Jews, Jesus and Republicans: Playing Ann Coulter's Game

To read Jon Wiener's most recent post, "[Expletive] the Jews. They didn't vote for us anyway": Republicans and Israel, click here.

The following piece was produced by the Huffington Post's OffTheBus.

When Ann Coulter remarked on CNBC that Jews should become Christians, it wasn't "a faux pas," and she wasn't being "an idiot," as many commentators suggested. Instead she was playing her game -- provoking her critics to get her into the media spotlight that helps sell her books. That raises the question: should the Republican candidates be asked whether they agree with Ann Coulter that America would be a better place if we were all Christians? Or is that simply playing Ann Coulter's game?

Many people are playing her game this time around: Rabbi Marvin Hier, founder and dean of the Simon Wiesenthal Center, denounced Coulter for speaking in "the classic language of anti-Semites throughout the millennia." The National Jewish Democratic Council asked broadcast news organizations not to give Coulter airtime. Then right wing talk radio got to yell at liberals for trying to deny Ann Coulter her right to free speech.

So it's happened again: Ann Coulter is controversial. Ann Coulter is important. We all need to take a stand for or against Ann Coulter's right to express her views, no matter how repugnant they may be.

But what if we ignored her latest publicity ploy? What if we didn't play Ann Coulter's game - again?

That would be a mistake, Tim Rutten argued recently in the LA Times. We need to press the issue on the candidates, and others, this time -- because, Rutten writes, "the implications of these latest remarks simply are too threatening to be allowed to stand."

Yes, it's worked for her many times before, propelling her books to the top of the best-seller list. Her readers buy her books precisely because they love the way she provokes liberals to screaming outrage. That's why in the past, when asked about our enemies in the Middle East, she said "We should invade their countries, kill their leaders and convert them to Christianity"; that's why she insulted the 9-11widows.

But this time, Rutten argues, it's different. That's because Coulter's argument - that Christianity "perfects" Judaism, and that Jews need "perfecting" -- is the major theological underpinning of anti-Semitism (along with the notion to that the Jews killed Jesus). The Catholic church, and most Protestant denominations, have explicitly broken with that claim. The Republican candidates ought to do the same thing.

"It's a scandal that in this pluralist nation it falls to the voices of organized Jewry to make this case," Rutten writes, "because it is a case whose outcome is of the greatest consequence to us all. For too long we've pretended that the brutal political rhetoric that now characterizes our partisan politics can be quarantined, that it won't inevitably leach over into every other aspect of our lives."

So it would be good to ask Rudy Giuliani, Mitt Romney and their rivals: Ann Coulter is a best-selling Republican pundit; do you agree with her that the ideal America is a Christian America?

Read more OffTheBus coverage here.

Comments

[kms34786]

If anyone is truly interested in silencing Ann Coulter they MUST "Imus" her. What do I mean? Don Imus was a tremendously popular entertainer that drew his audience from a broad spectrum of the American population. But he went too far one morning and drew the outrage of the black community. That community coalesced and went right after the advertisers on his program.

That is what got CBS & MSNBC's attention, advertisers were starting to walk. If you truly despise everything Ann Coulter stands for (self promotion not matter what the cost) then go after the companies that advertise on programs when she is on. If you have the clot to get the advertisers to complain, then she will be cut off from the medium the same way Imus was.

[fetchezlavache]

I don't know what outrageous remark could be used to "Imus" her that she hasn't already said.

[Aristophanes]

Imus is BACK. ON WABC IN NYC.

[tandrmcdonald]

The reason Coulter gets so much face time on television and in the press is because the media poohbas know it tweaks ratings.
Now she's insulting the Jewish people, their religion and probably everything else associated with Jewishness.
The woman is a media pig. She isn't very intelligent, she isn't very attractive, she doesn't speak very well, very clearly or very coherently. She's just loud and profane.
The cure to Ann Coulter, turn the channel; like most of us do with the Head-On commercials.
Gramma Rose

[dogman44]

Gramma Rose, we can ignore the trash and filth
that coulter is purveying. We can also ignore
the crack dealers in our neighborhoods.
Both cheapen and disrupt our civil growth. My
guess is that this demon is peddling her particular crank to about 29-30% of the Amerikan public. About the same number that are
still on board shrub's trainwreck.

[robiform]

Actually, the question that Mr. Wiener poses at the end of his blog SHOULD be asked of the Republican presidential candidates, preferably at the next debate. The most likely response from all of them would be "no" followed by the inevitable "but I'm a Christian. . ." Since the evangelical right wing believes the tripe that she-who-wi­ll-not-be-­named spouted on the CNBC show, they will use this as an excuse to go third party. Voila! A Democratic landslide next year!

[epotruchyeahright]

I wrote emails to Romney, Brownback, and Thompson asking them to "agree or disagree" with Coulter's comments, and to explain their reasons for either position.
Not surprisingly, Giuliani didn't have a "Contact Us" link on his website (just "Get Involved" or "Contribute" links), and Huckabee didn't have a website. Paul, McCain, Hunter, and Tancredo are single digit also-rans, whose voices aren't going to register with much of anyone, but I would write them if it meant getting a public comment out of them.

[esgabel]

Everyones best bet would be to ignore her--she is not worth our consideration on any count. Szhe is all effect and no substance.

[OckhamsElectricRazor]

Exactly, the is with CNBC for repeatedly providing this provocateur a forum. Remember, this was a taped interview. A deliberate editorial decision was made to air this rubbish and to replay it repeatedly. Therefore, CNBC shares responsibility for it's content, and should be targeted accordingly.

[Theda]

I'm glad CNBC didn't "censor" her remark. Why should they? Why shouldn't the public know when Coulter has said something stupid and reprehensible?
Maybe her book sales will finally drop. Remember--this person has made millions of dollars from those stupid books of hers.
She even wrote an idiotic book praising Joseph McCarthy.
Let her be responsible for the rubbish she says. Her anti-semitic remarks shouldn't be hidden. If she's censored, we won't know how truly offensive she is.
Maybe NOW people will finally stop buying her books.

[knowhelpnow]

That is the reason they buy her books because she says all these stupid and abusive things.