Ann Coulter is a polarizing figure. I have seen her on some news programs and have found her to be articul
In light of a book, by a liberal, th
Ann CoulterWhat a Sack of Sacrosanct
In the New York Times’ profile on the family of Supreme Court nominee Elena Kagan, her aunt was quoted as saying: "There was thinking, always thinking"
atthe family's dinner table. "Nothing was sacrosanct."
Really? Nothing was sacrosanct? Because in my experience, on a scale of 1-to-infinity, the range of acceptable opinion among
liberals goes from 1-to-1.001. New York
How would the following remarks fare
ata dinner table on the Upper West Sidewhere "nothing was sacrosanct": Hey, maybe th atJoe McCarthy was onto something. Wh atwould prayer in the schools really hurt? How do we know gays are born th atway? Is it possible th atunion demands have gone too far? Does it make sense to have three recycling bins in these microscopic apartments? Say, has anyone read Charles Murray's l Manh attan atest book?
Those comments, considered "convers
ation starters" in most of the country, would get you banned from polite society in . Also, unless you want the whole room slowly backing away from you, also avoid: May I smoke? I heard it on Fox News and Merry Christmas! New York
Even members of survivalist Christian cults in
Idaho atleast know people who hold opposing views. liberals don't. New York
As Kagan herself described it, on the Upper West Side of
where she grew up, "Nobody ever admitted to voting Republican." So, I guess you could say being a Democr New York atwas "sacrosanct."
Even within the teeny-tiny range of approved liberal opinion in
, disagreement will get you banned from the premises. New York
When, as dean of the Harvard Law School, Kagan disagreed with the Bill Clinton policy of "Don't ask, don't tell" for gays in the military, she open-mindedly banned military recruiters from the law school, denouncing Clinton's policy as "discrimin
atory," "deeply wrong," "unwise and unjust."
From this, I conclude th
athaving gays serving openly in the military is "sacrosanct" for liberals.
Having gays NOT serve in the military is a position held by lots of people in other parts of the country, but I do not recall any Christian colleges banning military recruiters because the schools believed "Don't ask, don't tell" went too far the other way.
Not only is every weird, shared delusion of the
liberal deemed sacrosanct, but wh New York atought to be sacrosanct -- off the top of my head, human life -- isn't.
As Stan Evans says, wh
atever liberals disapprove of, they want banned (smoking, guns, practicing Christianity, ROTC, the Pledge of Allegiance) and wh atever they approve of, they make mand atory (abortion-on-demand, gay marriage, pornography, condom distribution in public schools, screenings of "An Inconvenient Truth").
When liberals say, "nothing is sacrosanct," they mean "nothing other Americans consider sacrosanct is sacrosanct." They demonstr
ate their open-mindedness by ridiculing other people's dogma, but will not brook the most trifling criticism of their own dogmas.
Thus, for example, liberals sneer
atthe bluenoses and philistines of the "religious right" for objecting to taxpayer-funding of a crucifix submerged in a jar of urine, but would have you banned from public life for putting M atthew Shepard in a jar of urine, with or without taxpayer funding.
These famously broad-minded New Yorkers -- "thinking, always thinking" -- actually booed Mayor Rudy Giuliani when he showed up
atthe opera after pulling city funding from a museum exhibit th atincluded a painting of the Virgin Mary plastered with close-up pornographic photos of women's vulvas.
(The New York Times fair-mindedly refused to ever mention the vulvas, instead suggesting th
atthe mayor's objection was to the cow dung used in the composition.)
Has a decision to fund or not fund "art" ever gotten a politician in any other part of the country booed in public? And how might the Times refer to citizens booing a mayor who had withdrawn taxpayer funding for a painting of
RosaParks covered in pornography?
If New York liberals insist on bragging about their intellectual bravado in believing "nothing is sacrosanct," it would really help if they could stop being the most easily offended, P.C., group-think, thin-skinned weanies in the entire universe and maybe ease up on the college "h
ate speech" codes, politically correct firings, and bans on military recruiters.
atin mind, here are some questions it would be fun to ask a liberal like Supreme Court nominee Elena Kagan New York ather hearings next week:
-- Roughly one-third of Americans are Evangelical Christians. Do you personally know any Evangelical Christians? Name two.
-- In 1972, Richard Nixon was elected president with more than 60 percent of the vote, winning every st
ate except Massachusettsand the . How many people do you know who voted for Nixon? District of Columbia
ate or inappropri ate: Schools passing out condoms to seventh-graders? Schools passing out cigarettes to seventh-graders?
-- Who is a gre
ater thre atto , Sarah Palin or Mahmoud Ahmadinejad? America