Tag Archives: hypocrisy

Coulter’s Beyoncé Blunders

Ann Coulter stuffed so much nonsense into just one tweet that she enraged Beyoncé fans and kicked reason and decency in the head.

coulters-beyonce-blunders

Coulter’s tweet:

“Beyonce, cited by Michelle Obama as role model for her daughters, sings about ‘pussy curvalicious, served delicious.’ Oh my. I just fainted.”

Sarcasm notwithstanding, Coulter was wrong on the singer, mangled the lyrics, offered a tortured interpretation of those lyrics, and confused sexual assault with a provocatively poetic expression of consensual sex in marriage.

Coulter was as wrong as wrong can be. Again.

  • Coulter cited the wrong singer. The lyrics were rapped by Nicki Minaj, not Beyoncé.
  • Coulter mangled the lyrics. Coulter transposed the first two words, mutilating the rhythm of the rhyme. The actual lyrics are: “Curvalicious, pussy served delicious.”
  • Coulter tortured the interpretation of those lyrics. Defending Trump from allegations of sexual assault, Coulter missed the significance of consensual sex in those lyrics. As reported by Mediaite: “By referring to her privates as something being ‘served,’ Minaj is, in effect, giving her partner her consent, which a woman being grabbed ‘by the pussy’ by a famous man has not done.”
  • Coulter equated sexual talk with sexual assault. Intent upon absolving Trump of guilt for gloating over grabbing women “by the pussy,” Coulter spotlights the word “pussy” (a word she herself frequently uses). However, as Mediaite also observes, “most of Trump’s detractors are not as outraged by the word ‘pussy’ as they are by Trump telling Billy Bush that famous men can get away with grabbing women by the pussy.” It’s assault, not talk!
  • Coulter concluded by mocking Trump’s victims. “Oh my. I just fainted.” No! Innocent women have been sexually assaulted by a rich, powerful, and famous man. Coulter was and remains aghast over Bill Clinton’s treatment of women, yet rushes to Trump’s defense over similar charges.

For Coulter, this is all about ideology, not reality. It is about power, not morality. It is about winning an election, not doing the right thing. Apparently, the end really does justify the means to these people.

John O’Sullivan writes:

“In 2001, before anyone saw the Donald as a presidential aspirant, I wrote a critique in National Review of his interviews with Howard Stern in which he discussed women in terms I thought ungallant. My attack wasn’t political, even though Trump was then a Democrat, but its message was sternly disapproving. … Those interviews (which were on the record) were not very different from the notorious videotape. They were vulgar, crass, shameless, and silly sexual boasting – the kind of thing (second only to intrusive women sports reporters) that prompts me to avoid locker rooms. Above all, however, they were known about and readily available.”

Now that the pussy’s out of the bag, so to speak, Trump’s cadre of female shills have turned truth upside down to salvage what remains of Trump’s reputation. Coulter’s Beyoncé tweet is emblematic of those unsavory efforts.

Trump’s P^ssies

Donald Trump described sexual assault and his female surrogates defend him!

trumps-pussies

Trump said, “Grab them by the pussy. You can do anything.”

Kellyanne Conway, Trump’s latest campaign manager, used multiple lines of defense, beginning with denial (10/10/16): “He did not say the word ‘sexual assault.’” But Trump described sexual assault.

Conway also used the he’s-nice-to-me-so-he-can’t-be-bad defense (10/10/16):

“And this is a man I’ve been alone with many times who’s never been anything but gracious and [a] gentleman and elevated me to the top level of his campaign, the way he’s elevated women in the Trump organization for decades, because he respects women.”

Trump propagandist and consigliere, Ann Coulter, used the they-did-it-too defense in multiple tweets (10/9/16):

“Media covered for serial rapist Bill Clinton, who continued his abuse of women & teenaged girls AS PRESIDENT…”

“Media covered for Ted Kennedy (drowned a girl, left her to die, then ran for president ELEVEN years later.”

“It’s not Trump v Bill Clinton. It’s Trump v MSM-covered for Ted Kennedy (killed girl) Bill Clinton (serial rapist) John Edwards(open affair)”

Ironically, both Coulter and Conway were united against President Clinton – seeking to destroy his presidency based, in part, on his sexual exploits – and they are now united against Hillary Clinton – defending the sexual exploits of their new-found savior.

Talk about pussies.

Vile #NeverTrump

Let’s look beneath Ann Coulter’s faux humanity. Coulter revealed the real Coulter in an interview for The Drive Home (9/29/16): a phony hypocrite who pretends to like those she hates.

vile-nevertrump

Speaking of conservatives opposed to Trump, Coulter boasted, “But all the people that I had to be talked into liking before because they’re technically on my side, whoa, they’re all gone now.”

Her next words: “I don’t have to pretend I like them anymore. It was all the ones I hated. Gone, gone, gone.”

Hear that, conservatives! Coulter no longer has to pretend to like you. Talk about phony! She really hated you all along!

You are now “gone, gone, gone” down into her personal memory hole. Except, naturally for her, Coulter never forgives and she never forgets.

A split microsecond later, Coulter singled out one name: “John Podhoretz.” (Podhoretz, a former friend and ally, incensed Coulter by shaming her inexcusable behavior.)

A few seconds later, Coulter claimed, “I don’t have to defend the people who were the most embarrassing to our side.”

Who is the real embarrassment, Ann?

Porn Star is in Eye of the Beholder

Which porn star do you prefer: Melania Trump or Alicia Machado?

porn-star-is-in-eye-of-the-beholder

Donald Trump has repeatedly body shamed former Miss Universe Alicia Machado. Consequently, Trump supporters have flooded the Internet with pornographic photos of Machado to justify Trump’s sexist and derogatory behavior.

Funny thing is: Trump supporters decried any posting of any pornographic photo featuring Melania Trump.

Ann Coulter is NOT John the Baptist

John the Baptist lost his head for proclaiming God’s truth and holiness. Ann Coulter has betrayed all that she once believed in to promote the ungodly and profane.[1]

Now Coulter is a champion of New York Values, the kind she has opposed her entire adult life.

Not John the Baptist

A recent headline exposed Coulter’s betrayal: “Ann Coulter Says Trump’s Affair With Marla Maples Was Sanctioned By God.”

Coulter Praises Donald Trump’s Adultery

In an astonishing dialogue with Eric Metaxas, Coulter defended Trump’s vice as a virtue![2] In response to Metaxas’ declaration, “His vice of choice was adultery,” Coulter replied, “Allegedly.” Allegedly? Trump boasts of his conquests and his sexual desire for his own daughter!

Coulter added, “You know where he met Marla Maples? You know where he met her? I haven’t really followed his personal story very closely but he met her in church.”

According to Coulter, Trump’s long-term affair was justified because “he did marry her.” (No comment about his subsequent divorce or any of his affairs.) Coulter even claimed, “There are degrees of murder, there are degrees of adultery.” (However, all murderers are punished!)

Coulter will countenance any evil so long as she gets her way. In this case, she wants Trump to build a wall in her honor. She said, “It’s not his strongest point, oh well. He’s the only one who’s going to build the wall.” (Except, Trump will not build the wall Coulter wants.[3] Cruz will!)[4]

Coulter Condemns Divorce and Adultery

Nevertheless, Coulter continues to reject the sacred for the profane.

Until now, Coulter has condemned adultery (and divorce) throughout her professional career, chastising any public figures caught in that practice. She is wont to call the Democrat Party the party of “killing, lying, adultery, thievery, envy.”

For Coulter, admirable people cannot be adulterers. Coulter once declared, “None of the leaders I admire [have had affairs].”[5] (Until Trump!)

Coulter immediately added, “The greatest president of this century certainly never had an affair. … Of course we know that [he never had an affair]. Ronald Reagan could not possibly have had an affair. It is beyond the realm of possibility.”

Then, faithfulness and kept promises mattered to Coulter. Now, not so much.

Coulter Touts “The Rules”

A stickler for details and the letter of the law (until Trump, that is – now, “THE RULES[6] no longer matter), Coulter has always stridently decried divorce, citing it’s close connection with adultery. Coulter explained:

“To be absolutely punctilious about the sort of Bible description of divorce, it is considered adultery because the ‘one and only’ is your one and only. So you may go through our little civil procedures but your second wife would be considered – I guess divorce would be better than adultery as long as you don’t re-marry because the marriage would technically be considered adultery.”[7]

What about Trump’s confessed adulterous affairs and two divorces?

Coulter Loves Outing Adulterers

Coulter also favors news outlets and tabloids exposing prominent figures as adulterers. She said, “I’m all for outing adulterers, whether it’s some Hollywood starlet telling on a politician. I love that.”[8]

An effusive Coulter continued, “Oh, yeah, I love that. It’s like having all these Bernie Goetzs of adultery out there. They’re preventing people from committing adultery for fear of being exposed.”

But Trump, her Savior,[9] is now off limits!

Coulter Condemns Rudy Giuliani

Indeed, Coulter regards divorce and adultery as disqualifying factors for public office.

In 2000, Coulter denounced Rudy Giuliani as an adulterer (“committed adulterer,” “chasing tail,” “pathetic,” “boob,” and “pig” “forever wetting [himself] in public”), Coulter ridiculed the appearance of his mistresses. Consider Coulter’s lengthy tirade against Giuliani’s mistresses:[10]

“It seems to me that once a woman puts her sexual attractiveness at issue by, for example, competing sexually for the husbands of other women, she’s made her relative pulchritude fair game. Indeed, it is impossible to comprehend why some Republicans are still defending Giuliani’s honor without taking note of how homely his mistresses are.” (Isn’t Coulter now defending Trump’s honor?)

Coulter’s diatribe continued: “On every possible scale – body, face, youthful appearance, accomplishments, style, pedigree, IQ – Giuliani’s wife is several orders of magnitude superior to his apparent mistresses. His latest acquisition is even more squat and frumpy than the last consort.”

Rudy Giuliani was a letch, but Donald Trump is a saint?

John the Baptist

In contrast to Coulter, John the Baptist was devoted to righteousness and holy living. John repeatedly condemned King Herod for his sexual deviancy – and lost his head for it.

As reported in the Gospel of John (6:16-18):

“But when Herod heard, he said, ‘This is John, whom I beheaded; he has been raised from the dead!’ For Herod himself had sent and laid hold of John, and bound him in prison for the sake of Herodias, his brother Philip’s wife; for he had married her. Because John had said to Herod, ‘It is not lawful for you to have your brother’s wife.’”

Jesus persistently condemned adultery, going so far as to say, “You have heard that it was said to those of old, ‘You shall not commit adultery.’ But I say to you that whoever looks at a woman to lust for her has already committed adultery with her in his heart (Mt. 5:27-28).”

Coulter once understood and agreed with that teaching, but now, for political purposes, Coulter calls evil good and good evil. Trump even lusts for his own daughter!

Less than a year ago, Coulter bragged, “I’ve never sucked up to anybody. I’ve always said what I believe.”[11]

(Sorry, Ann, but you’ve become the biggest suck-up in modern American history.)

Endnotes:

[1]               See “Ann Coulter’s Upside Down World” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-cP.

[2]               Ann Coulter, Eric Metaxas Show, Salem Media Group, 4/5/16.

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

[4]               See “An Open Letter to Ann Coulter” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-cK.

[5]               Ann Coulter, MSNBC, 6/7/97.

[6]               See “Coulter Hates ‘THE RULES’ That Thwart Trump” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-e6.

[7]               Ann Coulter, MSNBC, 6/7/97.

[8]               Ann Coulter, Politically Incorrect, ABC, 7/21/97.

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

[10]             See The Beauty of Conservatism, 2011, pg. 99, available as a freed download at www.coulterwatch.com/beauty.pdf.

[11]             Ann Coulter, “New Vice Video: Shooting Guns With Ann Coulter –UNPLUGGED,” 8/11/15, https://broadly.vice.com/en_us/video/shooting-guns-with-ann-coulter?utm_source=broadlyfbus.

Coulter Lies About Supreme Court Case

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

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

Supreme Court Case

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

Backdrop: Elián González

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

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

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

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

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

Lying About Supreme Court Cases

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Endnotes:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The Gospel According to Ann Coulter

At the turn of this millennium, conservative pugilist Ann Coulter became a leader of the Religious Right, even as she denied its existence. With the publication of Godless (2006), Coulter was recognized as a Christian authority, despite displaying a pattern of unchristian behavior and promoting unbiblical doctrines.

Coulter’s false theology invaded both the Church and Conservatism.

The Gospel According to Ann Coulter highlights the good, the bad, and the downright evil theological pronouncements of Ann Coulter.

Book2

Here is a sampling from The Gospel According to Ann Coulter:

The Gospel According to Ann Coulter: How Coulterism Corrupts Christianity and Conservatism

Daniel J. Borchers

Published: June 10, 2012

159 pages

www.coulterwatch.com/gospel.pdf.

Introduction

Speaking the Truth in Love

Über-conservative Ann Coulter appeared as an angel of light in the midst of the darkness of contemporary American politics. Among a new generation of political pundits to emerge in the mid-1990s, Coulter was one of the few to openly express her religious beliefs, defend the faith of her forefathers, and extol the Creator.

In 2006, Coulter was recognized as a religious leader with the publication of her fifth book, Godless. That year she was also called “the most hated woman in America”[1] whose book should have been entitled Heartless.[2] Oddly, a person perceived to be heartless became the arbiter of godliness.

The Gospel According to Ann Coulter seeks to differentiate between sound Christian doctrine and incorrect interpretation of Scripture, between espoused beliefs and exhibited behaviors – to affirm the truth correctly espoused by Coulter and to correct the many errors, in style and in substance, conveyed by Coulter.

The structure of this book is simple. The Preface provides my own personal testimony, my own faith journey. Chapter one offers background and insight into Coulter’s own Christian heritage and the evolution of her faith. Chapter two provides a brief overview of the importance of the faith once delivered. Chapters three through 13 evaluate Coulter’s accuracy in conveying specific key Christian doctrines. Chapter 8 also incorporates a case study in how Coulterism corrupts Christianity, causing otherwise godly people to become hypocritical or heretical, demonstrating the importance of this book and the spiritual dimensions it addresses.

Chapters 14 through 18 examine the intersection of religion and politics as they appear in Coulter’s writings and professions of faith. Chapter 19 summarizes key points of this book and contrasts authentic and disingenuous expressions of faith. Chapter 20 highlights Coulter’s growing spiritual schizophrenia over the past couple of years. Finally, Chapter 21 offers up a prayer for Coulter, her acolytes, the body of Christ, and the nation. Four appendices build upon the themes of this book.

Since, from the beginning, Coulter has melded religious faith and political policies, we will necessarily address the interplay between the two. For the purposes of our narrative, using broad strokes, the Christian Right can be likened to “truth Christians” who emphasize the truth of God, while the Christian Left can be likened to “love Christians” who accentuate the love aspect of the gospel. Broadly speaking, conservative Christians tend to emphasize truth over love and can appear legalistic and insensitive, while liberal Christians tend to emphasize love over truth and can become permissive and overly tolerant.

Chapter 1

Roots: Ann Coulter’s Christian Heritage

Her greatest personal influences, according to Coulter, were “Parents, brothers, and Jesus – not necessarily in that order.”[3] Asked to prioritize the order, she said, “Obviously, Jesus has to be number one,” adding that she had “great Christian parents and great Christian brothers,” and concluding “ultimately all you have is God.”

Ann is a Daughter of the American Revolution. In fact, she can trace her lineage back to the Puritans!

Born literally of Puritan blood, proud of her Puritan ancestry, and raised theologically and politically in a quasi-Puritan environment, Coulter found that being a Puritan is harder than it looks. It requires actually taking up one’s cross and following Him. It requires self-sacrifice, something abhorrent to one who is seemingly self-consumed. And it requires an active, living faith in the One who makes it all worthwhile.

So, what’s a girl to do? Proclaim doctrines while twisting truth to enable one’s own hypocritical behavior. Create an ever-narrowing worldview which shuts out all opposing views to provide an emotional and spiritual safety zone. Engage in patterns of addictive thinking to deceive oneself and incorporate Orwellian propaganda techniques to deceive others. Lie, while claiming to speak the truth (see Chapter 8). Defame, while adopting the mantle of victimhood (see Chapter 8). Hate, while claiming hatred a good thing, and, simultaneously, asserting that the hatred is coming from others (see Chapter 7).

But, what’s a Christian to do? A Puritan to do? Sadly, Coulter missed the true significance of her Puritan heritage. The heart of a Puritan was one of piety and humility, honor and integrity, devotion to God and not to self. Seemingly enslaved to self, Coulter refuses to yield to God, yet she seeks the benefits of appearing godly and proclaiming godliness.

As we will see, Coulter squeezes her religious beliefs into her rigid political template instead of adapting her political paradigm to fit into her faith template. Instead of letting faith inform politics, Coulter has politicized faith itself, subordinating it to partisan purposes.

Consequently, Coulter is quick to subordinate biblical principles for partisan purposes or to further her personal and professional pursuits.[4]

Chapter 2

Faith: Once Delivered for All

Coulter once opined, “I’m not a Catholic – but, [standing up for principles is] something that’s admirable about the Catholic church.”[5] Coulter added, “If it’s true, it’s true, and it’s not just some consciousness-raising rap session. … What the Church is supposed to tell you – or religion is supposed to tell you – is how to behave in your particular life.” As Coulter (and every Christian everywhere) would soon find out, knowing what is right and doing what is right are two entirely different things.

A standard-bearer for the traditional family and traditional values, Coulter once boasted of her “total slutty look”[6] and the appropriateness of having serial sexual relationships (“Let’s say I go out every night, I meet a guy and have sex with him. Good for me. I’m not married”).[7]

A proponent of truth-telling and opponent of hate speech, Coulter readily employs lies and ad hominem in her work. In one telling radio interview,[8] Coulter declared “Lying is never OK,” but then, when asked “What are your views on honesty and civility in political discourse and personal relationships?” she abruptly asserted “I’m against it!”

Most hypocritically, while condemning hypocrisy on the left, Coulter invariably justifies hypocrisy by Christians and conservatives, saying “At least we have standards,” thus totally missing the point of the purpose of standards and the dangers of hypocrisy itself (see Chapter 12).

As for heresy, Coulter frequently turns the gospel on its head (see Chapter 13). In her impassioned defense of Mel Gibson’s controversial movie, The Passion of the Christ, Coulter inexplicably denied the very purpose of Jesus’ passion by treating the Golden Rule as virtually irrelevant in human relationships and by titling one essay “WWJK: Whom Would Jesus Kill?” – when the entire purpose of Jesus’ sacrificial love exhibited on the cross was to save humanity.

Chapter 3

Creator: Author and Finisher of Everything

In the mid-1990s, Coulter observed that traditional national monuments, such as the Lincoln and Jefferson Memorials, are “suffused with the idea of God and our Maker.”[9] In debates over character education, she exclaimed, “I just can’t really see how you can teach values separate from God.”[10] Coulter also observed, “we’re now living off of the moral capital of the last two centuries of this country. It was really an incredibly novel concept this idea that our Creator endowed us with inalienable rights. That’s what mutual respect comes from.” She added, “We all have these inalienable rights that come from the Creator.” She further clarified, “I’m talking about the Creator. I’m talking about our religion, this country’s founding religion.”

Coulter devoted several chapters of her 2006 bestseller, Godless, to debunking evolution and she frequently writes and speaks on that subject. In fact, she became an “expert” for Coral Ridge Ministries’ DVD documentary, Darwin’s Deadly Legacy. The producers were seemingly unaware of the incongruity of Coulter espousing a link between Darwinism and the Nazi’s dehumanizing Final Solution when she herself has a propensity to engage in using Orwellian techniques of hate speech, character assassination, elimination rhetoric, and dehumanization of anyone who disagrees with her (see Chapter 11 and Appendix 1).[11]

Coulter condemns those who worship the creation while denying the Creator. Ironically, while mindful of her Lord and Savior, Coulter still distorts His words of instruction to mankind regarding the Earth: husbandry, not savagery. Even while acknowledging the Creator’s craftsmanship over His creation, Coulter somehow presumes that He would have us abuse that which He created. She infamously asserted, “God gave us the earth. We have dominion over the plants, the animals, the trees. God said, ‘Earth is yours. Take it. Rape it. It’s yours.’”[12]

Chapter 4

Forgiveness: Required For All Believers

Coulter insists that she herself has not changed (because change would necessitate admitting past imperfection): “I have friends I went to summer camp with who say I haven’t changed in that respect. I’ve always talked this way, and I always will.”[13] Ironically, Coulter only regrets being nice: “I’ve never said anything so outrageous that I regret it. Though I’ve regretted things that were too tame.”[14] Moreover, Coulter says, “This is the shocking thing for your readers: I believe everything I say.”[15]

When asked if she regretted any of her more controversial remarks, Coulter replied: “You can quote anything I’ve said back to me and ask me if I have reservations, if I would have done it differently, if I would have said it differently, do I have any regrets. The answer is no!”[16]

Expressions of regret or contrition, and admissions of change, would require an acknowledgement of either growth or of decline. If growth, then an admission of prior imperfection is necessary, and for a person for whom flaws are anathema, such an admission is unthinkable. If decline, then those very flaws are growing worse. In either case, admission of warts and wrinkles is emotionally and psychologically unacceptable to a person who must appear perfect. Consequently, Coulter’s ego and her wounds impede her personal growth.

In her eyes, Coulter is never wrong and never repents. On 5/4/12, Coulter posted a series of tweets which ridiculed Chinese dissident Chen Guangcheng’s blindness (isn’t he one of the good guys?), displaying both tastelessness and impenitence. To wit, Coulter joked “Couldn’t we just tell that blind Chinese dissident that he’s in America now?” Under fire, Coulter said, “Wow. I felt worse about making light of Communist hellholes known for slaughtering their own people, but it still made me laugh.” Attacking her critics, including those from the National Federation for the Blind, Coulter added, “I’d say they’re a little myopic, except they’d be offended.”[17]

Chapter 5

Redemption: The Power Of His Blood

Coulter once opined, “Once a child commits a crime like that [four-year-old killing his younger brother] what are the odds that he could be taken back [redeemed] in any event, no matter where he’s put?”[18]

Say what? Jesus, who said that nothing is impossible with God, provided His own mission statement at the beginning of His ministry, saying, “The Spirit of the LORD is upon Me, because He has anointed Me to preach the gospel to the poor; He has sent Me to heal the brokenhearted, to proclaim liberty to the captives and recovery of sight to the blind, to set at liberty those who are oppressed; to proclaim the acceptable year of the LORD” (Luke 4:18-19). Indeed, during His earthly ministry, Jesus healed lepers, exorcised demons, and raised people from the dead. Nothing is impossible! That is our assurance and our hope.

Perhaps Coulter’s hopelessness about redemption informed her desire following 9/11 “to kill them. And we will kill them.”[19] But who was she talking about killing? Terrorists – whom she defines as “the people cheering and dancing in the street.”[20] Her scythe seems sharpened to kill a vast number of people.

Chapter 6

Transformation: By His Spirit

Speaking to a college audience, Coulter confessed, “Jesus died for my sins – that’s all that matters.”[21] That sounds nice, but is it true? Yes – and no. Yes, Jesus died for our sins. No, it is not all that matters. What really matters is a person’s response to the grace God exhibited in Jesus’ atoning sacrifice.

Coulter’s confession of faith is a crucial first step for all Christians. But it is only a first step. Godly repentance requires bearing the fruit of repentance – a transformed life. According to the apostle James, “Faith without works is dead” (Jas. 2:20). An unrepentant life is spiritually barren. Jesus’ sacrificial atonement for our sins (salvation) was followed by the power of His resurrected life (transformation).

Spiritual growth depends upon two things: 1) repentance, turning toward God, putting off the old man, and 2) transformation, living by faith and in the spirit of God, putting on the new man. GOGI: Garbage Out, Godliness In.

Chapter 7

Love: God’s Desire and Goal for Us

Readers may recall Coulter’s humorous admission from 1997: “[I’m a] right-wing crazy and proud of it. I’m included in a hate group – what do they call them? ‘The right-wing haters.’”[22] Coulter, once chastised for having “an ice cube for a heart,”[23] has become the Left’s caricature of a mean-spirited Republican. She acknowledges that she is viewed as a” hard-hearted and mean-spirited conservative.”[24]

On the eve of the 2000 election, a Coulter rant appeared on National Review: “Oh, how I hate them! And, oh, how I hate the waiting. To quote wacky comic Prof. Irwin Corey, when asked about his feelings on the subject of love: ‘I like love, because it’s so close to hate. And without hate, there could be no revenge.’ Tomorrow, we take revenge.” [25]

Coulter feels free to hate indiscriminately. Taking pride in her polemics, loving her loathing, and fomenting hatred in others, she apparently does not know how to love.[26] While well-versed in the art of hatred, Coulter seemingly knows nothing about love. Her espoused enmity for John McCain bares the barrenness of love in her heart. Coulter claims she once loved McCain – but as early as 1999, came to despise him.

Regarding McCain, she said, “I used to love him [John McCain], then I liked him, now I despise him.”[27] (Ann, if you “despise” him now, you didn’t “love” him then.) Remember, Coulter’s hatred of McCain stems from his politics, not who he is as a person!

Kevin McCullough, a Coulter colleague and confidante, recently acknowledged, “She draws large crowds at both conservative and homosexual political conferences. She speaks openly of her own faith (Christianity), while regularly misinterpreting and/or misleading others as to the meanings of Christ, specifically the most important Christian doctrine – Grace.”[28]

Chapter 8

Truth: True Freedom in Christ

In her first post-9/11 book, Slander (2002), Coulter bore false witness against numerous individuals and whole groups of people.[29] Outright lies, falsehoods, exaggerations, and fabrications filled its pages, so much so that scores of websites documented its lack of veracity.[30] Subsequent Coulter books have had their own problems with truth. At times, her truth deficit even strains the grace of her defenders.

Coulter’s worldview seems premised upon a whole series of big lies: all liberals are stupid, evil, traitors seeking to destroy civilization; all Arabs and Muslims are terrorists; “liberalism and terrorism are different stages of the same disease” (her actual speech title); all liberals are godless, all conservatives are godly.

In Slander, Coulter condemned the politics of personal destruction and the vitriolic public square by concluding, “At the risk of giving away the ending: It’s all liberals’ fault.” With the publication of Treason (2003), Coulter posited her propositions that liberalism = terrorism = treason and conservatism = McCarthyism = patriotism. In How to Talk to a Liberal (If You Must) (2004), Coulter asserted, “Nothing too extreme can be said about liberals because it’s all true.” These are all truth claims which are demonstrably false. Indeed, Coulter’s own rhetoric disproves her assertions.

Chapter 9

Reconciliation: Our Ministry as Peacemakers

In 1999, Coulter declared, “There’s nothing more attractive than a rabid conservative.”[31] In 2006, on the quest for unlimited freedom of expression, Coulter admitted, “I’ve always told my friends if only I could be a black Jewish homosexual – then we could really have some fun! Then I could say anything!”[32] In 2007, Coulter asserted her own leadership in outré oratory, exclaiming, “I am the illegal alien of commentary. I will do the jokes that no one else will do.”[33]

Two days before the release of If Democrats Had Any Brains, They’d Be Republicans (2007), Coulter published a pre-emptive essay to frame the debate.[34] That essay – excerpting what Coulter considered the key point in her book – emphasizes the accuracy of the themes addressed thus far in this book. Her essay title – “Liberals and the Woman Who Hates Them” – reiterates enmity as the fanatical fuel which drives Coulter. Notice the modifier – “the Woman” – as if she alone of all women hate liberals. Her ego posits herself as the solitary “gyno-American” standing up for truth, justice, and the American way.

The Orwellian memory hole almost immediately came to fore with Coulter making this astonishing claim: “Liberals spend so much time hating, hating, hating that they can’t get anything done. I mean, we all thought that Clinton was a cheap pervert, but we didn’t hate him.”[35] What happened to “the Woman Who Hates Them?” Or, for that matter, the woman who, in 2000, declared, “If you don’t hate Clinton, and those who labored to keep him in office, you don’t love your country?” Couldn’t she remember the title of her own essay meant to propel her book to the top of the best-seller list? But then, on Fox & Friends,[36] Coulter again remembered.

Brian Kilmeade asked, “How could you possibly pull off a book with this type of genre, and this type of theme, Ann Coulter? Where does it come from? The anger? The directness? The bluntness?” Coulter replied, “Thank you, thank you. Pure resentment and hatred.” As she had years earlier, Coulter redefined hate speech: “‘Hate speech’ is telling the truth about liberals.”[37]

Chapter 10

Equality: Self-Evident Truths

Despite her assertions of equality, Coulter has a tendency to express racist views. In 1996, she lauded white Europeans while belittling minorities: “It’s extremely difficult to come in if you’re coming from a Western European country. However, if you are from a Third World country, ‘Welcome.’ If your genetic ancestors did not invent the wheel, ‘Oh, well, let them come in.’”[38]

American Indians have fared poorly in Coulter’s worldview: “The Indians were savages. … they were nomads, scalping people. … We [white people] don’t eat people. We don’t engage in human sacrifice.”[39] On that occasion, she added, “Thank God the white man did win or we would not have the sort of equality and freedom, or life, that we have now.”

White supremacy was an underlying theme in several Coulter columns. For example, Coulter wrote, “And manifestly, white men have no political power in modern America. They just rush in to save us when the nation is attacked.”[40]

In Slander (2002), Coulter wrote: “More than any of their other hate speech, the left’s attacks on women for being ugly tell you everything. There is nothing so irredeemably cruel as an attack on a woman for her looks. Attacking a female for being ugly is a hideous thing, always inherently vicious.”[41] Having condemned those who attack “people personally for what they look like,” Coulter attacked people for what they look like, with Bella Abzug being her poster girl for liberals.

Although Coulter claims to eschew groupthink,[42] groupthink pervades her thinking. Far from regarding all human beings as self-evidently equal in God’s eyes and, therefore worthy of the civility due to anyone created in His image, Coulter uses racial, ethnic, gender, and class constructs as criteria to judge the worth of individuals and whole groups of people. Her complex criteria matrix is further complicated by political partisanship and personal prevarication.

Chapter 11

Life: Choosing the Abundant Life

Of the murder of abortionists, Coulter said, “Those few abortionists were shot, or, depending on your point of view, had a procedure with a rifle performed on them. I’m not justifying it, but I do understand how it happened.”[43]

Furthermore, Coulter has defended the execution of prisoners for crimes they did not commit! She once declared, “Sometimes people are innocent of the crime they were sentenced to death for, but perhaps not all crimes.”[44] Investment banker Judith Aidoo then briefly lectured Coulter on the law, specifically, “exact justice.” She also favors capital punishment for teenagers: “I enthusiastically embrace the death penalty [for 14-year-olds convicted of murder].”[45]

Coulter even defended a Democrat – of My Lai Massacre infamy – for the wanton slaughter of innocent civilians, saying, “Even on the worst version, I think it’s a little scurrilous to sit back and attack [Bob Kerrey]. That’s why they say ‘War is hell.’ Civilians get killed.”[46]

In a chilling clarification of her views on the murder of abortionist George Tiller, Coulter boldly stated, “I don’t really like to think of it as a murder. It was terminating Tiller in the 203rd trimester.”[47] Morally tone-deaf, Coulter added a macabre twist: “I’ve noticed there haven’t been a lot of [conservatives] talking about [abortion]. I’d like to think it’s because they’re hung over from the ‘Hurray, George Tiller is Dead Party.’”

Chapter 12

Hypocrisy: Defaming Our Lord and Savior

With Rush Limbaugh’s admission of prescription drug abuse in 2003, some conservatives unabashedly defended him. Rationalizations ran rampant on MSNBC’s Scarborough Country,[48] that discussion being emblematic of the debate within the larger conservative community. Coulter offered a whole series of justifications for Limbaugh’s illegal drug use:

  1. Rush is the beloved father of talk radio.
  2. Rush was experiencing back pain.
  3. No one is perfect like Jesus.
  4. Rush should be praised for doing so well while on drugs.
  5. Rush is my friend.

Sean Hannity frequently attacks the Left for its “hate speech” and “hyperbole,” even calling liberal depictions of conservatives throwing grandmothers over a cliff as “vile,”[49] yet defends Coulter’s hate speech and hyperbole. Coulter’s rhetoric is often far more pejorative and hyperbolic than that which Hannity condemns.

Chapter 13

Heresy: Appearing as an Angel of Light

Perhaps the two most perverse aspects of Coulter’s gospel are her expression of enmity for fellow human beings (including people of faith) and her defense of hypocrisy (at least when committed by conservatives). Indeed, Coulter’s hatred extends to issuing frequent death threats against people, all in the name of advancing civilization and the gospel of life. Further, Coulter politicizes faith (as she does patriotism) by proclaiming its existence exclusively within the province of only one political party. Moreover, Coulter does this through demagogy, deception and deceit, thus turning the gospel of Jesus Christ – a gospel of truth and love – into one of lies, hatred and hypocrisy.

Coulter has declared her hatred for feminists (“I hate the feminists. The real reason I loathe and detest feminists …[they] are also marauding, bloodthirsty vipers”),[50] the media (“It just reminded me of my hatred for the media”),[51] the government (“I think I’m second to none in my hatred for the government”),[52] Bill Clinton (“I’m part of the Clinton hate group”),[53] John McCain (“I used to love him, then I liked him, now I despise him”),[54] and, of course, liberals (“If you don’t hate Clinton and the people who labored to keep him in office, you don’t love your country.”),[55] liberals (“Oh, how I hate them!”),[56] and liberals (“I for one bolted past indifference straight into loathing long ago”).[57]

Coulter’s enmity erupts into death threats against individuals and organizations, such as Elizabeth Dole (assault weapons), John Walker Lindh (execution, burned alive), Transportation Secretary Norman Mineta (assassination), the New York Times building (truck bomb), John Kerry (carpet-bombing), Vice President Al Gore (friendly fire), California Governor Gray Davis (friendly fire), Senator John Edwards (strangling), Senator John Kerry (carpet bombing), American journalists in Iraq (assassination), Supreme Court Justice Stevens (poisoning), all the liberal Supreme Court justices (terrorist attack). (See Appendix 1.)

Chapter 14

Godless: Exhibiting the Works of the Flesh

Coulter herself has turned Christian theology on its head by claiming that “being nice to people is an incidental tenet of Christianity.” Coulter denies the Christian imperative given by Jesus Christ Himself in the Sermon on the Mount – the Golden Rule. Surprisingly, Coulter cites both Ronald Reagan and Jesus Christ as role models, yet the former embraced the Golden Rule while the latter commanded it.

Coulter even transformed the evangelical “What Would Jesus Do?” into a sacrilegious question: “Who Would Jesus Kill?” Boasting of being a “mean Christian” doesn’t seem to register on her conscience as the oxymoron that it is, an oxymoron which only makes sense through newspeak and doublethink. Coulter redefines Christianity in political terms and uses cognitive dissonance to reshape the gospel of Christ.

Sadly, Coulter has a one-dimensional vision of liberalism and of Christianity. Incapable of discerning an intersection of the two, she has developed a convoluted hodgepodge of viewpoints to support her theory of liberal godlessness. In the ultimate definition of demonization, Coulter places liberals on the side of demons. Coulter disparages liberal motives and actually asserts, “Liberals just want to kill humans.”

Chapter 15

Religious Right: Warriors for Truth

Coulter once observed that the mainstream media criticizes the “religious right” and “portrays us as an obscure cult of skinheads. … But we are a very powerful force.”[58]

Amazingly, just a few years earlier, Coulter denied the very existence of the “Religious Right” based on 1) conflicting definitions for “Religious Right” and 2) leadership differences within the “Religious Right.”[59] More astonishing, leaders of the Religious Right accepted her absurd premise.

According to Coulter, the “Religious Right” is “nonexistent,” a “mythical enemy,” “bogeyman,” a “meaningless concept,” “the left’s imaginary enemy” and “ghosts of liberal imaginations” “invented” by the Left to strike “terror” in the hearts of Americans.

Coulter even claims she is unable to locate a single person who is a member of the Religious Right. I did a Google search on “Religious Right” and, within a few minutes, came across Christianity Today. Christianity Today has written dozens of articles about the Religious Right and has devoted whole issues to the Religious Right with articles written by people from the Religious Right.[60]

As I wrote in 2002, “Coulter’s greatest fault, however, is not her provocative policy ideas or discriminatory remarks. … Coulter’s offense rather is that she portrays herself as a Christian conservative, a representative of the views and principles of the Religious Right, and then uses that adopted identity to spread hate and fear, thus stigmatizing all those who embrace Christian conservatism.”[61]

Chapter 16

Religious Left: Ambassadors for Love

Where Coulter’s views on the Religious Right have been confusing and contradictory, her views on the Religious Left have been constant: it does not exist. As early as 1998, Coulter asserted that there are no liberal Christians. According to her, the Religious Left does not exist! In Slander (2002), Coulter denied the existence of the Religious Right (see previous chapter), while simultaneously attacking the Atheist Left as its nemesis. (If the former does not exist, how can the latter be its nemesis?)

The atheist left is Coulter’s straw man. Most Americans are religious and there are very few atheists in America. Coulter herself gives the lie to her fabrication when she cites statistics which show Christians in America are relatively split, politically, left and right. A more apropos dichotomy is Religious Right versus Religious Left. Christian author David Aikman notes that according to a 2007 Newsweek poll, roughly 3% of Americans are atheists.[62]

In the fall of 2010, Coulter again asserted, “All liberals are atheists. Only the ones who have to stand for election even bother pretending to believe in God.”[63] To date, no Christian or conservative leader has yet to dispute her assertion.

Chapter 17

Perfected: The End of Sanctification

During her book tour for If Democrats Had Any Brains, They’d Be Republicans (2007), Coulter was embroiled in yet another controversy of her own making. Talking with Jewish talk show host Donnie Deutsch, who had treated her very favorably in previous interviews, Coulter made the astonishing claim, “That is what Christians consider themselves: perfected Jews.”[64]

A Fox News Channel lead paragraph remarkably declared, “Slash-and-burn columnist Ann Coulter shocked a cable TV talk-show audience Monday when she declared that Jews need to be ‘perfected’ by becoming Christians, and that America would be better off if everyone were Christian.”[65] Yes, Fox News!

The tipping moment quickly arrived when Coulter claimed, “No, we think – we just want Jews to be perfected, as they say.” She added, “That is what Christianity is. We believe the Old Testament, but ours is more like Federal Express. You have to obey laws.”

Immediately following the taped interview – long before it even aired – Coulter began her campaign against Deutsch. Playing the victim for radio talk show host Kevin McCullough, Coulter claimed that she had been set up. McCullough fell for it. Indeed, McCullough accused Deutsch of being an “angry anti-Christian bigot.”

Chapter 18

Victimhood: Christian Persecution Complex

Coulter frequently likens herself to Jesus Christ and heroic martyrs of past and present. Everyone knows her moral and political views, from being anti-abortion and anti-gay marriage, and pro-abstinence and pro-traditional values, to favoring a strong military with limited government and low taxes. However, Coulter’s controversies inevitably arise not from her stated Christian/conservative commentary or biblical views but are due entirely to her own carefully-constructed manner of conveying them, with an avowed intent to incite rage.

Virtually every “firestorm of controversy” circling around Coulter has been contrived by Coulter herself, or is the direct consequence of her own unchristian behavior and rhetoric. Rarely are these controversies sparked by conservative principles or Christian doctrines. Rather, the catalyst is almost invariably Coulter’s own deliberate provocation (she calls herself a polemicist and provocateur with good reason). And, with good reason, reasonable people are outraged at her use of hate speech, character assassination, elimination rhetoric, lies, and slurs (racial, ethnic, gay, misogynist). These behaviors – which are antithetical to Jesus’ teachings – are rightly condemned.

Coulter even views constructive criticism as a badge of honor and proof that she is always right (one of the hallmarks of addictive thinking). Denial demands that all criticism be false. As the Daily Telegraph observed: “This is a woman who likes being loved but loves to be hated. ‘Most of the time, I just think of Chairman Mao’s saying that it’s a good thing to be attacked by the enemy. The more vicious they are, the happier I am.’”[66]

In a 2002 interview with World magazine, Coulter said, “I tell the truth, relentlessly. In addition, I thrive on their attacks, which seems to annoy them.”[67] With the publication of How to Talk to a Liberal (2004), Coulter crystallized her self-identity as a conservative martyr. The promotion for How to Talk to a Liberal (and the book itself) portrays Coulter as a heroic victim, even victimized by those conservative publications which “censor” her. By a psychological quirk, everything Coulter does and everything said about Coulter is proof of Coulter’s self-image as a heroic victim.[68]

Chapter 19

Confessions of Faith

In the mid-1990s, Coulter correlated character development with a belief in God. She asserted that it is virtually impossible to “teach values separate from God,”[69] amplifying that our “common character attributes” derive from “a belief in a higher being.” Questions to consider are whether Coulter and her acolytes exhibit the character Coulter professes to promote and whether their own beliefs in a higher being have developed godly character within them. Beliefs which are not internalized, which are not practiced, are dead beliefs. A transformed life is an engaged life, one engaged with the things of God.

In a 2009 essay,[70] Coulter offered astonishing clarity on the gospel message: “Christians aren’t people who believe they are without sin; they’re people who know they’re sinners and are awestruck by God’s grace in sending his only Son to take the punishment they deserve.” However, as we have seen, Coulter has difficulty in living in the grace she claims to have received from God. Humility and moral integrity are hallmarks of a grace-filled life.

Her very next sentence is equally astonishing, this time for its spiritual naivety and for the psychological projection contained within it: “This is in contradistinction to liberals, all of whom believe they’re on a fast track to heaven on the basis of being ‘basically good’ people – and also believe that anyone who disagrees with that theological view is evil.”

Coulter exists somewhere within the four spheres of orthodoxy, hypocrisy, heresy, and apostasy. In her truly unique gospel, Coulter embraces some degree of orthodoxy (the person believes and lives the truth) mixed with large measures of hypocrisy (the person believes truth but lives a lie) and even heresy (the person believes and lives a lie). Coulter has even flirted with apostasy (the person forsakes the truth and embraces a lie), once writing, “If God himself came down from heaven and told me these cops intentionally murdered Amadou Diallo knowing he was unarmed, I would not believe it.”[71]

May God sweetly sift the chaff from her soul and spirit and reap an abundant harvest of wheat in her life.

Chapter 20

It Really Is a God Thing

Published on January 6th, in her extraordinary essay, “If You Can Find a Better Deal, Take It!”[72] Coulter cogently and succinctly encapsulated the central precepts of the gospel of Jesus Christ. In a relatively non-polemical fashion. Suggesting a new and improved Ann Coulter may be on the horizon. Which would be the handiwork of God. Let’s all give glory to God.

In her essay, Coulter observed that faith in Jesus Christ’s sacrifice for our sins freed us to be forgiven. She concluded with these exquisite words, “With Christianity, your sins are forgiven, the slate is wiped clean and your eternal life is guaranteed through nothing you did yourself, even though you don’t deserve it. It’s the best deal in the universe.” Truth and humility in one paragraph!

Coulter also wrote that spiritual transformation is the natural consequence of being forgiven by God. All Christians, having been forgiven by God, should therefore live transformed lives in which they no longer dwell in sin. As Coulter put it, “Christianity is also the hardest religion in the world because, if you believe Christ died for your sins and rose from the dead, you have no choice but to give your life entirely over to Him. No more sexual promiscuity, no lying, no cheating, no stealing, no killing inconvenient old people or unborn babies – no doing what all the other kids do.”

Does Coulter believe what she writes? Will she practice what she preaches? Time will tell.[73]

Chapter 21

Prayer

On December 2, 1997, a deranged student of New Freedom Christian High School in Paducah, KY, shot eight fellow students who were participating in a prayer circle. In discussing the tragic shooting and death of three of those students, Coulter exclaimed, “guns are great things. … If one of those kids in Paducah, Kentucky, if all of them had been emerging from a gun-training class rather than a prayer class, only one person would be dead and it would be the culprit.”[74]

Apparently not grasping the fact that these were children, Coulter later reemphasized her point: “If those kids had been carrying guns they would have gunned down this one [child] gunman,” concluding with her own words of wisdom, “Don’t pray. Learn to use guns.”

In contrast to Coulter’s dismissive approach to fellowship with our providential Father in heaven, Scripture is replete with exhortations to communicate with the One who can change the circumstances of our lives and, indeed, our very beings.

Endnotes:

[1]     Headline on the cover of the National Enquirer, 6/26/06.

[2]       Hillary Rodham Clinton, “Sen. Clinton: Coulter’s 9/11 remarks ‘vicious, mean-spirited,’” USA Today, 6/7/06.

[3]       Ann Coulter, In Depth, C-Span, 8/7/11.

[4]       For greater insight into Coulter’s family and religious origins, see “Chapter 1: The Seduction of Ann Coulter,” in my free PDF book, The Beauty of Conservatism, which is available for download at www.CoulterWatch.com/beauty.pdf.

[5]       Ann Coulter, MSNBC, 3/30/97.

[6]       Ann Coulter, quoted by Toby Harnden, “I love to pick fights with liberals,” Daily Telegraph, 7/19/02.

[7]       Ann Coulter, Rivera Live, CNBC, 6/7/00.

[8]       Ann Coulter, Jerry Hughes Show, 2/5/99.

[9]       Ann Coulter, MSNBC, 12/1/96.

[10]     Ann Coulter, MSNBC, 2/2/97.

[11]     See also my free PDF book, The Beauty of Conservatism, which is available for download at www.CoulterWatch.com/beauty.pdf. Notwithstanding Coulter’s inclusion in Darwin’s Deadly Legacy, a valid case is made for the danger of negative consequences arising whenever the creation divorces itself from its Creator.

[12]     Ann Coulter, Hannity & Colmes, FNC, 6/20/01.

[13]     Ann Coulter, “Coulter, sweetly disemboweling the left wing,” Philadelphia Inquirer, 7/30/03.

[14]     Lynda Wright, “Ms. Right,” People, 7/29/02, pg. 107.

[15]     “Ann Coulter: The blond assassin,” The Independent, 8/16/04, http://news.independent.co.uk/people/profiles/article52029.ece, accessed 9/19/07.

[16]     Ann Coulter, The Mike Rosen Show, KOA News Radio 850.

[17]     Hunter Walker, “Ann Coulter Responds To Furor Over Her Blind Mane Joke By Making More Blind Man Jokes,” www.Politicker.com, 5/4/12.

[18]     Ann Coulter, MSNBC, 11/17/96.

[19]     Ann Coulter, Crossfire, CNN, 11/23/01.

[20]     Ibid.

[21]     Marvin Olasky, “South Park vs. Ann Coulter,” World, 8/13/05.

[22]     Ann Coulter, Vantage Points: Issues for Women, Amazon City Radio, 12/5/97.

[23]     Gerry Spence, Rivera Live, CNBC, 11/19/99.

[24]     Ann Coulter, Fox Face Off, FNC, 6/18/99.

[25]     Ann Coulter, National Review, 11/7/00, http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/comment110700a.shtml.

[26]     John, the apostle of love, wrote, “Whoever does not love does not know God, because God is love.” (1st John 4:8).

[27]     Ann Coulter, quoted in Washington Post, 8/1/00.

[28]     Kevin McCullough, “How Do You Solve a Problem Like Ann Coulter?” Hot Air, 11/17/11.

[29]     See John C. Cotey, “Bestseller trampled under footnotes,” St. Petersburg Times, 8/26/02; Michael Scherer and Sarah Secules, “How Slippery is Slander?” Columbia Journalism Review, Nov/Dec 2002. For a precise, detailed analysis of Slander, check out the July and August 2002 archives for Daily Howler (http://www.dailyhowler.com/archives-2002.shtml).

[30]     Though reluctant to apply the term “pathological liar” to Coulter, that application is validated by the plethora of prevarication contained in all of her post-9/11 books. Slander alone has been amply documented as replete with lies, falsehoods, fabrications, mischaracterizations and the like all to prove her thesis – see http://slannder.homestead.com/, July 2002 entries for http://www.dailyhowler.com/archives-2002.shtml and April 2005 entries in http://www.dailyhowler.com/archives-2005.shtml.

[31]     Ann Coulter, speech, 6/8/99.

[32]     Gaby Wood, “Lethally Blonde,” The Observer, 6/11/06, http://observer.guardian.co.uk/review/story/0,,1794552,00.html.

[33]     Ann Coulter, O’Reilly Factor, FNC, 6/28/07, http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,287381,00.html.

[34]     Ann Coulter, “Liberals and the Woman Who Hates Them,” Townhall.com, 9/30/07, http://www.townhall.com/Columnists/AnnCoulter/2007/09/30/liberals_and_the_woman_who_hates_them?page=full&comments=true.

[35]     Ann Coulter, Cleary University, 10/1/07.

[36]     Ann Coulter and Brian Kilmeade, Fox & Friends, FNC, 10/2/07.

[37]     Ann Coulter, Newsmax, 10/2/07, http://observanda.blogspot.com/2007/10/newsmax-coulter-interview-laughs-abound.html.

[38]     Ann Coulter, MSNBC, 8/23/96.

[39]     Ann Coulter, Oregon State University, 11/19/01.

[40]     Ann Coulter, “The color of demagogy,” 1/16/02.

[41]     Ann Coulter, Slander: Liberal Lies About the American Right, Crown Forum, 2002, pg. 17.

[42]     Ann Coulter, In Depth, C-Span, 8/7/11.

[43]     Ann Coulter, Reclaiming America for Christ Conference, Ft. Lauderdale, FL, 3/3/07. Coulter said something similar at a Values Voter Summit in Washington, D.C.: “For two decades after Roe, no abortion clinic doctors were killed. But immediately after Planned Parenthood v. Casey, after working within the system did not work, produced no results…for the first time an abortion doctor was killed. A few more abortion clinic workers were killed in the next few years. I’m not justifying it, but I understand when you take democracy away from people, some of them will react violently. The total number of deaths attributable to Roe were seven abortion clinic workers and 40 million unborn babies.” (See http://www.publiceye.org/christian_right/values-voters/Values%20Voters-09-04.html#TopOfPage.) See Daniel Borchers, “Ann Coulter Speeches Scrubbed by Conservative Groups,” Bradblog, 5/1/07, http://www.bradblog.com/?p=4476.

[44]     Ann Coulter, MSNBC, 11/9/96.

[45]     Ann Coulter, MSNBC, 4/10/97.

[46]     Ann Coulter, Politically Incorrect, ABC, 4/26/01.

[47]     Ann Coulter, The O’Reilly Factor, FNC, 6/22/09.

[48]     Scarborough Country, MSNBC, 10/10/03.

[49]     Sean Hannity, Hannity, Premiere Radio Networks, 5/7/12.

[50]     Ann Coulter, How to Talk to a Liberal (If You Must), Crown Forum, 2004, pp. 324-325.

[51]     Ann Coulter, MSNBC, 9/21/96.

[52]     Ann Coulter, MSNBC, 4/19/97.

[53]     Ibid.

[54]     Ann Coulter, quoted in Washington Post, 8/1/00.

[55]     Ann Coulter, George, July 1999.

[56]     Ann Coulter, National Review, 11/7/00.

[57]     Ann Coulter, Human Events, 8/18/00.

[58]     Ann Coulter, Foreword for Rev. Donald Wildmon, Speechless: Silencing the Christians, Pathway Book Service, 2009, pg. xvi.

[59]     See chapter nine (“Shadowboxing the Apocryphal ‘Religious Right’”), Ann Coulter, Slander: Liberal Lies About the American Right, Crown Forum, 2002.

[60]     See http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/9ta/9ta058.html, http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/7t1/7t1054.html and http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2000/121/14.0.html.

[61]     Daniel Borchers, “Columnist does conservatives a disservice,” Palladium-Item, Richmond, IN, 9/14/02, pg. A6, http://www.coulterwatch.com/files/Columnist%20does%20conservatives%20a%20disservice.pdf.

[62]     David Aikman, The Delusion of Disbelief: Why the New Atheism Is a Threat to Your Life, Liberty, and Pursuit of Happiness, Salt River, 2008, pg. 4, referencing “The Latest Numbers,” Newsweek, 3/13/07.

[63]     Ann Coulter, “Obama is not a Muslim,” 9/1/10.

[64]     Ann Coulter, The Big Idea with Donnie Deutsch, CNBC, 10/8/07. See video at http://www.cnbc.com/id/21257844.

[65]     “Columnist Ann Coulter Shocks Cable TV Show, Declaring ‘Jews Need to Be Perfected by Becoming Christians,’” FNC, 10/11/07, http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,301216,00.html.

[66]     Ann Coulter, Daily Telegraph, 7/19/02.

[67]     Ann Coulter interview, World magazine, 10/5/02. http://www.worldmag.com/world/issue/10-05-02/cultural_4.asp.

[68]     These dynamics are explained in greater detail in “Chapter 6: I Am Victim, Hear Me Whine,” in my free PDF book, The Beauty of Conservatism, which is available for download at www.CoulterWatch.com/beauty.pdf.

[69]     Ann Coulter, MSNBC, 2/2/97.

[70]     Ann Coulter, “Liberal Taliban Issues Fatwa Against Miss California,” 5/13/09.

[71]     Ann Coulter, “A liberal lynching,” 2/16/00.

[72]   Ann Coulter, “If You Can Find a Better Deal, Take It!” 1/6/10.

[73]    Within just a few weeks, hopes were dashed by the concluding eliminationistic paragraph of an otherwise laudatory Coulter column: “Republicans should defend any investment houses that never benefited from a government bailout. But anyone who took huge gambles, lost and got bailed out with taxpayer money should be tortured and then shot, miraculously brought back to life, tortured some more, then shot a few more times.” – Ann Coulter, “Obama’s Owned – You Can Bank On It,” 2/10/10. With her very next column (“Ahmadinejad: ‘Yep, I’m Nuclear!’” 2/17/10), Coulter reverted back to the hostile polemics which have been her métier since before the turn of the millennium.

[74]     Ann Coulter, Politically Incorrect, ABC, 12/18/97.

Ann Coulter and “the Democrats’ Thousand Year Reich”

At an Eagle Forum Leadership Summit earlier this month, Ann Coulter told the youth audience, “It seems like we’re in the middle of the Democrats’ Thousand Year Reich.”

Reich

Coulter Abhors Nazi and Fascist Imagery

Coulter claims,

“We certainly don’t demonize the opponents the way they do. We may ridicule them, make jokes about them. But the way they turned George Bush into the enemy, a Nazi. George Soros and Al Gore have all compared him to Hitler. He was compared to Osama bin Laden by a New York Times op-ed writer. William Raspberry, Pulitzer Prize-winning columnist, a liberal, called him the devil.”[1]

“A novel released in 2004 advocated the assassination of President Bush ‘for the good of humankind.’ Liberal columnist William Raspberry referred to President Bush as ‘the Devil.’ Remember the good old days, during Bush’s honeymoon with the press, when he was just Hitler?”[2]

Coulter Employs Nazi and Fascist Imagery

If conservatives don’t demonize opponents, then Ann Coulter is not a conservative.

Having lambasted those who employ Nazi imagery, what does Coulter do? Employ Nazi imagery.

Coulter’s remarks at the Heritage Foundation come as no surprise to those who have witnessed Coulter’s regular use of Nazi imagery.

Coulter once compared both Barack Obama and John McCain to Hitler – in the same election year. Coulter asserted, “[Obama’s autobiography is] a dime store Mein Kampf” [and Obama is a two-bit Hitler].”[3] As for McCain, “I’m not comparing McCain to Hitler. Hitler had a coherent tax policy.”[4] Similarly, Coulter famously named Katie Couric “the affable Eva Braun.”

Coulter has a fascination with fascists. “[Liberals are] total fascists, but they’re going out and imposing their left-wing fascism on the rest of the country. … They’re not only fascist where they live, they’re expanding their fascism to the rest of America.”[5]

Time and time again, Coulter makes the same point: “I think that is not going to inure to the Democrats’ benefit, to be having this obviously political prosecution of a political enemy. No, that just shows them to be the fascists that they are.”[6]

Coulter’s fascination extends to Nazis, with these assertions about liberals: “They’re Nazi block watchers. … Block watchers, you know. They tattle on their parents, turn them in to the Nazis. They’re little Nazi block watchers.”[7] Ever on her mind, Coulter warns, “Those, the Nazi block watchers are coming back and attacking the Democrats now if they’re not crazy enough.”[8]

And now, a new generation of young conservatives – at a Leadership Summit – have been indoctrinated in Coulter’s ideological humor: “It seems like we’re in the middle of the Democrats’ Thousand Year Reich.”

Barbie01

Endnotes:

[1]       Ann Coulter, Hannity, FNC, 6/6/11.

[2]       Ann Coulter, Guilty: Liberal “Victims” and Their Assault on America, Crown Forum, 2009, pg. 244.

[3]       Ann Coulter, Hannity & Colmes, FNC, 4/3/08.

[4]       Ann Coulter, CPAC, 2/8/08.

[5]       “Ann Coulter: The blonde assassin,” The Independent, 8/16/04.

[6]       Ann Coulter, The Big Story, FNC, 10/27/05.

[7]       Ann Coulter, O’Reilly Factor, FNC, 12/1/05.

[8]       Ann Coulter, Glenn Beck Show, 10/5/07.

Ann Coulter Condemns “Moral Show-offs”

On Wednesday, Coulter went on a half-hour Twitter rant upon reading a New York Times story about the chaos on our southern border. Her condemnation was a mixture of hatred for immigrants, hatred of liberals, and hatred of liberal Christians (who, in her mind, not only aren’t Christians at all, but don’t even believe in God).

Above all, it was an arrogant expression of self-righteous indignation.

Moral Show-offs

Coulter’s Tweets

Before continuing, it would be worth reading her complete set of tweets on the subject.

Moral Show-offs

Coulter’s Censorious Spirit

Notice Coulter’s intense hatred of people – church leaders and parishioners alike – whose theology compels them to adopt political positions with which she disagrees.

Because Coulter does not agree with them, they must be lying hypocrites. She claims none of them believe in God!

Coulter seems incapable of recognizing faith in action. She abhors the intended results and presumes evil motivations.

Because she regards them as “fake ‘Christians,’” then something other than biblical doctrine must be motivating them, such as personal aggrandizement. These “moral show-offs,” in her mind, are “phony, grandstanding, Bible-toting hypocrite(s).” Consequently, Coulter impugns not only their motives but their character.

Pretty tough words for people Coulter has never even met!

But that’s our Ann.

I remember when she spoke of censoriousness on MSNBC. In defense of smoking and the tobacco industry, Coulter said …

“The main overarching point I wanted to make is that I think, especially since listening to the callers, and the sort of moral fervor and censoriousness – I think it’s a strong human impulse to be self-righteous and censorious and, now, it’s gotten to the point where we can’t be self-righteous and censorious of the things that humans have been censorious for the past 5,000 years, like illegitimacy, like deserting your country in a time of war … It’s because we are not censorious and self-righteous about promiscuous sex, not to say perverted sex, all of the censoriousness comes bubbling up and it’s all directed to smokers. I mean, people who are handing out condoms in schools are the ones who are most upset about smoking.”[1]

But as we have seen, Coulter is incapable of controlling her own “strong human impulse to be self-righteous and censorious.” All of her “moral fervor and censoriousness” “comes bubbling up” – and it’s all directed at liberals!

Coulter, devoid of charitable impulses, cannot grasp simple Christian charity. She is right that the government should not be involved in dispensing compassion. But she attacks individuals, charities, and churches for doing what they are called to do. See “Ann Coulter Auditions for U.N. Ambassador” at http://t.co/R7IDzwnUJ8.

Is Coulter a Moral Show-off?

Let’s think about that. Consider a sampling of her books:

Slander (2002) – “It’s all liberals’ fault.”

Treason (2003) – All liberals are traitors.

Godless (2006) – All liberals are godless.

Demonic (2011) – All liberals are demonic.

Since even before 9/11, Coulter has portrayed and promoted herself as the premiere representative of patriotism and godliness. Would that qualify as being a “moral show-off?”

Resources:

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.

Endnotes:

[1]       Ann Coulter, MSNBC, 3/20/97.

Ann Coulter’s “anti-logic” is illogical

A striking comment in Ann Coulter’s latest column deserves comment. Coulter wrote, “This is something I don’t recall encountering before. It’s anti-logic.”

Yet, in Demonic, Coulter wrote: “Liberal logic is exactly backwards. They think: How do I know Lebron James just made a great shot? Answer: Because the cheerleaders cheered him. They have no capacity to reason in the absence of thunderous applause or booing from the bleachers indicating what they should think.”

Wouldn’t that be anti-logic?

anti-logic

On Tuesday, I urged Coulter, “Let’s be Logical, Ann.” The next day, she claimed to have encountered for the very first time something she calls “anti-logic.”

Let’s be logical. Coulter employs anti-logic all the time.

Repulsive Women

In Slander (2002), Coulter asserted, “More than any of their other hate speech, the left’s attacks on women for being ugly tell you everything.  There is nothing so irredeemably cruel as an attack on a woman for her looks. Attacking a female for being ugly is a hideous thing, always inherently vicious.”

Yet, in that very book, Coulter repeatedly attacked the looks of liberal women. Bella Abzug is high on her list. She wrote, “A blind man in America would think the ugliest women ever to darken the planet are Paula Jones, Linda Tripp, and Katherine Harris. This from the party of Bella Abzug.”

In Guilty (2009), Coulter explicitly called Abzug “physically repulsive.” In Godless (2006), Coulter wrote, “Miss Landolph, to put it as charitably as possible, is physically repulsive in appearance.”

Is it logical to condemn attacks on women’s looks – calling it “irredeemably cruel,” a “hideous thing,” and “inherently vicious” – while doing so yourself? Frequently. As occasion permits?

Stupid Liberals

Is it logical to condemn attacks on the intelligence of people – calling it childish – while doing so yourself? Frequently. As occasion permits?

In Slander (2002), Coulter wrote, “This is how six-year-olds argue: They call everything ‘stupid.’” But, also in Slander, Coulter asserted, “If a conservative says you’re stupid, you’re stupid.” And, in that very same book, she proceeded to identify all those she regards as stupid.

During her Slander book tour, Coulter spoke of liberalism’s big lie, saying, “The big [lie] and the one I, I, that is really all the same lie is – don’t listen to conservatives. They are stupid or they’re nuts.”

Coulter charged, “This is how liberals respond to arguments, to principled arguments, to facts, to figures, to studies. They respond by calling the conservatives stupid, mean.”

Continuing to elaborate on her point, Coulter said, “This is one of, I think, the biggest lies. Liberals are incredibly vicious.”

Having accused the Left of viciousness in their lies – just as she had accused them of viciousness in their attacks on women’s looks – Coulter claimed, “They accuse Republicans and conservatives of every malfeasance imaginable and then they sit back and say, ‘Oh, both sides do it.’ Both sides don’t do it, as I demonstrate in my book.”

Here again, Coulter is wrong. Both sides do do it. Coulter does it.

Resources:

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