Katie Kieffer Reports
Power Line
We contacted St. Thomas senior Katie Kieffer and asked for her report on Ann Coulter's appearance at St. Thomas. Ms. Kieffer's report provides a valuable counterpoint to the columns by the Star Tribune's fatuous columnist as well as to Father Dease's condemnation of the event:
>>>
Here are my thoughts on the atmosphere at the Ann Coulter event. Please note that the quotes are accurate to the best of my knowledge, but since there was no recording of the speech, they may not be word-for-word.
About five days prior to the event, several members of the St. Thomas Standard staff and some of the College Republicans made and posted fliers all around campus advertising Ms. Coulter's talk. I had to personally replace these signs around campus every day because they were repeatedly torn down or defaced. The vandals wrote "sad" across Ann's forehead, wrote "man hands" on them, or drew Ann on a leopard-print couch on several of the fliers. These acts foreshadowed the inappropriate manner of several rioters who ended up attending Ms. Coulter's speech.
My sister, Amie Kieffer, the artist for the St. Thomas Standard, and freshman at UST, told me that she felt that the atmosphere prior to, and especially after Ms. Coulter's speech was very oppressive. For example, she said that before the speech, her Old Testament professor told one of the College Republican students in her class--in front of the rest of the class--that she did not hold Ann in high regard--basically degrading the speech before it happened, and saying she wouldn't go. When her roommate had another student ask her if she was going to the speech, and she said she didn't know, the guy said: "I'm gonna go just because I hate her." Another guy told her that Ann sucked, and Amie asked why.
He said, "I don't know that's just what I've heard...and Amie said, "So what do you know about her?"..and he was like, "she is blond"... so that conversation didn't really go anywhere because he didn't have any facts....no one seems to!
My sister and I are both tired of repeatedly hearing from students who tell us that they did not attend the event, but think that Ann went over the line-that she's mean, she's a hater, she's full of it, that she said things that were inappropriate, etc. None of these people can point to anything specific that she said...it's all hearsay. Example: Amie's other roommate-who hadn't gone-came into her room saying: "Do you know this girl (Ann)? She is so racist...someone went to her speech and said all she did was diss black people...and who would want to listen to that?"
The truth is that Ms. Coulter was politically correct and professional. Students are spreading outright lies about Ann's performance, and so, everyone has an opinion on the event--even students who did not attend!
There was a standing-room-only audience (meaning 750+ in attendance). Overall, the majority of the crowd was very pro-Ann, and very respectful--clapping and cheering loudly for her throughout the speech. The atmosphere was tense, however, because of a few inappropriate outbursts and cackling from the audience-especially in the balcony areas. At least one individual had to be escorted out of the room by security.
Ms. Coulter was very respectful and would respond with facts to those audience members who asked her questions. Sometimes she would respond with her quick wit, or would move on to the next person, if the questioner became extremely obnoxious.
At the beginning of Ms. Coulter's speech, one man in the third row stood up and started yelling things like "Bush is a Liar!" The first few rows were all reserved seating--mainly for students who had attended the reception with Ann prior to the event-so he should not have been there. Public Safety escorted him out of the room, as he yelled: "Someone told me to sit here!"
Also toward the beginning of her talk, Ms. Coulter made a reference to Bill Clinton. Upon hearing his name, several people in the balcony kept obnoxiously clapping and cheering for an extended period of time.
There were two individuals in the balcony who stood out for their inappropriate conduct during the question and answer session. The first one was a student who asked her: "What do you think about the Bible and especially the Sermon on the Mount?" Ann responded that she agreed with them, but before she was able to continue speaking, he interrupted her and said, "Well if that's all you can say, then Fuck you." He gave her the finger with both hands, and then stomped up the stairs.
The second individual waited in line to talk to Ann, and when he got to the microphone, said something like: "How can you call yourself a Christian since Jesus said 'Blessed are the Peacemakers'?" Ann looked a bit confused...he then added: "And I love my Muslim Friends too!" Ann responded (as he quickly walked away) that his statements seemed a bit contradictory, and then added: "Is this young man a student at this university, and if so, what are the SAT requirements to get in?" This student left the microphone right after he finished talking. He did not wait to hear Ms. Coulter's response, but immediately walked up the balcony stairs and left. This young man clearly was not interested in having any kind of respectful dialogue with Ms. Coulter. Rather he just wanted a platform to make his own personal--and confusing--statement.
The second to last person to ask Ann a question was a Vietnam veteran. He shared that he had served our country for over 30 years and said, "Thank you from the troops in Iraq" to Ms. Coulter. Before he was finished talking, someone in the audience obnoxiously shouted, "What is your question?" Not only did the audience fail to respect the speaker-Ms. Coulter-they had the boldness to mock a man who had served his country, and the rest of the U.S. troops!
After the event, I submitted a letter to the editor twice to the Star Tribune, which they never printed, in response to Nick Coleman's first column. I thought that they would want to hear my perspective, since I had organized the event!
Here is the Letter to the Editor I received from one student who was upset that there was no similar response on the part of the University after Al Franken spoke here:
(((
The liberal response to Ann Coulter's visit here at UST was distasteful and lacked any sort of intellectualism. Only a short time ago the champion of the left wing radio, Al Franken, visited our school and spoke about his political beliefs. Now someone on the right comes to school and the liberals go up in arms about her presence. This is a clear cut case of hypocrisy. I should remind my liberal counterparts about what liberal truly means. The basic premise of liberality is tolerance, open-mindedness, and diversity. Yet they not only ignore, but completely reject another point of view that varies from their own. When Ms. Coulter did arrive she was met with great negativity and rude behavior. These liberals are supposed to be part of the party for the lower classes, they should instead be known as the party of low class.
Dillon Donnelly--Sophomore, University of St. Thomas
)))
I was very disappointed with the way that the other student newspaper, the Aquin, responded to the event. The editors said that Ann Coulter's speech "concentrated on widening the divide that exists within our student body as well as within our community," while the two peace activists who had also spoken that same week: Arun Gandhi and Francis Bok, were praised for having given "intriguing" speeches. The editors complain that she is an example of "pure negativity," and then go on to complain about the immaturity of some of the members of the audience.
Although in reality the only ones in the audience who acted immature were liberal rioters, the Aquin editors claim that "the conservatives were so wrapped up in themselves that they had no tolerance for any liberal there on the mere basis that they were a liberal." I have no idea what immature conservative words or actions the editors could be referring to in this comment! The editors complain that Coulter's words were above "all the children" who were in the audience: In response, I would say: Shouldn't speakers at a university speak at an adult's not a child's level, and secondly, the vast majority of the audience were students and community members-there were only handful of a middle-school-aged children-who found seats near the front! The editors conclude by saying that "People like Ann Coulter thrive on stirring up trouble so that everyone forgets the important issues we should be focusing on. People this close-minded are not going to help us come to rational solutions about social justice or learn to work as one. They are too focused on instructing us how to hate each other." Actually, I think that the only ones who are close-minded in this picture are the editors of the Aquin.
>>>
It might have been a thoughtful gesture for the president of St. Thomas to contact Ms. Kieffer for her perspective on the event before he issued his condemnation of it. Her perspective might have given him pause; it might even have made him want to shift the identification of the source of the "hateful speech" he sought to condemn.
powerlineblog.com |
