ACLU WANTS TO SILENCE ANN COULTER
Mark Brewer is an ACLU lawyer and The Michigan Democratic State Party Chairman. At one time he defended the KKK’s right to speak, but is now asking that the Michigan Republicans rescind their invitation to have Ann Coulter speak.
Brewer said Coulter’s not a comedian, “she’s a paid political pundit.” And he agreed with her right to speak, but said it was up to Republicans to “send a message they disapprove of her ethnic slurs.”
“The KKK wasn’t being invited to a Democratic Party function,” Brewer said of his 1994 case defending the group. “That was for the right of the KKK to speak in a public place. If Ann Coulter wants to speak in a public place, that’s fine. But it’s very different from being invited to raise money for a political party.”
Coulter has every right to speak to Republicans, however offensive she is to political opponents, ACLU spokeswoman Wendy Wagenheim said.
“Ann Coulter can be very hateful and offensive, but it’s not a crime,” Wagenheim said. “She has the right to be as hateful as she wants as long as she’s not physically hurting someone.”
State Republican Party Chairman Saul Anuzis touched off Brewer’s criticism when he enthusiastically praised Coulter’s Feb. 10 speech.
In his Feb. 11 state party blog, Anuzis said, “So, did Ann Coulter ‘rock’ the conference? … We sat, stood, applauded, sat, stood, applauded. you get the picture. She was motivational, funny, sarcastic and Ann Coulter at her best.”
Anuzis said he wasn’t condoning her ethnic slur, calling it “distasteful. My point was that she has the presence and style that fires people up. She excited the troops, threw them a lot of red meat. That’s part of her role, her schtick as a commentator.”
But Lana Boldi, a former Kent County Democratic Party chairwoman, said Coulter’s appearance reflects badly on Republicans.
“If they consider her a serious political thinker, that’s the travesty,” she said.
I wonder what Lana thinks of Al Gore, Jimmy Carter or Michael Moore.
Loading ...
February 18, 2006 - 01:54 AM on February 18th, 2006
So the Anti-American Communist Liberlas United don’t want Ann Coulter to speak? In that case, I would not only have her speak, but speak for twice as long.
Rot in hell, ACLU
February 18, 2006 - 09:26 AM on February 18th, 2006
The ACLU wants tolerence for everyone but conservatives those who might have a different opinion of the leftists ideas and just leave it to the Atheists.Communists and Lawyers.Underground for this and the fact is the ACLU was founded by a confiremed socialists and leftist:mad:
February 20, 2006 - 09:03 PM on February 20th, 2006
There is nothing wrong with the ACLU that pulling their major source of funding (legislatively mandated legal fee payments for civil rights lawsuits whether they win or lose.) won’t solve. Once that income stream is cut off, we can all guess how many lawyers they’ll be able to keep on staff. I’m betting the number is pretty darn small. (There are always a few hardcore idiots in every group. Except PETA and Greenpeace, they’re all nuts.)
February 21, 2006 - 09:57 AM on February 21st, 2006
Isn’t the ACLU supposed to be “Non-partisan”??
Mark Brewer is an ACLU lawyer and The Michigan Democratic State Party Chairman
hahaha
non-partisan…my ass.
February 22, 2006 - 09:25 PM on February 22nd, 2006
Peejz, thanks for the link on the video of Mark Brewer attacking my camera at an open meeting of the Board of Canvassers.
Mark Brewer is also a serious thinker, in the (alleged) vein of Ms. Coulter. About an hour after I caught him on tape swatting at my camera, he made sure to call me a certain body part (and made sure my camera was off). He refused Howard Dean’s request to audit the Mich. Dem. Party’s books in 2005 when it was learned 1.5 million dollars was unaccounted for. And I’ve heard many a story that I can’t relay without secondary confirmation or based on private conversations.
October 12, 2006 - 04:02 PM on October 12th, 2006
ONCE AGAIN WHY ARE WE SURPRISED ABOUT WHAT THE ACLU DOES. THEY’VE BEEN SUPPORTING AND PROTECTING THE DEMOCRATS, LIBERALS, AND CRIMINALS UNDER THE DISGUISE OF CIVIL RIGHTS FOR YEARS. EXAMPLE THE LITTLE BOY THAT WAS KILLED AND RAPED IN MASSACHUSETTS. ONE OF THE TWO ACCUSED STATED “THAT HE GOT THE INFO FROM THE NAMBLA WEBSITE” WHICH IS A GROUP THAT PROMOTES MAN TO BOY LOVE. THE ACCUSED STATED “HE WENT ON THEIR WEBSITE AT A LIBRARY AND GOT THE INFO ON HOW TO HAVE SEX WITH A BOY AFTER KILLING THAT CHILD”. THE PARENTS OF THE CHILD WERE SO DISTRAUGHT(UNDERSTANDABLY SO) THAT THEY SUED NAMBLA FOR 200 MILLION TO STOP THIS TYPE OF INFORMATION. THE ACLU TOOK THE NAMBLA CASE “PRO BONO” STATING THAT NAMBLA SHOULDN’T BE BLAMED FOR SOMETHING THAT IS A 1ST AMENDMENT RIGHT. MEANING THE OUTPUT OF INFORMATION.
October 12, 2006 - 05:36 PM on October 12th, 2006
6.
PLEASE, NO NEED TO SHOUT!!