Tag Archives: establishment


Ann Coulter obviously never really knew the real Ronald Reagan.

Once a self-described Reagan conservative, Coulter now claims that Donald Trump is the new (and improved) Ronald Reagan.


In her best-failing book,[1] In Trump We Trust,[2] Coulter offers a caricature of the Gipper even as she lambastes conservatives for preserving his legacy.

Chapter 6, “You’re Not Reagan,” is replete with banalities, blunders, and bluster.

Speaking largely to those who never knew Reagan (and the politically disinterested, disaffected, and disillusioned), Coulter offers humor and false analogies in place of facts and reasons. Indeed, this chapter, in particular, employs rationalization instead of rational arguments.

Coulter’s False Claims About Reagan

Among the many ludicrous claims Coulter makes about Reagan, these two are especially laughable.

First, “Reagan was optimistic, but only after he’d been president.

To buttress her claim, Coulter proffered one quote from the Reagan-Carter debate in 1980.

Anyone who knew Reagan saw his eternal optimism. Coulter also asked, “Did Reagan ever blurt out something as insipid as ‘I have an optimistic message’?”

 In his one and only debate with Carter, Reagan actually said, “I am eternally optimistic.” He then addressed racial issues in America and pledged “that we will have total equal opportunity for all people. And I would do everything I could in my power to bring that about.”

Second, “Reagan had a few big ideas but, famously, was not a detail man.

In that same debate, Reagan was extremely familiar with not just the big picture but the details of the various subjects being debated. Reagan was an intellectual populist and visionary who thought before he spoke and his views were thoughtful because he’d given them due consideration. (One need only read his biographies or his journals to discern the depth of his knowledge, understanding, and discernment.)

Reagan could even hold his own with an intellectual giant like William F. Buckley, Jr.

Reagan, famously, knew the details and, more importantly, what those details meant and the underlying principles involved.

Coulter’s False Claims About Reagan Conservatives

Coulter derides Conservatism’s quest for the next Reagan because she does not understand or value the original. She dismisses Reaganism, writing, “(1) Reagan was president in the 1980s, and (2) today’s Republicans don’t seem to remember Reagan.”

 As to her second point, are we to consign to the ash-heap of history George Washington and Abraham Lincoln because many Americans are woefully unfamiliar with those giants?

 As to her first point, Coulter repeatedly reiterated ad infinitum (for Trump supporters, that’s “over, and over, and over again”) that Reagan’s era was 35 years ago and his solutions are old-fashioned, out-of-date, passé, from a bygone age, and no longer applicable to our modern, 21st-century, era. (Sounds remarkably 1960s countercultural, doesn’t it?)

 BT – Before Trump – Coulter claimed, “[Romney is] more conservative than Reagan.”[3] (Now the flavor of this election cycle is Trump.) Coulter also lamented, “These johnny-come-latelies to Reagan worship seem to think that he was Jesus Christ and could do no wrong.”[4]

Coulter added, “I don’t really like groupthink and mob-think. I liked Reagan a lot more when it was unpopular.”[5] (Reagan was always popular.)

 Now, Coulter reviles “Republicans [who] believe they can capture Reagan’s greatness by repeating his answers to the problems of three decades ago.” But Coulter fails to realize that Reagan governed by paying attention to eternal principles.

Human nature hasn’t changed since The Fall. People still want Liberty. The government’s primary legitimate function is security (law and order, national defense). The Constitution remains (nominally) the “law of the land.”

Yet, Coulter told the Miami Herald:

I sent the tweet halfway through a debate where there was no discussion of anything but Ronald Reagan, Israel and abortion.[6] Those things are all fine, but there’s no disagreement about them. All Republicans agree – who doesn’t love Reagan and Israel, and who doesn’t hate abortion? So what’s the point in talking about it? They all go on and on about Ronald Reagan. Yes, he’s great, but Ronald Reagan was 35 years ago. Can we move on?”

Actually, no. Washington, Lincoln, and Reagan were great American leaders, men of character, integrity, vision, and courage. The GOP is (or, at least, used to be) “the party of Lincoln and Reagan.” Trump has effectively jettisoned that legacy down a memory hole in his quest for power.

Nevertheless, Coulter argues, “It’s taken Republicans who aren’t Trump 35 years to become some Frankenstein monster of Reagan.”

 Hailing Trump as the new and improved Reagan, Coulter concluded her Reagan chapter with these words:

 “If history is any guide, in the 2046 election, Republicans will all be campaigning on the issue of who most credibly promises to build a second wall on border, to fortify the Great Wall of Trump.”[7] (Except a President Trump wouldn’t build a Great Wall of Trump.[8])

 Trump is NOT Reagan

Attempting to position Trump as just like (or better than) Reagan, Coulter attempted to favorably compare the two with these claims:

  • “Reagan opposed both the media and his own party to do what was best for the country.”
  • “Reagan refused to accept America’s inevitable decline.”
  • “Reagan was ridiculed for announcing that he would solve seemingly intractable problems, specifically the Cold War.”
  • “Reagan aggressively opposed Republican orthodoxy on a slew of issues: SALT treaties, détente, and the Equal Rights Amendment, to name a few.”
  • “Reagan had a few big ideas but, famously, was not a detail man.” [False – see above]

But Coulter’s observations miss the salient point. Donald Trump is no Ronald Reagan. Trump cannot be trusted to keep any of his promises. Trump lacks the requisite character and discipline to do so.

 Indeed, Trump’s only moral compass is his own self-interest.

 As reported by The Federalist, “[Coulter’s] solution – replacing one hero with another – makes even less sense. The Great Communicator had ideas, theories, and solutions; the Great Prevaricator has nothing but his hero project on the Rio Grande.”

After the first Trump-Clinton debate, James C. Capretta observed:

“Trump has sometimes compared himself to Ronald Reagan. But it is hard to imagine Reagan sounding anything like the Republican candidate who debated Hillary Clinton on Monday. Trump never mentioned reining in an activist federal government or cutting back on wasteful spending. He never talked about the power of free markets, or individual liberty, or the importance of the Constitution. On foreign policy, he spoke of American weakness and showed no interest in continuing the U.S.’s post-war role as the leader of the democratic West. When he talked with real conviction, it was about how trade agreements such as NAFTA were broken and he alone could bring the lost jobs back to the U.S., without offering any kind of explanation (even when invited to do so) of how he would accomplish this.”

Capretta added,

“Trump has sometimes hit on traditional conservative themes during the past year, but those themes do not come naturally to him because he spent much of his adult life supporting a very different worldview. What animates him is a determination to disengage America from the world through changes in immigration, trade, and foreign policy. A lot can be said about this agenda, including that it has the support of many Americans. What cannot be said is that it is consistent with what Reagan would propose if he were running for president today.”

 The Ronald Reagan Coulter Never Knew

In the 1990s, Coulter regarded Reagan as the greatest American president of the 20th century. Now, not so much. Indeed, it turns out that Coulter never really knew Reagan.

Just last week, Coulter claimed, “[Reagan] kind of came across as a bumbling old man [in his first debate with Carter].”[9] (There you go again, Ann. Reagan and Carter had only one presidential debate and Reagan won.)

Pardon me, Ann, but the Gipper[10] was brilliant, thoroughly conversant with the issues, utterly conservative, and articulated his principles better than most, including William F. Buckley, Jr. When Reagan spoke to the American people, they could relate to him and they could grasp his message.

Reagan’s legacy is as much who he was as what he did. He accomplished what he did because of who is was and what he became.

Reagan’s Legacy

Twelve years ago, the nation mourned his passing while celebrating Reagan’s life and legacy. Hundreds of thousands of people visited the Capitol Rotunda for his lying in state.[11]

Reagan biographer Craig Shirley[12] has declared that the Republican Party is dead but that Reaganism is alive and well and living in a populist-energized Conservative Movement.

In an exclusive interview at CPAC,[13] I asked about Ronald Reagan’s legacy[14] and its relevance today. Shirley replied, “Reagan’s legacy is intellectual conservatism, a belief in the future, a belief in young Americans, and an optimistic outlook – all the things that he brought to the Republican Party which had been missing since the time of Teddy Roosevelt.”

Asked whether there are any leaders on the stage right now who could fill Reagan’s shoes, Shirley bluntly replied, “No.” He added, “Leaders like Ronald Reagan don’t grow on trees.”

But then he offered hope, saying, “in defense of the current crop of candidates, Ronald Reagan wasn’t Ronald Reagan before Ronald Reagan was Ronald Reagan.”

Shirley went on to explain, “by that I mean that very few saw his greatness before he was actually president and then afterwards. He was actually derided by the Eastern elites and by the Republican establishment and by the liberal media in the Sixties and the Seventies. It took time to understand Reagan’s greatness.”

Consequently, “in defense of the current crop of candidates, we can’t peer into the future, so I would say, if they stick to their principles, if they stick to their guns, they make their argument, they might succeed and make history, and, if they do, then they will also be seen in a different light.”

[In recognition of his Reaganesque qualities, love of America, and devotion to the Constitution, BrotherWatch endorsed Sen. Ted Cruz for President of the United States.[15]]


[1]               See “Coulter’s Big Fail” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-ia.

[2]               See “Alternative Ann Coulter Book Covers” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-gr.

[3]               Ann Coulter, Joyce Kaufman Show, WFTL, 5/8/15.

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

[5]               Ann Coulter, Laura Ingraham Show, 6/3/15.

[6]               See “Jews: Quality, not Quantity” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-al.

[7]               See “Trump’s Phony Wall” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-cn.

[8]               See “Coulter Logic (she wants candidate who won’t pursue her agenda)” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-dQ.

[9]               Ann Coulter, Good Morning Britain,  ITN, 9/27/16.

[10]             See “Remembering Reagan” at http://t.co/GYAescwhYa.

[11]             See “My Pilgrimage to Reagan” (5 pp.) for a first-hand account of that experience. See also a 1997 “Ronald Reagan Special Edition” (28 pp) with tributes from people who knew him best.

[12]             Mr. Shirley’s latest Reagan biography, Last Act, is available on Amazon and elsewhere.

[13]             See “CPAC: Reagan’s Legacy Endures” at http://wp.me/p4scHf-e1.

[14]             See “Remembering Reagan” at http://t.co/GYAescwhYa.

[15]             See “BrotherWatch Endorses Ted Cruz” at http://wp.me/p4scHf-dw.

Coulter – Face of the Alt-Right

Donald Trump’s chief propagandist and cheerleader, Ann Coulter, is the face of the alt-Right.

Face of the alt-Right

Coulter has been a prominent member of the alt-Right community for decades. Over the past two years, Coulter’s beliefs and character have been exposed as never before. This is particularly problematic given her position as advisor to and promoter of the GOP presidential nominee. Her current book, In Trump We Trust, is a fawning tribute to failing candidate.

The alt-Right, according to Jonah Goldberg, “want[s] to replace the conservative movement.” That is Coulter’s goal, too: Destroy and replace.[1] Following are the core beliefs and attitudes of the alt-Right movement as exemplified by Coulter.


Coulter’s anti-Semitic roots go back to the early 1990s           [2] when she worked for, consecutively, two Jewish-run law firms in New York City. Her anti-Semitism exploded[3] last year[4] during the presidential debates and recently re-emerged[5] to the point[6] where a long-time friend tweeted, “I’m ashamed ever to have known you.”[7]


Once raised Catholic,[8] Coulter now expresses deep animosity toward Catholics.[9] She calls them “moral show-offs” and “fake Christians.” [10]Her anti-Catholic sentiments have only grown worse[11] as she seeks to create a New Know-Nothing Party.[12]


Coulter’s New Know-Nothing Party is modeled after the mid-19th century version, complete with its America First, anti-immigrant rhetoric and platform. Her nativism runs deep[13] as she hates all immigrants[14] and even hates Christian missionaries[15] for going on overseas mission trips to save lives.

Coulter even trashed native-born Gov. Nikki Haley,[16] calling her an “ignorant immigrant.” Haley’s roots weren’t pure enough, unlike Coulter’s which trace back to the Puritans.[17]


Race figures prominently in Coulter’s worldview[18] and remarkably so. Yet, she remains very confused in her racial constructions,[19] regards diversity as white,[20] seeks a restoration of a white WASP nation,[21] and argues that she and Trump deserve a “racism credit”[22] for seeking to help blacks even as she advocates for her own (white) racial grievance industry.[23]

Make America White Again


To that end, Coulter adopts and furthers neo-Confederate ideas,[24] continually defends the Confederacy and Confederate flag, and has actually confused the Confederate and American flags![25]

Coulter’s (and Trump’s) America is one where the elite few (like Coulter and Trump) would determine the nature of our national identity[26] at the expense of individual liberty,[27] the Constitution,[28] and our founding ideals.[29]

If one is truly America first, then one must be #NeverTrump!

[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.]


[1]               See “Coulter Wants to Destroy GOP” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-bn. Yes, I know, Conservatism and the GOP are not synonymous. However, Coulter has waged war – for years – against conservative and Christian ideals, values, and principles. She seeks to root out and destroy whatever opposes her will and willingly props up a would-be tyrant and statism to achieve her own objectives, whether they are peculiar and pecuniary or personal and political.

[2]               See “Ann Coulter’s Jewish Roots” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-a1.

[3]               See “Effing Jews and Ann Coulter’s Waterloo (or Damascus Road?)” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-a9.

[4]               See “Jews: Quality, not Quantity” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-al.

[5]               See “When Will Conservatives Reject Coulter’s Anti-Semitism?” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-eY.

[6]               See “Is Ann Coulter Anti-Semitic?” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-f4.

[7]               See “I’m Ashamed Ever to Have Known You” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-f1.

[8]               See “Ann Coulter’s Root Causes – Part 1 (12/8/1961)” at http://t.co/VSsvq9UBlF.

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

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

[11]             See “Is Ann Coulter Anti-Catholic?” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-f7.

[12]             See “Coulter’s Know-Nothing American Party” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-bP.

[13]             See “Ann Coulter Auditions for U.N. Ambassador” at http://t.co/R7IDzwnUJ8.

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

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

[16]             See “Adios, Ann: Coulter Trashes Nikki Haley” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-7m.

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

[18]             See “Adios, Ann: Coulter’s Blood Politics” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-6H.

[19]             See “Adios, Ann: Coulter’s Racial Confusion” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-7f.

[20]             See “Adios, Ann: Diversity = White” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-7j.

[21]             See “Adios, Ann: Coulter’s WASP Fantasy” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-7H.

[22]             See “Ann Coulter’s ‘Racism Credit’” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-7V.

[23]             See “Does @AnnCoulter Love #BLM?” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-fK.

[24]             See “Trump, Coulter, and the KKK” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-cF.

[25]             See “Coulter Confuses Confederate and American Flags” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-fg.

[26]             See “The End of the American Experiment?” at http://wp.me/p4scHf-eZ.

[27]             See “Why Brad Thor is #NeverTrump! Litmus test is liberty!” at http://wp.me/p4scHf-fb.

[28]             See “Liberty Died in Cleveland: America’s Establishment Coup” at http://wp.me/p4scHf-g1.

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

Most Americans Are Establishment!

At least, Ann Coulter seems to think so!


According to Coulter, Donald Trump is the quintessential anti-Establishment figure. Rather, Trump is your prototypical Establishment insider. He always has been and always will be. Trump knows how to work the system, get the deal, be flexible.

As for the American people, Coulter must believe that most of us are Establishment, too.

How so?

Coulter claims that anyone opposed to Trump must be, ipso facto, Establishment. In a recent twitter rant against the Koch brothers, Coulter took them to task for opposing Trump, concluding that, therefore, they must be part of the Establishment.

Most Americans are vocally and viscerally opposed to Trump. Ergo, we are Establishment!

Once praised for her logic, Coulter appears to have wholeheartedly embraced Trump’s banalities and buffoonish bravado. What a pity!

Coulter Stumps for Romney – Again!

Ann Coulter is seemingly the only person in America who still considers Mitt Romney[1] the “perfect,”[2]ideal,”[3] and “fantastic[4] GOP presidential candidate for 2016.

So much so, that she still stumps for him even though he has said that he won’t run again.


So much so, that she attacks all of the other potential presidential candidates – even though Romney is not running. (If we won’t play by her rules, she’ll just destroy the game board.)

Upon hearing that Romney was determined not to run for president in 2016, Coulter penned a diatribe – “Three Generations of Imbeciles Are Enough”[5] – to attack all non-Romney GOP candidates!

Coulter trashed the entire GOP presidential field to support Romney – who is not running! Why? To vindicate her love affair with Romney and his defeat in 2012?

(The “imbeciles” in Coulter’s title are the Bush’s – George H.W. Bush, George W. Bush, and Jeb Bush. Never mind that it is only two generations, she nevertheless regards them all as imbeciles. But, wait, didn’t she defend Dubya for over a decade of liberal charges that he was stupid?)[6]

Coulter blames the GOP for pushing Romney “out of the presidential race – temporarily, I hope.”

(No one pushed Romney out. No one wanted Romney in.)

Her lead sentence – “It’s good to see conservatives have gotten back to letting The New York Times choose their nominees for them.” – makes no sense. The American people – in poll after poll – rejected Romney.

In her polemic, Coulter compares the Bushes to the Three Stooges: “Then, Shemp Bush will declare and knock Jeb out of the running, only to be replaced by Zeppo Bush.”

But her analogy goes off the rails. Shemp was the brother of Moe and Curly Howard. Zeppo was the brother of Groucho and Cheeko Marx.

(Next, Ann will confuse Romney with Reagan. Oh, that’s right, she already has.)

The list of Republicans Coulter trashes is long: Jeb Bush, Marco Rubio, Chris Christie, Rick Perry, Mike Huckabee, Rick Santorum, Newt Gingrich, Rand Paul, Ted Cruz, Scott Walker, and Sarah Palin.

And, as she did in her last book, Coulter blames conservatives for seeking a genuinely conservative candidate for President.[7]

According to Coulter:

“But instead of familiarizing themselves with the facts, most half-wits masquerading as conservative spokesmen on TV simply repeated whatever Sarah Palin said, and she believed whatever Sheldon Adelson said. Which was: Romney’s not a real conservative! The only real conservatives are the ones who don’t want to separate plutocrats from their servants! – oops, I mean, children from their grandmothers!

Coulter – unlike most conservatives – still regards Romney as “a real conservative.” [8] And she will demonize all those who disagree with her. [9]

In an amazing interview with Joyce Kaufmann (2/2/15), Coulter berated “Rush Limbaugh, Sarah Palin, all the alleged conservatives,” and insisted, “with Mitt Romney we had someone who could win, who will win again.”

Coulter claimed, “They lost the best candidate they ever had with Romney. I think they’ll call him back by acclamation.”

Update: Following Scott Walker’s announced policy position on illegal immigration, Coulter expressed her approval, yet – again – said Romney would be even better! She exclaimed, “YES! Fantastic, amazing, just what I’ve been waiting for! Romney, of course, said exactly this and also endorsed E-Verify and a fence on the border.”


[1]           See “Chapter 11: The Beauty of Conservatism,” The Beauty of Conservatism, 2011, available as a free PDF download at www.coulterwatch.com/beauty.pdf.

[2]           See “Case Study # 7: Mitt Romney – Ideal Candidate” Vanity: Ann Coulter’s Quest for Glory, 2012, available as a free PDF download at www.coulterwatch.com/vanity.pdf.

[3]           See “Chapter 2: Presidential Follies,” Never Trust Ann Coulter – at ANY Age, 2013, available as a free PDF download at www.coulterwatch.com/never.pdf.

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

[5]           Ann Coulter, “Three Generations of Imbeciles Are Enough,” 2/4/15. Coulter’s essay title is a quote by Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes from a eugenics case, Buck v Bell. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buck_v._Bell.

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

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

[8]           See “Case Study # 7: Mitt Romney – Ideal Candidate” Vanity: Ann Coulter’s Quest for Glory, 2012, available as a free PDF download at www.coulterwatch.com/vanity.pdf.

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

Propaganda: Orwell in the Age of Ann Coulter

For almost two decades, Ann Coulter has proven herself untrustworthy.[1] From betraying her own client[2] and scamming voters,[3] to using lies and employing elimination rhetoric,[4] Coulter has shown herself to be unscrupulous – all in the pursuit of self-promotion and self-glory.[5]

A new book – Propaganda: Orwell in the Age of Ann Coulter – delves into the various ways in which Coulter promotes herself and her worldview, and it examines why so many people can come to believe her distortions and lies, even when confronted with a wealth of irrefutable evidence.


That Coulter retains any credibility at all – despite her pathological prevarication, her eager employment of elimination rhetoric, and her enmity to all who do not fit into her scheme of life – is perhaps the mystery of the ages. Propaganda endeavors to explain the seemingly inexplicable.

In a startling manner, Coulter audaciously adopted Orwell’s iconic 1984[6] as a blueprint for her own career. What totalitarian governments and dictators do on a national and international level, Coulter does on a somewhat smaller scale. Ever ideological, always self-promoting, Coulter uses the tactics and techniques, the verbiage and the principles, of 1984 to pursue her own agenda. Where that agenda collides with conservative principles or Christian values, those interests become subservient to her own.

If George Orwell is the Father of Big Brother, then he is the cherished uncle of Ann Coulter. Coulter certainly seems more at home with 1984 then she does with either the Bible or the Constitution.

Propaganda: Orwell in the Age of Ann Coulter is structured in a simple fashion.

Chapter One compares and contrasts Coulter with Nazi propagandist Leni Riefenstahl.

Chapter Two provides a humorous review of a fictitious Ann Coulter book, Delusional, in which all of the quotations contained therein are from Coulter, demonstrating the schizophrenia of Coulter’s own self-identity.

Chapter Three examines Coulter’s first distinctly Orwellian book, Slander, and its incorporation of many Orwellian propaganda techniques. It further looks at Coulter’s own addiction to addictive thinking and its implication in her work.

With Chapter Four, we see the pervasiveness of Orwellian thinking as it is exhibited in Coulter’s third book, Treason, which is steeped in the thought processes of 1984. This chapter explores the many and varied Orwellian techniques and constructs employed by Coulter in Treason.

Chapter Five looks at Coulter’s first compilation of essays, How to Talk to a Liberal (if you must), which is an instruction book – or, How To manual – for conservatives.

A series of case studies then fleshes out the reality of Coulter’s utilization of propaganda and its political and cultural impact.

An Epilog renders hope possible in the life and work of Coulter.

An Appendix critiques an (almost) perfect piece of propaganda by Coulter.

Propaganda: Orwell in the Age of Ann Coulter is available as a free PDF download at www.coulterwatch.com/propaganda.pdf.


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

[2]       See “Case Study #1: Oh, Paula (Jones)! Ann Coulter’s Betrayal,” Vanity: Ann Coulter’s Quest for Glory, 2012, available as a free PDF download at www.coulterwatch.com/vanity.pdf.

[3]       See “Case Study #3: Coulter for Congress: Only Scoundrels Need Apply,” Vanity: Ann Coulter’s Quest for Glory, 2012, available as a free PDF download at www.coulterwatch.com/vanity.pdf.

[4]       See “Appendix 1: Sampling of Coulter’s Elimination Rhetoric,” The Gospel According to Ann Coulter, 2012, available as a free PDF download at www.coulterwatch.com/gospel.pdf.

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

[6]       The full text of Orwell’s 1984 is available at http://www.george-orwell.org/1984/0.html.

Coulter Wrong Again! Romney Caves on Amnesty!

Ann Coulter is wrong again!

In the wake of a GOP election tsunami with a decisive anti-Obama mandate, Mitt Romney caves to a lame-duck president whose policies and agenda were repudiated at the ballot box.


Romney caves on amnesty!

Romney envisions a multi-pronged approach to immigration reform which one could call “comprehensive,” a code-word for amnesty (because the Obama administration would ignore border security provisions in any law and solely enforce amnesty provisions).

Indeed, Romney “indicated that he still felt the new Congress should pass a more permanent amnesty bill.”[1]

For years, Ann Coulter has extolled Romney’s virtues, calling him a perfect, magnificent, and ideal candidate. Amnesty was Coulter’s primary issue.

According to Coulter, “Amnesty is a winner for Republicans and it will only help in 2016, and I would use Romney as an example. That was the reason I supported Romney. He was very good on immigration.”[2]

Coulter has repeatedly claimed that Romney was and remains the very best GOP candidate on immigration. Repeatedly, in 2014 alone, Coulter has championed Romney, asserting, “that’s why Mitt Romney was my favorite candidate, he was the most aggressive on immigration.”[3]

Now that Romney has adopted the very same comprehensive immigration strategy as Sen. Marco Rubio once did – a strategy Coulter ridiculed from a senator she excoriated – what will Coulter do? Excoriate her presidential beau?

Remember, Coulter continually favors establishment Republicans over Tea Party candidates. And she falls in love with RINOs for president, from Romney to Christie.

Coulter desperately wants to be a president maker and she has long contended that she knows better than most Americans and better than most politicos. Her hubris – and her many errors in presidential prognostication – dictate that we should Never Trust Ann Coulter – at ANY Age, at www.coulterwatch.com/never.pdf.


[1]       Tony Lee, “Mitt Romney: Republicans Should ‘Swallow Hard,’ Pass “Permanent’ Amnesty Bill,” Breitbart, 11/27/14, http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2014/11/26/Mitt-Romney-Republicans-Should-Swallow-Hard-Pass-Permanent-Amnesty-Bill. See also, Tony Lee, “Mitt Romney; Not Healthy Congress Hasn’t Passed Amnesty,” Breitbart, 5/30/14, http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2014/05/30/Mitt-Romney-Not-Healthy-Congress-Hasn-t-Passed-Amnesty. See Also, Mike Lillis, “GOP hardliners won’t attack Romney’s ‘amnesty’ plan on illegal immigration,” The Hill, 6/23/12, http://thehill.com/homenews/house/234401-gop-hardliners-wont-attack-romneys-amnesty-plan.

[2]       Ann Coulter, Kelly File, FNC, 6/10/14.

[3]       Ann Coulter, CPAC 2014, 3/8/14.

Coulter Trashes Principled Patriot, Promotes Corrupt Incumbent

Ann Coulter has again trashed principled conservatives to extol a corrupt establishment Republican who used fraudulent and illegal methods to retain power.

In the midst of crises, character is forged and proven, and true leaders emerge triumphant. In the midst of the darkness of deceit and treachery, the light of truth shines most brightly.

Coulter eschews the light as she runs to the darkness.


Coulter Discounts Integrity and Principles

Coulter began her column by listing a series of current domestic crises, then asked, “why is a dime’s worth of money being wasted on trying to replace the Republican senator from Mississippi with a slightly different Republican?”[1] Because principles matter!

Slightly different Republicans? They are drastically different Republicans. One is a pro-establishment incumbent who engaged in a smear campaign and voter fraud, then covered it up. The other is an anti-establishment Tea Party candidate standing up for principles and the rule of law.

But for Coulter, the rule of law does not matter as long as her candidate wins.

She treats McDaniel supporters as if they were iceberg-deniers on the Titanic (“Honestly, I think these deck chairs look just fine. Maybe we should check on the Titanic’s hull, captain.”)

Coulter, Still Race-Obsessed, Lies About McDaniel

The majority of Coulter’s column focuses on race, Cochran’s racial bona fides, and the Left’s dark history of racial animus toward blacks. But she blames McDaniel – not Cochran – for injecting race into the campaign.

For the truth, we must turn to the National Review:

“But the ads and robocalls against McDaniel went much further. They explicitly warned that McDaniel was closely tied to people involved with the Ku Klux Klan. They said McDaniel had a ‘racist agenda.’ They specifically branded the entire tea-party movement as having ‘racist ideas.’ And even the slightly-less-explicit robocalls, which Barbour already admitted helping pay for (although he says he never listened to them in advance), tied tea partiers explicitly to disrespectful treatment of the first African-American president.”

At the onset of her racial attack against McDaniel, Coulter admitted, “Yes, it’s annoying to see a Republican appeal to Democratic voters to save his seat.” Coulter utterly ignores Cochran’s illegal and immoral methods of effecting that appeal.

Then she continued her blame game, asserting, “It also doesn’t look great having alleged Republican activists claiming that any votes from blacks in a GOP primary were fraudulent.”

Say again, “alleged Republican activists?” Disputing “votes from blacks?” But that isn’t what McDaniel alleges! McDaniel is focusing on illegal votes, not black votes. It is Coulter who is obsessed with color.[2] Color matters to Coulter.

Again attacking McDaniel, Coulter lied, ‘But it’s really fantastic to have McDaniel supporters out there denouncing Cochran for getting blacks to vote for him.” McDaniel is addressing a corrupt campaign which used fraudulent means to win a primary election.

Coulter concluded her column by asking, “Why shouldn’t Cochran ask black people for their votes in a primary? The Republican Party was once, and for some still is, the natural political home for black Mississippians.”

These are the real questions: Why is Coulter so adamant that McDaniel ignore his opponent’s voter fraud and why is Coulter so determined to have a GOP nominee who wins the primary based on the will of the Democratic base and not the Republican grassroots?

Answer: If the election were honestly run, the anti-establishment Tea Party candidate would beat the establishment incumbent Republican.

For Coulter, it’s all about results, not principles.

But if you’re principled, you’ll get the result.

Previous Essays in this Series

ESSAY 1: “Coulter Attacks Principled Conservatives” at http://t.co/npUIoRm4gt.

Coulter, called “The Manchurian Columnist” by the American Family Association, is busy attacking the Tea Party again. As Bryan Fischer notes, “her attack on McDaniel and his camp is wrongheaded and unprincipled in almost every respect.”

What does Ann Coulter have against genuine conservatives? Coulter attacks what she is not.

Standing up for principles – and for principled conservatives – seems to be very difficult for Coulter. Indeed, taking Coulter’s “pragmatic” approach has proven counterproductive for several election cycles.

ESSAY 2: “Coulter is Just Wrong About McDaniel” at http://t.co/zc4kKlqV25.

Coulter is wronglegally and politically – about McDaniel because she supports the establishment candidate over him.

Coulter has been an establishment RINO for many, many years. In the last election cycle, she attacked every Republican who threatened the candidacy of her political savior, Mitt Romney. Indeed, she still regards his as an exemplary candidate who should run for president in 2016.[3]

As a consequence of her factually-challenged polemics, the reputations of good people have been tarnished and the conservative brand has been damaged.

ESSAY 3: “Ann Coulter, Orwell’s Protégé” at http://t.co/QYVkBapTIO.

Coulter was recently called a “Manchurian Columnist,” conjuring up images of propaganda and brainwashing. Certainly, Coulter is the consummate propagandist and her recent polemic against Republican Senate candidate Chris McDaniel is representative of her work.

Coulter utilizes many Orwellian techniques to fool her readers into believing her big lies. Among them, Newspeak, doublethink, the memory hole, and character assassination. Coulter also uses humor and ridicule to delegitimize her foes, and uses exaggeration to effect.

Let’s look at a few of the techniques she used in her attack on Chris McDaniel and his campaign. (Remember, McDaniel is a surrogate for the Tea Party and all those who oppose her establishment candidates.)


Never Trust Ann Coulter – at ANY Age at www.coulterwatch.com/never.pdf.


[1]       Ann Coulter, “Eyes on the Prize,” 7/23/14.

[2]       This has been true for most of the past two decades and, most recently, in her disparagement of soccer as “foreign.” See “Coulter’s Soccer Flop – Part Trois” at http://t.co/uy7FDPu79v. See also Chapter 4: “Prejudice,” in Vanity: Ann Coulter’s Quest for Glory, 2012, available as a free download at www.coulterwatch.com/vanity.pdf.

[3]       See “Case Study # 7: Mitt Romney – Ideal Candidate,” Vanity: Ann Coulter’s Quest for Glory, 2012, available as a free download at www.coulterwatch.com/vanity.pdf.

Coulter is soooooo confused!

Coulter considers Sarah Palin “establishment” and Mitt Romney “anti-establishment.”

So Confused

Coulter penned a column proclaiming Palin “Conservative of the Year” in 2008.[i] In it, she wrote, “Palin is the sort of genuine American that brings out the worst, most egregious pomposity of liberals.” But Coulter cautioned Palin, “Perhaps Palin’s year is 2012, but I would recommend that she take a little more time to become older and wiser.” (Like Coulter?)

Then Coulter claimed that Palin was too inexperienced to run for president. Now Coulter claims Palin is too experienced – part of the establishment, writing, “… Fox News contributor Sarah Palin – who has also offered herself up as a possible presidential nominee at a contested convention. (Wouldn’t a former candidate for vice president on a major party’s ticket be part of the Establishment?)”[ii]

If Palin is “establishment” for being a VP candidate, why isn’t Romney “establishment” after twice being a P candidate? Yet, Coulter still wants him to try again in 2016!

Just a few months ago, Coulter said, “Well, don’t tell him, but I’m planning on giving Mitt Romney a little more time to rest, flying out, kidnapping him, and depriving him of sleep, food and water, until he agrees to run again.”[iii] Coulter added, “I think he was a fantastic candidate.”

Coulter claims Romney was a “fantastic candidate” in 2012[iv] and would be ideal for 2016. Does Coulter know that Romney voted for Paul Tsongas in the 1992 presidential primaries. Tsongas was a social liberal and economic moderate.

True to form, Coulter castigates anyone who threatens the person she believes should be the nominee. At the end of the last century, Coulter defamed Gary Bauer as a “fascist” to support her man, George W. Bush. In this century, Coulter besmirches Sarah Palin as “establishment” to support her new man, Mitt Romney.

Coulter conforms reality to her fantasy. “That’s what they call delusional, this schizophrenia,” Coulter said, explaining, “they do weave some reality into fantasy.”[v]

Recommended reading: Never Trust Ann Coulter – at ANY Age, at http://www.coulterwatch.com/never.pdf.


[i] Ann Coulter, “Sarah Palin: Conservatrive of the Year,” Human Events, 12/22/08, http://www.humanevents.com/2008/12/22/sarah-palin-conservative-of-the-year/.

[ii] Ann Coulter, “What’s Their Problem with Romney?” 2/22/12, see http://www.nebraskattitude.com/2012/02/ann-coulter-suggests-sarah-palin-is.html.

[iii] Ann Coulter, Howie Carr Show, WRKO, 3/31/14.

[iv] See “Case Study # 7; Mitt Romney – Ideal Candidate,” Vanity: Ann Coulter’s Quest for Glory, 2012, available as a free PDF download at http://www.coulterwatch.com/vanity.pdf.

[v] Ann Coulter, Mid-Day LA, KABC, 5/28/14.