:35 PM (0+)
|
|
W.P.I.T.W.
The following day, she'll be W.T.I.P.W on Countdown! She probably has another one of her silly books out, something along the lines of "How I Constantly Con The Gullible Out Of Their Money." by Kenneth Barr (10 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 107 comments) on Tuesday, Dec 30, 2008 at 8:47:26 PM (0+)
|
|
Anne Coulter
Mary, you're dead right about Ann Coulter. As much as I detest almost everything she stands for, and particularly hate the tone of her venomous rhetoric, I've read her books and even bought some in order to provide balanced views in the high school library I managed in California. What I can't understand is how in heaven's name did such a miscreat get a law degree from Michigan? Similarly, I'll never understand how Phyllis Schlafly got a law degree from Washington Univ. in St. Louis. These female fascists continue to astonish me with their hate-filled writing. It drops the political debate in America to new lows. Shame on her and shame on NBC for hosting such claptrap garbage. by Larry Retzack (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 43 comments) on Tuesday, Dec 30, 2008 at 10:22:06 PM (0+)
|
|
What are you afraid of?
Her words could destroy this nation? Huh?? My gosh, that is absurd. I actually think she is an embarassment to conservatives, but I also know the nation does not revolve around her ridiculous words. Another way that I look at it: This is the same network that employs Keith Olbermann, and I think his words are nothing but verbal methane. So it's fitting that NBC debases itself using all extremes. At this rate, the only thing I find worth watching on NBC is Sunday Night Football - and I refuse to watch the halftime show. by Scott (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 744 comments [30 recommended, 3 rejected]) on Tuesday, Dec 30, 2008 at 11:31:49 PM (0+)
|
|
Pray for this woman
This shows how strikingly out of touch with America NBC is. In case you've been dead for the last decade, right-wing ideas and policies have been discredited. The first and last neocon President is nationalizing the banks. Conservatives are meeting to "retool" and are obsessing about birth certificates. The right used its moment in power to break all records for screwing up. In desperation, the corporations are putting poor Ann Coulter up there to fight the wingnut cause. Can more badmouthing of the left save the right? We must pray for this woman... And ring in the New Year with some Bubbles: by Perry Logan (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 557 comments [74 recommended, 3 rejected]) on Wednesday, Dec 31, 2008 at 6:05:01 AM (0+)
|
|
Watching Coulter
over the years, I'm guessing she is smarter than she appears. I think she figured out early in her career, she was headed nowhere on talent or content. She then decided to be an obnoxious hate spewer to antagonize the masses. This allows her to write books (that sell somehow) and appear on T.V. shows, and make money. Beats "tea and cookies" I guess. by sommers (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 174 comments [38 recommended, 2 rejected]) on Wednesday, Dec 31, 2008 at 11:34:39 AM (0+)
|
|
Re: Starbuck comment
"The sad reality is, to define a view as "hate filled" and demand that it be silenced just because it differs from one's own seems to be a predominently left-wing tactic. How often do you hear voices from the right demanding that left leaning commentators be silenced? Yet the predominant theme here is not that people should not watch, but that the voice should not be heard in the first place." You know SB, I was agreeing with your reasoned argument until you went off the right edge with the paragraph quoted above. An immediate counter to your statement is the right-wing treatment of Jeremiah Wright for saying the same things that Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson said on the day of. Even at the top of the right-wing party the whole Joe Wilson/Valerie Plame affair disproves your statement showing how far the right wing-nuts will go to silence those who disagree with them. by ssmitty (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 27 comments [1 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Thursday, Jan 1, 2009 at 8:22:58 AM (0+)
|
Want to post your own comment on this Article? 
|
||||
|
||||||||||||||
Must Read (0) 
Well Said (0) 
News (0) 
Touching (0) 
Funny (0) 
Supported (0) 
Interesting (0) 
Inspiring (0) 
Valuable (0)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tell a Friend:
|
Copyright © 2002-2009, OpEdNews |
