Conservapedia - User contributions [en]

Ann Coulter

2010-04-18T14:32:07Z

DD:

[[File:Ann Coulter2.jpg|right|200px]]
'''Ann Hart Coulter''' (b. 1961) frequently nails [[liberal]]s to the wall with deadly accuracy. She also sometimes answers liberals in their own coin, making a remark just as outrageous as the worst of theirs.

Liberals have slandered her for this, pretending that her outrageous zingers are the only thing she ever says or writes.

She is an [[attorney]], legal affairs correspondent, social commentator and a well known political pundit.
She has written five bestselling books on U.S. politics. U.S. Federal Judge [[Richard Posner]] called her one of America's top public intellectuals.<ref>[http://home.uchicago.edu/~rposner/publicintellect.htm] "Data for tables in Chapter 5 of Richard A. Posner, Public Intellectuals: A Study of Decline" where Posner talks about the data he used for his book ''Public Intellectuals: A Study of Decline''.</ref><ref>[http://home.uchicago.edu/~rposner/TABLE%20II.pdf] Table II, which is Posner's data for 607 public intellectuals. A PDF search of "Coulter" will show she is on Posner's list.</ref>

Coulter's primary focus is exposing the faults of [[liberalism]], and she has enjoyed a popular following for her strong defense of family values against [[abortion]] and [[same-sex marriage]]. She is well known for her forthright statements against those who wish to hurt the [[United States]].

In what is considered the highest point of her career, she even had the guts to criticize the relatives of those who God killed in the 9/11 attacks, as some of both the widows and "victims" of the attacks were undoubtedly liberals.

Coulter is a high profile female [[conservative]], in line with [[Phyllis Schlafly]] and [[Condoleezza Rice]]. Her books and strong speaking style have endeared her to fans and infuriated opponents.

As a [[Christian]], Coulter adheres to the [[Judeo-Christian]] tradition the view that [[human being]]s are utterly and distinctly apart from other species.

Being an unabashedly conservative pundit, Coulter's social commentaries often draw the ire of [[liberal]]s. Her comments are frequently controversial and her critics often feign being offended.<ref>She called Democratic women "no-bra needing, sandal-wearing, [[hirsute]], somewhat fragrant [[hippie]] chick pie wagons". [http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/03/05/AR2007030501610_2.html (Washington Post)]</ref><ref>At a CPAC conference, Coulter joked, "I was going to have a few comments about John Edwards but you have to go into rehab if you use the word 'f*****.'" [http://www.rawstory.com/news/2007/Coulter_Faggot_not_offensive_to_gay_0306.html]</ref>

Coulter made headlines during the 2008 Presidential primaries by endorsing [[Hillary Rodham Clinton]] for President instead of [[John McCain]]. Coulter asserted that McCain is not conservative, but [[liberal]].

==Views on the Democratic Party==

Coulter says that the [[Democratic Party]] has a "history of supporting [[slavery]], [[segregation]], racial preferences, [[George Wallace]] and [[Bull Connor]]." [http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=35188]
[[Image:Coulter2006.jpg|thumb|left|200px|Coulter on the ''Tonight Show with Jay Leno''.]]
==Books==

Some of her books include
*''[[High Crimes and Misdemeanors: The Case Against Bill Clinton]]'' (2002)
*''[[Slander: Liberal Lies About the American Right]]'' (2003)
*''[[Treason: Liberal Treachery from the Cold War to the War on Terrorism]]'' (2004)
*''[[How to Talk to a Liberal (If You Must)]]'' (2005)
*''[[Godless: The Church of Liberalism]]'' (2007)
*''[[If Democrats Had Any Brains They'd Be Republicans]]'' (2007)
*''[[Guilty: Liberal "Victims" and Their Assault on America]]'' (2009)

In ''Godless'', Coulter illustrates how liberals make a [[religion]] out of their beliefs, which they follow with the sort of intolerant zeal which they claim [[fundamentalist]]s do. "Liberalism is a comprehensive belief system denying the Christian belief in man's immortal soul [and] that we are moral beings in God's image." (pg. 3)

==Quotes==

* "Whether they are defending the [[Soviet Union]] or bleating for [[Saddam Hussein]], liberals are always against [[United States of America|America]]. They are either traitors or idiots ... "<Ref>''Treason: Liberal Treachery from the Cold War to the War on Terrorism.''</ref>
* "My only regret with [[Timothy McVeigh]] is he did not go to the [[New York Times]] Building." She later clarified "Of course I regret [saying] it. I should have added, 'after everyone had left the building except the editors and reporters."<ref>[http://www.usatoday.com/life/people/2006-06-09-coulter-roemer_x.htm 9/11 Commissioner Criticizes Coulter's 'Hate-Filled Attack'] Associated Press story in USA Today. "'My only regret with Timothy McVeigh is he did not go to the New York Times Building,' The New York Observer quoted her as saying on Aug. 20, 2002. She clarified those remarks with RightWingNews.com: 'Of course I regret it. I should have added, "after everyone had left the building except the editors and reporters."'"</ref><ref>Hawkins, [http://rightwingnews.com/interviews/anncoulter.php An Interview With Ann Coulter], Right Wing News.</ref>

* "We just want Jews to be perfected, as they say." (The view that Christians are perfected Jews is a common belief among Jewish converts to Christianity, who view Christianity as a natural continuation of Judaism.

* "Saddam's barbaric rape rooms, chemical attacks and torture — those, liberals could live with. But now they want us to send troops to [[Darfur]], a country from which no one anticipates terrorism anytime in the next millennium. If you're looking for a good definition of "no imminent threat," Darfur is it... These people can't even wrap up genocide. We've been hearing about this slaughter in Darfur forever — and they still haven't finished. The aggressors are moving like termites across that country. It's like genocide by committee. Who's running this holocaust in Darfur, FEMA?...Darfur is not the threat... though a hostage-taking, [[Holocaust]]-denying lunatic who doesn't own a necktie but is within two years of having a nuclear bomb comes to mind. You can already hear [[Harry Reid]] and [[Nancy Pelosi]] saying, "If the Democrats were in charge, the use of military force wouldn't be necessary because we'd constructively engage them and appease their stated desire to kill us."<REF>This appeared on Coulter's web site on April 4th, 2007. http://www.anncoulter.com/cgi-local/article.cgi?article=177</REF>

* "If you want a shorter rebuilding process, then we're going to have to wage less humane wars. The enemy — as well as innocent civilians — must be bombed into quivering terror. Otherwise, we displace aggression but don't destroy it. Americans are weaker for having seen that kind of carnage in [[World War II]]. Recall that the Worst Generation was raised by the Greatest Generation. That tells you how awful war is. The Greatest Generation was so exhausted by the war, it didn't have the spine to stand up to [[pot-smoking]], draft-dodging hippies occupying administration buildings."<REF>This appeared on Coulter's web site on April 4th, 2007. http://www.anncoulter.com/cgi-local/article.cgi?article=177</REF>

* "I think [women] should be armed but should not vote. No, they all have to give up their vote, not just, you know, the lady clapping and me. The problem with women voting -- and your [[Communists]] will back me up on this -- is that, you know, women have no capacity to understand how money is earned. They have a lot of ideas on how to spend it. And when they take these polls, it's always more money on education, more money on child care, more money on day care."<ref> ''Politically Incorrect'', Feb. 26, 2001</ref>

* "...a cruise missile is more important than Head Start."<ref>Nov. 2001 speech rebroadcast by C-Span in Jan. 2002</ref>

* On Sept. 13, 2001 she wrote this about the [[September 11, 2001 attacks|Sept. 11 terrorist attack]]: "We should invade their countries, kill their leaders and convert them to Christianity."<ref>''National Review Online'', September 2001 [http://www.nationalreview.com/coulter/coulter.shtml]</ref>

* "We need to execute people like John Walker [Lindh] in order to physically intimidate liberals, by making them realize that they can be killed, too. Otherwise, they will turn out to be outright traitors," Conservative Political Action Conference, January 2002. Coulter later clarified what she meant; "when I said we should "execute" John Walker Lindh, I mis-spoke. What I meant to say was 'We should burn John Walker Lindh alive and televise it on prime-time network TV'. My apologies for any misunderstanding that might have occurred."<ref>[http://www.rightwingnews.com/interviews/coulteriffic.php RWN's Ann Coulter Interview #2] John Hawkins.</ref>

* "Liberals are driven by [[Satan]] and lie constantly.<ref>[http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=21345 That Was No Lady -- That Was My Husband], by Ann Coulter, ''Human Events'', 06/28/2007.</ref>

* "Every concrete example of the racism allegedly sweeping the nation's campuses keeps turning out to be a fraud. Far from "institutional racism," there is "institutional racial hoaxism" run amok in this country."<ref>[http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=22909&email Another Liberal Noose-ance], by Ann Coulter, ''Human Events'', 10/17/2007.</ref>

* "Rather than own up to their moral blindness to Soviet espionage, Democrats fired up the liberal slander machine, which would be deployed again and again over the next half century to the present day.<ref>[http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=23316 McCarthyism: The Rosetta Stone of Liberal Lies], by Ann Coulter, ''Human Events'', 11/07/2007.</ref>

* "By exposing the Democrats' absolute blindness to Soviet [[totalitarianism]], [[McCarthy]] shattered forever the nation's confidence in the Democrats' capacity to govern. For that, the [[Stalin]]ist [[liberal hate speech|hate machine]] attacked him viciously and has never let up."<ref>[http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=23824 They'll Never Forgive You], by Ann Coulter, ''Human Events'', 12/05/2007.</ref>

* "How about having [[Tim Russert]] ask Hillary if she believes the [[New Testament]] is the [[perfection]] of the [[Old Testament]]? She claims to be a [[Christian]]. Let's get it on the table: Is she or isn't she? It doesn't get any more bare-bones than that.<ref>[http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=23174 How Long Before the A.D.L. Kicks Out All its Jews?], By Ann Coulter, ''Human Events'', October 31, 2007.</ref>

* "[The New York Times'] reaction to al-Zarqawi's death was to lower the U.S. flag at the Times building to half-staff. (Ha ha — just kidding! Everybody knows there aren't any American flags at The New York Times.)"<ref>[http://jewishworldreview.com/cols/coulter071306.php3 ''N.Y. Times: Better dead than read]]</ref>

* "I think our motto should be post-9-11, ‘raghead talks tough, raghead faces consequences.'"<ref>http://michellemalkin.com/2006/02/12/ragheads-and-sambos-and-gooks/</ref>

* "I was going to have a few comments about John Edwards but you have to go into rehab if you use the word faggot."

==See Also==
*[[Previous Breaking News/Ann Coulter|Articles about '''Ann Coulter''' from previous "Breaking News"]]
*[[Wikiproject:News by Subject#Ann Coulter| Wikiproject:News by Subject- Ann Coulter]]
*[[Conservative Links]]
*[[Lou Dobbs]]

==Notes and references==
{{reflist|2}}

==External Links==
*[http://www.anncoulter.com/cgi-local/welcome.cgi AnnCoulter.com]
*RealClearPolitcs.com [http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2006/03/poll_most_americans_love_coult.html Poll: Most Americans Love Coulter Columns], accessed 6 May 2007.
*[http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/03/05/AR2007030501610_2.html The Long Fuse on Ann Coulter's Bomb] - ''Washington Post'' - March 6, 2007
*[http://www.eyeblast.tv/public/video.aspx?RsrcID=2095 Media Research Center 'Funny Video's from 2007'] Watch Ann Coulter present funny videos from 2007 at the 2008 MRC DisHonors Awards in DC.

{{DEFAULTSORT:Coulter, Ann}}

[[Category:Women Authors]]
[[Category:Conservative Commentators]]
{{Conservatism}}

Conservative Bible Project

2010-04-18T14:00:37Z

DD: /* Advantages to a Conservative Bible Online */

[[File:BIBLE.jpg|right]]{{ConservativeBible}}

The '''Conservative Bible Project''' is a project utilizing the "[[best of the public]]" to render God's word into modern [[English]] without [[liberal]] translation distortions.<ref>Beginners can pick any verse, type its citation into [http://www.blueletterbible.org/], click on "<small>SHOW STRONG'S</small>" at the top right to obtain the Greek, and then edit a book in the chart (lower right). Another original Greek source is [http://www.greekbible.com/].</ref> A Colbert Report interview featured this project.<ref>[http://www.colbertnation.com/the-colbert-report-videos/258144/december-08-2009/andy-schlafly The Colbert Report Videos: Andy Schlafly], ColbertNation.com, December 08, 2009.</ref> Nearly all of the [[Gospels]] have been translated; several letters of [[St. Paul|Paul]] are the primary unfinished work in the New Testament.

Already our translators have identified numerous pro-abortion distortions that omit or twist clear references to the unborn child.

Liberal [[bias]] has become the single biggest distortion in modern [[Bible]] translations. There are three sources of errors in conveying biblical meaning are, in increasing amount:

*lack of precision in the original language, such as terms underdeveloped to convey new concepts introduced by Christ
*lack of precision in modern language
*translation bias, mainly of the liberal kind, in converting the original language to the modern one.

Experts in ancient languages are helpful in reducing the first type of error above, which is a vanishing source of error as scholarship advances understanding. English language linguists are helpful in reducing the second type of error, which also decreases due to an increasing vocabulary. '''But the third -- and largest -- source of translation error requires conservative principles to reduce and eliminate'''.<ref>The committee in charge of updating the bestselling version, the [[NIV]], is dominated by professors and higher-educated participants who can be expected to be [[liberal]] and [[feminist]] in outlook. As a result, the revision and replacement of the [[NIV]] will be influenced more by [[political correctness]] and other [[liberal]] distortions than by genuine examination of the oldest manuscripts. As a result of these political influences, it becomes desirable to develop a [[conservative]] translation that can serve, at a minimum, as a bulwark against the liberal manipulation of meaning in future versions.</ref>

As of 2009, there is no fully conservative translation of the [[Bible]] which satisfies the following ten guidelines:<ref>Additional less important guidelines include (1) adherence to a concise and dignifying style, such as use of "who" rather than "that" when referring to people and also use glorifying language for the remarkable achievements and (2) recognizing that Christianity introduced powerful new concepts that even the Greek and Hebrew were inadequate to express, but modern conservative language can express well.</ref>

:# '''Framework against Liberal Bias''': providing a strong framework that enables a thought-for-thought translation without corruption by liberal bias. For example, the ''Living Bible'' translation has liberal [[evolution|evolutionary]] bias;<ref>http://www.cai.org/bible-studies/evolutions-influence-modern-bible-translations</ref> the widely used ''NIV'' translation has a pro-[[abortion]] bias.<ref>''See'' [[Feminist Bible]]</ref>
:# '''Not Emasculated''': avoiding unisex, "gender inclusive" language, and other feminist distortions; preserve many references to the unborn child (the [[NIV]] deletes these)
:# '''Not Dumbed Down''': not dumbing down the reading level, or diluting the intellectual force and logic of Christianity<ref>English translations fail to use the word "illogical" where appropriate, and under-utilize the term "mind".</ref>; the [[NIV]] is written at only the 7th grade level<ref>The [[NIV]] has supplanted the [[KJV]] in popularity.</ref>
:#'''Utilize Terms which better capture original intent''': using powerful new [[Essay:Best New Conservative Terms|conservative terms]] to capture better the original intent;<ref>For example, in 1611 the [[conservative]] concept of "accountability" had not yet developed, and the [[King James Version]] does not use "accountable to God" in translating Romans 3:19; good modern translations do.</ref> Defective translations use the word "comrade" three times as often as "volunteer"; similarly, updating words that have a change in meaning, such as "word", "peace", and "miracle".
:# '''Combat Harmful Addiction''': combating addiction<ref>See [[Bible on Addiction]].</ref> by using modern terms for it, such as "gamble" rather than "cast lots";<ref>For example, the [[English Standard Version]] (2001) does not use the word "gamble" anywhere in translating numerous references to the concept in the [[Bible]].</ref> using modern political terms, such as "register" rather than "enroll" for the census
:# '''Accept the Logic of Hell''': applying logic with its full force and effect, as in not denying or downplaying the very real existence of [[Hell]] or the [[Devil]].
:# '''Express Free Market Parables'''; explaining the numerous economic parables with their full free-market meaning
:# '''Exclude Later-Inserted Inauthentic Passages''': excluding the interpolated passages that liberals commonly put their own spin on, such as the [[adulteress story]]
:# '''Credit Open-Mindedness of Disciples''': crediting [[Essay:Quantifying Openmindedness|open-mindedness]], often found in youngsters like the eyewitnesses Mark and John, the authors of two of the Gospels
:# '''Prefer Conciseness over Liberal Wordiness''': preferring conciseness to the liberal style of high word-to-substance ratio; avoid compound negatives and unnecessary ambiguities; prefer concise, consistent use of the word "Lord" rather than "Jehovah" or "Yahweh" or "Lord God."

Thus, a project has begun among members of [[Conservapedia]] to translate the Bible in accordance with these principles. The translated Bible can be found [[Conservative Bible|here]].

It is very important to translate the Bible correctly. As it is written, "I warn everyone who hears the prophetic words in this book: if anyone adds to them, God will add to him the plagues described in this book, and if anyone takes away from the words in this prophetic book, God will take away his share in the tree of life and in the holy city described in this book" (Revelation 22, 18-19).

Benefits include:

*mastery of the Bible, which is priceless
*mastery of the English language, which is valuable
*thorough understanding of the differences in Bible translations, particularly the historically important [[King James Version]]
*benefiting from activity that no [[public school]] would ever allow; a Conservative Bible could become a text for public school courses
*political issues can become a pathway to evangelizing liberals
*liberals will oppose this effort, but they will have to read the Bible to criticize this, and that will open their minds
*this project has a unifying effect on various [[Christian]] denominations, and serves as an important counterweight to liberal efforts to divide conservative candidates based on religion

How long would this project take? There are about 8000 verses in the [[New Testament]]. At a careful rate of translating about four verses an hour, it would take one person 2000 hours, or about one year working full time on the project.

== Possible Approaches ==

Here are possible approaches to creating a conservative Bible translation:

*identify faulty pro-liberal terms used in existing Bible translations, such as "government", and suggest more accurate substitutes
*identify the omission of liberal terms for vices, such as "gambling", and identify where they should be used
*identify conservative terms that are omitted from existing translations, and propose where they could improve the translation
*identify terms that have lost their original meaning, such as "word" in the beginning of the [[Gospel of John]], and suggest replacements, such as "truth"

An existing translation might license its version for improvement by the above approaches, much as several modern translations today are built on prior translations. Alternatively, a more ambitious approach would be to start anew from the best available ancient transcripts.

In stage one, the translation could focus on word improvement and thereby be described as a "conservative word-for-word" translation. If greater freedom in interpretation is then desired, then a "conservative thought-for-thought" version could be generated as a second stage.

== Building on the [[King James Version]] ==

In the [[United States]] and much of the world, the immensely popular and respected [[King James Version]] (KJV) is freely available and in the [[public domain]]. It could be used as the baseline for developing a conservative translation without requiring a license or any fees. Where the KJV is known to be deficient due to discovery of more authentic sources, exceptions can be made that use either more modern [[public domain]] translations as a baseline, or by using the original Greek or Hebrew.

There are 66 books in the [[KJV]], comprised of 1,189 chapters, 31,102 verses, and 788,280 words.<ref>http://www.biblebelievers.com/believers-org/kjv-stats.html</ref> The project could begin with translation of the [[New Testament]], which is only 27 books, 260 chapters, 7,957 verses, and
less than 200,000 words.

Retranslation at rate of 20 verses a day would complete the entire [[New Testament]] in about a year. With 5 good retranslators, that would be an average of only 4 verses a day per translator. At a faster rate of 20 verses per day by 5 good translators, the entire [[New Testament]] could be retranslated in less than 3 months.

== First Example - Liberal-Promoted Falsehood ==

The earliest, most authentic manuscripts of the Gospel According to Luke lack this verse fragment set forth at the start of Luke 23:34:<ref>[http://www.blueletterbible.org/Bible.cfm?b=Luk&c=23&v=34&t=NIV#34 Quoted] here from the [[NIV]].</ref>

:Jesus said, "Father, forgive them, for they do not know what they are doing."

Is this a corruption of the original, perhaps promoted by [[liberal]]s without regard to its authenticity? This does not appear in any other Gospel, and the simple fact is that some of the persecutors of Jesus '''''did''''' know what they were doing. This quotation is a favorite of liberals, although it does not appear in the earliest and best manuscripts of the Gospel of Luke. It should not appear in a [[conservative]] Bible, because in point of fact Jesus might never had said it at all.

== Second Example - Dishonestly Shrewd ==

At Luke 16:8, the [[NIV]] describes an enigmatic parable in which the "master commended the dishonest manager because he had acted shrewdly." But is "shrewdly", which has connotations of dishonesty, the best term here? Being dishonestly shrewd is not an admirable trait.

The better conservative term, which became available only in 1851, is "resourceful". The manager was praised for being "resourceful", which is very different from dishonesty. Yet not even the [[ESV]], which was published in 2001, contains a single use of the term "resourceful" in its entire translation of the Bible.

== Third Example - Socialism ==

Socialistic terminology permeates English translations of the Bible, without justification. This improperly encourages the "social justice" movement among Christians.

For example, the conservative word "volunteer" is mentioned only once in the [[ESV]], yet the socialistic word "comrade" is used three times, "laborer(s)" is used 13 times, "labored" 15 times, and "fellow" (as in "fellow worker") is used 55 times.

== Advantages to a Conservative Bible Online ==

There are several striking advantages to a conservative approach to translating the Bible online:

* participants learn enormously from the process
* liberal bias - and lack of authenticity - become easier to recognize and address
* by translating online, this utilizes the growing online resources that improve accuracy
* supported by conservative principles, the project can be bolder in uprooting and excluding liberal distortions
* the project can adapt quickly to future threats from liberals to biblical integrity
* this defends the Bible from those who would seek to warp and twist its meaning for their own ends, as our version of it would change the meaning to an unmistakeably conservative one
* access is free and immediate to the growing internet audience, for their benefit
* the ensuing debate would flesh out -- and stop -- the infiltration of churches by liberals pretending to be Christian, much as a vote by legislators exposes the liberals
* this would bring the Bible to a new audience of political types, for their benefit; Bible courses in college Politics Departments would be welcome
* this would debunk the pervasive and hurtful myth that Jesus would be a political liberal today
* an unbiased and truthful Bible is of immeasurable value to society

== See also ==

* [[Conservative Bible]]
* [http://www.greekbible.com/ Nestle-Aland 26th edition Greek Bible (the source for all modern translations except the [[NKJV]]])
* [http://www.lib.uchicago.edu/e/ets/efts/Greek.html Liddell-Scott-Jones Greek Lexicon and Woodhouse's English-Greek Dictionary]
* [[Bible Translations]]
* [[Bible Translation Issues]]
* [[Bible Retranslation Project]]
* [[Word Analysis of Bible]]
* [[NIV]]
* [[Inspiration of Holy Scripture: An Eastern Christian and Jewish Perspective]]
* [[Best of the public]]

{{Conservapedia}}

== References ==

<references/>

[[Category:Bible]]
[[Category:Bible Versions]]
[[Category:Conservative Bible]]