Tag Archives: Ann Coulter

Ann Coulter is Wrong on Controlling Facebook, Twitter and Google, by Michael S. Rozeff

Foes of the social media companies and their censors are using pretzel logic to try to justify the imposition of the First Amendment on them. However, ties to the government don’t make a private company part of the government, and the First Amendment applies to the federal government and no other entity. From Michael S. Rozoff at lewrockwell.com:

Ann Coulter says

“We need to apply the First Amendment to social media companies like Twitter, Facebook, and Google, because it is a public square, and there is precedent for that and it’s gotta be done…”

I present arguments against her suggestion. I realize fully that these companies have important connections to government including contracts, data sharing and products being developed that further the surveillance state. My argument against Coulter’s suggestion is pertinent to speech, which was her concern, not these other links.

Coulter is speaking out of emotion, confusion, needless desperation and ignorance. The First Amendment restricts Congress. It cannot be “applied” to speech on social media company platforms or to these companies themselves. They are not government. They are private associations. A corporation is a nexus of contracts accomplished by private persons. Her suggestion is impractical, unconstitutional and anti-freedom.

Coulter is actually calling for the government to enforce diversity of speech within these companies. Her diversity agenda is directed to speech, not other matters like hiring; but it’s no different in kind than the government controls that leftists demand when they advocate diversity or extend the idea of non-discrimination into areas where it doesn’t belong.

What Coulter wants is actually not free speech but its opposite, which is “fair” access to speech on social media platforms or “equal opportunity” to speak on these platforms. She wants non-discrimination by these media among those proffering speech. This is not free speech as exercised by the companies. A media platform or site or operation would not be allowed to shape a social communications product adhering to a given non-diverse or exclusive viewpoint. Coulter’s suggestion rules out companies devoted on political matters to particular audiences. There could not be companies devoted to conspiracy theories, fascist ideas, communist ideas, conservative ideas, progressive ideas, socialist ideas, etc. Diversity in speech enforced by government is not free speech at all, whether based upon the First Amendment or any other amendment or provision.

To continue reading: Ann Coulter is Wrong on Controlling Facebook, Twitter and Google

They Said That? 1/11/18

From President Trump today at an Oval Office meeting with lawmakers:

“Why are we having all these people from shithole countries come here?” Trump said, according to these people, referring to countries mentioned by the lawmakers.

Trump then suggested that the United States should instead bring more people from countries such as Norway, whose prime minister he met with Wednesday. The president, according to a White House official, also suggested he would be open to more immigrants from Asian countries because he felt they help the United States economically.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trump-attacks-protections-for-immigrants-from-shithole-countries-in-oval-office-meeting/2018/01/11/bfc0725c-f711-11e7-91af-31ac729add94_story.html?utm_term=.2e09766bf604

What a radical idea! Let people in who will help your country, not drain it or blow it up.

From an Ann Coulter tweet:

 Okay, yes—Trump shouldn’t call them “shithole countries.” A little respect is in order. They are shithole nations.

The shitstorm this kicks up may go a whole 48 hours, instead of the usual 24.

 

Ann Coulter Backs Out from Berkeley: For Patriots, It’s Still On, by Jack Kerwick

The left has descended into violence and its Democratic partisans have not denounced or tried to stop it. The Republicans have failed to use their control of many state and local governments to address the violence. From Jack Kerwick at lewrockwell.com:

After a highly publicized ordeal involving UC Berkeley and Ann Coulter, and after the latter insisted as recently as just a few hours before the time of this writing that she would speak at Berkeley irrespectively of the fact that administrators had done all that they could to prevent her from being heard, Ann has decided to…cancel her event.

“There will be no speech,” she wrote in an email to Reuters. Two groups that originally planned on sponsoring her had backed out.  “I looked over my shoulder and my allies had joined the other team.” Ann added: “I have no sponsor, no lawyer, no court order.  I can’t vindicate constitutional rights on my own.  I was just supposed to give the speech.”

Whether these were the only considerations that led a defiant Ann Coulter to reverse course as dramatically and abruptly as she did is questionable.  For the time being, they are also beside the point.  The points that are worth focusing on here are three-fold.

First, the left has thrust the country into a new era of political violence. That’s right.  It is on the collective shoulders of the militant, neo-communist left, and no one else, on which the burden for this violence directly rests.  That being said, while the domestic terrorists of Black Lives Matter, the so-called “antifa,” and those who are physically attacking their opponents are directly responsible for the mayhem, their ideological ilk in the Democrat Party and its network of propaganda organs—the “media” and Hollywood—own this as well.

Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, Bernie Sanders, Chuck Schumer, Nancy Pelosi—they have both fueled the flames with their reckless rhetoric and sat in silence as the anti-American terrorist wing of their party victimized innocents.

They deserve and, God-permitting, will receive their comeuppance.

To continue reading: Ann Coulter Backs Out from Berkeley: For Patriots, It’s Still On

 

She Said That? 2/20/15

From Ann Coulter in “GOP DOUBLE CROSSING TRAITORS,” at anncoulter.com:

Why don’t Republicans attack the media? People hate the media! Their power is eroding — and it would erode a lot faster if Congress would challenge them. Instead of submitting to the media’s blackmail, my suggestion is, take their gun away.

Tell voters what the media won’t: that Obama’s “amnesty” will give illegal aliens Social Security cards and three years of back-payments through the Earned Income Tax Credit, even though they never paid taxes in the first place.

Could we get a poll on that: Should the government issue work permits to illegal aliens and give them each $25,000 in U.S. taxpayer money? I promise you, Obama would lose that vote by at least 80-20. Even people vaguely supportive of not hounding illegal aliens out of the country didn’t sign up to open the U.S. Treasury to them.

Tell voters that the media are refusing to report that, for the past two weeks, Senate Democrats have been filibustering a bill that would defund Obama’s illegal amnesty.

Whether or not the Democrats continue to filibuster the bill containing the amnesty defund, the government won’t shut down — contrary to hysterical claims by the media and George Will. The government is funded. Only the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) will be “defunded.”

Which means, wait … I’m counting on my fingers … yes, that’s right: NOTHING.

Nearly all DHS employees are “essential” personnel required to stay on the job even if the department is defunded — the Secret Service, the Transportation Security Administration, the Federal Emergency Management Agency, Customs and Border Protection and the Coast Guard.

Approximately 200,000 of DHS’s 230,000 employees will keep working.

By “government shutdown,” the media mean: “some secretaries will not go to work.”

Why don’t Republicans spend all their airtime attacking the media for lying about what Obama’s amnesty does and what the Democrats are doing? It’s hard to avoid concluding that Republicans aren’t trying to make the right arguments. In fact, it kind of looks like they’re intentionally throwing the fight on amnesty.

If a Republican majority in both houses of Congress can’t stop Obama from issuing illegal immigrants Social Security cards and years of back welfare payments, there is no reason to vote Republican ever again.

http://www.anncoulter.com/columns/2015-02-18.html#read_more

The interesting sentence here is the last one. You’re late to the party Ann, because there hasn’t been a reason to vote Republican for a long time. However, we all have our moments of epiphany. For some former Republicans, it was when they read George H.W. Bush’s lips as he announced that he would in fact raise taxes. For some, it was when his son blundered into war in Iraq and the “nation-building” he had formerly eschewed. Republicans used to be good at keeping the country out of wars and ending Democratic ones; now they’re the war party. Some Republicans lost faith when Bush signed into law an unaffordable prescription drug benefit, and for some it was after TARP and the bailouts.

Anyway, better late than never for Ms. Coulter, if she does steps outside and inhales deeply the bracing air of independence. She should consider her decision carefully. After all, she’s made a lot of money and garnered much fame pandering to the still substantial group of “mainstream” Republicans, the kind who believe everything Fox News and The Wall Street Journal tell them to believe. However, if she meant what she said in that last sentence, she will end up independent, because congressional Republicans are going to cave on immigration. She may have some company if she leaves the Republicans, but the remaining “mainstream” Republicans will line up behind their 2016 candidate, Jeb-yet-another-Bush.