Daniel Borchers from www.coulterwatch.wordpress.com: Ann Coulter Auditions for U.N. Ambassador

Ann Coulter Auditions for U.N. Ambassador

July 18, 2014Uncategorizedanncoulter, coulter, nativism, racism, soccer, United Nations, xenophobia

“All countries suck compared to America.”[1]

This from the stereotypical Ugly American who recently, again, became an international sensation, this time for her repeated denunciations ofsoccer as un-American, succinctly encapsulated in two words: “It’s foreign.” Coulter’s antipathy toward foreigners and immigrants (legal and illegal) is legendary.

Perhaps she is auditioning for an ambassadorship to the United Nations. Wouldn’t that be a hoot!

Surprisingly, Coulter, a world-traveler, “spent summers in Spain” as a child and, as an adult, traveled worldwide to Grateful Dead concerts and ski resorts. In fact, her first soccer diatribe was published while she was in Paris (France, not Texas).

Let’s consider Ann Hart Coulter for the next U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations. Wouldn’t that be a sight to behold? Coulter favors Western Europeans (those who are non-liberal, non-feminized, and non-pacified) over the rest of the world, particularly the Third World. But English must be spoken!

Here is a sampling of classic Coulter commentary. Travel the world through Ann’s eyes.

Coulter’s If Democrats Had Any Brains contained a section entitled, “FOREIGNERS, OR THE ‘NON-SOAP-ORIENTED.’” Her lead paragraph began, “They’re no good. Don’t trust ‘em – except Denmark, Australia, the Czech Republic, and the rest of new Europe, which, amazingly enough, has recently come to include France and Germany. … Canadians, for example, are either great or awful, and at the outset of the War on Terror, the balance was swinging perilously close to awful. Better shape up, Canada! At this point, we’re only keeping you around for the beer.”

Canada

“[Canadians] better hope the United States does not roll over one night and crush them. They are lucky we allow them to exist on the same continent. … We like the English-speaking Canadians.”[2]

China

Asked about invading China, Coulter replied, “Yeah!”[3]

Although she is opposed to the totalitarian regime in China, Coulter nevertheless ridiculed blind Chinese dissident Chen Guangcheng, tweeting, “Couldn’t we just tell that blind Chinese dissident that he’s in America now?”[4] Responding to the controversy she had created, Coulter joked, “I’d say they’re being a little myopic, except they’d be offended.”[5] One could say that Coulter is blind to her own insensitivity.

Europeans

Asked why “Europeans prefer liberals to conservatives,” Coulter answered, “Because you’re all a bunch of atheists, humanists, and moral relativists. Love the food, though! And don’t get me started on the shoes you wonderful people make! They’re to surrender for!”[6]

France

“Attack France!”[7] Her essay title concluded with these words: “If this is a war against terrorism and not a Eurocentric war against Islam, the conclusion is ineluctable: We must attack France. What are they going to do? Fight us?”

“This is as opposed to France, against whom I think we should launch a preemptive nuclear strike.”[8]

Iran

“Well, I keep hearing people say we can’t find the nuclear material, and you can bury it in caves. How about we just carpet bomb them so they can’t build a transistor radio?”[9]

“How about [invading Iran] right now? You have a lunatic running Iran, who’s running around claiming he has a nuke. When do we wait? Do we wait for a city to be taken out?”[10]

Coulter said, “It’s good for Wall Street if we bomb Iran,” adding, “I think it would be fun.”[11]

Coulter tweeted, “Let’s destroy Iran by giving them ObamaCare.”[12]

Lebanon

“Some have argued that Israel’s response is disproportionate, which is actually correct: It wasn’t nearly strong enough. I know this because there are parts of South Lebanon still standing.”[13]

North Korea

“I think we ought to nuke North Korea right now just to give the rest of the world a warning. Boom! … I just think it would be fun to nuke them and have it be a warning … to the world.”[14]

Syria

“Perhaps we could put aside our national, ongoing, post-9/11 Muslim butt-kissing contest and get on with the business at hand: Bombing Syria back to the stone age and then permanently disarming Iran.”[15]

Third World

“It’s extremely difficult to come in if you’re coming from a Western European country. However, if you are from a Third World country, ‘Welcome.’ If your genetic ancestors did not invent the wheel, ‘Oh, well, let them come in.’ But they’re the natural Democratic voters.”[16]

Resources:

See Chapter 10: “Equality: Self-Evident Truths,” The Gospel According to Ann Coulter, 2012, available as a free pdf download atwww.coulterwatch.com/gospel.pdf. It documents Coulter’s astonishing predilection to racism, sexism, and classism.

copied from www.coulterwatch.com

please check out the web page for more info and comments on this post......here is a link:

http://coulterwatch.wordpress.com/

Related articles

• Let's all annoy Ann Coulter! Seven things to irritate the conservative performance artist
• The End of Ann Coulter: The World Cup Rant That No One Cares About
• Ann Coulter Wants to Arrest American World Cup Fans for Treason
• Soccer madness in America yet another 'sign of the nation's moral decay': Ann Coulter
• Fighting Racism with Doc Jazz: Bringing the World Together with Food and Fabric and Music from The Ronnie Republic
• Free School in Norway: I'm going there right now.......
• Kids Fight Bullying in South Wales Gwent
• Bill O'Reilly on White Privilege: That goes against my platform
• Geraldo Rivera Talks Puerto Rican-Jew Pride and a Homeland for Palestine

Does Ann Coulter Know What She Believes?

Does Ann Coulter Know What She Believes?

Polemicist Ann Coulter, once a recognized icon of the conservative movement, and later, a gay icon, has puzzled many people in recent years. Eager to be seen as conservatism’s darling, a firebrand and flamethrower – indeed, a zealot in all things conservative – Coulter has been anything but conservative.

Though giving lip service to the pro-life movement, Coulter fails to seek or support pro-life candidates. Espousing family values, she became a national spokesman for gay conservatives. Claiming to be a Reagan conservative, Coulter claims Romney was a better candidate that Reagan. Now, Coulter is again attacking the Tea Party. Coulter wouldn’t know a RINO if she looked in the mirror.

If Coulter is such a firebrand conservative zealot, why does she fall in love with so many RINOs?

Perhaps the answer to Coulter’s conflicting views and behaviors lies within Coulter. Perhaps Coulter neither knows what she really believes nor believes what she thinks she knows.

For almost two decades, Coulter has lied, twisted the truth, defended her hypocrisy, refused to repent, and continually pushed the political and rhetorical edge. Without boundaries, and having forsaken the north star of truth, Coulter has simply gone over the edge.

If Coulter doesn’t know what to believe, and if she doesn’t believe what she claims to believe, why should be believe anything she says? We should Never Trust Ann Coulter – at ANY Age.

from Daniel Borchers

Thank you, Dan, for telling us your thoughts.......cl

here is a link to Dan's website:

www.coulterwatch.com

this is from Coulter Watch....just click on the link (above) and it will take you right to this page if you would like to see the website and sign up on the mailing list.......cl:

Welcome to Coulter Watch!

Coulter Watch is a site that promotes the proposition that Conservatism can only endure as a viable and vibrant movement if it maintains a commitment to the core character traits of honor andintegrity, honesty and virtue.

Ann Coulter: Wrecking the Republican Party

GOP CRAFTS PLAN TO WRECK THE COUNTRY, LOSE VOTERS

January 29, 2014

As House Republicans prepare to sell out the country on immigration this week, Phyllis Schlafly has produced a stunning report on how immigration is changing the country. The report is still embargoed, but someone slipped me a copy, and it's too important to wait. 

Leave aside the harm cheap labor being dumped on the country does to the millions of unemployed Americans. What does it mean for the Republican Party? 

Citing surveys from the Pew Research Center, the Pew Hispanic Center, Gallup, NBC News, Harris polling, the Annenberg Policy Center, Latino Decisions, the Center for Immigration Studies and the Hudson Institute, Schlafly's report overwhelmingly demonstrates that merely continuing our current immigration policies spells doom for the Republican Party. 

Immigrants -- all immigrants -- have always been the bulwark of the Democratic Party. For one thing, recent arrivals tend to be poor and in need of government assistance. Also, they're coming from societies that are far more left-wing than our own. History shows that, rather than fleeing those policies, they bring their cultures with them. (Look at what New Yorkers did to Vermont.) 

This is not a secret. For at least a century, there's never been a period when a majority of immigrants weren't Democrats. 

At the current accelerated rate of immigration -- 1.1 million new immigrants every year -- Republicans will be a fringe party in about a decade. 

Thanks to endless polling, we have a pretty good idea of what most immigrants believe. 

According to a Harris poll, 81 percent of native-born citizens think the schools should teach students to be proud of being American. Only 50 percent of naturalized U.S. citizens do. 

While 67 percent of native-born Americans believe our Constitution is a higher legal authority than international law, only 37 percent of naturalized citizens agree. 

No wonder they vote 2-1 for the Democrats.

copied from the website of Ann Coulter

Prisme à travers prisme de la Constitution

Prisme à travers prisme de la Constitution
Comme un conservateur pro - défense , j'ai mes doutes sérieux quant à la légitimité de Prisme de la NSA et de programmes connexes qui rassemblent une quantité massive d'informations privées sur tous les Américains et clairement ( à mon avis ) viole la Constitution .
On nous dit qu'il n'y a pas eu d' abus signalés de ces programmes . Qui savoir si elles ont été la cible illégalement ? Il s'agit d'un programme secret, après tout . Si Snowden n'avait pas divulgué certaines informations , il a obtenu de manière frauduleuse , nous aurions à ce jour n'ont aucune connaissance de ses crimes .
La Constitution et la Déclaration des droits ont été expressément conçus pour limiter et de diffuser le pouvoir du gouvernement fédéral par l'entremise des pouvoirs énumérés , divers freins et contrepoids , et clairement définis protection des droits civils pour les citoyens .
L'argument selon lequel le gouvernement devrait intercepter et maintenir les communications téléphoniques et électroniques sur tous les Américains parce que les compagnies de téléphone et les fournisseurs de services Internet possèdent déjà cette information est grotesque . Il fait partie du travail de ces entreprises à maintenir certains documents pour leurs clients , comme requis par la loi .
Dominé dans tous les dissimuler sur cette question cruciale de la vie privée est que le secteur privé ne possède pas le pouvoir coercitif de l'État. En outre , ces entreprises agissent effectivement comme un tampon entre les individus et le gouvernement .
Une raison principale pour exiger du gouvernement de délivrer des mandats individu ( et non couverture ) dans des cas précis est de garder le gouvernement d'abuser de son pouvoir . C'est la principale préoccupation rédacteurs et il devrait nous être ainsi .


de Daniel Borchers à www.CoulterWatch.com

voici un lien sur le site de Dan :

http://www.coulterwatch.com/


translated on google translate

PRISM Through Prism of Constitution

As a pro-defense conservative, I have my serious doubts about the legitimacy of NSA’s PRISM and related programs which gather a massive amount of private information on all Americans and clearly (in my view) violates the Constitution.

We are told that there have been no reported abuses of these programs. Who would know whether they have been illegally targeted? It’s a secret program, after all. If Snowden had not leaked some of the information he fraudulently obtained, we would to this day have no knowledge of his crimes.

The Constitution and Bill of Rights were expressly designed to limit and diffuse the power of the federal government through enumerated powers, various checks and balances, and clearly defined civil rights protections for the citizenry.

The argument that the government should intercept and maintain telephone and email communications on all Americans because telephone companies and Internet providers already possess that information is farcical. It is part of the job of those companies to maintain certain records for their customers, as required by law.

Overlooked in all the dissembling on this critical privacy issue is that the private sector does not possess the coercive power of government. Moreover, those businesses actually act as a buffer between individuals and the government.

One primary reason for requiring the government to issue individual (and not blanket) warrants in specific instances is to keep the government from abusing its power. That was the Framers primary concern and it should be ours as well.

from Daniel Borchers at www.CoulterWatch.com

here is a link to Dan's website:

http://www.coulterwatch.com/

Ann Coulter on Geraldo Tomorrow: Dan Borchers on Ann Coulter Today

 Ann Coulter and God’s Word

In her New Year’s Eve essay (her eighth almost identical Kwanzaa essay in 14^th years), Coulter argued that the Bible should be taken seriously and not misinterpreted for political purposes. She added this aside: “(I promise you, except for venereal disease and eternal damnation, life would be a lot more fun if we were making it up as we went along.)”

 

Some have misread Coulter’s parenthetical remark as an expression of what befalls those who reject and disobey God’s Word. Yes, Coulter commends God’s Word yet, at the very same time, seems to commend doing your own thing (“making it up as we [go] along.”) Are “venereal disease and eternal damnation” the only consequences to sin? Is life all about seeking “a lot more fun?” Amazingly, Coulter made a “promise” about life being more fun doing things your own way. (Yet another failed Coulter promise.)

 

All actions have consequences – according to Newton and according to God. Coulter might think “life would be a lot more fun” doing it her way instead of God’s, revealing her ignorance of God’s greatness and His grace: our Father in heaven really does know better what is best for us. Jesus came to give us life, and to give it to us abundantly.

 

The apostle Paul exhorts Christians to “Rejoice! And, again I say, rejoice!” We, as Christians, are called to experience a bit of heaven on earth in living in a close relationship with our Creator. When we are walking with God, we experience His unsurpassing peace, His inexpressible joy, and His unfailing love. Those experiences are to be prized! The world has nothing better to offer.

 

What passes for “fun” in this world badly misses the mark and deprives people of the joy which can be experienced in following Jesus and doing what He would do.

 

As noted in Vanity: Ann Coulter’s Quest for Glory, Coulter has a problem subjecting her will to God’s. She would rather do what is right in her own eyes than in God’s. Ironically, Coulter concluded her “Breaking Bad” essay (in which she called that TV series “a Christian parable”) with Scripture: “There is a way that appears to be right, but in the end it leads to death.”

by Daniel Borchers

Dan's website is www.CoulterWatch.com

Ann Coulter and God’s Word

English: Commentator and author at CPAC in . (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Ann Coulter and God’s Word

In her New Year’s Eve essay (her eighth almost identical Kwanzaa essay in 14^th years), Coulter argued that the Bible should be taken seriously and not misinterpreted for political purposes. She added this aside: “(I promise you, except for venereal disease and eternal damnation, life would be a lot more fun if we were making it up as we went along.)”

Some have misread Coulter’s parenthetical remark as an expression of what befalls those who reject and disobey God’s Word. Yes, Coulter commends God’s Word yet, at the very same time, seems to commend doing your own thing (“making it up as we [go] along.”) Are “venereal disease and eternal damnation” the only consequences to sin? Is life all about seeking “a lot more fun?” Amazingly, Coulter made a “promise” about life being more fun doing things your own way. (Yet another failed Coulter promise.)

All actions have consequences – according to Newton and according to God. Coulter might think “life would be a lot more fun” doing it her way instead of God’s, revealing her ignorance of God’s greatness and His grace: our Father in heaven really does know better what is best for us. Jesus came to give us life, and to give it to us abundantly.

The apostle Paul exhorts Christians to “Rejoice! And, again I say, rejoice!” We, as Christians, are called to experience a bit of heaven on earth in living in a close relationship with our Creator. When we are walking with God, we experience His unsurpassing peace, His inexpressible joy, and His unfailing love. Those experiences are to be prized! The world has nothing better to offer.

What passes for “fun” in this world badly misses the mark and deprives people of the joy which can be experienced in following Jesus and doing what He would do.

As noted in Vanity: Ann Coulter’s Quest for Glory, Coulter has a problem subjecting her will to God’s. She would rather do what is right in her own eyes than in God’s. Ironically, Coulter concluded her “Breaking Bad” essay (in which she called that TV series “a Christian parable”) with Scripture: “There is a way that appears to be right, but in the end it leads to death.”

Related articles

• Offer to God acceptable worship. Gratitude derives from knowing that our names are written in heaven and from our experience of God's "inexpressible gift" - Jesus Christ.
• Coulter: Defending Phil Robertson
• Beautiful Liza: Royal Albert Hall--We'll Have a Drink at The Ritz Before The Show
• Thank you to all of my Twitter followers: Would you like to comment on my blog.......
• Bernie Kerik's Lawyer Slams the Screen Door in the Face of Joe Tacopina
• Geraldo Rivera's OJ Simpspn Show on CNBC: One of the Best OJ Shows Out There
• Pit Bulls at The Dog Park: It's a Loaded Gun Sich
• Yarn Bomb: Wichita Style--Millie the Millipede at the Ulrich Museum WSU
• What, Bacon in Israel.....I'm Going there Right Now
• The Jesus Christ Show Easter Morning: Thanks, Neil, That Was a Good One

from Coulter Watch Author Dan Borchers: Coulter Confronts Pope on Key Christian Tenet

from Coulter Watch Author Dan Borchers:  Coulter Confronts Pope on Key Christian Tenet 

Ann Coulter’s often confused (and confusing) Christian theological expressions were detailed in The Gospel According to Ann Coulter. But just last week, Coulter spoke with clarity and conviction, challenging the Pope on a key tenet of the faith. Surprisingly, she’s right. When she’s right, she’s right.

The Pope’s words were peculiar regarding entrance into heaven: Per Coulter, “the statement by the Pope that I find most surprising was his statement that you don't have to be a Christian to go to heaven.” Though there is debate over whether the Pope actually said that atheists can go to heaven, it is worth examining the matter.

Coulter explained her point in political terms to a largely political audience, saying, “Look you may think that, maybe there are lot of people who think that. But if you’re head of the RNC, you're not supposed to be saying, ‘Oh, don't bother, voting Republican.’ That isn't supposed to be your position. That's the most surprising. I mean I guess except for the anti-papist crowd.”

The PC Police don’t like declarative statements. They eschew absolutism. Thus they neglect the truth. As a consequence, they decry such clear statements of faith as those which Christians believe: Jesus Christ is the one and only way to heaven. For some, that truth seems very exclusive, but believers see it as profoundly inclusive. Jesus is the Door; He is the Way, the Truth, and the Life; He is the Bread of Life; He is our Salvation; He is our Mediator and our Advocate with the Father. Jesus Christ is the Messiah.

Christianity is like an exclusive club which has one requirement: accepting Jesus as your Lord and Savior. But that Club’s doors are open to anyone and everyone – open invitations to all people. That’s pretty inclusive. Jesus urges His people to come to Him and He will give them rest. That’s an all-encompassing offer.

Those who criticize the church for being a church which preserves the eternal truths of God are missing the point: what the church can accomplish for God, for His people, and even for His critics. It is the preservation of the Word of Truth which enlightens people and draws them to Jesus for salvation and a place in heaven.

In the end, everyone gets a place at the table and greeted by Jesus Himself.

Let’s remember that this Christmas.

Coulter Confronts Pope on Key Christian Tenet

  Coulter Confronts Pope on Key Christian Tenet

Ann Coulter’s often confused (and confusing) Christian theological expressions were detailed in The Gospel According to Ann Coulter. But just last week, Coulter spoke with clarity and conviction, challenging the Pope on a key tenet of the faith. Surprisingly, she’s right. When she’s right, she’s right.

The Pope’s words were peculiar regarding entrance into heaven: Per Coulter, “the statement by the Pope that I find most surprising was his statement that you don't have to be a Christian to go to heaven.” Though there is debate over whether the Pope actually said that atheists can go to heaven, it is worth examining the matter.

Coulter explained her point in political terms to a largely political audience, saying, “Look you may think that, maybe there are lot of people who think that. But if you’re head of the RNC, you're not supposed to be saying, ‘Oh, don't bother, voting Republican.’ That isn't supposed to be your position. That's the most surprising. I mean I guess except for the anti-papist crowd.”

The PC Police don’t like declarative statements. They eschew absolutism. Thus they neglect the truth. As a consequence, they decry such clear statements of faith as those which Christians believe: Jesus Christ is the one and only way to heaven. For some, that truth seems very exclusive, but believers see it as profoundly inclusive. Jesus is the Door; He is the Way, the Truth, and the Life; He is the Bread of Life; He is our Salvation; He is our Mediator and our Advocate with the Father. Jesus Christ is the Messiah.

Christianity is like an exclusive club which has one requirement: accepting Jesus as your Lord and Savior. But that Club’s doors are open to anyone and everyone – open invitations to all people. That’s pretty inclusive. Jesus urges His people to come to Him and He will give them rest. That’s an all-encompassing offer.

Those who criticize the church for being a church which preserves the eternal truths of God are missing the point: what the church can accomplish for God, for His people, and even for His critics. It is the preservation of the Word of Truth which enlightens people and draws them to Jesus for salvation and a place in heaven.

In the end, everyone gets a place at the table and greeted by Jesus Himself.

Let’s remember that this Christmas.

by Daniel Borchers

here is a link to Dan's website:

http://www.coulterwatch.com/

Thank you, Dan, for taking time to share your thoughts with the ronnie republic.

Ann Coulter and Free Speech

 

In a startling New Year’s Eve diatribe – demurely titled “The Anus Monologues” – Ann Coulter defended free speech by calling for the execution of those who disagree with her.

 

In the middle of her essay condemning liberal activists and the liberal media, Coulter tried to seize the moral high ground, going badly off track in the process. Coulter writes, “free speech existed even before we had a Constitution.” Actually, free speech wasn’t recognized and protected as a “right” until the Constitution (or, to be more precise, the Bill of Rights).

 

Further, Coulter conflates “shock troops of liberal agitators” with “government censoring speech.” Belaboring the point that “A&E is not the government,” Coulter misses the point that A&E is not the government. A&E can do what it wants. The free market (not the government) should decide its fate. Regarding censorship, the First Amendment really does only apply to the government (“Congress shall make no law …”), notwithstanding Coulter’s protestations.

 

But, in the name of free speech, Coulter wants to prohibit some people “from ever talking in public again.” Moreover, she concludes her essay advocating execution of the liberal press: “Cliché-spouting hack TV pundits: I recommend capital punishment.” (See The Gospel According to Ann Coulter for her extensive use of elimination rhetoric.)

 

Lauding conservatism and Scripture, Coulter denies both in practice and in temperament. Coulter’s hypocrisy and double standards are as self-evident as the nation’s founding principles that she cites.

 

Conservatives believe in free speech for conservatives and for liberals, for Christians and for non-Christians. The Constitution applies to all. Unlike Coulter, conservatives and Christians actually believe the self-evident truth that “all men are created equal” in the image of God, and, thus, all should be accorded due respect.

 

People are free to believe, or not believe, as they like. Jesus was about persuasion, not coercion.

 

Instead of vilifying “shock troops of liberal agitators,” conservatives and Christians would counter them with truth and grace, which is exactly why Robertson was so quickly restored by A&E.

 

Coulter champions the values of Duck Dynasty, but she fails miserably at living those values.

from Daniel Borchers

here is a link to Dan's website: CoulterWatch

http://www.coulterwatch.com/

Coulter Says Santa is Still White; Her Racism Continues

Yesterday, Coulter tweeted that Santa is still white, posting a photo as proof. In the past, she has extolled white supremacy, and she continues to do so – with a fictional character. Coulter’s racism is well documented (see chapter four of Vanity: Ann Coulter’s Quest for Glory and chapter ten of The Gospel According to Ann Coulter).

 

Even though Coulter’s last book, Mugged, dealt brilliantly with race – detailing the Party of Lincoln’s history of promoting freedom for all – Coulter, time and time again, views life through the prisms of race and class. Coulter takes pride in being white and in being an elite.

 

Conservatives, on the other hand, agree with the Declaration of Independence, that all men are created equal. We believe in equality before God. We believe in liberty and justice for all. We uphold Rev. King’s pronouncement that character, not race, is what matters. We eschew racial quotas and race-norming as ineffective societal correctives because they actually deny the inherent, God-given equality of mankind, which was created in God’s image. We seebeyond race because it is truly the person within that matters.

 

For all her research into race relations, Coulter misses the heart of the matter because, in her heart, she can’t help but make race and class distinctions. It is a part of who she is.

by Daniel Borchers

here is a link to Dan's website CoulterWatch.com

http://www.coulterwatch.com/

Ann Coulter, Jesus Christ, and Santa Claus

If Ann Coulter can’t be trusted (see Never Trust Ann Coulter – at ANY Age), why do so many conservatives trust her? Sometimes she gets things right and stands her ground for truth. (Complications arise, however, when she as equally fervently expresses falsehood.)

Entering into an already ongoing racial debate sparked by Fox News commentators and Coulter’s own tweets, Piers Morgan recently posed a series of questions to Coulter regarding the race of both Jesus and Santa.

Regarding the Savior, Coulter was accurate: “As for Jesus, Jesus is a real person. He was a Jew. I mean, if you want to tell me Jews aren't white, OK. But he's Jewish. So, whatever that is.” Repeatedly pressed by a contentious Piers who could not accept that reality, Coulter amplified her remarks: “Well, he's not black, he's Middle Eastern. Maybe he's sort of beige, Piers.” For the record, Jesus was biblically and historically Jewish and, thus, light-complexioned.

Coulter’s views on Santa are a bit more problematic. “But I met the real Santa Clause and he is white.” Santa Claus is a fictional character inspired by an historical figure, a 4^th-century Greek Christian bishop. Our contemporary picture of Santa Claus derives from an 1881 illustration which was created in a dominant white milieu.

Of course Santa Claus in America was white – in 1881. But Santa is a fictional figure and his race has no bearing on who he is and what he does. Santa transcends race. (Just as Jesus does.) Every individual and culture can envision Santa as they choose. Christmas is celebrated worldwide by a variety of different customs, in diverse cultures, with different representations of Santa.

Coulter, Piers, and others who emphasize the race of Jesus Christ and Santa Claus are entirely missing the point because they are focusing on something relatively inconsequential – race. They miss the point of Christmas – the universal love of God and Jesus Christ’s birth as Savior of the world.

It’s not about race, it’s about God’s gift to mankind.


by Daniel Borchers


here is a link to Dan's website www.CoulterWatch.com:


http://www.coulterwatch.com/