Tag Archives: Andrew McCarthy

Bully Boy Trump!

The bully, Donald Trump, proved himself just a bloviating boy. In the end, bullies usually do.

David French related two key moments in the Houston debate.

Bull Boy Trump

First, The Donald insisted that Rubio “Be quiet. Just be quiet.” Why? Trump fears the truth, especially about himself.

As French put it, “An alpha male commands respect; a bully tries to rule by fear. But when no one is actually afraid, the bully looks foolish. When the bully demands silence but instead receives a sarcastic retort, he reveals that that his ‘strength’ was a mirage.”

George Will puts it this way: “Like all bullies, Trump is a coward, and like all those who feel the need to boast about being strong and tough, he is neither.”

Second, The Donald insisted that Cruz apologize. Why? Trump wants the truth, especially about himself, to go away. Trump wants to suppress the truth! Intimidation is his primary tactic to achieve that end.

French noted, “Once again, the bully made his demand, this time for an apology. Cruz refused to comply, and went on to make exactly the right point: that Trump would be the Democrats’ best ‘Republican’ friend.”

Rubio correctly characterized Trump as a “con artist,” a truth many have heralded since before Trump launched his presidential campaign. Cruz astutely noted that Trump cares nothing for the Constitution and would be a Barack Obama in whiteface.

As I and others have pointed out before, Trump is a braggart and a bully who holds neither conservative principles nor a Christian ethos. Jonah Goldberg argues, “His cheap macho posturing and boasting is simply tacky.”

Trump is, as Andrew McCarthy describes, “a fraud – a liberal Democrat posing as the Republican savior.” Transfixed by Trump, some people still “blindly worship” him as their “Savior”!

McCarthy outlines, on issue after issue, the fraudulent nature of Trump’s politics, persona, and character.

It is important to stress Trump’s own purported self-image, concocted for the moment, to garner votes. After the Houston debate, he claimed, “I’m a strong Christian.” On another occasion, he claimed, “nobody reads the Bible more than me.” Goldberg noted, “Either Donald Trump believes what he said, or he doesn’t. If he does believe this, he’s sufficiently delusional to disqualify himself for public office. If he doesn’t believe this, he thinks his conservative Christian supporters are morons.”

Trump also alleges, “I’m very conservative,” adding, “I’m the most conservative person in the world” on a host of issues. Even New York Magazine called him out on that one.

But Trump is following in the footsteps of his consigliere, Ann Coulter, who regards herself as both an exemplary conservative and extraordinary Christian. Coulter boasts, “I’m like the conservative ayatollah” and “I’m an extraordinarily good Christian.”

As an example of her good judgment and proof of her conservative and Christian credentials, Coulter said that she would actually marry Trump if he were available. Maybe they should (after his fourth divorce). They are made for each other.

[NOTE: This essay was originally posted on BrotherWatch at http://wp.me/p4scHf-df.]

 

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.

Let Them Be Martyred!

Ann Coulter has been actively working against the body of Christ in manifold ways for nearly two decades. Now, she would condemn tens of thousands of Middle Eastern Christians to torture and death – for being Christians – simply to promote her own book and her ideas on immigration.

In fact, Coulter would deny refugee status to the very people those laws were designed to protect: people persecuted for their faith. In that respect (as in many others), Coulter emulates Obama, who, likewise, denies refugee status to Christians suffering persecution, indeed, genocide, in the Middle East.

Martyred

Coulter claims that it’s impossible to only give Christian Syrians refugee status and insists, “We’re not letting in the Christian Syrians. We’re cutting it all off.”[1] Coulter falsely claims, “The asylees and the refugees are 100% fraudulent.” 100%? Coulter has examined every case?

Coulter insists that she would not admit Christian refugees who are fleeing persecution.[2] Why? Because, “We are not a battered women’s shelter.” But America’s refugee laws are explicitly and expressly designed to protect people persecuted for their faith.

1) Refuge laws exist to protect people persecuted for their faith; 2) Coulter admits Christians are being persecuted for their faith; 3) Coulter would deny those persecuted Christians protection.

Coulter said, “Needless to say, the mealy-mouthed, midway position of most Republicans is, ‘we’ll only take the Christians.’ Um, no, no, we don’t want the Christians – alleged Christians – for one thing, we have to take care of our own people first.”[3]

Talk about Christian charity!

America’s Refugee Laws

Coulter, who touts her experience and expertise as an attorney, is wrong (again) about the law. Andrew McCarthy recently explained America’s immigration laws and how they require consideration of religion, determining whether people are being persecuted for their faith. He wrote:

“Under the provision governing asylum (section 1158 of Title 8, U.S. Code), an alien applying for admission must establish that … religion [among other things] … was or will be at least one central reason for persecuting the applicant.”

The definition of refugee “(set forth in Section 1101(a)(42)(A) of Title, U.S. Code) also requires the executive branch to take account of the alien’s religion: The term ‘refugee’ means (A) any person who is outside any country of such person’s nationality … and who is unable or unwilling to return to … that country because of persecution or a well-founded fear of persecution on account of … religion [among other things] …[.]”

McCarthy observes: “In the case of this war, the Islamic State is undeniably persecuting Christians. It is doing so, moreover, as a matter of doctrine. Even those Christians the Islamic State does not kill, it otherwise persecutes as called for by its construction of sharia (observe, for example, the ongoing rape jihad and sexual slavery).”

John Nolte at Breitbart News notes, “Despite President Obama’s sanctimonious proclamation Monday that America does not have a religious test when it comes to admitting refugees into America, the actual math appears to show the complete opposite is true. According to CNSNews.com, who looked at the data, only 53 Syrian Christian refugees have been allowed into America, compared to 2,098 Syrian Muslims.” The Obama administration is perversely permitted entry to Muslims (who are not undergoing systemic persecution) but denying entry to Christians (who are experiencing genocide).

Christian Persecution / Genocide

Christian genocide in the Middle East is on the rise as Islamists seek to create a global caliphate. The Islamic State has seized large amounts of territory and operates with impunity in many nations. Islamists seek the eradication of Christianity and they do so in the most grotesque manner possible.

Nina Shea, the Center for Religious Freedom, says that Christians have been forsaken and abandoned in Syria and Iraq. Shea recommends viewing “Sing a Little Louder,” a video which cautions against the perils of ignoring genocide.

The Hudson Institute reports that “Christians have been executed by the thousands. Christian women and girls are vulnerable to sexual enslavement. Many of their clergy have been assassinated and their churches and ancient monasteries demolished or desecrated. They have been systematically stripped of all their wealth, and those too elderly or sick to flee ISIS-controlled territory have been forcibly converted to Islam or killed, such as an 80-year-old woman who was burned to death for refusing to abide by ISIS religious rules. Pope Francis pronounced their suffering ‘genocide’ in July.”

“ISIS atrocities against Christians became public in June 2014 when the jihadists stamped Christian homes in Mosul with the red letter N for ‘Nazarene’ and began enforcing its ‘convert or die’ policy.” ISIS pursues that policy with the ruthlessness of the Gestapo.

Breitbart reports: “Christian migrants in German asylum centres are living under persistent threat, with many fearing for their lives as the hardline Sunni majority within the migrant population attempts to enforce Sharia law in their new host nation. The situation is so bad that Christians claim they live like “prisoners” in Germany, and some have even returned to Middle East.”

 Reporting last September revealed: “ISIS has already executed thousands of Christians and forced thousands more to flee ancient Christian communities in northeastern Syria and western Iraq, notes the article, adding that the jihadists demand they either convert to Islam, pay an extortionate rate/tax, or face execution, while other Christians are crucified.”

“Christians have reportedly been crucified, beheaded, raped, and forced to convert to Islam by ISIS. All the while, Christian children are being sold into slavery.”

Nolte adds, “there is no question that Syrian Christians have been singled out for the worst kind of persecution under ISIS, including mass beheadings that do not discriminate against innocent women and even small children.”

Open Doors reports that every month, “322 Christians are killed for their faith, 214 churches and Christin properties are destroyed, and 772 forms of violence are committed against Christians.” Iraq and Syria are ranked third and fourth among nations persecuting Christians.

Those are the refugees Coulter callously dismisses as unworthy of aid.

[Please support House Resolution 75.]

Ann Coulter – Anti-Christian?

For over 16 years, Coulter has attacked Christians for being Christian. Coulter gets upset with Christians who actually live their lives according to their faith.

Coulter has called pro-life Christians “fascists” and “cowards”[4] for pursuing a pro-life agenda.

Coulter has defamed Christians missionaries as “traitors” and publicity hounds[5] for doing humanitarian work and promoting the gospel overseas.

Coulter has charged Christians who oppose the gay agenda[6] with being “phony Christians.”

Coulter asserts that Christians who oppose Trump[7] are bossy, proud, and seeking validation from liberals.

Now, Coulter would watch Christians die by torture and massacre – all in pursuit of her political agenda.

Ann Coulter is about as Christian as Barack Obama.[8]

Endnotes:

[1]               Ann Coulter, The Drive Home, KABC, 11/19/15.

[2]               Ann Coulter, John Gibson Show, Fox News, 11/14/15.

[3]               Ann Coulter, Sean Hannity Show, Premiere Radio Networks, 9/14/15.

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

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

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

[7]               See “Coulter Attacks Christians for Being Godly” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-az.

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