Canadians…

Beady little eyes, floppy heads, with their watery beer, always calling people ‘budday’ and wanting to tell everyone what this is all ‘aboot’...

I’m not a fan of Ann Coulter, but I don’t think these little Maple Syrup Facists realize that their actions preached her points better and louder than if they had allowed her to speak unmolested. I don’t think they reailze that they gave her more free press and sympathy that she could ever haev even bought.

All those protesters must have been public school educated…

Ann Coulter speaks the truth—sometimes in a strong and uncomfortable manner—but it’s the truth. The Left never wants to hear “other” truths—only their own. If another group speaks truths, it’s defined as hate speech. It’s very frustrating.

I am no fan of Ann Coulter - frankly, I am impartial to her. Don’t listen to what she has to say, nor do I care. As a Canadian, I am embarrassed by the actions of those who protested her speech at the University of Ottawa. I am all for free speech, especially in a university campus. However, I do protest being called a “little Maple Syrup facist”, I don’t drink beer, I’ve never used the term “budday” nor “aboot” (I normally only here that word from Americans actually). Frankly, if the only way a person can get themselves heard is by being insulting, then I automatically disregard anything they have to say. If one isn’t intelligent enough to make their point without being insulting, one is probably not worth listening to. Goodbye.

Susan,

You were not a protestor at the event, which was what my term “Maple Syrup Facist” applied to. ( I had thought that was pretty obvious )

The entire first sentence of my first post was actually a jest combining the (albiet rather dumb) southpark humor with a hat tip to the movie Canadian Bacon.

I mean good heavens! You Canadians are almost as touchy as us Americans when it comes to sterotypes! Makes me almost want to pop another ‘lite’ beer, sit back in my trailer with my cowboy hat and watch Nascar. :-)

I am not shocked by the protest.  It was a violent protest in that it physically threatened Ms. Coulter’s well being.  Why else die the authorities think it best that her speech be canceled.  So violence was done to free speech - that Canadian style free speech.  Of course, I also find the hate-speech laws are an affront to true-free speech. Such laws are a step toward the control of all speech.  You either have free speech or your do not.

The students of the university are uncivilized. They always think that those who plead for decency in sex culture, those who speak about the need for abstinence and control are idiots. Do these students want to be free beasts ? Let them hold their opinion, but let them listen to others. Let them think of God a supreme power.

Ann Coulter speaks the truth in a witty, intelligent, clear and concise way.  I read almost everything Ann writes and I have yet to find something false or vaguely offensive.  I understand her style may not be for everyone, but that is not her fault.  I challenge Ms. Bean to produce a couple of examples that justify her last statement where she implies that Ann Coulter offends people.

At the risk of inflaming a war with my Catholic cousins to the south, let me inform Danielle Bean and pseudonymous name callers that hate speech laws are “held dear” by only a cabal of activist Utopians in Canada.  Ann Coulter was the victim of mob censorship, something hardly unknown in the U.S. Coulter went on to another university, and all went without incident.

Danielle is surprised Coulter was ever invited.  How about wanting to hear her speak?  Canadians and Americans spend hours each day absorbing the media pratlings of neanderthals known as commentators, comedians and social opinion makers.  There is little to choose intellectually between Coulter and late-evening chicken-house chatter.  Yet few object to those offerings.

@ Juan, I do not understand your objection. Of course Ann Coulter offends people! Almost everything she does or says causes an uproar. This whole post is about the fact that people are offended by her. Whether you agree with what she says or not, you have to admit that what she says offends people. I firmly defend her right to offend.

I like Ann, but like a loud-mouthed, embarassing sister, sometimes she goes too far. She’s good at back-pedaling when she needs to, and she also claims “humor” at times to get out of a jam.

Sometimes she says what some of the rest of us are afraid to say. She’ll take the heat for it.

I do think much of the uproar is calculated by Ann, calculated right before she goes to the bank for her book royalties and speaking fees. She’s sly like a fox.

Hey, we’re talking about her! And even negative publicity IS publicity.

Smart Ann, you are in need of your Catholic supporters prayers for wisdom!

Ann Coulter, speaks honestly, sadly many people in Canada are scared stiff of an honest spoken word.

I like Ann and will afford her the same courtesy that all should receive, that being the ability to speak your mind without harassment or fear. Most Canadians are embarrassed at the reaction of both the Provost of the U of O who has prejudged someone and crossed the line into a violation of human rights and the fascists who closed the event down. Now that we are the laughing stock of the free speaking world I am perplexed as to how we rehabilitate the image that we once had. I support Ann in her move to sue and applaud Ezra Levant in his desire to challenge once again the Canadian Human Rights Commission (or farce as we so lovingly refer to it). I would ask Americans to judge us by what we do as a nation and not what some prude from one of our bottom ranked Universities does. He will receive his comeuppance in due course. The fascist left wingers at our Universities have the same disregard for free speech as yours do. We will tolerate them as best we can. To those on both sides of the border who cannot enter a discussion without casting vitriolic aspirations on an opposing view, shame on you.

I would like to know whether these protesting students have parents and if so whether they respect them. Does their respect include acceptance of any of their teachings on sexual morality.  I would advise them to read the book ” Fatherless America ” BY David Blankenhorn and decide what kind of America tghey visualise The mothers of America should take interest in giving correct moral lessons to their children

Re: Danielle Bean and “of course Ann Coulter offends people.”  Danielle, the only people Ann offends are the liberals and leftest.  They can’t stand humor aimed at them.  They’re like bullies who can dish it out but can’t take it.  They don’t mind attacking Pres. Bush or and conservative.  Thank God for strong women, especially, like Ann!

Dear Ms. Bean.  According to Merriam-Webster Online to offend is :1 a : to transgress the moral or divine law : sin b : to violate a law or rule : do wrong 2 a : to cause difficulty, discomfort, or injury b : to cause dislike, anger, or vexation.  So you are right, Ann Coulter offends people not because she is lying or breaking a moral or divine law (definition 1) but because she causes discomfort to people by actually speaking the truth (definition 2).  I am a simple man. My mother always says “La verdad no peca, pero incomoda” which means “To speak the truth is not a sin, but it makes people uncomfortable”.  You are right, Ann does offend people but does so by speaking the truth.  So let me amend my previous challenge to you now that (I hope) we agree on the definition of the word “offend”.  Please provide not two, but one example of Ann Coulter lying.

@stilbelieve, I am neither a liberal nor a leftist and yet I sometimes find Coulter’s tone offensive.

@Juan, thank you for posting the definition of “offend.” I’m glad we’re on the same page with that word now (and I especially appreciate your mother’s saying ... so true!). But you are confusing me again. Why exactly are you asking me to give an example of Coulter lying? I never said she lied about anything.

@DB.  As Juan has clarified by quoting Webster - hearing the truth can be offending to someone.  I find it is always offensive to liberals, such that liberals can’t stand being with anyone that thinks and speaks differently than them no matter how carefully one picks his words.  That is why Hollywood and so many entertainers are like they are - they don’t associate with normal people.  As for your discomfort, I would attribute it to your mothering side and female nature.  Ann is not aiming her remarks towards you, or people like you and I, but to the liberals and lefties who love to insult and ridicule conservatives as they did, and do, Sarah Palin, G. W. Bush, etc.  I admire W not ever making an insulting or belittling remark about those who so enjoyed doing so against him. But, what did that get him?  Nothing.  I love Ann giving it right back to them.  (By the way, did you ever hear a bishop or priest come to the defense of those the liberals and left like to destroy, like Judge Bork, or Justice Clarence Thomas [a church-going Catholic]?)  Morale minded people need to support one another and stick together and not cringe when one of our own is able to take the gloves off and kick butt.  You can’t let them divided us, as you are letting your emotions do.  It is like General Patton’s approach to the enemy.  I’d rather follow a General Patton than some “pompous” Field Marshal Bernard Montgomery into the battle we find ourselves in the middle of, started by the liberals and leftist who not only feel the necessity to be insulting to us, but don’t even think we have a right to be alive…and given the chance wouldn’t let us live.

Are any readers here aware of the fact that Ann Coulter canceled her own speech in order to score a massive publicity coup?  No one at the University of Ottawa or the police thought there was any reason to cancel the speech—Ann Coulter did it herself.  Unfortunately, she was successful, possibly beyond her wildest dreams.  That’s more than a little depressing.  I believe the readers of the Register are owed the facts about this story.

By the way, I am completely in favor of letting Ann Coulter speak whenever and as often as she wants: she is a rousing testament to the bankruptcy of her own ideology.

Bill VD, where did you get your information?  None of the news story support your version of the story.

Hi all,
  Frankly I’m surprised and disappointed that the author of this article seems to have gotten the facts of this incident backward.  “Ann Coulter, Face of Hate”?  Who did the hating here?  I thought is was the intolerant students who forced the cancelation of Ann’s speech by threatening violence?  I’m disppointed too, that this article was included in my mailing from the National Catholic Register, a publication I otherwise respect.  My impression of Ann Coulter is the she tends to use a lot of satire and some sarcasm in her talks and writing, which is really not my cup of tea.  But ‘hate’?  The only haters in this scenario were the students and maybe some of the biased administrators.  Please Danielle, don’t be so quick to jump on the politically correct bandwagon.  We have too many journalists doing that already.  Take care and God bless -  Walt

@ Walter, I wish you had read the post before commenting. I titled it “Is Ann Coulter the Face of Hate?” to inspire a discussion, not to make a statement.

Ann Coulter is SO offensive. I’m a little sad, really, that so many here are defending her!

She isn’t just offensive to liberals, she’s offensive to anyone who hopes for respectful and reasonable interchanges or debates. She’s absolutely inflammatory - for one, she’s said awful things about single mothers, which I find offensive as a woman.

She’s sarcastic and derogatory and not just about issues of life.

Hi all and Hi Danielle - I would like to apologize to Danielle for spouting off above before throughly reading her article.  She wasn’t saying what I assumed she was, and I hope she will forgive me for shortchanging her.  I hope to remember to check things out more throughly in the future before criticising someone’s work in a public forum.  As to Ashley’s post, I have a simple solution for people who don’t like or are offended by Ann Coulter - don’t listen to her!  The incident reported is about people violating Ann’s right to speak and the right of the audience to hear her.  It was done by means of the threat of violence.  That’s totalitarianism, and has no place in a ‘free society’, much less on a college campus.  That violation of rights, rather than whether or not we agree with Ann, is the real issue here, in my view.  It reveals alot about the people involved, and some larger issues as well.  Thanks, Danielle, for reporting on this.  Take care ~

@ashley.  Again the truth is difficult for some people to take, let alone hear.  Facts are facts. All one has to do is provide facts to prove Ann is in error about what she says about women who decide to raise a child or children without a father.  That would be a lot more interesting to hear than listening to someone bemoan how they don’t like the messaginger’s tone or use of wording.  She’s put her facts in her book.  Just disprove them.

I’m late in the game for this, and I’m largely unfamiliar with Ms. Coulter’s work.  I grant the currently used definition of “offend” does lend itself to Ms. Coulter’s rhetoric because she causes discomfort among people who listen to her. However, to be a purveyor of “hate” she has to be insulting. Does the author have examples of her being insulting that might lend Ms. Coulter to being a purveyor of hate? If Ms. Coulter merely causes discomfort because she attacks the poor arguments and conclusions of those who find her difficult, that is no grounds for “insult”. Rather, if she assaults people’s character or personality, then there is room for more serious discussion on her merits or lack thereof. However, one can be “shrewd as serpents, but loving as doves” and still stick it to those that oppose the truth.  This is what Christ calls us to; remember, he threw tables, chased people out with a whip, and called people out on their sins. He even called people names (within the context of their behavior)!  If the point is to be dramatic, it seems if the Lord can do it, so can she. However, St. Paul says, “if I speak the truth, but without love, I am like a resounding gong.” 
In the end, the Lord has given us criteria by which to judge whether it is truthful and loving, and sometimes the truth hurts. As St. John Chrysostom said, “Comfort the afflicted, and afflict the comforted”.

You state she was ‘’...I thank God that I live in a country where she is free to offend…..’ You should read your own report the event was cancelled ....Prat