Monthly Archives: January 2016

Ann Coulter, Bimbo

Ann Coulter loves the words “bimbo,” “retarded,” “idiot,” “moron,” and similar words!

Is Coulter, by her own definition, a bimbo?

Bimbo

Simply put, Coulter loves to offend people[1] and, more importantly, she thinks she is smarter than[2] and superior to[3] everyone else. Everyone opposed to Coulter is, in her mind, a “useless idiot.”[4]

In Slander, Coulter asserted, “If liberal propaganda didn’t work, it would be impossible to comprehend bimbo starlets and uneducated slobs attacking the intelligence of the man who won the Cold War.”

(Ironically, Coulter now attacks those “idol-worshipping Ronald Reagan”[5] and laments, “These johnny-come-latelies to Reagan worship [who] seem to think that he was Jesus Christ and could do no wrong.”[6] Would that make Coulter a bimbo talking head?)

Coulter’s own propagandistic version[7] is to simply assert that everyone who disagrees with her is stupid, retarded, or a bimbo. Of course, Coulter’s ad hominem attacks actually work by shifting debates over substantive arguments to issues of free speech.

Coulter Proudly Calls Nikki Haley a Bimbo

A fascinating dialogue on the John Gibson Show[8] is instructive of Coulter’s temperament and Trumpian sense of self-importance. Asked if she was joking about deporting Gov. Nikki Haley, Coulter replied:

“Um, no. No, no, no, no. Yeah, [I think she should be deported]. Yeah, she won’t be governor anymore, I suspect.”

Then Coulter stepped on a linguistic landmine, as is her wont:

“I think she’s a bimbo and, um, you know, having a black Indian do such a fantastic job in a response to the State of the Union, yeah, they picked her to be, to be …”

At this point, Coulter was interrupted by the host, her decades-long friend from her MSNBC days in 1996-97. Gibson asked if her characterization was “kosher.”

Coulter erupted, “What do you mean, ‘kosher?’ Is it true or isn’t it? You’re policing my language? I’m saying something I think is true. I think she is a bimbo!”

Naturally, Coulter never explained how it is true – and the host never asked. (They rarely do.)

Irate at being, in her mind, censored by political correctness, Coulter petulantly queried, “What is that? Do we have to add that to the list of words that can’t be used now, because the list is getting bigger than the dictionary?” (Proper grace and decorum never seem to register with Ann.)

Going with the flow, Coulter then defined what a bimbo is rather than use the term: “Yeah, a not very bright female. Actually, they’re not always females but they often have those qualities, the feminine qualities.”

Notice, Coulter, as she is prone to do, includes liberal men in her definition and regards those qualities as distinctly feminine in nature.

Contemptuous of being asked not to engage in name-calling, Coulter again erupted, “You’re joking!” Continuing, Coulter immediately asked, “Can you email me a list of what words can’t be used?” Then she defiantly said, “Bimbo!”

Still not done, Coulter addressed the GOP’s decision to choose Haley to give a rebuttal to Obama’s State of the Union address. Coulter pondered, “It’s going to be hard to describe how she was chosen. She’s a, a, a, a woman who was accidentally elected, um, because she’s pretty and isn’t very bright. Can we say that?”

In other words, a bimbo. However, Coulter never explained why being a bimbo would be a qualification for that choice – or for anything, for that matter.

Continuing her rant, and incorporating her unisex definition of the word in dispute, Coulter lambasted South Carolinian Republicans, saying, “they have the worst representatives. … Lindsey Graham is South Carolina. … Lindsey Graham and Nikki Haley? Lindsey Graham – also a bimbo!”

(Whenever exchanges like this take place, Coulter is implacably impenitent.[9])

Is Ann Coulter a Bimbo?

As noted above, Coulter offered her preferred definition of “bimbo” – someone who is “pretty and isn’t very bright.” We can work with that.[10]

Remember, it’s been over a decade since Coulter so eloquently said, “I’m so pleased with my gender. We’re not that bright.”[11] Proof of Coulter’s contention regarding herself abounds![12]

Just a few weeks ago, Coulter claimed that the Great Depression[13] was “the most prosperous period in American history.”[14] Need I say more?

Consider, too, Coulter’s own self-revelation. In 2003, she admitted, “Ann Coulter engages in ad hominem attacks. Ann Coulter is insane.”[15] 13 years later, her long-time friend, Sean Hannity, finally reached the same conclusion, saying, “You crack me up, but you’re insane.”[16]

Endnotes:

[1]               See “Coulter, Simply Offensive” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-5i.

[2]               See “Ann Coulter – Smartest Person in the World” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-59.

[3]               See “Coulter – An Elite’s Elite” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-aW.

[4]               See “Coulter’s ‘Useless Idiots’ and Other Foolishness” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-ar.

[5]               Ann Coulter, quoted by Lloyd Grove, “Coulter Hates ‘the Browning of America,’” Daily Beast, 5/26/15.

[6]               Ann Coulter, Ricochet, 6/4/15.

[7]               See Propaganda: Orwell in the Age of Ann Coulter, 2014, available as a free download t www.coulterwatch.com/propaganda.pdf.

[8]               Ann Coulter, John Gibson Show, Fox News, 1/14/16.

[9]               See “Chapter 9: Conscience & Innocence,” Vanity: Ann Coulter’s Quest for Glory, 2012, available as a free download at www.coulterwatch.com/vanity.pdf.

[10]             See Never Trust Ann Coulter – at ANY Age, 2014, available as a free download at www.coulterwatch.com/never.pdf.

[11]             Ann Coulter, Hannity & Colmes, FNC, 9/23/04.

[12]             See “Chapter 4: … Brains …,” The Beauty of Conservatism, 2011, available as a free download at www.coulterwatch.com/beauty.pdf.

[13]             See “Ignorant Ideologue” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-br.

[14]             Ann Coulter, Sean Hannity Show, Premiere Radio Networks, 12/18/15.

[15]             Ann Coulter, Scarborough Country, MSNBC, 7/7/03.

[16]             Sean Hannity, Sean Hannity Show, Premiere Radio Networks, 1/19/16.

Coulter’s Know-Nothing American Party

Ann Coulter, head cheerleader for a new Know-Nothing American Party,[1] champions a faux conservative as America’s savior,[2] calling him a “real American,” as opposed to Trump’s opponents, and she again conflates being conservative with being Republican.

Coulter's Know-Nothing American Party

In her current column[3] – this week’s shtick – Coulter heralds yet another grand conspiracy theory, this one by the “liberal and conservative media.”

Coulter repeatedly attacks “conservative news outlet(s)” which break “fake Trump scandal(s),” decries “the ‘conservative’ media calling him a socialist, a Democrat, a flip-flopper, a fake conservative,” and asserts that all such accusations are merely “name-calling” and non-substantive.

According to Coulter, “the accusers never include examples, not true ones, anyway.” This is the exact same tactic Coulter used to defend Romney,[4] boldly asserting that Romney’s flip-flops and gaffes were all imaginary.[5]

Coulter again confuses “conservative” with “Republican,” regarding them as synonymous. One would think that she would have learned by now that electing RINOs[6] (the very non-conservative Republicans Coulter is prone to promote) does not further a conservative agenda.

Still, Coulter vilifies “Conservative pundits [who] keep assuring clueless viewers that Trump is not a ‘real Republican.’” Trump may be a “real” RINO, but he is not a conservative!

Nevertheless, Coulter envisions a time when the next generation will invoke “Trump Republicans[7] with adulation. (Ann, Trump = Rockefeller = Eastern.)

Coulter warps herself and her savior in the American flag to shield both of them from criticism for their non-conservative views. Coulter reprised her nativist[8] politics,[9] asking, “Wouldn’t it be nice to have a president who likes us more than he likes foreigners – and the rich donors who employ them?”

Coulter concludes her hit piece with this paragraph:

“Looking at what the party has become, I certainly hope he’s not a ‘real Republican.’ I know he’s a real American. Those used to be the same thing.”

Conservatives criticize Trump for not being a real conservative, not a real Republican. Further, Coulter suggests that anyone opposed to Trump is not a real American.

Real conservatives – those who defend the Constitution and support a traditional, biblically-grounded American culture – recognize the dangers of Trump’s anti-Constitutional, non-Christian, non-conservative approach[10] to solving the manifold problems besetting America today.

Endnotes:

[1]               See “First, Jews; Now, Catholics?” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-ah.

[2]               See “Meet Ann Coulter’s Savior” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-bM.

[3]               Ann Coulter, “Liberal and Conservative Media Unite Against Trump,” 1/20/16.

[4]               See “Adios, Ann: Only Mitt for Me” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-70.

[5]               See “Case Study # 6: Romney v. Everyone Else,” Propaganda: Orwell in the Age of Ann Coulter, 2014, available as a free download at www.coulterwatch.com/propaganda.pdf.

[6]               See “Coulter Discovers RINOs will be … RINOs” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-56.

[7]               See “Coulter Hates All GOP Candidates But Trump” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-bj.

[8]               See “Coulter: All Immigrants Are Bad” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-8w.

[9]               See “Ann Coulter’s Xenophobic Anti-Gospel of Hate” at http://t.co/aQGhLuWwtD.

[10]             See “Coulter’s Latest RINO Would Give Democrats Victory” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-8t.

Meet Ann Coulter’s Savior

For Coulter, salvation is always political, not spiritual; temporal, not eternal. For Coulter, pursuing Paradise on earth is preferential to the heavenly one. This has been true for nearly two decades.

Coulter's Savior

Beginning with the 2000 election cycle,[1] Coulter has consistently attacked Christians and pro-lifers, demonized the opponents of her chosen candidates, and sought to subvert the political process to achieve victory.

Apocalypse Now

Coulter loves hyperbole and frequently employs apocalyptic terms. In 2014, she said, “It seems like we’re in the middle of the Democrats’ Thousand Year Reich.”[2]

Keeping with the theme, Coulter asserts, “America is the most consequential nation on Earth … If America falls, it will be a thousand years of darkness for the entire planet.” A thousand years?

Regarding our near future, Coulter argues, “We are talking about the future not only of America but the last genuinely Christian country on earth, and, thus, the world. If we lose America, it is lights out for the entire world for a thousand years!”[3]

Sounds like the future of the planet rests in America’s (not God’s) hands.

Just last week, Coulter chimed in again with her apocalyptic millennial prophesy:

“If America is gone, it’s not just lights out for Americans, it’s lights out for the rest of the world. … When this country is gone, who is going to save these other countries from war lords, from tsunamis, from, from Ebola, from, from, from the Nazis?”[4]

America’s Christian Roots

Surprisingly, in the midst of her Cassandra-like oracle, Coulter said, “This is a powerful Christian country. I would say it is the only genuinely Christian country … the only country with any power that is a genuinely shot through with Christianity from its very founding country on earth.”

America, as Coulter observed, “was not only founded by Christians, it was founded by Protestants.” She added, “The underlying, animating philosophy to this country and to our founding is a Christian worldview.”

Coulter is good at expounding upon America’s Christian heritage[5] but fails to grasp that what America needs most is not a political realignment but a spiritual revival to reclaim America’s roots.[6]

Salvation cannot come by means of political saviors but only through a heartfelt appeal to the Savior of the world.

Yet, Coulter ignores the moral morass and cultural decay prevalent in so much of America and seeks a political, as opposed to moral, solution, saying,

“It is like the fall of Rome but, thank God, and I am not using the Lord’s name in vain, I mean that absolutely literally, thank God for raising up Donald Trump and giving us a chance to save the country.”[7]

Coulter is looking to the wrong savior!

Coulter’s Savior

Trumpeting Trump,[8] Coulter warns, “I think any Republican – other than Trump – would be a disaster [for America].”[9]

Coulter reminisced, “Whoever thought that Donald Trump would be America’s savior?”[10] And, again, “If he ran, I had no idea he would be America’s Savior. … our next president, who’s going to save America.”[11]

Donald Trump is Coulter’s current Savior[12] – and America’s, too. So says Ann, who calls Trump, “my hero, our Savior, the man who’s going to save my world.”[13] (Sorry, Ann, but Jesus is the Savior of my world – and yours!)

Calling Trump, “the greatest candidate for president ever”[14] and “the candidate I’ve been dreaming of,”[15] Coulter astonishingly said, “I totally would [marry Trump if he were single].”[16]

Asked to describe her actual relationship with Trump, Coulter replied, “Blind worship.”

Blind worship? Sounds like a religious experience to me. Coulter amplified her answer, “It’s a little like the North Korean people with their dear, dear leader.” (Trump is really like a crazy, socialist tyrant?)

Ensuring that we all get the spiritual undertone of her remarks, Coulter employs biblical imagery. She introduced Trump at one of his rallies, saying,

“And now I think it’s like Joseph in the Bible. He had to be sold into slavery, imprisoned, betrayed so that eventually he could save the Jews. Maybe Mitt Romney had to lose. And maybe we had to give Republicans one more chance in 2014. And maybe Mitch McConnell and John Boehner had to betray us one more time to pave the way for President Donald Trump. God hasn’t given up on America yet.”[17]

On another occasion, Coulter compared Trump to yet another biblical hero: “and then it all works out and David is the assistant to the king and saves all the Jews.”[18]

Vote Republican! … or Else

Coulter sees Republicans (not necessarily conservatives) as America’s savior.

For many years now, Coulter has insisted that we vote Republican, regardless of either the character or conservative credentials of the candidate. History has proven her wrong. Despite historic gains,[19] Republicans have caved in to the Obama/leftist agenda because far too few Republicans are actually conservative.

Why would that be? In part, because Coulter continually promotes RINOs (even when they are not running!)[20] and attacks true conservatives.[21] Then she is chagrined when RINOs act like RINOs.[22]

Coulter now complains that we should not seek out conservatives because they haven’t done anything!

“Forget conservative. What have the conservatives done for you? What did conservative George Bush do? He nearly destroyed the Party and the country in one swell foop. … He wiped out the Republican Party in the House and the Senate. … How about Mitch McConnell and John Boehner?”[23]

The people Coulter complains about are the ones she supported! Coulter practically worshiped Bush throughout most of his presidency. Now – after the facthe’s the problem? Coulter defended McConnell at every turn, even as conservatives discounted his alleged conservative credentials. (Coulter was wrong!)

Confronted with the claim that they weren’t conservative, Coulter exclaimed, “They’re Republicans! You have to vote for somebody!”

Wow! She still doesn’t get it. Republicans are not necessarily conservatives. Coulter has consistently supported non-conservative Republicans, yet complains when they fail to legislate or govern according to conservative principles.

Blinded by her own unique paradigm, Coulter is alone in her worldview, exclaiming, “In fact, my ideal ticket is Trump-Romney. That’s what I’m really hoping for. That’s the dynamite combo.”[24] (Two RINOs to restore America’s Christian conservative roots?)

Coulter, the Closet Christian

For almost twenty years, Coulter has boasted of being a Christian. She claimed, “I’m a Christian and everything comes from being a Christian,”[25] adding that “Christianity fuels all of my books.”

Why does Christianity fuel all of her books? “because you are called upon to behave in a certain way as a Christian and that is to fight lies, injustice, cruelty, hypocrisy, that fuels everything.” (One could argue that she has been fighting against herself all of these years!)

Then why has Coulter repeatedly vilified[26] Christian missionaries[27] over a period of years[28] and repeatedly attacked[29] pro-lifers[30]for years.[31]

Coulter even refuses to help Christians being martyred[32] in a horrific genocide overseas! For Coulter, political considerations always outweigh the moral and spiritual implications of any situation. Ann Coulter is about as Christian as Barack Obama.[33]

Yet, Coulter insists, “Christianity fuels everything I write”[34] and claims, “I’m an extraordinarily good Christian.”[35]

Just yesterday, Coulter asserted, “You know I’m a big Christian.”[36]

Many Christians live fearfully in the closet, threatened by persecution, torture, and death. Coulter claims to be a Christian. If only her words and actions would come out of the closet and prove her claims!

Endnotes:

[1]               See various case studies in Vanity: Ann Coulter’s Quest for Glory, 2012, available as a free download at www.coulterwatch.com/vanity.pdf.

[2]               Ann Coulter, Heritage Foundation, 7/11/14.

[3]               Ann Coulter, Eric Metaxas Show, Salem Media Group, 1/12/16.

[4]               Ann Coulter, The Costa Report, 1/14/16.

[5]               See “CPAC: America’s Christian Heritage Denied” at http://wp.me/p4scHf-8E.

[6]               See “Reclaiming America!” at http://wp.me/p4scHf-9V.

[7]               Ann Coulter, Eric Metaxas Show, Salem Media Group, 1/12/16.

[8]               See “Coulter Hates All GOP Candidates But Trump” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-bj.

[9]               Ann Coulter, Eric Metaxas Show, Salem Media Group, 10/22/15.

[10]             Ann Coulter, John Gibson Show, Fox News, 1/14/16.

[11]             Ann Coulter, Live Book Signing, 12/21/15.

[12]             See “Coulter Trumped Up” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-7Q.

[13]             Ann Coulter, Alan Colmes Show, Fox News, 1/15/16.

[14]             Ann Coulter, Joyce Kaufman Show, WFTL, 12/17/15.

[15]             Ann Coulter, Sean Hannity Show, Premiere Radio Networks, 1/19/16.

[16]             Ann Coulter, Alan Colmes Show, Fox News, 1/15/16.

[17]             Ann Coulter, speech introducing Donald Trump, Dubuque, IA, 8/25/15.

[18]             Ann Coulter, Live Book Signing, 12/21/15.

[19]             See “GOP Triumphs Despite Voter Fraud” at http://wp.me/p4scHf-59.

[20]             See “Adios, Ann: Only Mitt for Me” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-70.

[21]             See “Coulter Attacks Principled Conservatives” at http://t.co/npUIoRm4gt.

[22]             See “Coulter Discovers RINOs will be … RINOs” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-56.

[23]             Ann Coulter, Eric Metaxas Show, Salem Media Group, 1/12/16.

[24]             Ann Coulter, Hardball, MSNBC, 1/11/16.

[25]             Ann Coulter, Hannity & Colmes, FNC, 6/6/06.

[26]             See “Ann Coulter’s Xenophobic Anti-Gospel of Hate” at http://t.co/aQGhLuWwtD.

[27]             See “Ann Coulter to God: “STFU”” at http://t.co/avKhlc4yVv.

[28]             See “Fake Christians” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-5T.

[29]             See “Coulter Disses Pro-Lifers – Again!” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-8J.

[30]             See “Coulter’s Assault on Pro-Life Movement Continues” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-9a.

[31]             See “Ann Coulter Still Blind to Abortion” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-9I.

[32]             See “Let Them Be Martyred!” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-aR.

[33]             See “Is Ann Coulter a Courageous Christian?” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-60.

[34]             Lisa de Pasquale,Exclusive Interview: Coulter Says Book Examines ‘Mental Disorder’ of Liberalism,” Human Events, 6/6/06.

[35]             “Church Militant: Ann Coulter on God, Faith, and Liberals,” beliefnet.com, 2006, http://www.beliefnet.com/story/196/story_19646.html.

[36]             Ann Coulter, Sean Hannity Show, Premiere Radio Networks, 1/19/16.

Birther Coulter Births More Lies

Erstwhile anti-birther Ann Coulter, worshiping at the idol of The Donald, has become the premiere birther attacking Ted Cruz. Why? She wants to scuttle Cruz’s presidential ambitions and stop his burgeoning support before her own Savior, Trump, loses the nomination.

Birther Ann Coulter

(Coulter has, after all, tied her future – and that of America[1]to a Trump victory,[2] however wise or foolish that might be.)

Just two days ago, Coulter burst out, “Thank God for raising up Donald Trump and giving us a chance to save the country.”[3]

It’s Really Not About Ted, But All About Ann

Seemingly on emotional steroids, Coulter has turned her attack dog persona on Trump’s most formidable Republican foe, all the while professing an “Ah, shucks, I don’t want to do this, but it’s the right thing to do” attitude even has she sticks a shiv in Ted’s side.

Coulter dodges claims that she changed position on Cruz’s eligibility solely to support Trump by asserting she took her current position prior to Trump’s candidacy. That is a red herring.

Just yesterday, Coulter wrote: “I said so long before Trump declared for president, back when Cruz was still my guy.”[4] Coulter claims, “It’s not that I want him not to be a Natural Born Citizen.”[5] Except, Coulter’s later claim is patently false and demonstrably untrue.

In reality, Coulter was obsessed with recruiting Romney for president, so much so that her close friend, Sean Hannity, was aghast at the depth of her obsession. Ted Cruz was becoming an impediment to Coulter’s plans for Romney.

Coulter first sought to disqualify Cruz as a presidential contender to force her idol, Mitt Romney, to run again[6] in 2016. At that time, she wanted Romney – and only Romney![7]

Now, she wants Trump – and only Trump![8]

In fact, just three days ago, Coulter boasted that she still wants a Trump-Romney ticket: “In fact, my ideal ticket is Trump-Romney. That’s what I’m really hoping for. That’s the dynamite combo.”[9]

Bob Woodward recently said, “History is character; behavior is character.”[10] Coulter’s history, and her behavior these past two decades, proves Coulter’s own lack of character.[11] Coulter lied about the Constitution and Supreme Court cases during the 2000 election[12] and she is doing the same thing now.

Why would Ann lie? Donald Trump[13] is her new political savior.[14] In Ann’s words: “[Donald Trump is] America’s savior.”[15]

Nevertheless, Coulter hypocritically attacks those who correctly interpret the Constitution, lamenting, “It’s kind of annoying me that we are all Ruth Bader Ginsburg now and people interpret the Constitution based on what they want the Constitution to say, not what it does say.”[16]

1608 or 1790; Blood or Soil?

According to Coulter, “In the U.S., also in Great Britain and in France, citizenship is determined by soil. … Congress can write laws for naturalization. That is also in the Constitution. But if Congress has to write a law to make you a citizen, you’re not natural born. … It is determined by a law written by Congress; not by the common law, not by the Constitution. So that is not natural born.”[17]

Except, the law written by Congress (and empowered by the Constitution) establishes who is natural born! In 1790, Congress established citizenship by blood.

Coulter asserts: “The phrase ‘natural born’ is a legal term of art that goes back to Calvin’s Case, in the British Court of Common Pleas, reported in 1608 by Lord Coke. The question before the court was whether Calvin – a Scot – could own land in England, a right permitted only to English subjects.”[18]

The case which Coulter cites – Calvin’s Case (1608) – has to do with English subjects, not citizens. Americans are not subjects. Our Founders took those portions of English common law with which they agreed and modified or dispensed with those portions which were incongruent with the new American constitutional system that they were creating.

Chief Justice Joseph Story wrote, in an 1829 Supreme Court opinion: “The common law of England is not to be taken, in all respects, to be that of America. Our ancestors brought with them its general principles, and claimed it as their birthright; but they brought with them and adopted, only that portion which was applicable to their situation.”

Coulter claims that a 1608 case in England is the basis for America’s definition of Natural Born Citizen.[19] Consequently, Coulter asserts that the 1790 law enacted by Congress is irrelevant. Does Coulter seriously believe that a 1790 American law enacted by the Founders is nullified by an English case law from 1608? Really?

According to the Yale Journal of Law and the Humanities (emphasis added), “In Britain, even before Calvin’s Case, various acts and proclamations provided that a child born out of the territory of England could also be a natural-born subject, as long as the child’s parents owed allegiance to the sovereign of England. This is an example of the jus sanguinis [blood] operating alongside the jus soli [soil]. In the history of both Britain and the United States, the jus sanguinis has always been established by statute, never by judge-made law.

The 1790 statute by Congress, which Coulter dismisses as “irrelevant,” precisely establishes the principle of right of blood which Coulter denies!

The Congressional Research Service published its findings on this issue (emphasis added):

“From historical material and case law, it appears that the common understanding of the term ‘natural born’ in England and in the American colonies in the 1700s may have included both the strict common law meaning as born in the territory (jus soli), as well as the statutory laws adopted in England since at least 1350, which included children born abroad to British fathers (jus sanguinis, the law of descent).”

Cleverly, Coulter very subtly suggests that those defending citizenship by blood are nascent Nazis, saying, “The two methods are soil or blood. Curiously, in Germany, it’s, it’s blood.”[20]

Coulter Lies About ANOTHER Supreme Court Case

Coulter writes: “As the Supreme Court said in Bellei, a case about the citizenship of a man born in Italy to a native-born American mother and an Italian father: ‘It is evident that Congress felt itself possessed of the power to grant citizenship to the foreign born and at the same time to impose qualifications and conditions for that citizenship.’”[21]

Coulter uses this case to prove her contention that Cruz is ineligible, when, in fact, it proves the opposite!

As noted in ROGERS v. BELLEI, (1971) (emphasis added):

“Section 301 (a) of the Act, 8 U.S.C. 1401 (a), defines those persons who ‘shall be nationals and citizens of the United States at birth.’ Paragraph (7) of 301 (a) includes in that definition a person born abroad ‘of parents one of whom is an alien, and the other a citizen of the United States’ who has met specified conditions of residence in this country.”

The plan thus adopted by Congress with respect to a person of this classification was to bestow citizenship at birth but to take it away upon the person’s failure to comply with a post-age-14 and pre-age-28 residential requirement. It is this deprival of citizenship, once bestowed, that is under attack here.”

“The very first Congress, at its Second Session, proceeded to implement its power, under the Constitution’s Art. I, 8, cl. 4, to ‘establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization’ by producing the Act of March 26, 1790, 1 Stat. 103. That statute, among other things, stated, ‘And the children of citizens of the United States, that may be born beyond sea, or out of the limits of the United States, shall be considered as natural born citizens: Provided, That the right of citizenship shall not descend to persons whose fathers have never been resident in the United States.’” [Subsequent statutes extended it to either a citizen mother or citizen father.]

Cruz Is Eligible!

Gary DeMar is perhaps the foremost expert on America’s Founders. DeMar recently offered a history of originalist thought on Natural Born Citizen and reached this stunning conclusion: “Ted Cruz [is] more of an American than some of the drafters of the Constitution.”

Endnotes:

[1]               See “Coulter’s Latest RINO Would Give Democrats Victory” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-8t.

[2]               See “Coulter Hates All GOP Candidates But Trump” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-bj.

[3]               Ann Coulter, Eric Metaxas Show, Salem Media Group, 1/12/16.

[4]               Ann Coulter, “We’re All Ruth Bader Ginsburg Now,” 1/13/16.

[5]               Ann Coulter, Hardball, MSNBC, 1/11/16.

[6]               See “Coulter Stumps for Romney – Again!” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-4V.

[7]               See “Adios, Ann: Only Mitt for Me” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-70.

[8]               See “Coulter Hates All GOP Candidates But Trump” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-bj.

[9]               Ann Coulter, Hardball, MSNBC, 1/11/16.

[10]             Bob Woodward, Fox News Sunday, FNC, 1/10/16.

[11]             See Never Trust Ann Coulter – at ANY Age, 2013, available as a free download at www.coulterwatch.com/never.pdf.

[12]             See “Coulter Lies About Supreme Court Case” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-bE.

[13]             See “Coulter Trumped Up” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-7Q.

[14]             See “Coulter’s Latest RINO Would Give Democrats Victory” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-8t.

[15]             Ann Coulter, Peter Tilden Show, KABC, 8/28/15.

[16]             Ann Coulter, Eric Metaxas Show, Salem Media Group, 1/12/16.

[17]             Ann Coulter, John Gibson Show, Fox News, 1/8/16.

[18]             Ann Coulter, “We’re All Ruth Bader Ginsburg Now,” 1/13/16.

[19]             Ann Coulter, Eric Metaxas Show, Salem Media Group, 1/12/16.

[20]             Ann Coulter, John Gibson Show, Fox News, 1/8/16.

[21]             Ann Coulter, “We’re All Ruth Bader Ginsburg Now,” 1/13/16.

Coulter Lies About Supreme Court Case

Ann Coulter leads the charge of those seeking to crush a Cruz candidacy with a lie!

When she thought she could foist Romney on us again in 2016,[1] Coulter began to attack Cruz on his citizenship. With Cruz posing a serious threat to Trump, her new-found soul-mate,[2] Coulter has shifted into high gear, stridently claiming Cruz is ineligible to be president.[3]

Supreme Court Case

This isn’t Coulter’s first attempt at subverting the Constitution for political purposes.[4]

Backdrop: Elián González

The Elián González case became international political theater during the 2000 presidential race. It rekindled the Cold War in miniature. Coulter fed into that political hysteria by telling lies of her own, lies which fit into her own ideological sensibilities. Those lies included turning a Supreme Court decision on its head, claiming it said the exact opposite of what the Court decided.[5]

The heart and core of Coulter’s case for denying Juan Miguel González custody of his own son rested on Coulter’s decades-long belief that fathers have absolutely no rights or responsibilities to their own children except through marriage.

On talk TV – contrary to what the law actually says – Coulter continually insisted that putative fathers have no rights to their children: “The law used to account for these things by saying the father doesn’t have rights to a child unless he’s married to the mother. That’s how a man can claim his heritage and his claims on a child. … That’s how a father gets the right to children, by being married to the mother.”[6]

Coulter reaffirmed – again and again – that only marriage confers custodial rights: “First of all, the idea that a father has rights to a child by donating sperm; No! A father gains rights to a child by being married to the mother. … He has absolutely no rights to the child! Fathers gain rights to children by marrying the mothers.”[7]

The only problem with Coulter’s claims is that they are false. The law has always upheld the biological rights of fathers, irrespective of whether the child is born out-of-wedlock.

Lying About Supreme Court Cases

Coulter’s view of parental rights was her principal argument to separate a son from his father, but that core point of her position, that central concept, was an outright lie! To buttress that lie – which she has consistently expressed for almost twenty years – Coulter lied about a Supreme Court ruling which any layman can read and see that reaches the exact opposite conclusion. Coulter wrote:

“Let’s just consider the initial presumption that a father gets custody of his son. The law is indeed clear, at least to this extent: That ‘law’ refers only to legitimate children. … The Supreme Court last weighed in on the legal rights of unwed fathers in 1989 when it cut off all of the father’s rights to his child, including visitation.”[8]

In her essay, Coulter literally reversed the decision of the Court, falsely claiming it denied those custodial rights. Contrary to Coulter’s fiery opinion, the law says otherwise. The Supreme Court, in five cases, upheld the principle of paternity rights for putative fathers. Those cases were all cited in the Supreme Court case cited by Coulter.

In a rather remarkable display of truth twisting, Coulter took this Supreme Court case which affirms the custody rights of natural fathers and declared it the definitive denial of those rights![9]

The father in Coulter’s cited case was not denied parental rights due to illegitimacy but because his claim of fatherhood was filed after the filing deadline. That father had failed to assert his rights within two years of his daughter’s birth. Illegitimacy was never the issue. The Supreme Court has consistently confirmed custodial rights of natural fathers, both in principle and in practice. So, the case Coulter cited says the exact opposite of what Coulter claimed.

“Bald assertions about the very question under dispute,” Coulter once wrote, “is an odd method of argument,”[10] yet that is precisely what Coulter did (and continues to do). According to Coulter, “Everyone is entitled to his own opinion; everyone is not entitled to his own facts.”[11] Apparently Coulter is not above making up her own “facts.”

Strangely (or not, for Ann), Coulter recently asserted, “Apparently that’s the way constitutional analysis goes these days. You determine, we’re all Ruth Bader Ginsburg now: Whatever you want the Constitution to say, that’s what it says, miraculously. Well, that has never been me!”[12]

Sorry, Ann, but you are the allegedly “conservative”[13] Ruth Bader Ginsburg!

Endnotes:

[1]               See “Adios, Ann: Only Mitt for Me” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-70.

[2]               See “Coulter Hates All GOP Candidates But Trump” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-bj.

[3]               See “Coulter Claims Cruz Ineligible” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-9j.

[4]               See a series of case studies in Vanity: Ann Coulter’s Quest for Glory, 2012, available as a free download at www.coulterwatch.com/vanity.pdf.

[5]               For greater details on the González case and Coulter’s perversion of constitutional law, see “Case Study # 4: In the Name of Elián (González),” Vanity: Ann Coulter’s Quest for Glory, 2012, available as a free download at www.coulterwatch.com/vanity.pdf.

[6]               Ann Coulter, MSNBC, 1/22/97.

[7]               Ann Coulter, MSNBC, 1/25/97.

[8]               Ann Coulter, “The bastardization of justice,” 4/26/00.

[9]               Michael H. v. Gerald D., 491 U.S. 410 (1989).

[10]             Ann Coulter, “Miranda Not a ‘Constitutional Straightjacket,’” 12/15/99.

[11]             Ann Coulter, High Crimes and Misdemeanors: The Case Against Bill Clinton, Regnery, 1998, pg. 3.

[12]             Ann Coulter, John Gibson Show, Fox News, 1/8/16.

[13]             See Never Trust Ann Coulter – at ANY Age, 2013, available as a free download at www.coulterwatch.com/never.pdf.

Coulter Betrays, Then Attacks Paula Jones

In her first column of the year,[1] Ann Coulter missed a scoop right under her aristocratic nose! She did so trying to avoid exposing her own shenanigans during the Clinton sex scandals of the 1990s.

Betrayal

Coulter took Chris Matthews to task for his incredulity over accusations that Hillary enabled Bill in his sexual escapades. But she missed a scoop by trying to hide her own past. (One might call it, “Ann Coulter’s Ann Coulter Amnesia.”) Coulter wrote:

“That’s why no one under 30 has ever heard of Gennifer Flowers, Juanita Broaddrick, Dolly Kyle Browning, Elizabeth Ward Gracen, Sally Perdue, Kathleen Willey and Monica Lewinsky. Nor have they heard that Hillary’s explanation of all these alleged rapes, molestations (proved), gropings (proved) and sexual affairs (proved) was that there was a ‘vast right-wing conspiracy, conspiring against my husband.’”

Coulter citations missed one of the most prominent cases, charges of sexual harassment by Paula Jones, the one person on that singular list whom Coulter personally knew, professionally betrayed, and profoundly demeaned.

The exclusion of Paula Jones from Coulter’s list is striking! Jones received a substantial out-of-court settlement.

Even more striking, Coulter extensively quoted Matthews on Hillary but missed the best Matthews quote out there, a scoop which exposes the very character of Hillary Clinton.

But first,

Coulter v. Jones

Coulter’s involvement with both the Paula Jones sexual harassment case against Bill Clinton and Linda Tripp’s taped conversations with Monica Lewinsky would prove crucial to not only undermining the Clinton agenda and tarnishing the Clinton legacy, but would also provide the impetus for impeachment of the President and, not coincidentally, provide Coulter with her first best-seller.

During the scandal, Coulter expressed not one word of empathy for Jones. Indeed, Coulter gloried in Paula’s misery because Paula became a weapon to use against the President. Coulter divulged attorney-client privileged information to the press with the express purpose of thwarting her client’s desire for an out-of-court settlement.

As a result of the sabotaged negotiations, Jones reluctantly went to court, the Lewinsky scandal erupted, and Jones’ life was radically altered. Rather than receiving the settlement she so desperately desired, Jones entered media hell and gained a fractured family. Coulter, however, benefited, later boasting that she “got a bestseller out of it.” Meanwhile, Jones remained in media hell.

Coulter publicly commiserated with Jones: “It seems to me, after seeing this in a practical matter, what Paula Jones went through, I don’t think any of them would bring a lawsuit. I certainly wouldn’t. How would you like to be called ‘trailer park trash,’ and have the entire White House apparatus focused on you as one sole little woman without a capacity to respond?”

As it was, due to marital breakup, legal fees, back taxes, and a defense fund fiasco – all as a result of Coulter’s interference in her lawsuit – Jones thought the only way out of her family meltdown and financial chaos was to discreetly pose for Penthouse.

Ironically, after abandoning Jones – without ever offering her any post-impeachment aid – Coulter denounced her as “trailer park trash,” doing precisely what she had previously condemned Clinton supporters for doing. In Coulter’s own words: “Now she’s just the trailer park trash they said she was.”

(Many more details are available in “Case Study # 1: Oh, Paula (Jones)! Ann Coulter’s Betrayal.”)[2]

Coulter Missed This Scoop!

Coulter’s extensive excerpts from Chris Matthews somehow missed his most important words on the subject. On October 26, 2007, Chris Matthews outlined many of the Clinton sex scandals (emphasis added):

“But we know it has because his private matters inevitably become private. We know the name of every woman he’s been involved with – everybody.  You know, there’s never been any investigative reporting.  Paula Jones filed a lawsuit.  Gennifer Flowers had a big press conference.  Monica Lewinsky blabbed about him on some tape recording with her pal, Linda Tripp.  We have this stuff thrown at us, and they keep saying, private matter.  If it’s private, why do we always know about it?”

Matthews mentioned the person Coulter was loathe to name: Paula Jones. Matthews also affirmed the public notoriety of Clinton’s private sexual behavior with women other than his wife. But, more than that, Matthews probed deeper.

Then Matthews asked how those scandals accrued to Hillary’s benefit!

“Does she exploit it and get power by knowing that he’s always feeling guilty with her?  In other words, did she get power – I heard this from David Gergen.  She got power over health care financing, the biggest issue of that administration because he was so hooked up in the problem of Paula Jones that she just squeezed it out of [him] … Is that the kind of exploitation, or what do you call it – what do you call it, blackmail?  What  do you call it? … And she exploited it to get more power.”

Here we see that it was well known during the Clinton presidency that the First Lady was exploiting her own husband’s sexual misconduct (in particular, the Jones’ scandal) to advance her own agenda with the power of the presidency behind it! This is yet another example of Clinton’s abuse of power as First Lady and one which foreshadows what a Hillary presidency would look like.

Hillary and Ann, Enemies Forever?

Trekkies will recall the Star Trek episode, “Let That Be Your Last Battlefield,” in which “two survivors of a war-torn planet … are still committed to destroying each other aboard the ship.” Each is “half black and half white, the two halves split perfectly down the center of his body.” Why do they seek to destroy one another? Each regards the other as evil. They are, ironically, mirror images of one another. (One is white on the left side, black on the right; the other is the reverse.) Yet, they cannot see how much they have in common.

Coulter and Clinton have far more in common with one another than just enmity.

Neither Clinton nor Coulter can escape their ignoble past (except by godly sorrow, repentance, and God’s grace). The character of both is cut from the same cloth[3]narcissistic hubris[4] and ambition unbridled by scruples.[5] Coulter and Clinton share a shocking number of character traits[6] (though radically different personalities).

Like Clinton,[7] Coulter cannot be trusted![8]

Endnotes:

[1]               Ann Coulter, “Chris Matthews’ Hillary Amnesia,” 1/6/16.

[2]               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 www.coulterwatch.com/vanity.pdf.

[3]               See “Is Coulter as Corrupt as Clinton?” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-64.

[4]               See Vanity: Ann Coulter’s Quest for Glory, 2012, available as a free download at www.coulterwatch.com/vanity.pdf.

[5]               See “Ignorant Ideologue” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-br.

[6]               See The Beauty of Conservatism, 2011, available as a free download at www.coulterwatch.com/beauty.pdf.

[7]               See “HRC: A Caricature of the Left” at http://wp.me/p4scHf-94.

[8]               See Never Trust Ann Coulter – at ANY Age, 2013, available as a free download at www.coulterwatch.com/never.pdf.