Tag Archives: Ted Cruz

Normal People

Ann Coulter’s definition of “normal” is someone just like her.

normal-people

In her latest column (11/16/16), Coulter argued that “the consequence of the Democratic Party’s decision in the 1970s [was] to get rid of all the normal people.”

Hearing Coulter – lover of words like “retarded” and defender of going “full-on spastic retard” – (for the sheer joy of being offensive) – use the word “normal” with regard to people almost be deemed Hitlerian.

Taken in the context of the Alt-Right’s rise to power this election cycle – an Alt-Right which would relish jettisoning the majority of mankind into the dustbin of history – Coulter speaking of “normal people” takes on far greater significance.

Remember, Coulter truly hates soccer – because it is “foreign” – and hates all foreigners and immigrants. especially Mexicans. Coulter even hates Christian missionaries for going to foreign countries.

She hates Gov. Nikki Haley for being an ignorant second-generation immigrant (meaning, she is a native-born American with foreign parents).

Coulter’s views can arguably be called anti-Semitic and anti-Catholic. She even attacks war heroes and Gold Star families.

Coulter’s hatred also extends to other Americans. She loves to call Democrats Nazis, crazy, and demonic.

Coulter hates Carly Fiorina and the GOP. Ben Carson does not fare well with Coulter. She has had a love-hate relationship with Ted Cruz. Once a Reagan-lover, Coulter now derides Reagan and his legacy.

For Coulter, “normal people” are just like her. But there aren’t too many of them because she is genetically superior to us.

The Alt-Right’s view of the world is distinctly nativist, racist, and supremacist. Ann Coulter is its high priestess and its muse.

Welcome to Ann Coulter’s world.

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

Advertisements

Great Wall of Trump Crumbles

The Donald’s “Great Wall of Trump” was a lie from the beginning, a clever marketing ploy to tap in to the legions of Americans who are deeply concerned about America’s national sovereignty and her obeisance to the open borders lobby.

great-wall-of-trump-crumbles

Nevertheless, this huckster succeeding in grasping the GOP nomination based on lies.

Trump will not erect an impenetrable wall to stop illegal immigration.

Trump will not oppose amnesty.

We knew those two truths before the GOP Convention.

David French put it well: “There’s the bizarre wall fantasy, as if we’re going to get – for free! – some combination of the Great Wall of China and the Maginot Line on our southern border.”

Final Presidential Debate

The Great Wall of Trump is, like the Statue of Liberty, symbolic. It symbolizes the substance of the debate over national identity, national sovereignty, border control, and amnesty.

And, like Trump himself, it is a sham.

In the final 2016 presidential debate, Trump started out strong, definitively declaring, “We need strong borders. We need absolute – we cannot give amnesty.”

Then, moments later, Trump rambling equivocation should give his supporters pause (emphasis added):

“Now, I want to build the wall. We need the wall. And the Border Patrol, ICE, they all want the wall. We stop the drugs. We shore up the border. One of my first acts will be to get all of the drug lords, all of the bad ones – we have some bad, bad people in this country that have to go out. We’re going to get them out; we’re going to secure the border. And once the border is secured, at a later date, we’ll make a determination as to the rest. But we have some bad hombres here, and we’re going to get them out.”

So, Trump pledges to “secure the border” and get the “bad hombres” out (the “drug lords”) and, “at a later date,” figure out what to do with the rest. Sounds a lot like amnesty and a lot like an insecure border.

Shifting Goal Posts

Ann Coulter famously championed Trump for his alleged Great Wall of Trump and his alleged “mass deportation” of millions of illegal aliens.

Responding to the Hollywood Reporter’s question – “What’s the top thing you like about Trump? – Coulter replied:

“In this order: Immigration, immigration, immigration, flagrantly violates all the rules of political correctness, immigration, no more pointless wars, will bring back manufacturing, immigration and immigration.”

Coulter was so cocksure of herself that she declared, “If there’s one thing we’re going to get out of a Trump presidency, it’s a wall.”

In her book, Coulter confided, “Until the bleeding has stopped, there’s nothing Trump can do that won’t be forgiven. Except change his immigration policies.”

That’s exactly what Trump started to do.

On the very day her hagiography of Trump was published, the Trump campaign began its reversal of his immigration policy positions.

Heather Wilhelm noted, “Trump appears to be breezily selling out his stances on Coulter’s favorite policy topics – those would be immigration and mass deportation – on the very week of her ‘In Trump We Trust’ book release.”

Wilhelm continued, “Trump has spent the last week – again, the week of Coulter’s book release! – signaling there’s no way he’s going to deport 12 million illegal immigrants,” telling Sean Hannity that illegals would have to “pay back taxes.”

Trump explained to Hannity, “But when I go through and I meet thousands and thousands of people on this subject, and I’ve had very strong people come up to me, really great, great people come up to me, and they’ve said, ‘Mr. Trump, I love you, but to take a person who’s been here for 15 or 20 years and throw them and their family out, it’s so tough, Mr. Trump,’ I have it all the time! It’s a very, very hard thing.”

As reported in New York Magazine, Coulter quickly expressed the first two stages of grief: denial and anger. In fact, she experienced all five stages in little more than one day.

In denial, Coulter told Extra TV: “I don’t think he really did [soften his immigration position]. He just said something stupid, which he’s done before, and he will do again… he does need a little slap now and then. But no, his policy is to put Americans first on everything. If he does that, he’s fine.”

But Coulter rapidly moved on to the final stage of grief – acceptance. Coulter said, “If [Trump] got rid of deporting illegals altogether, which he is not, it would still be better than any Republican who has run for president in my lifetime.” (Didn’t Ronald Reagan run for president in her lifetime?)

Coulter told the Washington Examiner, “The policy is anyone who’s here illegally is here illegally, does not have the right to be here. We’ll decide whether it’s in our best interest to let them stay or not. Perhaps it is in our interest to let some of them stay.”

So much for mass deportation.

And the wall.

Trump’s magnificent wall was a fraud from the beginning. Indeed, he stole some of his ideas from his biggest rival, Sen. Ted Cruz.

Trump’s own Op-Ed from 2013 refutes his recently manufactured respect for American sovereignty. Trump wrote:  “We will have to leave borders behind and go for global unity when it comes to financial stability.” Sounds an awful lot like Hillary’s “My dream is a hemispheric common market, with open trade and open borders.”

Trump continued: “The future of Europe, as well as the United States, depends on a cohesive global economy. All of us must work toward together toward that very significant common goal.”

Amnesty, yes. Wall, no.

Trump Brought Amnesty Back to Life

Just as his entire presidential campaign can be reasonably interpreted as a sham to give the presidency to Hillary, so, too, his hostile opposition to amnesty appears to have been counterproductive, perhaps purposely so.

Red State’s Neil Stevens spotted a disturbing trend. Looking at Fox News polls from July 2010 to the present, Stevens discovered a dramatic shift in support for amnesty.

According to Stevens, “in July 2010, amnesty was only up 4 points, 49-45.” When Trump launched his campaign, the pro-amnesty cohort gained momentum: “64-30.” What about now? Stevens noted, “In the newest Fox poll, Amnesty’s lead has increased by 22 points since Trump’s campaign launched and now leads by an amazing 74-18 supermajority.”

Stevens concluded:

“Donald Trump’s core campaign issue is to boot the Mexicans out, but over the course of his campaign, nearly half the people who used to support deportations no longer do so. Amnesty has taken an overwhelming lead of support. This is why Republicans are losing: they’ve picked a loser of a candidate who is driving people away.”

#NeverReagan

Ann Coulter obviously never really knew the real Ronald Reagan.

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

neverreagan

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

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

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

Coulter’s False Claims About Reagan

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Coulter’s False Claims About Reagan Conservatives

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Yet, Coulter told the Miami Herald:

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

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

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

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

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

 Trump is NOT Reagan

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Capretta added,

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

 The Ronald Reagan Coulter Never Knew

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

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

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

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

Reagan’s Legacy

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Endnotes:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

GOP Base is Fringe

Coulter recently gave a stunning description of the GOP base. She claims it is a “teeny, tiny base” composed of religious zealots and extremist pro-lifers!

gop-base-is-fringe

Coulter defended charges that Trump is “not a real Republican” by saying (emphasis added), “I don’t want someone appealing just to the base. Somebody appealing just to the base is, you know, handling tongues and having raptures on stage and is saying, like Marco Rubio, correcting Megyn Kelly, that, ‘No, I don’t support abortion in the case of rape and incest.’ Oh, good grief. Did he not remember – did he not live through Todd Akin? No, that’s sucking up to a teeny, tiny base.”

Yes, Coulter’s gunsights are aimed at Christian conservatives and pro-lifers – whom she claims represent “a teeny, tiny base.” Alert readers will gather that Ted Cruz is the specific object of her wrath. (Cruz, of course, is solidly pro-life and unabashedly Christian.)

Beginning with the 2000 presidential election cycle, Coulter has actively opposed pro-lifers for what she regards as politically pragmatic purposes. Nevertheless, Coulter told a Politicon audience, “I’m an evangelical pro-lifer. I don’t need my president speaking in tongues.” Yes, she again blended the pro-life movement with evangelical Christians. (Coulter even claims to be an “evangelical pro-lifer,” even though evidence for her being either a Christian or a pro-lifer is scant.)

Using her recurring ugly stereotype on the Nowman Show (6/25/16), Coulter argued, “[Trump] doesn’t have religious ecstasies on stage. He doesn’t speak in tongues.” Coulter will say anything to destroy Cruz.

Sadly, time after time, Coulter attacks Christians for behaving as Christians are supposed to behave – in a godly manner. Why? Political expediency? To justify her own ungodly behavior?

Coulter hated every GOP candidate but Trump – who isn’t even a Republican! Moreover, her mission was and remains to destroy the GOP. Coulter’s latest broadside against the GOP base is in keeping with her ultimate goal. She does, after all, want to form a New Trump Party.

Ann Coulter Pence-ive

With Conservatism and the American Dream on the precipice of disaster, will Ann Coulter choose to save herself or America? Will she continue to place pride above principles[1] or, in an abrupt about face, to actually do the right thing.

Pence-ive

Donald Trump’s selection of pro-immigration Gov. Mike Pence (IN) as his running mate places Coulter in a predicament, especially since her primary (if not sole) reason for supporting Trump is what she perceives as his strong stand against immigration.

For over a year,[2] Coulter has insisted – promised, vowed – that Donald Trump[3] is the only one we can trust to build a wall and stop immigration.[4]

Early this May, Coulter astonishingly claimed: “I’m bitter and cynical enough on immigration that I don’t trust anyone not to betray us. But if there was ever a candidate we could believe will build a wall and stop the mass importation of the Third World, it’s Trump.”[5]

But Trump has already proven that his immigration policy is malleable in order to reach consensus with the establishment. His pledge for a wall and deportation of illegal aliens are merely starting points for negotiation and will be retracted for expediency and making deals with Congress.

Even as Trump spoke of being flexible and willing to negotiate a grand deal (“comprehensive immigration reform” anyone?), Coulter continued to extol his virtues (as invisible as they might be) while besmirching all his detractors as corrupt or crazy[6]all the while opposing the one conservative candidate with a proven record on immigration – Ted Cruz.[7]

Aghast at the very thought of Trump choosing Pence for vice president, Coulter erupted with a tirade.[8]

For a fleeting moment, I hoped that she would see through Trump’s flimflam and realize that he will never fulfill her dreams. Immigration remains the single issue that matters most to her, yet she continues – to this day – to support Trump, the one candidate who has proven himself untrustworthy on this (and every other) issue.[9]

Will Coulter now abandon her commitment to a border wall and a moratorium on immigration – national policies she claims are essential to saving America as we know it – merely to salvage her pride and sell more books?

If Coulter has any integrity at all, she will denounce Trump, support a delegate revolt at the GOP Convention, and endorse Sen. Ted Cruz (TX), the only conceivable candidate who could both defeat Hillary this November and, once in office, be trusted to follow the Constitution and to make preservation of national sovereignty and American identity a top priority.

It will take more than integrity for Coulter to do the right thing. It will also take incredible courage – courage to admit that she was wrong about Trump[10] and that she lied about Cruz.[11]

Will Coulter place her own pride above the best interests of this nation (and the world), continuing to do what she has always done by taking the path of least resistance?[12]

Or will Ann do what she knows in her heart is the right thing to do? Will she trust in God, seek His will, and do it?

Ann regards Trump as her Savior.[13] If she would look to her real Savior – Jesus Christ[14] – then she could be filled with courage to do the right thing.[15] Will she?

(Have a little faith, Ann.)

Endnotes:

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

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

[3]               See “Coulter Crazy Over Trump” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-c5.

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

[5]               Ann Coulter, “And Then There Was the One,” 5/4/16.

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

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

[8]               See “Trump Ignores Coulter, Ann Irate” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-eT.

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

[10]             See “Coulter Admits Trump is a Fraud” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-cf.

[11]             See “Birther Coulter Births More Lies” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-bI.

[12]             See “No Better Than Trump!” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-dW.

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

[14]             See “Resurrection: Life & Liberty, Power & Purpose” at http://wp.me/p4scHf-z.

[15]             See “Is Ann Coulter a Courageous Christian?” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-60.

Coulter Proud to be Leni

Ann Coulter is proud to take the credit for Donald Trump’s political ascendancy as the GOP’s presumptive presidential nominee.

Coulter Proud to be Leni

Coulter is a propagandist without peer,[1] the Leni Riefenstahl[2] of the Trump campaign,[3] and she is delighted to be called “the most influential commentator of this campaign.” Coulter always wanted to be a king-maker,[4] regardless of the outcome. Previously, she foisted Mitt Romney on us;[5] now she has given us the man with little hands.[6] Little hands, big ego.

If Coulter wants the credit, then she can take the blame!

Trump and Clinton are equally disasters, narcissistic statists who would further Obama’s statist agenda and, perhaps, irreparably end the American Experiment.[7] It doesn’t matter who prevails – Hillary or The Donald – because they are both liberal statists[8] unbridled by morality and unfettered by constitutional restraints.

Coulter has knowingly done this. Coulter admits Trump is a fraud[9] and exclaimed he is mental![10] Moreover, Trump will not pursue her professed immigration,[11] yet Coulter still extols Trump. Whatever his faults – and they are legion – Coulter is worse than Trump.[12]

As Americans suffer under the next liberal president[13] – likely with a Democrat House and Senate and an additional left-wing activist Justice – remember who wanted the credit and deserves the blame!

Endnotes:

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

[2]               See “Ann Coulter = Leni Riefenstahl” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-5w.

[3]               See “Coulter’s Orwellian Opus” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-e0.

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

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

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

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

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

[9]               See “Coulter Admits Trump is a Fraud” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-cf.

[10]             See “Coulter Goes Mental Over Her ‘Mental’ Candidate” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-d8.

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

[12]             See “No Better Than Trump!” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-dW.

[13]             See “Only Trump Can Lose!” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-dA.

Stolen Election?

Donald Trump, and his foremost lapdog, Ann Coulter, insist that the GOP nomination and election are being “stolen” from The Donald.

The truth evades those who dwell in lies.

Stolen Election

In her April 20th column, Coulter reprised her absurd election-stealing charges,[1] distinguishing between “elections, not party-rigged conferences or caucuses.”

Every eligible voter is able to do so in a caucus, a primary, or a conference.

Coulter once loved federalism, but now – for this election cycle[2] – wants a single, uniform, monolithic system for voting. Why? Because Trump is ignorant of the rules![3]

A member of Free Republic, Kandy Atz, provided excellent analysis of one particularly nonsensical paragraph contained in one of Coulter’s more vitriolic diatribes.[4]

Coulter’s propagandistic paragraph:

Until Cruz won a primary in mean-as-a-snake Wisconsin, he hadn’t won a single primary – i.e., an ‘election’ – outside of his home state, a sister state and a state where Trump didn’t campaign. In fact, until cantankerous Wisconsin, the only primary where Cruz managed to surpass 34 percent of the vote was his home state of Texas – where he got 43.8 percent.”

You don’t have to be a particularly astute reader to recognize the nonsense contained in those words.

Here is Freeper Kandy Atz’s Response:

“Has Ann gone bat guano crazy? So states that don’t allow Democrats to select the GOP candidate are somehow evil? And they adopted rules to help … Ted Cruz? He must be really amazing to anticipate exactly where the campaign would be a year in advance and then fly all over the country in time to change the rules so that they would work perfectly just for him right at this moment. What an amazing candidate!”

“Instead of attacking Ted Cruz for playing by the rules, she should be complaining about the dysfunctional Trump campaign. He has virtually no ground game, and sometimes doesn’t even know when to show up – see his latest Washington state fiasco. Is this a serious campaign for POTUS, or just another reality TV show Ann?”

“Trump has NEVER topped 50% in any state. His best performance 49.31 was in THE MOST PROGRESSIVE STATE ON THE PLANET, politically just to the left of North Korea. Yep, that Trump fella is a force to be reckoned with. He’s unstoppable. I promise you what people in Taxachusetts want in a President is WILDLY different from most Americans, especially Christians and Conservatives. BTW – Has Cruz whined and complained about the Hawaii, Minnesota, Nevada, or Kentucky caucuses? I wonder why not? Now that the field is narrowed and Conservatives aren’t splitting their votes 3-5 ways, it will get much harder for Trump to win any state, except his mind-numbed progressive friends in the Northeast. Enjoy that lead while you have it, and oh by the way, have Trump read the rules.”

“Speaking of Texas, there were 14 people on the ballot when early voting began, and a massive influx of DNC voters/rent-a-Trump-mob types in the open primary. Even with all those advantages, Cruz still beat Trump by almost 500,000 votes. Setting aside the votes for Cruz, in the MOST RELIABLY CONSERVATIVE STATE IN THE UNION, more people voted AGAINST the progressive reality TV star than for him – (837,154 to 757,489). Don’t know how one spins that as a negative for Cruz, but it’s certainly NOT a positive for Trump moving forward.”

“The primary system in recent years has given us 2 progressives – McCain, Romney, and now a hard core NYC values big government progressive – Trump, is leading. After watching far too many Democrats vote in the GOP primary in Texas, I’m leaning more towards a caucus or closed primary in the future. The GOP cannot allow progressives, especially Democrat crossovers to have so much influence over our nominee. Ann may be happy nominating Obama-lite and Hillary-lite, but it’s the fastest way to kill turnout among Conservatives and Christians, and is disastrous for local and state races down the ticket. They are terrified at the prospect of Trump at the top of the ticket. What a nightmare that would be, even in reliably Conservative districts/counties/states.”

Endnotes:

[1]               See “Coulter’s Orwellian Opus” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-e0.

[2]               See “Coulter Bass Ackwards on Elections” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-ea.

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

[4]               See “Ann Coulter: Wisconsin Sucks” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-ec.