Category: Ann Coulter

Incredible mind, inspirational lady.

Why Is Ann Coulter Doing This?

Posted on Comments

An unnecessary conflict:

Former Donald Trump fan Ann Coulter yesterday went on an extraordinary Twitter rant, calling the president a ‘disloyal retard’ and a ‘blithering idiot.’
Coulter was incensed on Sunday after Trump tweeted ‘Alabama, do not trust Jeff Sessions’, the latest attack by the president on his former Attorney General.
The far-right pundit said Trump’s endorsement of Tommy Tuberville – Sessions’ opponent in the Republican primary – showed he was ‘the most disloyal human God ever created.’
The author of the 2016 book ‘In Trump We Trust’ went on to say: ‘I will never apologize for supporting the issues that candidate Trump advocated, but I am deeply sorry for thinking that this shallow and broken man would show even some remote fealty to the promises that got him elected.’
Coulter, 58, once one of the few people who Trump followed on Twitter, has gone after the president ever since she feels he betrayed his immigration pledges, particularly his failure to build the wall.
She defended Sessions in her tweets, saying he was ‘the ONE PERSON in the Trump administration who did anything about immigration.’
It comes amid a bitter war of words between Trump and Sessions which centers around the Alabamian’s time as AG and his infamous recusal in 2017.
Trump was furious Sessions recused himself from overseeing special counsel Robert Mueller’s Russia investigation. Sessions ultimately resigned at Trump’s request.
Trump tweeted Saturday: ‘3 years ago, after Jeff Sessions recused himself, the Fraudulent Mueller Scam began. Alabama, do not trust Jeff Sessions. He let our Country down. That’s why I endorsed Coach Tommy Tuberville (@TTuberville), the true supporter of our #MAGA agenda!’
Coulter disagreed with the president’s analysis of how the ‘Mueller Scam’ came to pass, writing: ‘Sessions HAD to recuse himself, you complete blithering idiot.
‘YOU did not have to go on Lester Holt’s show and announce you fired Comey over the Russian investigation. That’s what got you a Special Prosecutor.’

Everyone wishes Trump would be more circumspect in his Twitter usage, but I don’t see the benefit of engaging in such public feuds. I am not an enemy of Jeff Sessions, but I think most conservatives see his recusal as a mistake, and I don’t see why Sessions believes he is owed a return to his former Senate seat. If you feel differently, of course, you have the right to your own opinion, but I won’t argue with you about it, because I don’t enjoy seeing conservatives lacerating each other in public this way.


 

If Your Whole Campaign Was ‘We’re Gonna Build a Wall,’ You Better Build It

Posted on

Ann Coulter takes the Republican Party to school:

What the Democrats want is for Trump to be stuck explaining why he didn’t build the wall.
Then it will be a bloodbath. Not only Trump, but also the entire GOP, is dead if he doesn’t build a wall. Republicans will be wiped out in the midterms, Democrats will have a 300-seat House majority, and Trump will have to come up with an excuse for why he’s not running for re-election.
The New York Times and MSNBC are not going to say, “We are so impressed with his growth in office, we’re going to drop all that nonsense about Russia and endorse the Republican ticket!”
No, at that point, Trump will be the worst of everything.
No one voted for Trump because of the “Access Hollywood” tape. They voted for him because of his issues; most prominently, his promise to build “a big beautiful wall.” And who’s going to pay for it? MEXICO!
You can’t say that at every campaign rally for 18 months and then not build a wall.
Do not imagine that a Trump double-cross on the wall will not destroy the Republican Party. Oh, we’ll get them back. No, you won’t. Trump wasn’t a distraction: He was the last chance to save the GOP.
Millions of Americans who hadn’t voted in 30 years came out in 2016 to vote for Trump. If he betrays them, they’ll say, “You see? I told you. They’re all crooks.”
No excuses will work. . . .

Read the whole thing. And build the freaking wall.

 

Ann Coulter on Illegal Immigration and Demographics: ‘No, You’re Raping Me.’

Posted on Comments

Phyllis Schlafly and Ann Coulter at Saturday’s immigration panel.

Vivid analogies are not evidence of hate and, while I’m sure this is going to become another one of those “CPAC controversy” headlines, the point Ann Coulter was making is entirely valid:

“My favorite network for humor is MSNBC. They’re always sneering, demographics are changing. No this isn’t a natural process,” Coulter said. “It’s like you’re being raped and the guy is telling you ‘my penis is in you.’ No, you’re raping me. Demographics are changing by force. There is nothing natural about it.”

That’s the quote according to the Blaze, and my memory of what Coulter said at today’s Eagle Forum immigration panel is slightly different, but there were dozens of bloggers at the event, so we’ll see video eventually and be able to check it word-for-word.

The springboard of this discussion was the Eagle Forum’s recent report on the political and economic impact of immigration. And the point that Coulter was making is that when people in the media say that “demographics are changing,” they convey the impression that this is an inexorable, organic process. It’s not.

Our nation’s demographics are being changed as a result of deliberate government policy, and anyone who tells you otherwise — whether it’s the clowns on MSNBC or the clowns running the Republican Party — is lying. If people knew the truth about our current immigration policy, they would be very angry about it, but there are people deeply invested in keeping people uninformed and misinformed, so that indeed, we are like rape victims who are being told by the perpetrator that we aren’t actually being raped.

God bless Ann Coulter for speaking the truth — and for putting it in strong language that makes people pay attention.

 

Who’s the Liberal: Hannity or Coulter?

Posted on Comments

Sean Hannity has a bad habit of interrupting and hectoring guests he disagrees with and, in the case of the “Gang of Eight” immigration bill, Hannity has evidently decided that criticism of Marco Rubio is impermissible. This led to an interesting exchange Wednesday night:

Hannity asked [Ann Coulter] what she would do about the estimated 11 million illegal immigrants who are already in the United States.
“This is a total fraud and a fig leaf that the American people can’t sleep at night,” Coulter responded, “because the situation is exactly the same today as it was –”
“You’re not answering my question,” Hannity interrupted. “You’re like a liberal.”
Ooh! That got a reaction.
“No, you are like a liberal, making a silly argument,” Coulter retorted. “It’s a straw man argument. Nobody cares. This idea that it’s an emergency, it’s a crisis — it’s preposterous. The same thing will happen as is happening now.”

You can watch the video at ViralRead. And obviously, Coulter is right: Hannity is “like a liberal,” because he is letting his emotional empathy with Marco Rubio overwhelm facts and logic. Also, he’s “like a liberal,” interrupting and hectoring his guest.

 


Dude, Did You Have to Diss Ann Coulter? Also: Obama Has ‘Certainly Been Massively Disappointing to Young People’

Posted on Comments

Let’s face it: Ever since Ann Coulter volunteered as head cheerleader for Team Romney, some of Miss Coulter’s longtime conservative defenders have been under tremendous pressure to denounce her.

The problem is that nearly all the people who joined the anti-Coulter movement back in the day — and I’m looking at you, Ace of Spades — are also now on the “Roll Over for Romney” bandwagon. So while I defended her when she called Mahmoud Ahmadinejad a “raghead” and called John Edwards a “faggot,” I should probably be content to let Ace (and Sean Hackbarth, Ed Morrissey, Joy McCann, et al.) defend Miss Coulter now that she’s snuggling up with Mister Inevitability.

Nevertheless, I was irritated when I saw that Matt Lewis cited Ann Coulter as an example of a media “peacock” in a Daily Caller item he posted last week, even while Matt was making a point worth considering:

[On March 16], there was tremendous buzz about a picture of Rick Santorum sunbathing. I’m sure it got a lot of hits, but  it was completely irrelevant, and utterly vapid. I’m sure we probably ran it — we sort of had to. But can you imagine back in the old days if a reporter had  come to a grizzled, old newspaper editor with the idea of publishing that photo?  The old fella might have said, “Son, we’re not going to run that because it’s  not news. We’re not going to run that as long as I’m here. I don’t care if other  newspapers do — we’re not. Now get the hell out of my office!”
Today, that old guy is dead. Or retired — probably pushed out by some  upstart.

Having dealt with a few grizzled old newspaper editors in my day, I very well see the point Matt is trying to make. What is happening is that the news media are being democratized, for both good and ill, so that the readers get whatever the readers want, including society reporters turned strippers and NFL cheerleader sex scandals.

Yet I’ve always said that if I were ever put in charge of a newspaper, I’d run it like the NY Post: Lots of celebrities, scandals, sports and crime stories to pull in the readers, thus to pay the bills for the political coverage and the right-wing op-ed pages.

So if I were the grizzled old editor and some reporter brought me a picture of Rick Santorum sunbathing, my response would be: “What the hell is wrong with you, kid? I said I wanted Ann Romney bikini pictures! Now get to work on it, or you’re fired!”

Part of what’s wrong with the conservative movement — and maybe we can discuss this at “DoomCon 2012” — is a sense of insecurity that manifests itself as a craving for respectability.

This prudishly superficial concern with being “respectable” causes some conservatives to scurry for cover the minute Ann Coulter says “faggot” or Rush Limbaugh says “slut,” so that all liberals have to do is make a big deal about some silly little “gaffe” or “scandal” and they win.

Wake the hell up, conservatives: Are you going to let Politico and Media Matters pick your leaders and spokesmen for you? Remember Breitbart!

OK, so that’s my rant about that. Meanwhile, via the eminently respectable Washington Free Beacon, we have this delightful video:

Obama has “certainly been massively disappointing to young people,” says Stephen Marche of Esquire, a liberal magazine that features lots of pictures of nearly naked women.

Polls show Obama’s popularity among the young “started at 63 percent and I think it’s in the 30s now,” says Marche. “It just continues to fall.”

Good. Now go get me those Ann Romney bikini pictures.

Update: linked by Fishersville Mike.

Ann Coulter: What?

Posted on Comments

by Smitty

Is free speech a bad thing?

The No. 1 conservative talk-radio host in America, Rush Limbaugh, is critical of Romney, and another top conservative talk-radio host, Mark Levin, is adamantly against Romney — though both Limbaugh and Levin supported Romney as the conservative alternative to John McCain in 2008, and Romney has only gotten better since then.
Purely to hurt Romney, the Iowa Republican Party fiddled with the vote tally to take Romney’s victory away from him and give it to Rick Santorum — even though the “official count” was missing eight precincts. Isn’t the party apparatus of a state considered part of the Establishment?

So, Limbaugh and Levin play by the Buckley Rule, and support the most conservative electable candidate. . .even if that means that 2008’s pick is 2012’s pan? Consistency can do that.

And what does ‘purely to hurt Romney’ mean? Does Rick Santorum exist? A reasonable alternative scenario, borne out by irregularities in New Hampshire, is that some state committees are owned by some candidates, and may not have made the initial victory calls in an unbiased way. Ann, you’ve been great in the past, and I hope that the shocking spectacle of your 2012 beclownment is something you can overcome. But the sad truth is that the Romney infatuation is starting to resemble some of the creepy BHO infatuation I’ve seen from a couple of Lefties I know.

Whoever wins the GOP nomination shall have earned it by August, and these over-wrought appeals to end the process now seem more emotionally driven than anything else.

via iOwnTheWorld

Celebrating The Crowd At CPAC, i

Posted on Comments

by Smitty

Gustav Le Bon’s 1895 book The Crowd heavily informed Ann Coulter’s
book Demonic: How the Liberal Mob Is Endangering America. Thanks to Ann for the hat tip. Rather than take her route of showing the specific evil effects of the Democrat party, and then quoting Le Bon, it seems needful to go back to Le Bon’s book and explore his ideas in the book. Le Bon is subtle in his diabolical approach, I find. The Darth Vader of the social sciences, perhaps.

While I’m going to agree with Ann and argue that Progressives have abused the aspects of human nature illuminated by Le Bon, here’s what I think is important:

  1. Not wasting time getting emotional about the history involved.
  2. Avoiding seduction by the dark side of the mob force, and becoming the Left.
  3. Asking ourselves how, if at all possible, our notions of individual liberty and American exceptionalism can be bolstered to protect a post-Progressive future from going down the same road of statism and debt.

With that, this series follows the Le Bon’s table of contents, with a post on every item illuminating what I think are the key takeaways.