Tag Archives: GOP

When Will Conservatives Reject Coulter’s Anti-Semitism?

Ann Coulter tweeted: “Where are the Bernie supporters tonight? Did Hillary have them gassed?

Reject Coulter's Anti-Semitism

Coulter has a long history of anti-Semitism, stretching back to at least the early 1990s. In the wake of her Effing Jews tweets, Coulter claimed to be pro-Semitic, employing arguments worthy of an Orwellian dictator. Coulter even enlisted the aid of her conservative friends to prove her noble and just. Those efforts abysmally failed. Her Orwellian newspeak and doublethink was exposed for what it is.

Then Coulter went after Catholics. Now she has retargeted her preferred object of hatred: Jews.

Why attack Jews and Catholics? Because they do not fit into her utopian dream of a restored WASP nation. Coulter is ecstatic over Trump’s transformation of the GOP into a new Know-Nothing Party which is anti-immigrant, anti-Catholic, and anti-Jew.

The Alt-Right and David Duke have eagerly embraced Donald Trump and his (and Coulter’s) message.

Will conservatives join the Never Trump movement and denounce this latest instance of anti-Semitism by Trump’s consigliere?

Advertisements

Wrong and Foolish

Following Donald Trump’s seismic electoral victory and the Republican rout at all levels of government, Alt-Right propagandist Ann Coulter tweeted: “1928 was last time Republicans had the White House, the House and the Senate.

Not quite. Coulter’s tweet is factually wrong and foolishly composed.

wrong-and-foolish

Did she sleep through the George W. Bush years (2003-2006), when he had both a Republican House and Senate? (Perhaps Ann forgot about the presidency part of that equation given her current hatred for Bush, the president she once adored in her neoconservative phase.)

As for foolishness, it is surely foolhardy to remind Americans (and the world) that Republicans ruled when the Great Depression emerged.

Strikingly, the Alt-Right agenda – which Coulter extols and Trump apparently will pursue – includes protectionism and trade wars which exacerbated the Great Depression.

But this isn’t the first time Coulter has made an arse (a good Anglo-Saxon word) of herself with regards to the Great Depression.

Great Depression = Unparalleled Prosperity

During her Adios, America! book tour, Coulter repeatedly claimed,

“From 1924 to 1965, the United States of America virtually stopped all immigration – the most prosperous period in American history. That’s when we developed into a country with this massive, wealthy middle class.”

Putting it another way, Coulter asserted, “For example, in the twenties, 1924, basically a total moratorium for the next 40 years. It was the most prosperous period of American history.”

Somehow, Coulter forgot all about the Great Depression!

She also forgot about the historic economic boom under Ronald Reagan – a period of time during which she lived and experienced firsthand. (Perhaps Coulter’s amnesia stems from her tendency to diminish Reagan’s stature in order to elevate that of her present-day idols, first Romney, then Trump.)

Michael Novak highlighted what Coulter dismisses: the unparalleled prosperity brought about by the leadership of Ronald Reagan. Novak wrote:

“Following the economic ‘malaise’ bemoaned by President Carter, President Reagan changed the country’s direction dramatically. He ended the oil shortage, brought interest rates down by two-thirds, spurred the creation of 16 million new jobs, and put a higher proportion of American adults to work than ever before in history. Under Reagan, the American economy added to its wealth the equivalent of the whole economy of West Germany. This American boon lasted another 20 years after Reagan, through Democratic and Republican administrations. Reagan pointed out that government bureaucrats do not put more citizens to work; millions of new business startups do. He gave priority to sparking business startups.”

Coulter prides herself on her “fanatical” (her word) research. Perhaps she needs more research and less fanaticism.

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

#NeverReagan

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.

neverreagan

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]]

Endnotes:

[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.

Does @AnnCoulter Love #BLM?

Nativist Ann Coulter recently reaffirmed her view that America “owes blacks” for the “legacy of slavery and Jim Crow.”

Coulter Loves BLM

Black Lives Matter would be proud. Those who value truth cringe.

This is polar opposite of the position she took in 1997 when she (quite accurately) said:

“I don’t understand the principle under which I’m supposed to be responsible for what some white people may have done six generations back. I mean, on that theory we oughta be punishing the children of criminals. We don’t even hold one – the next generation – responsible for what that person’s precise father did, much less some white guy 200 years ago.”[1]

(Indeed, today we don’t even hold the culprit accountable for his own actions.)

Only Blacks Have Civil Rights?

Now, two decades later, Coulter contends that America will be forever in debt to blacks. Coulter’s revised paradigm first emerged in her book, Mugged.[2]

Coulter claimed “civil rights are for blacks” because “We owe black people something, we have the legacy of slavery.” Yes, Coulter has fallen for the cult of victimhood and entitlement which is devastating so much of America today.

Civil rights are not, as Coulter contends, a function of victimization, but rather the consequence of a compact between citizens within a nation. For instance, the Constitution provides the foundation for our civil rights, with equal protections to all under the law. One could say these civil rights complement our universal human rights.

Coulter frequently cites the 13th, 14th, and 15th Amendments to the Constitution, as well as the Civil Rights Act of 1964, none of which claim that civil rights are for blacks only. Rather, they apply to all citizens of the United States. The Civil Rights Act of 1964 does not limit civil rights to blacks (it doesn’t even use the word “blacks”), but actually prohibits discrimination based on “race, color, religion, sex, or national origin,” a pretty all-encompassing cohort of the population.

The Amendments and Act Coulter refers to were designed to include blacks – and others – into the pool of individuals whose civil rights are guaranteed. Coulter seemed to understand this in 1997, when she commended California’s Proposition 209[3] “to prohibit racial discrimination, much like the equal protection clause under the Civil Rights Act.”[4]

Legacy of Slavery and Jim Crow?

Coulter is simply wrong.

Dysfunctional blacks communities in America today are not the result of the “legacy of slavery and Jim Crow.” Rather, they are the direct consequence of the legacy of identity politics[5] and the welfare state.[6]

For fifty years, every failed big city has been run by Democrats pursuing liberal policies. Chicago, Detroit, Baltimore, Milwaukee, and Washington, DC, spring to mind. Their liberal policies and perspectives have wreaked havoc on those communities, often erupting in violence, riots, and murder.

This is irrefutable,[7] yet Coulter continues her own version of racial demagoguery which acts as if the Union lost the Civil War and the Civil Rights Movement failed.

Coulter tacitly supports Black Lives Matter ideology by promoting a fallacious set of root causes for contemporary cultural pathologies within the black community. In effect, Coulter contributes to the escalating racial divide among Americans.

Black Lives Matter seized upon a false racial narrative in Ferguson[8] which literally fueled fires as the city erupted in flames.[9] Truth succumbed to a racial hoax.[10] Coulter perpetuates the core foundation of that hoax.

Strangely, Coulter once accurately condemned the racial grievance industry[11] and outed white liberals for their complicity and collusion.[12] Nevertheless, Coulter continues to grossly distort racial reality[13] and claim that civil rights are only for blacks and that blacks, in effect, have special rights. Apparently she never heard of Rev. King’s vision of a colorblind society.[14]

Coulter’s Own Racial Grievance Industry

As it turns out, Coulter is actually in the vanguard of a white version of the racial grievance industry[15] which asserts that America’s changing racial demographics will destroy America[16] as we once knew it and that we must restore a pristine WASP (white) America.[17]

Coulter’s nativist and xenophobic[18] views – fully expressed in Adios, America! – demonize all immigrants,[19] particularly Third World immigrants, especially Hispanics,[20] and those views have permeated Donald Trump’s presidential campaign.

Indeed, Coulter trumpets the advent of a New Trump Party[21] remarkably similar to the defunct Know-Nothing Party of antebellum America, one which is isolationist, anti-immigrant, anti-Semitic,[22] and anti-Catholic.[23]

Coulter has repeatedly likened Trump’s fight for freedom for American workers to Lincoln’s fight for liberty for enslaved blacks. Strikingly, Coulter recently confused the Confederate flag for the American flag,[24] raising the question of which side she would have supported in that war.

It is possible that Coulter is compensating for her xenophobic, nativist views[25] (anti-immigrant, anti-Semitic, anti-Catholic) by extoling her love for blacks.

Regardless of her motives, her views suffuse the Trump campaign and threaten American values of liberty for all irrespective of race, gender, and class. We are all “endowed by our Creator with certain inalienable rights” because “all men are created equal.”

Let us all return to our roots – the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution – and reject the nonsense of Black Lives Matter, the New Trump Party, and Ann Coulter.

Endnotes:

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

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

[3]               Proposition 209 was modeled on, and mirrored, the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

[4]               Ann Coulter, MSNBC, 4/12/97.

[5]               See “Identity Politics Is the Problem” at http://wp.me/p4scHf-1l.

[6]               See “Baltimore ‘Purged’” at http://wp.me/p4scHf-8S.

[7]               See “Race Myths Exposed!” at http://wp.me/p4scHf-8Z.

[8]               See “Ferguson: Justice, Race, and Reason” at http://t.co/ksowFPCx62.

[9]               See “Ferguson in Flames” at http://wp.me/p4scHf-5I.

[10]             See “I’m Black: Truth Does Not Matter” at http://wp.me/p4scHf-5t.

[11]             See “Ann Coulter Takes on the Racial Grievance Industry” at http://t.co/YgG2rpgZIc.

[12]             See “Coulter Hates White Liberals” at http://t.co/NyvQ3KFhS9.

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

[14]             See “King’s Dream Realized (sort of)” at http://wp.me/p4scHf-76.

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

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

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

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

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

[20]             See “Adios, Ann: Fear Mexicans, Not Jihadists” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-6A.

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

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

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

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

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

Effing Ann?

Christian evangelical Ann Coulter loves profanity. She uses it both privately and publicly. She has even been bleeped during on-air interviews.

Effing Ann

[Profanity alert!]

Coulter shouted “Fuck you” to a blogger covering one of her speeches. She told a reporter, “saying ‘Merry Christmas’ is like saying ‘Fuck you!’ I’ve said it to everyone.”

ANN COULTER WISHING NEW YORKERS PEACE ON EARTH AND GOODWILL TOWARD MEN

Immediately after one TV interview, Coulter erupted, “Fuck him! … Fuck Rush.”[1]

In yet another interview, Coulter exclaimed, “Can you imagine the Irish or Italians or Germans saying that to our country back at the turn of the century? ‘No! Fuck you! You came to our country. Learn our ways!’”[2]

Euphemisms figure prominently in Coulter’s lexicon, substituting “effing” to characterize and demonize  individuals and entire groups of people.

One too many anti-Semitic tweets[3] prompted her banishment from Fox News[4] and other conservative outlets. Her attempts to rationalize her anti-Semitism failed miserably.[5] Coulter claimed “effing Jews” referred to quantity and not quality; that, in fact, it was sort of an endearment.

In 2016, Coulter reprised her anti-Semitic commentary,[6] prompting even friends to be ashamed for ever having known her.[7] The question – Is Ann Coulter anti-Semitic?[8] – must be answered, “Yes.”

But Coulter is an Equal Opportunity Offender,[9] going out of her way to be offensive. She blithely employs her “effing” endearment to others, including Arabs. Contradicting her cultivated sense of refinement, Coulter argues, “I promise you out-of-work steel workers could not give two f***s.”

Coulter prides herself on her Buckleyesque language skills. Vulgarity diminishes, rather than enhances, her message. It also offers up a window into her heart.

Endnotes:

[1]               See Never Trust Ann Coulter – at ANY Age, www.coulterwatch.com/never.pdf.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

When Will Conservatives Reject Coulter’s Anti-Semitism?

Ann Coulter tweeted: “Where are the Bernie supporters tonight? Did Hillary have them gassed?

Reject Coulter's Anti-Semitism

Coulter has a long history of anti-Semitism, stretching back to at least the early 1990s. In the wake of her Effing Jews tweets, Coulter claimed to be pro-Semitic, employing arguments worthy of an Orwellian dictator. Coulter even enlisted the aid of her conservative friends to prove her noble and just. Those efforts abysmally failed. Her Orwellian newspeak and doublethink was exposed for what it is.

Then Coulter went after Catholics. Now she has retargeted her preferred object of hatred: Jews.

Why attack Jews and Catholics? Because they do not fit into her utopian dream of a restored WASP nation. Coulter is ecstatic over Trump’s transformation of the GOP into a new Know-Nothing Party which is anti-immigrant, anti-Catholic, and anti-Jew.

The Alt-Right and David Duke have eagerly embraced Donald Trump and his (and Coulter’s) message.

Will conservatives join the Never Trump movement and denounce this latest instance of anti-Semitism by Trump’s consigliere?

Trump Ignores Coulter, Ann Irate

Trump consigliere Ann Coulter is irate at her Savior. (Not our Savior, Jesus Christ. Her Savior, Donald Trump.)

Ann Irate

The Donald ignored Coulter’s painstaking advice for selection of his vice presidential running mate and chose Gov. Mike Pence (IN).

In her column (7/6/16), Coulter vilified fiery former House Speaker Newt Gingrich only to have Trump choose milquetoast Pence. Apparently, Little Hands Donald feared being upstaged by his own running mate.

Coulter vented her wrath on Facebook and Twitter.

Coulter’s Principal Facebook Posting

Coulter considers Pence “the combo platter of disasters.”

Pence 03

Coulter’s First Set of Tweets (reverse chronical order)

Coulter contends her “next-door neighbor” or Harriet Myers would be better options. Given Coulter’s prior vitriol against Myers, I hope her neighbor is well-armed.

Pence 01

Coulter’s Second Set of Tweets (reverse chronical order)

In a state of denial, hoping the nightmare would soon pass, Coulter declared Gingrich to be the only worse possible VP choice.

Pence 02

Subsequent tweets continue to tar and feather Trump’s selection. The smartest women in the world disagrees with the choice made by the best candidate she’s ever seen.

Will Coulter continue to attack her presumptive VP, and, in effect, attack Trump himself?

Or will avarice and self-interest inevitably prevail?

Trump is, after all, her current meal ticket and subject of her next book.