NJ Democrats try to ban Ann Coulter's book

[progunner1957]

Once again, enlightened/tolerant/progressive ones show their true colors: They want to ban Ann Coulter's new book, Godless: The Church of Liberalism. Apparently, the First Amendment applies only to leftists/Democrats/socialists.

Let's see - who else is known for banning books?
1- The Communist regieme formerly known as the USSR;
2- Communist China;
3- Iran;
4- The Taliban;
5- Aldolph Hitler/Nazi Germany.

Reprinted from NewsMax.com
Saturday, June 10, 2006 11:50 p.m. EDT

Ann Coulter Banned in New Jersey?

Two New Jersey Democrats are pushing to have Ann Coulter's new book "Godless: The Church of Liberalism," banned from all bookstores in their state because she criticized four 9/11 widows known as "the Jersey Girls."

In a joint press release issued Friday, New Jersey Assemblywomen Joan Quigley and Linda Stender say they want New Jersey retailers to "ban the sale of [Coulter's] book throughout the state."

"Ann Coulter's criticism of 9-11 widows, whose only desire since the attacks have been to repair their shattered lives and protect other families from the horrors they have experienced, is motivated purely by petty greed and hate," the two Democrats complained.

"Coulter's vicious characterizations and remarks are motivated by greed and her desire to sell books . . . She is a leech trying to turn a profit off perverting the suffering of others."

Quigley and Stender conclude:

"No one in New Jersey should buy this book and allow Ann Coulter to profit from her hate-mongering. We are asking New Jersey retailers statewide to stand with us and express their outrage by refusing to carry or sell copies of Coulter's book. Her hate-filled attacks on our 9-11 widows has no place on New Jersey bookshelves."

Support Freedom of Speech - buy and read Ann Coulter's Godless: The Church of Liberalism.

 

[Gray Peterson]

This is not banning and censorship. As long as the state of New Jersey does not actually ban it by statute, the retailers may do whatever they want as far as not selling Ann Coulter's book.

Personally I think Ann Coulter is a windbag, but if a state were to flat out ban it by statute or rule, then I would fight any such law, even though I am on the opposite political spectrum. First amendment and all.

 

[longeyes]

R-E-C-A-L-L.

 

[Justin]

Support Freedom of Speech - buy and read Ann Coulter's Godless: The Church of Liberalism.

Coulter has the right to say whatever she wants, but I've got better things to do than read the half-baked ravings of a Washington, DC nutter.

 

[default]

Do you have a link to original source? The quote was not clear as to whether the Assemblywomen were simply urging retailers not to stock the book, or if they were actually proposing legislation that would legally forbid the sale of the book. If the latter, then that is indeed reprehensible and all believers in the First Amendment should resist it. If the former, who cares, really? People get their knickers in a twist over things they disagree with all the time and urge others to join them in boycotts. Republican ex-Dixie Chicks fans, for example.

 

[rock jock]

but I've got better things to do than read the half-baked ravings of a Washington, DC nutter.

Half the posts on THR meet that definition. Unfortunately, I have to wade through those to get to the good ones.

 

[Justin]

Yeah, but we don't charge you for the privelege!

 

[progunner1957]

Do you have a link to original source?

http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2006/6/10/235539.shtml?s=et

 

[cbsbyte]

I have no love for the woman, but banning her books because one does not agree with her is the wrong tact to take. Why not ban her from NJ all together. She won't sell many books there anyway. Who ever came up with this gem, is just as mentaly bankrupt as Ann.

 

[Malone LaVeigh]

Misuse of the word "ban" both by the NJ pols and the writer. Still, it's way more attention than that nitwit deserves for her ranting.

 

[rock jock]

Yeah, but we don't charge you for the privelege!

And don't think I don't appreciate it.

 

[American By Blood]

I'd be surprised if Ms. Coulter moved all that many units in Jersey to begin with. This hullabaloo will likely cause a net increase in the number of copies sold, whether or not NJ retailers choose to refrain from stocking the book.

That said, I will not be among those purchasing the book. She's a blowhard and a faux-conservative.

 

[Kim]

There is a group at DU (the so called First Amendment stalwarts) who want the Congress to censure her. They are so arrogant and ignorant I have to laugh or I would cry. I alway knew the left was a buch of hippocrits and if you would just give them enough rope they would hang themeselves literally.

 

[Mr.V.]

Let's see - who else is known for banning books?
1- The Communist regieme formerly known as the USSR;
2- Communist China;
3- Iran;
4- The Taliban;
5- Aldolph Hitler/Nazi Germany.

Wow, you had 4 other references before finally comparing New Jersey Democrats to the Nazis...that's argumentative restraint if I've ever seen it.

 

[xd9fan]

COOL now Ann can play the Victim

 

[Doug b]

IMO Coulter's new book is the extreme right preparing America for a new low in political dirt.

 

[Camp David]

Support Freedom of Speech - buy and read Ann Coulter's Godless: The Church of Liberalism.

Well said! I bought a copy this weekend... good book!

The more I hear of Democrats and their anti-American actions, the more I believe they do not deserve democracy!

 

[dfaugh]

Never read any of her stuff...but it doesn't matter...She could be a raving lunatic, BUT...

Even WITHOUT any kind of legislative "ban", simply the suggestion by any government authorities violates the 1st amendment, IMHO.

Another example that the erosion of our rights continues down a slippery slope.

 

[bromdenlong]

Others said it here first, but apparently it needs to be repeated:

A boycott is not a ban.

A boycott is purely voluntary. A ban has the force of law, and would be censorship. A boycott is not censorship, it is free market capitalism in action. It has no force of law.

 

[Eleven Mike]

IMO Coulter's new book is the extreme right preparing America for a new low in political dirt.

What?

Politics has always been laced with harsh denunciation of one's opponents, and this is no different.

Coulter's point was put in the worst possible way, but was basically correct: the left uses sympathetic characters as mouthpeices and then demonizes anyone who disagrees with them. Coulter is getting the same treatment she would have received no matter how gently she had questioned the motives of these widows.

 

[BryanP]

Let's see - who else is known for banning books?
1- The Communist regieme formerly known as the USSR;
2- Communist China;
3- Iran;
4- The Taliban;
5- Aldolph Hitler/Nazi Germany.

You forget the grandaddy of them all - churches / religious organizations.

My "ban" of Ann Coulter consists of not spending money for her pompous load of BS.

 

[HankB]

Ann Coulter's biggest problem is that she has FAR too much regard for liberals and Democrats.

Anyway, I don't waste my $$ buying books filled with people's opinions no matter where they fall in the political spectrum - especially when I'm well acquainted with their point of view from their columns, website, and TV appearances.

And as for these two Jersey politicians wanting to "ban" Coulter's book . . . I wonder how they'd react if there was a move by other politicians to similarly "ban" books filled with the distortions, misrepresentations, half-truths, and outright lies of Al Franken, Al Gore, Hillary Clinton, and other nutters on the left.

 

[Eleven Mike]

You forget the grandaddy of them all - churches / religious organizations.

The Taliban and Iran are/were religious organizations.

 

[RealGun]

Obviously Ann Coulter and the PC police don't have a warm relationship. The real question is whether or not she has a good point, never mind the red herrings and other obfuscation. She is the shock jock of the political commentators.

Personally I think leftists are addicted to a behavior and to power and react poorly to having that power constrained by a Republican majority and administration. I wouldn't call their stuff a "religion". That is far too loaded a term but does serve Coulter's style of getting attention by being inappropriate to a degree, starting a debate.

 

[buzz_knox]

A boycott is not a ban.

A boycott is purely voluntary. A ban has the force of law, and would be censorship. A boycott is not censorship, it is free market capitalism in action. It has no force of law.

If done voluntarilly, true. If the boycott is initiated because retailers become convinced and/or concerned that the state will take action for or against them based on their response to the call for a boycott, then the situation gets murky.

Not saying that's what is occuring here, but before determining whether something falls within boycott or de facto ban, you need to look at what's behind the overall actions.