Tag Archives: Jeb Bush

Jews: Quality, not Quantity

Don’t be fooled by Ann Coulter’s lies about her anti-Semitic tweet. Her very own words betray her heart.

Coulter has repeatedly justified her anti-Semitic tweet (“f—ing Jews”) by arguing that she was addressing the quantity, not the quality, of Jews. This is nonsense! The epithet modifies “Jews,” not “many.”

She also claims she was attacking the panderers, not Jews. Poppycock!

Epithet3

Ludicrously, Coulter claims that there was nowhere else to place Effing in that sentence. If that were true – and it isn’t – then write a different sentence. But her assertions are and remain lies.

All Coulter had to do was place Effing in front of “many” (thereby modifying the quantity) instead of after it (making it a statement of quality) – or – to place it before “people” (panderers) instead of before “Jews.”

Quality or Quantity?

Coulter tweeted (emphasis added):

“How many f—ing Jews do these people think there are in the United States?”

Coulter did not tweet (emphasis added):

“How f—ing many Jews do these people think there are in the United States?”

Coulter’s actual tweet expresses the quality of Jews. To express the quantity of Jews, all Coulter had to do was move her modifier over one word to the left.

Yet, Coulter claims that the only place she could find to put Effing in that sentence was before Jews. Coupling those two words together is ipso facto anti-Semitic. In context or out, they are anti-Semitic by the very coupling of Effing with Jews.

Epithet4

Panderers or Object of Pandering?

Coulter still claims she could not express her views any other way in that short space of characters. She further claims she was talking about the panderers, not the object of their pandering. But then, why not write:

“Those f—ing candidates are pandering to Jews, who are very few in U.S.”

Simple. Easy. Anyone with a pulse could come up with that formulation.

Let’s return to Coulter’s original tweet (emphasis added):

“How many f—ing Jews do these people think there are in the United States?”

If Coulter had truly meant Effing to condemn the panderers and not the object of the pandering, she should have placed Effing three words to the right, in front of “people.”

Coulter did not tweet (emphasis added):

“How many Jews do these f—ing people think there are in the United States?”

Again, she didn’t.

Why? Because Coulter intended that epithet for Jews.

Not quantity. Not panderers. But Jews.

Coulter’s Choice of Words and Their Placement

Writing is all about word choice and word placement. Coulter chose her words and she placed them exactly where she wanted them.

Why would she do so? Why would she attack Jews?

Because she was exasperated by what seemed to her to be too many references to Israel. Again, she did not attack the alleged pandering of GOP candidates; she attacked the object of their alleged pandering: Jews.

Coulter’s words self-evidently reveal that she believes Jews really do wield power disproportionate to their numbers, prompting the pandering she so despises and, thus, her attack on Jews.

First, Jews; Now, Catholics?

Ann Hart Coulter is a modern-day Know Nothing.

KnowNothing

Following her anti-Semitic rant[1] against Jews and Israel,[2] Coulter has now embarked upon a Know Nothing approach to Catholicism. This is especially strange as she attended a private Catholic school until she entered high school. One would think she would know better.

Coulter’s Anti-Catholic Tweets

Among Coulter’s many tweets disparaging the Catholic Church (emphasis added):

Time Tweet
9:55 a.m. Equally accurate statement to the Pope’s: The Catholic Church was “largely built by pedophiles.” twitter.com/WSJ/status/646…
10:04 a.m. I’m an American and this is why our founders (not “immigrants”!) distrusted Catholics & wouldn’t make them citizens. twitter.com/DavidLimbaugh/…
10:06 a.m. Catholics were not accepted until they became more AMERICAN Catholic less ROMAN Catholic-Harvard’s Samuel Huntington twitter.com/DavidLimbaugh/…
10:29 a.m. Yes, 55 Protestants & 1 Catholic. Can we admit immigrants in that wildly diverse proportion? twitter.com/michaelbd/stat…
10:40 a.m. No, I’m attacking the Pope. So did Martin Luther. So did America’s settlers. So did Dems when it was John Paul II. twitter.com/dmataconis/sta…
11:05 a.m. THIS Pope’s philosophy of worshiping the poor, blaming the rich leads to Latin American poverty. American Catholicism leads to success.

Coulter’s WASP Nativism

Coulter has a distinctly WASP (White and Protestant)[3] view of America. For years now, Coulter has hated immigrants.[4] Her nativism has been especially pronounced[5] this year. Coulter even hates the idea of Christians serving overseas.[6] Indeed, she insists that all other nations suck.[7]

During the 2012 election cycle, Coulter compared social conservative Rick Santorum to ultra-liberal Ted Kennedy – because of their shared Catholicism. To Coulter, Santorum was “more Catholic than conservative.”

Last year, Coulter condemned Catholics as “moral show-offs” and “fake Christians,” expressing contempt for church leaders and parishioners alike whose theology compels them to adopt political positions with which she disagrees.

Coulter claims that American Catholics are better than Roman Catholics. Yet, Coulter condemns liberal Catholics in America for their liberalism, while the traditional pro-life Roman Catholic doctrines remain extant. Ironically, Coulter has waged war on pro-lifers for defending the unborn while claiming to be totally pro-life herself. Confused? So is Coulter.

Coulter does not make sense. To reiterate, she claims that American Catholics are better than Roman Catholics because they have been assimilated. Yet, many of those Catholics who have been assimilated into American culture have become more secularized and embraced leftwing views on social issues (abortion, homosexuality, marriage, etc.) while the foreign Roman Catholics hold the views that Coulter cherishes. Reality is the exact opposite of what Coulter claims it is.

As noted by National Memo, Coulter’s ire at Latin American Catholics may stem from her anti-immigration thesis in Adios, America! They correct Coulter on the historical record:

“Catholics in the New World had easily become Americans following the Louisiana Purchase from France in 1803, and the acquisition of Florida from Spain in 1819. And Catholics did indeed play a role in the early polity of the U.S. This included one signer of the Declaration of Independence, Charles Carroll of Maryland, and two delegates to the Constitutional Convention of 1787, Daniel Carroll of Maryland (and cousin of Charles), plus Thomas Fitzsimmons of Pennsylvania.”

Catholics in the Revolutionary War

Contrary to Coulter’s assertions, Catholics were among the “American settlers” Coulter cherishes. And they fought for America! Several of America’s Founding Fathers were Catholic.

From “Catholics and the Founding”:

“The preeminent Catholic patriot was undoubtedly Charles Carroll of Carrollton. Heir to the fortune of an early Maryland Catholic family, it was said that Carroll risked more (in financial terms) than any other when he became the only Catholic to sign the Declaration of Independence.”

“Carroll’s cousin, John, was also an important figure in Revolutionary America. John Carroll had been a Jesuit priest before the suppression of the order by Pope Clement XIV and had continued to minister as one of the colonies’ few priests. Uniquely positioned as an ardent patriot and a Catholic religious leader, he was called upon by the Continental Congress to join Benjamin Franklin, Samuel Chase and Charles Carroll on an unsuccessful mission to Canada to try to convince the colonies’ northern neighbor to maintain neutrality during the war with Britain. Carroll would become the first American bishop in 1789.”

“A thousand miles to the west, another Catholic with less economic clout and fewer connections would also play an important part in the military plans of the Americans. Father Pierre Gibault was a missionary of French descent in southwestern Indiana. When the Virginia militia under Colonel George Rogers Clark entered the area, Gibault and others met the American commander and pledged the support of the region to the forces of independence in return for assurances of religious freedom. Against the wishes of the bishop of Quebec, Gibault led the French residents of the Vincennes region in cooperating with the Americans.”

Endnotes:

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

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

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

[4]               See “Coulter’s Soccer Flop – Part Trois” at http://t.co/uy7FDPu79v.

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

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

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

Effing Jews and Ann Coulter’s Waterloo (or Damascus Road?)

Ann Coulter’s incendiary “f—ing Jews” tweet was quickly countered by her claim, “I like the Jews.” Really?

As I pointed out last week,[1] Coulter’s tweet was, is, and remains indefensible. Yet, she defends herself. Before analyzing her rebuttal, let’s take a quick look at exactly what her initial tweet said.

Effing

Effing Jews – Expletive of Endearment

Coulter tweeted, “How many f—ing Jews do these people think there are in the United States?” Notice her exquisite courtesy in bleeping out the offensive adjective. Very polite. Who could possibly imagine what that bleeped word is?

The subject is not, as Coulter later claimed, panderers. The subject is Jews – and the modifier is an expletive! (Yet, just hours later, Coulter claimed to “like” “the Jews.”) Coulter’s criticism and wrath was directed at Jews, not GOP candidates. The adjective employed applied to Jews, not politicians.

Regardless of the context of her tweet, even taking in the totality of all of her tweets during the debate, there is no denying the anti-Semitic nature of those two words. In context or out, they are anti-Semitic by the very coupling of Effing with Jews.

Again, as I pointed out last Thursday, who (besides Ann) uses an expletive as an endearment?

Just thinking those two conjoined words is bad enough, but to actually tweet them? And, having tweeted them, to justify using them? Yes, Ann Coulter is an impenitent propagandist.[2]

Coulter and GOP Panderers

As noted in last week’s column,[3] Coulter quickly attempted to rebuff criticisms of her tweets by claiming she was attacking the GOP candidates for pandering. But prior to the fallout, Coulter never tweeted the word “pander.”

Coulter claims: “My tweet was about Republicans and the pandering. It wasn’t about Israel, it wasn’t about Jews. It’s what Republicans are thinking in their little pea brains. I could say the same thing about Evangelicals. Who are you pandering to? A lot of it is to Sheldon Adelson and the Evangelicals…. This kind of suck-uppery is humiliating.”

Wait! Effing Jews isn’t about Jews? Jews was the subject of the tweet and the object of Coulter’s wrath. To claim otherwise is ludicrous.

As Coulter has made painfully obvious, in her view, the Jews are to blame for GOP candidates pandering to them. (If that is, in fact, what the candidates were doing.) Coulter has obviously bought into the narrative that she claims other Republicans have embraced.

A column on Jerusalem Post asks why the GOP would “pander” to Jews: “As Coulter well knows, Jews overwhelmingly voted for Obama, not once but twice. She is also aware that the vast majority of Iran-deal opponents is Republican. Sheldon Adelson, whom she made a point of mentioning in her Daily Beast interview, is an exception, not the rule.”

David French noted “a small irony about Ann Coulter: Even while she was slamming the GOP for ‘pandering’ on issues like abortion and Israel, she herself was using specific language that panders to the small, race-obsessed far-right crowd that is particularly focused on those same issues.”

French continued: “We defend a culture, not a race. The foundation of that culture is a faith that makes no distinction among races but rather declares, unequivocally, ‘All are one, in Christ Jesus.’ Shunning the slur disempowers the trolls and forces the radical Left to confront the race hatred that fuels its own rage.”

Coulter: “I like the Jews”

Coulter’s defense includes the self-evidently fraudulent assertion, “I like the Jews.”

We know this is a lie for many reasons. First, is the definitive article “the” preceding “Jews.” If someone said “I like the blacks,” would you believe her? If someone claimed to like “the Hispanics” or “the Asians,” what veracity would you give their claim? (Remember, Coulter is a linguist and a wordsmith who knows how to effectively and accurately use the English language.)

Second, speaking of “the Jews,” Coulter is speaking of all Jews. But we already know from 35 years of commentary, that Coulter “hates,” “despises,” and “loathes” (her words) liberals and feminists, many of whom are Jews. Indeed, a majority of Jews in America vote Democrat. Does Coulter really “like” those “Jews?” Hardly. Coulter has often attacked liberal Jews (as a group or individually).

Binyamin Jolkovsky, the founder of Jewish World Review, wonders: “She could have been drunk, she could have been high, I don’t know, I have to give her the benefit of the doubt … but I don’t have to delude myself. Pandering to Jewish money is about as anti-Semitic a stereotype as you could put forth. Her ‘eff-ing Jews’ comment is not identifying Israel – it’s identifying Jews, plural, and all Jews. There is no excuse for that. You can’t just wiggle out of something that vile and hateful.”

Tom Sykes observes that Coulter’s “whole argument echoes a historic libel against Jews that they hold secret influence.”

Third, claiming to either like or dislike an entire race of people is, itself, a racist claim. It is called stereotyping. Does anyone like all people of a given racial or ethnic group? Or of a particular religion? Or of a particular political persuasion?

Wasn’t it Coulter who said, “All nations suck compared to America?”[4] Isn’t Israel a nation?

Coulter’s Twitter Rebuttal

On September 17th, Coulter tweeted a ludicrous assertion: “No: It’s pro-Semitic. Where is all the GOP pandering on Israel getting us? US becoming Mexico very bad for Israel. twitter.com/ANewSarah/stat…

Coulter has just redefined anti-Semitism as pro-Semitic!

Many of Coulter’s tweets reiterated her many false claims during her book tour that the only issue that matters is immigration. She uses that narrative to justify her attacks on pro-lifers,[5] on Reagan lovers,[6] and, now, on defenders of Israel.[7]

Coulter’s joke – “Boy were they wrong @ Jewish influence! I complained about pandering on Israel (Reagan & abortion) & haven’t heard a thing about it!” – merely reinforces her contention that Jews have too much power, the root of her anti-Semitic rant.

Undermining her own arguments, Coulter retweeted from her friend, Ben Shapiro: “RT @benshapiro: This I know of @anncoulter: she is far more a friend to Jews and Israel than Jewish Obama voters now jumping on her.”

Does Coulter really “like” those Obama-voting Jews? Remember, Coulter called Jews, not Israel, “f—ing!” She obviously has a high regard for Israel’s policies, but not necessarily her people (or Jewish people outside Israel).

Finally, “John Derbyshire @DissidentRight reviews indexed references to Israel in my smash bestseller “Adios, America!” – bit.ly/1V13f9x.”

Derbyshire actually promotes the anti-Semitic stereotype of a disproportionately powerful Jewish lobby –and Coulter is using that as one of her defenses!

According to the Zionist Organization of America, “Ann Coulter made appalling, anti-Jewish remarks which evoked the classic, anti-Semitic trope about Jewish manipulation of America for the purposes of supporting Israel at America’s expense.”

As for Derbyshire’s quotes from Coulter’s “smash bestseller” – they pertain to a love of Israel’s policies, not her people. In Adios, America! Coulter is not defending Jews, she is defending Israel. Moreover, she is defending Israel in the areas that pertain to her agenda for America: immigration and border security.

Coulter’s Video Rebuttal

Coulter quickly entered firestorm mode, posting a professionally produced video defense[8] of her tweets. In her condescending self-defense video, Coulter attacked her critics while lying about her tweets and the context of those tweets.

Coulter claimed, ““It’s been a long theme of mine – attacking Republicans[9] for all, you know, trying to prove – I don’t know what they’re trying to prove – by constantly praising Reagan and denouncing abortion.”[10]

Yes, Coulter asserts that her criticism of Jews is really criticism of the GOP.

But even in defending herself, Coulter convicts herself. She added, “I hadn’t even mentioned their, their incessant sucking up to Israel in my column.” So, in Coulter’s view, the GOP is always, incessantly “sucking up to Israel.” Is Coulter suggesting that Israel donates to GOP campaign coffers? Or is she arguing that American Jews – most of whom vote Democrat – will vote for the GOP?

Coulter continued, “Then I watched the debate …” and hated those few references to Israel. Moreover – in her professionally-produced video rebuttal – Coulter again lied about the last question of the GOP debate. She claimed it had to do with what America would look like. No! The object of the question was the “world,” not “America.” In her tweets and interviews, she continually misstates that crucial question.

Regarding her GOP debate questions, Coulter asserts: “That was the anti-pandering section of my tweeting debate night.” Except, her criticism was of Israel, not pandering, and her anti-Semitic tweet called Jews, not GOP panderers, “f—ing.”

Coulter’s logic utterly falls apart in the next section. She argues:

“They chopped up the tweet, sent it out, the apotheosis of which was the Daily Beast post: ‘Ann Coulter Shouts Effing Jew.’ O, come on now. I know how to use Effing in a sentence.”

Coulter then admits that using “Effing Jew” on its own is anti-Semitic, but “Saying how many Effing anything, that’s a comment on quantity. It’s not saying ‘Effing Jews,’ it’s saying ‘how many.’ Quantity, not quality.”

Balderdash! The question queried quantity, but the qualifier on the noun (Jews) denoted quality (f—ing).

Coulter continued: “Because it was chopped up, [some] may have thought that I said something unkind and, I wouldn’t want [dramatic pause] them to think that.”

First, it was not “chopped up.” Second, everyone knows what her tweet meant. It is painfully obvious to all. Third, who is “them?” Why the significant pause before saying the word “them?” Who is “them?” Jews?

Coulter concluded: “I’m pro-Israel. So is everyone in the room. So is everyone on the stage. Can you give it a rest?”

Throughout her various iterations defending her indefensible tweet, Coulter has continually conflated “Jews” with “Israel.” They are not identical.

Anyone with a pulse knows, Jews are a people (racially, ethnically, religiously) and Israel is a nation. Coulter has certainly proven her exuberance for Israel’s policies (fence, immigration, anti-terrorism) and her current leader (Netanyahu). But when has she evinced support for the Jewish people? In fact, Coulter has treated Jews in a derogatory fashion.[11]

Hollywood Reporter Interview

In an astonishing interview with Hollywood Reporter, Coulter made several outrageous (and demonstrably untrue) assertions.

“It’s totally fake outrage from frauds who want to continue the dump of third-worlders on the country, including Muslim Jihadists, and voted for the guy who just gave a nuke to Iran.”

Except, of course, much of the criticism arises from conservatives, including conservative Jews.

Coulter claims her critics are “mostly Israel-hating liberals and pro-mass-immigration Republicans. Both of whom don’t want anyone to notice how immigration is changing the country, putting Americans – and Israel – at risk.”

Except, of course, much of the criticism arises from conservatives, including conservative Jews.

“The hypocrites who are mad at me are the ones who support anti-Israel college professors, who refuse to condemn Islamic barbarism, who supported the overthrow of Mubarak for the Muslim Brotherhood, who spread the deadly libel that Jews in America are only successful because of ‘white privilege.’”

Except, of course, much of the criticism arises from conservatives, including conservative Jews.

“There has been a huge spike in anti-Semitism across Europe due to the massive influx of Muslim immigrants. The same people in a faux uproar about my tweets are also leading the charge to import Muslims into the U.S.A. Half a million girls in the U.S. are now at risk for female genital mutilation. I doubt their dads are voting for pro-Israel politics. I’m the one who just wrote a book about these problems.”

How does Coulter know that it is the same people? Because they oppose Ann?

Conservative Coulter Critics

Sarah Rumpf lamented that “Ann Coulter Broke My Heart,” arguing that Coulter’s “raison d’être is no longer the bold articulation of conservative principles but rather an ugly and small-minded vision for America.” Rumpf concluded, “Coulter is too smart not to realize the danger she is courting. Her comments, and continued justification of them, are a betrayal of the principles of not just conservatism, but America.”

David French, at National Review, objected to Coulter’s “Snide comments about GOP obsessions with abortion, insufficient attention to immigration … and obsession with Israel.” French charged Coulter with “pandering – pandering to a very small, very angry crowd that’s far more white nationalist than it is recognizably conservative.”

French continued, “[Her tweets] do not reflect conservative ideals, they do not advance conservative ideals, nor will they even advance the civilizational goals she seems to care so much about. Like it or not, if one wants to actually secure the border and impose a sensible immigration policy, extending a middle finger to conservative America – while attention-getting – is ultimately unpersuasive.”

Joseph Farah, at World Net Daily noted, “The use of the F-bomb really does put her on shaky ground in denying her comment was not anti-Semitic. This is, after all, a woman who claims to be a Christian – one who presumably worships a Jewish Messiah called Jesus. As a Christian Arab-American, I can tell you stringing together that epithet with the word ‘Jews’ puts her on very shaky grounds in denying anti-Semitism.”

Farah continued, “At the very least, one has to wonder if she ever had a nasty, twisted, repugnant thought that went unexpressed.”

Farah continued, “Is Coulter aware that of all the religion-based attacks on people in the U.S., some 60 percent are directed at Jews? Is she unaware of the rising anti-Semitism on American college campuses and elsewhere in the country? Is she blithely ignorant of the fact that the one and only Jewish state in the world is surrounded by enemies who seek its destruction?”

Jack Engelhard, a conservative Jewish author, grieved over Coulter’s words to the point of throwing away all of her books. Her former fan wrote “she happens to be a fine, witty writer, a strong Conservative – a gal after my own heart. She was near the top of my list of brainy blonde Conservative bombshells, and politically, we work the same beat.”

But Coulter’s tweet was “like a kick in the gut – from a valued and trusted friend.” Engelhard then asked, “If that is what she is thinking – what about the rest of them who are my trusted political allies?” After mourning his loss, he added, “It’s bad enough that I am at odds with my Leftist acquaintances, but now I feel estranged from the Right. Are we really on the same side?”

“What part of shared Judeo/Christian heritage doesn’t she understand? Apparently the Judeo part.”

Binyamin Jolkovsky observed: “This is about a girl who threw a tantrum … on Twitter. Having an apology that’s acceptable, especially during this time of the year for the Jewish calendar, would be the right thing to do – it would be the Jewish thing to do. This is crazy.”

An apology would also be the Christian thing to do. That’s why she won’t do it.

Supporting Israel

Israel is America’s only loyal ally in the Middle East. Israel is the only nation in the world that truly understands the nature of the Islamist threat, having experienced an existential threat since her founding. Israel and the Israeli people share in the Judeo-Christian roots of the American people.[12]

In an Open Letter to Ann, Dr. Michael Brown wrote:

“Is it that hard to connect the dots between Israel, Iran, and American security, especially when you consider the devastating worldwide effects of a completely destabilized Middle East? And when Iranians chant in the streets, ‘Death to Israel! Death to America!’ it’s not that hard to realize that we’re connected in more ways than one.”

“And, by the way, in case you forgot, the Savior of the world is a Jewish Rabbi.”

Avi Davis observed: “Every one of these candidates has been on record for years expressing unconditional support for the State of Israel and its security needs – and it is for one glaringly simple reason: they believe Israel’s security vouchsafes the United States’ security.”

Davis continued, “Making that connection may not be so patently obvious given the geographical distance between the two countries. But it is abundantly clear to anyone who has heard jihadist rantings in mosques from Oslo to Riyadh – the two countries are regarded as the hydra headed monster whose joint destruction is essential to paving the way for the re-emergence of the Caliphate.”

As reported by Hollywood Reporter, Rick Santorum also took Coulter to task for her remarks, saying, “How many Bible-believing Christians does she think are in this country, who understand the significance of the heritage of the Jewish people in the Holy Land?”

Santorum added, “I think everybody, every conservative has a right to look at that and say that this is someone who clearly doesn’t understand the significance of [the relationship between Israel and the U.S.].”

Seemingly, Coulter makes common cause with the enemies of Israel and America.

Coulter’s Motivations

Tom Sykes echoes what I have been saying for years: “Fearful of being forgotten, Coulter has reacted by becoming ever more offensive.”

Per Joseph Farah, “It’s sad to see Coulter degenerate into a slur machine, one who seems so desperate for fame at any cost that she will say anything and possibly do anything to maintain a career as, frankly, a thuggish commentator.”

Rick Santorum argues that Coulter’s rhetoric is reflective of her desires for self-promotion: “some people in the Republican Party who are in the pundit class, who are there to be controversial, and to try to make money, and sell their books. And that’s just fine – they can go sell their books.”

Dr. Brown wrote to Coulter: “You’re obviously no stranger to controversy. To the contrary, you seem to thrive on controversy. In fact, you seem to enjoy provoking it.”

My dear Jewish and Christian friends, let me commiserate with you. Betrayal hurts. But Coulter has never been a trustworthy person.[13] For at least twenty years now, Coulter has betrayed individuals, groups, and causes. Claiming to be a pro-life[14] Christian,[15] she has notably attacked both groups – all to serve her own agenda.

Ann Coulter is her own North Star.[16] Or, to put it another way, Ann Coulter ‘s North Star is Ann Coulter.

Perhaps, at one time, Coulter was guided to some degree by the values of Mother and Father, but no longer. Coulter has become a law unto herself. Her indomitable will seeks to bend the will of others to her own.[17] But she is not a force of nature because nature bends to the will of God.

Time will tell if this particular controversy (again, of Coulter’s own making) will be her Waterloo or her Road to Damascus experience.

Prayer for Ann

Karen Wolfers Rapaport has a gracious response to Coulter’s series of anti-Semitic remarks. Karen began: “Before I continue I would like to be clear that I believe most Christians and non-Jews do not agree with Ann’s remark. I do not see her as a spokeswoman or an ambassador for her religion.”

Rapaport later noted the introspective, soul-searching nature of this season of the Jewish calendar, and she expressed gratitude to Coulter:

“Thank you for being a shofar of sorts, reminding this Jew or any Jew or non-Jew who wishes to participate in a time worn, magical practice, that this is the time for us to do teshuvah; to repent and take stock in our personal character inventory. And in the spirit of forgiveness that marks this time, I solemnly, and with all my heart, forgive you for your insensitivity and ignorance on the subject of perfection.”

Please join me in prayer for Ann:

Lord, cast down Ann Coulter’s haughtiness, her pride and arrogance, her sense of superiority and sense of entitlement. Cast them down to the earth. Cast them down to depths of hell itself.

Then, Lord, lift her up to You. Open her eyes to Your Truth and open her heart to Your love. Grant her a spirit of repentance and forgiveness, a spirit of humility and grace.

Amen.

Endnotes:

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

[2]               See “Propaganda: George Orwell in the Age of Ann Coulter” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-4j.

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

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

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

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

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

[8]               “Ann Coulter Defends Her Controversial tweet,’ producer Graham Flanagan, Business Insider, 9/18/15.

[9]               See “Never Trust Ann Coulter – at ANY Age” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-3p.

[10]             See “Coulter’s Assault on Pro-Life Movement Continues” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-9a.

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

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

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

[14]               See “Coulter’s Assault on Pro-Life Movement Continues” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-9a.

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

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

[17]               See Propaganda: Orwell in the Age of Ann Coulter, 2014, available as a free download at www.coulterwatch.com/propaganda.pdf.

Ann Coulter’s Jewish Roots

Ann Coulter has come under fire for what have been described as “controversial” (i.e., anti-Semitic) tweets. Given Coulter’s long history of anti-Jewish sentiment, why are conservatives giving her the benefit of the doubt?

Jewish

Before perusing the historical record, let’s examine Coulter’s most-recent tweets.

Coulter’s Tweets on Israel

Coulter remains single-mindedly obsessed with immigration (and selling herself and her book[1]), so much so that every other cause means nothing to Coulter, who has viciously attacked pro-lifers[2] and Reaganites.[3] Now, Coulter has gone after Jews and Israel. Anything or anyone posing a threat to Coulter’s agenda or her preferred nominee is fodder.

As for her tweets (emphasis added) …

Time Tweet
8:46 pm Huckabee admirably passionate on Israel. If only he cared as much about the survival of the U.S.
8:51 pm GOP definitely wants to protect Israel! How are they going to do it when immigration turns US into CA and no GOP can be elected president?
9:00 pm So glad I’m watching debate! Learned GOP is: anti-abortion, pro-Israel, pro-Reagan. I wonder if there’s any disagreement on immigration…
11:00 pm Good grief! Huckabee is running for PM of Israel.
11:05 pm Cruz, Huckabee Rubio all mentioned ISRAEL in their response to: “What will AMERICA look like after you are president.” [NOTE: The actual question was “world” not “America.”]
11:05 pm How many f—ing Jews do these people think there are in the United States? [NOTE: Coulter courteously bleeped out expletive so as not to offend. Answer: Almost 7 million.]
11:06 pm Maybe it’s to suck up to the Evangelicals.
11:14 pm Christie also talks @ Israel in response to the question: What will AMERICA look like after you are president? [NOTE: The actual question was “world” not “America.”]
11:18 pm How to get applause from GOP donors: 1) Pledge to start a war 2) Talk about job creators 3) Denounce abortion 4) Cite Reagan 5) Cite Israel.

In Coulter’s lopsided logic, affirmation of America’s commitment to Israel should be presumed but not expressed.

Coulter must know that there are many reasons for candidates to pledge support to one of America’s staunchest allies and the only democracy in the Middle East. Geopolitically, candidates employ “Israel” as a symbol of their worldviews and global vision: Judeo-Christian camaraderie and a united defense against terrorist, tyrannical, and rogue regimes. One’s stance on Israel presages one’s foreign-policy perspective.

If we’re not standing with Israel, we’re standing with Iran.

Notice that Coulter impugns the motives of all those who are “anti-abortion, pro-Israel, pro-Reagan.” She contends – as she has throughout her book tour – that they are “pandering” to constituencies (offering no evidence) and that they are cowards for not being single-mindedly focused on her preeminent issue: immigration.

The ease with which Coulter enters into scorched-earth polemics is astonishing.

Coulter Defends Tweets on Israel

Coulter’s self-defense began on the Kelly File, with her close friend, Megyn Kelly, lending support. Asked by Kelly, “Do you want to take that back?” Coulter said, “No” and claimed her tweet was part of a larger narrative condemning the alleged political “pandering” of GOP candidates who seek to check off “virtue boxes.”[4] Coulter again misquoted the debate question about how America would be different when the question was about how the world would be different. Kelly then quickly switched topics.

Coulter’s post-Fox interview tweets build upon her creative justification for her earlier tweets (emphasis added):

Time Tweet
1:15 am U weren’t following tweets. About pandering on RR Israel prolife. Last Q was @ AMERICA & 4 Reps talk @ Israel AGAIN! twitter.com/jpodhoretz/sta… [NOTE: The actual question was “world” not “America.”]
1:16 am All GOPs = prolife, pro-Reagan, pro-Israel. Pandering on all 3 tonight was EPIC. twitter.com/jpodhoretz/sta…
1:17 am There aren’t even that many Evangelicals to pander to (probably the intended Israel pander-recipients). twitter.com/jpodhoretz/sta…
1:28 am I like the Jews, I like fetuses, I like Reagan. Didn’t need to hear applause lines about them all night. twitter.com/Jimbobbarley/s…
1:32 am It’s not about Jewish people; it’s about Republican panderers. twitter.com/lilenchiladas/…
2:00 am It has to be read w/ prior tweet. Only 140 characters so sometimes they continue. Not @ Jews; about GOP pandering. twitter.com/RightForLife/s…
4:24 am @JoelCRosenberg Joel! I am a huge Israel fan! See my current book. I was attacking GOP for pandering on Israel (AND Reagan AND abortion).

Anyone who is “a huge Israel fan” could not marry the words “f—ing” and “Jews.” Moreover, if it was about pandering, why an expletive for Jews instead of the pandering politicians?

Who uses expletives to express love for a loved one? Yet, Coulter tweeted, “I like the Jews.” Do you believe her?

In that very same tweet, Coulter continued, “I like fetuses.” Since when? Throughout her book tour,[5] Coulter has vilified pro-life Republicans[6] for pursuing a pro-life agenda.[7] For nearly twenty years, Coulter has subordinated pro-life concerns for her own personal or political agendas.

Don’t listen to who or what Ann Coulter claims to be. Pay attention to what she actually does. Her claims[8] and promises are worthless.[9]

Coulter’s Jewish Roots

Throughout her career, Coulter has expressed antipathy toward Jews, from writing about “oily Jews” to wanting them to be “perfected.” These are not gaffes. They reflect her heart.

Coulter has a long history of anti-Semitism, stretching back to at least the early 1990s. In his first anticonservative book, David Brock “outed” Coulter as an anti-Semite, stating, “That she wanted to leave her New York law firm ‘to get away from all these Jews’ was one of her gentler remarks.”[10]

Consider a 2003 column by Coulter (emphasis added):

“In addition to having a number of family deaths among them, the Democrats’ other big idea – too nuanced for a bumper sticker – is that many of them have Jewish ancestry. There’s Joe Lieberman: Always Jewish. Wesley Clark: Found Out His Father Was Jewish in College. John Kerry: Jewish Since He Began Presidential Fund-Raising. Howard Dean: Married to a Jew. Al Sharpton: Circumcised. Even Hillary Clinton claimed to have unearthed some evidence that she was a Jew – along with the long lost evidence that she was a Yankees fan. And that, boys and girls, is how the Jews survived thousands of years of persecution: by being susceptible to pandering.”[11]

Pandering to Jews?[12]

Only Coulter (or an MSNBC host) could write of “oily Jews”[13] and get away with it.

In an equally astonishing entry on her own personal website, captioned “Who said Jews are smart?” Coulter wrote: “NYT Letter of the Day!: ‘Astroturf’ refers to protesters who disagree with me and therefore are not rational.”[14]

Let’s not forget Coulter’s infamous dialogue with Donnie Deutsch about “perfecting” Jews. To save herself from repercussions for her faux paus, Coulter claimed to be the victim and besmirched Deutsch with a wholly fabricated claim which fellow conservatives and fellow Christians bought into as if it were holy writ.[15]

Regarding her “f—ing Jews” tweet, the Anti-Defamation League immediately condemned her remarks, noting:

“While most of America has rightly tuned out Ann Coulter’s hyperbolic and hateful rhetoric, her irresponsible tweets during the Republican presidential candidate’s debate are truly a new low and must be called out.”

“Ms. Coulter is pandering to the basest of her base. Her messages challenging the candidates’ support for Israel were offensive, ugly, spiteful and anti-Semitic.  Her tweets give fodder to those who buy into the anti-Semitic notions that Jews ‘control’ the U.S. government, wield disproportionate power in politics, and are more loyal to Israel than to their own country.”

“All decent Americans should reject Ms. Coulter’s rhetoric as simply beyond the pale.”

Coulter has often said that she sets out to deliberately offend people,[16] and offend she does. Coulter has no filters. Also bear in mind that Coulter is explicitly seeking the restoration of a WASP culture,[17] one predominated by Western European (i.e., British) peoples. Jews and Israelis need not apply.

Update: As usual, Coulter claims her innocence. She insists she “likes” Jews. Does she consider “f—ing Jews” a compliment? An expression (epithet) of love? How can she defend her choice of words and how could she even imagine marrying those words to begin with? Did she greet her father, “F—ing Father?” How does she speak to her lovers?

Coulter told the Daily Beast: “I’m accusing Republicans of thinking the Jews have so much power. They’re the ones who are comedically acting out this play where Jews control everything.” But, wait! Coulter is the one perpetuating this stereotype that no Republicans have voiced. This is Coulter’s explanation for expressing anti-Semitic thoughts – that other people (who have stated those thoughts) are thinking it.

Coulter interjected, “This episode is not going a long way to disprove that [Jews have too much power in Washington.]” Yes, Coulter laments that Jews are so powerful that they are behind the backlash against her anti-Semitic remarks.

Coulter continued: “My point was this whole culture of virtue-signaling where debates are about nothing. Look, Republicans all agree 100 percent that we are pro-Israel, pro-Life, pro-gun. So why do we spend so much time on these issues? It’s just pandering, so who are they pandering to?”

Except, as noted above, Israel is a proxy for a candidate’s entire foreign policy perspective. Moreover, at this moment in history, with Israel (and Jews) under attack throughout the world, and with Obama’s complete surrender to Iran – who wants to destroy both Israel and America – voicing support for Israel is a good, moral, and rational thing to do.

Moreover, Coulter is a consummate wordsmith. She knows language and is proud of her expertise. The adjective “f—ing” modifies the noun “Jews” – not panderers. Indeed, she only tweeted about “pandering” after fallout from her earlier tweets.

Coulter defended her choice of words – “f—ing Jews” – saying, “I don’t think it was my language. I think it was ripped out of context and lied about.” Contrary to Coulter’s assertions, her words are clear and precise – and they reveal her heart.

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

Endnotes:

[1]               See “Adios, Ann: Coulter’s Bio Fraud” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-6p.

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

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

[4]               Ann Coulter, Kelly File, FNC, 9/17/15.

[5]               See “Coulter Disses Pro-Lifers – Again!” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-8J.

[6]               See “Coulter’s Assault on Pro-Life Movement Continues” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-9a.

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

[8]               See “Ann Coulter’s Crazy Funhouse Mirror” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-8n.

[9]               See Never Trust Ann Coulter – at ANY Age, 2014, available as a free download at www.coulterwatch.com/never.pdf.

[10]             David Brock, Blinded by the Right: The Conscience of an Ex-Conservative, Crown Forum, 2002, pg. 182.

[11]             Ann Coulter, “Party of Ideas,” 11/20/03.

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

[13]             Ann Coulter, “Inmates ‘Have A Plan’ To Run The Asylum,” 10/20/04.

[14]             Ann Coulter entry, http://www.anncoulter.com, 8/25/09, 2:17 p.m. (emphasis in the original).

[15]             See Chapter 6: “I Am Victim, Hear Me Whine,” The Beauty of Conservatism, 2011, available as a free download at www.coulterwatch.com/beauty.pdf.

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

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

Annotated Transcript of Coulter’s set at the Roast of Rob Lowe

[This transcript of Coulter’s roast speech includes bracketed annotations.]

“Welcome to the Ann Coulter Roast with Rob Lowe.”

annotated-transcript-of-coulters-set-at-the-roast-of-rob-lowe

“I’m so overwhelmed with the love in this room tonight. I can’t thank you enough. It’s really something.”

[Following her clever opening sentence, Coulter’s petulant sarcasm expressed a you’re so mean to me attitude. Coulter is prone to crying “victim” when she is often the victimizer.]

“I’m not a comedienne, which is why, you can imagine, I often get mistaken for Nikki Glaser.”

[Actually, Coulter considers herself the ultimate comedienne. She likens herself to H.L. Mencken and Mark Twain. Her speeches are often a series of punchlines and she discards substantive material in favor of jokes in her columns. Some of her closest friend are comics, a milieu she cherishes.]

“I’m only here tonight because of all the love and respect I have for Rob Lowe and all these fabulous and talented performers tonight. It has nothing to do with this being the next stop on my press junket for the book I’ve just published four days ago, In Trump We Trust: E Pluribus Awesome – Pause for boos. Oh, wait, I wasn’t supposed to read that – available at fine bookstores everywhere. I know it’s pretty shameless, but I’m on stage with a guy who made two ‘Joe Dirt’ films, so how shameless can I be.”

[The first of two “shameless” book promotions, Coulter failed to grasp the nature of the roast format and to distinguish it from a celebrity talk show.]

“As a right-wing hatemonger, it’s fantastic to be at a big Hollywood shindig with all these glittering celebrities that isn’t a fundraiser for Obama. I’m hoping to persuade you all to vote for Trump but most of all I want you, David [Spade], because it would prove the media is lying when they say there, say that Trump won’t get the vote of a single Spade.”

[Someone as race-obsessed as Ann should avoid using the term “spade” in such a context.]

“David is the perfect toastmaster for the show. He’s successful enough that everyone knows who he is but not so successful that he makes us feel threatened. He’s like the Mike Pence of comedy.”

[That Coulter thinks people are naturally threatened by successful people suggests she has a warped perspective on what success entails. Milquetoast Mike Pence? But she doesn’t like him.]

“A lot of people don’t realize that David’s sister is famous designer Kate Spade. Judging by your outfit, David, I gather you’re not speaking.”

“Why is Jeff Ross at every roast? He thinks he deserves it and everyone else just goes along with it? He’s like Hillary Clinton.”

“Actually, to be fair, if I could get just one person here to vote for Trump, it would be you, Ralph. People would be so surprised. I’d go up and say, ‘I got Ralph Macchio. He’s voting for Donald Trump.’ And they’d say, ‘Oh, oh, what a shock. Ralph is still alive?’ Just kidding. You look totally fantastic. It’s unbelievable, Ralph. Can you believe this guy’s like 54? He looks incredible. Whatever you’ve been drinking, you gotta send a few cases to Hillary.”

[Why emphasis Ralph’s age and “incredible” looks? Is Ann trying to convince others – and herself – that she looks incredible at 54?]

“We have British comedian Jimmy Carr with us because of Obama’s lax immigration policies.”

[But Coulter favors white immigrants from Britain. She wants to restore a WASP – White Anglo-Saxon – America. Oh, that’s right, Carr is a liberal.]

“I must admit I’m a little uncomfortable with not only the mean jokes but the raw sexual commentary that’s so popular at these roasts. I mean, apparently female comics have to be dirty to expand their fan base. Thank God you didn’t have to go there, Nikki.”

[Uncomfortable? Coulter is the queen of mean jokes and deliberately offensive. Moreover, the “raw sexual commentary” directed at her and others is no worse than the humor employed by some of her comedic friends.]

“If you’ve ever asked yourself, ‘Who do I have to screw to get a TV show in Hollywood?’ Nikki has the actual list.”

“I’m honored to share this stage with a patriot, Rob Riggle. Thank you for your service. You were a marine for over 20 years. You’ve seen things no man should have seen, including The Daily Show with Trever Noah.”

“Peyton Manning, I applaud your conservative convictions. I know you’re a big supporter of Jeb Bush. That’s a political contribution that will pay handsomely. Jeb got four delegates, which makes me laugh harder than any of the jokes tonight.”

“I once thought Pete Davidson was just like Obama, a biracial goofball who ruined a once-beloved institution. But it turns out I was wrong. Pete’s not biracial.”

[Race-obsessed Ann has been fixated on biracial Obama since his first inauguration. As an emerging leader of the alt-Right, Coulter has some distinctly flawed views on all things racial.]

“And now for the man of the hour [interrupted by applause], the man of the hour – the one hour left in his career – Rob Lowe. I’m a big fan of Rob Lowe’s work, especially, of course, the tapes, threesome. To this day, that remains the most authentic performance I have ever seen at a Democratic National Convention.”

“Rob was on the West Wing where he managed the impossible task of being the most insufferable part of an Aaron Sorkin show. A few years ago, there was talk of Rob Lowe replacing Charlie Sheen and the government was deciding who to give AIDS to next. Rob’s last show was called The Grinder. Hard to believe that a TV show named after a gay dating app wouldn’t be a huge hit.”

“I know some of you are saying I did this only to promote my book, In Trump We Trust: E Pluribus Awesome, available at bookstores everywhere, including the Barnes & Noble where Ralph Macchio works.”

[Second self-serving book promotion. How gauche!]

“We all do what we do. Writers write. Actors act. And Rob Lowe. What does he do? The truth is, Rob Lowe does a job that most Americans just won’t do – he plays Rob Lowe. It’s a thankless job but we’re all so grateful that you do it, Rob. Thank you.”

Tears of a Clown

Ann Coulter claims she “killed.” Others say she “bombed.” What’s the truth?

Ann Coulter upstaged Rob Lowe at his own roast, without even trying. But is there something more substantive to learn amidst all the folderol surrounding the Roast of Coulter with Lowe?

tears-of-a-clown

Roasts depend upon humor and, in this case, the jokes targeting Coulter and those given by Coulter conceal and reveal Coulter’s heart.

Prior to the roast, Coulter told Extra: “I’ve never seen a roast but I hear it gets kind of mean.” She placed special emphasis on that last word, suggesting it was something to relish. Coulter then joked, “ My whole life is an Ann Coulter roast.”

Moreover, Coulter arrogantly entered a forum foreign to her, believing that she would inevitably prevail. She was clearly unprepared for what she was about to experience.

Jokes about Coulter

The opening to the roast introduced “The way less intelligent Ann Coulter.” (Coulter disagrees.)

The Coulter with Lowe Roast was an equal opportunity roasting, with everyone getting singed, but Coulter was uniquely burned.

These raunchy roasts generally employ good-natured ribbing. At this roast, Coulter was abjectly hated and, thus, became the recipient of a disproportionate number of “jokes” and vulgar venom. Many of the jokes were spiteful, not jocular. Some weren’t jokes at all but merely expressions of enmity. (This video contains every Coulter insult.)

The very best jokes contain at least a kernel of truth. Many of the jokes were actually accurate, on target. Coulter is known to be an offensive person because she purposely provokes offense.

Irrationally, Coulter seems surprised that deliberately offending people invites retaliation. (Live by the F.U., cry by the F.U.) This is particularly striking given her instructions in her 2004 bestseller, How to Talk to a Liberal (if you must). In it, she offers 10 rules for conservatives. Number three: “you must outrage the enemy.” She also advises, “Nothing too extreme can be said about liberals, because it’s all true.”

According to the Atlantic:

“Coulter, after all, has arguably based her entire profession on trolling TV viewers and political commentators with intentionally shocking, awful statements. To enumerate them all would be impossible – she’s less a pundit and more a vessel for free-associative hate speech … Her newsmaking brand isn’t dissimilar from the approach to writing a roast-appropriate joke: Craft an insult that’s as vicious as possible but still ends on a laugh line, a wink to the audience that suggests the whole thing is all in good fun. Coulter, however, mostly lacks that final element – her defenders might claim that she’s just trying to push buttons, but her arena isn’t the world of stand-up.”

Coulter’s Response

Ann Coulter was shocked to be targeted with such vitriol. (Her supporters claim she was “ambushed,” a conspiracy theory to Coulter’s liking.)

Coulter even contends that Comedy Central carefully edited the program to excise laughter at her jokes. She said, “I don’t know how they edited it but I know I got laughs when I was there.” She added, “It’s very easy to cut jokes, or laughs, out. You can make anybody look like they’re playing to a dead audience.”

One website took screengrabs of Coulter following various “jokes” and concluded that she handled it with grace. The Atlantic offered a different, more accurate, take: “Coulter, instead, responded to the lines with a sort of frozen, tortured grin, rendering the whole thing deeply uncomfortable.”

Coulter was clearly distressed and, in the beginning, visibly enraged. Toward the latter half of the show she was able to smile – a plastic, frozen smile to hide the incensed inferno within.

She never laughed at herself. Comedian Jeff Ross said, “She hated every second of it. She wouldn’t laugh.” Coulter doesn’t know how to laugh at herself. (Perhaps she should pretend her mirror is a camera.)

Coulter told Sam Roberts: “Ned [Rice] came running up to me at the first break … and [Ned] said, ‘You have to laugh; you have to laugh’ and I said, ‘I can’t, I can’t act. I’m sorry. It’s not that it’s about me. A lot of it wasn’t funny.’”

Claiming to have been “bored” by the whole roast, Coulter asserts, “I don’t notice ‘mean,’ but I do notice ‘jokes’ and I didn’t hear many of those – until I took the mic!” Boastful bravado masks her sorrow.

Coulter hides her rage by laughing about the low caliber of the “jokes” made at her expense, claiming, “I don’t care – I am just telling you what happened – it was a bore until I spoke and I was fantastic.

But Coulter does care. Ann hates criticism more than most people and she recoils against ridicule (though she is quite quick to dispense it). Coulter is a shameless person who hates to be shamed. The smallest criticism generates internal angst.

Coulter’s rage was obvious in her own description of the event: “Hunt, hunt, hunt, Hitler, KKK, hunt, hussy, hussy, Hitler, KKK, burning crosses, hunt, she hates Muslims, hunt, hunt, hussy, hussy, hussy – now I have summarized the entire two hours I had to listen to.” She made similar characterizations on other programs.

Jokes by Coulter

In our examination of this controversy (one which Coulter has, once again, ably exploited), a crucial element in this saga must be cleared up. The consensus on the Internet and social media is that Coulter bombed. This is nonsense. The audience disliked Coulter’s politics (and tasteful) humor.

Coulter was poised and sharp, though she stumbled over a few words. Some of her jokes were quite good and well presented. Others were not. Their fatal flaw: they were inappropriate to the venue. Moreover, they were often far too political and self-serving. But then, Ann is a very political and self-serving person. (See “Annotated transcript of Coulter’s set at the Roast of Rob Lowe.”)

Coulter told TMZ, “I wrote [my jokes, with] a few friends.” She explained, “I did not take the roasters’ jokes – they were too blue and too mean.” (Coulter reported rejected a series of jokes proffered by Comedy Central, only one of which could be regarded as incongruently apropos: “I have to say, Rob, it’s nice to finally not be the most hated person in the room.”)

As for Coulter’s actual shtick, it would have served her well to revise her prepared remarks after experiencing what a roast is really like. Instead, politics suffused her routine. One-liners are standard fare for a Coulter speech, but this wasn’t supposed to be a speech – it was a roast.

That reminded of an MRC Dishonors Awards ceremony where Coulter had been slated to introduce Rush Limbaugh, who abruptly canceled his appearance. Rather than introduce the actual speaker, Coulter introduced him as if he were Limbaugh so that her prepared material would not go to waste.

On Sam Roberts’ Show, Coulter boasted of her roast segment: “I killed.” She added, “All I had was jokes, I didn’t go blue and I wasn’t mean, and they laughed and I got to really promote my book.”

You can judge for yourself. (See “Annotated transcript of Coulter’s set at the Roast of Rob Lowe.”)

Coulter Wants to Destroy GOP

Ann Coulter wants to destroy the GOP (and, ultimately, America, in the process).[1]

Donald Trump is Coulter’s current Savior[2] – and America’s, too. So says Ann.

Destroy GOP

For many election cycles, Coulter has promoted RINO candidates and vilified conservative ones. For several years, she has insisted that we always vote R regardless of any questionable conservative credentials of the candidate.

Coulter has defamed the Tea Party,[3] pro-lifers,[4] and Christians[5] – all to promote her RINO of the day.

Coulter has even joyfully contemplated the demise of the Republican Party – all out of pique over its failure to be transformed into her image. (Ironically, Coulter has promoted many candidates who, like her, are unprincipled.)

Now, Coulter insists that we preempt the nominating process in order to coronate her candidate. Her most recent column title says it all: “It’s Time for the Other 13 Candidates to Drop Out.”[6] (My column, “Coulter Hates All GOP Candidates But Trump,”[7] was posted the day before hers.)

Coulter has always regarded herself as a king-maker[8] and has been ever-willing to circumvent the electoral process.[9]

Destroying GOP

Let’s be clear here: Coulter wants to destroy the GOP over immigration using Trump as her weapon.

With whom would she replace the GOP? The Tea Party she has attacked for several election cycles? The genuine conservatives she has trashed in pursuit of her own agenda? Her dwindling fan base?

A gloating Coulter opined, “it’s apparently considered a devastating attack for Republicans to go on Fox News and say, ‘He’s not a real Republican.’ Well, OK, half the country is say, ‘Oh, he’s not? Fantastic!’ … I think this is an incredibly important election year. This could be the end of the Republican Party. It could go the way of the Whigs.”[10]

And again, “With Donald Trump, I think we may be seeing the breakup, ironically, of the Republican Party, like something we haven’t seen since the Republicans broke away from the Whigs.”[11]

As Jamie Weinstein noted, “If [Trump] won it would be the death of the conservative movement.”[12]

Coulter seems to cherish the thought. Why? During Tuesday’s debate, Coulter tweeted: “Audience so stacked with RNC toadies!!!!! I’m surrounded by America’s enemies!”[13]

Coulter has already vilified every Republican candidate (save Trump), saying she hates them.[14] Coulter claims that all of the GOP candidates (save Trump) are awful, embarrassing, and unpatriotic.[15]

What to do with a party you hate, with candidates you regard as America’s enemies? Coulter’s answer: Destroy them!

Time after time, Coulter has stated her goal of destruction, saying, “All we’ll have to do is organize the death panels for the people who destroyed America, and map out whose graves will be desecrated.”[16]

Again, “No, I’m just not getting to the point that I think the only the only thing left for us to do is death squads.”[17]

Again, “Now it’s time to call out the death squads.”[18]

Again, “OK, now it’s time to call out the death squads.”[19]

Coulter’s warning before the 2014 election: “We’ll vote one more time for Republicans. You screw us on immigration, we are done. At that point, there’s no point to anything except organizing the death squads.”[20]

What If?

What if Coulter had backed staunchly conservative candidates[21] instead of her “magnificent” RINOs? (All Republicans, like pundits, are not equal.)

What if Coulter had insisted on principles over pragmatism? (Unscrupulous people don’t have principles.)

What if Coulter has been true to her espoused core beliefs instead of trading them in for a fantasy? (The only thing Coulter seems to believe in is herself.)

What if, instead of vilifying true conservatives, she had kept her mouth shut? (That would truly be a miracle.)

Perhaps we would then have a Republican Congress and White House which abides by the Constitution and pursues a conservative vision for America.

Update:

Writing immediately after Super Tuesday, Liam Donovan contends (emphasis added):

“But whatever divisiveness a contested convention might bring, whatever fissures within the party it might deepen, there would be nothing more destructive to the GOP than a Trump nomination. If anything, taking this to the convention and fighting until the bitter end is a necessary battle for the soul of the party of Lincoln and the movement it has come to be associated with. There can be no catharsis unless the resistance is fierce.”

Endnotes:

[1]               See “Coulter’s Latest RINO Would Give Democrats Victory” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-8t.

[2]               See “Coulter Trumped Up” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-7Q.

[3]               See “Coulter Discovers RINOs will be … RINOs” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-56.

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

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

[6]               Ann Coulter, “It’s Time for the Other 13 Candidates to Drop Out,” 12/16/15.

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

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

[9]               See “Coulter – An Elite’s Elite” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-aW.

[10]             Ann Coulter, Studio 11LA, KTTV, 12/11/15.

[11]             Ann Coulter, Flipside with Michael Loftus, Telco Productions, 11/7/15.

[12]             Jamie Weinstein, Drive at Five, WMAL, 12/11/15. I realize that conservative and Republican are not interchangeable. (Apparently Coulter does not grasp that distinction.) In the context of this column, one main point is that we have not nominated and elected enough genuine conservatives as Republicans. At the moment, the only political party with a conservative orientation is the GOP. Coulter has nothing with which to replace it.

[13]             Ann Coulter, tweet, 12/15/15, 9:41 p.m.

[14]             Ann Coulter, Eric Metaxas Show, Salem Media Group, 11/11/15.

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

[16]             Ann Coulter, Stevens Institute of Technology, 2/19/15.

[17]             Ann Coulter, Howie Carr Show, WRKO, 1/28/14.

[18]             Ann Coulter, Joyce Kaufman Show, WFTL, 7/6/15.

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

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

[21]             See “Coulter Bashes Cruz – Again!” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-aZ.