Republicans Quietly Rejecting Coulter's Advocacy of Terrorism?

Last week I discussed the Delaware Pogrom and how it was merely a mob of right wing fanatics acting out precisely what Ann Coulter and Bill O'Reilly advocate on national television. I confirmed with the Anti-Defamation League that the pogrom actually took place. Although the ADL has not as far as I am aware made any public statements regarding the pogrom, they are helping the families forced out of town by Christian extremists with lawsuits. We need to continue the pressure on the media and politicians, particularly Republican politicians, to condemn the pogrom and to realize the link with the advocacy of violence by extremists like Ann Coulter and Bill O'Reilly. I also, at the end of this article, will indicate that Republicans may well already be getting fed up with Ann Coulter's advocacy of terrorism because she is suddenly proving to be an absolute dismal flop when it comes to helping Republicans raise money.

Hate Crimes have been on the rise in America since 9/11, and, according to the Southern Poverty Law Center, hate groups in America have increased by 33% in the past five years. A peak in attacks on Muslims after 9/11 was rapidly followed by an increase in anti-Semitism in the US and worldwide. There was a slight decline in anti-Semetic incidents in 2005, but incidents are still at disturbingly high levels.

Back in February I reported an incident that, while not a hate crime, was certainly a frightening trend. In Indiana, a prominent politician told a group of Jews that their opinion on the recitation of Christian prayers at legislative sessions didn't matter because they only made up 2% of the population. This is a further sign of the rise of Republican intolerance in the US.

But now, in Delaware, two families, one Jewish the other as yet anonymous, were forced to flee the town due to threatened violence by right wing Christian fanatics who were pushing Christian prayer in school. Not just prayer, but specifically and exclusively Christian prayer. The families were humiliated, threatened and insulted by a mob using anti-Semetic rhetoric and letters threating to "bring in the KKK" and to make the Jewish family "disappear like Madaline O'Hare."

We should not be surprised at the Delaware Pogrom, because it is nothing more or less than what right wing “pundits” advocate frequently on mainstream media outlets. These right wing hate mongers are the darlings of the Republican propaganda machine and have the ear and admiration of most elected Republicans. Yet it is their rhetoric that stirs up incidents like the Delaware Pogrom.

It is now time to hold the two worst hate-mongers accountable for their advocacy of terrorism against Americans.

Ann Coulter is possibly the nastiest of the Conservative propagandists. As I mentioned last week, Media Matters has a good round up of Ann Coulter’s stupid and un-American statements.

Included are suggesting Timothy McVeigh should bomb the NY Times building, suggesting people attack liberals with baseball bats, and suggesting that someone poison a Supreme Court Justice. She has expressed outright hatred for the 9/11 widows and has advocated the murder of Congressman Murtha. In one case, it is quite possible that someone took her advocacy of violence seriously. Soon after Coulter advocated "talking to liberals with a baseball bat" someone in Kansas physically attacked a professor who had spoken out against Christian fundamentalists. There is no clear link between her advocacy of violence and this incident, but the latter followed closely after the former and it is an action in line with what she advocates to her audience.

The threats of violence in Delaware are also right in line with what Ann Coulter routinely advocates. Ann Coulter is telling her listeners to use violence and to be intolerant and increasingly right wing extremists in America are using violence and intolerance as a weapon against Americans and American values.

Bill O'Reilly also advocates intolerance and terrorism. He advocated bombing Coit Tower in San Francisco. He also told a Jewish caller to "go to Israel" if he felt uncomfortable with government displays of Christianity. His advocacy of America as a Christian nation and his telling Jews to get out if they don't like it are exactly the kind of inspiration that drives the right wing extremists behind the Delaware pogrom.

Ann Coulter and Bill O'Reilly are in part responsible for this increase in violence and intolerance in America and we need to hold them accountable. The Delaware Pogrom was the natural consequence of their rhetoric.

To many current Republican politicians, corruption, hatred, intolerance and threats of violence are acceptable parts of American Culture. Right wing extremists advocate terrorism on talk shows in the mainstream media even as those same extremists schmooze with Republican politicians and advocate for the Republican far righta agenda.

I am not saying traditional conservative ideology is detestable. I am a liberal, but I have respect for old style conservative ideology where fiscal responsibility and law and order are paramount. But the modern Republican party, led by Bush, Cheney, Rove, DeLay and their corrupt compatriots, have abandoned traditional conservative ideology in favor of corruption, greed and intolerance. The Republican party has become something Eisenhower would have detested and, quite honestly, all Americans should detest. In fact, I have a couple of Republican friends who have come to hate the current Republican Party.

It is time to hold the right wing hate mongers and the Republican Party responsible for the consequences of their actions. The Delaware Pogrom was a direct result of the modern Republican Culture of Intolerance. Right wing talk show hosts advocate exactly this kind of pogrom against anyone who is different in America, anyone who doesn’t conform to the extremist ideology of the modern Halliburton Republicans.

Republican politicians are close with Ann Coulter and Bill O'Reilly, despite their advocacy of violence and terrorism. So the question is, does the Republican party support the kind of terrorist actions that Ann Coulter and Bill O'Reilly advocate and which people in Kansas and Delaware have carried out. Essentially, does the Republican party support terrorist attacks on Americans, from regular citizens like you and me all the way up to Supreme Court Justices and Congressmen.

Write them and ask them. Hold the Republican Party accountable for terrorist advocacy by right wing windbags who they schmooze with. It is time to ask the question of Republican politicians if they agree with Ann Coulter and Bill O'Reilly’s advocating bombing American buildings, poisoning Supreme Court Justices and attacking Americans with baseball bats. Call on the Republican Party to REJECT Ann Coulter and Bill O'Reilly’s advocacy of violence and to demand that the mainstream media stops paying terrorist advocates. Tell them that Coulter and O'Reilly's rhetoric is the exact kind of rhetoric that will inspire more pogroms like the one in Delaware.

New Democratic Majority has initiated this campaign to hold the Republican Party accountable. You can see what they have to say here (scroll down)

If you are represented by a Republican on ANY level of government, go here, and look on the left column to contact your state, local and Federal politicians and contact them to demand they call for a stop to Ann Coulter’s advocacy of terrorism.

And in particular, hold Delaware’s Republican Congressman responsible. Contact this man regarding the Delaware Pogrom: Representative Michael Castle (R-DE At-Large).

And by all means write to the media calling for Republicans to renounce Ann Coulter and Bill O'Reilly’s terrorist advocacy campaign and directly link it to the Delaware pogrom.

I should note, since Republicans have started to be confronted with Coulter's advocacy of violence, they have started quietly distancing themselves from her. A fundraiser for a Colorado politician that featured Ann Coulter raised a grand total of...nothing! I think we really need to continue this campaign because I think Republicans are finall statring to realize that Coulter and O'Reilly are not people they are comfortable with. Let us make them even more uncomfortable with intolerance and violence advocacy.


mole333's picture

| | | | | | | | |


Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
oops's picture

The person who wrote this

The person who wrote this article is a bigot and a racist who intent on stirring up hatred in this country and around the world. This person promotes terrorism at any level to support his/her views. This person is responsible for the death of many innocent people.
It is so sad that this kind of hatespeak must be allowed because freedom of speech is guaranteed. But guess what, I support your right to post stupidity.Link Text


mole333's picture

You don't make sense at all

Sorry but your post makes no sense. You are saying that my condemnation of the people who violently forced two families from their homes and my condemnation of two right wing extremists who have advocated murder and violence is somehow bigoted and racist and inflamatory? That makes no sense at all. Maybe you want to clarify?

The people who are bigoted are the people who threaten violence against people because they are Jewish. And the people who are stirring up violence are the ones who advocate bombing, beating and poisoning of people. So your comments should be directed at the mob who conducted the Delaware Pogrom and Ann Coulter and Bill O'Reilly.


Coulter'sDribblingA&&'s picture

really?

I thought it was a wellwritten article.

As for Beauprez -- he's a nothing anyway. I suspect even if Bush himself came to fundraise, ol' rancher Bob wouldn't raise much money. He's too fascist for most folks.


JJ Ross's picture

Preemptive Strike?

Coulter is a very clever advocate, herself a literal fundamentalist with lawyer training. We must assume she knows exactly what she is saying, and means it all. She isn't misspeaking.

So, a new thought occured to me reading Salon's July 7 interview with "The End Of Faith" author Sam Harris. What if Coulter is making a strategic "preemptive strike" designed quite intentionally to hit the 9/11 widows for being untouchably sympathetic political players, before the public can notice the truly untouchable players blowing up our world are monotheistic God-channelers such as herself, rather than victims of the explosions she and her clan ignite so righteously?

Harris argues that much of the violence in today's world stems directly
from people willing to live and die by these sacred texts.

In perhaps his most daring rhetorical gambit, Harris seeks to undermine
religion by denouncing not just jihadis and fundamentalists, but
moderates. "Religious moderates are, in large part, responsible for the
religious conflict in our world," he writes, "because their beliefs
provide the context in which scriptural literalism and religious
violence can never be adequately opposed." Harris especially chastises
moderates for refusing to criticize scripture-quoting extremists; for
him, they are basically guilty of legitimizing fundamentalism.

. . . In order to see how
preposterous our situation really is, you need only imagine what our
world would be like if we had people believing in the literal existence
of Zeus. I defy anyone to come forward with the evidence that puts the
Biblical God or the Quranic God on fundamentally different footing than
the gods of Mt. Olympus. There are historical reasons why Zeus is no
longer worshiped and the God of Abraham is. But there are not sound
epistemological or philosophical or empirical reasons.

******************

Martin Luther King, to some significant
degree, was animated by Christianity. But when you look at why he
preached nonviolence to the degree that he did, he didn't get that from
Christianity. He got it from Gandhi. And Gandhi got it from the Jains.
Jainism is a religion of India that preaches this doctrine of
nonviolence. To argue that that's the true face of Christianity is
really misleading.

. . . The Bible
is just not a good lens through which to view our present circumstance,
given all that we've learned in the last 2,000 years. So questions of
stem cell research, questions of social equity are not best processed
through a reading of the Bible, however liberal you want to be. . .

These are beliefs about the
end of history, about the utility of trying to create a sustainable
civilization for ourselves -- specifically, beliefs in eschatology.
These are maladaptive. For instance, if a mushroom cloud replaced the
city of New York tomorrow morning, something like half the American
people would see a silver lining in that cloud because it would presage
to them that the end of days are upon us.

. . . all dogmas are not equal and don't have
equal behavioral consequences.


Visit our sponsors

Upcoming events

Fill up our coffee fund

BlogAds

Buy it!


Visit our sponsors

Get our Digestifs du jour

Nibble daily on our brainy goodness with our daily syndication digest. You'll receive an email with a list and links to the previous day's posts.



Powered by FeedBlitz

culturekitchens

The Publisher
Liza Sabater

Daily servings of political dissent
culturekitchen

Grassroots News and
Activism for New Yorkers

Daily Gotham

Feminist Bloggers
Network

BlogSheroes

A new kind of vouyerism
Voogling

Art + Code + Philosophy
Potatoland.blog

Got any dirt, tips, leads or money for us? Then drop us a line or two at editors [at] culturekitchen [dot] com or use our general contact form to reach everybody in the editorial team ASAP.


Member's articles and stories

More stories

Google Ads

The Big Dialog


Who's online

There are currently 2 users and 1263 guests online.

Online users

Instant Congress

Don't know your Senators or US Representatives' phone numbers?
Enter your street address and zip code and find out right now.
Street number and name only:
Zip Code (5 digits):


Words to live by

The truth is that as a woman, a woman of color, and specifically an African American woman, the insults come so fast and furious that there’s always the danger of becoming overwhelmed and de-sensitized.

Sad to say, but I’m used to hearing black and brown women being call “bitch” “ho” “skank” “skeazer” “gold digger” or some variation of all of the above in popular songs and music videos. “Norbit,” Eddie Murphy’s current movie, may be the most recent example of a black man putting on a dress and playing the fat, ignorant, loud, brown-skinned black woman as an object of ridicule and revulsion, you can bet it won’t be the last. And check out “Flavor of Love,” VH1’s hit show in which women demean themselves in an effort to get Flava Flav - brought beneath low since his high as a member of the seriously political rap group Public Enemy - to choose them.

What these three have in common is that they demean black women, earn handsome profits for their corporate sponsors, and for the most part exist devoid of criticism.


Subscribe Buttons

Feed IconGoogleDeliciousYahoo!BloglinesNewsgatorMSNFeedsterAOLFurlRojoNewsburstPluckFeedFeedsAdd KinjaMultiRSSrMailRSSFwdBlogarithmSimplify