Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Welcome to The New Coffee Room. We hope you enjoy your visit.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
Ann Coulter's Version of the Truth
Topic Started: Aug 9 2006, 08:33 PM (1,353 Views)
Kincaid
Member Avatar
HOLY CARP!!!
I was hoping there was a larger quote (since I don't have the book). This one quote doesn't come right out and say someone is teaching or threatening to teach kindergartners about the sexual practices listed. It may be that she was trying to make that connection but w/the quote as given I don't think it is clear.
Kincaid - disgusted Republican Partisan since 2006.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
QuirtEvans
Member Avatar
I Owe It All To John D'Oh
Sorry, I don't have the book. I'd read it if someone had a copy, but I'm disinclined to pay royalties to Annie.
It would be unwise to underestimate what large groups of ill-informed people acting together can achieve. -- John D'Oh, January 14, 2010.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Kincaid
Member Avatar
HOLY CARP!!!
Larry should have it. Larry! Can you copy and post a few pages before the Coulter quote?
Kincaid - disgusted Republican Partisan since 2006.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Daniel\
Member Avatar
Fulla-Carp
Phlebas
Aug 10 2006, 01:47 PM
Kincaid
Aug 10 2006, 01:38 PM
QuirtEvans
Aug 10 2006, 11:37 AM
Coulter's quote, which I quoted above, was about teaching anal sex, fisting, and some other fairly "out there" practices to kindergarteners.  And her source for that was a 20 year-old story about college students. 

She can't be trusted to get her facts right.  Anything she says needs to be examined with a microscope.

Is there more that you can post or link on this? I mean, the full text. I just am not sure that what you posted accurately reflects what Coulter was trying to convey. If the authors misconstrued something, then the entire thread is pointless.

If it helps, here's the 1987 NY Times article [response to your snarky comment before](how's that for doing research :silly:[/response to your snarky comment before]

Survey of Education Desk; 12
At Dartmouth, A Helping Candor
By Thomas Morgan; Thomas Morgan is a reporter on the metropolitan staff of The New York Times.
2362 words
8 November 1987
The New York Times
Late City Final Edition
English
Copyright 1987 The New York Times Company. All Rights Reserved.
DURING registration at Dartmouth College, students can pick up forms, course material and a sex-education packet containing a condom, a dental dam for oral sex, and an explicit pamphlet explaining how to have safer sex in the era of AIDS. When they go to the library they can also get a condom when they check out a book. etc.

The quote implies that these things have ALREADY been taught fwiw.


Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ivorythumper
Member Avatar
I am so adjective that I verb nouns!
Kincaid
Aug 10 2006, 02:52 PM
I was hoping there was a larger quote (since I don't have the book). This one quote doesn't come right out and say someone is teaching or threatening to teach kindergartners about the sexual practices listed. It may be that she was trying to make that connection but w/the quote as given I don't think it is clear.

If she was trying to support the kindergarten allegation with that quote, she certainly screwed the pooch.

However, if she was trying to make a point about value free education, which seems to be the context of the paragraph from the first sentence quoted ("But in contrast to liberal preachiness about IQ, there would be no moralizing when it came to sex."), this use of the Dartmouth quote does not discredit the argument.
The dogma lives loudly within me.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Kincaid
Member Avatar
HOLY CARP!!!
The quote says "all that would be" indicating a future tense.
Kincaid - disgusted Republican Partisan since 2006.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ivorythumper
Member Avatar
I am so adjective that I verb nouns!
Kincaid
Aug 10 2006, 05:19 PM
The quote says "all that would be" indicating a future tense.


Quote:
 
But in contrast to liberal preachiness about IQ, there would be no moralizing when it came to sex. Anal sex, oral sex, fisting, dental dams, "birthing games" -- all that would be foisted on unsuspecting children in order to protect kindergarteners from the scourge of AIDS. As one heroine of the sex education movement told an approving New York Times reporter, "My job is not to teach one right value system. Parents and churches teach moral values. My job is to say, 'These are the facts,' and to help the students, as adults, decide what is right for them."


Given that "there would be no moralizing when it came to sex" and "all that [ie, the naughty stuff] would be foisted upon unsuspecting children" are both subjunctives, and not indicatives, the whole thread and argument about her "Version of the Truth" seems to be based on not understanding the rules of grammar.

The sentence regarding the value free education is not a misstatement since it supports the case being made in the subjunctive mood. There is no stated "fact" (which would have to be in the indicative mood) about teaching the naughty stuff to kindergarteners.
The dogma lives loudly within me.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ivorythumper
Member Avatar
I am so adjective that I verb nouns!
Rick Zimmer
Aug 9 2006, 09:41 PM
Now Quirt.

You know the right won't actually criticize her. Cluck-cluck with their tongues maybe. But critiicize her? You can't be serious!

At the most they will say these may have been errors, but it was up to her editor to catch these. Hell, she is just the author!

More likely, they will spin this to show that the real problem is the left wing media -- not truth tellers like St. Ann of Coulter.

Rick:

It has nothing to do with anyone not being willing to criticize her or her editor.

The "real problem" seems to be one of not appreciating the precise construction of her sentences in the subjunctive mood.
The dogma lives loudly within me.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
John D'Oh
Member Avatar
MAMIL
ivorythumper
Aug 10 2006, 08:37 PM
Kincaid
Aug 10 2006, 05:19 PM
The quote says "all that would be" indicating a future tense.


Quote:
 
But in contrast to liberal preachiness about IQ, there would be no moralizing when it came to sex. Anal sex, oral sex, fisting, dental dams, "birthing games" -- all that would be foisted on unsuspecting children in order to protect kindergarteners from the scourge of AIDS. As one heroine of the sex education movement told an approving New York Times reporter, "My job is not to teach one right value system. Parents and churches teach moral values. My job is to say, 'These are the facts,' and to help the students, as adults, decide what is right for them."


Given that "there would be no moralizing when it came to sex" and "all that [ie, the naughty stuff] would be foisted upon unsuspecting children" are both subjunctives, and not indicatives, the whole thread and argument about her "Version of the Truth" seems to be based on not understanding the rules of grammar.

The sentence regarding the value free education is not a misstatement since it supports the case being made in the subjunctive mood. There is no stated "fact" (which would have to be in the indicative mood) about teaching the naughty stuff to kindergarteners.

I'm sorry, I didn't understand any of that.

I still think she's a harpy.
What do you mean "we", have you got a mouse in your pocket?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
George K
Member Avatar
Finally
Harpie

Posted Image


Harpy

Posted Image


Harp

Posted Image

I'm sorry, back to your argument.
A guide to GKSR: Click

"Now look here, you Baltic gas passer... "
- Mik, 6/14/08


Nothing is as effective as homeopathy.

I'd rather listen to an hour of Abba than an hour of The Beatles.
- Klaus, 4/29/18
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
John D'Oh
Member Avatar
MAMIL
Posted Image

Harp-pee.
What do you mean "we", have you got a mouse in your pocket?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ivorythumper
Member Avatar
I am so adjective that I verb nouns!
John D'Oh
Aug 10 2006, 06:27 PM

I'm sorry, I didn't understand any of that.


I wouldn't expect you to understand the nuances of the English language, being British and all. :lol:

Still, you're right -- she might well be a harpy.
The dogma lives loudly within me.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ivorythumper
Member Avatar
I am so adjective that I verb nouns!
But certainly you understood about the "naughty stuff", being British and all...
The dogma lives loudly within me.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
George K
Member Avatar
Finally
John D'Oh
Aug 10 2006, 08:37 PM
Harp-pee.

Here we go:
Posted Image

"Hello front desk?"
"Yes, can I help you?"
"I gotta leak in my sink."
"Go ahead, sir, I'll have housekeeping clean it up in the morning."
A guide to GKSR: Click

"Now look here, you Baltic gas passer... "
- Mik, 6/14/08


Nothing is as effective as homeopathy.

I'd rather listen to an hour of Abba than an hour of The Beatles.
- Klaus, 4/29/18
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
John D'Oh
Member Avatar
MAMIL
ivorythumper
Aug 10 2006, 09:52 PM
John D'Oh
Aug 10 2006, 06:27 PM

I'm sorry, I didn't understand any of that.


I wouldn't expect you to understand the nuances of the English language, being British and all. :lol:

The English language is much like that most noble and English of sports, rugby-football. We are born to it, foreigners practice it, and in some cases achieve a strange, unfair kind of mastery. The Americans abuse and vulgarise it, change it beyond all civilised recognition, and then claim it as their own.
What do you mean "we", have you got a mouse in your pocket?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
AlbertaCrude
Bull-Carp
George K
Aug 10 2006, 05:32 PM
Harpie

Posted Image


Harpy

Posted Image


Harp

Posted Image

I'm sorry, back to your argument.

Posted Image

Harpo
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
George K
Member Avatar
Finally
That's what I love about this place (and the people here). You can start with a serious (hah!) subject, such as Ann Coulter's (Michael Moore's, Al Franken's) intellectual dishonesty, and within 24 hours, the whole tread has degenerated progressed to a serious discussion of the arts, Greek Mythology, Film and Music.

What a crowd! What a crowd!
A guide to GKSR: Click

"Now look here, you Baltic gas passer... "
- Mik, 6/14/08


Nothing is as effective as homeopathy.

I'd rather listen to an hour of Abba than an hour of The Beatles.
- Klaus, 4/29/18
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Daniel\
Member Avatar
Fulla-Carp
ivorythumper
Aug 10 2006, 04:37 PM
Kincaid
Aug 10 2006, 05:19 PM
The quote says "all that would be" indicating a future tense.


Quote:
 
But in contrast to liberal preachiness about IQ, there would be no moralizing when it came to sex. Anal sex, oral sex, fisting, dental dams, "birthing games" -- all that would be foisted on unsuspecting children in order to protect kindergarteners from the scourge of AIDS. As one heroine of the sex education movement told an approving New York Times reporter, "My job is not to teach one right value system. Parents and churches teach moral values. My job is to say, 'These are the facts,' and to help the students, as adults, decide what is right for them."


Given that "there would be no moralizing when it came to sex" and "all that [ie, the naughty stuff] would be foisted upon unsuspecting children" are both subjunctives, and not indicatives, the whole thread and argument about her "Version of the Truth" seems to be based on not understanding the rules of grammar.

The sentence regarding the value free education is not a misstatement since it supports the case being made in the subjunctive mood. There is no stated "fact" (which would have to be in the indicative mood) about teaching the naughty stuff to kindergarteners.

Of course there's no stated fact (there is no fact). I said the quote IMPLIES these things happened in the past (and maybe in context of the entire passage it wouldn't).

But in contrast to liberal preachiness about IQ, there would be no moralizing when it came to sex. Anal sex, oral sex, fisting, dental dams, "birthing games" -- all that would be foisted on unsuspecting children in order to protect kindergarteners from the scourge of AIDS. As one heroine of the sex education movement told an approving New York Times reporter, "My job is not to teach one right value system. Parents and churches teach moral values. My job is to say, 'These are the facts,' and to help the students, as adults, decide what is right for them."9

I think the problem being mentioned is that the citation doesn't fit the argument being made (and the person's views are being misrepresented). :thumb:


Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ivorythumper
Member Avatar
I am so adjective that I verb nouns!
Daniel
Aug 10 2006, 08:16 PM
ivorythumper
Aug 10 2006, 04:37 PM
Kincaid
Aug 10 2006, 05:19 PM
The quote says "all that would be" indicating a future tense.


Quote:
 
But in contrast to liberal preachiness about IQ, there would be no moralizing when it came to sex. Anal sex, oral sex, fisting, dental dams, "birthing games" -- all that would be foisted on unsuspecting children in order to protect kindergarteners from the scourge of AIDS. As one heroine of the sex education movement told an approving New York Times reporter, "My job is not to teach one right value system. Parents and churches teach moral values. My job is to say, 'These are the facts,' and to help the students, as adults, decide what is right for them."


Given that "there would be no moralizing when it came to sex" and "all that [ie, the naughty stuff] would be foisted upon unsuspecting children" are both subjunctives, and not indicatives, the whole thread and argument about her "Version of the Truth" seems to be based on not understanding the rules of grammar.

The sentence regarding the value free education is not a misstatement since it supports the case being made in the subjunctive mood. There is no stated "fact" (which would have to be in the indicative mood) about teaching the naughty stuff to kindergarteners.

Of course there's no stated fact (there is no fact). I said the quote IMPLIES these things happened in the past (and maybe in context of the entire passage it wouldn't).

But in contrast to liberal preachiness about IQ, there would be no moralizing when it came to sex. Anal sex, oral sex, fisting, dental dams, "birthing games" -- all that would be foisted on unsuspecting children in order to protect kindergarteners from the scourge of AIDS. As one heroine of the sex education movement told an approving New York Times reporter, "My job is not to teach one right value system. Parents and churches teach moral values. My job is to say, 'These are the facts,' and to help the students, as adults, decide what is right for them."9

I think the problem being mentioned is that the citation doesn't fit the argument being made (and the person's views are being misrepresented). :thumb:

Well, Daniel, I guess your argument would be with Quirt then, since he's the one who said that this was one of "14 blatant factual errors", and in fact the worst one.

Since you acknowlege that teaching kindergartners about these naughty things was not presented as a fact, I don't know how it can be claimed that what she wrote was a blatant error, which was the whole point of the thread.

In rhetoric you can get away with a lot using the subjunctive -- in fact it is by nature a rhetorical voice. Coulter is nothing if not a rhetorician.

PS: The quote does not even imply that these things happened in the past. You might have inferred that, but that's your problem. :wink:
The dogma lives loudly within me.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
David Burton
Senior Carp
George K
Aug 10 2006, 07:03 PM
That's what I love about this place (and the people here). You can start with a serious (hah!) subject, such as Ann Coulter's (Michael Moore's, Al Franken's) intellectual dishonesty, and within 24 hours, the whole tread has degenerated progressed to a serious discussion of the arts, Greek Mythology, Film and Music.

What a crowd! What a crowd!

What do you expect of us? No matter how we differ, and how passionately we will fight, in the long run, most of this stuff bores the **** out of most of us anyway.

I just returned from SPAC: Philadelphia Orchestra, Dutoit; Mozart, Bruch, Debussy, Ravel, a clear 10 out of 10, the best of the best.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Larry
Member Avatar
Mmmmmmm, pie!
BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!

I found out what the deal is with Quirt's Media Matters "controversy!!

Apparently no one at Media Matters quite understands sarcasm - and neither does Quirt!..

BAHAAAAAA!! Coulter wasn't talking about *real* kindergartners - she was *calling the students at Dartmouth* kindergartners! She was making fun of the whole situation of college students being handed condoms when they checked books out in the library, given dental dams, etc. like a bunch of little kids!

As it turns out, :D :D :D....... it isn't Coulter who ends up looking silly in this little "oh my god, look what she said now" silliness - it's Media Matters...


I love it. Liberals - no sense of humor, so hate filled they couldn't get it even if they did....... BWAHAHAHAAAA!!
Of the Pokatwat Tribe

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Daniel\
Member Avatar
Fulla-Carp
I have no argument with Quirt, and would be interested to read anything else he had to say.

I see that Larry's been here and said that Ann Coulter wasn't writing about sex education and children. I'd be interested to read the rest of the passage.






Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ivorythumper
Member Avatar
I am so adjective that I verb nouns!
Larry
Aug 10 2006, 11:28 PM
BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!

I found out what the deal is with Quirt's Media Matters "controversy!!

Apparently no one at Media Matters quite understands sarcasm - and neither does Quirt!..

BAHAAAAAA!! Coulter wasn't talking about *real* kindergartners - she was *calling the students at Dartmouth* kindergartners! She was making fun of the whole situation of college students being handed condoms when they checked books out in the library, given dental dams, etc. like a bunch of little kids!

As it turns out, :D :D :D....... it isn't Coulter who ends up looking silly in this little "oh my god, look what she said now" silliness - it's Media Matters...


I love it. Liberals - no sense of humor, so hate filled they couldn't get it even if they did....... BWAHAHAHAAAA!!

I keep rereading the actual text, and I can't get that out of her words.

How her paragraph makes clear sense is

1) Liberals don't moralize when it comes to sex. What is most important is to curtail AIDS.

2) The NYT quote is used to support that contention-- in fact, the whole article that Phleebs posted supports those premises, at least in regards to the health care program at Dartmouth.

3) Since (1) is supported by (2) she conjectures that these naughty things would be foisted on even kindergarteners to protect them from AIDS.

Now that is not a particularly tight argument, since many liberals would draw the line well short of that. Furthermore, the educator speaks as educating "adults", not children. This is a fatal flaw in her argument.

The whole thing is cast in the subjunctive mood, but even with that it is a bad argument. However, I don't see how Quirt can validly say that "she said that kindergarteners were being taught sex education, including how to use dental dams, fisting, etc."
The dogma lives loudly within me.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Daniel\
Member Avatar
Fulla-Carp
The problem I have reading it is that I am not used to someone using a citation only to prove the point that a person said the particular thing mentioned in the sentence. It is certainly taking the source out of context and misrpresenting the person's views. And if it is sarcasm, this is not clear from these three sentences, and even if it is sarcasm, it is still taking the source out of context and misrepresenting the person's views.

I am sure that Ann Coulter's persona is to be agitating and to revel in being agitating, nonetheless.


Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ivorythumper
Member Avatar
I am so adjective that I verb nouns!
I can agree with you that using this quote where it is specifically intended for adult education and applying the same principle to K education is misleading.

Also, I am sure that agitation is her bread and butter.
The dogma lives loudly within me.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ZetaBoards - Free Forum Hosting
Free Forums. Reliable service with over 8 years of experience.
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · The New Coffee Room · Next Topic »
Add Reply