Tag Archives: hypocrite

Never Trust Ann Coulter – at ANY Age

A fixture on the political scene for almost two decades, author Ann Coulter has made a name for herself and given Conservatism a bad name. While many on the Right hail her as a heroine, a growing number of conservatives have discovered that Ann Coulter cannot be trusted.

As documented in my previous books, Coulter – seemingly without a conscience – will say and do whatever she needs to in order to accomplish her goal. Lies, betrayal, defamation, hate speech, elimination rhetoric – all are justified by her to achieve her end.

In a word, unscrupulous.


Here is a sampling from Never Trust Ann Coulter – at ANY Age:

Never Trust Ann Coulter – at ANY Age

Daniel J. Borchers

Published: December 8, 2013

78 pages



Arrogance of Power

Never Trust Ann Coulter – at Any Age briefly examines Coulter’s latest book, Never Trust a Liberal Over 3 – Especially a Republican, and it looks at the various ways in which Coulter herself cannot be trusted!

Many of the essays reprinted in her latest book – as with so many of her earlier works – are filled with projection: projecting her negative attitudes, attributes, and articulations unto those she targets for destruction.

Conservatives rightly decried the politics of personal destruction during the Clinton years, but Coulter has taken that destructive practice to a new level – all in the name of Christ and of Conservatism!

Born and bred an elite,[1] living a privileged life,[2] and taking full advantage of a continually expanding network of elite power-brokers,[3] Coulter has seemingly sought glory from the advent of her birth.

Arrogance definitively describes Coulter’s latest book and the substance of her book tour appearances.[4] More than usual, Coulter thinks she knows what is best for everyone else and insists we subscribe to her edicts, foisting her innate superiority upon us mere mortals. For instance, she – and she alone – creates the criteria for conservative electoral victory: only senators and governors can run for national office. Exhorting party unity – and condemning previous primarying of officeholders and candidates – Coulter nonetheless provides lists of Republicans she wants primaryed and removed from office.[5]

As reported in a Washington Post Style section profile during her book tour, while she was being escorted to a TV studio for an interview, she complained “about not getting booked on the big-time programs,” asking, “Is this an Internet show? I want to be on ‘George Stephanopoulos.’”[6] Coulter’s sense of entitlement tells her – and us – that she thinks she deserves to be on the biggest and best talk shows.

As I was completing this preface, Coulter repeatedly accused the Obama administration of “arrogance,” [7] seemingly oblivious to that word’s relevance to herself. She then described why they are so arrogant:Obama and the people around him thought he would get away with it the same way he got away with Benghazi, the same way he got away with the IRS being used to, to, to harass Obama’s political enemies. He has been able to count on what I call the non-Fox media until now to just, just treat him like some cult figure.”

Sounds awfully familiar, doesn’t it? For over a dozen years, Coulter has said the most outrageous things – which would have prompted the firing of just about anyone else – but she brags about surviving those controversies, all enabled by her well-placed friends and colleagues.

Chapter 1

Never … at ANY Age

Since before 9/11, Ann Coulter has proven herself untrustworthy. Her lies and hate speech are legendary because they are real – they are not figments of her opponents’ imaginations as she claims. One can arguably lay a large measure of blame to Coulter for the 2012 GOP presidential debacle (see next chapter). Yet, Coulter wants to – again – choose for conservatives the best “electable” conservative candidate. Hubris! Run from it!

An utterly fascinating video of Coulter, posted by Harry Shearer, shows her in-studio wearing a whole series of masks within the space of 74 seconds.[8]

Shearer’s video introduction is explicitly to the point: “It’s not just liberals she castigates. Here, Ann Coulter veers from deriding the intelligence of her debating opponent to reviling a certain Mr. Limbaugh, and finishes off with a sweet photo-op smile.”

At the beginning of this short clip, Coulter responds to the interviewer: “You don’t even know what the Republican approach was. That isn’t what Bush did (laughter and eye rolls).”

Seconds later, apparently, referring to her interlocutor, she mutters, “God, she’s stupid,” followed by her realization that the interview was over: “I think that’s it.”

To, apparently the sound technician, she explains, “No, I wanted to get to them dissing the queen. I had a lot of jokes on that.” Hearing something off-camera, Coulter asks, “What’s that noise?” and then says, “Oh.” Noticing someone off-camera, she exclaims, “You’re still here! … I think so.” Responding to comments from her earpiece, she says, “Thank you!”

While disengaging herself from the microphone paraphernalia, she laments, “I should have given them a line from my column, but I thought it sounded too self-promoting. I already said, ‘Start attacking me instead of Rush.’ I’m getting sick of defending him. He doesn’t defend me. Fuck him!”

A smiling Coulter then quickly poses for a photo.

Say what? Consider Coulter’s last two words: “Fuck him.” To think it is one thing, to express it another. But Coulter is without inhibitions. She loves expressing the inexpressible. It has become her trademark. The more outlandish, the better – for her notoriety and her bank account.

Chapter 2

Presidential Follies

Beginning with the 2000 presidential election cycle, Coulter has insisted that she knows best and that only her criteria matters. From a field of 12 Republican candidates in 1999, Coulter anointed George W. Bush the clear winner and denounced any Republicans who got in his way, even before Bush had announced his platform.

Even though conservatives clearly rejected Romney in 2008 and did not want him in 2012, Coulter foisted him on the party through character assassination of his opponents and mischaracterization of Romney. Electoral disaster ensued.

Hearkening back to CPAC 2007, in a private conversation with Romney, a smitten Coulter gushed, “You have great answers on everything. The Reagan position on abortion is brilliant. … No, they don’t understand; we hate these liberal atheists. You can’t get these sectarian wars going with us. We’re all Christians. … You’re SO wonderful.”

Four years later, her devotion to Romney remained unquenched. Amidst a series of essays praising Romney and vilifying his foes, Coulter penned this paragraph:

“Among Romney’s positives is the fact that he has a demonstrated ability to trick liberals into voting for him. He was elected governor of Massachusetts – one of the most liberal states in the union – by appealing to Democrats, independents and suburban women… Also, Romney will be the first Republican presidential nominee since Ronald Reagan who can talk. Liberals are going to have to dust off their playbook from 30 years ago to figure out how to run against a Republican who isn’t a tongue-tied marble-mouth.”[9]

Already, Coulter was comparing Romney to Reagan, but, at the same time lauding Romney’s “ability to trick liberals into voting for him.” In other words, Romney pretended to be liberal to get elected, but is really a true conservative in disguise. Coulter still believes this nonsense.

To this day, Coulter insists, “Romney was the ideal candidate,”[10] comparing him favorably to Ronald Reagan: “Romney was a magnificent candidate and it enrages me that people will never see it because he narrowly lost to an incumbent. If this were the same demographics, as I’ve said a million times, the same demographics as 1980, Romney would have won bigger than Reagan did.”[11]

Yes, Romney was better than Reagan!

Having been wrong on Romney (twice), wrong on other presidential candidates, and wrong on congressional candidate Mark Sanford, Coulter deigns to dispense her superior wisdom to us mere mortals and insist that we embrace it.

Coulter began her latest book tour lambasting Republicans for failing to run the right candidates for office. Instead of standing for principles, she contends that the GOP should run electable candidates. Pragmatism over principle. “All that matters is winning, winning, winning.”[12]

Coulter’s strategy for winning future elections is fraught with convoluted reasoning. Indeed, she gets it backwards! On Hannity, Coulter explained her strategy: “My point is, and these Republicans looking ahead, I’m talking mostly about Senate and House elections, in 2016 we are not going to be nominating a congressman, an inspirational leader, a businessman, only look at governors and senators.”[13]

Coulter clearly articulated the primary thrust of her candidate selection process: she would nominate only governors and senators for president. But, wait, what does recent history tell us?

Senator McCain and Governor Romney each lost – on multiple occasions (two for Romney, three for McCain) – their bids for President of the United States. By Coulter’s current criteria, they should have won. They lost because they were moderates!

Chapter 3

The Capitol is Under Attack

Coulter is widely regarded as the conservative queen of sound-bites and her colorful rhetoric catches the imagination. Snappy sound-bites and clever comparisons catch one’s attention and beguile readers. Over the years, The Federalist Society (as but one example) has often commended Coulter’s commentary, extracting – as examples of brilliancy – her most inane views. Just as other fans, the Federalist Society often accepts Coulter’s words without examination when they are actually without merit.

The following example exemplifies Coulter’s technique.

“The U.S. military has had considerably more success in turning Iraq around than liberals have had in turning the ghettos around with their 40-year ‘War on Poverty.’ So far, fewer troops have been killed by hostile fire since the end of major combat in Iraq than civilians were murdered in Washington, D.C., last year (239 deaths in Iraq compared to 262 murders in D.C.). How many years has it been since we declared the end of major U.S. combat operations against Marion Barry’s regime? How long before we just give up and pull out of that hellish quagmire known as Washington, D.C.?”[14]

Many neoconservatives latched onto Coulter’s analogy with relish, treating nonsense as genius. This analogy formed the centerpiece for Coulter’s defense of America’s reconstruction in Iraq. Coulter’s analogy sparkles, but it is deceptive and is, indeed, a lie.

Nothing in it is, in fact, true!

Considered bold and brilliant, Coulter’s analogies are bold and they do sparkle, yet their brilliance is as deceptive as fool’s gold. Far from profound, this analogy is profoundly meaningless. Let’s examine this nugget to discover its true worth.

[Detailed analysis follows.]

Chapter 4

War Heroes & Villains

In October 1997, Coulter debated Bobby Muller, President of Vietnam Veterans for America, over the efficacy of banning landmines. Muller said to Ann, “In 90 percent of cases that U.S. soldiers got blown up – Ann, are you listening? – they were our own mines.” Coulter derisively replied, “No wonder you guys lost.”[15] Coulter blamed Muller, a disabled Vietnam veteran, for losing the Vietnam War.

MSNBC fired Coulter for defaming that disabled Vietnam veteran. Seven years later, she repeatedly defamed yet another disabled Vietnam War veteran, Max Cleland, and Human Events did nothing about it.

In 2004, two back-to-back Coulter polemics denied the recognized heroism of Vietnam veteran and triple-amputee Max Cleland. She would compound her defamation later that year by publishing four chapters on Cleland in her book, How to Talk to a Liberal (If You Must).[16] For the purposes of this book, it is sufficient to address only her first two essays.

Before delving into the errors contained in both columns, a comparison of the two would prove useful.

On February 11,[17] Coulter lashed out at Cleland:

Max Cleland is the Democrats’ designated hysteric … basking in the affection of liberals who have suddenly become jock-sniffers for war veterans, and working himself into a lather about President Bush’s military service. … Cleland testily remarked … what Cleland sneeringly calls … maybe Max Cleland should stop allowing Democrats to portray him as a war hero.

But Cleland is a war hero!

For Coulter, there are no liberal patriots, no liberal war heroes. She ferociously denied that world-renown war hero Pat Tillman could possibly be a liberal. A visit to Arlington Cemetery or the Vietnam Memorial leaves one head-scratching in wonder. Where are the Rs and Ds on the tombstones and crosses or next to their names? How can we determine which soldier was a “real” American and “real” patriot without knowing their party affiliation?

Even before 9/11, Coulter defined patriotism and love of country as a peculiarly Republican prerogative. In her words, anyone who objects to any facet of the Republican agenda is patently un-American.

Thus, Coulter, and others like her, feels at home demonizing Bobby Muller, Max Cleland, Wesley Clark, John McCain, John Murtha, and other American patriots who bravely served their country but do not subscribe to Coulter’s ideological beliefs.

Coulter has re-instituted the McCarthyite concept of “litmus tests” for Americanism. Clearly, some patriots need not apply.

Chapter 5

Paint Chip Profiling

Just as every American hero looks like a conservative to Coulter, all terrorists looks alike. According to Coulter, “they all look identical!” She would use “a paint chip for their skin color” to determine their guilt or innocence. In reading and listening to her commentary on terrorist profiling, it’s as if Coulter knows of only two paint chips: white and non-white.

Coulter’s obsession with racial profiling began in mid-September, 2001. By March of the following year, she had developed her bizarre, viscerally-offensive, and self-evidently false paint chip theory. Paint chips to profile? Coulter’s own unique contribution to racial demagoguery – paint chips – exceeds even South Africa’s apartheid which incorporated a complex system of racial categories.

In a speech at Harvard in 2002, Coulter said, “After Manhattan is nuked by Muslims, then should we give an extra look to swarthy Middle Eastern men? … They have all had the same eye color, hair color, skin color and half of them have been named Muhammad. This is not racial profiling; it’s a description of the suspect.”[18] Her speech title: “Liberalism and Terrorism: Different Stages of the Same Disease.” (Yes, Coulter equates liberalism and terrorism.)

Anyone with eyes to see can see that Coulter is wrong. Even a casual glance at the Department of Defense’s photo of the 19 hijackers reveals stark differences in skin color and facial features. From the particular (those 19 hijackers) – where she is wrong – Coulter extrapolates to a universal paint chip profile for identifying all terrorists.

Coulter continually conflates race and religion, alternately denouncing “Muslim terrorists” and demanding “racial profiling,” all the time ignoring the non-Arab traits of John Walker Lindh, Robert Reid, and, Jose Padilla, to name a few

Even though the racial profile doesn’t fit, Ann Coulter wants others to wear it.

One particular gaffe is worthy of note. Coulter wrote, “(This is excluding Sirhan Sirhan, the first Muslim to bring the classic religion-of-peace protest to American shores, when, in support of the Palestinians, he assassinated Robert Kennedy.)”[19] Of course, Coulter undermined both of her major points – the necessity for racial (religious) profiling and the Islam-is-inherently-evil paradigm – since Sirhan Sirhan was not a Muslim but a Christian.

From the onset of the war on terror, Coulter has religiously promoted racial profiling – for religious extremists! Once again, she seeks implementation of racial profiling to catch religious extremists. Did you catch that? Racial profiling for religious extremists? In Coulter’s mind – or at least, in her commentary – race and religion are synonymous.

Most Muslims are not Arabs at all. Moreover, most of the 3.5 million Arab Americans were Christian (77%). Further, the Muslim population worldwide was approximately 1.7 billion in 2003. Are they all really terrorists?

Still, Coulter writes that profiling Arabs will prevent Muslims from terrorizing Americans. Her essays regularly interchange “Arab” and “Muslim,” as if they are identical. Failure to accept this fact – race does not equal religion – suggests either a willful ignorance or an obliviousness to reality.

In 2003, Coulter wrote, “European barbarism baffles Americans, since they look like us.”[20] How do Europeans “look like us?” White? The following year, Coulter again accentuated race: “When we were fighting communism, OK, they had mass murderers and gulags, but they were white men and they were sane. Now we’re up against absolutely insane savages.”[21]

Coulter commended the FBI efforts against Islamic terrorism in Treason: “The FBI had been on the Arab community like white on rice with wiretaps, informants, arrests, and interrogations. By the end of 2002, the Department of Justice had disrupted terrorist cells in Buffalo, Portland, and Detroit.”[22] What Coulter failed to mention is that a number of those suspects were non-Arabs and women. Terrorist cells in other locations (Newburgh, Miami, North Carolina) similarly included non-Arab jihadists.

The Beltway Snipers terrorized the D.C. for some time. Coulter castigated Homeland Security and the politically correct liberal media during and after the shootings took place, correctly linking the terrorists to the jihadist mentality that inspired the 9/11 attacks. Yet, Coulter continued to promote racial profiling to prevent religious extremists from committing evil. (Apparently, she is really is colorblind, not noticing the Beltway snipers were black.)

Coulter emphasized the sniper’s religion and ignored his race, writing, “He is a Muslim. He converted to Islam 17 years ago. He changed his name to John Muhammad. He belonged to Louis Farrakhan’s Nation of Islam. He cheered the terrorist attack of Sept. 11. He registered his getaway vehicle with the DMV on the anniversary of Sept. 11 – writing down the time of registration as 8:52 a.m.”[23] Coulter failed to mention that his accomplice was a Jamaican.

In that same essay, Coulter pounded away at his religion – “He’s a Muslim. That’s his condition and his diagnosis. It may be time to update the DSM-IV by adding ‘Jihad Impulse-Control Disorder’ to its index of official diagnoses” – but she ignored the inconvenient truth that this terrorist is a non-Arab.

The Beltway snipers – two black Muslim men (non-Arabs!) – could not have been apprehended using Coulter’s racial profiling paradigm.

Chapter 6

Amanda Knox Convicted by Coulter After Being Exonerated by Court

Ann Coulter will say whatever she wants about whomever she wants irrespective of the truth. From almost the beginning of the sensational murder case in 2007 Coulter defamed Amanda Knox, “an innocent American girl,” whom Coulter turned into a poster child for her thesis of left-wing leniency in the criminal justice system (“criminal apologists,” to use her words).

Coulter needed a face, a cause célèbre, to represent her grandiose theory – liberals are evil, love criminals, and hate the police – and Knox fit the bill.

At the time, Coulter friend and radio talk show host Kevin McCullough astutely observed serious character flaws in his friend, particularly regarding Coulter’s slander of Amanda Knox and her defenders [emphasis added].

“Often she throws rhetorical temper tantrums over issues she has no relationship to. In the Amanda Knox case she sided against an innocent American girl, who had wrongfully been skillfully framed for the murder of a roommate. In doing so she called Knox’s defenders ‘liberals and progressives’ doing so from a framework of ignorance or negligence – neither an attractive quality. But she was materially and expressly false in those assumptions and refused to apologize to the conservative, Christian, Republican families she slandered in the process.”[24]

Nevertheless, Coulter insists “that Amanda Knox was guilty of murder, in spite of an almost complete absence of evidence or motive tying Knox to the crime.”[25] It is Coulter’s impenitence which prevents her from apologizing or admitting error.

Coulter’s defamation continues to the very present – defaming not only Knox, but all her defenders and those who believe in the rule of law. To date, Coulter has written a series of essays condemning Knox, given scores of interviews on the subject, and repeated her defamation in Never Trust a Liberal Over 3.

As I noted in The Gospel According to Ann Coulter,[26] Coulter defended the execution of prisoners for crimes they did not commit! Ignorant of the meaning of “exact justice,” constitutional attorney Coulter once declared, “Sometimes people are innocent of the crime they were sentenced to death for, but perhaps not all crimes.”[27]

In the press, Coulter subtly but quickly convicted Rep. Gary Condit (D-CA) of murdering his intern, Chandra Levy, and disposing of her body. Years later, the real murderer was caught. The truth matters little to Coulter. She will do whatever it takes to get those nasty Democrats and to promote her worldview – and herself – in the process.

Yes, Coulter will even besmirch an innocent American who served four years in an Italian prison for a crime she did not commit – just to sell more books and prove the thesis of those books. Coulter claims liberals “defend the guilty and impugn the innocent,” which is precisely what Coulter has done to Amanda Knox.

Chapter 7

Embracing Liberty

Coulter enjoys being offensive, claiming she’d be “disappointed if liberals did not spit their drinks out when they heard [her] name.”[28] She says that’s what she’s “shooting for.” Being offensive is her goal. In doing so – in justifying herself in her own eyes – she tries to disassociate herself from her actions: “But that does not relate to the reality of me. It relates to me creating a reaction in godless traitors.” Just what is the meaning of “is?”

She seeks to enrage the Left and then excoriates the Left for being enraged. Coulter said, “Normally, when I write columns I am specifically baiting liberals and I know exactly which line they are going to scream blue murder about.”[29] She later provided an example: “In retrospect, that phrase [‘affable Eva Braun’] was a one-punch knockout. I think that a lot of people really hate her and I was just the first one to pop her.”[30]

Indeed, Coulter enjoys being hated. It’s fun! “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.”[31]

“[Political discourse] is littered with ad hominem landmines,” [32] Coulter affirmed. “When they call me [Coulter lists names], I find it like the first sip of champagne. I enjoy nothing so much as being attacked by liberals.”

Responding to a query from a friend asking “How do you get used to being hated by so many people?” Coulter said that her “first paragraph was bubbling over with how fun it was to be hated by liberals,” but then she realized “at the end of it, maybe I am getting too into being hated by liberals.”[33]

But she absolutely hates being criticized by conservatives. When Coulter abandoned Christian conservative principles to promote homosexuality, she castigated those who criticized her:[34] “These are fake Christians trying to get publicity.”[35]

Joseph Farah responded to Coulter’s remarks, saying, “Ann is angry. I hope she calms down and there can be some restoration, repentance and forgiveness. She said some mean things about me, but I can sleep at night knowing I did the right thing in God’s economy.”[36]

As is widely-known, Coulter has difficulty with apologies and with repenting.[37] As far back as 1997, Coulter said, “I’ve never backed off anything.” Her fourth rule in her 2005 book, How to Talk to a Liberal (if you must), is “never apologize.” In 2013, she affirmed her convictions, declaring, “I am strongly anti-apology.”[38] At that time she even affirmed her unwillingness to forgive by adding, “I think [apologies] should never be accepted.”[39]

Christian apologist C.S. Lewis said, “Above all else, the Devil cannot stand to be mocked.”

Throughout human history, shame has been used to bring people to their senses. In 1997, Coulter lamented, “there is a problem with people becoming less and less capable of being shamed.” [40] She added, “There is one sort of type of criminal that a public humiliation might work particularly well with are the juvenile delinquents, a lot of whom, you know, consider it a badge of honor to be sent to juvenile detention. And it might not be such a cool thing, you know, in the Hood, to be flogged publicly.”

Coulter made it explicitly clear, “I have to say I’m all for public flogging” and insisted, “I’m all in favor of punishment being something unpleasant.” The express purpose of the public flogging is to instill shame in the person behaving immorally and criminally.

Newsbusters once asked why anyone should mock Coulter.[41] Arrogant people need to be mocked in order to shame them, to cause them to wake up to who they’ve become, and to lead them to repentance and liberty – freedom from their patterns of wrong behavior.

Arrogant people are unrepentant people and Ann Coulter is surely arrogant, unrepentant, and unforgiving.

Coulter needs to be mocked, to be embarrassed, to be shamed, to be brought to her knees before God for forgiveness, for restoration, for liberty.[42]

Appendix 1

Is Breaking Bad Breaking Good for Ann Coulter?

Many people are puzzled by Coulter’s contention that Breaking Bad is a “Christian parable” since Christ is absent from the series and no one is redeemed.

Breaking Bad was intended to show the dark side of human nature spiraling downward in its descent to depravity, raising the question of whether it truly is a Christian parable.

If Breaking Bad is Coulter’s theological benchmark and framework for morality, then that explains much regarding her personal and professional conduct over the last couple of decades.

Ann Coulter’s essay[43] on “AMC’s smash TV series,” Breaking Bad, is a must read – for perplexed fans and for practicing Christians.

From her second sentence onward, Ann extols the God of the Bible, forgiveness, and the godly character His children should be developing. Strangely, she ignores repentance and how to actually live a godly life.[44]

Ann begins by equating Breaking Bad with Mel Gibson’s The Passion of the Christ,[45] claiming that Breaking Bad contains both conservative and Christian themes, and exhorting her readers to “READ THE BIBLE!” Knowing that human nature has not changed since the Bible was written, Ann observes: “It’s chockablock with gore, incest, jealousy, murder, love and hate,” thus proving the Bible’s relevancy for today and confirming that there truly is nothing new under the sun, but utterly failing to prove the Christian paradigm of Breaking Bad.

Ann also correctly observes – counter to the prevailing moral relativism pervading our culture – that “the Bible tells the truth, the lessons are eternal,” remarking that this “also marks the difference between great literature and passing amusements.”

Next, Ann forays into the realm of forgiveness, describing the show’s Jesse Pinkman as that “sweet, soulful druggie” who “illustrates – heartbreakingly – the monumental importance of the cross.”[46] Ann’s word choices are faultless.

Having for years heralded the importance of the cross and the forgiveness upon which her salvation rests, Ann nevertheless departs from Christian orthodoxy by suggesting that Jesse should go to the cross to be able to forgive himself. Instead, Ann says he enters “some godless hippie rehab center” and, consequently, “is still unable to forgive himself.”

Ann contends that – because Jesse has been “unable to forgive himself” – he returns to an ungodly lifestyle which intensifies his descent into darkness. Ann writes, “Mayhem, murder and disaster ensue.”

Why? Because Jesse did not “forgive himself” and, instead, accepted that he’s “the bad guy.”

But is that what the cross is all about? No. It is about receiving forgiveness from God and then living a transformed life. The problem for Jesse was not a failure to forgive himself but a failure to repent, thereby receiving forgiveness from God.

But Ann continues with her nonsense, writing, “There’s only one thing in the world that ever could have allowed Jesse to forgive himself.” Except, once again, the cross isn’t about self-forgiveness. Indeed, even forgiven Christians – those who have genuinely repented with godly sorrow – should still feel a measure of guilt until they have done all they can do to right the wrongs they have committed (Matthew 5:23-24). (Making amends is one of the principal recovery steps, after all, in Alcoholics Anonymous and other addiction treatment programs.)

Therein lies the dilemma for those seeking to do God’s will but still loving the sins to which they are addicted. Whom will they serve? Jesus and the disciples frequently asked that question. In the Old Testament, Joshua answered, “As for me and my house, we will serve the Lord.”

Ann recognizes there is only one Master, yet she fails to place her own life into the biblical perspective of that reality. She introduces Jesse’s wife, Skyler, as a perfect illustration of “why Scripture instructs us to flee evil and admonishes: ‘You shall have no other gods before me.’”

Discovering Jesse’s criminal activities – and hating them – Skyler keeps his secret and even becomes a “partner in crime.” Ann writes, “Her husband and son have become her ‘gods,’ whom she values more than the one true God.”[47]

Then Ann segues to “the greatest sin of all: pride,” which she calls “the most incessantly proved lesson” of this television series, contending “there is no better study of the sin of pride than … Walter White.”[48]

For Ann, “Walt starts out as a sympathetic character … But throughout five seasons, we watch him become irredeemably evil because of his pride.”

Throughout the series, viewers witness “Walt’s descent into darkness,” ostensibly with benevolent motives to help his family. But, as Ann noticed, “[Walt] hadn’t made any of these increasingly depraved moral choices for ‘his family’ – as he finally admits in the last episode. It was for himself, to feed his pride.” Narcissism and pride.

The Bible repeatedly says, “God resists the proud, but gives grace to the humble.”

Appendix 2

Ann Coulter’s Trust Busted

Controversialist Ann Coulter’s 10th book was launched as her books typically are – in the midst of controversy. But, atypically, Never Trust a Liberal Over 3 – Especially a Republican is unique among her portfolio. It is the only one which failed to make the New York Times best-seller list.

This third in her series of essay collections also ranks third in its successfulness, indicating, perhaps, that its author’s cachet and clout are indeed dramatically diminishing among conservatives. Recently touted as “conservatism’s darling”[49] by her journalistic home, Human Events, many of her most loyal fans have become disenchanted with their heroine due to her proclivity for prevarication and her inappropriate attacks against fellow conservatives.

In recent years, Coulter has alienated many Libertarians, Tea Party members, establishment Republicans, and social conservatives. Columnist Debbie Schlussel’s clever re-titling of Coulter’s latest book says it all: Never Trust an Ann Coulter Who Pimps Us on GOP Libs, Then Pimps Books Saying the Opposite.[50]

Comparing like to like, here we examine only three of Coulter’s ten books – those which are essentially essay collections with additional material thrown in. All three, coincidentally, were published in the month of October in their respective years.

How to Talk to a Liberal contained a number of new essays and several previously-unpublished ones, while If Democrats Had Any Brains included interviews from a large number of domestic and foreign news outlets. Never Trust a Liberal includes very dated material which she tries desperately to promote as both descriptive in the past and predictive of the future.

In 2004, How to Talk to a Liberal populated the best-seller list for 16 weeks, more than any other Coulter book, but, just three years later, her second collection, If Democrats, appeared only four times. By then, tech-savvy fans knew they could read her columns in various archived collections sprinkled around the Internet. Moreover, even by that time, her credibility was in steep decline, suffering from credible allegations of plagiarism[51] in two of her books[52] and continual controversies (ad hominem attacks, hate speech, prevarication, etc.).

Now, six years later, too few people are interested in too many columns from too long ago. Never Trust a Liberal Over 3 has little to offer, especially for those Coulter has alienated. Her own trust deficit now plagues her work.

Given that each of Coulter’s previous nine books ranked at least six on the best-seller list, Trust is an abysmal failure. Even more so when you consider that, as of this writing, Charles Krauthammer’s Things That Matter – a collection of his essays spanning three decades – is currently number one on that list. Krauthammer has credibility and gravitas. Coulter does not.

Each of Coulter’s books tries to outdo the last; each promotional campaign raises already superlative expectations that much higher. Coulter’s approach is to continually push the envelope, to extend the parameters of normative political dialogue, to top herself in order to stay relevant.

I suspect that a lot of people who would normally be predisposed to buy and promote her books are put off by the arrogance of her book title, it’s theme, and her current commentary. She’s back to her old self – untrustworthy.

Coulter crows that each time critics contend “this time she has gone too far,” she has survived and thrived. But her shtick is wearying and people are looking for someone to trust.

Since Coulter busted the trust of her readers, they have busted her Trust.


[1]       See Chapter 1: “The Seduction of Ann Coulter,” The Beauty of Conservatism, 2011, available as a free download at www.coulterwatch.com/beauty.pdf and Chapter 1: “Roots: Ann Coulter’s Christian Heritage,” The Gospel According to Ann Coulter, available as a free download at www.coulterwatch.com/gospel.pdf.

[2]       See Chapter 2: “The Cuckolding of Conscience,” The Beauty of Conservatism, 2011, available as a free download at www.coulterwatch.com/beauty.pdf.

[3]       See Chapter 9: “Goddess of the Conservative Movement,” The Beauty of Conservatism, 2011, available as a free download at www.coulterwatch.com/beauty.pdf.

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

[5]       See Chapter 2: “Presidential Follies.”

[6]       Krissah Thompson, “Ann Coulter back on airwaves, reenergized by shutdown and exemplifying unhappiness of GOP,” Washington Post, 10/29/13.

[7]       Ann Coulter, Fox & Friends, FNC, 11/9/13. She also denigrated “arrogant bureaucrats” in her 11/13/13 column.

[8]       See Harry Shearer, “Found Objects: The Many Moods of Ann Coulter,” My Damn Channel, http://www.mydamnchannel.com/harry_shearer/found_objects/foundobjectsthemanymoodsofanncoulter_2173.aspx.

[9]       Ann Coulter, “If not Romney, who? If not now, when?” 11/16/11.

[10]     Ann Coulter, Book Party, Daily Caller, 10/22/13.

[11]     Ibid.

[12]     Ann Coulter, Glenn Beck Radio Show, Premiere Radio Networks, 10/15/13.

[13]     Ann Coulter, Hannity, FNC, 10/14/13.

[14]     Ann Coulter, “’The Plan,”” 11/05/03.

[15]     Ann Coulter, MSNBC, 10/11/97.

[16]     How to Talk to a Liberal (If You Must): The World According to Ann Coulter, Crown Forum, 2004.

[17]     Ann Coulter, “Democrats Bash Bush for Serving in Guard,” Human Events, 2/11/04, http://www.humaneventsonline.com/article.php?id=3031.

[18]     Ann Coulter, Harvard University, 10/26/02.

[19]     Ann Coulter, “Bush pays homage to the rituals of liberalism,” 6/20/02.

[20]     Ann Coulter, Treason: Liberal Treachery From the Cold War to the War on Terror, Crown Forum, 2003, pg. 288.

[21]     Ann Coulter, quoted by Sholto Byrnes, “Ann Coulter: The blonde assassin,” The Independent, 8/16/04.

[22]     Ann Coulter, Treason: Liberal Treachery From the Cold War to the War on Terror, Crown Forum, 2003, pg. 270.

[23]     Ann Coulter, “Media Muslim makeovers!” 10/30/02.

[24]     Kevin McCullough, “No! Ann Coulter, you couldn’t be more wrong!!!” Hot Air Green Room, 11/17/11, http://hotair.com/greenroom/archives/2011/11/17/no-ann-coulter-you-couldnt-be-more-wrong/.

[25]     “Ann Coulter’s Continuing Error on Amanda Knox and My Rebuttal,” SaberPoint, 9/10/11, http://saberpoint.blogspot.com/2011/09/ann-coulters-continuing-error-on-amanda.html. The blogger adds, “The prosecution’s “evidence” has been thoroughly debunked by former FBI agent Steven Moore and Forensic Engineer Ron Hendry, Mark Waterubury, PhD, among others.”

[26]     See Daniel Borchers, The Gospel According to Ann Coulter, 2012, available as a free PDF download at www.coulterwatch.com/gospel.pdf.

[27]     Ann Coulter, MSNBC, 11/9/96.

[28]     Laura M. Holson, “Outflanked on Right, Coulter Seeks New Image,” New York Times, 10/8/10.

[29]     Ann Coulter, quoted by Toby Hamden, ‘I love to pick fights with liberals,’ The Telegraph, 7/19/02, http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/1401932/I-love-to-pick-fights-with-liberals.html.

[30]     Ibid.

[31]     Ibid.

[32]     Ann Coulter interview with Bill Thompson, Eye on Books, August 2002.

[33]     Laura M. Holson, “Outflanked on Right, Coulter Seeks New Image,” New York Times, 10/8/10.

[34]     “WND Drops Ann Coulter From Miami Event Over Homo Conflict,” WorldNetDaily, 8/17/10, http://www.wnd.com/2010/08/192405/.

[35]     Ann Coulter, Red Eye, FNC, 8/20/10.

[36]     “Ann Coulter on WND: ‘They’re a Bunch of Fake Christians,” WorldNetDaily, 8/21/10, http://www.wnd.com/2010/08/194229/.

[37]     See Chapter 5: “… and Balls!” The Beauty of Conservatism, 2011, available as a free PDF download at www.coulterwatch.com/beauty.pdf.

[38]     Ann Coulter, Red Eye, FNC, 6/22/13.

[39]     Repentance and forgiveness have always co-existed in an intricately intertwined symbiotic relationship. Repentance compels forgiveness and forgiveness entreats repentance. The impenitent rarely forgive others while the unforgiving rarely seek forgiveness. In that regard, repentance and forgiveness are complementary measures of the state of one’s heart.

[40]     Ann Coulter, MSNBC, 3/22/97.

[41]     Tim Graham, “Fox’s Glee Mocks Ann Coulter, Makes Femiist Wage Claims,” Newsbusters, 4/20/10, http://newsbusters.org/blogs/tim-graham/2010/04/20/foxs-glee-mocks-ann-coulter-makes-feminist-wage-claims.

[42]     Spiritual, emotional, and intellectual healing is my hope for Coulter. Though she is impenitent, she is not irredeemable. See Chapter 20: “It Really IS a God Thing,” The Gospel According to Ann Coulter, 2012, available as a free PDF download at www.coulterwatch.com/gospel.pdf. May Ann one day accept the liberty that God offers her in Jesus Christ.

[43]     Ann Coulter, “Breaking Bad: A Christian Parable,” 10/2/13.

[44]     See my (audio) sermon, “Living the Resurrected Life,” at http://www.brotherwatch.com/files/Living%20the%20Resurrected%20Life.mp3.

[45]     It does seem strikingly odd (and “counterintuitive”) that Ann would claim that a show which is seemingly (indeed, deliberately) irreligious is really religious, but, again, being unfamiliar with Breaking Bad, I must reserve judgment. Still, equating a television series devoid of God with a movie extolling Him does seem rather odd. See Andy Graham, “The Baptism of Breaking Bad,” caffeinatedthoughts.com, 10/2/13, http://caffeinatedthoughts.com/2013/10/baptism-breaking-bad/.

[46]     To reiterate, these and subsequent references regarding Breaking Bad derive from Ann’s essay and her observations, perspectives, and paradigm – not mine.

[47]     The subject of idolatry is addressed in several chapters of Vanity: Ann Coulter’s Quest for Glory, available as a free PDF download at www.coulterwatch.com/vanity.pdf.

[48]     The subject of pride is addressed in several chapters of Vanity: Ann Coulter’s Quest for Glory, available as a free PDF download at www.coulterwatch.com/vanity.pdf.

[49]     Teresa Mull, “Ann Coulter Offers Advice to GOP on The View,” Human Events, 10/22/13, http://www.humanevents.com/2013/10/22/ann-coulter-offers-advice-to-gop-on-the-view/. The article title was mysteriously changed to “Coulter Charms Left-Leaning Ladies of the View.”

[50]     Debbie Schlussel, “Never Trust an Ann Coulter Who Pimps Us on GOP Libs, Then Pimps Books Saying the Opposite,” 10/21/13, http://www.debbieschlussel.com/66624/never-trust-an-ann-coulter-who-pimps-us-on-liberal-gop-then-pimps-books-saying-the-opposite/.

[51]     Ron Brynaert, “In new book, Coulter ‘cribs’ stem cell list from right-to-life group,” Raw Story, 6/14/06, http://www.rawstory.com/news/2006/In_new_book_Coulter_cribs_stem_0614.html.

[52]     See Daniel Borchers, “The Plagiarism Trap,” BrotherWatch, 2002, http://www.coulterwatch.com/files/BW2-009-Plagiarism_Trap.pdf.

Vanity: Ann Coulter’s Quest for Glory

Ann Coulter – a “conservative icon” whose words and controversies make headlines around the world – glories in having the distinction of being “the most hated woman in America”[1] and, still, wielding considerable clout as a conservative diva.

From the beginning, Coulter has sought fame and fortune and, having acquired both, she still finds an emptiness within her soul which she cannot fill – no matter how hard she tries.

Coulter has discovered that fame is fickle and glory is glaringly fleeting. Only in the moment does it satisfy. Absent the spotlight, reality sets in. Despite all the accolades and all the trappings of power, emptiness blankets her heart and soul.

Moreover, hard as she tries to promote her own preferred image of herself, Coulter is confronted with the reality that the truth will always come out – people will come to see her as she really is. No amount of fame, fortune, power, or prestige can hide the person she truly is.


Here is a sampling from Vanity: Ann Coulter’s Quest for Glory:

Vanity: Ann Coulter’s Quest for Glory

Daniel J. Borchers

Published: December 31, 2012

194 pages



Image Obsessed

Two weeks after meeting Coulter in 1997, Ann sent me several multi-page emails urging me to aid her by writing letters-to-the-editor on her behalf to George magazine, TV Guide, and the New York Times. Ann was distraught over how she was portrayed in those publications, incensed over minor issues, and very concerned about her image. She wanted me to correct what she perceived as mischaracterizations of her in those publications.

As she told me, “it’s a good idea that someone besides Ann writes a letter because otherwise it’ll just appear self-serving.” Ann later thanked me for writing the letters, explaining that “a letter would be good to put my name in that magazine another week,” adding, “I was tempted to write a letter myself for this purpose, but thought it would be hard to do without sounding defensive and pathetic, no matter how short and sarcastic.”[2]

It was quickly impressed upon me that Ann was passionate about, even obsessed with, her image.[3] I would soon discover that Ann would scour the media for references to herself and would shoot off emails to counter anything of which she disapproved. That pattern still continues to some degree today with Coulter either directly defending herself or, more often, enlisting the aid of surrogates within her network of friends and colleagues to do so for her.


Object of Adoration

The structure of Vanity is simple. Chapter one lays the foundation – narcissism – as not just a human proclivity but as an overwhelming operating psychological principle in Coulter’s life. As documented elsewhere, the psychological formula which appears to have created the Ann Coulter so many love and so many hate is …

Beauty + Brains + Background → Narcissism.[4]

Chapter two shows how narcissism can lead to and become idol worship, with the narcissist becoming the object of idolatry for both the narcissist and her devotees. Chapters three through five address the psychological triplets of pride, prejudice, and power, all of which reinforce narcissism. Chapters six and seven examine the twins of fame and fortune, which similarly reinforce and intensify narcissistic patterns of thinking and behavior. Combined, these factors and forces all create a synergistic cycle which can seem unbreakable, as represented in the following formula:

Pride → Prejudice → Pursuit of Power → Fame → Fortune → Pride → …

Chapter eight gazes into the mirror of Ann Coulter’s soul by examining perhaps the most revelatory essays a person can write: her eulogies to family, friends, and colleagues. In many of those eulogies, Coulter is literally the center of attention.

Chapter nine delves into the nature of conscience and innocence; the former can put a brake on narcissism and its devastating consequences while the latter is a state to which narcissists can return with repentance and healing.

Afterwards, seven case studies in narcissism are provided. They reveal various ways in which Coulter has, through treachery and deceit, attempted to subvert the electoral process to achieve her desired electoral outcome, all the while elevating herself, her goals, and her desires for glory.

Those case studies, chronologically presented, include Coulter’s betrayal of her client (Paula Jones), her illegal possession of (and perhaps contamination of) evidence in a case involving President Clinton (the “Tripp tapes”), her attempt to run a “total sham campaign” for Congress to oust a sitting Republican, and her attempts to subvert the presidential election process in the 2000, 2008, and 2012 election cycles.

We conclude with three appendices. The first features Coulter impersonators, the second is an interview with Katherine Black, author of her own book about Coulter. My sermon, “The Success of the Godly,” in Appendix 3, completes this book.

Chapter 1

Rising Crème: Narcissism – A Primer

Ann Coulter epitomizes narcissism. She has been both favorably and unfavorably compared to Britney Spears, Paris Hilton, Lady Gaga, and Madonna (not the Virgin). Coulter’s ascendancy to celebrity and her longevity as a sensationalist who nonetheless is somehow taken seriously attest to the demise of Western Civilization as we once knew it.[5]

Self-promotion is where it’s at these days. Self-promotion sells. At least the kind in which Coulter engages. Cliff Kincaid of Accuracy in Media stated the obvious about Coulter’s then most recent controversy: “The political equivalent of Britney Spears shaving the hair off her head, Ann Coulter made headlines at Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) by calling Democrat John Edwards a faggot.” Kincaid then connected the incongruity of Coulter’s behavior, her attire, and her espoused Christian beliefs: “Wearing a leather dress and a Christian cross around her neck, Coulter must be a liberal infiltrator whose purpose is to give conservatism a bad name.”[6]

Deeply conflicted, with a remarkably dynamic internal ambivalence, Coulter believes herself to be the crème de-la crème (wanting “the cream to rise to the top”) while simultaneously questioning her own self-worth, especially when confronted by people who are brighter and more accomplished than her, or by situations which are beyond her ability to resolve.

Several formative stages emerged as Coulter strove to both prove herself and rise to the level of accomplishment to which she felt entitled. The first stage was bracketed by her graduate and post-graduate education and her legal experience as first an intern for a circuit court judge and then working briefly for two New York law firms. The second stage succeeded in bringing her dreams to fruition while the third stage heralds the dangers of getting what we seek.

In the Beauty of Conservatism,[7] I addressed the various traits of addictive thinking, which include denial, projection, and rationalization. It may seem counterintuitive, but those traits are all self-focused. In denial, the person obsessively looks away from self to another for the source of her problems, all the while seeing herself as the victim of those creating the problem. Using projection, the person projects one’s own patterns of thinking and feeling onto others. And using rationalization, the person rationalizes her own behavior to justify herself.

Chapter 2


Some fans call Coulter their idol, or wear clothes emblazoned with “Ann Coulter is my idol!” In response to a fan who gushed, “You’re my idol,” Coulter exclaimed, “God bless you! See, all the pretty girls are on my side.”[8] It would appear that Coulter is also an idol to herself.[9]

(One of Coulter’s continuing contradictions is claiming that only conservatives are attractive and liberals are not, yet admitting that liberal “air-head actresses” have beauty. Speaking to those actresses, Coulter said, “God gave you the gift of genetic beauty and nothing between your ears.”[10])

In her 2004 biographical documentary, Coulter bragged, “My hobby has become my life. I have the greatest life imaginable. I think I have a greater life than anyone in the universe. I sleep till noon. I work in my underwear. I’m my own boss. No one can fire me. The only people who can fire me are the American people.”[11]

Yes, that’s right, Coulter speaks for the American people! All of them? Peter T. King put it nicely, “Ann Coulter has become a legend in her own mind.”[12]

Narcissism is, at heart, self-worship.[13] Narcissists are enraptured with themselves.

According to Patrick X. Coyle of Young America’s Foundation, “Ann Coulter is a star among conservative students! Her books are best sellers. Her campus lectures are the most popular events on campus. Swooning fans wait hours to hear her speak.”[14]

Chapter 3

Pride – All is Vanity

In 1999, Coulter admired John F. Kennedy, Jr.’s admiration for her, and she said so in her eulogy for the fallen liberal icon (see Chapter 8). Not surprisingly, in addition to being full of acrimony, Coulter’s Kennedy eulogy praised Coulter. In one surprising interview, Coulter boasted:

“I really did admire and respect him a lot and … I think what he was doing was very important and that is taking a lot of the acrimony out of political dialogue. For example, by having me write for him and proposing article ideas. He was very enthusiastic about my articles, and I’m a Republican.”[15]

Yes, that’s right – the deceased heir of Camelot was worthy of admiration and respect because he hired Coulter! [The accompanying photo is of Coulter flirting with the married Kennedy just a few weeks before his death.]

In a 2004 interview,[16] Coulter was asked, “What are the top five books you’d recommend to become an informed voter?” Coulter’s humble reply listed the Bible first, followed by her own four books: “The Bible, High Crimes and Misdemeanors, Slander, Treason, and How to Talk to a Liberal (If You Must).” She ignored the secondary question, “And what can your new book contribute?”

Asked about her book titles in 2011, Coulter replied, “Zippy titles, aren’t they?”[17] Responding to a caller’s question in that interview, Coulter said, “You need to read my book, Godless, where this point is made more pithily, I think.”[18] Asked about the process of writing a book, Coulter joked, “It’s a lot more fun to read it over and over again if I’m using myself [with her trademark humor].”[19]

Marketing herself and her book, Coulter repeatedly insisted that Mugged is “IT’S SO GOOD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! it’s a blockbuster”[20] and “It’s soooo good!”[21] Indeed, she insisted it was a “smash book” even before its release. She even claimed her previous book, Demonic, was a “smash best-seller.”

Chapter 4


There’s a reason polemics come so easily for Coulter. She looks down on so many people. Coulter typically denigrates specific individuals (even if she does not know them). For instance, she burst out, “Hang on! Back down! Look, would you two hatchet women back off for five minutes! I can’t even finish a statement.”[22] Hatchet women?

Coulter’s ill-disguised contempt for specific individuals in particular is paralleled by similar views of humanity as a whole. According to Coulter, “humans are fascist by nature,” with an “instinct to fascism,”[23] and “humans are stupid.”[24]

Yes, it’s official! Coulter has hatred. Coulter said, “I’m glad that I didn’t do the interview yesterday. I didn’t want to be on radio yesterday because I couldn’t officially hate Todd Akin until the 5 p.m. deadline. Once he refused to resign — not even resign. He doesn’t hold the office — to withdraw as the candidate. Now I can officially hate him. … Now I officially hate him.”[25]

Chapter 5

Pursuit of Power

Coulter’s control of her own life and career exerts itself in numerous ways and is strikingly revealed in a 2004 documentary about her life: “My hobby has become my life. I have the greatest life imaginable. I think I have a greater life than anyone in the universe. I sleep till noon. I work in my underwear. I’m my own boss. No one can fire me. The only people who can fire me are the American people.”[26]

With her power and control, Coulter believes “I can say whatever I want to say.”[27] Coulter boasts, “I am the illegal alien of commentary. I will do the jokes that no one else will do.”[28] Coulter promises, “A word to those of you out there who have yet to be offended by something I have said: Please be patient. I am working as fast as I can.”[29]

Asked in 2003, whether interviewers try to provoke her into saying outrageous things just because of who she is, Coulter responded, “No. I do that on my own.”[30]

With a distinct air on invincibility, Coulter boasts, “The American people like me; editors don’t. I’ve arranged my life so that I am unfireable. I don’t have any bosses. The only people who can fire me are the American people.”[31] Coulter contends, “I have set up my life so that I cannot be fired, I cannot be edited.”[32] Yes, these are all things she has done. She has acquired total control to accomplish these things.

Unfazed by criticism, filled with pride, Coulter possesses neither humility nor humanity. Her response to her critics and victims: “Oh, screw them!”[33] Coulter continued, “I feel they’re being authoritarian bullying victims.” They’re the bullies!?

Chapter 6


An excessive desire for fame and glory can wreak havoc in a person’s life and psyche. It has certainly done so in Coulter’s life. As noted in the Introduction, I asked a colleague of Coulter’s about the “mass of contradictions” in Ann’s life. This colleague sees these contradictions linked to her desire for fame: “Part of it has to do with being a celebrity, but part of it has to do with being the kind of person who so wants to be a celebrity.”[34]

Coulter has been on her own quest for fame and glory, her own journey to the stars. Indeed, early in her career, Coulter claimed that stardom is something to be desired, sought, acquired, and she has purposely pursued it with vigor.

Dan Travers, a long-time friend of Coulter’s, observed, “She likes the attention and the fans. She thrives on the whole thing.”[35] To those who have seen Coulter in person at rallies and conferences, this is a self-evident truth.

A colleague and confidante of Coulter’s explained her transient career, hopping from one job to the next, this way: Coulter’s job-hopping was one of “ticket-punching” to “build a legal career” and become credentialed – “Justice Department, Capitol Hill, private-sector legal, public-sector legal, non-profit legal, media. She’s done it all. She’s an aim high kind of person. All of these appointments and jobs have been very prestigious opportunities.”[36] All in pursuit of glory.

According to former Newsweek editor and political correspondent Howard Fineman, “Ann Coulter is getting exactly what she wants, which is attention.”[37] From Fineman’s perspective, “Coulter often has intriguing and provocative things to say about the clash between liberalism and conservatism,” adding that “some of [her] personal comments were just over the line.” If anything, in subsequent years Coulter has redrawn the line, continually pushing the envelope, going further and further over the edge.

Chapter 7


Coulter was born in the then-richest county in America[38] to a blue-bloodline tracing back to the Puritans with a father who was a professional elite. Graduate of an Ivy League college (Cornell) and the elite University of Michigan Law School, Coulter was a frequent flyer crisscrossing America to attend concerts and enjoy ski weekends.[39]

In today’s parlance, Coulter is a One-Percenter. According to Forbes, “The average annual income of the top 1 percent of the population is $717,000, compared to the average income of the rest of the population, which is around $51,000. The real disparity between the classes isn’t in income, however, but in net value: The 1 percent are worth about $8.4 million, or 70 times the worth of the lower classes.”[40] According to some sources, Coulter’s net worth is approximately $8.5 million.[41]

By most culturally-recognized standards, Coulter is successful: she has fame, power, and wealth. She is wont to say that you can never be too thin or too rich. A multi-millionaire herself, Coulter’s closest friends are also multi-millionaires, with several billionaires thrown in for good measure.

Apparently money can buy you happiness. Coulter insists, “Yes, life is better if you have money than if you don’t have money, and the more money you have the better off you are.”[42] And, as for prioritization in one’s life, “Your money is private – that is more private than anything else.”[43] If wealth is your primary or sole criteria for the “good life” then doesn’t the acquisition of wealth become your primary goal, often at the expense of character development?

The love of money, fame – and the accompanying prestige and power – is central to the real Ann Coulter.

Numerous profiles note Coulter’s aristocratic origins and current lavish lifestyle. Consider this paragraph from a profile of Coulter in the Westchester WAG:[44]

“During the summer, she frequents ‘The Hamptons – I have lots of friends with places there – and Connecticut, where I visit with family.’ For winter getaways, Coulter can be found on the slopes. ‘Skiing is my biggest extravagance. I usually go to Aspen or Vail over New Year’s.’”

Chapter 8

The Lost Art of the Eulogy: It’s ALL About ME!

During the span of about a decade, Coulter has written a number of eulogies – for her family, friends, colleagues, and heroes. Those eulogies contain certain patterns. Naturally, being of a personal nature, personal aspects of the eulogizer inevitably emerge. What is striking about the eulogies which Coulter has written is just how out-of-the-norm they are.

Coulter often seems to be unrestrained in the expression of her thoughts and emotions. In her eulogies, she reveals a darkness within which gives one pause concerning her sanity and her humanity.

Before taking a look at those eulogies – primarily paeans to people she knew and loved – it behooves us to see how she treats those who have recently passed away.

You may recall that Coulter was briefly fired from MSNBC in early 1997 for calling the then recently-deceased Pamela Harriman, U.S. Ambassador to France, a whore (or, in Coulter’s more delicate nomenclature, a “round heel”). A few years later, Coulter was far more explicit: “Women like Pamela Harriman and Patricia Duff are basically Anna Nicole Smith from the waist down. Let’s just call it for what it is. They’re whores.”[45]

Also in 1997, Coulter repeatedly lambasted the just-deceased Princess Diana as an unfit mother and whore. Again, using her own unique verbiage, “I still think [Princess Diana was] a round heel.”[46] One week later, Coulter embellished her remarks: “Her children knew she’s sleeping with all these men. That just seems to me, it’s the definition of ‘not a good mother.’ … Is everyone just saying here that it’s okay to ostentatiously have premarital sex in front of your children?” After a caller asked Coulter to cite her own accomplishments, an enraged Coulter erupted: “[Diana was] an ordinary, and pathetic, and confessional. I’ve never had bulimia! I’ve never had an affair! I’ve never had a divorce! So I don’t think she’s better than I am.”[47]

Fast-forwarding to 2006, in Godless, Coulter viciously attacked the liberal survivors of 9/11 victims, writing:

“These broads are millionaires, lionized on TV and in articles about them, reveling in their status as celebrities and stalked by grief-arazzis. These self-obsessed women seemed genuinely unaware that 9/11 was an attack on our nation and acted as if the terrorist attacks happened only to them. … I’ve never seen people enjoying their husbands’ deaths so much … the Democrat ratpack gals endorsed John Kerry for president … cutting campaign commercials… how do we know their husbands weren’t planning to divorce these harpies? Now that their shelf life is dwindling, they’d better hurry up and appear in Playboy.”[48]

As backdrop for an utterly astounding essay on the movie theatre massacre, consider Coulter’s words just two weeks after 9/11:

“I really am sick of [the candle lighting]. I think the candle lighting is bad. It’s womanly. It’s hugging. It’s mourning. Mourning is the opposite of anger, and we’re supposed to be angry right now. A flag, that’s like a manly thing. … It’s the candle lighting. … I like the flag, and I don’t like the candles.”[49]

Now consider her words in the wake of a tragedy which stunned the nation. Coulter began her essay[50] – to date, her only written words on the massacre – by diminishing the need for the victims to mourn: “I feel awful about what happened in Colorado, but can we stop the hugging and the teddy bears?” Grief? Forget it. Remember, Coulter brags that her family culture isn’t into “emotional welfare.”

Coulter’s very next words attempted to present a bigger picture perspective in order to deflect the reader from the pathos of the event: “Just as society can become inured to violence, it can also become inured to sentiment.” But do we want society – and the individuals which comprise it – to “become inured” to the very sentiments which Coulter decries? Published just six days after the mayhem, Coulter would have the victims just, what, get on with life?

Clarifying exactly what she means by “sentiment,” Coulter continued, “There is nothing so hackneyed in the world of photojournalism as pictures of the hugging and the shrines with candles and teddy bears after a tragedy, with a piano softly trilling in the background.” Of what is Coulter afraid? Compassion? Oh, I almost forgot, Coulter claims that “being nice to people” isn’t part of the gospel of Christ, and we can surely sense that “being nice” is foreign to Coulter’s lexicon.[51]

With her virgin foray into published eulogizing, Coulter commemorated the tragic death of one of her employers, John F. Kennedy, Jr., for his praise of her, and repaid his kindness to her by attacking his grieving family. Immediately in the wake of 9/11, Coulter eulogized her fallen friend, Barbara Olson, by using Olson to praise herself, using the Olson marriage to attack the Clintons, and seeking to incite a Christian crusade.

Coulter’s eulogy for Ronald Reagan was utterly unworthy of the hero whom she worshipped, quite contrary to his gracious and magnanimous spirit, and vituperative toward his loved ones. Her self-serving eulogies for Jerry Falwell and William F. Buckley, Jr. lacked the poignancy of personal anecdotes and exploited both their character and their careers to buttress her own.

Her eulogy to her father, John Vincent Coulter, provided a bright spot among her eulogies, containing touching memories in an engaging fashion, yet, somehow exploited her father’s legacy in order to defend her own views of the Cold War and the McCarthy Era. Described as “creepy” by some critics, she used a tribute in honor of her father to do what she instinctively does: demonize liberals.

In eulogizing her courageous liberal friend, Ron Silver, Coulter again regaled readers with many interesting and poignant personal anecdotes, doing well in showing the character and temperament of her friend, yet using him as a cudgel to bludgeon those she hates (and those toward whom Silver held no animosity).[52]

Her eulogy to her mother, Nell Husbands Martin Coulter, was a praiseworthy paean to someone obviously deeply cherished and deeply missed and it provides a model for anyone wanting to give homage to a loved one. One could hope that the emotional maturity exhibited in Mother’s eulogy would be indicative of larger, more substantive spiritual and emotional growth in Ann Coulter’s life. One could hope.

Fully three and a half years after her eulogy to Mother, Coulter was elated over the death of retired Sen. Arlen Specter (PA), who died of cancer at the age of 82. Her first unseemly tweet appeared within hours of his death: “Arlen Specter has just switched to the Dead Party” (10/14/12). Doubling down, Coulter tweeted, “Arlen Specter’s diagnosis – breathing ‘not proven,’” (10/15/12) and “Arlen Specter Accused of Flip-Flopping on the ‘Alive or Dead?’ issue” (10/17/12).

Coulter loathed Specter for years for political reasons, but for her the political is personal. Moreover, Coulter hated him not because he was evil but because he was worse than evil – he was a moderate, a potential threat and political impediment to her utopian dream. Coulter’s tweets reveal an unrepentant and unforgiving heart.

Chapter 16

Conscience and Innocence

Ann Coulter is defective – as is every single human being. But Coulter is not like most people. Idols and goddesses cannot admit to being human. In trying to be – or pretending to be – perfect (without actually changing her behavior), Coulter has become a hypocrite while searing her conscience which recognizes the faults that she cannot confess even to herself.

To hide herself from herself, Coulter employs multiple layers of addictive thinking: denial that she has faults, projection of her negative thoughts, emotions, and behaviors unto others, and rationalization of her irrational and immoral beliefs and behaviors.

Unwilling to admit her faults and failures, ignoring and searing her stricken conscience, Coulter cannot bring her brokenness – and every human being has some brokenness – to God for healing and restoration.[53]

Needing to be – or at least appear – perfect, because of her ethos of performance-based love,[54] Coulter not only cannot admit wrong, she exhibits a judgmental attitude toward others, truly seeming “to despise weakness of any kind.”

Coulter’s pride is magnified as she turns a blind eye to her own faults and judges others for theirs. Her prejudice is heightened as others fail to meet her standards. She pursues power, in part, to control her self-image and how others view her. Fame and fortune add positive reinforcement of her self-identity. All of these facets of her life serve to enslave her to herself.

My original working title for this book was Ego: Looking into the Mirror of Ann Coulter’s Soul, but I soon realized that the subject matter was much deeper and broader than suggested by that title. Certainly ego is a huge part of the book, but only part. The futility of ego is important to grasp. Coulter’s is a fraudulent life based upon lies and deception. For all that she has accomplished, what has she really achieved? In gaining the world, what remains of her soul?

When Coulter looks into the mirror, who or what does she see?

Former colleague Eric Alterman once asserted that Coulter is a “true believer.”[55] Yet Coulter has consistently proven that she is not a true believer. Coulter has demonstrated that she has absolutely no faith in the principles she espouses.

Rather, what Coulter believes in is what serves her interests best. Self-centered, Coulter parades pride as she pursues fame and glory. Ever concerned with her reputation – engaging in spin to turn events and controversies to her advantage – Coulter seems to be creating a specific self-identity, one she feels comfortable with, so that she can feel at home in her own skin. What masks does Coulter wear to hide from others and from herself?

Case Studies

  1. Oh, Paula (Jones)! Ann Coulter’s Betrayal.

In the summer leading up to Clinton’s impeachment, Coulter boasted of doing pro-bono work for her law firm: “Pro-bono work is all I do these days. My law firm is a non-profit law firm.”[56] According to a spokesman at the Center for Individual Rights, Coulter provided no pro-bono work for them.[57] Long after Clinton’s impeachment took place, Coulter again boasted of her pro-bono work for Paula Jones. That year, she also boasted of her betrayal of Jones and took credit for getting Bill Clinton impeached.

  1. (Linda) TRIPPed Up – Tripp Tapes Compromised

One of Coulter’s “greatest moments” had national implications and international repercussions. In the early morning hours of January 16, 1998, Coulter illegally listened to illegally-recorded audiotapes of conversations between Linda Tripp and her friend, Monica Lewinsky, who was President Clinton’s lover. Those tapes would prove crucial to impeaching Clinton. To this day, it remains unknown whether Coulter tampered with those tapes prior to them being turned over to the OIC.

  1. Coulter for Congress: Only Scoundrels Need Apply

Seeking to unseat her Republican Congressman from Connecticut, Chris Shays, Coulter attempted to run for Congress herself. The Republicans and Libertarians rejected her efforts to run a “total sham” campaign. In retribution, Coulter attacked the Libertarians for being true to their principles.

  1. In the Name of Elián (González)

The future of Cuban refugee Elián González, a five-year-old boy, garnered international attention, became a campaign issue, and may have impacted Florida’s electoral outcome. Coulter made the custody battle all about fighting the Cold War over again, and lied about constitutional law to serve her agenda. She further boasted of her eagerness to break the law, thereby potentially endangering the child and his family.

  1. Raising Cain for McCain and Fascist Christians (2000 Election)

Promoting George W. Bush for president – even before knowing his platform – Coulter besmirched the reputations of John McCain, Gary Bauer, and anyone else endangering a Bush candidacy.

  1. Let’s Get Drunk and Vote for McCain (2008 Election)

After trying to destroy John McCain, once he was nominated, Coulter boasted of helping McCain improve in the polls.

  1. Mitt Romney – Ideal Candidate (2012 Election)

Coulter boasted of being able to prevent another electoral defeat by Republicans and attacked true believers (pro-lifers) for their integrity.


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

[2]       Even then, in 1997, Coulter valued sarcasm as a primary means of conveying her thoughts (and emotions).

[3]       See Chapter 4 (“… Brains …”) and Appendix 2 (“The Wisdom of Godliness”), in my free PDF book, The Beauty of Conservatism: The Seduction of Ann Coulter and the Cuckolding of Conscience, at www.CoulterWatch.com/beauty.pdf.

[4]       There are certainly many people who are attractive, articulate, intelligent, and have a distinguished background but who are not elf-absorbed and do not seek self-glory. However, the factors identified in my first two books have certainly significantly impacted Coulter emotionally, psychologically, and spiritually.

[5]       As Coulter can attest, I am using a literary device known as hyperbole.

[6]       Cliff Kincaid, “Ann Coulter: The Britney Spears of the Right,” The National Ledger, 3/4/07, http://www.nationalledger.com/politics-crime/ann-coulter-the-britney-spear-476040.shtml#.UAQgM_XAGq0.

[7]       In particular, see Chapter 5 (“… and Ball!”) in my free PDF book, The Beauty of Conservatism: The Seduction of Ann Coulter and the Cuckolding of Conscience, available at www.CoulterWatch.com/beauty.pdf.

[8]       Ann Coulter, quoted in Patrick Wright’s 2004 documentary, Is It True What They Say About Ann? A more correct response would have been to express gratitude for the compliment but observe that no human being qualifies for that honor. The only One who can be idolized or worshipped is God.

[9]       Coulter fans who object to my characterization of Coulter in this way will have to reconcile their views with Coulter’s. In her 2002 book, Slander, Coulter asserted that all liberals are godless and have turned themselves into gods, and in her 2006 book, Godless, Coulter again claimed that all liberals are godless and that they have created an elaborate idolatrous religious system. In contrast, my thesis is that some (not all) on the Right regard Coulter as a goddess (they even say they do!) and that she herself (an individual, not a collective) talks and behaves as if she is a goddess.

[10]     Ann Coulter, Hannity, FNC, 10/15/12. One should note Coulter’s continuing claims of liberal stupidity – “nothing between your ears” – as a major criterion of self-worth. She obviously considers herself of worth. Perhaps most significantly, Coulter is concerned only with the head, not the heart.

[11]     Ann Coulter, quoted in Patrick Wright’s 2004 documentary, Is It True What They Say About Ann?

[12]     Peter T. King, quoted in Susan Estrich, Soulless: Ann Coulter and the Right-Wing Church of Hate, William Morrow, 2006, pg. 71.

[13]     See Dr. Sam Vaknin, Malignant Self-Love: Narcissism Revisited, Narcissus Publications, 1991, 2001, 2003 and Drew Pinsky, The Mirror Effect: How Celebrity Narcissism is Seducing America, HarperCollins, 2009.

[14]     Patrick X. Coyle, “Ann Coulter and the Young America’s Foundation: Partners in Changing Campuses,” Libertas, Winter 2005, pg. 16, http://www.yaf.org/uploadedFiles/Webpages/Alumni/Coulter%20Profile.pdf?n=2364.

[15]     Ann Coulter, Rivera Live, CNBC, 7/23/99.

[16]     “Election 2004: The Ann Coulter Interview,” Amazon.com, http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/feature/-/537452/104-5654028-2056747.

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

[18]     Ibid.

[19]     Ibid.

[20]     Katie Pavlich, “Ann Coulter Takes on Obama’s Racial Demagoguery in Mugged,” Townhall, 7/10/12, http://townhall.com/tipsheet/katiepavlich/2012/07/10/exclusive_ann_coulter_takes_on_obamas_racial_demagoguery_in_mugged.

[21]     Ann Coulter, Hannity, FNC, 8/2/12.

[22]     Ann Coulter, Rivera Live, CNBC, 2/4/99.

[23]     Ann Coulter, “Air Travel Made Unpleasant By Overbearing Personnel,” 8/4/99.

[24]     Ann Coulter, Political Malpractice,” 10/6/99

[25]     Ann Coulter, Sean Hannity Radio Show, Premiere Radio Networks, 8/22/12.

[26]     Ann Coulter, quoted in Patrick Wright’s 2004 documentary, Is It True What They Say About Ann?

[27]     “Interview with Ann Coulter,” JD Jungle, http://www.lawcrossing.com/article/1172/Interview-with-Ann-Coulter/#.

[28]     Ann Coulter, If Democrats had Any Brains, They’d be Republicans, Crown Forum, 2008.

[29]     Ann Coulter, “Be patient, I am working as fast as I can to offend,” 6/22/06.

[30]     Lev Grossman, “10 Questions for Ann Coulter,” Time, 7/14/03.

[31]     George Gurley, “Coultergeist,” New York Observer, 8/25/02, http://www.observer.com/node/37827.

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

[33]     Ann Coulter, Alan Colmes Radio Show, Fox News Talk Radio, 10/26/12.

[34]     Author interview.

[35]     Ann Coulter, quoted by Howard Kurtz, “The Blonde Flinging Bombshells at Clinton,” Washington Post, 10/16/98.

[36]     Author interview.

[37]     Howard Fineman, quoted in Susan Estrich, Soulless: Ann Coulter and the Right-Wing Church of Hate, William Morrow, 2006, pg. 71.

[38]     http://www.ncnnews.com/bcinfo.htm.

[39]     Howard Kurtz, “The Blonde Flinging Bombshells at Clinton,” Washington Post, 10/16/98.

[40]     Alan Dunn, “Average America vs. One Percent,” Forbes, 3/21/12, http://www.forbes.com/sites/moneywisewomen/2012/03/21/average-america-vs-the-one-percent/.

[41]     See http://www.getnetworth.com/ann-coulter-net-worth/, accessed 12/3/12.

[42]     Ann Coulter, MSNBC, 2/1/97. Ironically, (for a fervent free marketer) this is paradoxically a capitalist form of Marxism, a variant of “economic determinism” which equates wealth with success, happiness or any other goal you care to plug into the equation. Wealth cannot buy happiness, nor is it a building block of character.

[43]     Ann Coulter, Rivera Live, CNBC, 4/10/98.

[44]     Emily Freund, “Ann Coulter: She May Be Right …” Westchester WAG, October 2002.

[45]     Ann Coulter, Salon, 11/16/00.

[46]     Ann Coulter, MSNBC, 9/12/97.

[47]     Ann Coulter, MSNBC, 9/19/97.

[48]     For an analysis of Coulter’s diatribe, see “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.

[49]     Ann Coulter, Politically Incorrect, ABC, 9/25/01.

[50]     Ann Coulter, “Obscurity: No Crueler Punishment!” 7/25/12.

[51]     Evangelist and missionary Franklin Graham provides an example of how all of this silly candle-lighting stuff (with balloons, too) in official and unofficial memorial services following the tragic Columbine massacre provided comfort and healing for the grieving and an opportunity to proclaim the One who is sovereign on His throne in heaven. See Chapter Two of Franklin Graham, The Name, Thomas Nelson, 2004.

[52]     Ironically, Silver, a non-Christian who actually attended church with Coulter, exhibited greater Christian charity and forgiveness than Coulter, an avowed evangelical Christian.

[53]     Looking at some of the very flawed ancestors of Jesus listed in Matthew chapter 1, Christian author Beth Moore asks a relevant question: “How do you respond to the fact that the only perfect person in Christ’s genealogy is Christ Himself?” Speaking for herself, she answers, “To me, Christ’s flawed family history serves as a continual reminder of the grace of God in my life.” (See Beth Moore, A Heart Like Him: Intimate Reflections on the Life of David, B&H Publishing Group, 1999, 2003, 2012, pg. 10.)

[54]     Ann, God’s perfect love perfectly loves even those who are imperfect, like you and me.

[55]     Annys Shin, “Blond Ambition on the Right,” National Journal, 5/31/97, pg. 1088.

[56]     Ann Coulter, Washington Journal, C-Span, 6/8/98.

[57]     Author interview.

Ann Coulter’s Root Causes – Part IV

(November 6, 2012)

How did Christian polemicist Ann Coulter become such a controversial, confrontational, and contradictory figure?

Coulter is revered and reviled in America and around the world. Few who know her are on the fence. Many who know her have discerned a “mass of contradictions” in her life and her work.

How did a Conservative Icon become a RINO?

Why would a professing Christian attack selfless Christians?


The first three parts in this four-part series cover Coulter’s life and career from birth through 9/11/01 and beyond: (1) Born and bred an elite groomed for success, (2) Coulter struck gold with the Clinton impeachment saga, but (3) found herself in freefall at the turn of the millennium.

However, within just a few years, the Comeback Queen reached her zenith with several bestselling books under her mini-skirted belt. She became a much sought after AAA-list celebrity who could command lucrative speaking fees while headlining a variety of events.

With her considerable political clout as a Conservative Icon, one would think hers was the perfect life (as she herself has claimed). One would be wrong.

Even in the midst of her achievements, Ann’s contradictions and inconsistencies grew.

Despite her manifest success, Coulter’s life and career started to fall apart by the middle of the first decade of this century.

Ironically, even as Ann was achieving the pinnacle of her success to make her parents proud, she was losing her father to dementia. Her third book, Treason (2003), was her last book that her father would be able to comprehend. (He died in 2008.)

Ann’s parents deeply impacted her life, as she herself explained, “Your parents are your whole world when you are a child.”[1]

John V. Coulter Passes Away

Coulter’s father died on January 4, 2008. Coulter’s touching eulogy, published just a few days after his death, began with these words:[2]

“As Mother and I stood at Daddy’s casket Monday morning, Mother repeated his joke to him, which he said on every wedding anniversary until a few years ago when Lewy bodies dementia prevented him from saying much at all: ‘54 years, married to the wrong woman.’ And we laughed.”

Coulter continued:

“And last Friday morning at 2 he passed away, in his bedroom with Mother. The police and firemen told my brother that they kept trying to distract Mother to keep her away from the bedroom with Father’s body, but she kept padding back into the bedroom to be close to him.”

Father was Ann’s rock, her sense of security, and a person whose integrity she admired and depended upon. Ann wrote, “Besides being very funny, Father had an absolutely straight moral compass without ever being preachy or judgmental or even telling us in words. He just was good.”

It is interesting to read Ann’s tribute to her father in the context of who Ann has become. Ann wrote: “Father hated puffery, pomposity, snobbery, fake friendliness, fake anything.” She continued, “Father didn’t care what popular opinion was: There was right and wrong.”

Now Ann’s rock was gone. The “absolutely straight moral compass” no longer there as an example or available for guidance. And Ann’s ability to discern “right and wrong” would suffer.

Nell Husbands Martin Coulter Passes Away

Ann’s mother died on April 14, 2009.

Nell Coulter succumbed to ovarian cancer after a five-year battle. She began her “final decline” the previous fall, when chemo treatments failed to work, prompting Ann to cancel speaking engagements, delay the publication of her next book, and tend to her mother.

Ann recalled, “I’ve been looking at her across the room in doctors’ offices over the past few years, thinking to myself: There will come a point when you won’t see that face again.”[3]

The void left by her passing was evident in Ann’s poignant tribute:

“A lot of people claim to be my No. 1 fan – God bless them – but my true No. 1 fan left this world last week. My mother quietly stopped breathing last Tuesday, as she slept peacefully, holding my hand.”

Ann added, “She was the biggest fan of all of us – Father, me and my brothers John and Jim.”

Continuing, “Her angelic face always looked like home to me. My whole life, as soon as I’d see my mother’s face I’d know I was safe, whether I was a little girl lost in a department store or a big girl with a problem, who needed her mother.”

If Father provided Ann with moral guidance and an example of integrity, Mother provided security and unconditional love. According to Ann, Mother’s “most notable characteristic” was “her constant, unconditional love.”


Little Girl Lost

Since her double-loss, Ann has been without her familial North Star. Having lost her touchstone (“a standard or criterion by which something is judged or recognized”), Coulter’s judgment has suffered.

The apostle Paul advised, “that we should no longer be children, tossed to and fro and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the trickery of men, in the cunning craftiness of deceitful plotting, but, speaking the truth in love, may grow up in all things into Him who is the head – Christ (Eph. 4:14-15).”

Ann has been tossed to and fro for many years. She has embraced political and theological positions totally at odds were those of her parents and opposed to her own stated positions in years past. Indeed, even as she expresses one set of views in public, she opposes them in practice.

Though a proponent of the nuclear family and traditional mores, Coulter courted the gay lobby and became a Gay Icon.

Though claiming to be staunchly pro-life, she has criticized others for being too pro-life.

Once a speaker at Tea Party rallies and a former Sarah Palin fan, Coulter now thwarts the efforts of the Tea Party movement to achieve its limited government goals.

Claiming her life’s work is derived from her Christian faith, many of Coulter’s words and actions have been decidedly anti-Christian.

Claiming to be anti-establishment, Coulter continually supports RINO candidates like Christie and Romney, deeming them more “electable,” principles be damned.

Obama Defeats Romney

Ann was devastated with Romney’s defeat in 2012. Coulter said, “If Mitt Romney cannot win in this economy, then the tipping point has been reached. … There is no hope.”[4]

Consider these words – spoken nearly two years later: “I was as depressed as I’ve ever been in my life – and I’m including my parents dying – after Obama won the second time beating Romney …”[5]

Ann’s worst depression was after Romney’s defeat? Not after the deaths of her parents following years of their deteriorating health?

Just last night, Coulter exclaimed, “I think the last presidential election was the most important election. But as we keep losing, each election becomes ‘oh, my gosh, this is our last shot.’ It makes me want to cry with tears of rage.”[6]

The reelection of Obama on November 6, 2012, dramatically impacted Ann’s life in perhaps incalculable ways. To this day, she insists Romney was the ideal candidate and she rejects the notion that she herself was in part to blame for the GOP not getting a better – winning – candidate.

Coulter makes excuse after excuse for Romney’s loss – and other losses in the Senate – all to deflect blame from herself. Moreover, Coulter still – to this day – wants Romney to run again in 2016. When recently asked about that prospect, she immediately declared, “I hope so. Oh, I hope so.”[7]

Her tenth book, Never Trust a Liberal Over 3 – Especially a Republican, fared poorly in sales and is her only book (thus far) not to make the New York Times best-seller list.[8]

Coulter began a campaign, it seems, to alienate as many natural allies as she can. She has blamed pro-lifers for being too pro-life, Libertarians for being too Libertarian, the Tea Party for being too anti-establishment, and Christians for, well, being Christians.

This past summer, it seemed as if Coulter had descended into madness. Week after week, Coulter’s columns expressed foolishness, xenophobia, anti-logic, unrivaled polemicism, and impenitent arrogance. Coulter even – twicedefamed Christian missionaries serving in Ebola-laden nations, calling them hypocrites seeking glory.

Whither Ann?

Ann Hart Coulter – born and bred a political, socio-economic, and religious elitesought stardom and succeeded. Having achieved success, she was traumatized by a reversal of fortune and the fall of the Twin Towers. While struggling with the devastation wrought by terrorists and, later, seeing her own career diminish, Ann lost her father to dementia, her mother to cancer, and her hopes in Romney defeating Obama.

Throughout it all, we have witnessed the ups and downs in Ann’s life, and see countless contradictions and conundrums in her words and her actions. It’s as if the Ann Coulter that each of us knows is a different Ann Coulter.

Perhaps Ann has never been able to discover who she really is, or who she really wants to be. She has certainly been compelled to seek the limelight and thrives in the glory. Yet, somehow, that has not been enough. The values imparted by her parents and her faith are often lacking in her life.

With her personal, professional, and political losses, Coulter seems fearful and desperate to find her way in uncertain times. Yet her refusal to repent (or forgive) obscures her vision and prevents her from seeing the truth and discovering God’s will for her life.


Chapter 9: “The Goddess of the Conservative Movement,” The Beauty of Conservatism, 2011, available as a free download at www.coulterwatch.com/beauty.pdf.

Chapter 10: “Equality: Self-Evident Truths,” The Gospel According to Ann Coulter, 2012, available as a free download at www.coulterwatch.com/gospel.pdf.

Chapter 8: “The Lost Art of the Eulogy: It’s ALL About ME!,” Vanity: Ann Coulter’s Quest for Glory, 2012, available as a free download at www.coulterwatch.com/vanity.pdf.

Appendix 1: “Is Breaking Bad Breaking Good for Ann Coulter?” Never Trust Ann Coulter – at ANY Age, 2013, available as a free download at www.coulterwatch.com/never.pdf.


[1]       Ann Coulter, “JOHN VINCENT COULTER,” 1/9/08.

[2]       Ibid. Ann dedicated Treason: “FOR MY FATHER, JOHN V. COULTER.”

[3]       Ann Coulter, “NELL HUSBANDS MARTIN COULTER,” 4/22/09.

[4]       Ann Coulter, Laura Ingraham Show, 11/7/12, http://dailycaller.com/2012/11/07/ann-coulter-laura-ingraham-debate-how-romney-lost-the-election-audio/.

[5]       Ann Coulter, Eagle Forum Collegians Leadership Summit, 7/11/14.

[6]       Ann Coulter, Howie Carr Show, 10/23/14.

[7]       Ann Coulter, O’Reilly Factor, FNC, 10/18/14.

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

Ann Coulter’s Root Causes – Part III

(September 11, 2001)

Even before the Twin Towers fell, Ann Coulter’s career was going into a tailspin. As a result, the 9/11 terrorist attack traumatized Coulter more than most, especially given other significant factors.

Coulter – the shock jock of conservative commentary – has been called both a heroine and a villain, and she seems equally at home with both characterizations. Though wanting to be perceived as a good person, Coulter relishes the provocateur label.

Which mask is the real one: angel or devil? Who is the real person behind the persona?

From whence did countless contradictions and complexities arise in Coulter’s life?


Key events, significant periods in her life, and a multitude of psychological forces have molded and shaped the person we know today as Ann Hart Coulter.

The first part in our series delving into the root causes in Coulter’s life appropriately began with her birth, family, childhood, and other formative factors in her early life. Part II examined her adult education, early career, a confluence of debilitating psychological factors, and the moment when the brass ring was within her grasp.

In part three, we look at events and circumstances prior to and surrounding the 9/11 terrorist attack which shocked the nation and heralded the war on terror in which we remain engaged.

Coulter was surely traumatized by 9/11, but both personal and professional circumstances in her life enhanced its impact upon her mind, heart, and soul.

A Troubled Soul in Need

Even with a best-selling book, accolades from her peers, and date requests from her fans, Coulter needed more. Much more.

In 1998, Coulter almost had a nervous breakdown, an emotional fracture from which she has yet to fully recover. Coulter craved attention, affirmation, and adoration. At a political rally on Halloween, Coulter’s insatiable need for more was palpable.

Coulter promised her publisher that she would not speak at the rally, but she felt compelled to obtain adoration. As she walked on stage, amidst thunderous applause, she said, “I said I wouldn’t talk.”[1] One fan shouted, “We love you, Annie!” Unable to contain herself, Coulter burst out, “God bless you!”

Then Coulter exclaimed, “I promised my publisher that in the interests of appearing non-partisan that I would not be speaking today but I had to come and see my fellow Freepers. … God bless you all. Thanks!”

Coulter’s narcissistic desire for attention also extended to her fan mail. She needed something to fill the void within.

In early 2000, Coulter devoted one of her legal columns to her fan mail.[2] She wrote, “I’ve read them all [thousands of letters],” adding that “those letters mean a lot to me.”

Coulter continued, “That is why I love my mail. Apart from my parents and a few friends – and I know they like me – it’s the only feedback I get.” Moreover, “Some letters are so touching I carry them around with me for a while. I still intend to respond someday, which is why I still have them all.”

Concluding her legal column for the week, Coulter wrote, “But I don’t need television, and I certainly don’t need pathetically frail bosses in any context. I do need those letters.”

In1998, Coulter left her one-year term as a part-time litigator for the Center for Individual Rights. George magazine employed her as a columnist for one year, ending in 2000. Coulter’s attempted run for Congress that year was quickly aborted as she could find no political party to represent. Moreover, she was distraught at her inability to garner a book deal for her next book. The words were in her, but no one would publish.

Then, in 2001, HarperCollins struck a deal with Coulter, but her book editor later died and her book deal died weeks after that.

Coulter’s World Fell Apart

In late 2001, Coulter experienced a triple whammy in just a few short weeks. The primary thrust of the 9/11 terrorist attack occurred just 6.66 miles from her Manhattan apartment[3] and at least one of her friends died on that day. Following her subsequent extremist essays, her publisher, HarperCollins, cancelled her lucrative book deal, requiring repayment of her substantial advance. And the Boston Globe exposed the plagiarism contained in her then only book, High Crimes and Misdemeanors.

So, Coulter lost a friend in Barbara Olson on 9/11, lost her sense of safety in Manhattan, lost her book deal and its income, and lost her reputation and credibility due to plagiarism allegations.

In the aftermath of 9/11, Coulter would come to condemn candle-lighting ceremonies and the human quest for closure. Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder would be a concept forever foreign to Coulter, who wrote:

“I really am sick of [the candle lighting]. I think the candle lighting is bad. It’s womanly. It’s hugging. It’s mourning. Mourning is the opposite of anger, and we’re supposed to be angry right now. A flag, that’s like a manly thing. … It’s the candle lighting. … I like the flag, and I don’t like the candles.”[4]

PTSD? Not in Ann’s lexicon. Coulter noted, “WASPs aren’t into that. In fact, if I ever used the words ‘emotional welfare,’ I would be sent to my room without dinner.”[5] As one profiler observed early in Coulter’s career, “She seems to despise weakness of any kind.”[6] To admit to weakness or a need for help was anathema to Coulter.

At the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) the following year, Coulter’s clout was at an all-time low. She was under attack from liberals, conservatives, and civil rights organizations for her questionable and deliberately provocative commentary. Moreover, the CPAC program guide listing the speakers included Coulter, but her description was very brief and, conspicuously absent, there was no sponsor or organizational affiliation listed for her. Coulter was becoming untouchable.


Crown Forum came to Ann’s rescue, publishing her second book, Slander.

Coulter attended the White House Correspondents Dinner, on May 4, 2002, as a guest of the Boston Globe, who had, the previous fall, disclosed the plagiarism allegations against Coulter. Coulter’s lawsuit threat abruptly terminated future coverage of her demonstrable plagiarism but also yielded a coveted seat at the Dinner. The New York Observer [7] reported on an after-dinner party faux pas by Coulter:

“Ms. Coulter spotted lobbyist Dan Senor, a former colleague from her days working under former Senator and current Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham, with Bush press secretary Ari Fleischer. Leaping up, she pleaded with Mr. Fleischer to have Mr. Bush read and publicly carry her forthcoming book, Slander: Liberal Lies About the American Right.”

“’I will do anything!’ Ms. Coulter said to Mr. Fleischer. ‘I’ll swear to you, you’ll like it! I will do anything!’ (Later, when asked if Mr. Bush might honor Ms. Coulter’s request, Mr. Fleischer said, ‘Well, I don’t know. I have to read it first.’)”



Chapter 5: “… and Balls!” The Beauty of Conservatism, 2011, available as a free download at www.coulterwatch.com/beauty.pdf.

Chapter 7: “Love: God’s Desire and Goal for Us,” The Gospel According to Ann Coulter, 2012, available as a free download at www.coulterwatch.com/gospel.pdf.

Chapter 8: “The Lost Art of the Eulogy: It’s ALL About ME!” Vanity: Ann Coulter’s Quest for Glory, 2012, available as a free download at www.coulterwatch.com/vanity.pdf.

Chapter 5: “Paint Chip Profiling,” Never Trust Ann Coulter – at ANY Age, 2013, available as a free download at www.coulterwatch.com/never.pdf.


[1]       Ann Coulter, Free Republic Rally, 10/31/98.

[2]       Ann Coulter, “You’ve Got Mail,” Human Events, 1/14/00.

[3]       Distance determined by Mapquest.

[4]       Ann Coulter, Politically Incorrect, ABC, 9/25/01.

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

[6]       Mary Jacoby, “The Pundettes,” Capital Style, December 1997, p 45.

[7]       Gabriel Snyder and Sridhar Pappu, “Reporters’ Party Makes George W. Bigger than Ozzy,” New York Observer, 5/12/07, http://www.observer.com/2002/reporters-party-makes-george-w-bigger-ozzy.

Ann Coulter’s Root Causes – Part II

(September 11, 1997)

Ann Coulter has international name recognition, with enraptured fans and aggrieved foes. Viewed as both an angel and a devil, Coulter has expressed and exhibited traits of both. For many, the contradictions and conundrums in Coulter’s life and career appear inexplicable. But they are explainable.


In part I of this four-part series examining the root causes in Ann Coulter’s life, we discovered the huge impact her family, pedigree, and upbringing had in creating the conservative icon so many have come to either love or hate. (Albeit, a growing number choose to ignore her.)

In this installment, we will look at another formative stage in Coulter’s life, one which decisively impacted her both personally and professionally.

Gingrich Revolution

The Gingrich Revolution provided professional salvation for Coulter, who felt unfulfilled working in corporate law in New York City. Her attempts at establishing a writing career were also barren and she was eager to engage the political enemy in combat in the nation’s capital.

Coulter “moved from an anonymous corporate-law job in Manhattan to the Washington office of a freshman Republican Senator.”[1] Starting as a “legislative assistant to Sen. Spencer Abraham,”[2] she later became his “deputy press secretary.”[3]

Belonging to such an elite political institution – walking among America’s most powerful political leaders, working with their seasoned and talented staffs, socializing with the crème de la crème – was an exhilarating experience for Coulter. But, as a novice staffer herself, Coulter soon realized that she was a very tiny fish in a very big aquarium. It must have wounded her delicate ego to feel so ordinary among the extraordinary.

But the United States Senate became too small for Ann Coulter, whose biggest challenge was dealing with the public. Coulter’s heart was always for writing and public speaking.

So, Coulter left the Senate for the limelight.

Steppingstones to Stardom

Within a few short years, Coulter was catapulted from being an “obscure Senate aide”[4] to become an A-list celebrity and best-selling author.

In short order, Coulter gained employment as a regular contributor on MSNBC, a weekly columnist for Human Events, and a litigator for the Center for Individual Rights (CIR). Beginning in 1996, Coulter became a ubiquitous guest on radio and television talk shows and frequently flew to Hollywood to appear on Politically Incorrect.

Each of Coulter’s jobs were steppingstones to stardom. As a Senate staffer, Coulter met and worked with the political elite. As a pundit on MSNBC, in 1996-97, Coulter interacted with national newsmakers and analyzed current events on-air. Her journalistic résumé was greatly enhanced with her job at Human Events[5] and she gained legal credentials through her one-year employment at the Center for Individual Rights.

Networking opportunities rapidly grew. In June 1997, America Spectator commissioned Coulter to co-host “a kind of debutante weekend for [Internet media guru Matt] Drudge,”[6] who “was guest of honor at a bustling party of young conservatives. Like a visiting head of state, he addressed the National Press Club and then toured Newsweek, creating quite a fuss there.”

That summer, Coulter was intimately involved in Paula Jones’ lawsuit against President Clinton and, in October, leaked attorney-client privileged information to thwart Jones’ desire for an out-of-court settlement.[7] As a result, Jones life would be ruined, but Coulter would gain a career. As Coulter’s ex-beau, James Tully, explained, “The Paula Jones case essentially made her career.”[8]

Coulter’s new beginnings mushroomed into a commanding media presence. She was profiled in five magazines in 1997 alone: National Journal,[9] TV Guide,[10] Capital Style,[11] New Republic,[12] and George.[13]

Starved for Success

With her success, politically and professionally, and her growing grassroots and elitist clout, Coulter became a victim of the success syndrome. An MSNBC Health News article, titled “Power: the greatest aphrodisiac?” provides greater insight into this affliction.[14] The Success Syndrome describes “a set of symptoms characterized by power-driven compulsive behaviors.”

Success Syndrome sufferers experience denial, as well as a belief they can get away with it. Al Cooper, a clinical director in California, concludes, “It’s about power. It’s about gratification. It’s about grandiosity.” Whichever symptoms are manifested, power remains at the root of the syndrome.

I asked a colleague of Coulter’s about this mass of contradictions in her life and he sees those contradictions linked to her desire for fame: “Part of it has to do with being a celebrity, but part of it has to do with being the kind of person who so wants to be a celebrity.”[15]

Child stars are often too emotionally immature to handle their stardom. Here, Coulter’s success struck in her mid-30s. Her own emotional immaturity and insecurities, her drive to prove herself to herself and others, and her obsession with destroying the Clinton presidency all converged to enhance the effects of the Success Syndrome.

Beginning around August, alert MSNBC viewers would have noticed a growing arrogance in Coulter’s demeanor. Abundant media profiles, growing connections within the conservative movement, involvement in the Paula Jones case, awards and lavish praise – these all figured prominently in transforming her personality and chipping away at her character. The Success Syndrome was having its success.

September 11, 1997

In 1997, September 11th was a transformative moment for Coulter. George magazine hosted a luncheon at the elegant Le Cirque restaurant in New York City,[16] in honor of George magazine’s “20 Most Fascinating Women in Politics,” with Coulter one of the honorees.

This proved a major turning point in Coulter’s life. Not so much the award – she would receive dozens during her career – but her private conversation with John F. Kennedy, Jr., who gave her effusive praise and affirmation. Doubts vanished. Vacillation disappeared. From that point forward, Coulter would speak her mind, without hesitation and even without thought. Coulter describes that life-transforming moment:

“The first time I met John was at a George magazine luncheon at Le Cirque a few years ago to honor the magazine’s “Twenty Most Fascinating Women in Politics.” First of all, consider that I was named one of them. … He thought it was tremendous that MSNBC kept firing me. That was the first time I stopped feeling lousy about my tenuous relationship with MSNBC.”[17]

Evidence for Coulter’s turning point, on September 11, 1997, was manifested on MSNBC the very next day. Coulter’s entire on-set demeanor was strikingly different. Arrogance and self-satisfaction became hallmarks of that time period. Perhaps the best example is her treatment of the recently deceased. Earlier that year, Coulter was reluctant to express her opinion about the just deceased Pamela Harriman. As Coulter told one reporter,

“I was constantly getting fired at MSNBC for, I thought were some of my wittiest remarks and one of them – which was then featured in George magazine – was after Pamela Harriman died, and I really went out of my way to avoid pointing out [that she was a round heel].”[18]

September 12, 1997

But on September 12th, Coulter vented uncontrolled vitriol against Lady Diana as the world mourned the loss of the People’s Princess. An enraged Coulter erupted with enmity:

“She was running around with a bunch of useless playboys. I mean, Dodi – what an appalling loser he was. …”

“This guy did nothing! He ran up huge debts every place he went, on the basis of his father’s money, and this is the guy she’s hanging around with – and apparently sleeping with – the “good mother?” …”

“She couldn’t hold back so the children wouldn’t know that she’s having premarital sex with some guy who doesn’t pay his debts to the 21 Club in New York? …”

“Well, then, what are we celebrating her for? She’s an ordinary and pathetic and confessional – I’ve never had bulimia! I’ve never had an affair! I’ve never had a divorce! So I don’t think she’s better than I am.”

An astute caller asked Coulter to cite her own accomplishments. Coulter blustered without citing any:

“If you’re trying to say that I’m better off than she was when she was married into this pathetic royal family, and had all this money and everyone loved her and we’re celebrating her death.”

Speaking and writing would become more profitable than politics and legislation. Human Events proved to be Coulter’s ticket to fame and glory. Through its sister publishing house, Regnery, Coulter became an author. Human Events is also a primary co-sponsor of CPAC – the Conservative Political Action Conference – an annual conference showcasing conservative politicians, authors, organizations and power-brokers. Coulter has spoken at every CPAC conference since 1998.

Moreover, at that time, Coulter’s close friendship with Geraldo Rivera enabled her to appear weekly on his television talk show. Coulter’s friendship with Sean Hannity serves the same function today. As one of the first pundettes on MSNBC, Coulter sometimes had difficulty finishing her thoughts [“Please let me finish …”]. Now, no one could get her to shut up.


Chapter 2: “The Cuckolding of Conscience,” The Beauty of Conservatism, 2011, available as a free download at www.coulterwatch.com/beauty.pdf.

Chapter 10: “Equality: Self-Evident Truths,” The Gospel According to Ann Coulter, 2012, available as a free download at www.coulterwatch.com/gospel.pdf.

Chapter 6: “Fame,” Vanity: Ann Coulter’s Quest for Glory, 2012, available as a free download at www.coulterwatch.com/vanity.pdf.

Preface: “Arrogance of Power,” Never Trust Ann Coulter – at ANY Age, 2013, available as a free download at www.coulterwatch.com/never.pdf.


[1]       John Cloud, “Ms. Right,” Time, 4/25/05, pg. 41.

[2]       “Washington, Inc. – Finally, They’re Center Stage,” National Journal, 3/11/95.

[3]       K.C. Swanson, “Hill People,” National Journal, 12/7/96.

[4]       Howard Kurtz, “The Blonde Flinging Bombshells at Bill Clinton,” Washington Post, 10/16/98, http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/special/clinton/stories/coulter101698.htm.

[5]       Anne Marie O’Connor, “Ann Coulter: Post-Feminist Pundit,” George, September 1997, p 117.

[6]       Marvin Kalb, One Scandalous Story: Clinton, Lewinsky, and Thirteen Days That Tarnished American Journalism, Free Press. 2001, pg. 85. See Chapter 5, “Enter Mr. Drudge,” http://www.powells.com/biblio?show=HARDCOVER:USED:0684859394:5.60&page=excerpt

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

[8]       Author interview.

[9]       Annys Shin, “Blonde Ambition on the Right,” National Journal, 5/31/97.

[10]     Mary Murphy, “Look Who’s Talking,” TV Guide, 8/9-15/97.

[11]     Mary Jacoby, “The Pundettes,” Capital Style, December 1997.

[12]     Hanna Rosi, “Radical Chicks,” The New Republic, 10/13/97.

[13]     Anne Marie O’Connor, “Ann Coulter: Post-Feminist Pundit,” George, September 1997.

[14]     Charlene Laino, “Power: the greatest aphrodisiac?” MSNBC, 2/3/98.

[15]     Author interview.

[16]     Carol Lawson, “Chronicle,” New York Times, 9/12/97.

[17]     Ann Coulter, “A Republican Tribute to John,” 7/28/99.

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

Ann Coulter’s Root Causes – Part I

(December 8, 1961)

Is Ann Coulter insane or evil (or both)? When asked that question, I typically respond that Ann is a little lamb who has gone astray, lost without a firm foundation.

Friends, strangers, colleagues, and talk show hosts have questioned why Coulter has become a person who can be called both the “most hated woman in America” and “an exemplar, in word and deed, of what a true leader is.”


From whence did America’s premiere polemicist arise? What events and forces coalesced to create the “mass of contradictions” evident in Ann’s life and work? How can someone who claims to be “an extraordinarily good Christian” behave in such an unchristian manner?

That Coulter, in recent months (and over the span of almost two decades) has said and done some things which could rightly be called crazy or evil is undeniable. Is it all an act, a charade, shtick, a carefully developed persona? Or do those words and actions accurately represent the person of Ann Coulter?

In this four-part series, we will look at the formative forces and key events and periods in Ann’s life which have shaped and molded her into the person we see before us today.

So, to begin with, let’s begin at the beginning.

Ann’s Birth and Pedigree

The first formative stage of Ann’s life began with her birth. Ann was born in Norwalk, Connecticut, on December 8, 1961. Ann spent the first few weeks of her life in an incubator. She would continue to be the center of attention – the center of her universe – throughout her years growing up in the Coulter home.

Born into a wealthy, well-connected family, in the most prosperous county in America, Ann was raised with high expectations and had high aspirations. Ann’s distant ancestors were Puritans,[1] dating back almost to the Mayflower, while her more recent relations were all staunch Republicans. Expectations were high. Aspirations would follow suit. Even at birth, Ann had a heritage – a patriotic and religious heritage – to which she must live up.

Growing up in elite circles, she would come to develop an elitist outlook on life. Her crème de la crème worldview is shamelessly stated in her high school yearbook: “I’m against homogenizers in art, in politics, in every walk of life. I want the cream to rise.” Clearly, Ann considered herself the crème de la crème. Paradoxically, she suffers from low self-esteem, knowing she does not really measure up. This cognitive dissonance would accelerate and infiltrate every area of her life.

Ann’s Family

Ann was the last of three children and the only girl – the “baby princess.” The last born, especially a baby princess, is often treated as special, and is frequently indulged and pampered. Yet, being the last, the baby princess often isn’t physically, mentally, or emotionally able to do what her older siblings can do, thus often engendering feelings of inadequacy and a lack of worth.[2]

Ann’s father, a prominent New York attorney, seems to have governed with a strict hand as a prototypical authoritarian father.[3] Authoritarian fathers tend to focus on the rules while failing to exhibit compassion. Psychologist and counselor Gary Smalley terms this a “controlling parent,” one who enacts laws without exhibiting love. An authoritarian father can cause a daughter to feel love is conditional, can create deep feelings of insecurity and fears of rejection, and can inculcate feelings of hostility and resentment. The child’s fear of failure fuels her ambition.

Ann’s mother was probably the typical “Trophy Mom,”[4] rewarding good behavior with fulsome praise, but being critical when expectations were not met. A trophy mom, in conjunction with an authoritarian father, can put tremendous pressure upon the baby princess to perform for acceptance and praise. A sense of inadequacy and fear of rejection can, in time, become pathological.

In her parents, Ann was heir to both strict Catholic theological doctrines and the Protestant work ethic.[5] Both tended towards performance-based relationships[6] which seem to have instilled a sense of insecurity in Ann, who seems to have pined for unconditional love (don’t we all?).

It was probably as a child and adolescent that Ann developed her censorious spirit, legalistic temperament, and that perfectionism which would forever plague her. Ironically, the more Ann sought to be (or at least appear) perfect – in order to be loved – the more glaring her imperfections became.

It appears – or at least it probably appeared to Ann – that she was the recipient of performance-based love. Hence her insatiable need to get attention by performing.

One gets the sense that Ann needed (or felt she needed) to perform in order to belong. Victims of performance-based love are emotionally insecure. They tend to put on a show for others (which reinforces the “last born” trait of being an entertainer). As one Coulter profiler would later observe, “She’s like a puppy waiting to be thrown a ball.”[7] (Because they are putting on a show for affection, they can become both disingenuous and distrustful of the genuineness of others.)

One section title in The Birth Order Book speaks volumes: “Last Borns Often Love the Limelight.” Last borns “often desperately crave attention” and “are notorious carrot-seekers as in, ‘Look at me, I’m performing – toss me a carrot.’” Ann’s family gave her plenty of carrots.

Victims of performance-based love also tend towards narcissism. Being perfectionists, their imperfections loom large in their consciousness, instilling self-doubt. Admitting error is anathema to them. They are often afflicted with depression, anxiety and shame. Consequently, they are prone to “compulsive and addictive behaviors.” Their deep-seated need for acceptance and unconditional love prevent them from doing the very thing they need to do to free them from themselves: acknowledge their inadequacies and repent from wrong behavior.

Ann’s Education

Ann received a strict Catholic education (K-8) at St. Aloysius Catholic School until she entered public school. She graduated from New Canaan High School in 1979.

After graduation, Ann was beset by two competing drives: a desire for greatness and a yearning for fun. She initially chose the latter before seeking the former. The last-born trait of rebelliousness arose with her escape from the family homestead. She would spend time doing what she wanted. Absent the presence of her parents, Coulter would take time for herself.

Consequently, Ann’s psychological template was set by the time she embarked for college. Ann later attended an Ivy League college (Cornell) and an elite post-graduate school (Univ. of Michigan).

Ann rejected her father’s Catholicism in favor of her mother’s Presbyterian faith, yet, upon reaching adulthood, she apparently disengaged herself from religion altogether at the same time as she was tossed to and fro by competing lifestyle and career choices. The absence of an internal moral compass would forever plague her.

Deeply conflicted, with a remarkably dynamic internal ambivalence, Coulter believes herself to be the crème de la crème (still wanting “the cream to rise to the top”) while simultaneously questioning her own self-worth, especially when confronted by people who are brighter and more accomplished than her, or by situations which are beyond her ability to resolve.


Chapter 1: “The Seduction of Ann Coulter,” The Beauty of Conservatism, 2011, available as a free download at www.coulterwatch.com/beauty.pdf.

Chapter 1: “Roots: Ann Coulter’s Christian Heritage,” The Gospel According to Ann Coulter, 2012, available as a free download at www.coulterwatch.com/gospel.pdf.

Chapter 1: “Rising Crème: Narcissism – A Primer,” Vanity: Ann Coulter’s Quest for Glory, 2012, available as a free download at www.coulterwatch.com/vanity.pdf.


[1]       Ann Coulter, “NELL HUSBANDS MARTIN COULTER,” 4/22/09.

[2]       Ironically, both a sense of entitlement and fear of inadequacy come to coexist in a psyche which is never at peace.

[3]       See http://www.rockridgeinstitute.org/research/lakoff/mp21?b_start:int=2 on authoritarian father figures.

[4]       See chapters 8 and 9 of The Mom Factor: Dealing with the Mother You Had, Didn’t Have, or Still Contend With, by Dr. Henry Cloud and Dr. John Townsend, Zondervan, 1996.

[5]       Ann Coulter, Washington Journal, C-Span, 5/24/99. Coulter: “My father’s Catholic and my mother’s Presbyterian.”

[6]       Although they can be misused to create performance-based relationships, that is not their intent.

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

Let’s Be Logical, Ann

Three striking things emerged from an interview with Ann Coulter at the Heritage Foundation: 1) a passionate defense of America and national sovereignty; a surprising unfamiliarity with basic English; and the sense that it was all a performance.


Let’s Be Illogical

Coulter, the consummate wordsmith, seemed unfamiliar with elementary English, claiming, “It’s not even illogical. It’s counter-logic. It’s the opposite of logic.”

But Ann, “illogical” means “devoid of logic.” If it’s “devoid of logic,” if it’s “counter-logic,” if it’s “the opposite of logic,” then it is, in fact, “illogical.” Elementary English.

Perhaps Coulter has twisted words so often to mean so many things that she has forgotten their true meanings. We know she has distorted “establishment” to mean “anyone but Romney” and she has suggested that it is more principled to be unprincipled.

Or perhaps Ann misspoke out of the intensity of the moment. Perhaps.

Passionate Policy

With passionate zeal, Coulter vociferously championed restoring border security and developing sound immigration policy, demanding,

“We want a barbed wire fence. I want the same fence that Israel has. Let’s start with that. I’d like the same fence Israel has, and we just have to get rid of this refugee policy. What are we going to do, take in the entire world? All countries suck compared to America. Is that the standard?”

All a Performance

Immediately after making her impassioned plea for sanity in the immigration debate, Coulter – in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye – totally changed her demeanor. Check the video (at about 1 Min. 25 sec.). One moment she was on fire defending America. The next moment, a self-satisfied smile appeared on her face, growing as she panned her audience seeking approval and applause for her splendid performance – looking away from her interviewer. But then she was brought back to earth by another question. Coulter’s face turned serious and she appeared frustrated that she had not received the accolades she felt she so richly deserved.

Who is the real Ann Coulter? Find out in Never Trust Ann Coulter – at ANY Age, available as a free download at www.coulterwatch.com/never.pdf.

UPDATE: One of Coulter’s colleagues suggested she just misspoke. Wrong. About 36 hours after this essay was published, Coulter posted her weekly column with this illogical absurdity: “This is something I don’t recall encountering before. It’s anti-logic.”

Instead of just admitting, as her colleague suggested, that she simply misspoke, Coulter doubled down, called it “anti-logic,” and claimed it to be a totally foreign concept to her. As we have seen, admitting error is anathema to her, as are repentance and forgiveness.

What is it about elementary English that Coulter cannot grasp?

In her column – in which she makes “anti-logic” its centerpiece – Coulter expands on her remarks of the previous Friday. Coulter continues to make a distinction between “illogical” and something more superlative, more hyperbolic: “counter-logic,” “opposite of logic,” and, now, “anti-logic.”

But Coulter’s new terms – for what she regards as a brand new concept – are merely different ways of saying the same thing: illogical – the very term she says “it’s not even!”

Illogical means “devoid of logic.” If it’s “devoid of logic,” it’s …

  • “counter-logic”
  • “the opposite of logic”
  • “anti-logic”

Another dictionary definition of illogical: “contradicting or disregarding the principles of logic”

Sounds anti-logic to me.

Strikingly, Coulter does not “recall encountering [this concept] before.” How is that possible? It’s illogical.


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