Monthly Archives: September 2014

Ann Coulter’s Root Causes – Part III

(September 11, 2001)

Even before the Twin Towers fell, Ann Coulter’s career was going into a tailspin. As a result, the 9/11 terrorist attack traumatized Coulter more than most, especially given other significant factors.

Coulter – the shock jock of conservative commentary – has been called both a heroine and a villain, and she seems equally at home with both characterizations. Though wanting to be perceived as a good person, Coulter relishes the provocateur label.

Which mask is the real one: angel or devil? Who is the real person behind the persona?

From whence did countless contradictions and complexities arise in Coulter’s life?


Key events, significant periods in her life, and a multitude of psychological forces have molded and shaped the person we know today as Ann Hart Coulter.

The first part in our series delving into the root causes in Coulter’s life appropriately began with her birth, family, childhood, and other formative factors in her early life. Part II examined her adult education, early career, a confluence of debilitating psychological factors, and the moment when the brass ring was within her grasp.

In part three, we look at events and circumstances prior to and surrounding the 9/11 terrorist attack which shocked the nation and heralded the war on terror in which we remain engaged.

Coulter was surely traumatized by 9/11, but both personal and professional circumstances in her life enhanced its impact upon her mind, heart, and soul.

A Troubled Soul in Need

Even with a best-selling book, accolades from her peers, and date requests from her fans, Coulter needed more. Much more.

In 1998, Coulter almost had a nervous breakdown, an emotional fracture from which she has yet to fully recover. Coulter craved attention, affirmation, and adoration. At a political rally on Halloween, Coulter’s insatiable need for more was palpable.

Coulter promised her publisher that she would not speak at the rally, but she felt compelled to obtain adoration. As she walked on stage, amidst thunderous applause, she said, “I said I wouldn’t talk.”[1] One fan shouted, “We love you, Annie!” Unable to contain herself, Coulter burst out, “God bless you!”

Then Coulter exclaimed, “I promised my publisher that in the interests of appearing non-partisan that I would not be speaking today but I had to come and see my fellow Freepers. … God bless you all. Thanks!”

Coulter’s narcissistic desire for attention also extended to her fan mail. She needed something to fill the void within.

In early 2000, Coulter devoted one of her legal columns to her fan mail.[2] She wrote, “I’ve read them all [thousands of letters],” adding that “those letters mean a lot to me.”

Coulter continued, “That is why I love my mail. Apart from my parents and a few friends – and I know they like me – it’s the only feedback I get.” Moreover, “Some letters are so touching I carry them around with me for a while. I still intend to respond someday, which is why I still have them all.”

Concluding her legal column for the week, Coulter wrote, “But I don’t need television, and I certainly don’t need pathetically frail bosses in any context. I do need those letters.”

In1998, Coulter left her one-year term as a part-time litigator for the Center for Individual Rights. George magazine employed her as a columnist for one year, ending in 2000. Coulter’s attempted run for Congress that year was quickly aborted as she could find no political party to represent. Moreover, she was distraught at her inability to garner a book deal for her next book. The words were in her, but no one would publish.

Then, in 2001, HarperCollins struck a deal with Coulter, but her book editor later died and her book deal died weeks after that.

Coulter’s World Fell Apart

In late 2001, Coulter experienced a triple whammy in just a few short weeks. The primary thrust of the 9/11 terrorist attack occurred just 6.66 miles from her Manhattan apartment[3] and at least one of her friends died on that day. Following her subsequent extremist essays, her publisher, HarperCollins, cancelled her lucrative book deal, requiring repayment of her substantial advance. And the Boston Globe exposed the plagiarism contained in her then only book, High Crimes and Misdemeanors.

So, Coulter lost a friend in Barbara Olson on 9/11, lost her sense of safety in Manhattan, lost her book deal and its income, and lost her reputation and credibility due to plagiarism allegations.

In the aftermath of 9/11, Coulter would come to condemn candle-lighting ceremonies and the human quest for closure. Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder would be a concept forever foreign to Coulter, who wrote:

“I really am sick of [the candle lighting]. I think the candle lighting is bad. It’s womanly. It’s hugging. It’s mourning. Mourning is the opposite of anger, and we’re supposed to be angry right now. A flag, that’s like a manly thing. … It’s the candle lighting. … I like the flag, and I don’t like the candles.”[4]

PTSD? Not in Ann’s lexicon. Coulter noted, “WASPs aren’t into that. In fact, if I ever used the words ‘emotional welfare,’ I would be sent to my room without dinner.”[5] As one profiler observed early in Coulter’s career, “She seems to despise weakness of any kind.”[6] To admit to weakness or a need for help was anathema to Coulter.

At the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) the following year, Coulter’s clout was at an all-time low. She was under attack from liberals, conservatives, and civil rights organizations for her questionable and deliberately provocative commentary. Moreover, the CPAC program guide listing the speakers included Coulter, but her description was very brief and, conspicuously absent, there was no sponsor or organizational affiliation listed for her. Coulter was becoming untouchable.


Crown Forum came to Ann’s rescue, publishing her second book, Slander.

Coulter attended the White House Correspondents Dinner, on May 4, 2002, as a guest of the Boston Globe, who had, the previous fall, disclosed the plagiarism allegations against Coulter. Coulter’s lawsuit threat abruptly terminated future coverage of her demonstrable plagiarism but also yielded a coveted seat at the Dinner. The New York Observer [7] reported on an after-dinner party faux pas by Coulter:

“Ms. Coulter spotted lobbyist Dan Senor, a former colleague from her days working under former Senator and current Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham, with Bush press secretary Ari Fleischer. Leaping up, she pleaded with Mr. Fleischer to have Mr. Bush read and publicly carry her forthcoming book, Slander: Liberal Lies About the American Right.”

“’I will do anything!’ Ms. Coulter said to Mr. Fleischer. ‘I’ll swear to you, you’ll like it! I will do anything!’ (Later, when asked if Mr. Bush might honor Ms. Coulter’s request, Mr. Fleischer said, ‘Well, I don’t know. I have to read it first.’)”



Chapter 5: “… and Balls!” The Beauty of Conservatism, 2011, available as a free download at

Chapter 7: “Love: God’s Desire and Goal for Us,” The Gospel According to Ann Coulter, 2012, available as a free download at

Chapter 8: “The Lost Art of the Eulogy: It’s ALL About ME!” Vanity: Ann Coulter’s Quest for Glory, 2012, available as a free download at

Chapter 5: “Paint Chip Profiling,” Never Trust Ann Coulter – at ANY Age, 2013, available as a free download at


[1]       Ann Coulter, Free Republic Rally, 10/31/98.

[2]       Ann Coulter, “You’ve Got Mail,” Human Events, 1/14/00.

[3]       Distance determined by Mapquest.

[4]       Ann Coulter, Politically Incorrect, ABC, 9/25/01.

[5]       Gaby Wood, “Lethally blonde,” The Observer, 6/11/06.,,1794552,00.html.

[6]       Mary Jacoby, “The Pundettes,” Capital Style, December 1997, p 45.

[7]       Gabriel Snyder and Sridhar Pappu, “Reporters’ Party Makes George W. Bigger than Ozzy,” New York Observer, 5/12/07,

Ann Coulter’s Root Causes – Part II

(September 11, 1997)

Ann Coulter has international name recognition, with enraptured fans and aggrieved foes. Viewed as both an angel and a devil, Coulter has expressed and exhibited traits of both. For many, the contradictions and conundrums in Coulter’s life and career appear inexplicable. But they are explainable.


In part I of this four-part series examining the root causes in Ann Coulter’s life, we discovered the huge impact her family, pedigree, and upbringing had in creating the conservative icon so many have come to either love or hate. (Albeit, a growing number choose to ignore her.)

In this installment, we will look at another formative stage in Coulter’s life, one which decisively impacted her both personally and professionally.

Gingrich Revolution

The Gingrich Revolution provided professional salvation for Coulter, who felt unfulfilled working in corporate law in New York City. Her attempts at establishing a writing career were also barren and she was eager to engage the political enemy in combat in the nation’s capital.

Coulter “moved from an anonymous corporate-law job in Manhattan to the Washington office of a freshman Republican Senator.”[1] Starting as a “legislative assistant to Sen. Spencer Abraham,”[2] she later became his “deputy press secretary.”[3]

Belonging to such an elite political institution – walking among America’s most powerful political leaders, working with their seasoned and talented staffs, socializing with the crème de la crème – was an exhilarating experience for Coulter. But, as a novice staffer herself, Coulter soon realized that she was a very tiny fish in a very big aquarium. It must have wounded her delicate ego to feel so ordinary among the extraordinary.

But the United States Senate became too small for Ann Coulter, whose biggest challenge was dealing with the public. Coulter’s heart was always for writing and public speaking.

So, Coulter left the Senate for the limelight.

Steppingstones to Stardom

Within a few short years, Coulter was catapulted from being an “obscure Senate aide”[4] to become an A-list celebrity and best-selling author.

In short order, Coulter gained employment as a regular contributor on MSNBC, a weekly columnist for Human Events, and a litigator for the Center for Individual Rights (CIR). Beginning in 1996, Coulter became a ubiquitous guest on radio and television talk shows and frequently flew to Hollywood to appear on Politically Incorrect.

Each of Coulter’s jobs were steppingstones to stardom. As a Senate staffer, Coulter met and worked with the political elite. As a pundit on MSNBC, in 1996-97, Coulter interacted with national newsmakers and analyzed current events on-air. Her journalistic résumé was greatly enhanced with her job at Human Events[5] and she gained legal credentials through her one-year employment at the Center for Individual Rights.

Networking opportunities rapidly grew. In June 1997, America Spectator commissioned Coulter to co-host “a kind of debutante weekend for [Internet media guru Matt] Drudge,”[6] who “was guest of honor at a bustling party of young conservatives. Like a visiting head of state, he addressed the National Press Club and then toured Newsweek, creating quite a fuss there.”

That summer, Coulter was intimately involved in Paula Jones’ lawsuit against President Clinton and, in October, leaked attorney-client privileged information to thwart Jones’ desire for an out-of-court settlement.[7] As a result, Jones life would be ruined, but Coulter would gain a career. As Coulter’s ex-beau, James Tully, explained, “The Paula Jones case essentially made her career.”[8]

Coulter’s new beginnings mushroomed into a commanding media presence. She was profiled in five magazines in 1997 alone: National Journal,[9] TV Guide,[10] Capital Style,[11] New Republic,[12] and George.[13]

Starved for Success

With her success, politically and professionally, and her growing grassroots and elitist clout, Coulter became a victim of the success syndrome. An MSNBC Health News article, titled “Power: the greatest aphrodisiac?” provides greater insight into this affliction.[14] The Success Syndrome describes “a set of symptoms characterized by power-driven compulsive behaviors.”

Success Syndrome sufferers experience denial, as well as a belief they can get away with it. Al Cooper, a clinical director in California, concludes, “It’s about power. It’s about gratification. It’s about grandiosity.” Whichever symptoms are manifested, power remains at the root of the syndrome.

I asked a colleague of Coulter’s about this mass of contradictions in her life and he sees those contradictions linked to her desire for fame: “Part of it has to do with being a celebrity, but part of it has to do with being the kind of person who so wants to be a celebrity.”[15]

Child stars are often too emotionally immature to handle their stardom. Here, Coulter’s success struck in her mid-30s. Her own emotional immaturity and insecurities, her drive to prove herself to herself and others, and her obsession with destroying the Clinton presidency all converged to enhance the effects of the Success Syndrome.

Beginning around August, alert MSNBC viewers would have noticed a growing arrogance in Coulter’s demeanor. Abundant media profiles, growing connections within the conservative movement, involvement in the Paula Jones case, awards and lavish praise – these all figured prominently in transforming her personality and chipping away at her character. The Success Syndrome was having its success.

September 11, 1997

In 1997, September 11th was a transformative moment for Coulter. George magazine hosted a luncheon at the elegant Le Cirque restaurant in New York City,[16] in honor of George magazine’s “20 Most Fascinating Women in Politics,” with Coulter one of the honorees.

This proved a major turning point in Coulter’s life. Not so much the award – she would receive dozens during her career – but her private conversation with John F. Kennedy, Jr., who gave her effusive praise and affirmation. Doubts vanished. Vacillation disappeared. From that point forward, Coulter would speak her mind, without hesitation and even without thought. Coulter describes that life-transforming moment:

“The first time I met John was at a George magazine luncheon at Le Cirque a few years ago to honor the magazine’s “Twenty Most Fascinating Women in Politics.” First of all, consider that I was named one of them. … He thought it was tremendous that MSNBC kept firing me. That was the first time I stopped feeling lousy about my tenuous relationship with MSNBC.”[17]

Evidence for Coulter’s turning point, on September 11, 1997, was manifested on MSNBC the very next day. Coulter’s entire on-set demeanor was strikingly different. Arrogance and self-satisfaction became hallmarks of that time period. Perhaps the best example is her treatment of the recently deceased. Earlier that year, Coulter was reluctant to express her opinion about the just deceased Pamela Harriman. As Coulter told one reporter,

“I was constantly getting fired at MSNBC for, I thought were some of my wittiest remarks and one of them – which was then featured in George magazine – was after Pamela Harriman died, and I really went out of my way to avoid pointing out [that she was a round heel].”[18]

September 12, 1997

But on September 12th, Coulter vented uncontrolled vitriol against Lady Diana as the world mourned the loss of the People’s Princess. An enraged Coulter erupted with enmity:

“She was running around with a bunch of useless playboys. I mean, Dodi – what an appalling loser he was. …”

“This guy did nothing! He ran up huge debts every place he went, on the basis of his father’s money, and this is the guy she’s hanging around with – and apparently sleeping with – the “good mother?” …”

“She couldn’t hold back so the children wouldn’t know that she’s having premarital sex with some guy who doesn’t pay his debts to the 21 Club in New York? …”

“Well, then, what are we celebrating her for? She’s an ordinary and pathetic and confessional – I’ve never had bulimia! I’ve never had an affair! I’ve never had a divorce! So I don’t think she’s better than I am.”

An astute caller asked Coulter to cite her own accomplishments. Coulter blustered without citing any:

“If you’re trying to say that I’m better off than she was when she was married into this pathetic royal family, and had all this money and everyone loved her and we’re celebrating her death.”

Speaking and writing would become more profitable than politics and legislation. Human Events proved to be Coulter’s ticket to fame and glory. Through its sister publishing house, Regnery, Coulter became an author. Human Events is also a primary co-sponsor of CPAC – the Conservative Political Action Conference – an annual conference showcasing conservative politicians, authors, organizations and power-brokers. Coulter has spoken at every CPAC conference since 1998.

Moreover, at that time, Coulter’s close friendship with Geraldo Rivera enabled her to appear weekly on his television talk show. Coulter’s friendship with Sean Hannity serves the same function today. As one of the first pundettes on MSNBC, Coulter sometimes had difficulty finishing her thoughts [“Please let me finish …”]. Now, no one could get her to shut up.


Chapter 2: “The Cuckolding of Conscience,” The Beauty of Conservatism, 2011, available as a free download at

Chapter 10: “Equality: Self-Evident Truths,” The Gospel According to Ann Coulter, 2012, available as a free download at

Chapter 6: “Fame,” Vanity: Ann Coulter’s Quest for Glory, 2012, available as a free download at

Preface: “Arrogance of Power,” Never Trust Ann Coulter – at ANY Age, 2013, available as a free download at


[1]       John Cloud, “Ms. Right,” Time, 4/25/05, pg. 41.

[2]       “Washington, Inc. – Finally, They’re Center Stage,” National Journal, 3/11/95.

[3]       K.C. Swanson, “Hill People,” National Journal, 12/7/96.

[4]       Howard Kurtz, “The Blonde Flinging Bombshells at Bill Clinton,” Washington Post, 10/16/98,

[5]       Anne Marie O’Connor, “Ann Coulter: Post-Feminist Pundit,” George, September 1997, p 117.

[6]       Marvin Kalb, One Scandalous Story: Clinton, Lewinsky, and Thirteen Days That Tarnished American Journalism, Free Press. 2001, pg. 85. See Chapter 5, “Enter Mr. Drudge,”

[7]       See “Case Study # 1: Oh, Paula (Jones)! Ann Coulter’s Betrayal,” Vanity: Ann Coulter’s Quest for Glory, 2012, available as a free download at

[8]       Author interview.

[9]       Annys Shin, “Blonde Ambition on the Right,” National Journal, 5/31/97.

[10]     Mary Murphy, “Look Who’s Talking,” TV Guide, 8/9-15/97.

[11]     Mary Jacoby, “The Pundettes,” Capital Style, December 1997.

[12]     Hanna Rosi, “Radical Chicks,” The New Republic, 10/13/97.

[13]     Anne Marie O’Connor, “Ann Coulter: Post-Feminist Pundit,” George, September 1997.

[14]     Charlene Laino, “Power: the greatest aphrodisiac?” MSNBC, 2/3/98.

[15]     Author interview.

[16]     Carol Lawson, “Chronicle,” New York Times, 9/12/97.

[17]     Ann Coulter, “A Republican Tribute to John,” 7/28/99.

[18]     Ann Coulter, Vantage Points: Issues for Women, Amazon City Radio, 12/5/97.

Ann Coulter’s Root Causes – Part I

(December 8, 1961)

Is Ann Coulter insane or evil (or both)? When asked that question, I typically respond that Ann is a little lamb who has gone astray, lost without a firm foundation.

Friends, strangers, colleagues, and talk show hosts have questioned why Coulter has become a person who can be called both the “most hated woman in America” and “an exemplar, in word and deed, of what a true leader is.”


From whence did America’s premiere polemicist arise? What events and forces coalesced to create the “mass of contradictions” evident in Ann’s life and work? How can someone who claims to be “an extraordinarily good Christian” behave in such an unchristian manner?

That Coulter, in recent months (and over the span of almost two decades) has said and done some things which could rightly be called crazy or evil is undeniable. Is it all an act, a charade, shtick, a carefully developed persona? Or do those words and actions accurately represent the person of Ann Coulter?

In this four-part series, we will look at the formative forces and key events and periods in Ann’s life which have shaped and molded her into the person we see before us today.

So, to begin with, let’s begin at the beginning.

Ann’s Birth and Pedigree

The first formative stage of Ann’s life began with her birth. Ann was born in Norwalk, Connecticut, on December 8, 1961. Ann spent the first few weeks of her life in an incubator. She would continue to be the center of attention – the center of her universe – throughout her years growing up in the Coulter home.

Born into a wealthy, well-connected family, in the most prosperous county in America, Ann was raised with high expectations and had high aspirations. Ann’s distant ancestors were Puritans,[1] dating back almost to the Mayflower, while her more recent relations were all staunch Republicans. Expectations were high. Aspirations would follow suit. Even at birth, Ann had a heritage – a patriotic and religious heritage – to which she must live up.

Growing up in elite circles, she would come to develop an elitist outlook on life. Her crème de la crème worldview is shamelessly stated in her high school yearbook: “I’m against homogenizers in art, in politics, in every walk of life. I want the cream to rise.” Clearly, Ann considered herself the crème de la crème. Paradoxically, she suffers from low self-esteem, knowing she does not really measure up. This cognitive dissonance would accelerate and infiltrate every area of her life.

Ann’s Family

Ann was the last of three children and the only girl – the “baby princess.” The last born, especially a baby princess, is often treated as special, and is frequently indulged and pampered. Yet, being the last, the baby princess often isn’t physically, mentally, or emotionally able to do what her older siblings can do, thus often engendering feelings of inadequacy and a lack of worth.[2]

Ann’s father, a prominent New York attorney, seems to have governed with a strict hand as a prototypical authoritarian father.[3] Authoritarian fathers tend to focus on the rules while failing to exhibit compassion. Psychologist and counselor Gary Smalley terms this a “controlling parent,” one who enacts laws without exhibiting love. An authoritarian father can cause a daughter to feel love is conditional, can create deep feelings of insecurity and fears of rejection, and can inculcate feelings of hostility and resentment. The child’s fear of failure fuels her ambition.

Ann’s mother was probably the typical “Trophy Mom,”[4] rewarding good behavior with fulsome praise, but being critical when expectations were not met. A trophy mom, in conjunction with an authoritarian father, can put tremendous pressure upon the baby princess to perform for acceptance and praise. A sense of inadequacy and fear of rejection can, in time, become pathological.

In her parents, Ann was heir to both strict Catholic theological doctrines and the Protestant work ethic.[5] Both tended towards performance-based relationships[6] which seem to have instilled a sense of insecurity in Ann, who seems to have pined for unconditional love (don’t we all?).

It was probably as a child and adolescent that Ann developed her censorious spirit, legalistic temperament, and that perfectionism which would forever plague her. Ironically, the more Ann sought to be (or at least appear) perfect – in order to be loved – the more glaring her imperfections became.

It appears – or at least it probably appeared to Ann – that she was the recipient of performance-based love. Hence her insatiable need to get attention by performing.

One gets the sense that Ann needed (or felt she needed) to perform in order to belong. Victims of performance-based love are emotionally insecure. They tend to put on a show for others (which reinforces the “last born” trait of being an entertainer). As one Coulter profiler would later observe, “She’s like a puppy waiting to be thrown a ball.”[7] (Because they are putting on a show for affection, they can become both disingenuous and distrustful of the genuineness of others.)

One section title in The Birth Order Book speaks volumes: “Last Borns Often Love the Limelight.” Last borns “often desperately crave attention” and “are notorious carrot-seekers as in, ‘Look at me, I’m performing – toss me a carrot.’” Ann’s family gave her plenty of carrots.

Victims of performance-based love also tend towards narcissism. Being perfectionists, their imperfections loom large in their consciousness, instilling self-doubt. Admitting error is anathema to them. They are often afflicted with depression, anxiety and shame. Consequently, they are prone to “compulsive and addictive behaviors.” Their deep-seated need for acceptance and unconditional love prevent them from doing the very thing they need to do to free them from themselves: acknowledge their inadequacies and repent from wrong behavior.

Ann’s Education

Ann received a strict Catholic education (K-8) at St. Aloysius Catholic School until she entered public school. She graduated from New Canaan High School in 1979.

After graduation, Ann was beset by two competing drives: a desire for greatness and a yearning for fun. She initially chose the latter before seeking the former. The last-born trait of rebelliousness arose with her escape from the family homestead. She would spend time doing what she wanted. Absent the presence of her parents, Coulter would take time for herself.

Consequently, Ann’s psychological template was set by the time she embarked for college. Ann later attended an Ivy League college (Cornell) and an elite post-graduate school (Univ. of Michigan).

Ann rejected her father’s Catholicism in favor of her mother’s Presbyterian faith, yet, upon reaching adulthood, she apparently disengaged herself from religion altogether at the same time as she was tossed to and fro by competing lifestyle and career choices. The absence of an internal moral compass would forever plague her.

Deeply conflicted, with a remarkably dynamic internal ambivalence, Coulter believes herself to be the crème de la crème (still wanting “the cream to rise to the top”) while simultaneously questioning her own self-worth, especially when confronted by people who are brighter and more accomplished than her, or by situations which are beyond her ability to resolve.


Chapter 1: “The Seduction of Ann Coulter,” The Beauty of Conservatism, 2011, available as a free download at

Chapter 1: “Roots: Ann Coulter’s Christian Heritage,” The Gospel According to Ann Coulter, 2012, available as a free download at

Chapter 1: “Rising Crème: Narcissism – A Primer,” Vanity: Ann Coulter’s Quest for Glory, 2012, available as a free download at


[1]       Ann Coulter, “NELL HUSBANDS MARTIN COULTER,” 4/22/09.

[2]       Ironically, both a sense of entitlement and fear of inadequacy come to coexist in a psyche which is never at peace.

[3]       See on authoritarian father figures.

[4]       See chapters 8 and 9 of The Mom Factor: Dealing with the Mother You Had, Didn’t Have, or Still Contend With, by Dr. Henry Cloud and Dr. John Townsend, Zondervan, 1996.

[5]       Ann Coulter, Washington Journal, C-Span, 5/24/99. Coulter: “My father’s Catholic and my mother’s Presbyterian.”

[6]       Although they can be misused to create performance-based relationships, that is not their intent.

[7]       Gaby Wood, “Lethally blonde,” The Observer, 6/11/06.,,1794552,00.html.

Ann Coulter Takes on the Racial Grievance Industry

In a surprising series on race relations, Ann Coulter takes on the racial grievance industry and, in the process, exposes a number of hoaxes, from white racism, to white killer cops, to racial profiling.


Ferguson Fallout

As I reported in my last column, in a beautifully titled piece (“No Facts, No Peace”),[1] Ann Coulter brought some much needed perspective to the turmoil taking place in Ferguson, Missouri.

Drawing from her best-selling book, Mugged, Coulter accurately attacked the default media narrative – “Racist until proved innocent” – and she provided numerous examples of the media’s jihad against white America and local authorities.

She further noted the necessarily changing media narrative as actual facts emerged. (Though the minds of many still remain committed to the false narrative.)

As Coulter pointed out in 1996, about another event, “We keep talking about how it’s racially-charged. It’s only racially-charged because we’re making it that way.”[2]

The injection of race into events which take place between people of different races often obscures the truth of what actually happened. Inserting a racial dynamic immediately inflames emotions and clouds reason. Indeed, injecting race into a situation typically confers guilt upon the white person, whoever it might be.

It’s not about race, but reality. (See “Race Does Not Matter.”)

In 1997, Coulter again raised concerns over the false narrative of widespread white racism oppressing blacks, saying,

“I think probably the worst things white people in American society do to blacks is compelling them to savor the experience of racism.”[3] Coulter is correct. It is the race hustlers – and the entire racial grievance industry – which is limiting the ability of many blacks to overcome the obstacles in life and be the best that they can be.

Coulter continued,

“When you talk about a racial dialogue and healing, the underlying message is ‘whites are racist, whites are racist, whites are racist,’ and I don’t think it’s true and I think it’s time we put that aside and move on. I think it’s not healthy for people to be constantly feeling like whites really are racist because they keep saying they’re racist so they really must be.” (See “Guilty of Being White.”)

More Black Cops!

Last week, Coulter addressed the clamor for more black cops in response to the already-identified false narrative in Ferguson.[4]

The prevalence of white killer cops is a favorite meme of Al Sharpton, Eric Holder, and other race hustlers. Naturally, the remedy they propose is to employ more black police officers. But their solution – premised upon a false paradigm of institutional racism – employs racism to solve it. Quotas, racial set-asides, race-norming, the welfare state – these have all hurt the black community far, far, far more than they have helped it.

According to Coulter, “If the Ferguson police are forced to hire more minorities and women for the sake of diversity, the one thing we can be sure of is that more black people will be murdered, raped and assaulted.” Facts support her claim.

Coulter discovered “a massive, detailed 2000 study of the effect of court-ordered affirmative action plans on police departments” which “found that the more minorities on a police force, the higher the rates of murder, manslaughter, violent crime, robbery and aggravated assault will be.”

She points out that the “problem was not with black cops … but rather with the lowering of standards across the board, resulting in less-qualified officers of every race.” (Her stats and examples are worth checking out.)

As Coulter put it, “I’m against more black people being murdered, raped and assaulted.” (How about Sharpton and Holder? Oh, that’s right, they haven’t been to Chicago yet.)

Racial Profiling

The racial grievance industry is hell-bent on portraying white Americans as racist and police officers as potential killers of blacks. The utter myth of America as a racist nation is continually propounded as fact by those who would profit from its proliferation.

Race hustlers are wealthy, powerful, and famous.

Yesterday, Coulter again used facts to expose yet another racial grievance industry hoax – the myth of racial profiling.[5] Coulter traced the origins of this myth and offered compelling evidence for discarding it

Coulter wrote, “Throughout the 1990s, the nation was fixated on tales of jack-booted New Jersey state troopers who were stopping speeders on the turnpike just because they were black!

Coulter considered the source and discovered, “As is usually the case with bogus race studies, the pivotal 1993 survey compared speed stops on the New Jersey turnpike to the population of all drivers on the turnpike – not with the population of all speeders on the turnpike.”

She noted the nonsensical nature of its conclusion: “Such meaningless studies are popular on the left, where it is assumed that people of different races, genders and ethnicities will always behave identically in all respects.”

Coulter also observed what proponents of that study should have grasped: “Any study purporting to show that too many blacks are stopped for speeding must first determine how many speeders are black.”

But race hustlers often miss the obvious and their disciples are often all too caught up in their emotions to even question the “facts” being given to them.

As Coulter noted, the Public Services Research Institute conducted a study “of nearly 40,000 drivers” to confirm the flawed 1993 survey and it reached its own conclusion: “No racial profiling.”


Every single investigation into the Ferguson shooting – including the exhaustive federal Justice Department investigation – exonerated Officer Wilson and determined that the Hands Up, Don’t Shoot narrative was a lie.

Even though this false racial narrative – this myth – has been proven false, many media, political, and cultural elites continue to promote this false narrative and attack those who expose it as a fraud.

That false racial narrative plays into the fears of those who are race-obsessed or who have been indoctrinated into believing racial stereotypes, which is ironic given they accuse others of racism.


[1]       Ann Coulter, “No Facts, No Peace,” 8/20/14.

[2]       Ann Coulter, MSNBC, 10/13/96.

[3]       Ann Coulter, MSNBC, 6/14/97.

[4]       Ann Coulter, “Would It Kill You to Hire More Black Cops? (Yes),” 8/27/14.

[5]       Ann Coulter, “Speed Kills Racial Profiling Study,” 9/3/14.