Murder Spree by People Who Refuse to Ask For Directions by Ann Coulter 01/14/2009 Print This Forward Feedback Digg This! Subscribe Sponsored By: In a front-page article on Jan. 2 of this year, The New York Times took a brief respite from its ongoing canonization of Barack Obama and returned to its series on violent crimes committed by returning GIs, or as I call it: “U.S. Military, Psycho Killers.” The Treason Times’ banner series about Iraq and Afghanistan veterans accused of murder began in January last year but was quickly discontinued as readers noticed that the Times doggedly refused to provide any statistics comparing veteran murders with murders in any other group. So they waited a year, hoping readers wouldn’t notice they were still including no relevant comparisons.Continued ———————————————————————————————————————— Sponsored Links: Newt Gingrich Weekly: Winning the Future REVEALED: The Hidden Truths about American History BRIC Investor Report: Brazil, Russia, India & China stocks Huge Profits from ETFs in 5 Easy Steps ———————————————————————————————————————— What, for example, is the percentage of murderers among veterans compared to the percentage of murderers in the population at large — or, more germane, in the general population of young males, inasmuch as violent crime is committed almost exclusively by young men? Any group composed primarily of young men will contain a seemingly mammoth number of murderers. Consider the harmless fantasy game, Dungeons and Dragons — which happens to be played almost exclusively by young males. When murders were committed in the ’80s by (1) young men, who were (2) Dungeons and Dragons enthusiasts, some people concluded that factor (2), rather than factor (1), led to murderous tendencies. Similarly, for its series about how America’s bravest and finest young men are really a gang of psychopathic cutthroats, the Times triumphantly produced 121 homicides committed by veterans of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars in order to pin the blame for the murders on the U.S. military. Perhaps the Times’ next major expose could be on how a huge percentage of murderers are people who won’t ask for directions or share the TV remote. Let’s compare murders by veterans to murders by other 18- to 35-year-olds in the U.S. population at large. From 1976 to 2005, 18- to 24-year-olds — both male and more gentle females — committed homicide at a rate of 29.9 per 100,000. Twenty-five- to 35-year-olds committed homicides at a rate of 15.8 per 100,000. Since 9/11, about 1.6 million troops have served in either Iraq or Afghanistan. That makes the homicide rate among veterans of these wars 7.6 per 100,000 — or about one-third the homicide rate for their age group (18 to 35) in the general population of both sexes. But fewer than 200,000 of the 1.6 million troops who served in Iraq and Afghanistan have been women, and the murder rate for the general population includes both males and females. Inasmuch as males commit nearly 90 percent of all murders, the rate for males in those age groups is probably nearly double the male/female combined rates, which translates to about 30 to 55 murderers per 100,000 males aged 18 to 35. So comparing the veterans’ rate of murder to only their male counterparts in the general population, we see that Iraq and Afghanistan veterans are about 10 times less likely to commit a murder than non-veterans of those wars. But as long as the Times has such a burning interest in the root causes of murder, how about considering the one factor more likely to create a murderer than any other? That is the topic we’re not allowed to discuss: single motherhood. As I describe in my new book, “Guilty: Liberal ‘Victims’ and Their Assault on America,” controlling for socioeconomic status, race and place of residence, the strongest predictor of whether a person will end up in prison is that he was raised by a single parent. (The second strongest factor is owning a Dennis Kucinich bumper sticker.) By 1996, 70 percent of inmates in state juvenile detention centers serving long-term sentences were raised by single mothers. Seventy percent of teenage births, dropouts, suicides, runaways, juvenile delinquents and child murderers involve children raised by single mothers. Girls raised without fathers are more sexually promiscuous and more likely to end up divorced. A 1990 study by the left-wing Progressive Policy Institute showed that, after controlling for single motherhood, the difference in black and white crime disappeared. Various studies come up with slightly different numbers, but all the figures are grim. A study cited in the far left-wing Village Voice found that children brought up in single-mother homes “are five times more likely to commit suicide, nine times more likely to drop out of high school, 10 times more likely to abuse chemical substances, 14 times more likely to commit rape (for the boys), 20 times more likely to end up in prison, and 32 times more likely to run away from home.” With new children being born, running away, dropping out of high school and committing murder every year, it’s not a static problem to analyze. But however the numbers are run, single motherhood is a societal nuclear bomb. Many of these studies, for example, are from the ’90s, when the percentage of teenagers raised by single parents was lower than it is today. In 1990, 28 percent of children under 18 were being raised in one-parent homes — mother or father, divorced or never-married. By 2005, more than one-third of all babies born in the U.S. were illegitimate. That’s a lot of social problems in the pipeline. Think I’m being cruel? Imagine an America with 60 to 70 percent fewer juvenile delinquents, teenage births, teenage suicides and runaways, and you will appreciate what the sainted “single mothers” have accomplished. Even in liberals’ fevered nightmares, predatory mortgage dealers, oil speculators and Ken Lay could never do as much harm to their fellow human beings as single mothers do to their own children, to say nothing of society at large. But the Times won’t run that series because liberals adore single motherhood and the dissolution of traditional marriage in America. They detest the military, so they cite a few anecdotal examples of veterans who have committed murder and hope that no one asks for details. ———————————————————————————————————————— Ann Coulter is Legal Affairs Correspondent for HUMAN EVENTS and author of “High Crimes and Misdemeanors,” “Slander,” “”How to Talk to a Liberal (If You Must),” “Godless,” and most recently, “If Democrats Had Any Brains, They’d Be Republicans.” ———————————————————————————————————————— You Betcha. Jan 14, 2009 @ 05:56 PMSarah Palin, Wasilla, Alaska ga ga goo goo Jan 14, 2009 @ 05:56 PMTrig Palin, Wasilla, Alaska Barack Obama is a great American! Jan 14, 2009 @ 05:57 PMSean Hannity, Fix News Network New York Times is the only reliable news source left. God Bless the New York Times. Jan 14, 2009 @ 05:59 PMA Conservative Man, Deep South I’m starting to think Ann Coulter was the child of a single parent. That would explain the lunacy. Jan 14, 2009 @ 06:00 PMA Conservative Man, Deep South Coulter is a raving maniac only out to sell books. Jan 14, 2009 @ 06:02 PManti-Coulter, left of you If Conservatives had brains, they would all be liberals. Jan 14, 2009 @ 06:04 PMCoultergeist, opposite of evil I wonder when Coulterheads will realize their messiah Ann is a phony and a fraud. Jan 14, 2009 @ 06:05 PMCoulter is a fraud, Truthville This is some of the intelligent coments left by liberals, on Ann Coulters article. If this is the best that the left has to offer, this nation is in BIG BIG BIG TROUBLE since it is now presently in the hands of the liberal left. I am looking forward to see what liberal babble you will reply to this.

I couldn’t be bothered to read it all, it is too wierd. I am opposed to anyone who speaks with such vile about others. I don’t care what their political affiliation - I do care about their humanity. I have actually stopped supporting Rosie because I believe she has stepped too far over the line. I cannot tolerate Coulter because she is much too hateful and vindictive. She spews hate out as though it were words of kindness - it seems to me she has some major issues with her sociopathic behaviors. I pray she gets help, one day before she offends the wrong person…

Hello! I am new to wowowow, today is really my first day poking around. I was really excited to experience the approach by intelligent women. I am really disappointed at the photos chosen for this story. The photo of Rosie 1) did not match the statement in the article - she was not being angry - she seemed very thoughtful in her comments and 2) wasn’t even nice. What women among us wants a less than flattering photo published of us? I would expect more from intelligent - fair minded women. It was completely a slant. For the record, had the photo of Ann been an angry looking photo - that would not have been fair either. As an aside - she is looking particularly angelic which makes me a little suspect of the bias at play here. From my perspective, it’s not an insult to Rosie or Ann, it’s an insult to the readers of this site - to think we would tolerate or be swayed by such propaganda. I do hope this is not indicative of the tone of this site.

Little Ann Coulter Fumes and smolders Dishing out her daily rag. She’s no Hedda Hopper, Seems no one can stop her, And we really all think she’s in drag.