The American Spectator

home
ADVERTISEMENT
Political Hay
Print Email
Text Size

Political Hay

Who Castrated Ann Coulter?

By on 2.6.12 @ 6:08AM

She once had cast iron… well… courage. Now she’s backing the “safe” GOP candidate.

There is no conservative writer that I admire more than Ann Coulter. She’s smart as hell and, more importantly, she is courageous. She has always been willing to write what other conservatives believe but don’t have the guts to say in print. She has never played it safe and has certainly never adjusted her opinions for the sake of conforming to the conventional wisdom of Old Guard Republicans. In 2008, for example, she declared that she would not merely vote for, but actively campaign for Hillary Clinton if the Republican Party were foolish enough to nominate John McCain for President: “If you are looking at substance rather than if there is an R or a D after his name, manifestly, if he’s our candidate, than Hillary is going to be our girl, because she’s more conservative than he is.”

But something has happened to Coulter. I don’t have firsthand knowledge that she was kidnapped by RINO Team Six and taken to an offshore medical facility where she was forced to undergo a gruesome surgical procedure, but many of her recent columns suggest that something of the sort must have occurred. What else could explain her endorsement of Mitt Romney? Once immutable where her core convictions were concerned, she has executed a vertigo-inducing volte-face in order to promote a brazen opportunist whose positions on the big issues were the opposite of hers before he began running for President. She relentlessly trashes Republican “moderates” like McCain, yet now supports a candidate who makes the Arizona Senator look like Barry Goldwater by comparison.

It first became apparent that something awful had happened to Coulter last November, when she wrote a column asking “If Not Romney, Who? If Not Now, When?” In this surreal effusion, she claimed that the media were “pushing Newt Gingrich” and other alternatives to Romney “because they are terrified of running against him.” This, as many pointed out at the time, was preposterous. The only thing that terrifies the media about Romney is that he might not get the GOP nomination. This is the man they want to run against. Unlike Coulter, the media and the Obama reelection team know that Romney can be easily portrayed as a Wall Street parasite whose only memorable “accomplishment” as the Governor of Massachusetts was the enactment of a health “reform” law that renders him unable to credibly denounce ObamaCare.

Which brings us to the latest evidence that Coulter has been somehow altered. Her inexplicable support for Romney has led her beyond being merely wrong about his chances in the general election to writing things that are either deliberately disingenuous or genuinely ignorant. The latest example of this tragic development is a column titled, “Three Cheers for RomneyCare.” As its title suggests, this piece actually defends the Massachusetts “universal” health law. When I first read it, I could hardly believe such horse manure had emanated from Coulter’s keyboard. The column opens with this howler: “If only the Democrats had decided to socialize the food industry or housing, RomneyCare would probably still be viewed as a massive triumph for conservative free-market principles — as it was at the time.”

First, Coulter apparently didn’t notice, but the Democrats did socialize housing, and it triggered the most dangerous financial crisis since the Great Depression. More to the point, her suggestion that Romneycare was viewed by conservatives as a free-market triumph is revisionist nonsense. Coulter attempts to support this claim by naming a couple of conservatives who initially supported the law. Somehow, though, she neglects to mention the large number who opposed it. As Merrill Matthews pointed out in Forbes, when Newt Gingrich claimed in a debate that most conservatives once supported the mandate as a way of countering HillaryCare, “That’s wrong. There was, in fact, a heated battle among conservatives, with a handful pushing for the mandate and the large majority opposing it.”

Nor does Coulter mention that one of the two conservatives she cites as supporters of Romneycare and its mandate has long since recanted. Robert Moffitt of the Heritage Foundation, whom Coulter tells us was so excited about Romneycare that he “flew to Boston for the bill signing,” realized years ago that mandates were not an effective mechanism for eliminating the “free-rider” problem. Since 2008, he has vigorously advocated “far better alternatives to the individual mandate.” And Moffitt’s buyer’s remorse is by no means an isolated case. As Matthews puts it, “[V]irtually all conservatives… have come to realize that the mandate is the gateway drug to control the health care system.” Coulter, in a journalistic sin of omission worthy of the New York Times, fails to note any of this.  

She instead claims that conservatives dislike Romneycare “because both ObamaCare and Romneycare concern the same general topic area — health care — and can be nicknamed (politician’s name plus “care”).” To this ridiculous charge she adds the irrelevant point that mandates are constitutional when enacted by states rather than by the federal government. This is true enough, but it misses what should be an obvious point. Health care consumers are less concerned with constitutional nuances relating to federal versus state powers than with the reality that they will be forced to buy insurance whether they wish to or not. That the mandate was passed by a state legislature rather than Congress will not render voters less inclined to resent such government interference in their private transactions.

Coulter then reminds us that Romney has pledged to repeal Obamacare, but that promise will ring hollow once Axelrod & Co. inform the voters that the law is virtually identical, in its effect on their individual lives, to a law her candidate signed in Massachusetts. The damage this will do to Romney’s credibility will be exacerbated when Obama’s many friends in the “news” media point out that his reversal of position on health reform is part of a larger pattern of opportunism. They will gleefully report, for example, that Romney is also guilty of shameless flip-flops on Second Amendment rights and abortion. On the latter issue he has reversed himself no fewer than three times. When the voters see MSM “reporters” relentlessly pound him for such “evolution,” they will realize that his campaign promises are meaningless.

Yet Coulter, once the scourge of such malleable “moderates,” has gone through some sort of transformation that has rendered her blind to Romney’s cheap opportunism. And if the primary voters are foolish enough to follow her advice, they will rue the day they listened to her and the establishment Republicans with whom she has now made common cause. As Coulter herself pointed out last year when she spoke at CPAC, Barack Obama will be reelected in 2012 if the Republican Party nominates Mitt Romney for President.

About the Author

David Catron is a health care revenue cycle expert who has spent more than twenty years working for and consulting with hospitals and medical practices. He has an MBA from the University of Georgia and blogs at Health Care BS.

Letter to the Editor View all comments (610) |

Appleby| 2.6.12 @ 6:37AM

I heard the opening few paragraphs of Ann Coulter's shrieks on Fox & Friends in this regard, and turned her off. Clearly she has either slid into menopause or lost her mind.

chuck| 2.6.12 @ 7:30AM

She really is not that bright, and that's being kind. I get a financial newsletter from people who are really very good at what they do. The one gentleman there had dinner with a group of people, one of which was Ann Coulter. He wrote in his newsletter that she is an economic dimwit.

Not saying that she can't sell a lot of books though, but she's kind of shrill, and not too smart.

Brian Mc| 2.6.12 @ 8:22AM

The finger pointing doesn't matter. The great experiment is over. We the people have lost due to an inextricable tendency to debate amongst ourselves over the communist agenda incrementally riding this Republic into the ground. Some say, "It's the economy, stupid" but, I say no, "It's the Constitution, stupid" and it's being shredded before our very eyes ever since we fell to playing the liberal game of incrementalism.

cuban pete| 2.6.12 @ 8:51AM

Brian,
I fear you are correct. I hope the experiment is not over but it is going to take years and years to recover and by then I'll be gone. I will keep swinging as long as I am able. The best of luck to our grandchildren.

skedaddle| 2.6.12 @ 9:06AM

You are so correct - it IS about the Constitution. And anyone who talks about that is labeled an extremist or idiot and shunted aside. We are in for tough times and there is no light at the end of the tunnel - yet.

PolishKnight| 2.6.12 @ 9:41AM

All of you are so wrong which is why conservatism is losing. It's about the PEOPLE, stupid. The people don't exist to serve the Holy Constitution. The Constitution exists to serve the people. The Constitution is not a Bible. The left has won, cleverly, by using the Constitution where applicable to serve it's interests. While we can all agree that Roe VS Wade is bupkiss, it's nonetheless LEGAL. It was passed by the S.C. and enforced by the executive office. The spirit behind The Constitution was that government should serve the people and conservatives have been slowly tossing its electorate in front of the bus or allowing the left to steal votes for decades. If the Constitution could vote or hold office, it might have a chance.

As Newt was bleating about the plight of illegal immigrant grandmothers, I chuckled that most conservatives probably didn't give much thought to the plight of their electorate beyond the economic chaos motivating them to show up to vote. Although the left is often disingenuous about their concern for their issues and electorate, they are at least are aware of the bottom line. Conservatives snidely tell people, including their own electorate, that they have no "compassion" (unless it's a RINO trying to poach a few percent of the left's electorate) and hey, let corporations offshore all the jobs overseas and then get massive tax breaks from the Democrats. Look the other way while hotels and restaurants break immigration laws. Help the media extend copyright monopolies, er, "property" to infinity and beyond at consumers' expense while demanding unconstitutional back doors into our computers. And pass IMBRA, VAWA, and other anti-father laws while pulling their beards at the rate of growth of marxist unwed mother families.

You reap what you sow and there isn't enough electorate to sow The Constitution anymore.

Sheila| 2.6.12 @ 11:54AM

Excellent comment, Polish Knight, the gist of which is my mantra: Demography is destiny. No other issue is as important; no other concern unaffected by this. We've largely been replaced as a people, and the tiny remnant left cannot vote its way out of this mess. Decline and fall.

PolishKnight| 2.6.12 @ 12:04PM

There's an insanity both here and on Reason.com that The Constitution is somehow this magical document that will prevail because it's Holy and Righteous and that they don't really need any voters or even defenders of it because the Holy Constitution should either prevail or we go down with it.

It's heresy for me to say this here, but my own personal interests trump The Constitution. Sorry. When the Constitution becomes a Losing Cause, that's the end of it.

Not only are there insufficient demographics to defend The Holy Constitution anymore, but even economics as well as businesses jump on the crony capitalism bandwagon: Hollywood and mass media loves those copyright extension and backdoors into computer laws. Businesses love getting big government regulations and tax breaks to kill their upstart competitors while simultaneously outsourcing or hiring H1B's. The left not only has gotten voters on their side, but most of capitalism as well. It's reminding me of the situation with Constantinople in the 15th century as a lonely outpost to fall to barbarians.

Maddox| 2.6.12 @ 12:18PM

The Constitution, as written, is what protects your "own personal interests," not the perversion of it we are being told is law.

PolishKnight| 2.6.12 @ 1:06PM

Ultimately, Maddox, they are the same thing. Once enough electorate is bought off and government officials and bureaucrats have their own vision of what The Constitution says, that _IS_ The Constitution.

We can hide in a bunker and wait for the tanks to come rolling in while we hug precious c0pies of The Constitution, but what good comes of that?

MinnItMan| 2.22.12 @ 10:14AM

I'm think I'm with you on this. The "conservative Constitution" is maybe 50 years old. More likely, it's about 25, since the Bork nomination. I'll go toe-to-toe with anybody on Constitutional law - having won actual cases on constitutional grounds. The conservative constitution is somewhat useful, but mostly bunk when it gets into the nitty-gritty, where governing actually takes place. (I take that back. Hugo Black and Frankfurter were better theorists than anybody the conservatives have put up). If conservatives were serious about the constitution - particularly about federal criminal law and the exceedingly narrow grounds where it is expressly delegated as a proper legislative power of Congress - there would be millions fewer felons in the US. But, that's just a wing-nut libertarian concern, isn't it? The fact that we have a police state, whose interests always take precedence over liberty tell you what you need to know. And, by the way, I'm not that much of a libertarian, either, at least as a purist.

Just because liberals are frequently wrong on constitutional matters, doesn't make conservatives right. But, conservatives have done an exceedingly good job of convincing folks that they are. Sarah Palin seems pretty expert to me. Uhhggg.

As for Coulter, she may have come to the conclusion - as I did - that conservatism has no interest in competent governing, plain and simple. It denies that it is even possible. If that is a true statement of conservative belief - and I think it is - then the only thing for conservative politicians to do is cheat, steal and grease their friends. Those are the "principles." They're pretty good at those.

Western Man| 2.8.12 @ 9:24AM

Exactly right, Sheila. The founding documents, suitably modified from time to time, served the country well when we remained more or less the same people, slowly modified over time by immigration from mostly similar populations, with enough time-outs and cultural confidence to ensure assimilation. At this point, if the country we inherited is to be saved at all, it must be done from the ground up: local, state & then national levels. With emphasis on educational institutions, media and the public square, not just politics (after all, a people gets the politicians it deserves). And as to the article itself: I'd rather have a Tea Partier lose to the Obama machine than a milquetoast RINO. That way, at least we will know whom to fault --- the American "people" of the 21st century. If the GOP nominates Romney, it will be time for conservatives to ditch the GOP.

Jim | 2.6.12 @ 1:19PM

Your comment is so wrong it is hard to begin commenting upon it. The Constitution does serve the people, but not by judges, legislators, etc., pretending it doesn't exist or mean what it CLEARLY says, but by the people, either through their will transmitted to Congress via Const. Convention, voting members in or out, etc. The problem with folks like you is that you wish to make the Constitution serve the people in whatever way YOU wish, regardless of whether said Const. provides for your doing so. If you wish to change the Const. to do something not currently allowed by it, do so, but don't pretend that your wanting it to be different should give you carte blanche to do so - that is what amendments, etc. are for. Of course, you won't go that route because almost no one would follow you, so you insist the people, Const. be damned, can change it just by taking a poll, or Twitter-ing what they want. Stupid and dangerous your idea is.

PolishKnight| 2.6.12 @ 1:42PM

Jim, I wish I was one of those people. I'd feel a lot better about myself. Really. Sadly, fate has tossed me in with a (shrinking) bunch of Constitution worshipers.

I had a cute debate on a plane with a Jewish leftist a few years ago and she snidely told me that, hey, leftism is fine because it's all legal. I retorted to her that Hitler came to power legally. She was rather cold to me after that. Ironically, the founding fathers didn't have much faith in the Constitution they wrote. After all, what's the 2nd amendment for? Isn't a document that institutes a massive federal government going to fail eventually if it only hopes to SLOW IT DOWN via checks and balances?

You can stomp your widdle feet all you like: The Wise Latina says that Roe v Wade is legal. And sadly, many elected officials in Congress, the Senate, and even the White House agree with her. I'm not happy with most of what she says, BTW. I would much rather have your more accurate vision of what the Constitution intended. But the reality is different. Get over it.

Your diatribe against me reminds me of this speech:
"Son, we live in a world that has walls, and those walls have to be guarded by men with guns. Who's gonna do it? You? You, Lt. Weinburg? I have a greater responsibility than you could possibly fathom. You weep for Santiago, and you curse the Marines. You have that luxury. You have the luxury of not knowing what I know. That Santiago's death, while tragic, probably saved lives. And my existence, while grotesque and incomprehensible to you, saves lives. You don't want the truth because deep down in places you don't talk about at parties, you want me on that wall, you need me on that wall. We use words like honor, code, loyalty. We use these words as the backbone of a life spent defending something. You use them as a punchline. I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the blanket of the very freedom that I provide, and then questions the manner in which I provide it. I would rather you just said thank you, and went on your way, Otherwise, I suggest you pick up a weapon, and stand a post. Either way, I don't give a damn what you think you are entitled to."

HH| 2.6.12 @ 3:15PM

When I stood before a sagely looking early 60's judge and began to speak of my 4th Amendments rights in August of this past summer, oh, you should have heard the chortling by the assembled: The balif, the clerk/typist, the secretary, the assembled police waiting to present their charges on the motley gang of poor souls like me with a summons that day. Oh, and the judge smirked at me as if he was glancing down on Oscar of Sesame Street fame.

A lot of good Madison's Constitution did for me that day --- in the most trivial of matters, and the most obvious of police improprieties.

In his strong argued points above, I'm not sure that Polish Knight is off base. In fact, let me correct: I am with him.

If people don't know anything about our Constitution, simple tenets therein, how it applies in everyday living, well, then it is useless. It is just a dusty museum piece.

Obama references it in three State of the Union addresses and then goes on (under the microscope of a thousand cameras, TV crews, 24/7 media, Congress overwatch?) to do just what he or his czars or department heads choose. Same with Bushes I & II.

Everybody knows that these things are not enumerated in the Constitution. So how has it mattered?

Above Polish Knight is strongly encouraging us to stop hugging it. Sure, it is a one-of-its-kind fantastic document. But it is not going to be what saves this nation.

PK is right. The Wise Latina is also going to tell us that Obamacare is totally legit. And not that most of us will ever read it or be able to endure reading it, but she will underscore her CONSTITUTIONAL support for Obamacare in $495/hour lawyeresque language that is 49 pages long. See? She's for Obamacare and can derive her support from it from the Constitution. And she can write about it in well over 300 paragraphs.

So, as PK is asking all of us: Just how is it that the Constitution has saved you? Preserved your liberties and life freedoms? Preserved you against eminent domain?

The Constitution, fine as it might be in a failed world of failed humans, is not going to save this nation and preserve safety and freedom in our 21st Century world.

Not by a long shot.

PolishKnight| 2.6.12 @ 4:05PM

HH, wow! How do I follow up to that! But just as you finished, another thought occurred to me: If the right is dying due to a bunch of Kaczinski's hugging their Constitution in a cabin in the woods, then the left has their own pet sentiments and Stalingrad issues we could win such as: Abortion and gay marriage.

As I pointed out, The Constitution doesn't outlaw abortion and there's no way a Constitutional amendment prohibiting it would pass today or even back in the 60's. At the state level and with discount airlines and $30 megabus tickets, outlawing abortion is impossible. Yet the left gets the Right to keep banging their heads against it like Lucy plays football with Charlie Brown.

How about WE play that game with THEM? Let them have the football. The fact is, most feminists have nightmares about dying single and childless rather than dying at the hands of some back alley doctor. Same thing with gay marriage. Guys, marriage is almost DEAD in the states thanks to feminism! Cher joked that only a crazy person would want to be institutionalized and she had a point: Wait until lesbians start getting into custody battles for a sperm bank baby! Or gay men try to split up their Grenwich Village Manhattan condo! Use some SMART thinking! How about undoing the Nixon mess and while ending their opposition to abortion and gay marriage, enact PERMANENT welfare limits AND ending the marriage penalty? Add in marriage tax breaks for homes with part-time SAH parents (guess which households THEY would be?) I suggested this to a feminist and she gasped with panic. Clinton suggested subsidized daycare and then killed his own bill when, gasp, the right attached a tax break for SAH parents (guess who!) and their family (guess who again!) The left is all about draining away resources from their opposition demographic while they profit. Let's give them WORTHLESS political footballs in exchange for treasure.

And that's perhaps where Coulter is going with this. Maybe she's growing up and simply throwing spit wads isn't so much fun anymore. I've read her articles. She "gets it" that this is about demographics and political power. You don't win wars vouching for limited government. If we need a big government to win, let it be OURS otherwise we're just letting them tell us what the rules are. Literally. Leftists LOVE big government which is why they're winning there. Imagine how much LESS they would love it it was OURS!!!!

Americanaiko| 2.8.12 @ 10:03AM

"If the right is dying due to a bunch of Kaczinski's hugging their Constitution in a cabin in the woods"

Sorry but that guy was found with Gore's books and was a Leftwing nutcase.

Your thoughts on the Constitution are interesting but miss the point of the purpose of the document.

The ideas and contraints it contains are meant to keep an interusive government from imposing it's will on the Individual as well as prevent the "tyranny of the majority". When you stray from those basic premises you get....well you get the news of the day.

typical white woman| 2.9.12 @ 7:16PM

I fear that the constitution and its purpose has been shredded over and over by activist judges, including the supremes. That is one of the reasons I agree with Polish's point 100%. There seems to be no possibility for 'we the people' to defend ourselves against outright assault on the constitution by the judicial system.

MJ| 2.8.12 @ 9:21PM

Coulter is a joke. She is obviously crazy and there is no explaining crazy. She is just as bombastic as always and throwing spit wads at conservatives now.

denise| 2.7.12 @ 6:18PM

The we all better vote for the people we need in the House and the Senate to repeal all of the policies that have been put into law, separating the people from the god-given rights.

thoughtcriminal2| 2.8.12 @ 10:32PM

You are of course right that the leftists have [dishonestly] redefined the meaning of the Constitution and use it selectively and opportunistically to enshrine statism. But you must understand that leftists actually dislike, even hate, the Constitution because it constrains them in the rate that they can foist their utopian experiment upon us, an experiment that will eventually lead possibly to anarchy but without a doubt eventually to despotism if we fail to halt and reverse it. (Justice Ginsberg expressed her disdain for our Constitution recently in response to a question about writing a new constitution for Egypt.) Leftists are, deep down inside, lawless people who cling to the vanity that they can build utopia where all others have failed. For them the means justifies the ends and some people will just have to get squashed in the revolution. The Constitution, our most basic law that constrains all other law, is still a great hedge of protection against the machinations of these maniacs, however imperfect. It is also the principles that has united us as one people for over two centuries as perhaps history's most successful nation. There is no other set of principles, not even Judeo-Christianity, that sufficiently unites us. Constitutional principles need to be renewed and reinvigorated, not abandoned -- they are also the very core of American conservatism. If we gave up on the Constitution, our quick destruction would follow.

fckewe| 2.14.12 @ 12:28AM

hitler, Mussolini and Stalin were the Republicans of their nations. They were RIGHT wing REDS!

BackToBasics| 2.6.12 @ 5:56PM

PK, from your post - "You reap what you sow and there isn't enough electorate to sow The Constitution anymore."

I agree with you, Sheila and HH below. There are some well-intentioned conservatives that I mostly agree with who have posted here but who write phrases such as "a cleansing is coming soon, let it come" or "bring it on," etc.

It may come to that but I am not certain the "good guys" are of sufficient numbers to prevail. Plus the losses in people and cities would be astronomical. Other powers may intervene as well as all this would not take place in a vacuum.

I am a believer in prayer and I think we are already at the point where the only recourse to save America is serious prayer and fasting by Christians. This is not a "praise the Lord and pass the ammunition" attitude either. We are beyond that point already. Only an appeal to God will keep us. If this prayer happens I suspect it will not be lead by church leaders but by the rank and file of the church. In large part, the rank and file are the only ones who seem to get it anymore; politically or in the church.

Trish| 2.6.12 @ 8:14PM

Back2Basics you are totally correct. Only prayer will avail. In fact, it is occuring nationwide. I am part of it.

BackToBasics| 2.7.12 @ 12:49AM

Good to hear Trish. May the Lord help His church to pray in earnest while we still have freedom.

All American American| 2.6.12 @ 6:58PM

The SC is NOT the final arbiter on what is "legal" or "constitutional." States have the responsibility to decide too. Something we all have either forgotten or more likely never were taught.

Remember, the States were at one time (and are supposed tostill be) sovereign and entered into this pact voluntarily. Federal overreach and influence ($$$) has eroded it to where all 50 of them simply bend over and accept everything that comes down the pipe from DC.

Sad really.

HH| 2.7.12 @ 2:21AM

BacktoBasics and Trish, I am with you both. Prayer. The God of the Bible reigns supreme, even when we don't understand or comprehend with all the travails of our day.

Thank you for praying, thank you for interceeding.

Back2Basics, you are right. Where I am I am frequently in 4 or 5 different churches in the course of a month. All are led by pastors my age or older. NONE of them are talking the issues like the very recent decision against the Catholic Church -- essentially a decision where the national government gets to decide what is going to be Catholic faith.

The pastors' collective silence (too many of them cowed and cowardly and apparently unaware of what it means to shepherd) does not speak to the spirit of boldness that we read of in Paul's words to Timothy.

We have a massive problem. There needs to be events like what took place in Houston all over the country.

For now, thank you both (and others here) for remaining faithful.

BackToBasics| 2.8.12 @ 1:01AM

Appreciate the encouragement, HH and Trish. The harder times "so far" have come at a merciful pace allowing us the time to pray more fervently. I thank the Lord for this as it is a blessing really for a nation(s) to be judged slowly instead of quickly.

PolishKnight| 2.7.12 @ 9:18AM

That's the key phrase AAA: "are supposed to still be". We can scream until we're blue in the face that Obamacare is unconstitutional or, for that matter, that federal mandates to educate illegals are (after all, if education is a state's issue and the the funds for K12 come mostly from the states and are administered by them, how can the feds say whom to educate?) Doesn't matter. And even then if states right were respected, it's almost too late since the left has already taken over most state governments anyway via the leftist educated bureaucracies and the main cities.

One of the reasons the left worships big government is because it's a pretty impressive god. Consider: big government funds education, the courts, the police, and through subsidies and regulation pretty much everything else. Once the octopus gets big enough, they are unstoppable. Now they have demographics on their side as well allowing them to reward their followers via the old fashioned method of using pograms against minorities (which is us) while calling their supporters minorities (which is classical Orwellian doublespeak.)

Once The Constitution becomes irrelevant, it's not worthy of my worship anymore.

Sheila| 2.7.12 @ 1:34PM

Final point. There's no way we're voting ourselves out of this mess. What other course will follow (slow-mo Brazil, race riots, implosion) I can't say, but voting can't fix what's broken here.

Earl of Sandwich| 2.7.12 @ 2:29PM

PK, B2B, Sheila: all of you are so right. The Constitution that details a limited federal government with enumerated powers is DEAD and GONE. By extension, the American Experiment of government by, for and of the people has FAILED.
Time to re-boot.
I vote for re-joining the United Kingdom. Let's ask Queen Elizabeth II if she would so kindly take us Colonists back. Put Lord William and Lady Kate of Cambridge in absolute charge. Compared to the bought and paid for hacks in D.C. today, they would be a breath of sanity and rationality.

PolishKnight| 2.7.12 @ 3:50PM

Sadly, England isn't doing much better.

Joe Wanninger| 2.10.12 @ 7:18PM

Only if Lord William abdicates Kate of Cambridge to me:) She's wonderful.

However, Britain is in no better shape than the US. In fact, I would say it's in worse shape.

It's odd, that so many countries that were once under control of "imperialist" nations such as France or Britain are in shambles, yet the United States grew to become what she is, or was. Why have most other nations failed upon gaining their independence, yet America, who fought for hers, flourished? Simply the exception that proves the rule? I think not. At one time, we took responsibility for ourselves. We are now falling into the chaos of former colonies turned independent nations. We now have the greed, corruption, ignorance, sloth and corruption that has permeated African countries.

Sadly, outside of a second revolution or civil war, I see no return of Lady Liberty. May it never come to that and may God Bless America and God Save the Queen! Oh, and keep those Nukes going to The Falklands!!!!!!

Artie| 2.8.12 @ 1:41PM

Maybe I'm not understanding you but it seems you are saying to just drop the argument because it is your impression that we are not winning it. Just give up. I guess if everybody just gives up and decides it doesn't matter because no one has any honor---it will certainly appear that no one does (have any honor, that is). The constitution will work when men of honor are in the government---and I believe there are such men. We need to encourage each other to keep trying to get those men into office--not just give up.

BackToBasics| 2.8.12 @ 10:58PM

It would be great to have men of honor and I'll add strength to uphold the constitution. Yet, even men of honor need sufficient numbers to back them. PK is making the point that the demographic shift going on will preclude future adherence to limited government as established in the constitution.

If someone wants to make a warning like this, it is not tantamount to "throwing in the towel." How can we have debate at all if somone is told essentially that he are out of line or weak simply because he gives warning of a serious problem?

BackToBasics| 2.8.12 @ 11:02PM

My last reply was to Artie.

typical white woman| 2.9.12 @ 7:25PM

Amen.

I am only on this site a few times a year, and today I find it hard to believe that there is someone else who sees the current state of the US the way I do. My late husband used to chide me for my dire predictions about the politics and economy and now he isn't here to see that about 95% of them came true.

As for Coulter, I had a good laugh when she critizised Gingrich for being bombastic! It's true that it takes one to know one.

Sarah| 2.9.12 @ 10:26PM

LOL Knight, conservativism is NOT losing. And it's loonies like you on the left that will ensure it stays that way!

thoughtcriminal2| 2.8.12 @ 10:37PM

Bingo.

George Beatty| 2.21.12 @ 6:42PM

The French Revolution & the Russian Revolution were about the people. The people = mob rule. Our nation was founded by men who understood individual freedom and opportunity and wrote a document to guarantee individual freedoms and God given rights, The Constitution, without it we are just another herd. Many of my generation pledged their lives to defend the Constitution only to watch our politicians scrap it to bailout the cronies who bought their offices for them. The Tea Party was just a precursor in the 18th century,lets hope we can accomplish with ballots what our founding fathers did with bullets.

VonMisesJr| 2.6.12 @ 9:46AM

Brian, cuban pete and skedaddle are spot on. What do people not understand about their "unalienable rights to life, liberty and pursuit of happiness?
And one could argue that RomneyCare is not constitutional since the state law violates the federal law protecting the same. Obama claims supremacy in not allowing AZ to enforce immigration law, but states can override our basic unaleinable rights and it is constitutional? Bullcrap.

Lyneuss Fields | 2.6.12 @ 9:49AM

The shredding of America's Constitution began before the ink on that document was even dry; therefore "The Great Experiment" was tampered with. One of the first items struck was the requirement for an accounting of all expenditures to "We The People". My point is, Congress since has felt no need, and is neither compelled, to practice fiscal constraint.
http://lyneussfields.blogspot......ative.html

SpiralArchitect| 2.6.12 @ 2:41PM

A republic is a great thing...if you can keep it.

janie| 2.7.12 @ 9:55AM

I too fear we have lost with Mitt getting so many votes. It is sad that Americans have become so ignorant of our predicament, especially at a time when we have access to so many voices and information to help us discern real truth. Perhaps we've lost our common sense!

stephen boone | 2.22.12 @ 12:16PM

What you should worry about is nominating an extremist. Forget McCain, a loser from way back. His first campaign ad coming out of the convention said, introducing the campaign and his running mate ---"She fought Republicans in her home state while I fought Republicans in Congress." That is INSANE. Go actually LOOK at the REAL Ronald Reagan. He was NOT a doctrinaire conservative. You were lead by a bunch of idiot talk show hosts to hate George W. Bush's SOLUTION of the illegals problem. If you read it, you would fall over dead from shock. Go to moronpolitics for an explanation. leave a comment. Reagan gave absolute complete amnesty to 15 million plus Illegals. He put Kennedy and OConner on the court. His friendship with Tip O'Neill was legendary FOR A REASON. O'Neill won more than he lost, believe me. Reagan again and again gave away the future for some good PR now.

Kurt| 2.6.12 @ 9:34AM

Yesterday's conservative is considered today's anarchist, yesterday's rino is today's conservative! Thank you Fox news you have successfully neutered your sheep, I mean viewers!

Occam's Tool| 2.6.12 @ 5:33PM

Chuck,

she's an Ivy League attorney. Aren't you being redundant when you call her dumb?

Seek| 2.6.12 @ 7:29PM

Coulter got her law degree from the University of Michigan, not Ivy League, though she earned her undergraduate degree from Cornell.

Seek| 2.6.12 @ 7:29PM

Coulter got her law degree from the University of Michigan, not Ivy League, though she earned her undergraduate degree from Cornell.

Vern Crisler| 2.6.12 @ 9:18AM

I, too, am puzzled by Ann's Romney-at-all-costs strategy. Must be a very personal dislike of Newt that could lead her to support such a non-entity for a candidate. I remember Ann trashed Newt for being something of a bomb-thrower, and I almost fell out of my chair. Talk about pot and kettle. It must be something personal to explain this weird Mitt's-our-guy attitude.

PolishKnight| 2.6.12 @ 9:44AM

Ann Coulter is not a politician but rather a pundit so she has the freedom (even responsibility) to lob bombs which explains the authors' dismay. On the other hand, Newt is very much like The Maverick McCain in that not only does he lob bombs but he throws them at his own friends.

Not only wasn't McCain on our side, but he was only effective when working for the enemy. His daughter is angry that the Republicans are full of evil conservatives.

Vern Crisler| 2.6.12 @ 9:54AM

Can you provide examples of Newt throwing bombs at his friends that compares with what Ann does? BTW, my comment was about Ann's hypocrisy, not about strong rhetoric. Nothing wrong with strong rhetoric as long as it's truthful.

PolishKnight| 2.6.12 @ 10:38AM

I explained that Coulter's not really being hypocritical. It's the "truth" that political pundits are held to a different standard than politicians. Ann Coulter knows that she could never win a presidential election so it's not hypocritical of her to hold herself to a different standard.

Heck, that goes for us too. Vern, how many bestselling books do you have under your belt? Ann Coulter not only sold them, but did so as a private citizen unlike Newt.

Al Adab| 2.6.12 @ 12:01PM

The pundits feed off each other and all begin to think alike. Inside the beltway syndrom if you will.

That said, what cabinet post was Niki Haley promised for her endorsement and perhaps Ann expects to be named press spokesman by Romney.

Dai Alanye | 2.6.12 @ 12:35PM

Coulter supposedly has a new boyfriend. I suspect he's a RINO, and she's converted out of a desire to please him. Women do a lot of stupid things for love. If someone has a better explanation, let's hear it.

We know that Romney has bought Pawlenty's endorsement, and probably Huntsman's as well. Nikki Haley might have gove for him in part because he backed her for Governor. In other words, she's acting out of gratitude. But what has Romney got that would turn Ann away from conservatism? I don't see her selling herself for money.

PolishKnight| 2.6.12 @ 1:12PM

Something I noticed about 30 years ago was that there were several conservative men with liberal girlfriends. Consider that married women tend to vote less conservative than married men. So who is changing for whom?

Most conservatives I talk to are shocked that I'm an open anti-feminist and that my wife shares my opinions on the matter. After all, I met the 1950's breadwinner standard that most bourgeois women still crave so why should I undermine it? In the meantime, why should I support a right for women to get first access to lifeboat seats while being allowed to vote or own property?

So here we are bashing Ann Coulter for endorsing a RINO while most conservative men let women have it both ways. Yes? Ann Coulter is MY kind of hypocrite: She wants to vote for a candidate to reverse women's equality. We need more like her.

Occam's Tool| 2.6.12 @ 5:39PM

PK: I'm sorry that your wife isn't matched well enough to you for you to worship the ground that she walks on (I'm sure she deserves it, but I'm not sure you deserve her). I'm a Mensan, and my income is in the top 1% and I know four things: 1) My wife is smarter (and more Conservative), 2) My wife is a more moral and decent human being than I am, 3) My wife deserves me to worship the ground that she walks on, 4) When I disagree with her over anything of substance, I'm wrong (no joke or sarcasm, please see 2 and 3), and 5) in a lifeboat situation, she gets the seat, as do my kids.

By the way, she had to beat several women off to nab me. I wonder why.

Occam's Tool| 2.6.12 @ 5:41PM

See, I said I know four things and I put down 5---hard to stop when I'm talking about how fantastic the wife is. And that's why I disagree with you, PK.

By the way, we have been in multiple life-threatening situations where she has saved my life and I have saved hers. She's pretty fantastic---the finest woman I have ever known, with the exception of her blessed mother.

PolishKnight| 2.7.12 @ 9:37AM

OT, one of the reasons why the Constitution is becoming a dishrag is that it's defenders are so ready to jump into the water to prove how chivalrous they are. Did you ever see The Life of Brian and the Judean Suicide Squad? "We sure showed them, eh?"

As I said, there aren't anymore defenders of the Holy Constitution anymore or even Damsels in Distress because they've fallen on their own swords and the Ladies have fallen in love with the Dragon (Obama and leftism.)

If you want to give up your lifeboat seat, enjoy. My wife would happily hold my place in line because she values our family. I didn't ask you to give up your lifeboat seat for her, I merely observed you needn't give it up for some other strange woman (who probably votes for Obama while crying how men like you oppress her) but hey, you've got the high IQ so you figured that out already, eh?

Speaking of the high IQ's: Leftists often use their education to rationalize crazy beliefs much like a 14th century monk used his higher education of the time to prove that cats were witches. Someone who uses his education and intelligence to rationalize his cherished childhood emotional notions and insecurities about women isn't wise, he's a fool.

Finally, regarding my relationship with my wife. She's smarter than me in booksmarts but I'm better at most of the practical things (not all of them) and that's one of my favorite observations about post feminism: They still need us men to pay their bills and protect them. If you and her are so smart, you wouldn't need to give up your seat for the lifeboat. You two would have figured out a way to save you both. My dumb wife and I would. Stupid is as stupid does.

ShineKehNihGhet| 2.7.12 @ 12:21PM

So, the moral of the bloviated story is, should anyone be needing a seat, to save himself from the tyranny that has oppressed the life and liberty of everyone, that has been the very reason the ship has been sinking, despite all the prayers, and there are still more people than seats, even after copiously fertilizing the tree of liberty with liberal tyrants, an option would be to fertilize the tree with a quasi-conservative with pseudo-intellectual honesty, and take his seat, as anyone who holds the document that is the justification and authority for life and liberty not in honor but in contempt does not have what it takes to save himself anyway, and everyone else would be saved from the inevitable incessant bilge everyone else would be exposed to on the journey, and no doubt while reestablishing the justification and authority for life and liberty through the document itself, the document that was initially established through the sacrifice of life, personal property and, honor.

Legarto Rey| 2.6.12 @ 9:52AM

Vern, Your sense is likely accurate. Feminism typically overshadows ALL womens' thinking. The feminist mindset sees Newt as the unpredictable alpha misogynist(likely accurate) while Mitt oozes supplicant feminist betatude. With regards to womens' issues , Mitt is their guy.

Vern Crisler| 2.6.12 @ 9:58AM

Oh, you think Mitt's got the Clinton-orgasm factor with women? As in drag a 100 dollar bill through a conservative trailer park, and .... well, I don't really see it happening with Ann.

I think it's something she has personally against Newt. I don't see any other reason that's strong enough to explain why she would throw her principles overboard.

PolishKnight| 2.6.12 @ 10:40AM

One of the things I love about Ann is that she's an anti-feminist. I have encountered many conservatives here who are "feminist" in the sense that they think that world revolves around pleasing women. Feminism is nothing more than hyper-chivalry. In cultures that don't grant women automatic protection, feminism doesn't exist because it can't. Women can only attain pretend equality when chivalrous, conservative men are backing them up.

Mike| 2.6.12 @ 2:08PM

Who are you kidding? Gingrich has always had a history of being dominated by women. How do you explain how he tried to throw away is candidacy last year to go one a cruise and buy jewelry for his trophy wife. The fact that Romney is a terrible candidate doesn't make Gingrich any less of a moron, or a socialist.

Susan Benton| 2.7.12 @ 7:23AM

I'm a woman, I have a Ph.D. and I despise feminism. Newt is a low-life jerk, but he also has a some great ideas and has been very effective. As to his 2nd ex-wife - she is either a liar (in which case I'm glad she is an ex-) or telling the truth (in which case at least he was a gentleman and gave her an option). AT LEAST WE KNOW ABOUT HIM - we know nothing about Obama's background.

PolishKnight| 2.7.12 @ 9:52AM

Susan, you'll have to elaborate on what you mean by hating feminism. Do you mean their open hatred of men or some of them advocating a gender neutral society with no more men's and women's restrooms (for example?)

All of these crazed beliefs goes back to Seneca Falls and the women's suffrage days. All of the stuff you hate about feminism today are the product of women wanting equality while still enjoying protected status.

Tommy Frisco| 2.6.12 @ 9:54AM

Yes, Vern, it is personal. Ann is on GOProud's advisory council. The gay community wants government-run health. Romney supported the gay community while Governor of Mass.. He is their candidate.

Vern Crisler| 2.6.12 @ 10:05AM

Really, I was not aware she was a gay supporter. I suppose it's easier for women to be gay-friendly, but I don't see how a supposed Christian can involve themselves with it, especially in an official capacity.

Tommy Frisco| 2.6.12 @ 10:51AM

Yes, go to GOProud.org. Grover Norquist is on thier advisory board. Andrew Breitbart was also on their board until he resigned in December in protest of one of Perry's aides being outed as being gay by GOProud members. I'm not saying Coulter is gay. She does not confess to being gay although she has said she does not see herself as ever getting married. I do believe her support for the gay community could be why she is supporting Romney and government-run health care. I don't know of any other explanation other than maybe her support has been purchased. What she is arguing for is not anything a conservative should endorse. She either truly believes in RomneyCare or she is being paid to support it. Either way, I no longer consider her to be a conservative nor do I respect anything she has to say.

TrueBlue | 2.6.12 @ 1:06PM

It's pretty sad since Mitt is about as conservative as Soros, Buffett, and both Bill Gates Sr. and Jr.

The ONLY thing he has going for him from a conservative angle is his family.

Cpm| 2.6.12 @ 1:22PM

But above, Dai Alanye swears she has a new RINO boyfriend. I think you are all talking out your asses. Just because she doesn't support Newt you figure she has somehow turned. She's been writing in support of Romney for months now, maybe she's just right, and you are wrong.

Seek| 2.6.12 @ 1:34PM

Ann always has a new boyfriend -- nothing new there. The key constant here is her extreme resentment of men who stray outside of marriage. Coulter, lest we forget, launched her punditry career about 15 years ago at the time Bill Clinton's extracurricular activity was becoming public knowledge. That's why she announced her backing of Hillary in 2008 over McCain. Hillary is "the Good Wife," wronged by her ambitious "rapist" husband. Ann's contempt for Gingrich is of a piece. She may despise feminists, but in an ironic way she is one herself.

Projecting motive is a risky venture, but I'd say Ann has been two-timed by any number of ex-boyfriends. Her loathing of cheatin' men in public life is a form of compensatory displacement for romantic disappointments in her own life. Am I wrong? Well, then, let's hear some alternative explanations.

Drek| 2.6.12 @ 2:04PM

Throw in Laura Ingraham into that boat as well.

She got sick, prior to marriage to the guy she was engaged to, got dumped, ------------- and has become a tiresome scold since.

Mike| 2.6.12 @ 2:11PM

I don't buy that. BTW, being against cheating husbands is anti-feminist. Remember, feminists were for no fault divorce, etc.

Seek| 2.6.12 @ 3:53PM

Say what you will, but underneath every scorned woman is a feminist that wants to get out.

As for no-fault divorce, lots of men supported it early on as well, Ronald Reagan among them. As a legal arrangement, it's far from perfect, but it's a lot better than what came before it.

Seek| 2.6.12 @ 7:32PM

I speak of Reagan when, as governor of California, he signed the nation's first no-fault divorce law in 1969.

Tommy Frisco| 2.6.12 @ 3:11PM

No one is talking out of their asses more than Ann Coulter. We're only trying to figure out why she is so rabidly supporting Chris Christie, Mitt Romney and RomneyCare. Her support and arguments for RomneyCare, in particlular, is completely at odds with conservativsm.

VonMisesJr| 2.6.12 @ 9:58AM

Now we know the effects and danger of female genital mutilation.
Coulter also loves Chris Christie. So we know it is not a stargazed crush on Mitt. It is ideological. Christie is great with the state budget and union abuses in Jersey; but he is conspicuously absent on health care and RGGI (Regional Greenhouse Gas Initative) Trap and Enslave fights.
Ann Coulter is witty, but she should be checked for an brain anomaly. Instead of growing breasts, I think she has fatty tissue growing between her ears.

Pete| 2.6.12 @ 11:35AM

From what I have heard, her enemy is the Tea Party. She has seen them start telling the GOP what to do, and as a GOP insider herself, she is trying to weed out the influence of the Tea Party. That is why she is pushing RINOs like Christie and Romney.
Its hard to trust "conservative" pundits from the beltway. They have limited their associations to beltway politicos and have a basic contempt for main street.

BackToBasics| 2.6.12 @ 6:05PM

The Tea party is well represented by evanglical Christians. She doesn't seem to have much tolerance for evangelicals either.

fckewe| 2.6.12 @ 12:31PM

They are one and the same I thought.. She has the same problem ALL RED party pundits have, a single agenda and no honest data to make a case for it. Hence the constant shrieking.

On 60 minutes, James J. Kilpatrick and Shana Alexander... played the same game on Point/Counterpoint every week. Same blather so CBS killed the segment... after 15 years because CBS is a RED shill 'liberal mass media' outlet.

Grzmlyk| 2.6.12 @ 12:56PM

There's your mistake, fckewe: you "thought."

Please stick only to those things good liberals do best: Reciting talking points.

Leave the thinking to people who have brains.

VonMisesJr| 2.6.12 @ 1:20PM

From sheep bangers comments; I don't think he did think before writing. I spent 25 years in sales listening; and I don't have a clue what he just bleeped. But I sure neither does he?
But the sex is good in the highlands with all his furry friends!

Occam's Tool| 2.6.12 @ 5:47PM

VonMises:

The three biggest lies in New Zealand:

3)I was drafted to play halfback for the All-Blacks.
2)I was engaged to mary a Maori Queen.
and, at number 1: I was just helping that sheep over the fence!!!!!!!!!

Bah-dum-dum! Thank you! Here all week! Don't forget to tip your waitress!

Nick| 2.6.12 @ 1:28PM

Grzmlyk,

As to what bleeding heart liberals do best, I believe it is a tie between reciting talking points and picking-up the money from the top of the dresser.

Since a lobotomy is a requirement to become a stinking liberal, "thinking" and "brains" are no longer part of the equation.

Excellent comments, as always. Have a great day.

PolishKnight| 2.6.12 @ 2:28PM

Leaving the thinking to people who have brains _IS_ a leftist talking point. It's a religion of belonging to the well educated big government crowd while simultaneously claiming to care about the poor and "middle class" when they could care less about conservatives who fall into the latter category.

So it is strange then that most leftists really haven't taken a close look at their own ideology. They want to make the world into a copy of Western Europe even as they're sacrificing Western Europe on the altar of political correctness to rationalize what they've done to take down the USA.

Seek| 2.6.12 @ 1:23PM

It's menopause. She turned 50 in December.

Your Excellency| 2.6.12 @ 3:04PM

I think you are on to something here . No babies for Coulter. Thank God.

Jeremiah| 2.6.12 @ 3:25PM

I think Anne is just going through a second childhood.

Like many adolescent girls from the wrong side of the tracks, she has fallen head over heels for the good-looking guy in the blue blazer from the tony side of town. She is absolutely certain it is true love and he would never, ever break her heart. If we only knew him, she assures us, we would understand how wonderful he really is. We know better, of course.

But there is nothing to be done about it except wait and hope that the stars fall from her eyes and the infatuation passes before she goes through the emotional train wreck this relationship would cause her. We can only hope that a year from now she is thanking us for not encouraging the infatuation - and realizing what a bullet she dodged, rather than dripping mascara as she tearfully asks us for the umpteenth time how he could have been so mean to her.

Alan Brooks| 2.6.12 @ 6:40PM

"Who Castrated Ann Coulter?"

A lurid headline worthy of the NY Post in the old days.

Anthony M| 2.6.12 @ 9:44PM

Maybe she's capable of seeing that, of the remaining candidates, Romney's the only one with any chance of winning. I like Santorum, but my experience tells me that the USA has shifted a bit to the left since Bush and Romney is the only one capable of pulling in the independents.

Anthony M| 2.6.12 @ 9:44PM

Maybe she's capable of seeing that, of the remaining candidates, Romney's the only one with any chance of winning. I like Santorum, but my experience tells me that the USA has shifted a bit to the left since Bush and Romney is the only one capable of pulling in the independents.

Sarah| 2.9.12 @ 10:23PM

She's simply not as deluded as the super-fems on the left. You find that offensive?

I find it offensive to claim she must be male. I hate how some liberals are afraid to admit that there are differences between men and women, which is an obvious scientific and indisputable FACT! And it doesn't take a man to know that. It just takes a functioning brain. Some of us women have those too, you know!

Dan Johnson| 2.13.12 @ 3:56PM

I don't like anyone to tell me how to think but as the Chairman of the Young Republicans on my campus during the Reagan election I can tell you the Right's hero Reagan was considered a moderate by many and would not pass the right's test today. Fact remains that we are a center right county and to nominate a extremest like Santorum would guarantee defeat. As a lifelong Republican I feel our party is being hijacked by the socially conservative right and I am so tired of hearing from Sarah Palin...she is banging the drum to our defeat.

denroy3| 3.7.12 @ 8:28AM

Bull. you're whole post is bull.

Micha Elyi| 3.11.12 @ 4:37AM

Dan Johnson certainly wasn't Chairman of the YRs (or CRs) at the college I attended!

Despite the college's conservatism, the club was packed with Ford partisans in 1976 and in 1980 the large majority of members were sure Reagan was an ultraconservative who would blow up the world - come to think of it, that's what the College Democrats on campus thought too.

Some things never change.

Dan Johnson| 2.13.12 @ 4:01PM

I don't like anyone to tell me how to think but as the Chairman of the Young Republicans on my campus during the Reagan election I can tell you the Right's hero Reagan was considered a moderate by many and would not pass the right's test today. Fact remains that we are a center right county and to nominate a extremest like Santorum would guarantee defeat. As a lifelong Republican I feel our party is being hijacked by the socially conservative right and I am so tired of hearing from Sarah Palin...she is banging the drum to our defeat.

Chef Schnauzer| 2.6.12 @ 6:49AM

The same thing happens to decent elected people and others.... the establishment go to work on them and the thoroughly evil perma-staffs have access 24/7 and isolate good people from their constituencies. Even the most stalwart a conservative needs the support of fellowship from like others. The federal district and its total contents are a write-off.

TrueBlue | 2.6.12 @ 1:09PM

The elected reps could start by reading their own emails instead of having their staff do it for them. John McCain has an excuse in that regard, I can't really think of anyone else that does.

Ric hard Baker| 2.6.12 @ 6:51AM

Used to go to her site every week to read her latest. Not anymore. The girl done lost her mind. How sad.

lulub| 2.6.12 @ 7:02AM

She's needing publicity, her newest book's sales are down

mcr| 2.6.12 @ 8:51AM

Amen to that. She is always seeking attention, and supporting Mitt the RINO is definitely giving her the attention she craves.

fckewe| 2.6.12 @ 12:34PM

She genuinely doesn't like BLACK men for SURE and the most antiblack man in the RED party is Mitt the meatball. Wouldn't it be funny to hear her come out on the same podium as Hilary Clinton, @ the AD4ABO convention (ancient dykes for anyone but obama)?

Grzmlyk| 2.6.12 @ 12:54PM

Ah yes, it all comes down to racism for you liars.

Drunken Sailor| 2.6.12 @ 1:15PM

Ann coulter doesn't like black men? And yet she defended Allan West. Guess he isn't black enough for you.

Drunken Sailor| 2.6.12 @ 1:15PM

http://www.examiner.com/politi.....nal-battle

megapotamus| 2.6.12 @ 10:23AM

This ain't gonna help unless she thinks the Left or center are likely targets. They may be more numerous put together but when it comes to non-fiction, public policy books, they just aren't that into it.

Clint| 2.6.12 @ 7:14AM

The Spayed Mitten's Kitten.

Carol| 2.6.12 @ 7:18AM

Good article.

Mind-boggling isn't it? Coulter went off the rails when she started endorsing Chrispy Creme. He's been great when it comes to fiscal issues. Other than that he is a progressive.

And now she defends Romneycare like he is the last great white hope. She knows he is a moderate but is willing to and has lost her conservative credentials defending the guy.

First it was "Vote For Newt, It's A Vote For Obama" while railing against the Tea Party (her and Laura Ingrahm who has also gone koo koo). Then "Three Cheers For Romneycare". I couldn't believe it when Mark Levin started talking about it on the radio.

Coulter is lucky she has Hannity because true conservatives shouldn't take her serious anymore. I don't.

Maxwell| 2.6.12 @ 8:39AM

Carol, with all due respect, Chris Christie in not all that great with the financial issues either. If you read Paul Mulshine of the Star Ledger this past week and Christies 10% tax cut, not really that great.

His court picks are just as bad. Just look at what happened to Mike Pat Carroll who is pro CCW.

megapotamus| 2.6.12 @ 10:24AM

Yes, Christie is preferable to Corzine, Torricelli and Luatenberg but that is about all that can be said.

fckewe| 2.6.12 @ 12:35PM

Ingram was always permanently menopausal. She and Dr. Laura the Liar both.

BD57| 2.6.12 @ 7:23AM

Then Obama is going to be re-elected, because we can't beat somethin' with nothin.'

Tearing down Romney doesn't give us somethin.'

Drek| 2.6.12 @ 10:37AM

Yea,

But Romney tore down everybody else, didn't he? Who launched a carpet bombing campaign in Iowa when he was trailing big? Romney? Who only won Florida by doing the same exact thing? Romney.

Romney can't win a campaign of ideas, can't frame debates, can't even wage political battle without vicious campaign ads?

That has served him well heretofore against Republicans without the means and the funds to combat at that level. BUT against Obama, he will have no such advantage.

We need a guy who can frame narratives just as well as the obama campaign. And that's not Romney. It's not Santorum by the way either.

fckewe| 2.6.12 @ 12:39PM

Sad thing about Romney's carpet bombing, it shows EXACTLY who he is. he knows money can buy him any illusion he wants to enjoy, but it can't buy him votes from thinking people, only from reactionaries.

The FABULOUS thing about his ads, they were more than enough of the truth to be irrefutable, no matter HOW much Gingrich lies, he can NOT undo that much truth about himself.

His chances DIED as soon as Mitt said, I have been married for 42 years. The only women voting for the Lizard now are chubby chasing, low rent, albino pumpkin humping, anorexic sluts.

Drek| 2.6.12 @ 2:06PM

You're clueless if you think the nation's fate should hang on whether the 68 year old Newt Gingrich chased skirts decades ago.

Mike| 2.6.12 @ 2:15PM

No, but the fact that he chased socialism in the 2000s. Decades ago, he was a Rockefeller Republican. Then he moved left.

Anyone who thinks Gingrich or Romney are conservatives seriously needs their head examined. Gingrich can barely contain his hatred for conservativism even during the election.

scout| 2.6.12 @ 6:09PM

bunk.

Pimarily Exhausted| 2.6.12 @ 7:24AM

Maybe she was waterboarded?

fckewe| 2.6.12 @ 12:40PM

Annie is into breathplay and watersports.

Cpm| 2.6.12 @ 1:49PM

And she has gay friends, like Bill Maher.

Lyneuss Fields | 2.6.12 @ 7:31PM

And only a closeted gay man would say something like that!
http://lyneussfields.blogspot......ammer.html

Dipesto| 2.7.12 @ 12:08AM

Anne into watersports with Mitt?: sounds like the lady who just wrote a book claiming she was an intern and a pump for JFK and spent time in the whitehouse bathtub with him playing with rubber duckies.

John Daniel| 2.6.12 @ 7:27AM

Her latent damnyankee is showing. Real conservatives are raised in agrarian cultures, the intellectual variety in new england. It's too easy for those not to the manner born to fall off the wagon....

Steve| 2.6.12 @ 7:49AM

We have a winner. Northeastern, blue-state *conservatives* go with what's familiar every time. Shockingly parochial. Good-bye, Ann.

Drek| 2.6.12 @ 10:40AM

And what's "parochial" to her up in NYC are flamers, libs, and at most, "moderates."

Her guy Governor Crispy Creme just appointed to NJ's Supreme Court a black flamer.

Who is she tight with? Drudge, who has been fully on board with ripping any nominee other than Romney.

The people she hangs around, the conversations she participates in, the ideas that swirl in her narrow social set ------------------------- the woman doesn't have anyone who is NORMAL, who isn't subjected to urban pathology.

Her own personal life, her own decisions in her personal life, ------------- they've all caught up with her.

EVEN HER LOOKS are slowly changing, and not for the better. And I'm not talking age here either.

scout| 2.6.12 @ 6:10PM

perfect nutshell.

mitch poremba| 2.6.12 @ 7:29AM

Great article and right on, I've been wondering when someone in the media would write what she has become, RINO!!
Obama is probably sitting there thinking, with Ann, Mitt, Newt, Christie and others, no need to expand my base, they will get me re-elected without the Independants..
I for one will stay home if Mitt is the candidate, I did with McCain, I'm just so tired of having to choose the lesser of two evils. Even though Obama has us in a police state, the only hope is to get the Senate with more Tea Party people, but we will still have RINO's like Mitch and John for leaders, but it's our only hope with enough Conservative Congress and Senate people, we can stop this madness and the Marxist in the WH.

Chalkdust| 2.6.12 @ 8:13AM

Ann Coulter is a shrill, self-severing, horse's potoot....so what else is not new. She has always looked down her very large nose at the Tea Party members, but of this is reason to vote for Obama and that's exactly what a stay-at-home voter will do by not voting. Shame.

mitch poremba| 2.6.12 @ 9:17AM

I see your point Chalkdust, but as a conservative, I've decided I have principals and should not change them, I don't want the Marxist in the WH in longer, but Mitt or in the past McCain, are Obama lite. I'm also tired of the GOP establishment pushing these RINO's on us and saying they are the only ones that can do the job and find out like with Bush, just a Liberal republican doing the same as a Liberal, now look were we are. The other thing, I'm so tired of seeing people believing all this hipe which has gotten us in this police state, like the TSA, which the republicans help create but will not get rid of it because most of them are for bigger government and power for themselves, but also the people, look how people are saying the police state of the TSA is okay if it keeps us safer, which it doesn't. Too many people will not look deeper into what's being done, they believe whatever is said in the papers or on TV and it's about being a Marxist country.
It is a shame and I don't want me not voting be a vote for Obama, but voted the lesser of two evils with Bush, not much different then Obama, just not quite as bad, the wars, the drug program, all the spending and yet at the end I wanted him impeached for protecting his buddy in Texas for putting two innocent border guards in prison. People will believe whatever someone says, free this for you, I'll give you this program and more, Mitt has a record of being Liberal and people can't see because they believe his flip-flops, oh, he has seen the light and is a conservative now. He only is so he can get into the WH just like Obama sounded like a conservative democrat to get into the RH and transform this country into a Marxist country and he has succeeded..

Mike| 2.6.12 @ 2:16PM

Don't forget to add Gingrich to that list. We don't need that Climate Change supporting, Obama Care supporting, Big government idiot.

megapotamus| 2.6.12 @ 10:30AM

Don't "shame" me, jackass. Shame those ignorant fools, so easily broken to the media whip who never knew Romney's record until he explained it to them. "Shame" 80 years of Republicans going along with New Dealism and that includes Reagan. You know what else is a vote for Obama? A vote for Romney! Except even Obama isn't dumb enough to agitate for the minimum wage to be indexed to inflation! I will never vote for Romney under any circumstances. Newt is very problematic as well. Santorum is less than perfect but blows the competition out of the water. Somewhat to my surprise I find that even chest-thumping "conservatives" fall easy prey to the media drumbeat. NEWSFLASH: Yes, Team O WANTS Romney. He is a pushover. Howabout we support the candidate that is closest to our views, huh? If everyone was doing that Willard wouldn't have gotten out of the barn. Of course neither would McCain.

fckewe| 2.6.12 @ 12:43PM

He needs Ron Paul to cull the herd of reactionary one wing Independents from the RED Tea party. Did you know you can be tossed out of the Tea party for drinking BLACK tea without 1/16th or more of Orange Pekoe in it?

They stopped tarring and feathering because the BLACK tar got all up in those white feathers.

Even notice they all wear Cordovan wingtips too.

Cpm| 2.6.12 @ 1:32PM

Hey Mitch, you and your ilk stayed home last time and what did you give us? Obama's police state. Now you are going to reelect him because you and your selfish baby friends are hung up on your stupid "principles". Maybe your principles are bullshit.

Nick| 2.6.12 @ 1:50PM

Cpm,

And calling names is the mature thing to do?
You and I may disagree with Mitch's decision to stay home, but, it is just a fact of life.

Ever since President G.H.W. Bush, there has been a significant block of the conservative voting base that will stay home if the Republican nominee is not conservative enough. They refuse to be burned again with a bogus "No new taxes!" pledge. I stayed home in 1992, because I couldn't stand the president.

This is just the real world. Calling names and ranting about it is not going to change this reality. The fact is that a good chunk of the T.E.A. Party is going to be more upset if Romney is the nominee than they were when McLame was.

The solution is to prevent Romney from getting the nominee.

Nick| 2.6.12 @ 2:07PM

Oops! That should be: "[...] from getting the nomination."

RCV| 2.6.12 @ 2:28PM

I like the original text, Nick!

Clint| 2.6.12 @ 3:21PM

You Like Obama, OBama LawBoy, RCV.

mitch poremba| 2.6.12 @ 6:51PM

Well Nick that is what is happening with this country, if someone doesn't agree with someone else, they can only use the name calling. I just consider it that time of the month for guys like cpm!!

martin j smith| 2.6.12 @ 7:40AM

Its all about MONEY.

Bill Hussein O'Stalin| 2.6.12 @ 7:41AM

What you observe here is a system where conservatives backed the concept that led to Romneycare, which was an attempt to end free riders in the health care system.

Then, when Romneycare passed, those same groups couldn't wait to condemn and disparage it.
In fact, Robert Moffit is typical of think tank liberals not conservatives since he was for it, and now he's some type of conservative hero because he's now against it. How charming!

Yes, all these conservative cowards embraced the idea, Romney acted on it, and now it's Romney who is the problem, not the same group of conservatives who have now come up with an even sweller idea.

And 20 years from now we will be hearing about how that same group embraced the concepts they are for today before they ran from them. That doesn't sound like conservatism. That sounds like liberalism.

Pete| 2.6.12 @ 11:39AM

What is conservative about socialized medicine?

fckewe| 2.6.12 @ 12:45PM

The price tag and the corruption. VERY conservative profits (ZERO) and you can't bribe someone if they are all treated the same. THOSE are conservative values that WORK!

Occam's Tool| 2.6.12 @ 5:50PM

Ewe: there are plenty of possibilities for corruption in a socialized system. You've never worked in one. I have.

Zal| 2.6.12 @ 7:49AM

Mark Levin, the radio talk show host and conservative commentator, very effectively dismantled her article line by line. With all these billionaires throwing money around, IMHO, Ann Coulter has been seduced and paid to go over to the dark side. She worships at the altar of Ann Coulter anyway. It's a win, win for her with Romney because he'll be a disaster either way and she'll be able to complain either way.

Drek| 2.6.12 @ 10:43AM

A good deal of her present support for Romney is just to ensure she gets a continued invite to certain social events.

It's all a cocktail party at that level, and those invitation only. You can't crash 'em.

She has become accustomed to frequenting with that crowd, inside DC and NYC, and she enjoys vacationing with 'em out on the Hamptons as well.

She's become a fixture in a world she once decried.

BcdErick| 2.6.12 @ 7:52AM

I want to be polite but this is such childish nonsense as to warrant a mental psychosis evaluation. I not going to belabor the obvious. Gingrich couldn't be elected apprentice assistant deputy dog catcher in a town that has no dogs. I went to college at the same school and the same time as Ann did. She was really smart then and is even smarter now.

Mitt Romney is smart and competent and has a proven record of achievement. B. Hussein is a menace who is bankrupting the country while taking endless vacations.

This writer should go back and get his toys in the sandbox. I'm sure Mommy is waiting.

Nick| 2.6.12 @ 9:10AM

BcdErick,

Um, you must have missed this, but, Mr. Gingrich was....Speaker of the House of Representatives!
He was only second in line to the presidency.

"Mitt Romney is smart and competent and has a proven record of achievement."

Who are you, Stuart Smalley?

"Mitt Romney is good enough. He's smart enough. And doggone it, people like him."

Romney has no core principals and is a bigger flip-flopper than J.F. Kerry. Miss Coulter was 100% correct, last year, when she said that if Romney is the nominee, O'Bama will be re-elected.

I could not agree more. Romney cannot beat President Downgrade because too many conservatives will stay home. Just as they did with McLame. Probably even more so.

Cpm| 2.6.12 @ 1:36PM

Nick......Mr. Gingrich was....Speaker of the House of Representatives!
He was only second in line to the presidency.

So was Nancy Pelosi. And they both screwed it up royally.

Nick| 2.6.12 @ 1:59PM

Cpm,

And your point is what, exactly?

I was countering BcdErick's false argument that Mr. Gingrich couldn't get elected as "apprentice assistant deputy dog catcher in a town that has no dogs."

Apparently, he doesn't know that Mr. Gingrich was elected to the House of Representatives for almost 2 decades and was elected to the office of Speaker for two terms.

Grzmlyk| 2.6.12 @ 10:10AM

Sorry, BcdErick, but perhaps it is you who should get your toys and go back to mommy, because you have a child's view of Mitt Romney. Lots of people are smart and competent and have proven records of achievement. That doesn't make them stalwart conservatives, and that is what we need - a person who believes to his core in free markets and less government - not a "go along to get along" technocrat who will kick the can down the road.

Just because Gingrich is a lousy option - and a statist phony - doesn't mean that Romney isn't also a lousy option - and a statist phony. A conservative he ain't. End of story.

I agree Coulter is smart - but she has indeed gone off the rails. Lots of smart people are liberals, don't forget.

And lots of smart people seem to think Romney is the answer. If so, please remind me what the question was again?

Al Adab| 2.6.12 @ 12:06PM

GRZ:
Romney is anything BUT a stalwart Conservative. His wing of the GOP has opposed the Conservative Movement from its inception. This is the same old East coast, establishment GOP that since Dewey has led the party to defeat. Why would we want to follow them again? All they stand for is better management of the social welfare state. They do not deny its legitimacy.

Grzmlyk| 2.6.12 @ 1:31PM

Exactly, Al Adab - I believe I made the point that Romney is anything but a stalwart conservative above, unless I'm misreading your post.

He's a classic go-along-to-get-along RINO, and Ann Coulter's passionate support of him has completely undermined her. I wonder if she's aware that she's crawled out onto a limb and then sawed it off, apparently expecting the tree to fall instead of the branch she's wandered onto.

I've lost any respect for her - you can't unring that bell, and she has been "outed as just another complete phony conservative.

She's just another pundit in a "Washington Generals" uniform playing farcical, "pretend" opponent to the establishment "Harlem Globetrotters."

Very disappointing.

Seek| 2.6.12 @ 1:39PM

Oh? Didn't "RINOs" Eisenhower, Nixon and Bush One manage to get elected president, in two cases more than once?

Al Adab| 2.6.12 @ 2:11PM

That's true Seek, but in those days (Nixon lost in '60) there was as yet no Conservative Movement. Both Nixon and Bush 41 ran as Conservatives (they lied) just like Mitt is trying to do now.

megapotamus| 2.6.12 @ 10:32AM

Competent at what?

fckewe| 2.6.12 @ 12:46PM

BILL!!! Oh Billy boy??? you gonna take that O'Reilly Factor trashing???

NO SPIN ZONE| 2.7.12 @ 4:52PM

"I am a 1%er, in Mensa."
fckewe | 1.16.12 @ 2:00PM

"you're MOM teach you that?"
fckewe | 1.20.12 @ 12:16PM

FAIR AND BALANCED| 2.8.12 @ 4:35PM

"You take 2 Viagarrrrrrrrra to day?"
3:06 am on 2/7/12

"in the eraly church was VERY Markist"
1:07 am on 2/8/12

"Babies cry, laugh, eat and poop and breath. If it is NOT doing those acts, it is just a scab, a snot bubble"
12:46 pm on 1/19/12

Edward Cropper | 2.6.12 @ 7:52AM

All the sudden Coulter haters are screaming and pulling their hair like a bunch of liberals who just found out Barney Frank is Straight.
Ann is given credit for having "Balls" when she says things the "quasi-conservatives" like, but saying anything differently makes her a traitor and non conservative.
As an original supporter of Barry Goldwater when he first came on the scene, I remember the " tag alongs " blasting him any time he said something they thought was not correct in their limited knowledge of what real conservatism really is. Barry told them to grow up.

Cpm| 2.6.12 @ 1:39PM

Exactly. Apparently if you aren't all in for Newt you're a RINO.

Janeway| 2.6.12 @ 7:57AM

Why don't you rename your paper the "I Hate Romney Column". You rant and rave about what a horrible person he is and anyone who supports him. Just who do you want for President? Ann Coulter is one of the few on the right that supports him and none on the left. Obama and Axlerod never mention anybody but Romney so it is ridiculous to think he want to run against him. The NYT and NYMag wrote the exact same articles about Romney. Both on the same page I guess but why you want more Obama is beyond me. Rather than calling Ann crazy and a RINO, look in the mirror.

Carol| 2.6.12 @ 8:02AM

Why don't you read Mr. Tucker's article on this website comparing Romneycare to Reagan.

Grzmlyk| 2.6.12 @ 10:15AM

It's not a question of hating Romney. What is it with you blind supporters who, rather than view Romney in toto, hitch your wagon to his star and he is forevermore the Conservative Ideal? Please - cults of personality are the purview of liberals, not ostensible conservatives.

And how is it, exactly, that not thinking Romney is a gift from the gods translates into wanting more Obama? Huh?

Hey, if he's the nominee, I'll vote for him. I have no doubt that he's a decent guy who is capable, and probably a pretty good manager - all important traits in a chief executive.

But if you think the guy is going to lead us back to a constitutional, small-government promised land, I have a bridge in Brooklyn I'd like to sell you.

megapotamus| 2.6.12 @ 10:38AM

Yes, I am quite sick of that. It's tribalism. What, you aren't for Mitt? Why do you hate Mitt? I don't hate anyone and that includes Obama, btw. I don't know any of these jackasses well enough to hate them or to love them either but, as Coulter demonstrates, any criticism or less than full throated support of Romney is taken as a denunciation of religious faith and monogamy. Regarding policy, Obama and Romney don't have a sliver of daylight between them. Claims to "competence" are unavailing unless we know what that person is laboring towards. The bottom line though is that NO ONE, not even Ron Paul is sufficiently divorced from our modern socialism by skooch to turn the tide. Whomever is first to denounce Social Security as the socialist, unworkable, immoral Ponzi scheme that it is will be the one. He or she may not have been born yet.

Grzmlyk| 2.6.12 @ 11:05AM

I agree with you entirely, Megapotamus! You are so right: this entire country has descended into a primitive tribalism that has balkanized and divided us in thousands of ways.

The bottom line is that we have descended into the moral relativity and fiscal insanity of a decadent, wealthy, bloated empire that is collapsing under the weight of its presumptuousness and complacency. We have accepted statism - indeed, we have prostrated ourselves before it and, as a result, we do not deserve to keep this country.

Hell, even Paul Ryan's much-touted plan (which Gingrich famously called 'right-wing social engineering - as if!!) seeks to preserve the welfare state, not abolish it.

I cannot understand any of the posters on this site - or in the entire universe of politics - who fall so madly in love with their candidate that everything that person has ever done or will ever do has to be fiercely defended as a glorious and good action, and any other candidate has to be blasted out of the water with extreme prejudice and vituperation (see Ron Paul supporters for a primer in that nihilism).

I say, relax you partisans: ALL of the GOP options suck.

None of them is going to save this republic - or even try to. Instead, they will do what Nixon did, what Ford did, what George Bush Sr. did and what George Bush Jr. did - not to mention what feckless jellyfish Bob Dole and John McCain would have done: Tiptoe past the Leviathan and try not to piss it off. Try to appease the mainstream media and popular culture by moving ever leftward.

Count on it.

cuban pete| 2.6.12 @ 12:13PM

After G-man's last two posts no further discussion necessary-as usual.

fckewe| 2.6.12 @ 12:48PM

So says the leader of his own platoon of RED party sheep. I'll bet even real sheep have more original opinions than the RED party ones.!

Grzmlyk| 2.6.12 @ 1:42PM

Hey fckewe: Read your own posts. If it weren't for shopworn platitudes generously sprinkled with utter gibberish (which I assume you think passes for wit), you'd have nothing to say whatsoever.

As a democrat in good standing, you are either a fool, a thief, a crook or a pawn.

As such, fckewe, I have one last thought for you: fckov.

Grzmlyk| 2.6.12 @ 1:38PM

Thank you, Cuban Pete.

Occam's Tool| 2.6.12 @ 5:54PM

Superb, Mr. G.

My view is that tomorrow I vote for Santorum in the caucus. Since Ron Paul will not be the nominee, any of the other 3 are better than Obama. I will vote for Newt, Rick, or Mitt if nominated. I will not put up with another term of a Communist traitor.

And I will vote for one of them, and donate money to the campaign, because Obama is terrifying. Really, stay home and go through another 4 years of the worst President since James Buchanan? Really?

Occam's Tool| 2.6.12 @ 5:55PM

And, by the way, Mr. G: I do like your reasoned arguments. Unfortunately, usually you have to respomd to turds. May G-d Bless you.

Occam's Tool| 2.6.12 @ 5:57PM

By the way, I've just bought Chris McNab's How to Survive: got to be able to take out the Paulbots and Libtards if they threaten, you know...

doug| 2.6.12 @ 9:52PM

Tiptoe past the Leviathan....beautiful, well-done

Martinn Winters| 2.6.12 @ 8:03AM

Ann is merely displaying her bias for northeasterners, being a card carrying one herself. Remember when we just couldn't live without
Christie?

Nancy in NC| 2.6.12 @ 8:57AM

I never understood the affinity for Christie...Christie could only be considered a conservative in NJ. Here in NC he is almost a Democrat.

Coulter has got lots of press by being shrill and frankly, obnoxious. Michelle Malkin could take her to the woodshed when it comes to principles.

megapotamus| 2.6.12 @ 10:40AM

He has taken on the teachers unions which, as I understand, event he CT Democrats have been forced to do by necessity. Things were BAD in NJ, and to some extent still are regarding education funding but the feeding frenzy has been brought to a manageable order.

POST American| 2.6.12 @ 8:04AM

---AS we mull ove recent Globalist takes
on the FUKISHIMA world nuclear
disaster ---that Coulter dissed back in April.

Seems the Globalists find the FUKISHIMA
mess --and Japan's plunging demographics
nightmare (---thank you Bisphenol A)
--'a good thing'.

They think Japan 's just suffeirng from being
'too closed' (ie too Japanese).

They think the demographic problem
opens a window of oppurtunity for
MASS immigration from ----where else?
---you guessed it! ---Globalist destroyed
RED China.

And DON'T fall into the programming trap
of going ojn about Japan. It's now documentated
history --Japanese military expansionisn,
and EUGENICS was a set up intiated
by Teddy Roosevelt after 1905 ---and
turned into a DEMAND by Bernard Baruch
years later (SEE 'The Fugu Plan' by Rabbi
Mayer Tokkier).

Japan's long underway takedown op
(think IMF 1990) ---and make way for
slave labor China, is a plight even gigglers
should think twice about.

Remember, 'Free Trade' (ie monopoly trade)
also calls for the FREE and unrestricted
movement of labor across borders.

THINK about what that means for little Korea and Tibet
---the MASS sterilization ops
voiding little Peru, as it too is made
a South American hub for Globalist front
RED Chinese 'development'

--ALSO -----THINK what it means for
the demographically booby-trapped
America and Europe.

---Borders ---Language ---Culture.

------------THINK WHAT THAT MEANS-----------

And have we heard so much as a PEEP
about Globalist slave labor practices in
RED China being rectified ---brought up to
a western standard? --conditions being made,
well, 'human'?

-------------------------------------NYET!

Coulter ---to Oprah ----NEVER a word about
ANY of this!

"Everything OLD --is NEW -remburg ---AGAIN"

REALLY

TRULY

------------------------------------CHILLINGLY

Kurt| 2.6.12 @ 8:53AM

Post American,
+1 Great post!!!

Cpm| 2.6.12 @ 1:47PM

POST, your stylistic, obscuro-literate slide into insanity is accelerating.

Occam's Tool| 2.6.12 @ 6:00PM

At least there's some Protocols of the Elders in there...

Dave | 2.6.12 @ 8:08AM

Late last year, I began getting some nervous inklings that there was something icky going on with Ann. At first I figured it was just some kind of bug going around, or maybe a passing case of adult coodies brought on by something in the water. And at that point, I hadn't even considered checking the family Kool Aid supply.

Like Dave Catron, I've long been a fan of Ann's writing and wit. But something wasn't quite right in River City. So, I decided to send out a note to a few of my close family and friends to see if I might be the only one considering making an emergency call to Doc Welby. Here's that note:

BRING HOME EDDIE
November, 2011:

Those on the receiving end of these occasional family alerts know that one of my favorite people is Ann Coulter. I love her thinking and style. Wrapped into her basic smartness is a razor sharp wit that helps slice through some of the grammarian feldergarb that occasionally dots the landscape of political commentary. In a nutshell, like her or not, she writes in an easy to understand, street level style, punctuated with that snappy sense of humor. And while I agree with most of her takes, my approval, occasionally, comes with a raised eyebrow.

A few days ago, Ann wrote a column on the recent surge in popularity of Newt Gingrich. She brought out some old skeletons that had been left hanging in his closet, and laid them out for some critical rethinking. In the end, there was a lot more for we among the old schoolers to consider before interrogating the new boyfriend.

While I approve most of Annie's style choices, I'm kind of like a concerned dad who occasionally gets nervous about some of the boys she dates. And I'm afraid this Mitt Romney kid might be another Eddie Haskel. At first blush, he's a guy who always wears a proper tie, claims he loves baseball (maybe the Red Sox), but the obligatory smile is often ... unconvincing. At least to me. When he shows up on television, I usually spritz the air with a can of pine scented Glade to get the lingering whiffs of Old Spice out of the room. Then there was that other one she had a crush on a few months ago. I think his name was Chris Crispy or ... something like that. He wasn't the slick dresser the Mitt kid is, and was a few pounds on the portly side. Still, he was clean cut looking in an I just shampooed sort of way. He also had the obligatory Peposident grin. Unfortunately, the extra chins around his neck made it tough to tell which side of his face he was talking out of. That's always a red flag.

Having said that ...

I'll always love Annie, but her recent choice in men sometimes leaves me wondering if she might be going down the wrong track. I suppose the good news is, neither of these latest crushes are apt to end up sitting in the pews of some hate mongering community preacher, ranting about how God ought to be damning the country, and inciting anarchy in the streets of downtown Mayberry and parts north.

I realize Annie will have to live with her choices. And I hope she ends up with one that won't break her heart after the dance. Having a few decades of life lessons stuffed under my belt, and always concerned about her well being, I'm afraid this latest crush might, sooner or later, drain her spirit in the same way that kid from Chicago sapped a lot of spirits over the last three years. I knew that guy was bad news from the git-go, but had some difficulty convincing other neighbors along the street to keep a close eye on him. What concerns me today is that while Kid Chi-Town and his posse ended up trashing the neighborhood in short order, the Mitt's and Christie's would probably leave the neighborhood in, pretty much, the same condition. It just might take them a little longer.

Meanwhile, the guys I'd hoped Ann might go the dance with were, one-by-one, kicked out of the campus glee club and relegated to eat their lunches with the school's great unwashed. Or as they're known among the cliques: the uncool kids. When you take time to sift through the pecking order of desirable choices, too often the kids riding skate boards can't match up with those who's daddy's bought them a Benz.

In the end, the heart wants what it wants. I only hope Annie doesn't regret what she wished for. I suspect we all do.

mcr| 2.6.12 @ 9:02AM

Very interesting and entertaining read! You have a gift-I am serious! Thanks!

skip| 2.6.12 @ 12:44PM

Didn't she recently turn 50?

A classic midlife crisis by a girl who has a history of being hung up on the old classic female vanity of age stereotype? Didn't she once get busted lying about her age on her driver's license?

It would help the conservative cause if she could snap out of whatever it is before November. When she is on she is an effective asset.

fckewe| 2.6.12 @ 12:49PM

Maybe the coolaid wore off. and she needs another dose. NO! She built up a tolerance and it no longer clouds her judgement.

CREDIBILITY| 2.6.12 @ 3:45PM

"I am a 1%er, in Mensa."

fckewe | 1.16.12 @ 2:00PM

Indy| 2.6.12 @ 8:09AM

If she wants to back Christie or Romney, that's her choice, to me where she crossed the line was when she became the defender of Romneycare...this will show up in Obama ads. She is now in attack mode against the Tea Party which will also show up in attack ads from the Left.

She has been through a lot with vicious attacks from liberals so I give her credit for tolerating all of that but she has turned on conservatives, especially nasty to the good people of SC just because they don't agree with her.

I caught a segment on the radio where she talked about going up to Romney at a fundraiser and told him he better govern as a conservative since she went out on a limb for him, she also stated she wanted him to pick Christie as VEEP, ugh that would be bad, two liberals on the ticket, there goes the court (that is if they can even beat Obama)

Zal| 2.6.12 @ 8:18AM

Like Donald Trump, journalists like being king makers also - it's an ego thing they can't help. But just imagine the state she'll be in by 2016 when the republican establishment pushes Jeb Bush on us because he's next in line, obviously. And Romney will lose if he becomes the nominee. Something fishy going on, but luckily there are still 45 (?) states left to go and time to stop this pending disaster.

Indy| 2.6.12 @ 9:12AM

I'm not worried about 2016, the Republic is barely hanging on 2012 is the cliff...we have lousy candidates, we cannot force good people to run, we are stuck with this lot. I am focused on the Senate / House, I've given up on the top of the ticket, I'll hold my nose and vote for ABO.

By 2016, the choices will be much better, the true conservatives will be veterans, West, Rubio, Scott Walker, Mike Lee who knows, but Jeb Bush will not be the guy, he may be the smartest of the Bush family but he cannot run away from his last name and we know they are a progressive family.

Zal| 2.6.12 @ 11:01AM

Unfortunately, money talks, my friend. After the 2010 election blow out it was supposed to change things but here we are again. The republican elite has no intention of ever letting a "Reagan" run again. With the Donald Trumps and Meghan McCains influencing the choices we'll never get a Rubio or Scott Walker. It's Jeb Bush or Chris Christie from the looks of things.

Indy| 2.6.12 @ 2:22PM

For now, let's focus like a laser on 2012. Meghan McCain, too funny, she has no influence, nor do I think Donald Trump does, he's one big ego with money to donate but he has a record of donating to liberals.

Rubio, Walker, and others (Rand Paul) will be much better choices but for now, we have to deal with those running. If Romney wins and "manages" our decline, it's over, the GOP will go the party of the Whigs if it hasn't already.

Al Adab| 2.6.12 @ 4:14PM

The GOP already is the Whig party and has been since about the time of Dewey. Only the Conservative Movement has given it vitality and how has the GOP establishment rewarded the Movement?

Occam's Tool| 2.6.12 @ 6:02PM

Al: I predict that if Obama wins again, 2016 will be the time of the Kratman "Wake Up America" party, and for the same reason. Piqued your interest about "Caliphate" yet?

Al Adab| 2.6.12 @ 6:48PM

Re: Caliphate yes indeed. I intend to find a copy.

What I truly do fear is that this time the collapse of the losng party may usher in a period of social unrest- not a war between the states- but urban v. rural action and riots in the cities on such a scale to seriously endanger the future viability of the nation.

I know, I have a dark side to me.

LarryK| 2.6.12 @ 8:17AM

Ann Coulter has learned the fine art of compromise.

megapotamus| 2.6.12 @ 10:44AM

She compromises with Ann of Last Week, yet still not with reality.

richard ryan| 2.6.12 @ 8:21AM

I think this whole process has been such a divisive one for conservatives is this- we sense that the end of our America is near. I do think this is the most important elective in modern times. If Obama gets a second term, it will be a disaster. But consider this: we are headed for a disaster either way. Our debt has reached a level that may hamper economic growth for generations. Mark Levin is correct, each dollar we borrow is a dollar that MUST be taxed eventually. Obama is skating through this term because the real pain has yet to be felt. When 2013 arrives, we can not afford anything but bold changes. Gingrich, Cain, Perry, Bachmann, and others are strong enough to provide that bold leadership. Romney would only stand by, trying not to offend voters, and take the heat for what I believe is certain disaster. I believe that would be the real beginning of the end.

rob| 2.6.12 @ 8:22AM

THEY get to everyone sooner or later, and all of you must know that...Well, they are running Bob Dole/McCain AGAIN !!!!!

USMC7174| 2.6.12 @ 8:27AM

In 2012 the GOP proposed the following candidates to Ann Coulter and the party faithful; Romney, Gingrich, Paul, Santorum, Bachman, Perry, Huntsman and Gary Johnson. Ann Coulter couldn't find a conservative in the group and pined for Chrispy Cream. When Chripsy Cream said no thanks, Ann jumped on the Romney train? Ann Coulter preaches conservatism but is the author of "The Church of Liberalism". She supports moderate candidates. Does that make her Godless?

Steve| 2.6.12 @ 8:28AM

It is not her support for Romney. It's her snarky comments about those of us who are...less than thrilled with Romney. Her act got old along time ago.
Now I have taken a real visceral dislike of her.

I for one hope she is booed off the stage at CPAC.

NedB| 2.6.12 @ 8:28AM

Ann Coulter has just moved into the same area as Peggy Noonan, George Will, and Charles Krauthammer. People who I once respected, but now, no longer pay any attention to.

Coulter has jumped the shark. She climbed into the fridge at ground zero. Stick the fork in, she's all done.

She is toast. No, she is burned toast. Actually, in her case the toast is on fire.

Good bye Ann. I'm sorry you went insane. I hope you get better soon.

Ohiolad| 2.6.12 @ 8:40AM

It is hard to understand Ann Coulter's embrace of moderate Republicans - first Cristie and then Romney, acting as though she has been thoroughly co-opted by the GOP establishment. One can only speculate that she may have been tired of being just one conservative voice among many and wished or was offered a place in the inner circle and a seat at the table of power in return for being one of their main spokespersons and defenders. So personal ambition may be the source of her conversion - nothing more.

wodiej| 2.6.12 @ 8:57AM

Coulter is a mean spirited, hateful person. The truth can be expressed without emulating that kind of behavior.

Second, this should not surprise you when she said she'd campaign for Hillary if McCain was the nominee and she is good friends w Bill Maher. He is one of the nastiest pieces of liberal work to be found. Coulter is another so called conservative who is really a Judas who obviously has no real core when it comes to collecting 30 pieces of Judas silver. She said awhile back that if Romney was the nominee we would lose. Now she is giving 3 cheers for Romneycare. This election is revealing all of the wolves in sheep's clothing. She's not on the conservative team, that is for certain.

PolishKnight| 2.6.12 @ 9:46AM

I smell a liberal troll.

Grzmlyk| 2.6.12 @ 2:00PM

People who describe other people as "mean spirited" are feckless, cowardly weasels. Every single time.

If you're a liberal troll, have the courage to admit it. If you're a conservative, I have news for you: You're too sensitive for real conservatism. Why don't you put on the hockey helmet and duct tape pillows to your body? Maybe you can avoid ever again being bruised by the slings and arrows of "mean spirited" people like Ann Coulter.

Or maybe by "mean spirited" you just mean someone who doesn't wake up every morning and check off every box on the list of "victims" they dare not offend.

Occam's Tool| 2.6.12 @ 6:03PM

Mr. G:

I prefer to call the people I don't like aaaaaaasswipes, not "mean-spirited." I'm MEAN-SPIRITED, dammit!

Reprobate Charlatan Vomitus| 2.6.12 @ 7:31PM

Zzz......zzz......zzz......zzz...zzz...............zzz...ZZZ

Anthony| 2.6.12 @ 8:59AM

Personally, I think either Maureen Dowd or Peggy Noonan has entered Ann's body and has attempted to take over.
The battle rages in Ann, who, while not a total Dowd lefty, has nonetheless moved left to the Noonan moderate setting.
Oh Ann, we hardly knew ye!!

Grzmlyk| 2.6.12 @ 2:15PM

Is Maureen Dowager still around? Gee, I thought they'd already taken out her remaining organs and finished the dessication job that nature began 10 years ago, and then entombed her in the Egyptian Artifacts wing of the Metropolitan Museum as a pristine example of the mummification of 1960s liberalism.

On second thought, although the individual soldiers in this army of alice-in-wonderland liberalism may dry up and blow away, its restless spirit wanders the world like an un-dead zombie, a voracious parasite feeding on the healthy tissue of bodies politic the world over in order to satisfy its insatiable hunger for self satisfaction and unquenchable thirst for moral superiority.

Nancy in NC| 2.6.12 @ 9:02AM

Anyone that could stand being in the same room with Bill Maher should be suspect.

Drek| 2.6.12 @ 11:01AM

Exactly!

All of the decisions in her personal life are now spilling out in her opinions on public matters.

She hangs around flamers and leftys, ----------- we don't even need to go with the guys she's rolled around the sack with, so it stands to reason that ultimately, the would be public servants she supports are guys who are comfortable with appointing flamers, and are guys that tend left.

Governor Crispy Creme's most recent appointment to the NJ Supreme Court is a black flamer. Rest assured, that black flamer isn't remotely conservative.

That's the Governor she and Drudge now desire.

As for Romney, he's another guy who rammed same sex marriage down on the citizens of his state, and tried to use the High Court as the reason for that imposition. It was all a lie. There's NO LEGAL WAY a court, ANY COURT, could order the legislature first to pass, then the executive to sign any individual piece of legislation.

And any lawyer knows as much. NOR DO you need to be a lawyer to know as much.

But Romney, Mr Harvard JD/MBA lied when he said that he was forced to ram flamerism down their throats.

This is a damn outrage!

Chef Schnauzer| 2.6.12 @ 5:07PM

You know, Bill Maher really is the human equivalent of 'ring around the tub'. Intellectually and morally - that's all he is. Thank God for Comet.

crookedwren| 2.6.12 @ 9:05AM

Ann's books are witty and thoroughly researched, complete with endnotes.

But I, too, am bewildered by her defense of Romneycare and the state mandate.

She must truly believe that Newt is "unelectable." It's possibly true. I don't know. But she also would consider that character does really count, and Newt has some background character baggage that Ann would not, could not (considering all that she's said in her books about Hillary's errant husband), overlook in considering him as a candidate.

That being said, I can only see one defense for Romneycare -- that the state of Massachusetts crafted it for their state alone and it is the business of states to do such things for their own people.

Tenth Amendment right to do so. Period.

But don't discount her books. "Demonic" told us all we needed to know BEFORE the Occupy people set up their tent cities so the rats had some place to go.

megapotamus| 2.6.12 @ 10:50AM

Coulter's great contribution has been to the art of footnoting. The notes are a fourth of the books, routinely. Whether she was always so meticulous or became so because she was always under such scrutiny, I don't know. We and she can look forward to a much friendlier reception for her works in the future though so we will see if she keeps up the habit. I have never found her peculiarly talented as a writer though. As with Tom Sowell, while the arguments are right in the strike zone there is a lumpy turgidity where there should be mellifluous flow. And her interview presence is about as convincing as Madam's (from Madam and Waylon). She LITERALLY sticks her tongue in her cheek to indicate laugh lines! And people do! Amazing.

Susan Benton| 2.6.12 @ 9:08AM

Agreed - one and all. Clever, smart, and, and - maybe it is the boyfriend who Hannity has referred to in recent months. Anyone know who he might be?
She should be out there supporting Santorum (very big Pro-Lifer) or Gingrich (saying 'yeah, he is a jerk in a lot of ways, but listen he loves the country, he has a lot of great credentials, and we kn0w what we are getting'). Instead we get her supporting various RINOs? There is something we just don't know about and I for one will not buy any more of her books (and incidently conservatives buy a lot more books than liberals).

Gary B| 2.6.12 @ 9:13AM

Ann Coulter lives in DC and is part of their culture. She was probably threatened with expulsion from the insider cocktail circuit.

Romney has received endorsements from people I used to like and respect. I suspect the ruling class is pulling out all the stops and threatening and bribing anyone they can to get Obama re-elected by handing the nomination to Romney.

It's been obvious from the beginning. This fix is in for Romney.

What a mess...

L. Humplik| 2.6.12 @ 9:20AM

Very true...................

megapotamus| 2.6.12 @ 10:51AM

Threats and bribes. THAT is the menu.

Drek| 2.6.12 @ 11:03AM

I thought she resided in Manhattan.

Probably has two residences.

Regardless, she's gotten around............

And now everybody knows it.

Al Adab| 2.6.12 @ 12:17PM

As always, it is simply a matter of the price. What was Niki Haley promised? We should all mail our Coulter books back to her with a "never again" note attached.

The issue of course is: Does winning without principle accomplish anything even though it rids us of Obama? If there is no point to winning, since such a candidate does not contest the legitimacy of the welfare state, , then what about an Obama second term? At least The Left will get the blame for the collapse of America.

Pelligrino| 2.6.12 @ 3:45PM

Yes, A.A. What have they been promised? How have they been courted? Oh, and we can bet our little red Lincolns they've been promised.

Nikki Haley in South Carolina's endorsement of Romney IN Iowa was a travesty. The Tea Party of SC was fully betrayed (THIS issue is why Gingrich won in SC). Virginia Governor Bob McDonnell leaving the hot-button, big legislative agenda in Richmond to stump 40 hours for Romney prior to the Florida vote last week....

[For those who do not know -- Virginia has a HISTORIC time now of a Richmond Assembly with both houses of the legislature in GOP hands. This NEVER happens. And the legislature only meets annually -- now -- for just a few, fast, furious weeks in the year. So for McDonnell to leave to go to Florida when he could be doing what some of his GOP predecessors couldn't dream of doing in the last 50 years? What does this tell you, tell us all?]

The fix is in.

You are asking us all the right questions, A.A. You are making us think. Thank you.

Al Adab| 2.6.12 @ 4:12PM

Thanks Pelligrino:
As GRZ and I were saying above, its the very legitimacy of the welfare state that is the issue. It robs us of our Liberty and independance while it promises government pottage in exchange for our birthright. Why should we support those who simply promise to manage it better rather than those who wish to reduce the size and intrusivness of government?

L. Humplik| 2.6.12 @ 9:18AM

I have always read just about everything Ann Coulter has written. BUT if she going to support romney....I will no longer care to read or hear anything that has her name on it. I am a conservative Republican and romney is NOT conservative or a Republican for that matter. He is on the Republican ticket becasuse he can not run as a Democrat........I think Coulter should change her stance and say that she us a liberal since she is supporting romney. May God bless America....with either obama or romney in office this country is DOOMED!

L. Humplik| 2.6.12 @ 9:18AM

I have always read just about everything Ann Coulter has written. BUT if she going to support romney....I will no longer care to read or hear anything that has her name on it. I am a conservative Republican and romney is NOT conservative or a Republican for that matter. He is on the Republican ticket becasuse he can not run as a Democrat........I think Coulter should change her stance and say that she us a liberal since she is supporting romney. May God bless America....with either obama or romney in office this country is DOOMED!

Gary B| 2.6.12 @ 9:33AM

This all brings on the inevitable revolution sooner. May as well get to it.

megapotamus| 2.6.12 @ 10:52AM

I used to say "Whoah!" to such statements. Then moved to, "Sadly, yes." Now I'm all.... FOOK YEAH!

JimP| 2.6.12 @ 9:20AM

This must be Ann's version of doing an Arianna Huffington transformation. It's bizarre and pathetic. I no longer read her column's, will never again buy one of her books and immediately began to ignore her when I saw her column supporting Romney. She is as bad as McCain. How ironic.

megapotamus| 2.6.12 @ 10:53AM

The Arianna of the Right? Yeeouch. I hope someone says that to her face on TV and pronto.

HH| 2.6.12 @ 3:50PM

JimP, probably the most insightful comment here of the day at 9:20 A.M. I think you boiled it/this metamorphosis down to its essence. Gracias.

spoofproof| 2.6.12 @ 9:26AM

Thank you, Mr. Catron for a concise analysis of Ann Coulter's astonishing dissemblage. The well-to-do elite like Coulter really do believe in the powers of their position and wealth. They expect to reign until the day they die in a godless utopia ruled by science, technology, terror, and death. The folly of their ignorance and hubris will overtake them when they are least aware. Here from Edgar Allan Poe is a summary of all things far more informative than anything presented during the Monday-morning network spin cycle: http://xroads.virginia.edu/~hyper/POE/convers.html

PaulC| 2.6.12 @ 9:39AM

Ann Coulter has lost all credibility with me. I haven't read her columns since she came out for Romney, and unless she recants well before the election, I won't be reading her again. I never would have imagined her supporting a nonentity like Mitt. It's puzzling.

tdiinva| 2.6.12 @ 9:44AM

Your article would have more credibility if you weren't backing Gingrich. Gingrich is a faux conservative. His attacks on Paul Ryan, his use of occupy themes to undermine Romney, his cozy relationship with Pelosi on global warming issues and as late as 2009 he was still supporting the hated health insurance mandate. This should give any real conservative pause.

If you don't like Romney then the natural conservative alternative is Rick Santorum but the only conservative pundit to endorse him is Michelle Malkin. While almost all conservatives like Santorum on the issues, few believe he has what it takes to win. Ann has endorsed the only available candidate who can beat Obama. She is following Buckley's rule. You can wish for Paul Ryan or Chris Christie but they aren't running. (Christie is much more of a RINO than Romney.)

Drek| 2.6.12 @ 11:05AM

What "attacks" on Paul Ryan, that Ryan later didn't validate?

Gingrich said that for the types of changes Ryan initially proposed, there would have to be a media campaign of persuasion. He said absent such persuasion, Ryan's plan went too far.

Ryan himself later revised and overhauled his proposals to make them more amenable to the public.

Which validated Gingrich's criticisms of his proposals!

That was all that Gingrich was really saying in regard to Ryan.

tdiinva| 2.6.12 @ 12:49PM

Maybe you missed it but Ryan found a Democratic Senator to co-sponsor the very plan you say he backed away from.

So what about the Mandate? What about Global Warming. What about his leftwing attacks on Romney.

Gingrich is a phony and you and people like you are aa big a sucker for phoney rhetoric as the Obama kids were in 2008.

martin j smith| 2.6.12 @ 9:45AM

Ladies and gentleman please. Look at Coulter look at FOX NUZE. Its about making deals. Its about Crony Capitalism. Its about making MONEY. There is no need to analyze her crap its just "follow the money".

PolishKnight| 2.6.12 @ 9:50AM

Obama is supported by Wall Street including Goldman Sachs. The fake OWS protestors walked by George Soros and GS to protest against Fox News. (How DARE a news outlet express an opinion different than theirs! That's free speech!)

I find it amusing that so many in the OWS protestor group are a bunch of spoiled, rich white college graduates who can't land jobs. Boo hoo! Guess what kiddies! You're just like the working class white males that the left quietly chucked overboard during the mid 60's but you're too STUPID and IGNORANT to see it! So much for college teaching kids how to THINK! :-)

If the OWS kids had leftist government, corporate, and political connections they'd be working and wouldn't have a need to sleep in flea filled tents and protest. Stupid losers!

Drek| 2.6.12 @ 11:07AM

She doesn't need more money.

It's not about the money.

It is about access to be sure.

But it's really her whole personal circle of peers and bedmates.

Vern Crisler| 2.6.12 @ 9:45AM

Speaking of conservatives going off their rockers, Quin Hillyer has an article over at NR in which is supports the quixotic run of Santorum. In the article, Hillyer trashes Newt.

IMO, to support Santorum and diss Newt is just a roundabout way of supporting Mitt Romney as the nominee. It seems that conservatives like Quin and Ann have been drinking from the wrong still this crazy political season.

Vern Crisler| 2.6.12 @ 9:49AM

To put Ann's search for strange new respect in context, I think it's important to note that she recently started trashing Sarah Palin:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/.....52086.html

PolishKnight| 2.6.12 @ 9:52AM

Actually, in that article it appears she's trashing Palin SUPPORTERS. Ironic you found this criticism on the Huffington Post.

Vern Crisler| 2.6.12 @ 10:09AM

Got it from a Google search.

"Ingraham said that Palin is too thin on policy to be a credible presidential candidate. She said people were "desperate" for "real substance" and that Palin doesn't seem "all that interested in digging really, really deep on that stuff."

"Coulter said that Palin's die-hard fans were becoming a real problem.

"You know, we used to all love Sarah Palin, conservatives like me, for her enemies," she said. "I'm starting to dislike her because of her fans."

Doesn't sound like either one is separately Palin from her supporters. Can you imagine saying something like this about Reagan? "I'm beginning to hate Reagan because of his supporters."

PolishKnight| 2.6.12 @ 11:06AM

I don't understand this: How is this a criticism of Coulter when you're using something Ingraham said?

That would be like taking a quote from, say, Newt and then quoting Reagan and equating the two... Oh, wait, Newt already tried that!

Vern Crisler| 2.6.12 @ 11:29AM

Try reading it again.

conservativemama| 2.7.12 @ 8:57PM

Ann and Laura are just part of the elite club and they'll be damned if they let Sarah in. They lost me when they joined the other pinched ladies of the east coast establishment in trashing Palin.

Drek| 2.6.12 @ 11:08AM

Yup!

Hillyer made his peace with Romney, but won't fess up to it.

Bill| 2.6.12 @ 10:01AM

Considering politics as music, Ann Coulter is the "queen of conservatism" as to Lady Gaga to be the "queen of pop." Coulter's support for Romney really puzzled me, considering the fact that Romneycare was the inspiration for Obamacare. She should have stayed in the sideline, as many conservative firebrands like Mitch Daniel, Marco Rubio, Jim Demint remained uncommitted to any particular candidate. Coulter will have a lot of work to do to make up her "fetal" endorsement of Romney in the long run. Yet, I love Coulter, as I worship Lady Gaga.

Nick| 2.6.12 @ 10:35AM

Bill,

Any "man" who admits to being a fan of Laddy GagGag, is no man, but is a girly-man.
Laddy is a talent-less hack. She (or should it be it?) is worse than Medusa/madonna.

Give me Patsy Cline, Aretha Franklin, Brenda Lee, Etta James, Mahalia Jackson, Le Ann Rimes, The Andrews Sisters, or, any girl-group from Motown, before any of these so-called "queens of pop."
I would rather be forced to listen to Babs Streisand, or, have ice-picks shoved in my ears, than listen to Laddy GagGag.
You should only worship God, by the way.

Bill| 2.6.12 @ 10:47AM

Lady Gaga has the beauty, talent, flash of God. She's ruling the world because nobody comes close to her sexuality. I went to her concert, and she is the best entertainer on earth, no doubt. Go Gaga!
I go to Church every Sunday, by the way.

Simon Templar| 2.6.12 @ 10:51AM

Bill, I like my women to eat steak not wear them.
To each his own....

megapotamus| 2.6.12 @ 10:56AM

I wouldn't know a Gaga song if it jumped up and bit me on the arse.

Occam's Tool| 2.6.12 @ 6:05PM

Mega: Have you had a lot of "bad romances" waiting by the "telephone" lately? I need to know this crap---my patients refer to it.

Nick| 2.6.12 @ 11:10AM

Bill,

Laddy rules nothing, except, maybe queer-nation.
This androgynous skank is a no-talent loser. In ten years, no one will play her garbage. Just like they don't play the last big androgynous shock-schlock, Marilyn Manson.

Seek| 2.6.12 @ 4:00PM

M.M. is still around and his audience is large. He's not going away anytime soon. And his cover of the Eurythmics' "Sweet Dreams" wasn't all that bad.

Nick| 2.6.12 @ 6:06PM

Seek,

I didn't say he was dead. And, his audience is stupid.
He's another talent-less hack.
Such is the price of fame these days. Here today, gone tomorrow. No, wait, it's always been that way. At least for the untalented ones.

Seek| 2.6.12 @ 7:40PM

Marilyn Manson's career began two decades ago. If he was talentless (he isn't, actually), he never would have lasted more than a year or two. Personally, for hardcore music I prefer Henry Rollins, Killing Joke, Skinny Puppy or Ministry, but I suppose that's just me.

Occam's Tool| 2.6.12 @ 6:06PM

The sad thing, Nick, is that she is a classically trained Julliard educated pianist, Gaga is.

Nick| 2.6.12 @ 6:27PM

Occam's Tool,

Well, that would put her/it one step above Medusa/madonna, I guess. I stand corrected.

But, from the few times I've seen Laddy, she/it is just another shock performer. Like the talent-less Eminem and Kid Schlock.

Detroit used to produce real talent like Motown, Mitch Ryder, Ted Nugent, Bob Seger, Glen Frey, Alice Cooper, Grand Funk Railroad, The Rockets, and The Romantics. To name but a few.

In the last 20 years, the two biggest names to come out of Detroit were candy-boy, Eminem, and Jack Kervorkian!
A real metaphor for what's happened to the Motor City, if you think about it.

Keyser Sozay| 2.6.12 @ 10:06AM

I am done with this flip flopping toothpick. Totally done. She's a flipper just like the next Rino elected and he will be. Google Romney Flipper.

Richard_Iowa | 2.6.12 @ 10:11AM

I always have listened to Ann and generally liked her views. I purchased her books and helped her become a millionairess, one book at a time. But, I was watching her last week and ended up changing the channel. I certainly respect her right to "cheer" for Romney, but she can lay off the vitriolic comments about those who do not share her views. Will I vote for Romney if he is the nominee - absolutely. Do I like Romney as a candidate - absolutely not. If she cannot respect that position then she go somewhere else to hawk her wares and castigate the base.

bill glass| 2.6.12 @ 10:12AM

Elect the most conservative candidate who can get enuf votes to WIN!! -- Ann's Right.

HH| 2.6.12 @ 4:05PM

Bill Glass: Okay. That's rather easy to achieve.

Then what happens?

A "win?" A win for what?

jim sweeney | 2.6.12 @ 10:14AM

Coulter has lost a great deal of her appeal and, at a spinstery 48 with neither husband nor children, she's looking for a way to get back on the lecture/cocktail party circuit. As I wrote in my National Spectrum blog, she's looking for a way back into the good graces of the Republican party's ruling class.

Jeb Bush in 2016? I've seen articles pushing that and am dismayed as to how the Rinos have already given up on 2012.

Drek| 2.6.12 @ 11:13AM

What I really don't understand is why the GOP elites went to the mattresses for Romney who is going to get his doors blown off, and they themselves suspect as much.

miller| 2.6.12 @ 10:16AM

Coulter's point is that is misleading to portray healthcare reform in Massachusetts as an example of Mitt Romneycare crawling into bed with liberals.

When healthcare reform in Massachusetts was enacted, there were conservative intellectuals who did indeed support it. There is no getting around it.

Finally, there is a tremendous difference between Romney's 2006 less-than-successful healthcare experiment in a single state (a state with high incomes and thus a relatively low percentage of uninsured citizens) and a nationwide takeover of the healthcare industry.

megapotamus| 2.6.12 @ 11:03AM

That 10th Amendment business has served Romney well. Alright, let us stipulate that Romneycare IS Constitutional and otherwise legal in Massachusetts. I submit that it has not delivered even on its own terms. HC costs are UP, not down. Results are DOWN, not up and what few seem to know is the whole contraption relies on a one-time cash infusion from Medicare. Now that that is burned up Deval Patrick is left with the hot potato. Insurance companies are collapsing; doctors are fleeing and so are patients who want services and have the dough to pay up. Coverage? Increased yes, but something like 88% to 94%. What about that six percent? It is the law of Diminishing Returns but the "arguments" for universality are just as valid today as they ever were. MA will destroy itself for another 4% and bankrupt the nation for another two. Romneycare is a holographic disaster; it stinks from every angle except one. If you desire single-payer REAL socialized medicine Romneycare and Obamacare are the wrecking machines that clear your path. Mitt's only defense is that he is too damn stupid to know any of this. And he may well be.

PolishKnight| 2.6.12 @ 11:16AM

And indeed, that's how it's supposed to work: Romneycare allows people to see what a bad idea socialist healthcare is without going through an irreversible federal mandate such as Obamacare. Romneycares' failure would allow Romney the justification for ending Obamacare. If the left attacks Romneycare, they are helping him dismantle both...

Pete| 2.6.12 @ 11:43AM

Romney will never admit RomneyCare has failed.

PolishKnight| 2.6.12 @ 1:43PM

He doesn't have to. Politicians have someone else via proxy say those things for them.

Pete| 2.6.12 @ 10:15PM

Newt?

Vern Crisler| 2.6.12 @ 10:17AM

BTW, here's hoping the CPAC conference breaks out into open revolution. Establishment Republicans, sunshine conservatives, and Ann Coulter should be laughed to scorn. Here's news for you RINOs"

WE WILL NOT UNITE BEHIND MITT ROMNEY

It's time to heed Sarah Palin and rage against the Republican establishment machine.

Cpm| 2.6.12 @ 2:00PM

THEN YOU ARE UNITING AROUND BARACK OBAMA

Al Adab| 2.6.12 @ 2:56PM

At least then CPM (BTW a very old operating system) the Left will get the historical blame for the collapse of America and the new dark age of tyranny about to descend on the world. It may make it easier for future generations to rediscover Liberty if they know where the fault lies.

Carl Spackler| 2.6.12 @ 10:18AM

The commenter above (billionaires throwing around money) had it right, I think.

How much good P.R. would, say, $500,000 buy for a major pundit like Coulter?

Obviously, we don't know if this is the case, but something smells fishy in Norway.

Drek| 2.6.12 @ 11:14AM

Romney bought a radio host, Hugh Hewitt, all under the very respectable veneer of a book deal, the details of said book deal by the way, Hewitt to this day, REFUSES to disclose.

somnolence| 2.6.12 @ 10:31AM

Catron, I could have saved you a lot of wasted words. Candidates evolve, and very few on that debate stage have been as consistently conservative as Romney has since 2004. There are many pages of resources on the web to back up my argument. Romney can, and will dispel any counterargument about health care in Massachusetts when pitted against federal health care. The latest Gallup Map has Romney winning rather easily. Obama has run out of spears, Holder and Axelrod have run out of effective lies. Good luck in your prognostication. I know that I am far more confident than you are, as this is no longer 2008 B.O.

Nick| 2.6.12 @ 10:47AM

somnolence,

Romney couldn't counter-argue his way out of paper bag.

He is not a conservative, therefore, he cannot make conservative arguments. He certainly can't make them without sticking his well-pedicured foot in his mouth. Romney is becoming our own Biden.
He cannot beat O'Bama. As Miss Coulter said last year. She was right then. She is wrong now.

megapotamus| 2.6.12 @ 11:05AM

Really. Somnolence, go back to sleep.

Simon Templar| 2.6.12 @ 10:47AM

Nothing has happened to here, it happened to the rest of us.

Many of you have forgotten that she was big on Chris Christie, said she vote for Hillary rather than John McCain, and often takes odd positions.

She is an east coast, highly educated, flame thrower that loves and lives on media attention. She is not as conservative as you all think she is and I believe she cares more about her book sales and media spotlight than actual survival and progress of the advancement of conservativism.

She does represent a phenommena that seems to plague modern conservatives living in this age of media and sound bite; we listen to too much of what these people say and idolize them as our spokespeople. We are then shocked when something surfaces that does not fit with our preconcieved notions and perceptions of them.

Bill| 2.6.12 @ 10:48AM

Ann Coulter is no flip-flopper, she made a "honest" mistake. Let's move on!

Simon Templar| 2.6.12 @ 10:57AM

Bill, perhaps. But I bet you want to see her wear some steak and beef before you completely forgive her!

I am not sure believing one year that Romeny is NOT a conservative and then years later that he is a conservative is a small "mistake." Sounds more like opportunism or some serious lack of judgement.

Purple Lips| 2.6.12 @ 10:52AM

Ann Coulter, I predict, will be to conservative punditry what Charles Johnson (a la Little Green Footballs fame) was to the conservative blogesphere. In Ann's case, I think it all comes down to age, fame, and money. She isn't getting any younger (I believe she is 51), and she pretty much tapped out the Conservative Blonde Flamethrower act. Her books are stale, her schtick on TV is dated. I think she is making a calculated break. But, unlike Charles Johnson it won't quite as dramatic. But who knows; fame and popularity are addictive. People will go to great lengths to keep in the spotlight.

Cpm| 2.6.12 @ 2:04PM

Charles Johnson started out as a liberal who was supposedly transformed by 9/11, but that eventually wore off as his hatred for conservatives overcame his hatred of muslims. Ann Coulter has always been a conservative.

Purple Lips| 2.6.12 @ 2:46PM

We don't really know Ann Coulter, do we? Perhaps she has always been a Left of Center person who found her niche in conservative punditry. But, that reality is just a little too uncomfortable for her groupies (mostly middle aged men). Coulter wouldn't be the first person to take conservatives for fools.

As for Charles Johnson: I think most of his conservative fans knew his politics were leftish. The C Johnson of 2012 has disavowed all of what he wrote in the past. But, that was after he cashed in his fame.

Purple Lips| 2.6.12 @ 10:52AM

Ann Coulter, I predict, will be to conservative punditry what Charles Johnson (a la Little Green Footballs fame) was to the conservative blogesphere. In Ann's case, I think it all comes down to age, fame, and money. She isn't getting any younger (I believe she is 51), and she pretty much tapped out the Conservative Blonde Flamethrower act. Her books are stale, her schtick on TV is dated. I think she is making a calculated break. But, unlike Charles Johnson it won't quite as dramatic. But who knows; fame and popularity are addictive. People will go to great lengths to keep in the spotlight.

scotchieguy| 2.6.12 @ 10:54AM

There is only one reason she is supporting Romney--her love affair with Chris Christie, whom she thinks will be Romney's VP.

Not Chicken Little| 2.6.12 @ 10:57AM

Ann has forgotten - or abandoned - the bedrock principles of conservatism and our Constitution: LIMITED government at ALL levels, and "That governs best which governs least".

PolishKnight| 2.6.12 @ 11:14AM

Did you think this through NCL? How can you have limited government at all levels when the federal government tells the states what they cannot legislate? While it sounds great at first (The SC will stop a state from prohibiting free speech for example), it carries an ugly danger that the SC then can shove new "rights" down the states' throats (hello Roe VS Wade!) Roe VS Wade is the bastard afterbirth of the civil rights movement and the civil war!

The concept of states' rights is that it allows people and businesses to vote with their feet. If you don't like high sales taxes in New York, move to New Hampshire. If you don't like legalized abortion in New York, move to Utah. If you WANT legalized abortion, do the opposite.

That's right: States' rights ultimately PROTECTS legalized abortion as much as Roe vs Wade MANDATED it. States' rights allows bad government ideas to die in the marketplace. (pardon the pun.)

Pete| 2.6.12 @ 11:51AM

State Rights also gave us the Jim Crow laws.

PolishKnight| 2.6.12 @ 1:16PM

And the so-called civil rights act gave us affirmative action.

At least with the Jim Crow laws, various individuals, groups, and businesses could vote with their wallets and refuse to do business with these states and communities that had them and bring public shame to bear. Under federalism, when a bad law is universal it's difficult to get overturned (such as Obamacare.)

It's no wonder that leftists love big government. It's like falling in love with a glacier. It just keeps moving forward no matter what you do about it.

HH| 2.6.12 @ 4:11PM

Pete: And where are those Jim Crow laws and practices today?

Sure, they were bad when introduced and had no place in an upright society (local, county, state).

Jim Crow practices would have died a natural death on the vine within the confines of the greater Republic. It did not take any Washington,D.C. faux sanctimony to undo them.

Or? Am I wrong?

Micha Elyi| 3.11.12 @ 5:06AM

You're wrong, I believe.

Recall that Jim Crow laws had been around over three generations with little sign of withering away until Washington, D.C. intervened.

You can think of today's bloated, Constitution-trampling big government as a penance this nation must suffer as a consequence of its racist sins of commission and omission. (For those who can truly say "I am not guilty of those sins," consider the pains of big government that you endure as acts of reparation for the sins of some of your fellow citizens.)

ltw| 2.6.12 @ 11:07AM

She's "erratic". I really think someone has called in the favor made long ago....if I ever need you I'll call and you owe me....kind of thing.

George S| 2.6.12 @ 11:08AM

First of all, the housing market collapse is anything but socialism. It is government pushing the free market where it didn't want to go and the market reacting by attempting to minimize its losses. The fact that housing prices jumped with this meddling made it all the more easier for an underground market in trading mortgages to flourish. Thus, housing prices rose (free market as demand increased). Finally, the free market (not a government edict or in spite of) determined to stop buying as the prices became too high. The free market started selling off, prices dropped, and hence a whole lot of overvalued houses and maxed out credit. Government push + market response = economic disaster.

Our health care is socialist, and was so long before RomneyCare. Government essentially owns the health care industry. It gives -- by law -- people free emergency care if they cannot afford it. It gives seniors Medicare. It gives the poor Medicaid. It forbids insurers to offer custom policies. It forbids doctors to open specialty hospitals or hospitals without emergency rooms or Medicare patients. It forbids drug makers from marketing anything that is not approved by the FDA. All of this causes the cost of medical care to rise. Couple that with government not reimbursing providers in full -- and in a timely manner -- for Medicare and the providers shift the cost to the insurance companies who, in turn, ever increase the premiums of our health insurance. Add to the mix government providing incentives to employer policies, and the result is overuse of the system as consumers do not incur the cost of their health care. This is a breeding ground for inefficiency -- the hallmark of socialism.

RomneyCare attempted to solve the problem. It figured that if the healthy paid into the system, costs would decrease (or at least cancel out the free riders). So it was an attempted solution within a non-free market created problem. But of course, there is NO solution to government intervention other than getting the government out.

If Romney wanted to do something radical, he would have taken on the federal government's overreach of power -- instead of taking on the individual's freedom. That would have been the conservative thing to do.

So Coulter is correct -- RomneyCare did not start the problem, nor did RomneyCare create socialist medicine. It is a state sponsored attempt to attack a problem. But where I differ with Coulter is enthusiasm for what Romney did. It would have been far better to attempt to exclude Massachusetts from Medicare than to double down with an individual mandate. It is like praising the burglar for attempting to clean up after himself.

Pete| 2.6.12 @ 11:49AM

Well, you are ignoring the Federal Reserve. For years it artificially kept interest rates low. Buy doing this it made it easier to buy houses at higher prices. As Greenspan said before Congress, if he had 30 years of housing data rather than 20 years, he would have forseen the housing bubble burst. That tells me he arrogantly ignored experts who had 30 years experience and believed his models and kept those interest rates low.
If you say that RomneyCare is not socialist, then you must be saying ObamaCare is not socialist. I can see Romney trying to run on that platform.

George S| 2.6.12 @ 12:43PM

All I was doing is refuting the author's point that Democrats socialized the housing market. In fact, only New York and Massachusetts have partially done that through rent control.

ObamaCare (and RomneyCare) is not socialism per se. Instead, they are a vehicle that forces the free market to abandon health care by making it economically unfeasible to stay in business, thus allowing the government to take complete control. Just like Great Britain, where all have "access" to health care without paying for it directly. We have a system that is very close because a) we do not pay directly for our health care and b) we are forced to pay for coverage we do not need. ObamaCare will be the nail in the coffin in the near future, but in the short term, it will provide benefits that people will readily see and then be afraid to give it up. Same as the Britons in 1960.

Pete| 2.6.12 @ 10:19PM

No, sorry, it prevents doctors from operating outside of state or federal control. ObamaCare prevents me from getting the care I want by paying directly for it rather than go through insurance or medicare. That is pure socialism.

megapotamus| 2.6.12 @ 11:08AM

I would prefer to link this in but it may be more brief than some of the c&p jobs above. Behold and tremble, America. This is Willardworld.

They say it is over. “They” is the Romnoids. But they have been saying it was over before it ever began. Now Newt, bedraggled and forlorn, seems to be in sullen agreement or at least he is not up to energetic resistance, which amounts to agreement. If we needed any more evidence that Newt has a half-life, a shelf-life and an inner-life inconsistent with the rigors of the Presidency, this is it. It seems Newt had begun to believe his own press. Santorum took a much harsher beating but unlike Newt, it was what he expected. Unshocked, he and his 13% will march on. If Newt were an ordinary party loyalist, he would back Mitt immediately hoping for Commerce Secretary to the detriment of the party and the nation. It seems he might be infantile enough though to consider his dignity over his advancement; always the calculation. If Gingrich can demonstrate a weak pulse and continue harrowing Romney it will be the finest service he could ever perform for the nation (and Rick Santorum), not that Newt should gain the office. Romney is the great threat at the moment and the Gingrich Blunderbuss is the only plausible weapon at hand but the powder, while voluminous, has grown damp in the Florida humidity. What if Mitt has succeeded, as of yesterday, to make his nomination a done deal?

Romney has spoken and conducted himself as if he had the one-and-only ticket to the nomination for three years. There is little reason to fault him for his public confidence. It is the habit of every candidate and should be. Of course he had the same confidence in 2008, a fact ill recalled. Those of us who have been dubious of the Governor from Massachusetts have done our best to explain why he is unelectable in a tactical sense and unsupportable for any would-be Constitutionalist but it seems that parochialism and name recognition have (nearly) carried the day. The gunslingers laugh, drink and swap resumes’, the bastards, but they have been right. No need to gaze into a deep, hypothetical future though to divine what this will mean. Mitt has been grand-poobah of the Republican party for years now, Reince Priebus notwithstanding. If you are a Right-leaning officeholder or voter, it’s Willard’s World and you are just living in it.

An eager, early citizen of Willardworld is one Chris Christie, sitting Governor of New Jersey and yes he sits AROUND the State, she being petite and he quite girthy but that is no mark against him. The true black mark he struck across his own record (which is credible for New Jersey but pretty crappy anywhere else) with his reactionary endorsement of Romney, taking up the colors of the regiment tasked to defend the indefensible. We speak of Romneycare, the zygote that twinned off metastatically to give us Obamacare. Christie’s task, which he took to like a meatball sub, was not to rebut reasoned objections to Romney as the father of Obamacare. Oh no! That would require air time and, um, some facts that we just don’t have right now, so instead the dubious Christie expends all his reserve flatulence in bilious, personalized denunciations of any who observe the simple fact that yes, procedurally they are one and the same! How can anyone with eyes to see and ears to hear deny this? But the blind and deaf are always a powerful voting bloc. If the talk shows are anything to go by the grammies and grampops are split between Mitt and Newt, each befuddled at the other but apparently as ignorant of their foe as they are indoctrinated for their own. What being can believe Romney’s adamant contention that he will immediately repeal Obamacare once in office? As the grannies say, “Of course he will, he says it every time he speaks. It is the first thing he says whenever he speaks.” Did everyone forget that it is the Legislature that would do such a thing? So Willard promises what he will have no power to do yet no one calls him on it. One might think the Obama Administration with their box-seats for this spectacle, might make the observation but the limits of the Presidency or indeed the limits on government of any sort are not an issue they would like on anyone’s mind. So Willard walks on unmolested, not from the regretable, forgettable wreckage of a lie/error caught out but rather amplifying and continuing his lie! Why? Because now it has been ratified, if not by the TEA Party proper at least by a majority Republican vote. It is now consensus that Romney is the first foe of Obamacare. From where did this vapid madness leak in? It all depends on what the definition of “repeal” is, don’t you see? As serviceable squish Senator from Minnesota, Norm Coleman (R) put it so well, there will be some tinkering about the edges but no, a Romney Administration will not repeal Obamacare. The proposition is absurd. And so it is. Any such action would be only pro-forma, if even that is actually attempted and there is little evidence that there is the desire, much less the will. Obamacare will become Romneycare although perhaps without the reproductive rules lately so offensive to Catholics (and one would presume, Mormons). The individual mandate? That is going nowhere except to be spray-painted.

Willardworld will have socialized medicine. Dandy! I hope the Romney supporters on Medicare/Medicaid/SSI enjoy that. Given their stated principles of responsibility and limited government they should at least not be surprised at the collapse. What will Willardworld NOT have that we might miss? One prominent excision is of Florida Republican Allen West. You have seen this man who first came to national prominence in uniform having interrogated an Iraqi prisoner by shooting a 9mm past his ear. He has practiced the same vigor in office (and let us stipulate that his actions were NOT illegal and were not found to be illegal) doing (political) drive-bys on the Congressional Black Caucus and Democrats, yes, but nearly as often (and with great accuracy) against the grandees, squishes and vested turncoats of the Republican Party. Could it be any surprise that such a man must go? Republicans rule in Florida generally and we have just had a census, as you recall. That means Redistricting. All House districts are re-drawn by the State Legislatures. Now, it is true that districts move with voters from State to State. New York loses seats and Arizona gains. So if the Florida Republicans are phasing out West’s district, and they are, it must be because they have lost seats or lost safe Republican seats due to a gigantic influx of Democrats, right? Oh, wrongo. Florida is gaining seats yet West is singled out for an attack by gerrymander. So be it, West has proven he is not easily dismayed or diswayed. Already he is making arrangements to run in another district with a retiring Republican incumbent. If anything it seems we have a more fiery West as a result, thankfully, but how can you blame this on Mitt Romney? Heck, he isn’t even from Florida! No, and neither is he from Virginia. Did the Virginia Republicans change their ballot rules spontaneously, excluding all candidates but Romney and Paul, in an instance of immaculate policy conception? No. No. Whether they took their orders from a Romney lieutenant or were acting to gain the great man’s eye and favor the result is the same. It is Mitt’s party and you can cry if you want to but if you vote for him anyway it won’t alter things in the slightest. Romney’s Republicans are not simply non-conservatives. They are actively and maliciously ANTI-conservative. If you do not know this, Romnoids, you don’t know much.

Is there an upside? Always, there is. The great virtue of Willardworld succeeding Obamaworld is continuity. Willard follows Obama like night follows day. Do you scoff? Perhaps you got youtubed into one of the President’s finest moments and a mere moment it proved to be. Obama did a very credible if brief bit of crooning in homage to the Rev Al Green and it was an unscripted, genuine touch of humanity. That it was conceived for partisan persuasion is not too relevant. It was not contrived. What was Romney’s response? Why in bloody hell should he HAVE a response? Yet he did, choosing perhaps the only song he knows (and that not well), Willard forced a crowd of supporters to endure his version of the national anthem. That was a conscious enough absurdity but Romney considers Obama his foil, not his adversary. Like Obama Mitt favors gun control but does not speak of it or openly pursue it. Like Obama, Mitt finds little in the Constitution but a barrier to his own just will. Like Obama, Mitt does not engage either foes or facts. Rather he dismisses them or has surrogates write them off the stage. Like Obama, Mitt has a media guard that serves to cement him and his policies in place. Certainly he enjoys less of that than Obama but it is the POLICIES not the personalities that we should concern ourselves with. Mitt is unquestioned on global warming because global warming is unquestionable. Mitt is babied by the media on his lengthy and adamant pro-choice record not for his sake but to safeguard abortion. Mitt is excused his self-dealing from the government trough, meager as it was relatively, not to save his skin but to prevent the general feeding from being disturbed. It is unclear if the foregoing really attaches to Mitt the Man as opposed to Romney Inc. It seems likely that Romney again apes Obama in his removal and indeed amazement at the realm of policy. Displaying no ideology or principle, Romney forces us to presume that it is mere ambition driving his march forward. Mitt aspires to be a belated but additional First in our Plague of Firsts exemplified by the First Black President (Bill Clinton). Willard Romney intends to be our First Mormon President, a laughable milestone that again is only a fitting of his feet into the footprints of Obama.

THAT is the world we are living in.

bill glass| 2.6.12 @ 12:19PM

please, more....

megapotamus| 2.6.12 @ 1:35PM

The matrix won't let me link you in. If you email me I will hook you up.

loulou| 2.6.12 @ 11:09AM

I suspect that since conservatives are no longer buying her books she's now trying to appeal to moderates. She's reaching across the aisle. Anything for a buck.

David| 2.6.12 @ 11:21AM

As to what happened to Ann, does anyone have any information about her relationship with that liberal of liberals Jewish movie actor (can't recall his name right now) who did end up supporting Bush for his efforts in Iraq and Afghanistan? Ann wrote a column about him after he passed away. I think they had something going on as she referred to staying at his place, and being with him during his last days. I think the guy rubbed off on her.

Does anyone have information about it?

albert constantine jr| 2.6.12 @ 4:02PM

I think you're referring to Ron Silver.

fckewe| 2.6.12 @ 4:13PM

Jerry Lewis?

Occam's Tool| 2.6.12 @ 6:07PM

Ron Silver was a Conservative, not a Liberal.

Occam's Tool| 2.6.12 @ 6:09PM

And then he voted for Obama, in the end, before he died, against McCain. WTF?

Russel| 2.6.12 @ 11:28AM

How many women would vote for Newt Gingrich ? . Seriously . We read today Zero said he's getting better and " deserves " a second term . All you here are fighting amongst yourselves hoping to win some ideological battle while the real enemy wins the war . We need every single vote possible to defeat the enemy . It doesn't matter if Daffy Duck is nominated if he can beat the marxist socialist . Coulter is saying the same thing . Even Thomas Sowell has noted we conservatives are now using machine guns in our circular firing squad . Vote for who can win and remember , Mr. Reagan evolved once he was in office , he was not perfect from day one .

Pete| 2.6.12 @ 11:44AM

Because we know the real enemy has put up both Obama and Romney.

Russel| 2.6.12 @ 12:18PM

If you don't get it yet , ZERO is our enemy . He said yest . the Constitution has just made his changes so difficult .

HH| 2.6.12 @ 4:17PM

Russel, think deeper. Sure, Obama is the enemy. 100% right. Pete's right -- so is Romney.

You're still going over the cliff. It might now be on a Friday afternoon versus going into the abyss on a Tuesday morning, but we're going over.

Banzai.

Star Tipper| 2.6.12 @ 11:45AM

I wonder if Ann is going to pull a David Brock and switch sides with a "tell all" book about how nasty conservatives are? She may have to as her current rants aren't helping her with her normal book audience.

Pete| 2.6.12 @ 11:57AM

I am thankful for one thing. The Romney campaign is exposing all these pseudo-conservatives. We are seeing where their real loyalties lie. We are finding who we can trust and who we can't. Coulter, Ingraham, Fox News among others fail. Rush, Levin, Malkin, Hannity pass. To the credit of American Spectator, they are on both sides, allowing us to discern the difference between the pseudo-s and real conservatives.

HH| 2.6.12 @ 4:23PM

Pete: Hannity passes? Are you sure? (Full disclosure: Hannity is probably 60% of the time a nice guy, but you need an IQ of 80 or lower to continually listen. He just grates on you over time. He lost me when he was playing footsy under the table with that blonde boob job Ms. California Prejan who he then threw under the bus. Still waiting on his California Nappa Valley fish-kills-off-farming follow-up story.

You are right. Romney now informs us who has immutable life principals. I wish Hannity did. Maybe I just have turned/tuned him off due to his sappy cast of wrecks (media lights hounds) that so-often say nothing on his "Great, Great, Great, Great, Great, Great.....American panel."

Pete| 2.7.12 @ 4:52PM

Hannity is willing to say the GOP is largely to blame. He is not willing to go after Republicans, but he is the one who just a couple of days ago asked Mc Cain why he didn't want to use Wright and that awful "church" as an argument why Obama should not be president. Why else is willing to do that?

Pete| 2.7.12 @ 4:52PM

Hannity is willing to say the GOP is largely to blame. He is not willing to go after Republicans, but he is the one who just a couple of days ago asked Mc Cain why he didn't want to use Wright and that awful "church" as an argument why Obama should not be president. Why else is willing to do that?

Paul from SA| 2.6.12 @ 5:07PM

Pete,

That's a very good point -- they are revealing themselves for the first time and it's not good. Many prominent writers whom I used to admire and respect have turned against me. It turns out they think I'm an idiot and they don't care about honesty, and the label of 'conervative' to them doesn't mean the same thing.

dale| 2.6.12 @ 12:00PM

Maybe what Ann Coulter has against Gingrich is that he's an unprincipled slug...

fmm| 2.6.12 @ 12:08PM

Wait until the MSM comes out with stories about inappropraite conduct between Romney and Coulter - can anyone say Cain?

Caped Crusader| 2.6.12 @ 12:11PM

Have not read all the multitude of previous posts, but in no one else has mentioned, there is a simple explanation; she has caught that most contagious disease confined primarily to the coastal ares where "PEGGY NOONAN DISEASE" is rampant.

sirbourbon| 2.6.12 @ 12:24PM

Ann Coulter has lost her "courage?" How about those that haven't the courage to support the Constitution, the country and God in heaven above?

Ann is a woman and is obviously struck by the looks of a man. She has an excuse, well, sort 'a , she had the cuts to defend Joe McCarthy, but she went way off the farm in backing Little Mitt the flip flopper; the custodian at New World Order headquarters that will do their bidding and play pretend he's a "conservative" if that is what it takes to give his wife a new residency. What more can Romney give his Mormon wife other than the chance to play the Jackie O of the 21 century?

I agree that if Ann really had a big pair she would back the good doctor. She does after all want to keep her place at the table and a Paul endorsement (?) ; well, she doesn't want to end up like Pat Buchanan without a spot on tv.

Al Adab| 2.6.12 @ 2:59PM

Libertarians, and Ann is one, carry a flaw which often puts them at odds with Conservatives: they fail to posses a moral compass being relativistic in that regard.

sirbourbon| 2.6.12 @ 6:58PM

The Founding Fathers were closer to "liberatarian" principles than you realize. The modern term "conservative" has nothing, or very little in common with the Founders' limited government both at either the domestic front or abroad in dealing with foreign governments and foreign outlaws.

Take George W. Bush and his creation of the 200,000 man Dept. of Homeland Security; his signing off on two huge increases to the Medicare government run program with the Prescription Drug bill and another huge increase to the Dept. of Education by signing the No Child Left Behind boondoggle. Those Bush programs have more in common with Karl Marx than to the Framers of the Constitution.

That is why the Insiders run people like George Wee wee Bush because they can get more socialist mileage out of a self-professed "conservative" who isn't really one in practice but a liberal one in the programs he adds to the American body politic.

In Obama's case red flags go up and people react as does the congress. But here again you have the no balls guys like John Boehner and other GOP leaders that talk- talk - talk about "no more debt ceiling increases" then they cave in when they think the time is right to do so.

In the meantime Ron Paul and a few true conservatives that vote against debt and inflation and bailouts are labelled every d****d time regarless of pressure to vote for them from their own party are labeled as uncooperative,the "Doctor No" and pigeon-holed the bad guys and associated with atheists, prostitutes and drug addicts and soft on terrorism pacifists.

In reality the softies on social issues and foreign policy are the pseudo-conservatives like Gingrich. The Newts and Mitts get their playbook handed to them by think tanks and all they have to do is memorize a few talking points. They really have no idea what the Constitution is all about. Gingrich to his credit knows the difference but he is too willing to play along and will never defend the Constitution due to his many character flaws going back to the Contract of America which was a publicity stunt that ended up growing government not reducing it.

Get your news on Newt here:http://search.incredimail.com/?q=Gingrich+the+establishment's+conservative&lang=english&source=012051022105235&cid=1&gc;=

David| 2.6.12 @ 12:34PM

The liberal actor's name who I think she had a relationship with is Ron Silver. I think he influenced her.

I hope she doesn't become a Huffington. I do like her on our side.

Resist We Much! | 2.6.12 @ 1:13PM

Ann (Coulter) Disaster

http://predicthistunpredictpas.....er_02.html

Perusha| 2.6.12 @ 1:23PM

Where’s Art Linkletter when you need him? People SURE ARE funny!

There is one undisputable truth about the passing of time---

Once the hemorrhoid paste is out of the tube, you can’t put it back in. Just so, RIGHT NOW, smart people always take into account EVERYTHING they can know about what has ALREADY taken place.

When giving Ann Coulter an anal exam, then, it seems to me that the butt sniffers should try their best to stick their nose between their own legs. By the way, anyone who, after all she has done to become deservedly rich and famous, NOW says she isn’t “smart”, can’t be very---SMART.

Perhaps THE most relevant notion from hoary-land is the following retort to someone who criticizes a person who changes their mind---“What do you do, when the facts change?”

I think Coulter, per Goldwater’s admonition, has GROWN UP.

She, and I believe a growing majority of Americans, even lots who claim to be leftists today, are getting the either-or nature of the coming election. Obama gets another four years to destroy the USA, or he doesn’t. Period. That’s almost the ONLY thing that matters, come November.

If he is chosen to continue his socialistic path, then America will be like Britain after WW II. And, as things continue to stagnate and/or worsen, at home and abroad, I just wonder what those people who wasted their time bemoaning the apparent betrayal of Coulter will think, especially if they didn’t vote for Romney.

On a happy note---anyone with a scintilla of knowledge about Mormons has to realize that the average member of that religion is about as conservative as you can get. Thus, people who actually believe Romney is Obama lite, or that he’s a closet liberal, are in for a big surprise, if Mitt is elected---IMHO.

Much of the criticism of Romney stems from his past record. My conviction, and I bet Coulter’s, as well, is that heretofore he’s had to hold back his default conservative beliefs, in order to get elected---which IS the sine qua non of a politician, after all.

As he and his brain trust do their best to become the GOP nominee, and then fight against the most radical president, EVER, I’d keep in mind that fact. Maybe Romney is the stealth conservative candidate, and he closely resembles all those horrible Supreme Court nominees, who fooled Republicans about their conservative credential, ending up like a Brennan or an Anthony Kennedy.

Psst---don’t tell anyone about THIS!

Wouldn’t it be an American-saving hoot, though, if the 2012 electorate doubled down on the 2010 election, and reacted, viscerally, to the horrible socialistic devil, Obama, by thrusting a freed conservative, Romney, into the White House, so he could openly proclaim his oneness with Paul Ryan, and all the other bright and wise STARS on the right?

Who knows, though? It could be that I’ll be as disappointed by a Romney as I was by the last Bush league president, when it comes to domestic, and especially economic, policies.

Whoever is chosen as president in November, though, he’ll be like the captain of the Titanic, in that whether he knows it or not, there’ll be NOTHING he can do to avoid “hitting the iceberg”---aka, dealing with the bursting of the bankrupt economy. Like ALL bubbles, there will be a bursting, and a tumultuous reckoning, involving massive write-downs and readjustments of portfolios.

Buy gold.

tendon| 2.6.12 @ 4:32PM

Perusha, you will be disappointed with Romney and Romney will be president as per vote on November 6th. And then you will be aghast and embarrassed in mid 2014 and your wallet, empty bank accounts, taxed into nothingness IRAs/401K, home underwater that you cannot sell with marauding unemployed under 35 (and over 55) males by the millions will imperil your life.

Perusha, you already know this about Romney and a Romney four years in office commencing in January 2013.

So what's your mental problem? You just love the pain of self-inflicted wounds?

Perusha| 2.6.12 @ 6:24PM

You actually ask, "So what's your mental problem?"

Are you crazy?

Mike| 2.6.12 @ 1:56PM

Basically, Coulter has gone Arianna Huffington. If she's gone this far (which I already find unbelievable), there's a good bet she'll go further. By 2016, she will be supporting the Democrat nominee.

How far can the Coulter Post be after that?

Purple Lips| 2.6.12 @ 2:52PM

See my comments above. Color me cynical, but I think Mz Coulter is making a calculated decision based on future earnings as a pundit and "media celebrity". She probably has earned as much as she can from the Bitter Clingers. And as other aging media celebrities, she figures she can earn more money and fame by going towards the Left.

By 2016, she will be a feature writer for the New Yorking. She probably will also publish a kiss-and-tell screed describing how bad conservatives are in bed.

Frank Sinclair | 2.6.12 @ 3:00PM

That's "Democratic" nominee. ;)

Jim Rolf| 2.6.12 @ 2:02PM

I am not always a fan of Ms. Coulter, although I do enjoy her acerbic wit and her steadiness to conservative principles. As a strong conservative (I classify myself as a Reagan Republican), I agree with her endorsement of Mitt Romney for president of the United States. He thinks like a conservative, talks like a conservative and, as important as his conservative principles, is the man who can both stench the flow of bad blood the Obama administration has brought to the US, and bring the country back to productivity as no other candidate has the ability to do.

Cpm| 2.6.12 @ 2:10PM

*Stanch*

Rob| 2.6.12 @ 2:03PM

Coulter and Romney are both liberals when it comes to gay rights. She doesn't focus on this as a reason for why she recommends that people vote for him since it would turn off conservatives.

Melvin| 2.6.12 @ 2:15PM

Coulter was probably told by the Progressive Republican Establishment Elders. "If you want to continue to play in our garden of Progressive Eden, you need to play by our rules or get out and be banished."
Coulter has to pay bills like the rest of us, and by all appearances she willingly complied with the demand from the Progressive Elders.

Purple Lips| 2.6.12 @ 2:54PM

One analyst has Coulters net worth to be about $8.5 million. Not bad for if you're a plumber or school teacher. But not nearly enough if you're a celebrity.

hrh| 2.6.12 @ 2:18PM

Coulter lost it as long ago as a year ago when she declared that if Chris Christie didn't run, we would lose the Presidency?

Chris Christie is as conservative as Mitt Romney.

The real concern is why didn't you write this column when Ann was shilling for that other Northeastern liberal Republican, Chris Christie?

Frank Sinclair | 2.6.12 @ 2:59PM

"Castrated?"

That's unintentional comedy at it's finest (in re Ann's Adam's apple).

politicaljules| 2.6.12 @ 3:19PM

Glenn Beck has done the same thing but in a slightly different Newt destroying way. I do not trust him or Coulter nowadays. I still trust Rush.

Clint| 2.6.12 @ 3:23PM

RINO-CINO Romney Wants To Index The Minimum Wage.

"Indexing the minimum wage would be an absolute job killer," Club for Growth President Chris Chocola said. "Mitt Romney's proposal is anti-growth and would harm our economy. It's disappointing to hear that the leading candidate for the Republican nomination believes that the government can set the price of labor better than the free market."

Mike Rogers | 2.6.12 @ 3:25PM

The Acid Queen no more. Sigh!
Perhaps the erstwhile conservative pinup is actually much older than she tries to appear - recent columns border on dementia, and are a far cry from the excellent books she penned a few years ago.
Skewering Liberals and denouncing Communists - good clean fun; Supporting W. Milquetoast Romney - amlost unethical.
What's with all these so-called conservative ladies endorsing Mittens? Is he just so unbelieveably handsome, or is money changing hands?
I have never seen the world's second oldest profession so closely resemble the first as during this campaign season!

Angus| 2.6.12 @ 3:33PM

Her behavior on Fox also reminded me of Martin Sheen and some bi-polar disorder people I have dealt with in real life.

HH| 2.6.12 @ 4:41PM

Can we get a medical professional to weigh in here?

I have always thought that the thinness of an Anne C. is too scary. Not quite, but tending anorexic.

Fox seldom features many women over the age of 35. Youth, legs, long hair, unwrinkled skin RULE across our media landscape, it is no different in the hedonistic TV world of alleged conservatism like Fox.

Can the medical expert tell us: Do some of these weight drugs -- over time -- impact the brain and then a person's big personality swings? Is this in the realm of possibilities with Anne?

Someone should tell her and all the other women (and men): Eat. Eat what you want. Don't dye your hair. Forget botox. No tummy tucks. Now, don't go all to pot and expect to get a lot of TV time, but just be yourself.

It is the IDEAS and THINKING that we want. Not buns of steel from endless hours of lab rat-like stair-steppers.

So, chime in, seasoned Medical Professionals. Is it weight loss drugs that have manipulated her mind? (serious question)

Occam's Tool| 2.6.12 @ 6:11PM

Long term use of stimulants in abusive doses can affect mood and personality over time. That's why I do not use stimulants for weight loss with my patients.

I have no idea about Ann without examining her and knowing her medical history.

Dipesto| 2.7.12 @ 12:45AM

Fox on weekends does have Liz Trotta on for a few minutes. I have a vague memory that she used to be on network radio news, so she is past 35, but needs to been seen more on Fox than she is.

Mike| 2.6.12 @ 4:07PM

Ann Coulter is the new David Brock.

Paul from SA| 2.6.12 @ 5:02PM

That is an apt description.

Or Bill Maher or Keith Olbermann or Janeane Garafolo or Rachel Maddow... and any others who tell lies to persuade.

Ann Coulter has new boobs and that should explain it all.

Ann has a boyfriend for the first time in her life. She's in love and delusional.

Ann has resorted not to just backing Romney, but outright lying against Rick Perry and Gingrich, and lying to support Romney.

Ann said I'm dumb. Hmmm. That's what all liberals say.

She will never regain her credibility with me. I can't stand her.

skip| 2.6.12 @ 7:43PM

You just jostled a faint recollection: didn't she date Olbermann?

Bob Grant | 2.6.12 @ 8:38PM

...and David Brock is the old David Brooks, or is it David Frum?

Damn I'm sick of these turncoat conservative Davids.

jstwndring| 2.6.12 @ 5:07PM

Who cares what happened to Ann? If you are a true conservative, you won't be fooled into following her just because she had seemed to be true to party ideals in the past. She clearly is not now, so, ignore her. Anyone who attempts to justify the nomination of such an obvious socialist to lead the party has clearly lost their way. Too bad--for her. She's lost all credibility to those of us who believe in limited government. I no longer read her articles--something I used to look forward to.

dave jones| 2.6.12 @ 7:39PM

Clearly ann has the right idea...to win the presidency we must win the Independents and

Mitt scares them less than Newt...she intelligently makes 2 other crucial arguements...

There are 2 issues here.....CRUCIAL ONES.......the results of which are lethal to

AMERICA and they cannot be undone.....the question becomes which candidate has the

best stance on these 2 issues

1. OBAMACARE...if it is allowed to go forth and people get used to some of the ‘treats’ it

contains...then it cannot and will not be overturned AND AMERICA WILL FOREVER BE

CONDEMEND TO GO DOWN THE SOCIALIST PATH......people simply will not let go of

their treats...therefore we must back the man most likely to deep six obamacare....on

Mitts website he pledges on his first day in office to write immediate waivers to each of

the 50 states thereby rendering it a non starter then he pledges to work for it’s repeal.

2. Immigration ....if amnesty in any form goes forth its just a matter of time before

America becomes CALIFORNIA...again it is something that cannot be undone AND WILL

FOREVER CHANCE AMERICA... if allowed to go forth....Newt has some crazy mixed up

red card guest worker scheme that will fade into general amnesty soon after it’s

clumsyness is initiated and AMERICAA WILL BECOME CALIFORNIA..again it will not be

able to be undone...

3. Ann points out that Mitt does show wome willingness to be infulenced and listen to

other conservative thought and with our control of both houses it will be not a difficult

thing to bring him around to conplete conservative compliance...

4. What part of the above do you ding bats who diss Ann...NOT understand?

Paul from SA| 2.6.12 @ 8:16PM

I don't understand the disrespect, betrayal, the dishonesty, the arrogance, the condescension and accusations of me being dumb and inferior, simply because I disagree about Romney. She flatout lied about Rick Perry on TV, over and over.

For that she attacks us like liberals do, like Bill Maher, Janeane Garafolo and the rest of the Hollywood celebrities.

Ann said there are two issues in this campaign: ObamaCare and immigration. She's simply wrong. There are many more issues. Who does she think she is to declare what is important to us?

Your comments in support of Ann Coulter reveal you are the same:

-I didn't take a poll, but I can tell there's more than just two issues,
-cheap name-calling (ding bats),
-lying about Newt Gingrich,
-attacking people who disagree.

Why do you and Ann attack people who disagree?

Why the cheap shots?

Why the liberal tactics?

Parker| 2.7.12 @ 12:14AM

Oh come on Dave, Romney campaign staffer Norm Coleman is on record stating, "Romney will not overturn Obamacare." Stop the wishful/delusional thinking. And, if you think Obamacare is the 'road to socialism' you haven't been paying attention to US politics since the 1920's. We've been socialist since Woodrow Wilson was slobbering on his pj's in the Lincoln Bedroom. Good grief man. The US is a politically fascist country. The US is and has been economically socialist for nearly 100 years. Why else do you suppose we are on the verge of collapse? Spending? Spending on what? SOCIAL programs and government run bureaucracies. That's what. Obamacare will simply be the final link in the chain of slavery which is the fascist way. Total control through regulation.
Good grief... "go down the road to socialism." ha! Wake up man you're miles (decades) down that road. You were probably born on socialism highway at the 500 mile marker.

Delmar Jackson| 2.8.12 @ 8:18AM

dave , you are one of the only commenters to remark on how Coulter said reducing immigration is as important as ending obamacare. I am amazed at how stupid a party the republicans really are. Immigration will demographically doom them. yet the GOP leadership seems to only care about cutting taxes for the rich, ending social programs like social security for the middle class and having endless wars in the name of isreal. The immigration issue is ignored by O reilly and Ruch and trhe other pundits, only Coulter and Buchanan seem to get how important immigration really is.

denroy3| 3.7.12 @ 8:34AM

That I don't believe a word the snake says, not one word. And when I hear you classless Romneyites calling people dumb for not supporting Mr Romneycare, pro-abortion, anti-second amendment, it doesn't change my mind.

somnolence| 2.6.12 @ 5:35PM

Buy gold, huh? There is a reason it is called FOOL'S GOLD!! There will be relatively few percentage wise who will have enough gold to sustain them IF it is accepted at Kroger, Costco, or The Dollar General Store. I'm all for self-sufficiency with gardening, hunting, fishing, and trapping. But regardless of who is elected in November, a mountain larger than Everest ever thought to be will have to be ascended.

Nelson H.| 2.6.12 @ 5:41PM

Give the gal her due. She was really super in the Clinton scandal years. Alas, that was 14 years ago (gulp).

I can't explain her recent conversion other than she can't stand the alternatives and must, by nature, take an edgy position.

former Republican| 2.6.12 @ 6:05PM

A shrill harpy who has evidently contracted some exotic dementia from her lefty friend Maher.

BackToBasics| 2.6.12 @ 6:14PM

Anne Coulter looks tired. Maybe she's tired of the battle.

Abu Nudnik| 2.6.12 @ 7:09PM

Possibly. But the federal constitution is limiting, the states are free to be as they are. What is unconscionable on the national stage is an exercise in governmental experiment, to paraphrase Clarence Thomas in Raich v Gonzales. It could swing either way.

As for Coulter, she has to make a buck. She has a choir to sing to and who will sing behind her... jealous?

A Conservative Teacher | 2.6.12 @ 7:16PM

I've seen Romney speak several times and examined his record and I support him- and if you're a regular reader of my blog you know I've been tea partying since before there were tea partiers. Stop with columns like this.

PCP Smoker| 2.6.12 @ 7:57PM

You are a stupid fuck. If you really "examined his record", and that assumes you were NOT high and were wearing your glasses, you would realize there is nothing conservative in him. If you are following the establishment's opinion this guy can win, then you are not a Tea Partier, you are coward follower afraid of a fight. Either way, you are PUSSY.

fckewe| 2.6.12 @ 10:47PM

And you PCP Smokey, are the ultimate boor and a pathetic asshole.

PCP Smoker| 2.8.12 @ 9:43PM

Who the fuck are you? Who flushed the toilet so you could opine? "Fckewe", yeah, you sound like a guy fucking ewes.

Paul from SA| 2.6.12 @ 8:24PM

I've seen Romney speak several times and examined his record and I don't support him.

I can respect your decision on Romney, but what gives you the right to call for censorship? Why do you get to decide for all? Why not just choose for yourself and not participate?

Are you afraid of the truth being reported and discussed?

former Republican| 2.6.12 @ 9:31PM

fraud

albert constantine jr.| 2.6.12 @ 7:50PM

I have been a fan of Ann Coulter’s for years, most frequently because many of her opinions overlap my own, and her sharp quick witted dissection of the left is amusing and occasionally enlightening. I am not going to discard her merely because her current assessment of the GOP field differs in some order from mine.

I’ve read her columns on why she supports Romney for the same reasons I review what others have to post on this site on the various GOP contenders. Some times I am enlightened, some times I am educated, some times I am amused. On occasion, I am persuaded to adjust an opinion; usually I just seek some extra validation of a position I developed independently.

I am not sure that disagreement on a single issue (even one as important as who to support as GOP nominee) is so substantial that holding a differing opinion entitles me or any of us to excommunicate any apostate. If we want to be a movement, and not just a bunch of highly principled loners, we need to be prepared to make peace with those with whom we mostly agree to accomplish important goals, such as defeating Obama.

Bob Grant | 2.6.12 @ 8:17PM

You make too much sense.

I happen to agree with Coulter on this one. Like many conservatives, her first concern this election cycle is not to lose to obama. She understands what's at stake for our country and has simply balanced conservatism vs electability. And, really, the only option is Romney. That is, unless Santorum catches fire which is highly unlikely.

He's got the money, organization, leadership qualities, and a secret weapon which is his wife, who's very impressive.

There's not much rocket science here. It's what used to be called common sense.

W| 2.6.12 @ 10:57PM

I have read Coulter's books and her weekly column. I usually agree with her. She is conservative, for a reduced government, and lower taxes. She was accurate that Romney was more conservative than McCain in 08. You can make a good case for either Romney or Newt but Romney is a better all around candidate. Just because Coulter is not a Newt supporter does not mean she is not a conservative or lost her mind like this author, who is trying to get publicity by criticizing Coulter, says.

tendon| 2.7.12 @ 2:56AM

Why are you discounting her TV and radio rants for Christie (ad nauseum) and now Romney. Look for the YouTube clips. She's like losing it. It's bizarre. Thinkers and reasoners can be passionate and present their case/arguments with gusto, but, fellas, Anne sounded drugged on weird meds.

We are supposed to be about sober thinkers, reasoners, doers.

Something is afoot here. I am not glad for it; I am sad for it.

PCP Smoker| 2.6.12 @ 7:55PM

Maybe the guy giving her the salami is a liberal Republican. You know how neurotic women in love become. You are right about one thing, the name Ann Coulter is dead to me. Oh, and screw Romney too.

Bob Grant | 2.6.12 @ 8:25PM

Fine,

Sit this election out and guarantee a second obama term. That'll show Romney.

You'll feel good about yourself when you wake up in '15 and find monopoly money is worth more than the dollar, violence in the streets caused by chronic high unemployment, and the dark cloud of obamacare is firmly rooted in all of our lives.

But go ahead and sit this one out pal. Your "principles" will be worth a hot cup of jack squat!!

PCP Smoker| 2.6.12 @ 9:04PM

There won't be violence on the streets, welfare has a tendency to quell those passions. We'll be more like Britain, with Mittens playing the role of Edward Heath. Managing the decline. As far as Obamacare, if you think old flip flopper is going to get rid of Obamacare, then talk to Romney's advisor Norm Coleman. He already stated he won't get rid of it. As far as principles, go ahead and vote for your Dewey/Wilke/McCain/Ford/Dole/Romney candidate. Just because GOP Establishment tells YOU Romney is going to win, doesn't mean he will. No one votes for liberal republicans, ask the 5 losers mentioned above.
You carry the name of a great American and PRINCIPLED conservatives, start acting like it. I'm sure Bob Grant did not vote for John Lindsey. Despite his electability.

PCP Smoker| 2.6.12 @ 9:09PM

As far as the dollar being worthless, under a GOP House with a number of tea party congressmen, the government is spending 1.5 TRILLIONS more than it takes in. I think the point of no return was somewhere around 2008. Flip Flopper won't be doing much about that.

PCP Smoker| 2.6.12 @ 9:09PM

As far as the dollar being worthless, under a GOP House with a number of tea party congressmen, the government is spending 1.5 TRILLIONS more than it takes in. I think the point of no return was somewhere around 2008. Flip Flopper won't be doing much about that.

sam sinatra| 2.6.12 @ 8:13PM

Excellent points. I've been wondering the exact same thing as I've read coulter's odd and absurd exhortations or romney and his record. She actually defends the act of flip-flopping itself because she says romney did it only to get elected in a liberal state. Outrageous. Maybe she's sold enough books. Maybe this is just another result of the type of fear-dementia brought about by the horrible years under obama--people are so desperate to beat this guy they'll support any piece of crap and use any stupid twisted no-logic to do it--even if it blinds you to the fact that you're doing all this to replace obama with another obama. Or maybe--as I suspect--she really never beileved the stuff she was writing and saying at all. It was all just schtick--like limbaugh and savage and all the rest. Maybe coulter is just now showing her true self as the single, aging, affluent, anglo-american female that she is whose traits include a total hatred for any female on the planet, an obsession with homosexual males (but not lesbians, strangely enough), "famous people" and alchohol.

David| 2.6.12 @ 8:57PM

Well Bob Grant, how does he catch fire if the primary voters have your attitude. I believe many people feel the way I (and maybe you) do, but won't vote for him because he is not in the lead. Shit conservatives, vote with your heart and your head. If they are with Santorum then be true to yourselves and vote for him and watch him go. Send him five bucks.

POST American| 2.6.12 @ 10:11PM

-------------------BOTTOM LINE------------------------

'Daring' 'outspoken' Coulter REFUSES
to talk the issues of the moment ---of
the century

-----The 4 decades underway
Globalist-RED China handover
and TREASON OP. and,
intertwined with this
--------the full-spectrum, covert,
but soon to be aggressively open
----EUGENICS OP.

And, through ALLLL the 'in your face'
plunder by the USURERS, has she had
anything to say about the 'FED'?

She must be on a foundation payroll we
don't know about.

OR --perhaps, she's been 'CALM--PRO--mized'
like the rest of the once critical media.

Remember kiddies ---the PCs have been
watching ---YOU all along. . .

bluecollarbytes| 2.6.12 @ 10:25PM

Coulter takes it to far. It's one thing to 'accept the inevitable' , something else to shill/shrill for Romney.

lillith70| 2.6.12 @ 11:29PM

Hillarycare precede Mass Health care and obamacare. Why am I the only one who seems to remember this far back or that it had been the dream of the left for years?

Conservative, even extreme hard right conservative ideologues might start knocking obama and the leeft instead of Romney.

I laugh to myself to think how the right will have to demand that the libs stop the Mormon bashing.

Mormons do not have protection under hate crime laws because the US has judged us as main streamed. Indeed, America, are we?

Romney was a closet conservative in Mass. He ran to the left to get in and served his people as he campaigned to do but lost favor and political capital when he chose life and vetoed stem cell bill.

People criticize his father for talking bad about Goldwater but George Romney was running against the hard right, nearly John Bircher, Goldwater.

Goldwater himself moderated have married a dem after his first wife's death. He said something I have often pondered. He said each party must get in power from time to time for balance.

Too mush right wing power leads to the need for redistribution of wealth or you get revolutions. A moderate GOP president is not bad in my book. We sure do not need more Reaganesque bloat at the top as in the CEO mega salaries since him.

However Romney just might pull in those same dem crossover types and middle and independents as Reagan did.

Kevin| 2.6.12 @ 11:38PM

Coulter is into her 50's now. Her routine of shocking people has gone stale, and lets face it, her marketability relied a lot on her looks (oh shut up, you know it was true.) At 50, those looks really aren't there anymore.

So she needs to find a way to stay relevant. Her transformation really isn't that surprising.

stage9| 2.6.12 @ 11:47PM

She's dating, that's what happened to her. It's killed her edge and her sanity. So much so that she now believes liberals are Conservatives.

Parker| 2.6.12 @ 11:54PM

I don't find Ann's support for Romney a surprise. She was pulling for him in 2008, so she's being consistent. I don't agree with her but she is being consistent. Now, granted, she was pulling for Christie to run in the early phase of the 2012 campaign but Christie is not conservative either. All that being said, perhaps, perhaps, Ann is tiring of writing books and is ready to set her sights on a cushy government job with a lifetime pension. Who knows. She may even be stumping for a return to National Review and needs to toe the line, it doesn't really matter. I never believed Ann was a true stalwart conservative anyway. She is just a decent writer who found a niche in the market of publishing and capitalized on it. She's a northeastern conservative, which is not the same as a midwestern conservative. Not even close. Unfortunately, Ann, like O'Reilly and others was handed a microphone on a big stage with an audience begging for their itching ears to be scratched and she said just enough of the right things to make most people believe she was always worth listening to. She wasn't, and now you are figuring out why I am not surprised.

HH| 2.7.12 @ 3:04AM

A very good summation, Parker. Thanks. Please hang around here. We need some sound reasoners making posts.

It is not just that I agree with you. It is the good, condensed wording.

Please help keep these American Spectator writers in line. The blog commenters too.

Pastor emeritus Nathan Bickel | 2.7.12 @ 12:12AM

How can Several Screws Loose Coulter ever recapture her Conservative credentials after falling off her rocker? Did she recently and secretly convert to Mormonism? Or, did Romney promise her a position as our nation's new Fat Czar (replacing Michelle), should he gain the GOP nomination and defeat Obama?

1389AD | 2.7.12 @ 12:14AM

Ann Coulter has been bought; it's as simple as that.

http://1389blog.com/2012/01/24.....n-coulter/

Dipesto| 2.7.12 @ 12:35AM

This may be trollness, but reading all these comments has moved me to put a horrible curse on Gannett and usatoday for that colored election map that started people to start calling Republicans Reds. Being old enough to have been a highschool HUACophile I know what a Red was 50 years ago. You may call the GOP crimson or chartreuse or vermillion, but not Red. Khrushchev was Red.

albert constantine jr.| 2.7.12 @ 10:06AM

The only one callind Republicans "Reds" is fckewe/diogenes/Orr, Gasm et al.

albert constantine jr.| 2.7.12 @ 10:07AM

calling

davod| 2.7.12 @ 2:07AM

I used to admire Coulter for her blunt no nonsense approach. Her actions since she jumped on the Christie then Romney wagon have become boorish.

Bulgaricus| 2.7.12 @ 4:55AM

Methinks that Ann has had a brain transplant w/ Maxine Waters. Let's hope that it is just temporary. Bottom line, if RINO Romney gets the nod, which he will, Obama wins. This means that most of the the Tea Party people, me included, will just flip the GOP the bird. No more using me. I would vote for Satan before I'd ever vote for ANY democrat, but I'd never vote for that plastic liberal fake conservative flip-flopping poof guy. He is all smoke & mirrors. BTW, to the guy who wrote that making abortions illegal is not in the Constitution, I challenge you to show me chapter & verse where the Constitution says abortion IS legal! Any SC fool can twist the Constitution to say anything these days. Which is total BS. It, unfortunately, has come down to the Constitution being as just a worthless "scrap of paper" as Hitler once said about a treaty. Either is says something or it does not! We need to end this idiocy about looking at the emanations & vapors from some clause to say that the moon is made of green cheese & is obviously in the Constitution. Any wise white guy w/ an IQ over room temp. can easily see what is written there & not. Fire these fools that want to use EU law & stuff they make out of whole cloth. Really sick of it. The average democrat values our Constitution about as much as a gum wrapper. Also, they probably think the gum wrapper is better too!

william sanders| 2.7.12 @ 10:17AM

HOORAY FOR ANN COULTER.SHE BACKS THE COMMON SENSE AND TURN AROUND GUY JUST LIKE.ME.THE FACTS ARE THAT GOVERNOR VETOED MANY SECTIONS OF THE SO CALLED ROMNEYCARE LEGISLATION BUT THE DEMOCRATIC MAJORITY IN THE MASSACHUSETTS SENATE AND CONGRESS OVERRODE THE GOVERNOIRS VETOES.THIS ELECTION IS ABOUT THE SOUL OF AMERICA.CHARACTER SPEAKS VOLUMES ABOUT PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATES.I JUST RECEIVED AN EMAIL FROM A DEVOTED REPUBLICAN VOTER THAT CONTAINS A TRUE STORY ABOUT WHAT MITT DID FOR ONE OF HIS PARTNERS AT BAIN THAT SPEAKS VOLUMES ABOUT THE CHARACTER OF MITT ROMNEY.GIVE ME YOUR EMAIL ADDRESS AND I WILL EMAIL THIS VERY TOUCHING STORY TO YOU.

TEA PARTY| 2.8.12 @ 1:43PM

All caps means no one reads your post

AVCurmudgeon| 2.7.12 @ 10:33AM

I've been of the opinion for a while now, ever since Ann came out gung-ho for Christie, that she sees herself as some sort of kingmaker inside the GOP. Her choices are uniformly moderate and centrist Republicans, which puts her squarely in the old Rockefeller Republican camp. She told us a year ago that the GOP would lose it if nominated Romney, now Romney is the best candidate. And of course along the way she put the hex on anyone who could in fact stand up and be counted as a conservative (though I give her some props for defending Cain against the sexual slanders).

Ann is a pure polemicist at her best when castigating liberals and liberalism. She is at her worst when she takes that talent and tries to turn it into a contribution to the leadership debate. The best that can be said about her recent jeremiad for Romney is that it has undermined her credibility as a conservative spokeswoman.

marshcope| 2.7.12 @ 12:07PM

A jeremiad is a bitter rant Against someone; Jeremiah blasting the Assyrians, King Zedekiah, women baking cakes for the queen of Heaven et al. Anne extolling Mit would be a Pindaric; ala Pindar glorifying various ancient Greek jocks.

marshcope| 2.7.12 @ 12:07PM

A jeremiad is a bitter rant Against someone; Jeremiah blasting the Assyrians, King Zedekiah, women baking cakes for the queen of Heaven et al. Anne extolling Mit would be a Pindaric; ala Pindar glorifying various ancient Greek jocks.

marshcope| 2.7.12 @ 12:08PM

A jeremiad is a bitter rant Against someone; Jeremiah blasting the Assyrians, King Zedekiah, women baking cakes for the queen of Heaven et al. Anne extolling Mit would be a Pindaric; ala Pindar glorifying various ancient Greek jocks.

marshcope| 2.7.12 @ 12:10PM

Excuse the three listings of the same comment; the puter is not behaving this morning.

Marc Jeric| 2.7.12 @ 1:08PM

Well - it's true that Romney is just another RINO with no education in history, philosophy, literature - ready to work with our eco-nazis, sozis, commies (i.e. Democrats) ready to agree to deadly compromises. But, on the other hand, we have no Reagan available now; so what should Ann do?

NEWT 2012!| 2.7.12 @ 5:48PM

Shut her yap for starters.

Mrs. Vito| 2.7.12 @ 2:41PM

David, you're right on the money with this piece. Coulter's been 'Roved' hard and put up wet!

marshcope| 2.7.12 @ 4:29PM

Anne seems a little like Chris Matthews, who once seemed to have some knowledge of political history(at least back to the 1950s) that most of the pundits on seenen and focks did not or do not have much of. But when he met O he went into a potusmance that made him a nitwit beyond any reason to listen to him anymore, like Wordsworth and Southy ended up being.

conservativemama| 2.7.12 @ 5:41PM

She's unwatchable. I think she will feel the repercussions when she releases her next book. I agree, I used to watch her, loved listening to her, but she's gone establishment and I have no use for the GOP establishment.

monty| 2.8.12 @ 1:02AM

You better have another close look at the establishment mammy. All the baggers like you have shot themselves.
First in the foot and then in their emply heads.

NEWT 2012!| 2.7.12 @ 5:46PM

Coulter's menopausal and she's gone nuts.

monty| 2.8.12 @ 12:58AM

that's not fair to Anndy. She's always been nuts. It's just that the republicans have nobody left to love and each of them hates each other. Delightful entertainment for us commie, pinko, librul, nigra lovin, Obama lovin, america, constitution destroyers!

Osamas Pajamas| 2.7.12 @ 6:45PM

I've always loved brash, fearless women with automatic weapons --- so falling in love with Ann Coulter was easy, like a runaway piano headed downstairs, and instantaneous --- and despite the fact that I'm an infidel and she's a believer. Imagine my dismay upon learning not so much that she feels constrained to support Romney --- but that she appears to find some justification for a healthcare insurance mandate. I'm going to shoot anyone who tries to force it on me, so I rather hope that Romney makes it the first stroke of his pen --- first to bring OhBummerCare to a screeching halt --- and secondly, to erase this bullshirt hijacking of the American healthcare industry --- every jot and tittle of it.

robbie| 2.7.12 @ 8:11PM

Well, John Bolton has come out for Mitt Romney. If he is a good enough candidate for John Bolton and Ann Coulter, then he is good enough for me.

NEWT 2012!| 2.7.12 @ 10:55PM

I don't care who supports Romney, but I do care about his record--and Romney's record stinks!

monty| 2.8.12 @ 12:08AM

She's a vicious cow who never did have a coherent message that wasn't filled with hate. Now she is in danger of being sidelined with the tea baggers and is trying to save her useless skin.

ON the positive side, buy her books! You can get them at 5 or 6 for a dollar.

Osamas Pajamas| 2.8.12 @ 3:05AM

Monty, Monty, Monty! You're such a waste of space, sucking-up oxygen and polluting the gene pool. In the best of all possible worlds, you'll collect so many rounds that you'll die of lead poisoning before you bleed to death.

monty| 2.8.12 @ 12:14AM

Man oh man, I love it when the conservative haters start eating their own young. The rabid dogs are coming out now! The baggers are soon to be history and the best remaining is Romney who will bring his own brand of universal healthcare. Congratulations america, you are actually accidentally stumbling down the right path!

Osamas Pajamas| 2.8.12 @ 3:07AM

ROUNDS COOKING OFF

The Democrats have this "enemies list" --- denominated in epithets aimed at the people whose wallets they wish to hijack and take up residence inside. You can be a “Racist!” and you can be a “Terrorist!” and you can be a “Dictator” and you can be a “Hostage-taker!” and you can “Wear a tinfoil hat!” and you can be a “Homophobe!” and you can be a “Teabagger!” --- a homosexual man taking his partner’s scrotum into his mouth. You can be “Selfish!” and you can be a “Wacko!” and you can be a “Hick!” and you can be a “Rube!” and you can be “Uneducated” and you can be an “Extremist!” You can be a “Right-wing-nut!” and you can be “Mentally Ill” and you can be “Deranged!” and you can be a “Flake!” and you can be a “Warmonger!” and you can be "Unenlightened!" and you can be a “FatCat!” and you can be a “Nazi!” and you can be a “Fascist!” --- although no one more closely approaches the precise description of “Nazi!” or “Fascist!” than the usual Democrat propagandist --- either official, or self-appointed.

Lies, after all, are the heart and soul and the sword and shield of the Democrat party.

So all you have to do to occupy multiple epithets on the Democrats’ enemies list is to insist that they take their hands off yourself, off your wallet, off your property, off your kids, off your diet, off your healthcare, off your household appliances, off your car, off your bank account, off your weapons of self-defense, off your liberty, and off your freedom of speech. Insist on all these good things - and that qualifies you to be spat upon by nasty, mean-spirited scum --- by The Friends of All Mankind --- by a gang of lying, thieving, dope-smoking, pill-popping, coke-snorting, sticky-fingered, bloodsxcking, tax-eating, gun-stealing, predatory humanitarian hoodlums, thugs and gangsters --- by the Democrat party, in other words. No political party in the history of America more profoundly deserves absolute and outright destruction.

POST American| 2.8.12 @ 12:25AM

---------------------FINAL WORD-----------------------

"Of all the NEO-Cons out there on the air
only Michael Savage is --somewhat-- a
genuine maverick. O'Reilly is now a sold
out, 'on board' compromised hack. Likewise
the rest of them at FOX."
-ALEX JONES
InfoWars
(NOW #2 in the world)

monty| 2.8.12 @ 12:53AM

I read redstate with glee and chuckles each day because it's a sure thing they will trash a rightie every day. Soon redstate will be nothing but a small gaggle of haters with no direction to go. Nasty baggers!

Osamas Pajamas| 2.8.12 @ 3:09AM

THE AGE OF OHBUMMER

OhBummer is a b00b and a fool for attacking the American Tea Partiers. Heck, he thought that he had all of us hoodwinked, hornswoggled, and bamboozled. He’s annoyed that the Tea Partiers are not grateful to him for hijacking the American healthcare system --- the greatest act of vandalism perpetrated upon the American people since a gang of jihadi frootloops and loonytoons hijacked some planes and crashed them into the World Trade Center towers --- and the Pentagon, and made a failed attempt to crash into the White House --- and instead drilled a hole in a Pennsylvania farm thanks to some very courageous American passengers.

And --- now widely seen for what he is --- the president presents a problem for the Democrat-captured media. They pump out his propaganda for him --- and, like the opinion monitors in Ayn Rand’s novel, “Atlas Shrugged” --- they are dodging brickbats and rotten vegetables.

He’s pompous, pampered, and pretentious --- a pseudo-intellectual fop. He’s a glorified, smooth-lyin’ dandy, and slicker than Sick Willie Clinton. He’s a dictator-on-the-make, a bloodsxcking, predatory humanitarian thug, and a low-down skunk.

He’s a fraud and a swindler. He lies when he inhales and he lies when he exhales; his oxygen is the falsification of reality. He lies, placidly and laconically, as if deception were a soporific drug.

He’s a friend of the poor and the downtrodden --- indeed, you can hear the milk of human kindness sloshing around inside of him when he walks.

He declares himself the post-racial leader --- “Let me be clear!” he intones --- and he hides behind his race, daring his critics to put their reputation for fairness at risk.

He pauses to ponder the portent of his propaganda --- and it is fakery; he smiles and his mendacity comes shining through. Shake hands with Barak Hushpuppy OhBummer --- “The Mistake of ‘08” --- the illegal alien squatter in the White House until his “papers” have been lab-tested for age and chemicals, etc --- the community organizer of the OhBummer Wrecking Crew, the Fleabagger-in-Chief, the King of The Republic of Lies --- and America’s first and last Arab president. Now count your fingers.

http://www.youtube.com/watch_p.....SWSzY#t=28

Russ Riekeman| 2.8.12 @ 11:54AM

You are clearly verbally talented and mentally challenged. Maybe you should be a politician, or better yet a carny barker. I've never read more creative drivel in my life.

RAWni| 2.8.12 @ 3:07AM

Dear Sir, You took the words right out of my mouth! She's lost her marbles. No not those marbles. Her intellectual marbles

Rocky| 2.8.12 @ 7:39AM

I'm glad I'm not the ony one who sees that Coulter has lost either her nerve or her mind.

Delmar Jackson| 2.8.12 @ 8:09AM

What a crock. Coulter is one of the ONLY pundits to draw a line in the sand and say clearly, that the two most important issues were repealing Obamacare, which all republicans agree, and reducing the tidal wave of immigration which is dooming demographically any future for republicans or conservatives.
On the second issue, we hear only crickets from the cowardly pundits.
Coulter defined the issue and picked the best candidate to accomplish both issues.
santorum would be as good as Romney, but he is far too eager to carry all the heavy lifting for isreal and send our boys into Iran. Let Isreal and its Nukes and submarines be a deterrent to its enemies, not our young men and women we need here at home.
Coulter and Buchanan are all that is left of the republicans not made into neocon zombies that only care about cutting taxes for the rich and ending social programs like social security for the middle class and fighting endlesswars for isreal.

redmanrt| 2.8.12 @ 8:09AM

"horse manure"

Please, equine feces.

Anyway, she's still funny.

tv22| 2.8.12 @ 8:15AM

Ms. Coulter sees what apparently is not clear to many Republicans - that an extreme right winger has no chance to win an election. Not to mention that other than Romney, none of these men has any executive experience whatsoever and frankly are pretty embarrassing representatives of whoever their supporters may be.

People need to be strategic in their thinking. You have to nudge policy to the right, can't lurch hard to the right. What exactly are people afraid of with Romney, that he'll actually cut spending on things that can be done for less rather than mindlessly cutting things to score political points?

Danram| 2.8.12 @ 8:33AM

Gee David, maybe Ann wants to actually ... you know ... WIN???

bflat879| 2.8.12 @ 9:38AM

Ann Coulter must be going through menopause, that's the only explanation I have. One more point, however, if the Republican Party believes they can get rid of Obamacare, without having a viable alternative ready to take it's place, they're sorely mistaken. Everyone knows we need to make some changes to our healthcare system and not just make a few tweaks.

Romney will only try to tweak Obamacare, Newt will change it completely.

PolishKnight| 2.8.12 @ 5:00PM

Or simply pass Ryancare. The left claimed that the Republicans were shooting down Obamacare with no alternative which is a lie. This is why they hate evil Foxnews for reporting it.

Donna| 2.8.12 @ 9:50AM

I agree. It's like she has lost control of all her rational thought processes. I hope she wakes up soon. I used to respect her but now when she speaks, I have to remember she has lost her mind.

monty| 2.8.12 @ 11:23AM

Awww, come on now and be fair. You baggers can't start hating 'all' of your conservative icons or you'll end up with nobody you like anymore. Ann still has potential and will surely say something completely ignorant like the pig she is. That'll make it better for the baggers.

monty| 2.8.12 @ 11:24AM

Awww, come on now and be fair. You baggers can't start hating 'all' of your conservative icons or you'll end up with nobody you like anymore. Ann still has potential and will surely say something completely ignorant like the pig she is. That'll make it better for the baggers.

fckewe| 2.8.12 @ 7:59PM

monty did you bring the K-Y jelly this time? I need to sodomize you again.

Mark| 2.8.12 @ 9:55AM

Not surebwhatbhappened to her, but I will never go see her speak or read her books ever again

PaulInPgh| 2.8.12 @ 10:02AM

The problem with Coulter is the same problem with Sean Hannity and several others who've refused to support anyone thus far and keep making the case that "any GOP candidate is better than Obama" when Romeny's record as Governor makes it crystal clear that's not the case. They call themselves conservatives, and they sure sound it when the people they are supporting are conservatives and doing conservative things but the truth is they're really Republicans despite their claims to the contrary and are more than willing to set aside conservative principles any time the Dole, HW Bush, McCain wing of the party asks them to.

I've always believed that if the GOP establishment pushed Mao as their party nominee Coulter would be out there making the case he was really a conservative and doing their bidding. Her conduct wrt Romney only serves to substantiate my beliefs and she's got zero credibility on the subject. I'm just turning of and disconnecting from any media that gives her a platform to spread this nonsense from here on out.

It should be abundantly clear now that the GOP base in the states Santorum and Gingrich are winning and Paul is doing well are never going to support a Massachusetts leftist like Romney and the party leadership better start dealing with that reality and put the cheerleaders like Coulter on the sidelines for the time being because nothing they say is going to change that and they're going to end up damaging their reputations beyond repair by continuing to defend this plastic, big government clown.

Worried for the country| 2.8.12 @ 11:09AM

Your analysis has flaws. I can't tell if you deceitful or simply ignorant.

First, Coulter supported Hillary over McCain last cycle so she is not a GOP lemming as you suggest.

Romney has a conservative record as governor of MA. He leveraged a fiscal crisis against an 85% dem legislature to shrink state government. If he was a leftist as you contend, why would he veto 800 bills sent up by the liberal legislature?

Romney is cut, cap and balance. That is not big government.

Jay Cadillac| 2.8.12 @ 10:30AM

I fear Ann has the Ariana disease. Remember when Huffington was conservative? Then she realized that liberals have the best cocktail parties so she quickly became a liberal. Look for Coulter to be campaigning for Obama if Romney's not nominated.

Bluehawk| 2.8.12 @ 11:25AM

Let me first say, this discussion is, for its vast majority, the most articulate and well-reasoned discussion on these issues I've ever seen anywhere on an internet blog.
That said, the article on which it's based and most of the commentary misses the point. The point is that Obama needs to be defeated.
Whether the conservative right wants to believe it or not, moderates will not accept Newt Gingrich!! - continuing a destructive debate about the reasons for that are not relevant to the discussion of who can beat Obama in an election.
Prior to his entry in the race, I for one, wanted to vote for Gingrich. Now, however, after seeing him in the campaign for only 3 months and learning more about him, I will not vote for him. He is mean, untruthful, spiteful, narcissistic, and gives every appearance of being willing to throw the republican party under the bus in what is now, a completely ill-advised effort to achieve the personal glory of becoming President. Further, Gingrich has shown time and time again, that he is no better than Romney as far as his support of conservative ideas and consistency of position. He will change positions, and go out of his way to destruct conservative policies when it suits his unstable personal ego to do so - e.g., Paul Ryan's budget as "right wing social engineering", affirmatively joining Nancy Pelosi in any political commentary, or perhaps the worst example, trying to destroy Romney's candidacy for his own benefit by a factually distorted anti-capitalist argument regarding Romney's pre-political work at Bain Capital. At least for the most part, Romney shows repentence for his liberal positions. Gingrich ignores and lies about his.
So, esoteric discussions concerning the Constitution aside, if conservatives want to win the White House, continuing to pound on the person who is virtually certain to win the Republican nominee is lemming-like political suicide.
At some point, conservatives/republicans need to take Mitt Romney at his word . . . He will act to repeal Obamacare, he will issue executive orders to undo many of the things Obama has done - and more importantly - as between him and Newt Gingrich, only Romney can get elected, if only because the nation's moderates and independents will accept him.
It is already past time for conservatives to let go the self-indulgent dream that candidates like Ron Paul and Gingrich present serious alternatives to Obama in a national election and gather themselves behind a valid effort to oust Obama.
Get your head around it conservatives - a Romney Presidency is 14 times more preferable than 4 more years of Obama, and whether you agree with the middle or not, Gingrich can not get elected, and continuing to allow him to rampage through the Repubican nominating process is completely self-destructive to the party.

James Dawson | 2.8.12 @ 11:38AM

David,
Right on. Although I started to become suspicious of her years ago when she supported Hillary over Mccain. I never liked Mccain for the way he sucks up to the liberal media and his forever backstabbing of G.W , due to his petty jealousies. But Hillary? Is she serious? That was taking sisterhood past the extreme. I think we all see her for the shrill phony and consumate liar she has become.
What disturbs me even more, is the protection she (and Drudge) have been getting from Hannity and Levin, and even to some degree from Rush. If we are going to call ourselves honest conservatives, lets get everything out into the open. Sean has become so commited to his "guest interview format", that he has become lazy and cowardly. Mark, as well, is so obsessed with peddling his new book, that he has very unlevinlike backed away from calling out either Coulter or Drudge, possibly through fear of retaliation. He certainly has become a far cry from the fearless, hell raising, Mark that we all grew to love. He was never afraid to tell it like it was. He rode to popularity through his honesty and his absolute courage. I used to tune in just to see who he was going to call up and confront right there, live, on the telephone, from John Stewart to, well, literally just about anyone. Although I am willing to give him some credit for at least coming out and endorsing a conservative, (Santorum), which at least is a step above the sellout that Hannity has become. Frankly, I have turned them both off.

Russ Riekeman| 2.8.12 @ 11:49AM

As a shill for the for-profit health care industry it must be difficult to dance around the obvious focus of your critique of Coulter. You know if you have studied other countries that have universal care, that they pay far less than us and are healthier. Thus you are forced to fall back on the idea that the Feds are intruding on individual liberty and private transactions. And maybe they are. But those of you in the for-profit health care industry don't want to seek solutions to keep costs down and cover everyone. You want to make money. So it really must hurt you to attack someone like Coulter for assuming a more moderate stance. The truth of her conversion is that she wants to win. Romney is the right's best shot and she knows it. C'est la vie in the fast lane!

Lisa| 2.8.12 @ 11:57AM

Great points in your article, Mr. Catron. Who is now the flip-flopper?

Mtn Biker| 2.8.12 @ 1:46PM

Yes, what possible worth does she have any more, she's not an extemist

TEA PARTY| 2.8.12 @ 1:47PM

Anyone is entitled to be dead wrong occasionally. Clearly, Coulter loves the eastern GOP elites and disdains the peasant Tea Party uprising. She's a royalist. I enjoy her attacks on the left, but if the GOP keeps doing what she suggests, the party will die. The sooner, the better.

Ed| 2.8.12 @ 1:47PM

You have an interesting take - "the media" wants to "run against Romney" - the Media doesn't run, the Republican nominee's opponent in November will presumably be Barak Obama. I can assure you that Mr. Obama would _much_ rather run against Newt Gingrich or Rick Santorum or Ron Paul than against the socially-centrist, independent-appealing Romney.

Clement Williams| 2.8.12 @ 1:52PM

Poor Ann Coulter lost her head when she she could not get her hero, the Governor of New Jersey, Chris Christie to runand her obsession with him and his endorsement of Romney has caused her very uncharacteristic beviour. This is the only explanation for her recent stand on behalf of Romney.

Gobombo| 2.8.12 @ 2:27PM

Welcome to the Ann Coulter lobotomy hour.

diana doran| 2.8.12 @ 2:52PM

Thank goodness I'm not the only one flubbergasted at Ms. Coulter's "change". Ann, Ann! Who abducted you on the way to C-Pac and how do we reverse what ever they did to you!

Brian| 2.8.12 @ 2:53PM

"[V]irtually all conservatives… have come to realize that the mandate is the gateway drug to control the health care system."

Conservatives realize that the mandate is the gateway drug for the government to control anything it wishes--not just the health care system.

Evil Lib| 2.8.12 @ 2:57PM

Perhaps Coulter simply can't keep up with trying to find evidence to support complete and utter make-believe statements like this:

"the Democrats did socialize housing, and it triggered the most dangerous financial crisis since the Great Depression."

I think a better question would be:

What the hell happened to the republican party?

Vauban| 2.8.12 @ 2:58PM

I was somewhat skeptical of a research article published recently in the Journal of Psychological Science entitled: “Bright Minds and Dark Attitudes: Lower Cognitive Ability Predicts Greater Prejudice Through Right-Wing Ideology and Low Intergroup Contact,” by Gordon Hodson and Michael A. Busseri. In this study of approximately 16,000 people the authors and their peers found a clear correlation between cognitive intelligence, and prejudice and authoritarianism. Reading the comments to this article has convinced me to put aside my skepticism and accept their conclusions: right wing extremists are intellectually challenged. Case in point I live in the red state of Utah which ranks 47th in K-12 education.

R. Freedom| 2.8.12 @ 3:07PM

The safe candidate is the one backed by the conservative cheerleaders (Limbaugh, Levin, & Hannity). Only a few (like Coulter) have the nerve not to line-up march in the big 3’s parade. It’s like not being a member of the club, or being on the outside of the popular clique in high school.

The big 3’s litmus test is not who will be the best President, but rather who is the most conservative candidate. They're setting up a GroupThink framework whereby if they don't put on their cheerleader skirts and take up their pom poms to cheer for a candidate, that candidate likely won't win. And if someone other than the “chosen one” wins the primary, there isn’t much enthusiasm for that candidate in the general election. Oh yeah, people will hold their noses & vote. But the big 3 crowd won’t get out and do the necessary groundwork to help get that candidate elected. Like McCain, it likely dooms that candidate (and us) to failure. But it bumps up the success of the big 3. They to get do celebratory dances like NFL players in the end zone after they score and say, “See, I told you so.”

Why, the big 3 has even gotten us to attack our own now.

And if they succeed, they'll become the "Republican Establishment." Imagine that. A political party controlled by radio hosts.

So, how about a little applause for the independent minded Coulter, instead of ridicule?

Robert| 2.8.12 @ 3:19PM

Very true! Ann Coulter has been pointing out Romney's experience and attributes for 4 years. She has not shifted her opinion to fit the media-produced conflict in the Republican party, but stuck to her guns and beliefs.

Duncan| 2.8.12 @ 3:17PM

It is weird how many seemingly intelligent conservative heads are pushing Romeo despite all the above and especially now that lately he has pretty well proven not to be sharpest knife in the drawer in his brief moments of forthrightness.

Who Cares| 2.8.12 @ 3:39PM

I've just slogged through most of this and what an experience it's been. Most message boards are denizens for the most angry and intellectually challenged among us, but certainly that is not the case for a lot of the posters here. As for the current situation, frankly it is already too late. Liberalism has won the day politically, socially, is close to hegemony economically, and most of all it has won the war demographically. The Republican Party has been on the ropes since the Great Depression. Didn't one of the posters here call them Whigs since the time of Dewey? The Republicans have been fractured since then, when time and again Robert Taft could not win the fight over the entrenched eastern power bloc that ran the party. That continues to run it to this day. Right into the ground. Then again, few could even agree what true conservatism really is? Do you want the government to be your hammer, just like the liberals do? Only instead of abortion on demand, do you want to ban it? Instead of unlimited social programs do you want a large military spanning a global empire? Anyway, I've digressed. The moment has come and gone and it is now too late. The only ways out of this mess are either to do what the Spanish Nationalists did from 1936-39, or for the southern and western red states to secede. I don't see either happening. As for dear Ann, maybe she is just returning to the political state that is normal for most women in this country.

Artie| 2.8.12 @ 5:54PM

Thank God you weren't around at the beginning of this country. You probably would have been one of the first to abandon George Washington at Valley Forge. It is so much easier to stand around and say "What's the use?" than to actually do something to help. It is not that hard to figure out what is the right thing to do in life. You don't deserve this country.

Pat Leath| 2.8.12 @ 3:43PM

Ann Coulter has lost all objectivity in her written articles and in her comments on television. She blatantly presents little or no legitimate well-researched news. She is an embarrassment to all journalists and to women journalists in particular. Her techniques include exaggeration of the character of Presidential candidates. Yelling on the O'Reilly Factor about Gingrich is scandal-mongering, and sensationalism. "She just knows that Gingrich is no good"? I beg your pardon, she is a prime example of pure yellow journalism.

Tom| 2.8.12 @ 3:59PM

Ann seems to have been brain washed like Patty Hearst or maybe she has been kidnapped and her long lost liberal twin sister has taken her place.

MamaBearJune| 2.8.12 @ 5:01PM

THANK YOU!!! I've been just stunned by her sudden support of liberalism! I'm convinced it's an invasion of the body snatchers and there's something else in that body! Looks like Ann, but sure as hell doesn't sound like her!

Brian| 2.8.12 @ 5:14PM

If I didn't know better, I'd swear the Romney campaign has uncovered a n Ann Counter sex tape or something... honestly, she is sending in articles that look like they were ghost written by the Rom-bots.

JonInVa| 2.8.12 @ 5:21PM

She switched because her idol, the blustering Chris (Crispy Cream) Christie went for Romney. And she's so hung up on this RINO that she'll support the other RINO too. Pertty soon Ann will be the "darling of the Left"

angelitaa| 2.8.12 @ 5:36PM

So, your opinions are more credible than Ann's?All political pundits are biased - they say and writ negative stuff about candidates they dislike in order to away voters minds, this then allows pundits like you to prop up the worst of the worst candidate. Think Obama!

Ferrari5858| 2.8.12 @ 7:39PM

Admiring Coulter and thinking she is smart was probably your first mistake. That being said who better than to denounce Obamacare than Romney as Obama hanging on to this failure just makes him look like a ideologue and defending it after the firestorm of this week isn't gaining him any points, in fact he may have jumped the shark on this one. All Romney has to say is tried it, didn't like it and he is ahead on the issue. Looks like a centrist who learned a lesson unlike Obama. Which brings me to my second point the great GOP ghost Reagan was hardly born a conservative, quite the opposite and we all know the end to that story. People do evolve but apparently if you fail the new conservative purity test there is no room for you in the GOP. Who then is left standing, Santorum, never met an earmark he didn't like, doesn't stand a chance in hell and Gingrich who thought he could run a campaign on hot air.

Are you kidding?| 2.8.12 @ 8:03PM

The Democrats socialized housing? Do you even understand what socialism is? Obamacare, Romneycare: these are not socialized medicine. Government subsidies to the private sector do not equal socialism.

lugnut| 2.8.12 @ 8:21PM

I encourage everyone to Google..."Fall of the Republic"

Brent Sherman | 2.8.12 @ 8:52PM

Four things Governor Jerry Brown could do to help California’s Hospitals, Doctors, Patients, and Economy http://bit.ly/s5z0Iy

BDavid| 2.8.12 @ 8:54PM

Though I'm not sure Coulter believes in it, I think it's called evolution. Last time the GOP impaled itself it was for the full-throated, blood and guts conservative, Barry Goldwater. This time, they're looking to Santorum for ring wing ballast; a less electable candidate than Romney. Time to start dipping into a much wider political gene pool.

marshcope| 2.8.12 @ 8:57PM

Ann as Patty Hearst? Oh My! Then there has to be a Steve Weed in the shadows (Patty's dumb boyfriend who didn't know what was going on during her disappearance), and one of the SLA women was once "a Goldwater supporter" (as was our current Sec of State).

Hwebb54| 2.8.12 @ 9:00PM

She has gone off her rocker. I dont know how she could support Romney with Newt and Santorum on the ballot. Both of these men have fought the fight for Conservatives over the years. (Not always perfect but a hell of a lot better than Romney's past) I can honestly say that Ann Coulter is a RINO and should be banned from CPAC for eternity.

Don| 2.8.12 @ 9:40PM

Anne Coulter needs publicity like the rest of us need air. No principal is too precious nor reason to sacred to be trampled by the crass need to generate sales. And she only makes money if her face is on TV, her voice is on the radio and her vacuous books are flying off the shelves because of the curious way she became a liberal. It's about the money. It's only about the money. And it has always been about the money. Believe nothing she says because she certainly doesn't believe it herself. She was lying all along and lying now. And we are all fools for not seeing it sooner.

Darwin| 2.8.12 @ 11:11PM

Great article, but Ann jumped the shark when she fell in love with Chris Christie. Romney is just an extension of that delusional behavior.

PHIL in UTAH| 2.9.12 @ 1:27AM

Her palms got greased, plain and simple. Is it so unfathomable that silver spoon Mitt would buy support for conservative credo? Thats his life solution to all problems.

LMK| 2.9.12 @ 2:22AM

Ann Coulter is truly one of the most despicable persons I have ever seen. She believes that lies have no meaning and that truth has no place in our public discourse. She would whore herself out to anyone, including Romney, if she thought it meant more attention for herself.

Guess what?? President Obama is going to win, and win big. You know it, and it is obvious that the Republican Party is starting to see this. That is why the Republicans are becoming so desperate. You guys know you are going to lose the presidential election, and the House is in jeopardy and the Senate may stay in the hands of the Democrats.

Pottergreen| 2.9.12 @ 3:31AM

He wasn't governor of Texas or Alaska, Mass. is a blue state with Scott Brown independents, the kind that can be taken from Obama. Conservatives will not vote for Obama (the Drudge poll notwithstanding) so the swing voter is the independent, which Romney can appeal to, if his election in Mass. is any evidence of.

Artie| 2.9.12 @ 7:07AM

I think Ann is backing Romney because she thinks he is the only one that can beat Obama and she is in a panic to get Obama out of there. She also doesn't really respect her own readers. She is wrong about Romney, but I don't think so wrong about Newt (being electable, that is)

bobmac| 2.9.12 @ 10:22AM

Coulter has always been about Coulter and selling her books.Nothing wrong with making money.I believe to be a regular on the Bill Maher left wing loonfest is a major problem.Maher calls conservative women such as Palin and Bachmann the C word on his show as she sits there is also problematic.Coulter describing Maher as a friend who she regularly goes out to dinner with is a major problem.Where is her moral compass and why should anyone care what this woman thinks or which candidate she backs?Somehow I don't think Ann will be selling enough books to suit her lifestyle.Oh well,I guess Maher can pick up the dinner check as he uses her all the way to the bank.

Wayne J| 2.9.12 @ 1:41PM

For six years I have religiously read Ann's weekly columns and books and found her wit and no-nonsense commentary both informative and entertaining. That ended about two weeks ago, when I unsubscribed to her weekly column after reading her third or fourth consecutive fit of the vapors over Romney.

Tex Expatriate| 2.9.12 @ 1:43PM

Thanks to Catron for this article. Way back when Ann began talking about supporting Hillary over McCain I began losing interest. I finally stopped reading her altogether, so that the first I knew about "Three Cheers for Romneycare" came when Mark Levin schooled her in a detailed analysis on his radio program.

One must wonder what has happened to a formerly insightful conservative thinker.

Beneteau| 2.9.12 @ 1:53PM

I was also shocked that she turned on Newt. The Left most be holding her dog hostage?

Ed Matayka| 2.9.12 @ 2:02PM

Isn't it odd that an ex-govenor who believes in abortion ,except when he doesn't,believes in Obamacare ,except when he doesn't,is now revered by a conservative ,except when she isn't.
So what is Ann's game? Hmmmmmm, I know
Ann believes Mitt to be a moderate to conservative while running for office because he
says he is.
You see Mitts only a liberal when he wins the office he was seeking.
I am no longer a fan Ann because you are not holding Mitt accountable for his actions ,instead
you are trusting his campaign words as the measure of this man.
I believe thats how Obama won the Presidency.

FURTIVE| 2.9.12 @ 2:49PM

There can only be one reason:
She is his paramour.

case closed.

Lagio Canda| 2.9.12 @ 3:02PM

This pretty much tells you everything you need to know about the far right: that Ann Coulter's ravings pass for smarts and that her rabidity passes for courage.

Noni| 2.9.12 @ 3:26PM

Whatever has happened, whether it is bribery, blackmail, or brain tumor. She is not to be trusted or read.

Rowan91016| 2.9.12 @ 3:46PM

I'm glad someone else is as appalled as I was by Ann Coulter's support of the universal mandate. I got physically sick when I read her column supporting it. She has long been a favorite of mine, but if her view of the mandate is indicative of the majority of Republicans -- God help us all!

Andrew| 2.9.12 @ 6:02PM

Coulter has become a pod person.

Senorita Bonita| 2.9.12 @ 6:09PM

Gop hotline: 1~800~WHINE

MARY HAMILTON| 2.9.12 @ 6:32PM

THANK YOU, MR CATRON! I couldn't have said it better.
For want of any better explanation of Ann becoming a BIG TIME RINO HERSELF- maybe she was beamed up by aliens and brainwashed.
hey,hey,hey- VERY SAD. I ALWAYS LIKED HER IN THE PAST -NO SO MUCH NOW.

Long Ben| 2.9.12 @ 6:56PM

I wonder if Ann has'nt taken up with a northeastern Rino boyfriend . Maybe it's just Romneys' manly beauty , or the masterful way he steps on the little people .

Bill Campbell| 2.9.12 @ 7:15PM

Castrate? While I usually do not usually agree with Ms. Coulter she has a right to both her opinions and endorsements. Since when did external plumbing have anything to do with leadership? In case you didn't notice most of our political problems can be associated with male politicians. Your article's title is provocative and gets attention, but poorly chosen.

Al| 2.9.12 @ 7:16PM

Ms Coulter is a realist. She realizes that the objective is to defeat Obama. It is not to nominate a far right candidate who has NO chance to be elected. The country is perhaps right of center but not overly so. Remember Barry Goldwater. Remember if you do not learn from historic mistakes you are doomed to repeat them. GET OVER IT.

Dan Johnson| 2.13.12 @ 3:52PM

As the Chairman of the Young Republicans during the Reagan election I can tell you the Right's hero Reagan was considered a moderate. We are a center right county and to nominate a extremest like Santorum would guarantee defeat. As a lifelong Republican I feel our party is being hijacked by the socially conservative right and I am so tired of hearing from Sarah Palin

Al| 2.9.12 @ 7:27PM

I notice that a lot of the commenters here have a lot in common with many of the NY Times commenters. Far right or far left a nut is a nut. A hater is a hater. Stupid is as stupid does.

Makeo| 2.9.12 @ 9:08PM

She was never anyone I liked to hear from. Maybe the castration will make her fat and lazy

Bob| 2.9.12 @ 9:28PM

If by smart as hell you mean sociopathic, then yes, you have a point

sad really| 2.9.12 @ 9:38PM

she was known as a tour whore back in the days of the dead tours

smarterthanann| 2.9.12 @ 9:57PM

Ann Coulter is a virulent, viral, sociopathic political commentator.
The problem with America now is that extremists like Ann Coulter are given air time in all the propagandist channels. She is glorifed, when in fact she should be "IN JAIL", for the "REST OF HER LIFE", for fomenting extremist views.....
GROW UP AMERICA.. GROW UP CONSERVATIVES.. ... STOP FORMENTING EXTREMISM, by glorifying her.

Conservatives should be COURAGEOUS to THROW HER OUT....

smarterthanann| 2.9.12 @ 9:57PM

Ann Coulter is a virulent, viral, sociopathic political commentator.
The problem with America now is that extremists like Ann Coulter are given air time in all the propagandist channels. She is glorifed, when in fact she should be "IN JAIL", for the "REST OF HER LIFE", for fomenting extremist views.....
GROW UP AMERICA.. GROW UP CONSERVATIVES.. ... STOP FORMENTING EXTREMISM, by glorifying her.

Conservatives should be COURAGEOUS to THROW HER OUT....

smarterthanann| 2.9.12 @ 9:58PM

Ann Coulter is a virulent, viral, sociopathic political commentator.
The problem with America now is that extremists like Ann Coulter are given air time in all the propagandist channels. She is glorifed, when in fact she should be "IN JAIL", for the "REST OF HER LIFE", for fomenting extremist views.....
GROW UP AMERICA.. GROW UP CONSERVATIVES.. ... STOP FORMENTING EXTREMISM, by glorifying her.
Conservatives should be COURAGEOUS to THROW HER OUT....

smarterthanann| 2.9.12 @ 9:58PM

Ann Coulter is a virulent, viral, sociopathic political commentator.
The problem with America now is that extremists like Ann Coulter are given air time in all the propagandist channels. She is glorifed, when in fact she should be "IN JAIL", for the "REST OF HER LIFE", for fomenting extremist views.....
GROW UP AMERICA.. GROW UP CONSERVATIVES.. ... STOP FORMENTING EXTREMISM, by glorifying her.
Conservatives should be COURAGEOUS to THROW HER OUT....

smarterthanann| 2.9.12 @ 9:58PM

Ann Coulter is a virulent, viral, sociopathic political commentator.
The problem with America now is that extremists like Ann Coulter are given air time in all the propagandist channels. She is glorifed, when in fact she should be "IN JAIL", for the "REST OF HER LIFE", for fomenting extremist views.....
GROW UP AMERICA.. GROW UP CONSERVATIVES.. ... STOP FORMENTING EXTREMISM, by glorifying her.
Conservatives should be COURAGEOUS to THROW HER OUT....

smarterthanann| 2.9.12 @ 9:59PM

Ann Coulter is a virulent, viral, sociopathic political commentator.
The problem with America now is that extremists like Ann Coulter are given air time in all the propagandist channels. She is glorifed, when in fact she should be "IN JAIL", for the "REST OF HER LIFE", for fomenting extremist views.....
GROW UP AMERICA.. GROW UP CONSERVATIVES.. ... STOP FORMENTING EXTREMISM, by glorifying her.
Conservatives should be COURAGEOUS to THROW HER OUT....

smarterthanann| 2.9.12 @ 10:00PM

Ann Coulter is a virulent, viral, sociopathic political commentator.
The problem with America now is that extremists like Ann Coulter are given air time in all the propagandist channels. She is glorifed, when in fact she should be "IN JAIL", for the "REST OF HER LIFE", for fomenting extremist views.....
GROW UP AMERICA.. GROW UP CONSERVATIVES.. ... STOP FORMENTING EXTREMISM, by glorifying her.
Conservatives should be COURAGEOUS to THROW HER OUT....

smarterthanann| 2.9.12 @ 10:00PM

Ann Coulter is a virulent, viral, sociopathic political commentator.
The problem with America now is that extremists like Ann Coulter are given air time in all the propagandist channels. She is glorifed, when in fact she should be "IN JAIL", for the "REST OF HER LIFE", for fomenting extremist views.....
GROW UP AMERICA.. GROW UP CONSERVATIVES.. ... STOP FORMENTING EXTREMISM, by glorifying her.
Conservatives should be COURAGEOUS to THROW HER OUT....

Sarah| 2.9.12 @ 10:19PM

I find it offensive to claim she must be male. I hate how some liberals are afraid to admit that there are differences between men and women, which is an obvious scientific and indisputable FACT! And it doesn't take a man to know that. It just takes a functioning brain. Some of us women have those too, you know!

Sarah| 2.9.12 @ 10:19PM

I find it offensive to claim she must be male. I hate how some liberals are afraid to admit that there are differences between men and women, which is an obvious scientific and indisputable FACT! And it doesn't take a man to know that. It just takes a functioning brain. Some of us women have those too, you know!

Sarah| 2.9.12 @ 10:20PM

I find it offensive to claim she must be male. I hate how some liberals are afraid to admit that there are differences between men and women, which is an obvious scientific and indisputable FACT! And it doesn't take a man to know that. It just takes a functioning brain. Some of us women have those too, you know!

Mike H| 2.9.12 @ 10:22PM

Speaking for Ann if I may, if what you say is correct, that she's supporting a candidate unworthy of her values, then it occurs to me that her usual focus has been diverted to a negative goal. Rather than supporting a conservative who stands for all she believes in, she's more concerned with getting Obama out at all costs.

ONTIME| 2.10.12 @ 1:21AM

I wish the MSM and the press would have vetted the Mysery Man the way the Republican candidates have been ripped, it is ashamed that they snitched on each other but the POTUS job must mean a lot more to them than any of us realize...

fashinrashin| 2.10.12 @ 1:47AM

Waah and then double waaaah. The reason there is all this hand wringing about Romney is he is an incredibly flawed candidate in ANY election year ! The way he covets the POTUS job is so obvious you can smell the stink on him he wants it so bad. The decision not to run by Daniels, Christie, Jeb Bush and Barbour has created this vacuum in the nomination process. Stop whining and deal with what you have, ROMNEY !

jbath| 2.10.12 @ 1:47AM

The reactionary right have sunk to a new low to say the least. What a disgusting title to your article; misogynistic, crude and surprising that it would be posted at all. ugh.

Jim| 2.10.12 @ 2:00AM

Castrated? ... I KNEW she was a man!

molly cruz | 2.10.12 @ 2:03AM

Who cares what Ann Coulter thinks? She gives me the creeps, and as for castration, I think she's got 'em, though it never occurred to me that that's what it is; she's just passing for a female, not that it matters. Most Right Wingers are bent out of shape in some profound way; flocking together the way they do, they always seem to be seeking comfort from their fellow losers; but the fact remains, without their bucks, they're losers, one and all.

Barry| 2.10.12 @ 2:20AM

Based on the logic in the article, laws requiring motorists to purchase insurance for their cars are also unconstitutional. Smart move. (But please don't think I'm defending Coulter.)

ian armstrong| 2.10.12 @ 5:46AM

Uhh? The Aff0rdable housing Act passed under a Republican house, co sponsored by Democrats. How then are Democrats solely responsible for your deluded impression of socialization. The only socializing was for the banks in receiving a free government pass for underwriting poor mortgages.

Southwest| 2.10.12 @ 7:58AM

My observations as well, David. Someone has brainwashed Ann Coulter. She's abandoned her Conservative values.

marcie| 2.10.12 @ 8:10AM

I couldn't disagree more adamantly. This is a very weak Republican field, granted. But Romney is the only one with a real shot to beat Obama. The others are beyond any scintilla of possibility. Newt is surly and mean and Rick is past unlikable. That's where Ann is coming from, and I agree with her.

marcie| 2.10.12 @ 8:10AM

I couldn't disagree more adamantly. This is a very weak Republican field, granted. But Romney is the only one with a real shot to beat Obama. The others are beyond any scintilla of possibility. Newt is surly and mean and Rick is past unlikable. That's where Ann is coming from, and I agree with her.

Dan Johnson| 2.13.12 @ 3:46PM

I agree 100%! The only one the Obama team fears is Romney. They recognize he is very smart, has a business mind for details and organization. They also know based upon Iowa and Florida he will hit Obama very hard. With Obama's record Romney will systemically tear him apart and Obama will be playing defense up until election day. We need to get away from the social issues that divide us and focus on the economy and debt. This is the real issue, everything else is just academic. Reality is no Republican is going make radical social changes like Obama has tried to do.

jrp628| 2.10.12 @ 8:18AM

HA! I knew she used to be a dude.

Herb Kaufman| 2.10.12 @ 8:19AM

Not only was the Fair Housing Act written by Republicans and co-sponsored by Democrats; it was during the Bush (the Minor) Administration that banks and other lenders were allowed and encouraged to sell mortagages to people who couldn't afford them and then "bundle" them; causing a recession that they now try to blame Obama for.

Herb Kaufman| 2.10.12 @ 8:20AM

Not only was the Fair Housing Act written by Republicans and co-sponsored by Democrats; it was during the Bush (the Minor) Administration that banks and other lenders were allowed and encouraged to sell mortagages to people who couldn't afford them and then "bundle" them; causing a recession that they now try to blame Obama for.

Man - Herb! Kauf Kauf Kauf K..| 2.11.12 @ 1:05PM

The policies established by Carter, that were increased exponentially under Clinton, that Bush reigned back but unfortunately did not eliminate, that Obama is currently making exponentially worse, by coercing banks to forgive even more mortgage debt, yet again, that the banks will ultimately pass on to consumers and taxpayers, while he quintuples down on Fannie and Freddie and Dodd-Frank?

Chiniqua LaSalle| 2.10.12 @ 8:45AM

Ann really is the most feminine man I've ever seen, other than Ru Paul. But Ann can take comfort in the realization that his political views are all man...an old , paranoid, conservative white man.

BoB de| 2.10.12 @ 8:52AM

None of the comments put forth by conservatives mention the premise of our Republic and that is "The greater Good". For those of you who complain that your own desires are never met please remind yourselves of our democratic principles.

C Puckett| 2.10.12 @ 9:18AM

my thoughts exactly
revenues are down perhaps. so now she's looking for an administration job.
she's bound to be disappointed.

Zak| 2.10.12 @ 9:26AM

Hey David,

Great comb-over, you'll fit right in.

Thanks for a stupid article.

Jim Shoesa| 2.10.12 @ 9:35AM

Coulter, Limbaugh, Hannity, conservative commentators in general now know what they did. They helped Obama win. They pummeled McCain in the primary with such ferocity, calling him everything from liberal to socialist, that when he did win the nomination, the damage was done. Many right thinking conservatives simply did not vote. Independent swing voters, many of whom listen to media for advice ran to Obama. After all, the left wing media surely loved him, and the right wing media hated McCain. This will go down as one of the worst things conservative media has ever done. Now they are trying to fix it, but it is a 4 years too late and the nation is in ruin.

Ben There| 2.10.12 @ 11:05AM

So, Jim Shoesa, why do you say the nation is in ruin? You must be a fraction of my age. I have observed 13 presidents, and lots of disturbing times, but we have done a pretty good job of bouncing back. However, it seems that the Far-Right always has this dire outlook that everything is falling apart, and everyone who disagrees with them is a commie or so other horrible creature. You sound like my father who rarely looked at the whole show with any objectivity, and then when anyone disagreed, he started throwing fists because thinking clearly was just too hard for him. Grow up. America is doing fairly well, despite having way too many Huns on talk radio and Fox. PS: Coulter is all the right needs to expose its stupidity.

Ben Dover| 2.12.12 @ 12:57PM

So,

to prevent the nation from sinking in ruin,
and to seek to avoid disturbing times when there is disagreement,
and to judge how the nation is doing overall despite opinions ranging from Fox News to MSNBC,
it should be observed that,

the last budget of federal revenue and spending under a republican president with a republican majority house of representatives in 2007 had a deficit of:

$0.160701 trillion

the last budget of federal revenue and spending under a democrat president with a democrat majority house of representatives in 2011 had a deficit more than 1023% higher:

$1.645119 trillion

yet,

no doubt some observers over the last 13 presidential elections have voted for Carter and Clinton twice and will soon vote for Obama a second time.

Dover And Dover Again| 2.12.12 @ 1:01PM

. . . not to mention once for Mondale and once for Dukakis and once for Gore and once for Kerry . . .

Greg| 2.10.12 @ 10:37AM

Whoever it was, I'd like to take them out for a drink!

neums| 2.10.12 @ 11:17AM

I don't care who castrated her, but THANK YOU!!!

Mark Bunch| 2.10.12 @ 12:11PM

Actually,she is a fascist and not too bright. That probably reflects on you.

C.O. Shea| 2.10.12 @ 12:32PM

Romney has probably offered her a position in his kitchen-cabinet... thus explaining her shift in rhetoric.

Bill| 2.10.12 @ 12:52PM

When she was younger, she was more of an ideologue. But older, she's not wiser, and realizing that one must strive not just for ideological purity, but one must also win the election. So she's more pragmatic. It's sexist to say she was "castrated". instead, she's strategically smarter.

e hunt| 2.10.12 @ 2:39PM

The question is whether Romney is a programmable meat puppet or a fanatical reactionary. Which would get him elected in a general election?

CF| 2.10.12 @ 2:48PM

Message to David Catron: Mitt Romney IS the most Conservative candidate running you dolt.

Matt the Liberal | 2.10.12 @ 3:11PM

Wow, After reading all the insanity in these comments, I feel a lot better that the rest of the 99% who are getting shafted by the policies of the right will be voting their conscience and obliterating the Tea Party & Republicans. Occupy the Constitution!

allison| 2.10.12 @ 3:13PM

The first sentence of this article -"There is no conservative writer that I admire more than Ann Coulter" - made it clear that it would be a waste of time to read any further. No surprise that the author likes our failed healthcare system in its current condition - he's one of the crooks getting rich from it.

bothered| 2.10.12 @ 3:15PM

Reading this page makes me better understand why the conservative movement is in tatters: we're more interested in fighting - each other, liberals, the government - more interested in "being right", then we are in standing up for what is right. It's the same on the liberal side: infighting delayed only when there's a chance to bash Republicans. Until we start working together as a people and a country - and yes, that means we have to compromise -we'll continue to fracture. And the people at the very top? The ones who fund political campaigns, who own the media, and whose kids never die in our wars? They stay at the top, whether liberal, conservative or moderate forces control the federal government. It's time to wake up and start relating to each other as fellow Americans - not enemies.

patrick Schrote| 2.10.12 @ 3:26PM

Catron, like many right wing ideologues, is infatuated with a world view only applicable to club members. But it's a very small club, indeed. And only then when convenient. If Catron wishes to equate his, and others, narrow perspectives with medical procedures, his might be most readily identified with a well deserved and hopefully scheduled lobotomy - that is, to alleviate neural pathways caught in fixed and destructive circuits. Catron is as outdated as the entire right wing message - world weary old white men who long for the days when women, non- whites, and anyone else deemed demonize- worthy at the moment, would just quietly acquiesce and let them run things, in a way that allowed them to posture as superior, benefit without merit, luxuriate in their self-declared entitlement of privilage, and do so without concern for any measure of accountability. Grow up, Catron.

Eric| 2.10.12 @ 3:26PM

Thank you, I was wondering what was going on!

dave| 2.10.12 @ 3:46PM

Who pays attention to MSNBC? What's wrong with you anyway?

kate| 2.10.12 @ 3:48PM

Could she have met her match in a torrid love affair with some knuckle dragging he-man bent on taming her? Or perhaps it is a Magic Liberal Man with the Magic hands...some Cuckhold Carvel type that one would lease expect. Maybe, just maybe she is getting the "Femi N A Z I banged out of her...the possibilities are endless...just sayin'

George| 2.10.12 @ 3:51PM

Coulter's only asset has always been her knack for sensationalism, like when she facetiously endorsed a terrorist attack on the New York Times. That knack appears to be what she has lost. I never believed that she was actually a all that conservative to begin with. It was all posturing for the sake of a paycheck.

kate| 2.10.12 @ 3:52PM

Could she have met her match in a torrid love affair with some knuckle dragging he-man bent on banging the Femi N A Z I of her...? Or perhaps it is a Magic Liberal Man with the Magic hands...some Cuckhold Carvel type that one would least expect...who knows... "the possibilities are endless...just sayin'

kate| 2.10.12 @ 3:53PM

Could she have met her match in a torrid love affair with some knuckle dragging he-man bent on banging the Femi N A Z I out of her...? Or perhaps it is a Magic Liberal Man with the Magic hands...some Cuckhold Carvel type that one would least expect...who knows... "the possibilities are endless...just sayin'

U. R. Alyingsackofshit| 2.10.12 @ 3:54PM

The Bush administration caused the economic crisis not the socialization of housing by Democrats. What bullshit.

You just lost all credibility with me as it appears all you care to spout is bullshit right agendas.

It's cunts like you that have ruined America with disinformation.

Have you no shame?

Loser.

URLookingInAMirrorDumbass| 2.11.12 @ 1:18PM

The economic crisis caused by Bush, through his credible agenda forcing Carter to establish C.R.A., his credible agenda forcing Clinton to exponentially expand C.R.A., his credible agenda forcing Obama to establish Dodd-Frank, and his credible agenda forcing Obama to coerce banks to slash mortgages yet again, exponentially making worse the crisis, through the wallets of consumers and taxpayers? That credible agenda?

Tommm| 2.10.12 @ 3:58PM

Newt's principles are only theory. His practices betray his heart. How can we trust a man to lead this nation when he has betrayed his wive(s) and family after taking a solemn vow before God? In practice he is more liberal than Obama.

Cheryl| 2.10.12 @ 4:30PM

As I always think it is good to know what the "other side" is doing and thinking I have read some of Ms. Coulter's books and she does know how to turn a phrase, but "courageous" does not seem to describe her behavior. Ballsie (sic) perhaps, but courageous is a stretch. Her rhetoric on various issues and candidates that she freely gives on talk shows and in her publications is a great way to sell books though!

Cheryl| 2.10.12 @ 4:30PM

As I always think it is good to know what the "other side" is doing and thinking I have read some of Ms. Coulter's books and she does know how to turn a phrase, but "courageous" does not seem to describe her behavior. Ballsie (sic) perhaps, but courageous is a stretch. Her rhetoric on various issues and candidates that she freely gives on talk shows and in her publications is a great way to sell books though!

Cheryl| 2.10.12 @ 4:31PM

As I always think it is good to know what the "other side" is doing and thinking I have read some of Ms. Coulter's books and she does know how to turn a phrase, but "courageous" does not seem to describe her behavior. Ballsie (sic) perhaps, but courageous is a stretch. Her rhetoric on various issues and candidates that she freely gives on talk shows and in her publications is a great way to sell books though!

Jerry Vandesic| 2.10.12 @ 4:43PM

"... to writing things that are either deliberately disingenuous or genuinely ignorant"

cmon, this has never stopped her before. You expect that to change?

MOe LepEw| 2.10.12 @ 4:48PM

Hilary Clinton--her balls are starting to wither and she wanted a new pair.

AllieT| 2.10.12 @ 5:11PM

she still won't f*ck or s*ck you dave.

Brian| 2.10.12 @ 5:42PM

I read the first sentence of this article and choked on my coffee . . .

Thomas| 2.10.12 @ 6:11PM

The reason, David, is because Ann - like all the others you have blindly followed - is/are, and have only ever been interested in one thing: Absolute power. When it suited their needs to court the Tea Party, they did so. They told you wanted you wanted to hear, and you bought it - hook, line and sinker. Now, they know Newt has even less of a chance of winning the election than Romney, and so they (including Palin) will endorse Romney - until such time as Romney looks less likely to win than someone else, perhaps Santorum in a few weeks, after Romney is "asked" to suspend?

My point is: You've been duped. And you've been duped by people who were willing to say whatever you wanted to hear, just to get your votes. They do this so they can win. They don't really believe anything they say to you. They just want to win, so they can do what they've always done: Make money off your sweat and hard labor, while making you believe it's actually OK not to get rewards for your hard work.

And please make no mistake of my own reasons for posting this: First of all, I have absolutely no empathy for extremists and Tea Party crazies like you, who seem hell bent in your own pathetic little ways on absolute power all for yourselves. I'm only thankful that you do this simply out of ignorance. I believe you really do love America. But you really have no clue how democracy really works. You prove this every time you point to the free expression of the collective will of all citizens (even the liberal ones), and call it "fascism" or "unconstitutional". However, all this having been said, I don't like seeing people misled, like you have been by Ann, Sarah and all the rest. In this democracy, and in accordance with my own moral code of personal conduct, I like a fair fight. I actually want conservatives to be that voice warning everyone else that we might be spending too much, or to be careful not to waste our tax dollars. A country like America, needs people like you, and people from the far extreme of the other side, and all the rest who are nicely somewhere in the middle, to help balance each others' interests to keep us from going too far in one direction or another. The far left might want "redistribution of wealth". The far right might want no government intervention, taxes or spending whatsoever. The final answer, after all is said and done, will be somewhere in the middle, hopefully not too far to one side or another (or at least not for very long).

But as Ann has proven here, there's a sucker born every minute - and she's managed to get rich off you. She's used your anger and ignorance to get you to serve her ambitions, without any regard for yours.

Long story short: We need crazies like you - but what I don't like is when people, even you, are taken advantage of. Even though you provide an important balance in a free society, the one main problem with you allowing yourselves to be whipped up into a hateful fury, is that then it is almost impossible to get you to accept what would otherwise be a perfectly normal democratic outcome: That you didn't get 100% of everything you wanted.

There once was a time when even the stupidist of morons in America still understood how democracy works. You allowed people like Ann and Sarah to blind you so far, that you now hate democracy, and you hate Americans. I hope you find your path again - even though I disagree with everything you believe, I believe you're important to America. You help keep us from becoming socialist - but now that you've started to arrogantly think your side is absolutely correct and right in every case, you represent as much a danger to American democracy as any foreign enemy.

Get your act together David. Educate yourselves enough so that you can add to the democratic process, rather than let people like Ann push you into fights we don't need to have with each other, or into civil conflicts of which the world has suffered long enough.

With God all things r possible| 2.12.12 @ 8:56PM

Projection.

Lee Larson| 2.10.12 @ 6:28PM

Why is anyone concerned that Ann Coulter is merely the latest 'conservative commentator' to flip-flop and suddenly take on a posture calculated to land her on The Winning Side, whichever side that may be?
Commentators, like bookies, are doing nothing more than assessing the odds and then trying to make a profit off of the results, no matter which way things fall. In the stock market this is called investment; in the political arena this is called selling-out-principles-and-ethics-for-The- Almighty-Dollar.
Now the question is whether Ann Coulter has been bought off, scared off, or whether she was a phoney from the very beginning.

Devaghost| 2.10.12 @ 6:29PM

It's this stuff, the obvious, inherent sexism of using "Castrated" that make you right-wing loons appear to be right-wing loons.

Just don't get it and never will.

Devaghost| 2.10.12 @ 6:29PM

It's this stuff, the obvious, inherent sexism of using "Castrated" that make you right-wing loons appear to be right-wing loons.

Just don't get it and never will.

Hoss Cartwright| 2.10.12 @ 6:39PM

YOU SIR, ARE AN IDIOT.

Glock22| 2.10.12 @ 6:53PM

This is some great stuff. Looks like the right has fallen vicitm to its own paranoia and has now turned on itself.
Oh, how I wish I could insert the audio file of George Bush saying, "I'm a uniter. Not a divider." Nice job, everyone. Nice job.

Joe Wanninger| 2.10.12 @ 7:03PM

Thank you for pointing out the obvious, yet silent issue. Why aren't more people talking about this?

First, Christie, who is not a conservative, and now Romney?

I've been reading Ms. Coulter for years and seen her in person numerous times. She's my type of woman, smart, witty, sarcastic and hot.... in all ways.

What the hell happened to her? First, it was Kathleen Parker, now Ann has succumbed to this intellectual affliction. I really, really admired her. Her book "Demonic" is quite good, but her editorials and guest appearances are getting to the point of being nauseating.

I can't believe she's been putting us on for all of these years. It's easier to believe she's doing this for publicity and to get her name out there. If that is true, I'm extremely saddened. I thought she brimmed with integrity and find it hard to believe she would sell out simply to make money instead of sticking to her principles. She's fine financially. I won't yet believe that scenario, but outside of a complete frontal lobotomy that she was forced to undergo at the still open "Gitmo" by some HHS Dr. Mengele, what is the reason for her radical turnaround? There is only one other reason I can think of, but I won't expound on that, as it is none of my business.

I always felt she was the Republican James Carville, except smart, funny and hot, as opposed to appearing as some sort of alien (though natural born citizen) life form.

I've always wanted to be like her...I've got a good mind, but her's is incredible. Her wit is incredible...and she's still hot:) I wanted to be as hated by the left as she was/is. I still hope to be someday.

I remember a movie I saw as a child..."Snoopy, Come Home". I implore: Ann, Come Home! And soon!!!!!!!!!!

edward Poe| 2.10.12 @ 7:05PM

Ann Coulter has come to realize that no matter how many people "agree" with her neo con prapaganda, she is wrong most of the time. This country is not in danger of failing. What is failing is the pseudo religious neo con grip on power. If they had been right their policies would not be the grandest failures in modern history. Ann is not hitting menopause, she is coming to her senses,at last

Joe/Cincinnati| 2.10.12 @ 7:31PM

Do you actually know what a "Neo-Con" is? It's oft spouted by many, but the definition known by few....It's simply a "catch-all", "bumper sticker" phrase like "Teabagger". It's a term thrown about by liberals like Christians were fed to the lions. It's simply red meat for the liberal masses to whip them into a vitriolic hysteria. As the lions ate the Christians while the frenzied crowds cheered, the left wing eats the red meat thrown them by their keepers, cheering for more blood and "Neo-Cons" to devour.

I suggest you read Ann's latest book, "Demonic" In fact, you should read all of her books. They may be informative. And you'll be contributing to a good cause: The salvation of The United States of America.

deetz100| 2.10.12 @ 7:12PM

Yikes! Imagine what this conversation would be like if you were all in a room, with people you actually liked, who were (gasp) Liberal? How would you talk to them? How does all of this spiteful, angry arrogant rhetoric advance your cause? The next time you post, why not try to do it in a way that is respectful of those who disagree with you? The fact is there are decent, smart people on all sides of these issues who actually do want what's best for the country. If you are a Christian, I suspect you already know that. Further, get a little perspective. Americans have always been convinced that things are going to heck, and yet compared to most of the world, we're doing just fine. So lighten up!

Northlite| 2.11.12 @ 7:54AM

Deetz, you hit the nail on the head. Perhaps equally important, all the angry over the top vitriol, name calling, and finger pointing turns off the independents and centrists who decide elections nowadays. You have Hannity screaming that Obama wanted to protect Bin Laden, but in six years Bush couldn't get him and in two years Obama did. The non-rabid right-wing listens to stuff like Hannity and is frankly, shocked that the right is so delusional and disrespectful. The louder and more maliciously the right screams, the worse they will do in the upcoming election.

jpcogan| 2.11.12 @ 9:29AM

David Catron is probably correct that Obama beats Romney in 2012, but he's living in a fantasy bubble if he thinks Gingrich or Santorum do anything in a general election other than lose in such spectacular fashion that the Democrats regain control of the House and increase their Senate majority.

xman12stlouis| 2.11.12 @ 3:19PM

if the election were today, i think santorum would probably lose but by a lower margin than romney...but the election's not today, it's not until next halloween...and we have plenty of time to groom the candidate, raise unspeakable amounts of cash for the effort, and take on obama as he continues to plod maliciously across more and more americans' mores and livelihoods...the simple truth is, we need an extremely high turnout of repubs/tea partiers/conservatives/catholics/business owners/self-employeds/seniors, coupled with a sufficient amount of so-called independents, to take down this imposter obama...oddly, it's almost too late now for him to expect any serious and substantial economic improvement by late in 2012, and if things do improve modestly, the unemployment rate will actually increase...such bad headlines will temper his once rabid supporters, especially those underemployed 20- and 30- somethings who once in 2008 saw him as christ-like in his magesterial robes...make no mistake - the obamaites will disrupt whatever they have to in order to remain at the helm...we have a colossal task ahead of us...this will be a summer to remember...God help us...

Colin Forsyth| 2.11.12 @ 12:10PM

This is all just schtick.Fat cats and wannabes who want to start wars but not pay taxes to pay for them.What happened to republicans who made some kind of sense?

Lee Larson| 2.12.12 @ 4:46PM

To believe that the 2012 election campaign is anything more than a matter of the GOP deciding who is going to lose to Obama is an exercise in wishful thinking.
To believe that the United States political system, as such, is not morally bankrupt reveals incredible naivete.
The machine is out of control, no matter who is in the driver's seat. The brakes are shot, the steering is shot, the muffler is shot, the transmission is stuck in Overdrive, the windshield is fogged over, and the air bags will not deploy. That makes for an abrupt halt to The American Dream.

JP| 2.13.12 @ 6:38AM

I was actually very concerned about this myself. I like Coulter for many of the same reasons you mention, so her article was inexplicable. Did someone hack her account?

Dan Johnson| 2.13.12 @ 3:44PM

The only one the Obama team fears is Romney. They recognize he is very smart, has a business mind for details and organization. They also know based upon Iowa and Florida he will hit Obama very hard. With Obama's record Romney will systemically tear him apart and Obama will be playing defense up until election day. We need to get away from the social issues that divide us and focus on the economy and debt. This is the real issue, everything else is just academic. Reality is no Republican is going make radical social changes like Obama has tried to do.

Tenn Slim| 2.14.12 @ 9:30AM

"We need to get away from the social issues that divide us and focus on the economy and debt."
Disagree.
The SOCIAL Issues are the key to the US Electorate apathy these long years of Leftist gains.
To allow and encourage further erosion into the Socail arenas is to allow the end game of Cloward Piven to succeed.
Principle is all. Honor, duty to country, faith in a Creator, these are the basics. Erode them and we have exactly what Van Jones and the Mid West academy of Obama funding, desire, a demise of the Republic.
Semper Fi

Schera Do| 2.13.12 @ 5:34PM

It's simple: Ann's intellect is subsumed by her attraction to his good looks; it is as simple and primal as that.

Tenn Slim| 2.14.12 @ 9:26AM

Ann C has indeed done an about face. Her appearances on FOX showed the angst and despair in her opines. No longer willing to box with O,Rielly, no longer willing to defend and protect, she simply rolled over on many issues.
The GOP RHINOS and the Obama Chi Town need and want Romney. They may well get him.
The 2012 election process itself is in doubt. A crisis in Chi Town in May, OWS DEMOS,,,, may be the key.
August in Tampa may well be the last line in the sand for the Conservatives. An FP October surprise is the final nail.
Make no mistake, the Left will not go quietly into the night.
Semper FI

daniel155| 2.14.12 @ 8:23PM

I think that Ann Coulter, like many people, is afraid of Barack Obama being re-elected. So she has cast her lot with Mitt Romney because she believes that he is the most electable of the candidates.

She is right to some extent. A Newt Gingrich campaign would be a traveling exercise in damage control. Ron Paul would have to break free of the crackpot image. He caught some flak for perceived anti-semitic comments in a newsletter published under his name. There are more articles in the newsletter and speeches by Paul out there that can be found be any opposition researcher.

I guess Coulter thinks that the social issues will defeat Rick Santorum but he has less baggage than the other two. So it is between Romney, Santorum or another candidate that emerges from an unlikely brokered convention. Again, I think that Coulter deeply fears an Obama second term and it is causing her to play it safe by backing Romney.

FreeUlysses| 2.15.12 @ 2:52AM

Read Bastiat's The Law. In fact, study it, share it.

http://bastiat.org/en/the_law.html#SECTION_G001

John Schaefer| 2.15.12 @ 10:01AM

Obviously Coulter thought that Clinton would be the 2008 nominee, so Clinton or McCain would win, and she was focused on getting the maximally conservative President. Obviously for the 2012 race, Coulter is focused first on Republicans getting a nominee that has a chance of defeating Obama...which means Romney, because you can't defeat a sitting Democrat with a candidate that doesn't maximally appeal to independents. I have no doubt that if she could choose between Romney and another conservative candidate with a chance of winning, she'd choose that alternate candidate. But, she doesn't, and she's realistic and smart about it.

If you don't win, you don't get to decide policies. It would be dumb to nominate an ideologically pure loser. Coulter knows that.

The Jimmy Z Show | 2.18.12 @ 2:48AM

She never was a conservative. Go through her book titles. She's anti-liberal, but she's a moderate.

jg2040| 2.21.12 @ 12:14AM

She is supporting Romney because the only goal in this election is to defeat Obama and Romney is the only one of the three who has a chance to win in the general election vs. Obama. I like Santorum, but he has absolutely no charisma and no ability to inspire people. I know substance should matter more than that, but when Santorum is standing next to Obama during the debates, he will be overpowered by Obama's presence. He will look like a third grader. Newt can stand up against Obama, and he will do great against him in the debates, but Newt has too much baggage, and since negative campaigning is the most effective, if Newt become the nominee, he will give Obama way too much fire power to destroy Newt's candidacy. That leaves Romney, who is the least conservative left in the race, but he has the presence to stand up next to Obama during the debates and look Presidential, and he does not carry much personal baggage to be exploited. Romney gives us the best chance to achieve this election's number one objective, get rid of Obama.

Poyman| 2.21.12 @ 4:20AM

This author wouldn't know conservatism if it hit him between the eyes... Show me another conservative candidate that would have governed MA more conservatively... No Tax Increases, $5 B turnaround in the Budget,veto stem cell research, in fact' vetoed a Democratic Legislature over 800 time in 4 years, pushed through the conservative individual mandate which was considered a Conservative Coup in 2006. This guy has opinions but always seems to be short on facts.

Swordmaiden Truthseeker| 2.21.12 @ 10:40AM

Where are you living? Are you Really trying to tell people that Mitt Romney is the darling of the media and the Republican Party? Really? It is so obvious neither wants Romney, as they can not control him! When have you seen a Candidate so clean they have to try to use his dog riding in the fresh air as his worst fault? Romney with his Gift is so obviously the only chance we have to save our US Economy, as the rest of the world falls.
I will repeat: If not Romney, WHO? If not now, WHEN? After it is everlastingly too late?
And are you seriously telling me you do not believe Newt Gingrich is the ultimate Political Insider? The Back room Deal Maker?
And Santorum was drummed out of office by those who know HIM Best. Mitt Romney is overwhelmingly supported by those who know Him Best, who have witnessed his inspired talents in action! I believe the Poll showing 71% in Utah is low, and there is sure not 71% Members of The Church Of Jesus Christ Of Latter Day Saints living there. They saw what he did, Right after 9-11, too. Sheer Magic? No. Inspiration. When he looks at the problem, He envisions SOLUTIONS.
Had he prevailed, as he would have without being double-teamed in VA by McCain giving his Delegates to Huckabee, we would not be in the position we are in now. He is one Candidate we KNOW believes the Constitution is an inspired document, which he reveres. He is a faithful, loving husband, father and grandfather who keeps his promises. He has been responsible for the care of at least thousands of poor members of The Church Of Jesus Christ Of Latter Day Saints in his leadership callings and knows their needs. He is a kind, caring man, as well as being one of the most accomplished entrepeneurs. Oh...and they say he is a Mormon. They said that last time, too. Hmmmm. Oh yes, I see your point.
Where is Ann Coulter's Courage?

George Beatty| 2.21.12 @ 6:14PM

Ann decided to be a Republican instead of a conservative. This primary has harmed the Republican Party by exposing the fraud it has been perpetrating on conservatives since Reagan. Let the elites pick their candidate and we will choose ours. The global Republican establishment and Obama can split the liberal vote and we will win with a majority of American Patriot conservatives.

Jeff| 2.21.12 @ 6:55PM

The MSM Has been pushing Newt Gingrich precisely because they want Republicans to LOSE in November. The same media worked to get McCain nominated only to do a 180 and trash him after the fact. It's not hard to understand why the MSM love* Newt Gingrich.

jimbo| 2.21.12 @ 7:46PM

So Romney is unelectable because of Romneycare...and Newt, Satanorum et. al. are electable because???

Did anyone hear Grover N speak at CPAC? I wish some of these Ron Paul freaks would listen up!

It DOES NOT MATTER who we nominate. The legislation is already written in the House. We need conservative Congress members to move the legislation up to the President's desk. All a Republican President needs is the the fine motor skills to operate a signing pen or two, and our troubles will quickly be coming to an end. We need Paul clones in the House and Senate...we don't actually need a President Paul.

And the other two...Newt and Santorum? I'm sorry, but they have both had their chances, and they failed long before and much harder than Romney ever did. Santorum

disgruntled| 2.21.12 @ 9:14PM

I myself have wondered what's up with Coulter. Yeah, I know she likes Chris Christie because he had the stones to take on the teachers' unions, but just because he endorses Romney is no reason for her to lose her marbles.

Mitt Romney, Ann. Seriously?

David B| 2.22.12 @ 7:00AM

Duh...she has been dating Bill Moyers for @ a year....No one is immuned to the clever focus group tested lies and deceptions of the left. Not her, not even Rush Limbaugh. He can be lead off track if he lets his guard down for one second! But like all evil has weaknesses, the dems always tell us who they fear by who they smear!

David B| 2.22.12 @ 7:14AM

oops immune...i be ammuned baby!

David B| 2.22.12 @ 7:13AM

Ann will figure it out. She is conservative and conservatives think for themselves.

David B| 2.22.12 @ 7:18AM

And I am shocked Rick called out the Devil! To prove Rick wrong the dems celebrated the 100,000,000th child dead from Malaria after the phoney science, liberal ban of DDT and are anxiously awaiting the 1,000,000,000th abortion which according to non devil worshipping liberals can't come soon enough.

Kevin McGill| 2.22.12 @ 6:59PM

You're delusional.

Mary| 2.22.12 @ 9:21AM

I have a sense that now that both her parents are deceased, that she is coming out of the closet.

Nemo| 2.22.12 @ 11:00AM

Um ... I don't see why the confusion.

According to Coulter, the difference between this election and the last is that we get 1 shot to repeal ObamaCare, and it's CRITICAL that we do so, pretty much regardless of the cost. That sort of gigantic do or die issue was not hanging in the air the last time around.

So no messing about with notions like backing Hillary ... not when the survival of the nation is at stake. We HAVE to win.

Regarding the other candidates, her estimates, near as I can tell are:
1) Gingrich will scare off the soccer moms and know-nothing fence-sitter independents.
2) Santorum doesn't have enough traction for a real natural victory in the nomination, much less the general election
3) Paul doesn't even count

And all of this in a setting where a big-tent winner like Reagan is simply NOT RUNNING.

Seems to me that that leaves us with Romney by elimination.

I don't like it either. But I also don't see any practical alternatives.

Paul is completely out of it and I don't have confidence in Santorum or Gingrich to win over the general public, albeit for different reasons.

I haven't really read much of the thread above, but I didn't notice any convincing arguments for why and how Gingrich or Santorum could carry the general election.

I think people are angry at Coulter for being the bearer of bad news.

Nemo| 2.22.12 @ 11:04AM

Oh, and just BTW, I don't really like the use of the word "castrated" in the title. I think it is an offense against Coulter's very obvious and normal femininity.

I suspect that the insult may have been intended as the author could just have easily used some other word.

R French| 2.22.12 @ 11:06AM

The attacks on Romney are silly and destructive. I would like to try a President who has some experience building a company/business than a perpetual politician. Romney has been in politics long enough to understand it, but most of his life's experience is in business. Let's try that.

JC| 2.22.12 @ 11:27AM

Perhaps Coulter came to her senses. At some level, the Republicans realize they are going to lose and lose big come November. My guess is Coulter is just abandoning a sinking ship. She's not the only one. Pat Robertson in a very public and hysterical manner beseeched the Republicans from maintaining their "nonsensical" positions at risk of losing in 2012. You can belittle it all you want. But when push comes to shove, the American people realize that every American should have access to health care. Although universal health care would have been a better alternative, Health Care Reform is a great start. Speaking about free riders. Our author in chief apparently makes his money by evaluating income flows from Medicare and Medicaid for health care companies. Yes indeed. Just another free loader sucking off the teet of America.

stephen boone | 2.22.12 @ 11:45AM

Classic Garbage. If someone disagrees with you, call them a name. Say the woman is castrated whatever that means. Duh. Don't listen to her explanations that Gingrich is actually a liberal or check her facts supporting that belief. Ignore her point that the whole point of arguing with people in your party is to CONVERT THEM to your point of view and then, when they say WAIT! YOU'RE RIGHT! and change from the "woman's right to choose" side to a strong committed believer in right to life you are insane to throw them out because of what the no longer believe and they are now fighting against. I guess Saint Paul should never have been allowed to ENTER a Christian Church and absolutely not been allowed to teach or lead one since, before his conversion he actually arranged and approved the stoning of Stephen and other early believers, right??? Go look in the mirror and say "Hello, Stupid".

stephen boone | 2.22.12 @ 12:05PM

Romneycare and Obamacare are identical in their effect on me???? You are demonstrably insane. Obamacare has ALREADY affected me and Romneycare will NEVER and CAN never affect me since I am in TEXAS. You, sir, need to study a map and the constitution. We are a union of STATES, STATES in the original meaning of COUNTRIES which are sovereign. They also have the right to make laws regarding what constitutes murder, manslaughter, self defense etc. THAT is why they can and should legally restrict and/or allow abortion within their borders. There were 50 separate laws about abortion and 50 separate laws about homosexual conduct before BOTH were declared constitutional rights by a court gone berserk. We NEED 50 different states with all their differences. In fact, I support MANIFEST DESTINY 2.0 from the Pole to Panama, we need to absorb Canada ( except Quebec) and Mexico and the islands of the Caribbean eventually into one glorious and free country a union of semi-independant STATES, That is only possible if these other countries and/or parts of countries get the freedom to have some differences. The state of Cuba will NOT have the same laws as Alaska and the State of Nova Scotia will not have the same laws as the State of Chihuahua. Sabes?

Paul Richard Strange, Sr.| 2.22.12 @ 3:03PM

Thanks so much, Mr. Catron, for an outstanding article. The GOP difficulties abound, with or without Romney as nominee, I think. Ron Paul cannot rise in the polls no matter what...even though the only real solution to chronic statism is having more libertarian leaders in the White House , U.S. House, and Senate.
Gingrich sold out to Freddie Mac, and this is a biggy....even more than his personal life failures!
Santorum can't wait to bomb Iran, which helps with some GOP conservatives who see nation-building as the only way to fight terrorism. But the general election voters agree more with Ron Paul and the President about policing the world!
Romney, alas, seems to be the generic non-Obama by default...win or lose!
PAUL RICHARD STRANGE SR
dadprs@hotmail.com
Waxahachie Texas

Kevin McGill| 2.22.12 @ 6:57PM

Folks may be disappointed that Ann Coulter has signed on for Romney...casting aside her hard core conservative roots.

I see her position more an admission that any other candidate will lose to President Obama in November. The fact is that the middle electorate is not going to vote for Gingrich and certainly not Santorum, but will for Romney. Bottom line: Coulter wants Obama to lose.

Coulter also recognizes that people do not always vote FOR a candidate, but vote AGAINST a candidate. Having Gingrich or Santorum as Republican nominees will also endanger losing Republican control of the House. That's the biggest danger.

Phyl R| 2.23.12 @ 11:04AM

So you would rather have me support Santorum, who is for card check, for raising the debt ceiling, for illegal immigration, for ear-marks merely because he might be more socially conservative than Mitt? I have an easier time believing Coulter and supporting Romney than going for a B-team middle manager career Washington policitician like Santorum. Also Romneycare was not mandatory until the Democrat controlled state legislature made it mandatory. Romney has not spent his whole life in Washington and as such is not the "establishment" candidate. Gingrich, Paul and Santorum are all part of the problem. And I am a tea-partier.

SouthWestie| 2.26.12 @ 3:34AM

I'm a REAL conservative! Nooo you're not, I'm the REAL conservative. You're a RINO! Nuh-uh, you're a RINO! Nu-Uhhh... I know you are but what am I?!?! Really? Is this what political discourse on the right has come to? Where were the articles asking if Coulter had been castrated in 2008, when she stood behind Romney? The better question for the amnesiacs that blindly worship at the temple of Rush, Levin, and Hanity is where were the declarations of castration for these "conservative prophets," who were enthusiastically endorsing Romney in 2008 and now have conveniently flip-flopped on their support for Mitt RINO Romney?

Sleuth| 2.27.12 @ 12:22AM

"Like"

Sleuth| 2.27.12 @ 12:19AM

This article is contrived anti-Romney diatribe. Just like Republicans couldn't win the 2010 midterms without the TPM, so too Romney is needed to dilute the 70 million voters who voted for Obama in 2008. Disaffected blue dogs, Independents, Latinos, Blacks, Women and students are needed to to gain the majority of the 130 voters who vote. Santorum is viewed as a religious fanatic and Gingrich is seen as a loon. Only Romney has a chance. The GOP cannot afford to not play it safe. You are fearful of Romney because he's not corrupt.

vmanso| 2.27.12 @ 1:15PM

Why, it's another liberal trying to get rid of Romney for fear that The Big O will become the forgotten P.
Come-on O can take Romney. Specially if O runs On his recOrd. hO hO hO.

Huuf Arted| 3.2.12 @ 1:27PM

I read somewhere that Ann Coulter has been riding some Left Wing cocks in her private life and has a bad case of Progressivism by Injection...

Tes| 3.5.12 @ 8:54PM

Ah...Does it hurt and have a temperature? Earth to Davey. Since Pat Robinson, the right has been consumed with becoming the media darlings that they thought constituted the vast left wing meanies. They've seen themselves in terms of having their own circus (Fox)advertisers and ratings up the whazoo. As long as Ms. Coulter appeared to be a committed , if incorrect, fringe idealogue (bent on slapping some sense into those unattractive moderates), she had your admiration. But she has become an excellent example of overpainted capitalism and she wants to stay in the game. Sorry you're so disappointed. No, actually I'm not.

Andrea Hall| 3.7.12 @ 11:13AM

Why did I know this about you?

JudyannJ| 4.27.12 @ 10:04AM

I have removed myself from Ann's weekly article emails and want nothing more to do with her. Have heard many rumors the reason for Coulter's sudden change of philosophy dt her new boyfriend, an aide to Romney. Had NO IDEA she was in such need of being "serviced."

mobielgeheimen | 6.12.12 @ 3:36AM

Everyone should be helped if he or she is sick! FREE

More Articles by David Catron

More Articles From Political Hay

Enough With the Bipartisanship

May 24, 2013 | Matt Purple

Lerner’s Plea

May 23, 2013 | Ray V. Hartwell, III

Damage Control for Dummies

May 22, 2013 | Matt Purple

McCain-Feingold Gave Us the IRS Scandal

May 21, 2013 | Ross Kaminsky

It’s.The.Law

May 20, 2013 | Ross Kaminsky

http://spectator.org/archives/2012/02/06/who-castrated-ann-coulter

ADVERTISEMENT

Latest Headlines

Real Immigration Reform Requires Free Markets

Ross Kaminsky|50 comments

Enough With the Bipartisanship

Matt Purple|30 comments

The United States of El Norte

Larry Thornberry|35 comments

Vodka = Vodka = Vodka

Daniel J. Flynn|52 comments

Laying Down My Pen

Quin Hillyer

Tornado Chasers

Claire Healey|18 comments

We Will Remember

Roger Kaplan|9 comments

The Chinese Waltz

George H. Wittman|1 comment

The Spectacle Blog

BBC World Survey Ranks Israel Near Bottom in Global Popularity

Aaron Goldstein | 12:36PM

Obamacare is a Big and Growing Problem for Democrats

Ross Kaminsky | 11:03AM

Stein on IRS Scandal

Patrick Ryan | 10:29AM

The Restricted Engine

Yogi Love | 6:00AM

Muslim, Er, Youth Riots in Sweden

Aaron Goldstein | 12:41AM

Good Luck Quin

Aaron Goldstein | 12:13AM

One of The London Soldier Beheading Suspects British Born

Aaron Goldstein | 5.23.13

Lois Lerner Now on Administrative Leave

Kaylin Bugos | 5.23.13

SPONSORED LINKS

FLASHBACK TO: 1995

Clip of the Day

H/T to National Review Online

ADVERTISEMENT

Home |About |Contributors |Advertise |Donate |Privacy Policy |Contact

The American Spectator Foundation is the 501(c)(3) organization responsible for publishing The American Spectator magazine and training aspiring journalists who espouse traditional American values. Your contributions are tax deductible to the extent permitted by law. Each donor receives a year-end summary of their giving for tax purposes.

Copyright 2013, The American Spectator. All rights reserved.