All posts by CoulterWatch

About CoulterWatch

CoulterWatch promotes the proposition that Conservatism can only endure as a viable and vibrant movement if it maintains a commitment to the core character traits of honor and integrity, honesty and virtue. Ann Coulter – the “Goddess of the Conservative Movement” and a “Conservative Icon” – has proven herself unreliable, unscrupulous, and untrustworthy. Currently, five books are available as free PDF downloads: The Beauty of Conservatism at www.coulterwatch.com/beauty.pdf. The Gospel According to Ann Coulter at www.coulterwatch.com/gospel.pdf. Vanity: Ann Coulter’s Quest for Glory at www.coulterwatch.com/vanity.pdf Never Trust Ann Coulter – at ANY Age at www.coulterwatch.com/never.pdf. Propaganda: Orwell in the Age of Ann Coulter at www.coulterwatch.com/propaganda.pdf. #NeverTrump: Coulter’s Alt-Right Utopia, at http://amzn.to/2fzA9Mr.

Coulter’s Berkeley Bluff

Ann Coulter has been undeservedly hailed a valiant heroine for the Battle at Berkeley, yet her perceived defiance of leftist mobs and censoring administrators was not really at all courageous.

In fact, Coulter never expected or intended to give a speech at Berkeley! It was all a clever ruse and publicity stunt. Bravado, not bravery, marked Coulter’s Berkeley bluff.

After successfully portraying herself as a courageous free speech warrior – having gotten exactly what she wanted: publicity and a new image – Coulter did not give what would have been a truly “free” (no honorarium) speech in what she herself insisted was the “safest place on earth” for her.

Before getting into details, let’s recall that Berkeley has justifiably been almost universally condemned (except by some on the far left) for not allowing Coulter to speak. Nevertheless, Coulter is not the courageous heroine she would have you believe her to be.

Coulter’s Last Stand

I gave Ann an Alamo Award in 1997 for her unquestioned courage – at that time – in speaking truth to power, at the risk of losing her livelihood. At Berkeley, Coulter risked nothing whatsoever. Indeed, regardless of the outcome, Coulter expected to gain that which she sought: publicity and an image of being a heroic-martyr.

This epic battle of wills pitting liberty lovers against academic censors saturated national news coverage. Coulter’s gambit was actually just a PR stunt from the very beginning. And it worked.

Her #BerkeleyBound mission perfectly suited her purposes. Whether or not she spoke, she won. If she spoke, she was heroic; if not, she was a courageous martyr. Win-win.

The Washington Post reported: “In a classic case of ‘heads I win, tails you lose,’ conservative provocateur Ann Coulter emerged from last week’s events at the University of California at Berkeley as a free-speech martyr.”

Coulter couldn’t lose. That was the plan from the start. It was all braggadocio and bravado, a marketing ploy explicitly designed to reinvigorate her reputation and career.

Lauded as the courageous conservative facing down Berkley rioters and university censors, the truth is otherwise: Coulter never intended to speak at Berkeley.

“Pranav Jandhyala, who founded [YAF’s] UC Berkeley chapter,” “acknowledged that it was now clear that Coulter’s intention wasn’t to engage in any real dialogue, but to prove her own point.”

Of course, YAF also wanted to use the entire scenario to promote itself and highlight the rampant trampling of the First Amendment on college campuses (and elsewhere).

Coulter’s Glory

Everything Coulter says or does accrues to Coulter’s benefit. That which she seeks most of all is glory. She became addicted to fame and power in late 1997 and she has never recovered from that pathology.

Coulter generated a tremendous amount of positive media coverage with her Berkeley kerfuffle, far more than during her last book tour. She gloried in her glory on The View.

Milking the situation for all it was worth, Coulter told KTVU that she was better than Milo Yiannopoulos: “I’m not even Milo. I mean, for Pete’s sake, I’m a twelve-time New York Times’ bestselling author.” (Actually, she’s only a ten-time bestselling author, as even McInnes admitted at Berkeley.)

Coulter also likened herself to heroic figures in the past: Martin Luther King, Jr. and Winston Churchill!

She boasted to Tucker Carlson: “By the way, I am giving the speech. What are they going to do, arrest me? They can put me in the Birmingham jail.” (King would have rejected both Coulter’s racial paradigm and anti-Christian behavior.)

The host on KTVU asked Coulter the most pertinent question imaginable: “Some people would say, ‘Ann Coulter is all about Ann Coulter. Ann Coulter wants to promote Ann Coulter. Ann Coulter wants to come here – and she’s gonna come here on Thursday – and she’s gonna be a rabble-rouser and she’s gonna try to incite people.’”

Usually in situations like this, Coulter reverts to using Jesus as her model of civil disobedience (upturning tables in temple, brood of vipers speech) to justify her own vitriol. On this occasion, she argued, “Winston Churchill was promoting himself with that ‘We shall fight on the beaches’ speech.”

Then she stridently claimed, “The idea that I’m trying to get publicity off of this event could not be further from the truth on the facts.”

Timeline

Here’s the actual timeline of events according to Coulter and her speech sponsors:

BridgeUSA and YAF sponsored Coulter’s speech. She knew – given riots at Milo Yiannopoulos’ event in February – that she wouldn’t be giving her speech. The university and/or rioters would surely shut it down.

Berkeley placed ever-demanding restrictions on Coulter’s speech. She insisted that YAF concede to every single demand. Coulter could not quit. She had to wait – and wait patiently she did (because she knew it was inevitable) – for Berkeley to cancel, making her a martyr. She told Tucker Carlson, “Well, they changed the rules every ten minutes. I kept agreeing to all of their conditions – they were hoping I would cancel.”

In this high-stakes game of chicken, Berkeley flinched. Berkeley caved and cancelled her speech, enabling Coulter to play the heroic victim of institutional censorship and mob rule.

Under intense media and political pressure, Berkeley offered an alternative date, which Coulter refused, keeping the pressure on Berkeley. Her sponsors filed lawsuits.

Coulter demanded her original speaking slot, insisted she would speak, and suggested she would speak in Sproul Plaza, if need be.

Berkeley announced that it could not ensure the safety of the speaker and attendees. Then YAF folded. Coulter wrote, “We were on [the] cusp of victory and YAF backed down, refused to seek a court order or allow the College Republicans to request a court order.  It’s a sad day for free speech.”

Coulter’s sponsors caved. Coulter was incensed. Why? She wanted Berkeley to cave and herself be vindicated as a heroine. Instead, she would have to speak outdoors, something she did not want to do.

In the end, Gavin McInnes, her good friend and latest knight in shining armor, gave Coulter’s extremely-short speech on her behalf in Sproul Plaza. Coulter was there, in Berkeley, but not at that peaceful event. Afterward, she joined McInnes and supporters for drinks at George and Walt’s.

Broken Vow

To KTVU, Coulter vowed: “I was invited to give a speech. I have a contract to give a speech. I’m giving a speech.” To the Hollywood Reporter, Coulter swore, “Yes, it was officially banned, but they can’t stop me. I’m an American. I have constitutional rights.”

Just the night before, Coulter told Sean Hannity: “I do think it is possible that the Berkeley campus will be the safest place on the face of the earth because so many people are flying in to defend me.”

At the airport, Coulter said, “Safest place on earth for me, but these cowards! Who has a better idea of what the campus is gonna be like than the person who’s going there as opposed to the moron sitting in Washington?”

So – both the day before and the afternoon of “the speech” – Coulter declared Berkeley “the safest place on earth for me,” yet she assigned her speech to McInnes! She gave him that assignment the day before the speech, which she emailed to him.

Coulter is there, but does not speak herself?

Gavin McInnes tweeted the day before the speech: “The @AnnCoulter event in Berkeley is NOT canceled. I will be speaking tomorrow with @Lauren_Southern @FaithGoldy @BrittPettibone #POYB.”

Two days earlier, Coulter tweeted: “Nice day for an outdoor speech at Berkeley,” implying she would give her speech in the plaza, if necessary. Coulter told AP, “I have my flights, so I thought I might stroll around the graveyard of the First Amendment.”

Five days later, Coulter told Lou Dobbs, “I would have preferred to have spoken.”

Coulter regularly advertises upcoming speeches on her website as soon as she has them booked. She never advertised her Berkeley speech on her own website – even though YAF did on theirs – complete with date, time, and location. Why?

She never intended to speak. It was all a charade. She wanted credit for courage without being courageous. She knew Berkeley would give in.

Nothing changed between Milo and Ann and the results were wholly predictable – and expected.

Coulter’s Speech

If Coulter really planned on speaking, then she must have prepared an astonishing speech. Indeed, Coulter boasted to Carlson that it would be “a searingly brilliant speech on immigration.”

McInnes said, “Ann sent me her speech,” and then he read it, breaking in with his own running commentary. Coulter’s actual speech was less than four minutes and contained nothing new, except for her comparison of immigrants to rat feces (contained in the lead paragraph). It contained zero references to Berkeley.

Hardly “searingly brilliant.”

Coulter told Carlson that her speech was about enforcement of existing immigration laws. Her speech – given by McInnes – never addressed that issue.

Earlier that week, Coulter said she would be updating her speech. Pretty good gig, $20,000 for a four-minute speech.

McInnes introduced her speech, saying, “Ann was betrayed. She was censored. They put all the legal onus upon her so that if someone gets hurt tonight, it would have been on her head. Now it’s on my head.”

If it was so dangerous that Coulter couldn’t give her speech, why did she have McInnes risk his life – and the lives of those in the audience – to do so on her behalf?

But what did she say shortly before McInnes gave her speech? “Safest place on earth for me, but these cowards!”

Yet, Coulter wasn’t about to nail her 95 Theses on Berkeley’s wall. She let her friend do it for her, while she took all the credit.

Speech Sponsors

The non-partisan BridgeUSA and conservative Young America’s Foundation co-sponsored Coulter’s speech. [Both YAF and BridgeUSA were non-responsive to my interview requests.]

The founder of BridgeUSA explained why his organization co-sponsored Coulter’s speech – “to facilitate dialogue between political opposites.” Ironically, he wrote: “Free speech isn’t about provocation, violence, publicity stunts, selling books or testing limits” – precisely what Coulter does on a regular basis.

Further, BridgeUSA “refuse[s] to invoke the right to free speech to inflame, attack and generate publicity” – exactly the modus operandi Coulter has embraced for the past two decades.

He added, “instigating controversy for publicity does not fix a broken system,” yet BridgeUSA sponsored a self-proclaimed provocateur and polemicist to do just that. How well would David Duke be received by the Black Panthers?

At CPAC 2002, Coulter posited the notion that she should keep going further and further right to draw the culture and the left toward her. Shortly thereafter, Coulter coined a series of “rules” for talking to a liberal: being as outrageous as you can be to inflame them. No reconciliation there.

Alheli Picazo writes, “People like Coulter and Yiannopoulos aren’t brought to campus to contribute substance – hearing either speak for a few minutes quickly puts lie to claims of their brilliance. They are skilled antagonists who can reliably incite backlash from a perceived enemy.”

It is unclear why Coulter is the best spokesman for YAF on anything, even immigration (the purported topic of the series of speeches spearheaded by BridgeUSA).

YAF has 100 speakers on its roster. Only five speakers are listed for immigration; Coulter is not among them. Were none of the actual “experts” on immigration available?

Moreover, only eight YAF speakers require an honorarium of $20K or more. Surely YAF could have selected a better representative of conservatism for less money.

YAF previously sponsored Milo Yiannopoulos, who isn’t even listed on its roster. Coulter claimed she is not like Yiannopoulos, yet they are both leaders of the Alt-Right and share an Alt-Right worldview. Is YAF in agreement with those views?

Unanswered Questions

One YAF tweet was particularly confusing: “At no time was there ever a space or lecture time confirmed for Ann Coulter to speak.” Yet YAF’s event page listed the location, date, and time as 110 Sprout Hall from 7:00 to 8:30 pm on 4/27/17. What really happened?

Would it be fair to say that YAF chose both Yiannopoulos and Coulter to generate controversy, anticipating a backlash which would then highlight the thuggish behavior on the Left and their threats to the First Amendment?

Coulter’s Courage

Conservative heroine Ann Coulter has proven herself a cowardly fraud. The free speech battle at Berkeley was merely a publicity stunt for this polemicist and provocateur.

As noted above, Coulter exhibited genuine courage in 1996-97. Hence her Alamo Award.

Since then, Coulter has gotten edgier and edgier while simultaneously abandoning her principles and ideals. In doing so, Coulter has actually embraced her fears. Now she is desperately grasping for the glory she once had and which increasingly eludes her.

What she fears most is facing the truth about the person she has become. Moreover, Coulter fears that she is beyond redemption, so why not continue on her downward path. (Ann, My Redeemer Lives, and so does yours!)

Ann Coulter isn’t a voice for freedom or free speech. Ann Coulter is a voice for Ann Coulter.

[#NeverTrump: Coulter’s Alt-Right Utopia examines the origins, worldview, and impact of the Alt-Right movement. It is now available on Amazon at http://amzn.to/2fzA9Mr.]

Advertisements

RIP Nell Husbands Martin Coulter

The death of Mother devastated Ann Coulter.

Following Mother’s death, Ann published a very personal, poignant, and often political eulogy.

In her eulogy, Ann mourned the loss her of “true No. 1 fan” who “was the biggest fan of” her entire family. Mother “was a little love machine, spreading warmth and joy wherever she went.” Mother loved hugging her daughter and telling her “what a wonderful, precious daughter” Ann was.

Ann felt safe and secure in her mother’s love: “My whole life, as soon as I’d see my mother’s face I’d know I was safe, whether I was a little girl lost in a department store or a big girl with a problem, who needed her mother.”

This Mother-Daughter love was very real.

A devoted daughter, Ann took excellent care of Mother during her declining years as she battled ovarian cancer. Ann even postponed publication of her seventh book, Guilty, to tend to her mother’s needs.

Ann understandably misses Mother’s “constant, unconditional love.”

In many ways, Ann emulates Mother (often to an extreme). In other ways, Ann repudiates Mother (often in extremist ways). Today, Mother would be both proud of, and perturbed by, her daughter.

Like Mother, Like Daughter

Ann and Mother both cherished their New England and Southern roots. Coulter’s prized genealogical roots all trace through Mother: New England Puritans and Daughters of the American Revolution, coupled with a solid Southern heritage.

Mother wanted to be specifically remembered for her “contributions to the Republican Party, the New Canaan Republican Town Committee and the Daughters of the American Revolution.”

“Mother may have thought her most notable characteristic was her Republican activism,” Coulter wrote, emphasizing her “deep-seated political activism” and being “always delighted to be with people talking about politics.”

Sounds a lot like Ann.

Mother was very proud to be “a direct descendant of at least a dozen patriots who served the cause of the American Revolution.” In fact, she “traced her lineage on both sides of her family to Puritan nonconformists who came to America in 1633 seeking religious freedom on a ship led by Pastor Thomas Hooker.”

Coulter, as she typically does, takes everything to extremes. Ann is so proud of her heritage as a Daughter of the American Revolution that she regards herself as a “settler” – and a “Native American.”

Ann also regards herself – a WASP – as a true American. (Hence her nativist and xenophobic impulses.) She treasures her Puritan roots, making her a self-identified authority on all things American.

Moreover, Ann is proud of Mother’s Southern roots, praising Mother’s “fighting Kentucky spirit” and “charming Southern accent.”

Coulter lauds the Confederacy whenever she can and tweeted (8/3/16): “Southerners accounted for 38 percent of those killed in Iraq and 47 percent in Afghanistan.” She then asked Gov. Haley: “How about Nikki put their flag back up?”

In other words, Coulter contends that Southerners who died in combat in Iraq and Afghanistan were fighting for the Confederacy!

Coulter continued: “The Confederate flag won’t lead to thousands of dead and maimed Americans, as Muslim immigration does. The only danger posed by the Confederate flag is that media elites will hold the South in even greater contempt than they already do, assuming that’s possible.”

Yes, Coulter equates Southerners with Confederates and believes that our brave military members from the South are currently fighting for the Confederacy and not for America!

Thus, Coulter has become the face of the Alt-Right movement, seeking restoration of a distinctly white WASP America while, simultaneously, promoting a neo-Confederate worldview.

Unlike Mother …

Mother was generous. Mother “probably contributed hundreds of thousands of dollars to various conservative outfits over the years.” Ann, not so much.

Ann’s generosity extends to helping those who can help her.

If she can get something out of it – self-promotion, praise, paycheck, book sale, networking connection – Ann will do it. Otherwise – if it does not personally benefit her – forget it.

Mother was compassionate. Since she “was a little girl,” Ann saw that “friends, relatives and neighbors would bring their problems to Mother.” Why? Because Mother “had a rare combination of being completely moral and completely nonjudgmental at the same time” and would give “good counsel” without making others feel worse about themselves.

As for Ann, well, her entire career is based upon wounding other people. Given a choice between fact and polemic, Ann usually chooses the latter.

Mother valued human life. She was a “gentle lady” who “never had an unkind word for anyone.” In fact, “Father would always smile and say, ‘Your mother defends everyone.’”

Mother was proud of Ann for her pro-life speech presented before a Roman Catholic women’s group in New Canaan, CT, and later published in Human Life Review and various essay collections nationwide.

Now, though claiming, “I am totally pro-life,” Ann passionately attacks conservatives and Christians for pursuing a pro-life agenda.

As far back as the late 1990s, Coulter began attacking pro-lifers for purely political purposes. In reality, Coulter would have pro-lifers do nothing and let the unborn fend for themselves!

Mother was a devout Christian. Faith figured prominently in Mother’s life. She was very active in her local church and her faith was important enough to her that she faithfully turned her daughter to Presbyterianism.

In her moving eulogy, Ann emphasized Mother’s Republican activism and DAR lineage. Surprisingly, Ann missed Mother’s Christian beliefs. She utterly ignored her Mother’s faith.

Though claiming, “I’m an extraordinarily good Christian,” Ann has attacked Christians for most of the past two decades. She even attacks Christians for being godly!

Ann lovingly gave honor to Mother with her words, but in her life Coulter dishonors Mother.

Gone Astray

As I wrote last year:

I suspect that Ann never really believed in the Christian ideals and conservative principles she espoused. Indeed, she was not the “true believer” everyone believed her to be. Rather, she adopted those ideals and principles from her parents, whom she loved. Her father died in 2008; her mother in 2009. Since then, Ann’s moral and spiritual compass no longer exists. Ann is being tossed to and fro by the pragmatism of the moment and the passing whims of her heart.”

“Coulter hates conservatives, Christians, and pro-lifers for being what they are because she once believed she belonged in those categories. Now, whenever these people of principle act on their principles, she is put to shame as a charlatan. They expose Coulter for who she really is – a fraud.”

“Will Ann always be a fraud? Only God knows and only He can bring meaning and direction to her life. Unless and until Ann courageously faces the reality of who she has become and fights the good fight of faith to become the person God has called her to be, she will always be filled with hate and fear.”

“May God grant Ann repentance and transform her heart.”

Yes, Ann Hart Coulter has, indeed, lost the moorings of her parents’ presence, principles, and piety. Her heart is now turned in the wrong direction, away from God and opposed to His will. Whether or not she knows it, Ann has rejected God and His will for her life.

Instead, the “Emperor-God Trump” is her Savior. Coulter has rejected God and arrogantly placed her will above His.

Coulter recently said that with Mother’s passing, she can now say anything she wants to. She claimed, “I really am the freest person in America right now. I can say anything.”

The Easter season reminds us that we are all equal before the cross and that we must humble ourselves before the One who saves.

Obviously, humility eludes Ann. Her hubris abhors humility because 1) she rejects its efficacy and 2) she regards it as a sign of weakness.

Here’s the rub: Without humility, salvation is impossible. We must humbly come to the cross to accept God’s love and salvation. Until we do, we are not saved and we will never have peace.

Our Father’s Love

Ann praised Mother for her “unconditional love.” Mother was loving – and loved.

Mother’s love actually points to our heavenly Father’s perfect unconditional love. But only God perfectly expresses and exhibits unconditional love. Mothers can come close, but imperfectly.

Our Father has a perfect love, presence, and power. Trust Him!

In her eulogy, Ann expressed reassurance that Mother and Father were reunited in heaven and that she would see them both in time.

Revelation 21:4 reveals: “And God will wipe away every tear from their eyes; there shall be no more death, nor sorrow, nor crying. There shall be no more pain, for the former things have passed away.”

I pray that God wipes away all of Ann’s tears, from whatever source.

[A new book, #NeverTrump: Coulter’s Alt-Right Utopia, examines the origins, worldview, and impact of the Alt-Right movement. It is now available on Amazon at http://amzn.to/2fzA9Mr.]

Ann Coulter – Assad Truther

Bizarre. Erstwhile neoconservative turned face of the Alt-Right has now gone TRUTHER on us.

Ann Coulter is an Assad Truther!

Coulter claims that Syria’s WMD attack never happened and photos of dead children are fake. If it did happen, America should not get involved, even though “half a million people have died already.” So, Syrian genocide is OK. (Coulter already supports Christian genocide.)

If Syria did commit a WMD attack, Coulter argues that “it wasn’t because they violated some, some horrible, you know, laws of war and humanity.” Except, of course, that is precisely what WMD use violates – “laws of war and humanity” that were enacted post-World War I and strengthened thereafter.

Bashar al-Assad is a (relatively) good guy and a friend of the United States. (Remember, only half-a-million dead.) Assad’s father was a butcher, too. Coulter wrote:

“Assad is one of the least bad leaders in the entire Middle East. He’s not a murderous thug like Saddam, has no rape rooms, isn’t into jihad, protects Christians and is fighting ISIS. He provided us with intelligence on al-Qaida after 9/11. He does not have crazy Islamic police slapping women around or throwing gays off buildings. (That would be our beloved ally, Saudi Arabia.)”

American generals are right out of Dr. Strangelove. “But, it’s been interesting watching so many of these generals straight out of Dr. Strangelove pushing for war with Syria, war with Russia, war with North Korea.” (Coulter is strangely prone to denigrate American war heroes and their families. It must stem from her Alt-Right ideology.)

Coulter questions why Assad would use chemical weapons. That’s not strange, Ann. Assad’s father leveled an entire city (Hama) in 1982 to demonstrate his power and crush resistance. Like father, like son. (Coulter should stop listening to leftist talking points and think for herself.)

Consequently, Coulter demands that Trump not wag the dog. She cannot see that #AmericaFirst includes a strong American military projecting American power against America’s enemies.

Coulter hates the rest of the world so much that she opposes Christians on overseas missions. Now, she wants America to cower within its borders (Fortress America) and let evil rise unopposed throughout the world.

To justify condoning evil she has gone truther, 1) denying evil exists, or 2) if evil does exist, it’s not so bad, and 3) evil out there is neither America’s fault nor America’s responsibility.

Most Americans, Ann, know the truth about Assad and they are coming to know the truth about you.

[A new book, #NeverTrump: Coulter’s Alt-Right Utopia, examines the origins, worldview, and impact of the Alt-Right movement. It is now available on Amazon at http://amzn.to/2fzA9Mr.]

Got Racism?

Renowned for her racism, Ann Coulter again heralded the racial superiority of the white male over minorities (particularly women).

got-racism

In her column (1/11/17), Coulter asserted (emphasis added), “the 21st-century white American male is the most pacific – and least rock-throwing – Y-chromosomed being ever to walk the Earth..”

In contrast, Coulter contends, “Black women accusing white men of throwing rocks at them are thinking of what they would do.”

Moreover, Coulter declares rock throwing at Occupy Wall Street events was not committed by the “directionless, white (alleged) ‘men’” but “was done by their minority backup.”

During the last presidential cycle, Coulter claimed that she deserved a racism credit because of her good intentions. Her deepest desire is to recreate a WASP America, arguing that true diversity is white. Oh, and the superiority of WASP culture can be traced to its genes.

Coulter has become the high priestess of the Alt-Right movement, yet denies that its worldview and agenda emulate those of David Duke. She even confused the Confederate and American flags.

Coulter’s racist views keep bubbling out in her tweets, columns, and books because she regards herself as genetically superior to other people.

[A new book, #NeverTrump: Coulter’s Alt-Right Utopia, examines the origins, worldview, and impact of the Alt-Right movement. It is now available on Amazon at http://amzn.to/2fzA9Mr.]

Ann Coulter Can’t Count, Read or Reason

In a stunning twitterstorm, Ann Coulter proved that she cannot count, read, or reason.

ann-coulter-cant-count-read-or-reason

Coulter was outed on January 5th, with a big controversy over her three-character tweet – “14!” – which shed obviously meant to identify the number of days until Trump’s inauguration but which was misconstrued as a white supremacist code word.

Defending herself, an irate Coulter unleashed her fury in a 2 ½-hour Twitter tirade (emphasis added):

6:16 pm – As I have been doing periodically since January 2016, today I tweeted out the number of days left in Obama’s presid… twitter.com/i/web/status/8…
6:17 pm – Inasmuch as today is Day 14 on the Obama Countdown Clock, I tweeted “14.” https://t.co/ArR3JMApGV
6:20 pm – Unknown to me, but VERY well known to hysterics, “14” has some mystical significance for the 5 or 6 ppl who believe themselves to be Nazis.
6:21 pm – Being the target of idiotic attacks can be fun! But being called a Nazi – even by ppl who are really really really dumb – isn’t so fun.
6:21 pm – The ringleader, a CUNY prof who specializes in – you’ll never guess! – social activism on the taxpayer’s dime, can’t figure out Twitter.
6:22 pm – This loathsome creature takes taxpayer money in order to waste students’ time and ensure that they are unemployable.
6:23 pm – His students don’t know how to read or write, but a guy too stupid to use Twitter, count or follow the news, is teaching them how to protest
6:246 pm – This charlatan ADVERTISES: I teach students to make life hell for taxpayers, white ppl and workers. (But not learn anything useful.)
6:24 pm – The others work at HuffPo & Mediaite, under the insane delusion that some day it will read to a paying job. (It won’t, Jenna.)
6:26 pm – To sh*t-for-brains, desperate hysterics: If you put your head on the desk & think really, really, really hard, I be… twitter.com/i/web/status/8…
7:57 pm – No, 14 days, moron. See “Obama Countdown Clock” which I’ve been using for my countdown tweets since LAST JANUARY.… twitter.com/i/web/status/8…
8:49 pm – 14: Angus Johnston’s percentile on the verbal SAT. twitter.com/studentactivis…
8:49 pm – 14: The last age at which girls were nice to Angus Johnston. twitter.com/studentactivis…

Coulter seemed particularly incensed over being called a Nazi, an appellation which actually deserves some consideration.

(It seemed obvious to me that “14!” was part of a countdown and not a secret code word – and that she had simply miscounted – but her critics’ confusion is understandable given Coulter’s prominence in the Alt-Right movement and her ideological affiliation with David Duke.)

Counting

As for counting, well, Coulter needs some lessons.

Her Twitter counteroffensive ignored this self-evident truth:

20 days – 5 days = 15 (not 14) days!

The countdown clock itself read 14 days plus. (It’s always the plus which seems to escape Coulter’s grasp.)

Nevertheless, Coulter has accused Republicans of stupidity, saying, “It’s not even just cowardice on the part of Republicans. It’s abject stupidity. It’s an inability to do math.”

Indeed, her rebuttals merely proved the point of her critics. Coulter’s error could easily be corrected by 1) counting on one’s fingers, 2) accurately reading source material, and 3) reason.

Both literacy and numeracy appear to evade Coulter. She even thinks the Great Depression was a time of unparalleled prosperity for America. Now that’s bad counting.

Reading

Actually reading her source material would have given her the clue. Her justifying tweet contains the answer to her error. Immediately above the countdown clock, the text reads, “we also have the countdown to 12 noon the same day, when inauguration actually occurs.”

countdown-2

In other words, Coulter was using the clock counting down to midnight, not noon (when the inauguration actually takes place). Each countdown is X days plus hours, minutes, and seconds.

In the military, it would be called 14 days and a wake-up, meaning more than 14 days. (A partial day counts as a day.)

Coulter should have used the noon countdown clock to determine the time until Trump’s inauguration (as plainly stated on the clock).

By her own account, for a year Coulter has been counting down to the day of the inauguration, not to the inauguration (and failing to see the difference).

The next day, Coulter – with rapid-fire humorous tweets – attempted to deflect attention from her miscalculation, to no avail (emphasis added):

3:25 pm – 13! (which is not a satanic, Nazi, Klan or reference, Lindsey Ellefson & Angus Johnston, you pathetic morons.)
3:28 pm – 13! Hey @Mediaite! Is it the number of brain cells in Lindsey Ellefson’s head??? https://t.co/une7ya8rUM
3:28 pm – 13! Could it be the jersey number of Russian hockey player Pavel Datsyuk as a secret code to Putin??? Get on this… twitter.com/i/web/status/8…
3:30 pm – 13! Is it the average number of times a day Angus Johnston swears at his parents for naming him Angus? https://t.co/sUwm1PW8Ko
3:30 pm – 13! Hey Angus! Could this be a reference to our 13th president, who had SLAVES??? https://t.co/jivwOYJ6mf
3:32 pm – 13! Is it the average number of years Angus Johnston’s students have to live with their parents after they graduat… twitter.com/i/web/status/8…
3:34 pm – 13! Hey sleuths! It’s *Friday* the 13th! A cryptic message to Jason to put on his hockey mask fire up the chainsaw… twitter.com/i/web/status/8…
3:36 pm – 13! Is it a subtle reference to the number of hours liberals spend lying about me per day??? https://t.co/2P7e7Xq1OU
3:37 pm – 13! Is it a DOG WHISTLE referencing the average number of fake news stories by HuffPo per day? https://t.co/qHzKNmgmNv
3:38 pm – 13! An unlucky number … unless it’s the number of days Obama has left in office!!!!! https://t.co/O8dKPE8DdZ

Reasoning

Humor notwithstanding, Coulter replicated her mistake from the previous day.

Berating her critics for their paucity of brain cells, Coulter showed herself immune from reason.

countdown-1

Let’s read the countdown clock she used.

It reads, “Time until Obama leaves office.”

It gives the days, hours, minutes, and seconds.

Let’s reason: Once the 13 days have expired, there remains over eight hours “until Obama leaves office.”

In other words, more than 13 days (i.e., 13 days plus part of a 14th day). It’s not in 13 days, it’s on the 14th day.

So, Coulter’s critics – and everyone else who knows how to count on their fingers – knows it’s 14 days until Trump becomes president.

(This isn’t like a birthday, which is traditionally marked at midnight, but a legal ceremony with a specific time of implementation.)

Coulter’s critics were rash – but understandably so – to impart a nefarious meaning to Coulter’s “14!” tweet. For her part, Coulter has again demonstrated that she doesn’t handle criticism very well, is quick to justify herself, and loathe to admit error.

[A new book, #NeverTrump: Coulter’s Alt-Right Utopia, examines the origins, worldview, and impact of the Alt-Right movement. It is now available on Amazon at http://amzn.to/2fzA9Mr.]

RIP John V. Coulter

Ann Coulter’s world fell apart when her parents died: Father in 2008, Mother in 2009. Though their passing was long anticipated, one can never fully prepare for the death of loved ones. Their absence remains a deep void in Ann’s life.

rip-john-vincent-coulter

As Ann put it, “Your parents are your whole world when you are a child. You only recognize what is unique about them when you get older and see how the rest of the world diverges from your standard of normality.”

Her parents were Ann’s moral compass. From them, she derived her set of personal values, moral standards, political views, and religious beliefs. Since their passing, Ann has haphazardly abandoned those values, standards, views, and beliefs.

In 2008, the family patriarch – John V. Coulter – passed away. With his passing, Ann lost a sense of safety, security, and stability. Daddy passed away after years of declining health from dementia, a tragic and traumatic time for the whole family.

In her eulogy, Ann provided poignant personal anecdotes but also exploited her father’s memory to attack liberals and defend herself.

Ann wrote:

“John Vincent Coulter was of the old school, a man of few words, the un-Oprah, no crying or wearing your heart on your sleeve, and reacting to moments of great sentiment with a joke. Or as we used to call them: men. …

“He hated unions because of their corrupt leadership, ripping off the members for their own aggrandizement. But he had more respect for genuine working men than anyone I’ve ever known. He was, in short, the molecular opposite of John Edwards. …

“Of course, toward the end, he probably didn’t even remember he was a Catholic. But on the bright side, he didn’t remember that Teddy Kennedy was a Catholic, either. …

Within her moving eulogy, Ann repeatedly attacked liberals and concluded with a wish that liberals be smited: “Now Daddy is with Joe McCarthy and Ronald Reagan. I hope they stop laughing about the Reds long enough to talk to God about smiting some liberals for me.”

One blogger was inspired to pen this poem:

Now I lay me down to sleep,

I pray the Lord my Dad to keep;

I also ask liberals He kill,

What I can’t do, I pray God will.

Ann’s words – and the blogger’s interpretation of those words – suggest that Ann is unfamiliar with basic Christianity: our Father in heaven is a God of love who gave His only Son to save and redeem the lost and the broken (John 3:16).

May God grant healing in the deepest recesses of Ann’s heart. May He bring Ann’s internal compass into alignment with the North Star of Jesus Christ. And may His grace and peace be upon her.

[A new book, #NeverTrump: Coulter’s Alt-Right Utopia, examines the origins, worldview, and impact of the Alt-Right movement. It is now available on Amazon at http://amzn.to/2fzA9Mr.]

Ann Coulter, Christian, Part 237

Is über-Christian Ann Coulter, author of Godless and Demonic, a (in her own words) “fake Christian?”

ann-coulter-christian-part-237

One could be forgiven for reaching that conclusion.

Perhaps Coulter’s tweets can shed some light. Her first and only Christmas tweet in 2016 proclaimed not the gospel but her political views on immigration: “My Christmas card: 7-Eleven Men’s Room Door, Bonner Springs, Kansas, today …” (Build the Wall).

Though she left Christ out of Christmas, what about Easter? Her 2016 Easter sunrise tweet – “Happy Easter! Thanks for eternal life, Jesus! And God bless this sweet Muslim martyred in Your name” – linked to a feature on a Muslim martyr.

While praising Jesus for salvation, Ann was joyful over a moderate Muslim who was martyred for seeking unity between people of different faiths. Asad Shah, a “devout Muslim,” never knew Jesus and was not saved. Jubilation?

In this year’s iteration of her (almost) annual Kwanzaa column (virtually identical to her 2013 version), Coulter concluded with these words (all caps): “MERRY CHRISTMAS, FELLOW CHRISTIANS!”

It is through the Prince of peace that mankind can experience true peace. Yet Coulter prefers political salvation for America and wishes a “Merry Christmas” to her “fellow Christians.”

Actually, the Christmas season is a spectacular time to introduce the Savior of the world to those in the world who do not yet know Him. Wishing non-Christians a “Merry Christmas” with a heart of love can, at the very least, point them toward Jesus. Moreover, it offers us an opportunity to share our faith with non-believers.

Christmas is all about the gospel of Christ, whose birth has been celebrated for two millennia. Favorite traditional Christmas songs (Joy to the World, God Rest Ye Merry Gentlemen, etc.) celebrate the incarnation of the Messiah into our world, our lives, and our hearts.

The most well-known Bible verse, John 3:16, encapsulates the gospel message: “ For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life.” Our Father’s gift of Christmas was followed by His gift on the cross.

Jesus entered our world, not to see a “devout Muslim” martyred for saying “Merry Christmas” or to promote an anti-immigration agenda, but, rather, to save mankind from itself, and, in the process, break down barriers and bring reconciliation.

Reconciliation is the very last thing Coulter wants. Coulter began 2005 reveling to a reporter, “Oh, it was so much fun this year, because saying ‘Merry Christmas’ is like saying ‘Fuck you!’”

The Christmas spirit still eludes Coulter.