Connect with us

Ann Coulter: Wikileaker An ‘Angry Gay,’ Gays Can’t Be Trusted To Serve

Published

on

Why is it that “angry gay” sounds so derogatory? Why doesn’t, say, “angry, bleached blond bigoted bitchy straight” sound as insulting?

Ann Coulter, the woman who would sell her soul (if she still had one — anyone know? Anyone seen it?) for, say, a chance to tell anti-gay jokes at a gay Tea Party fundraiser, is allowed to be so damn nasty?

Her “column” this week is titled, “Bradley Manning: Poster Boy For ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’.” For those of you who haven’t yet heard, Bradley Manning is the Wikileaker — the man who reportedly used a recordable CD (on which he delightfully recorded Lady Gaga) to transport hundreds of thousands of classified documents that have since embarrassed the U.S. Government.

And, he’s gay.

Though, I’m not sure how angry he is.

But I am sure that Ms. Coulter is. When she’s not taking her anger out on, well, anything to the Left of Ronald Reagan. (Or, say, trying to get the voting age raised to 21 to reduce the number of eligible voters.)

She writes, “The two biggest stories this week are WikiLeaks’ continued publication of classified government documents, which did untold damage to America’s national security interests, and the Democrats’ fanatical determination to repeal “don’t ask, don’t tell” and allow gays to serve openly in the military.”

“The mole who allegedly gave WikiLeaks the mountains of secret documents is Pfc. Bradley Manning, Army intelligence analyst and angry gay.”

Not, “an angry gay,” which would have been gramatically awkward, or, “an angry gay man,” which would have been neither here nor there, but, “angry gay,” as in, “mad fag.”

“Angry gay” is about as nasty as one can get without using the “F” word.

Which, of course, Coulter has no problem doing.

She’s already called former presidential candidate John Edwards a “faggot.” And if there are degrees of homosexuality, I suppose that at least gets Coulter points for nuance, when she called Al Gore a “total fag.”

But I digress.

Coulter says, “According to Bradley’s online chats, he was in “an awkward place” both “emotionally and psychologically.” So in a snit, he betrayed his country by orchestrating the greatest leak of classified intelligence in U.S. history.”

I suppose if he were allow to be openly-gay, perhaps he wouldn’t have felt so “emotionally and psychologically” upset, and maybe, just maybe, he wouldn’t have Wikileaked.

Who knows.

But to say that Manning leaked because he is gay is unacceptable, and, frankly, disgusting.

But is it more disgusting than her next “thought?”

“Maybe there’s a reason gays have traditionally been kept out of the intelligence services, apart from the fact that closeted gay men are easy to blackmail. Gays have always been suspicious of that rationale and perhaps they’re right.”

Yes, Ann, you just made my point. If gays didn’t have to be closeted to serve their country, they wouldn’t be blackmailable? So, let’s lose “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” once and for all, OK? If rabidly-homophobic Dr. Laura can support repealing “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” so can you.

But Coulter can’t reason that far ahead of her self.

Hers is the same stupid line of reasoning that president of the hate group, the Family Research Council (FRC,) used this fall when the teen suicides were making news. Tony Perkins said, homosexuality is “abnormal,” and it drives gay teens to suicide. No, you jackass, it’s not. YOU and the FRC’s hate-mongering drive gay teens to suicide.

Anyone sensing a pattern here?

Coulter, Perkins, Gallagher, et al, all demonize gays, then claim we’re not fit to serve, that we’re blackmailable because we have to stay in the closet, that we are suicidal. It’s ALL BECAUSE OF YOUR DEMONIZING US.

I don’t know. What do you think? to me, “angry, bleached blond bigoted bitchy straight” is sounding just about right.

(image)


Subscribe to
The New Civil Rights Movement


<!–
google_ad_client = “pub-6759057198693805”;
/* 468×60, created 10/21/10 */
google_ad_slot = “8507588931”;
google_ad_width = 468;
google_ad_height = 60;
//–>

Continue Reading
Click to comment
 
 

Enjoy this piece?

… then let us make a small request. The New Civil Rights Movement depends on readers like you to meet our ongoing expenses and continue producing quality progressive journalism. Three Silicon Valley giants consume 70 percent of all online advertising dollars, so we need your help to continue doing what we do.

NCRM is independent. You won’t find mainstream media bias here. From unflinching coverage of religious extremism, to spotlighting efforts to roll back our rights, NCRM continues to speak truth to power. America needs independent voices like NCRM to be sure no one is forgotten.

Every reader contribution, whatever the amount, makes a tremendous difference. Help ensure NCRM remains independent long into the future. Support progressive journalism with a one-time contribution to NCRM, or click here to become a subscriber. Thank you. Click here to donate by check.

RELIGIOUS EXTREMISM

Catholic Archbishop Defies Vatican by Banning Speaker Nancy Pelosi From Holy Communion – via Twitter

Published

on

Calling her stance on abortion a “most serious scandal,” and a “grave evil” San Francisco Archbishop Salvatore Cordileone publicly announced Friday that Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, whose district encompasses his diocese, is now banned from taking Holy Communion.

Archbishop Cordileone, a far right activist who repeatedly has challenged Pope Francis, is now in violation of directions from the Vatican to not politicize the Sacraments. Cordileone’s very public decree – made via Twitter – comes just weeks before the U.S. Supreme Court is set to rule on a case that is expected to overturn Roe v. Wade.

“After numerous attempts to speak with Speaker Pelosi to help her understand the grave evil she is perpetrating, the scandal she is causing, an the danger to her own soul she is risking, I have determined that she is not to be admitted to Holy Communion,” Cordileone tweeted, an apparent attempt to embarrass to the greatest degree possible the Democrat who is second in line to the Presidency,

“I am hereby notifying you that you are not to present yourself for Holy Communion and, should you do so, you are not to be admitted to Holy Communion, until such time as you publically [sic] repudiate your advocacy for the legitimacy of abortion and confess and receive absolution of this grave sin in the sacrament of Penance,” Cordileone wrote in that letter to the Speaker.

Fox News calls it “an escalation in a decades-long tension between the Roman Catholic Church and liberal Democratic politicians on abortion,” but in fact other extremist archbishops have taken the same stance against other notable Democrats.

Catholics believe the Pope is God’s infallible representative on earth. Last fall Pope Francis chastised far right Catholic bishops in America who were gearing up to ban President Joe Biden from receiving Holy Communion. In June the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) overwhelmingly voted to move toward chastising Biden for his abortion stance, despite the Vatican issuing a clear warning they were not to do so.

President Biden is a devout Catholic who personally opposes abortion but knows as President it is his role to uphold a woman’s right to choose, something has has worked strongly to support and strongly believes in.

“What must the pastor do?” Pope Francis said, The New York Times reported last September when a reporter asked him about President Biden and abortion. “Be a pastor, don’t go condemning. Be a pastor, because he is a pastor also for the excommunicated.”

“I have never refused the eucharist to anyone,” Pope Francis told reporters. The Times aded Francis said bishops should be pastors not politicians.

The Pope also told reporters, “communion is not a prize for the perfect,” and “the eucharist is not the reward of saints but the bread of sinners.”

The San Francisco Chronicle adds that Pope Francis “welcomed Biden for a private meeting at the Vatican last fall and Biden said the Pope told him he was a ‘good Catholic.’ Biden received Communion at St. Peter’s during that trip.”

 

This is a breaking news and developing story. Details may change. 

Continue Reading

COMMENTARY

‘Sordid, Corrupt, Lawless’: Experts Call New Ginni Thomas Revelations ‘Breathtaking’ and Ask ‘What Did Her Husband Know?’

Published

on

The latest revelations about the actions of Ginni Thomas, the far right wing activist, lobbyist, and spouse of a sitting U.S. Supreme Court justice who had unprecedented access to the Trump White House are leading experts to demand Clarence Thomas’ recusal while calling the combination of their actions “breathtaking corruption,” and noting the Justice’s extraordinary hypocrisy.

Later Friday morning The Washington Post reported that Ginni Thomas pressed two Arizona lawmakers to overturn the will of Arizona’s voters in the 2020 presidential election by choosing a “clean” slate of electors, representing Donald Trump and not Joe Biden. The Post notes Thomas did not mention any candidate by name but reports “the context was clear.”

“Before you choose your state’s Electors … consider what will happen to the nation we all love if you don’t stand up and lead,” an email bearing Ginni Thomas’ name, sent to the Arizona lawmakers, reads.

It included a link to a video of a man delivering a message meant for swing-state lawmakers, urging them to “put things right” and “not give in to cowardice.”

“You have only hours to act,” said the speaker, who is not identified in the video.

Thomas also pressed Trump White House chief of staff Mark Meadows to work to overturn the election, as has been widely reported.

Her efforts, combined with Justice Thomas’ actions on the Supreme Court, amount to “breathtaking corruption,” writes Slate’s legal expert Mark Joseph Stern.

“The conflict of interest between Ginni and Clarence Thomas has never been greater. While Clarence was applying the ‘independent state legislature doctrine’ from the bench, Ginni was using the exact same theory to try to overturn the 2020 election. Just breathtaking corruption,” Stern says.

He adds:

Former federal prosecutor Joyce Vance, now an NBC News/MSNBC legal analyst and law professor, issued a strong warning:

“Either Justice Thomas recuses in every case that comes to the Court where his wife is heavily involved in the action or the public’s confidence in the Court will be damaged beyond repair.”

Reuters reporter covering the U.S. Supreme Court, Lawrence Hurley:

Former federal corruption prosecutor Noah Bookbinder, who is president of Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) says it is “outrageous” Justice Thomas has refused to recuse:

“New evidence that Ginni Thomas’s participation in efforts to overturn the 2020 election was even greater than we knew; in this case pressure on AZ legislators to overturn that state’s vote. Makes it even more outrageous that Justice Thomas did not recuse.”

“Wow!” exclaimed Pulitzer Prize winning journalist and former New York Times columnist Nicholas Kristof. “Ginni Thomas, wife of Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, pressed Arizona legislators to overturn Biden’s win and choose a ‘clean slate of electors.’ In other words, she supported a coup to overthrow an elected president. What did her husband know?”

Economist and frequent political commentator David Rothschild observes, “Ginni Thomas was conspiring with high ranking Republicans to overturn [the] republic, and her husband was either privy to or actively involved in this conspiracy before using his position to coverup his wife’s role.”

Former SDNY Asst. U.S. Attorney Richard Signorelli sums up:

 

Image by Gage Skidmore via Flickr and a CC license

Continue Reading

BREAKING NEWS

Ginni Thomas Also Pressed Arizona Lawmakers to Overturn 2020 Election: ‘Stand Strong’

Published

on

Far right wing activist, lobbyist, and spouse of a U.S. Supreme Court justice, Ginni Thomas pressed lawmakers in Arizona to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election. In emails she urged them to “stand strong in the face of political and media pressure,” and send a “clean slate” of electors, falsely claiming the choice is “yours and yours alone.”

“The emails, sent by Ginni Thomas to a pair of lawmakers on Nov. 9, 2020, argued that legislators needed to intervene because the vote had been marred by fraud. Though she did not mention either candidate by name, the context was clear,” reports The Washington Post, which broke the news Friday. “In sending the emails, Thomas played a role in the extraordinary scheme to keep Trump in office by substituting the will of legislatures for the will of voters.”

Thomas also pressed then-White House chief of staff Mark Meadows to overturn the election in an exchange of text messages that spanned several months.

Justice Clarence Thomas has also come under fire for not recusing himself in matters related to his wife’s actions.

This is a breaking news and developing story. Details may change. 

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2020 AlterNet Media.