Posted on 05/23/2009 10:28:20 AM PDT by EternalVigilance
A friend recently forwarded me a link to Anne Coulter's latest column with the following comment:
"Anne's Coulter's latest column is entitled: "Notre Dame Holds First Alan Keyes Fundraiser"Here is a multiple choice test:
Anne Coulter uses Alan Keyes' name to
a. piggyback off of Dr. Keyes' fame and courage in order to get people to read her column (Dr. Keyes is never even mentioned in the body of the article)
b. give herself credibility by creating the appearance of being on the same side of the abortion issue as Dr. Keyes
c. to distract readers from realizing that she explains (in two consecutive sentences) that Roe v. Wade is both "lawless" and "the law of the land"
d. promote her latest "pro-life" idea of allowing the people the right to vote on whether or not babies can be killed."
Naturally I took a look at the column. My friend was right. Except for the shrewdly deceptive title, my name did not figure in the article at all. As I reflected on this oddity, one possibility occurred to me in addition to the choices listed. The title leaves the impression that somehow or another I benefited financially from what I did and endured at Notre Dame.
In reality, nothing could be further from the truth....
(Excerpt) Read more at loyaltoliberty.com ...
I’m not fair minded , but the clear intent would be that BO’s appearance boosts Keyes’ visibility and prospects; thus Keyes and his friend are both paranoid.
Keyes is a GOOD MAN
I’ll put you down as the first poster that didn’t read the article. Thanks for your input.
Keyes is a Whack Job.
I stopped eading after the second instance of Ann Coulter's name being misspelled.
Give me a break!
so has Keyes, who i do respect, speak with Ann about this column and get her input???
I did read it, it doesn’t take away the interpretation that Keyes didn’t “get” Coulter’s obvious satire, which was actually friendly in intent.
Keyes is kind of wacky but to the extent our aims coincide with his we shouldn’t bash him. The more anti-socialism, anti-abortion, anti-Obama voices there are out there, the better.
bttt
Go Ann!
Secondly, after reading Ann's piece, I think Keyes is over-reacting and comparing Ann's comments to his being barred by group after group for his beliefs.
Instead, Ann was doing what she does best, being contrarian. She suggests Notre Dame perform live abortions at graduation.
So the suggestion that Notre Dame has a fundraiser for Keyes (who was not welcomed by Notre Dame) is the same contrary statement to make people think.
Keyes is kind of wacky but to the extent our aims coincide with his we shouldnt bash him.
“to the extent our aims coincide with his we shouldnt bash him” ...
Would you say the reverse of that is true also?
Keyes has a bit of a drama queen streak. He wishes he were as famous as Ann Coulter these days.
Cocnur - Her irony/satire was completely missed by the Keynes’ “friend” - and by the man himself.
Oh well - He is not right all the time. But lately, the more strident he becomes, the less effective he is.
On another note, I did find it interesting that Keyes mentions his dealings with the Constitution Party, which some around here adore.
He states “Ironically, in the political realm my firm commitment to the defense of the US-Israel relationship contributed greatly to the failure of efforts to join forces with the Constitution Party last year.”
This is what has always bothered me about CP candidates....they are anti-Israel and typically nutjobs.
I'm going with a. Clearly Ann Coulter is jealous of Keyes' staggering fame and name recognition, and hopes one day to achieve just a fraction of his success.
By the way, what color is the sky on your planet?
Ann Coulter was clearly attemting contrarian humor. Alan Keyes is looking for an enemy in the wrong place with this. The article is biting satire, completely mocking the pro-abortion hoopla at Notre Dame.
Rather than attack Ann Coulter, perhaps he could have just pointed out that he actually is experiencing some loss of income via speaking engagements, due to taking a highly public stand on conscience, and leave it at that. Instead, he’s sounding rather peevish, and creating enemies where there were none.
So recognizing that Israel has the capability of defending itself and doesn't need all the aid the USA gives it is being anti-Israel? That's essentially what I get from the CP's position.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.