So I’ve had two people already suggest to me that I’m missing the point on the whole Coulter blow up. They argue that while it’s perfectly okay for a Christian to believe or even say that since his religion is true it would be better if others recognized it’s truth and converted that’s not what made Ann Coulter’s remarks outrageous/anti-semitic. Instead, the argument seems to go, it is the way Coulter presented them and/or her choice to bring up the issue that, when interpreted in light of her previous beliefs, is what makes her blameworthy. The major problem with this argument is that an examination of the transcript reveals that Coulter didn’t bring the controversial issue up and she was trying hard to communicate that she wasn’t attacking anyone but merely expressing a bland belief that logical coherence requires nearly all Christians to believe.

Now if we are going to consider Coulter’s past for context in this situation we have to consider all of it and I think things like the fact that she appears to be dating a Jew is reasonably good evidence that she isn’t actually anti-Semitic. Moreover, the criticism in this case only makes any sense if in fact it was this interview where she clearly made anti-Semitic comments/revealed herself to be an anti-Semite. You can’t justify this criticism by saying you knew she was an anti-Semite all along so it’s okay to criticize her for expressing a perfectly bland position. The only way the prior context can justify the accusations if it appears that Coulter didn’t merely happen to make some claims that were interpreted as anti-Semitic but knew that given her history they would be so interpreted and instead of trying to avoid the implication deliberately courted the ambiguity.

It simply doesn’t get you anywhere with this criticism to point out that Coulter has a history of saying offensive, rude or inflammatory things about religion¹ (or other subjects). In fact, far from providing evidence of anti-Antisemitism this is evidence against it. After all merely being rude, shallow and offensive doesn’t make you an anti-Semite. What is required is some evidence of animosity towards or prejudice against Jews as Jews and the more inflammatory she has been in the past the less reason to suppose these comments express any anti-Jewish sentiment. Moreover, a history of making controversial and outrageous statements about religion and not being misinterpreted by mainstream organizations as saying something antisemitic makes it more reasonable for her to suppose that she wouldn’t be misunderstood here while expressing a pretty banal belief.

Even if we suppose (contrary to the evidence) that she was deliberately presenting the belief in an inflammatory way this doesn’t get us anywhere. People phrase their statements confrontationally all the time for tons of reasons. I certainly can’t deny that I will sometimes state my views in the most extreme version partially in the hope of prompting an interesting disagreement. Treating religious belief the same way you treat other topics doesn’t make one antisemitic unless you actually take up an antisemitic view. But the upshot here is that nothing about Coulter’s past can obviate the need to show a particular antisemitic view or expression of animosity towards Jews. Interestingly, while Ann Coulter’s past behavior may not show the statements she made were antisemitic it does provide a motivation for others to misinterpret these statements in such a way.

Luckily we don’t need any of these more complex arguments because the transcript in this situation is remarkably clear. A careful read reveals that not only did Ann Coulter not bring up the subject at every turn she tried to avoid even the slightest hint that she might be attacking Jews. Coulter simply answered the question from the host about what she believed and, being smart enough to realize that if Christianity is true than it would be better for Jews to realize this as well, couldn’t honestly answer in any other way. As the conversation continued Coulter was repeatedly the subject of personal insults and horrific moral comparisons because of her religious belief but, even though many people would be tempted in such a situation to turn the tables and attack the host’s religious belief (he’s Jewish) she went to great pains to emphasize she meant nothing beyond the simple point that everyone should believe in whatever religion is true. Now maybe if she had the time to sit down and think through her answers she would have been able to be even more clear but I honestly can’t think of any other interpretation of her statements.

Usually in these cases I’m content to write off the whole thing as a misunderstanding and say no one is really blameworthy. However, (short of the response/interview being deliberately staged by Coulter to sell books) the accusations of antisemitism are so throughly and completely unsupported by any reasonable theory I think the people making them are nearly as blameworthy as if they were anti-Semites themselves. Sure, they honestly believe this is the case but racists often honestly believe whites are the superior race and we hold them accountable for allowing their prejudice to so throughly color their judgment and false accusations of racism/prejudice aren’t much less damaging than false racial beliefs.

Below the break I include more of the transcript than I did last time so the reader can see for themselves just how absurd the claims is that Coulter is deliberately bringing up this issue/phrasing her statements to attack Jews.

---

This is where the transcript that everyone is getting upset about starts.

DEUTSCH: Let me ask you a question. We’re going to get off strengths and weakness for a second. If you had your way, and all of your — forget that any of them –

COULTER: I like this.

DEUTSCH: — are calculated marketing teases, and your dreams, which are genuine, came true having to do with immigration, having to do with women’s — with abortion — what would this country look like?

COULTER: It would look like New York City during the Republican National Convention. In fact, that’s what I think heaven is going to look like.

DEUTSCH: And what did that look like?

COULTER: Happy, joyful Republicans in the greatest city in the world.

So the interview starts out with Ann Coulter saying some stupid shit about what her perfect world would look like. The comment about heaven looking like New York City during the Republican National Convention is particularly dumb and is the one point in this transcript where someone might be able to make the case that Coulter was being deliberately provocative. Of course it could also be that she just had a really great time during that convention (maybe she hooked up with some really hot guy) or is just shooting off the cuff during an interview. However, at best this comment was politically provocative hyperbole. Even the host who goes off the deep end with her latter comments doesn’t even raise an eyebrow and she can hardly be expected to have known where the host would take things from here.

She talks about politics for a bit with the host until we get to the point where he suggests that her vision would create more divisiveness.

DEUTSCH: — I can give — I can give you an argument there would be more divisiveness, that there would be more hate –

COULTER: Oh, no.

DEUTSCH: — that there would be a bigger difference between the rich and the poor, a lot of other — tell me what — why this would be a better world? Let’s give you — I’m going to give you — say this is your show.

COULTER: Well, OK, take the Republican National Convention. People were happy. They’re Christian. They’re tolerant. They defend America, they –

DEUTSCH: Christian — so we should be Christian? It would be better if we were all Christian?

COULTER: Yes.

DEUTSCH: We should all be Christian?

COULTER: Yes. Would you like to come to church with me, Donny?

Notice it was the host not Coulter who made the Christian point an issue. Coulter is just trying to toss out what she thinks are positive properties of the people at the RNC and unsurprisingly as a Christian she views being Christian as a good thing. However, despite the suggestions to the contrary Coulter isn’t pushing the Christian point, rather Deustch homes it on it and asks her about it point blank. What else should she have done, lied and pretended this wasn’t a consequence of the belief that Christianity is true and good to believe in? Notice the question about coming to Church with her at the end. This is an attempt to defuse the situation by being sorta funny and informal (clear if you listen) so from the very beginning she is trying to gloss over the religious issue not make it more offensive.

They continue

DEUTSCH: So I should not be a Jew, I should be a Christian, and this would be a better place?

COULTER: Well, you could be a practicing Jew, but you’re not.

DEUTSCH: I actually am. That’s not true. I really am. But — so we would be better if we were – if people — if there were no Jews, no Buddhists –

COULTER: Whenever I’m harangued by –

DEUTSCH: — in this country? You can’t believe that.

COULTER: — you know, liberals on diversity –

At this point Coulter succeeds in diverting the topic to liberals and diversity for a little while. Needless to say she manages to say some stupid things about mixed race couples in New York and we only get back to the controversial issue when Coulter complains about the idea that Christians are intolerant.

COULTER: But yeah, I think that’s reflective of what’s going on in the culture, but it is completely striking that at these huge megachurches — the idea that, you know, the more Christian you are, the less tolerant you would be is preposterous.

DEUTSCH: That isn’t what I said, but you said I should not — we should just throw Judaism away and we should all be Christians, then, or –

COULTER: Yeah.

DEUTSCH: Really?

COULTER: Well, it’s a lot easier. It’s kind of a fast track.

DEUTSCH: Really?

COULTER: Yeah. You have to obey.

DEUTSCH: You can’t possibly believe that.

COULTER: Yes.

DEUTSCH: You can’t possibly — you’re too educated, you can’t — you’re like my friend in –

Once again Coulter is trying to clarify that she only means that believing the true religion gives spiritual benefits (she doesn’t even accept the widespread dogma that non-believers can’t be saved) while Deustch reframes everything she says into a more controversial version not to mention suggesting that her belief is something no educated person could believe.

COULTER: Do you know what Christianity is? We believe your religion, but you have to obey.

DEUTSCH: No, no, no, but I mean –

COULTER: We have the fast-track program.

DEUTSCH: Why don’t I put you with the head of Iran? I mean, come on. You can’t believe that.

COULTER: The head of Iran is not a Christian.

DEUTSCH: No, but in fact, “Let’s wipe Israel” –

COULTER: I don’t know if you’ve been paying attention.

DEUTSCH: “Let’s wipe Israel off the earth.” I mean, what, no Jews?

COULTER: No, we think — we just want Jews to be perfected, as they say.

DEUTSCH: Wow, you didn’t really say that, did you?

COULTER: Yes. That is what Christianity is. We believe the Old Testament, but ours is more like Federal Express. You have to obey laws. We know we’re all sinners –

DEUTSCH: In my old days, I would have argued — when you say something absurd like that, there’s no –

COULTER: What’s absurd?

DEUTSCH: Jews are going to be perfected. I’m going to go off and try to perfect myself –

COULTER: Well, that’s what the New Testament says.

Coulter is still just explaining a perfectly banal idea and the host goes and compares her to a tyrannical rabid antisemite and holocaust denier. At this point many reasonable people would walk off in disgust or sink to insulting the host or his religion in response but to her credit Coulter continues trying to explain. Indeed far from choosing her words to provoke she clearly picks the word perfected to avoid any implication that she is calling Jews flawed, evil or the like. But what happens when they come back from the break?

DEUTSCH: Welcome back to The Big Idea. During the break, Ann said she wanted to explain her last comment. So I’m going to give her a chance. So you don’t think that was offensive?

COULTER: No. I’m sorry. It is not intended to be. I don’t think you should take it that way, but that is what Christians consider themselves: perfected Jews. We believe the Old Testament. As you know from the Old Testament, God was constantly getting fed up with humans for not being able to, you know, live up to all the laws. What Christians believe — this is just a statement of what the New Testament is — is that that’s why Christ came and died for our sins. Christians believe the Old Testament. You don’t believe our testament.

DEUTSCH: You said — your exact words were, “Jews need to be perfected.” Those are the words out of your mouth.

COULTER: No, I’m saying that’s what a Christian is.

DEUTSCH: But that’s what you said — don’t you see how hateful, how anti-Semitic –

COULTER: No!

DEUTSCH: How do you not see? You’re an educated woman. How do you not see that?

COULTER: That isn’t hateful at all.

DEUTSCH: But that’s even a scarier thought. OK –

COULTER: No, no, no, no, no. I don’t want you being offended by this. This is what Christians consider themselves, because our testament is the continuation of your testament. You know that. So we think Jews go to heaven. I mean, [Rev. Jerry] Falwell himself said that, but you have to follow laws. Ours is “Christ died for our sins.” We consider ourselves perfected Christians. For me to say that for you to become a Christian is to become a perfected Christian is not offensive at all.

Actually, for a live TV interview, Coulter gives a remarkably cogent and careful explanation of the view that virtually every Christian (damn those Unitarians for making me right virtually everywhere) is logically compelled to believe. Anyway there is no more argument to be had because the issue is clear as night and day. If you think she was stepping over some line or being antisemitic the burden is on you to explain what she should have said instead.

As an aside it seems pretty clear from the transcript that Deustch had the agenda of making Coulter say something controversial from the beginning. If he wants to do that I don’t really care too much but when the ADL and other mainstream Jewish groups start calling Coulter antisemitic for this while praising Deustch it’s really wrong

My claim is that a carefull look at the transcripts not only reveals that Coulter did not bring up or delibrately