Showing posts with label Ann Coulter. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Ann Coulter. Show all posts

Friday, December 02, 2016

It will surprise consumers of American media to learn this, but every promise Trump made on immigration is already the law.

If Trump betrays voters on immigration, he can have as many rallies as he wants, but Americans will say, Been there, done that – you screwed us. He will never escape the stink of broken campaign promises.

So unless Trump has another 60 million voters hiding someplace, the appointments he makes today – to State, Defense, Homeland Security, Labor, even the IRS – will determine whether he is remembered as America’s greatest president, or if the Trump name becomes a cautionary tale in American politics.

At this precise moment – not after his inauguration, not in year two of his administration, but today, as he fills his Cabinet – Trump has to decide if he’s going to be like every other Republican and throw a brick or grab the ball and score.

Whether he’s listening or not, his supporters are screaming: TRUMP! NOW! TAKE THE SHOT!!!
READ MORE

Friday, October 14, 2016

Ann Coulter: “The SAME MEDIA gasping in horror at “P*ssy” sure didn’t mind my being called a C*nt repeatedly”

If you have trouble viewing the links within Ann's article below, just read it online here

*Please note graphic language throughout the column.*
Donald Trump is the only hope to save America, so the media have gone to war to stop him.
They don’t care about being exposed as lying, hypocritical swine — I’d describe them more fully, but it would require locker room talk. They’ll win the public back later. Right now, all that matters is stopping Trump.
The same media that are pretending to consider the use of a bad word equivalent to rape don’t give a fig about real rape, real sexual assault, real whoring, even real homicide, depending on who did it.
JFK was an STD-infected drug addict who cavorted with whores at the White House, but the media ferociously hid all this from the public, publishing fairy-tale versions of his presidency as “Camelot.”
And what happened to the 11-year rule? Trump said the word “p*ssy” 11 years ago, in a secretly recorded conversation. Eleven years before Sen. Teddy Kennedy ran for president, he killed a girl — but he ran, not only without apology, but, indeed, as the Conscience of the Democratic Party.
Throughout 2009, good, decent Americans who happened to oppose Obamacare were called the name of a gay sex act hundreds of times on TV — and that was just on MSNBC. CNN’s Anderson Cooper made the reference explicit when he giggled, “It’s hard to talk when you’re tea-bagging.”
Among the people using this sexual slur were distinguished members of Congress such as U.S. Sen. Robert Menendez and Rep. Barney Frank. Were they fit to hold office?
Going way, way, way back to a few weeks ago, the same media gasping in horror at “p*ssy” sure didn’t mind my being called a c*nt repeatedly on a Comedy Central broadcast. And when I say “didn’t mind,” I mean they thought it was awesome.
But saying “p*ssy” 11 years ago is over the line.
Cut the crap, media.
A few years ago, Sen. Al Franken joked on a Comedy Central roast about producer Rob Reiner butt-f*cking his children. Does Hillary think he’s fit to be a U.S. senator? Is he fit enough for the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works, but not the Senate Finance Committee?
None of these were leaks of secretly recorded conversations — considered a hanging offense in the Clinton years. These vulgarities were intentionally, publicly broadcast by the same media that, today, pretend to need smelling salts after hearing “p*ssy.”
At least this new puritanical standard explains why rappers like Jay Z are banned from the White House. Wait — what?
Perhaps realizing their Victorian virgin act wasn’t cutting it, the media turned to their Pretend We Don’t Understand English method of argument, and claimed that Trump was confessing to having committed a “sexual assault”!
Trump said: “When you’re a star, they let you do it. You can do anything. Grab ’em by the pussy. You can do any of that. (Laughter.)” Journalists turned this into “sexual assault” by being literal on the “grab” part, non-figurative on the “you” part — and on the “they let you do it” part? Stone, cold deaf.
If “they let you do it,” it’s not an assault.
Like most of Trump’s bragging, his loutish boast was not intended to be taken seriously, nor was it. Far from whipping out his pencil and carefully taking notes, “Access Hollywood”‘s Billy Bush laughed. The gist of what Trump was saying is that — hold onto your hats! — women like to sleep with celebrities! I don’t know if you’ve heard that before.
At least we’re back to the media pretending to care about sexual assault — until further notice.
This is the same media that ran interference for an actual sexual predator in the White House, ignoring Bill Clinton’s serial pants-dropping, groping and raping for nearly a decade, while gleefully vilifying his accusers, and would have been happy to continue if Bill Richardson had become president. Clinton talking about p*ssy was one of his more dignified moments, proudly attested to by his friend Vernon Jordan in a nationally broadcast interview with Mike Wallace.
In the pages of The New York Times, feminist icon Gloria Steinem announced the “one-free grope” rule, specially developed forthe Clinton era.
Former Time magazine correspondent Nina Burleigh said of Clinton, “I would be happy to give him a bl*w job just to thank him for keeping abortion legal.”
Time magazine’s Margaret Carlson said Linda Tripp had “lost membership in the family of man” for secretly tape-recording Monica Lewinsky. Tripp kept the recordings not for something so exalted as stopping Trump, but to protect herself from a charge of perjury.
Even when the law began to close in on the horny hick — midway through the second term he won because of the media’s heroic self-censorship — the rest of us had to spend a year listening to liberals say “Guys like bl*w jobs,” “Everybody does it” and “Let’s move on.”
When Clinton was credibly accused of rape by Juanita Broaddrick, NBC strategically held the story — until a week after the Senate had voted in the rapist’s impeachment trial. All the public could do was helplessly sport “Free Lisa Myers” buttons, referring to the investigative reporter who got the interview.
Explaining NBC’s incomprehensible decision to hold its own investigative report, Myers told Broaddrick: “The good news is you’re credible. The bad news is that you’re very credible.”
At least NBC ran the story eventually. The name “Juanita Broaddrick” never crossed the lips of “CBS Evening News” anchor Dan Rather.
Asked by FNC’s Bill O’Reilly why he never got around to mentioning that the commander in chief was, more likely than not, a rapist, Rather said, “When the charge has something to do with somebody’s private sex life, I would prefer not to run any of it.”
So according to our media, committing a rape is “somebody’s private sex life,” but using a bad word is rape.
Poor Billy Bush has to be fired from NBC’s “Today” show so the media can pretend that Trump’s using bawdy language is a very, very serious offense.
Meanwhile, Billy’s ex-president uncle and cousin openly fraternize with the rapist. The second President Bush calls Bill Clinton his “brother from another mother” and praises Clinton’s “character” — something even Clinton’s defenders never did with a straight face.
Now the networks are holding casting calls for some loon willing to falsely accuse Trump of sexual assault, so they can hype it like the Duke lacrosse case, Mattress Girl and Rolling Stone’s fraternity rape. Unfortunately — for us, fortunately for the media — by the time the truth comes out, the election will be over.
H/T – AnnCoulter.com

READ MORE

Friday, November 23, 2012

The saga of Mitt and Ann

THE TROUBLE WITH MITT
by Daniel Greenfield:
Back when the establishment turned Romney into its choice, I said that they should have their shot, but that they should pay a political price for their failure if it blows up in their face. Ann Coulter isn't willing to pay that price. Instead she's gone back to her old routine. And Coulter's routine is a simple one.

1. Take a shot at an easy liberal target

2. Say something shocking about the left or minorities

3. Push liberal Republican apologetics

Items 1 and 2 establish Coulter's street cred for item 3 which is the real agenda. Using that same 1, 2 and 3 routine, Coulter has been able to sell anything, including RomneyCare as a conservative principle.

Now after taking a shot at Maxine Waters, a hard target if there ever was one, Coulter goes straight to selling Romney as more conservative than Reagan. Or more libertarian which is at least an easier sell.

But first Coulter throws out one of her specialties. Misleading facts.

The only Republican to defeat a sitting president in the last century was Ronald Reagan in 1980, when he beat Jimmy Carter, the second-worst president in U.S. history

Now this looks impressive. It makes it seem as if many Republicans tried to unseat Democratic presidents and failed.

One problem. Clinton was the only two-term Democratic president since FDR and his presidency unto death. The modern Republican Party, since its transformation into a conservative populist party, had only tried to unseat two Democratic presidents. It got one and utterly blew its attempt to unseat the other by running Bob Dole.

Now Obama was not an easy target, but neither is there some sort of track record of it being impossible for a Republican candidate to unseat a Democrat in the White House. But it helps to be a populist candidate, which Reagan was and Romney wasn't.

Reagan picked a pro-choice, anti-supply side Republican as his running mate. He lavishly praised FDR in his acceptance speech at the national convention, leading The New York Times to title an editorial about him “Franklin Delano Reagan.”

Meanwhile, Romney promised to institute major reforms to Medicare, repeal Obamacare and impose a 20 percent across-the-board tax cut. He said he’d issue a 50-state waiver to Obamacare on his first day in office. He chose a pro-life, fiscal conservative as his running mate and never praised FDR.

The only way Coulter can make Romney seem ultra-conservative is to tear down Reagan. But attempting to judge Reagan by 2012 standards doesn't work.

But let's look at why Reagan had to run the way he did and Romney had to run the way he did.

Reagan could run more liberal than he was, because he had established credibility on conservative ideas. No one doubted his bona fides after all these years. He could make compromises while people would still believe that he had the right agenda at heart.

Romney had to run more conservative than he was because he had no such credibility. And this is a major problem for politicians in general. It's how we ended up with our own version of John Kerry.

A Republican candidate may need to be able to run to the center in a national election while having right of center policies. Just the way that Obama runs a little to the right while holding a far left wing agenda. But candidates with no ideological cred cannot do this. People assume that they're selling out, rather than utilizing a strategy, and they're generally right.

The good news for masochists is that you can look forward to Ann Coulter doing this same full-court press for Chris Christie in a year or two as Mr. Conservative.

"The idea that Romney failed to present a clear contrast with Obama or was too “nice” is also nonsense." 
 Now Coulter almost has a point here. That is if you don't count foreign policy, where Romney spent an entire debate agreeing with Obama, or social policy which he avoided talking about.

But on business, Romney established a clear line of difference with Obama. It was so effective that many Democratic businessmen became the Romney Democrats. Unfortunately Romney failed to extend this difference into any other area and all his Romney Democrats were mostly small and big businessmen. The Reagan Democrats either stayed home or voted for Obama.

The problem wasn't that Romney was too nice. The problem was that Romney did not know anything outside his narrow sphere of business. He failed to challenge Obama on Benghazi because he really did not understand the issues. That was why he also favored a more aggressive policy in Syria. Or why he couldn't set himself apart from Obama on foreign policy.

The same went for any issue outside business and the economy. And that seems palatable enough because the economy was the big issue. But that just highlights the differences between Reagan and Romney.

Reagan could extend conservative philosophy across a range of areas. Romney could only champion free enterprise and it wasn't enough.

Conservatives love Reagan less because of policy than because of the way he was able to advocate conservative ideas as mainstream ones. Romney had trouble doing this.

To the extent Republicans have a problem with their candidates, it’s not that they’re not conservative enough. Where are today’s Nelson Rockefellers, Arlen Specters or George H.W. Bushes? Happily, they have gone the way of leprosy.

Having vanquished liberal Republicans, the party’s problem now runs more along the lines of moron showoffs, trying to impress tea partiers

Really? Liberal Republicans no longer exist?

Has Jeb Bush gone the way of leprosy? Has Lindsey Graham? Have Susan Collins, Lisa Murkowski, John McCain all vanished?

In CoulterWorld, the Republican Party's elected officials are now all conservatives and the only problem is that obnoxious Tea Party morons insist on asking them to be conservatives, even though they totally are. Like Mitt Romney and Chris Christie.
Friday Afternoon Roundup: Rumors of Ceasefires

Monday, August 27, 2007

Two Americas

“Democrats claim there are ‘two Americas.’ If they have their way, there will be two Latin Americas.

Liberals know they’re losing the demographic war. Christians have lots of children and adopt lots of children; liberals abort children and encourage the gay lifestyle in anyone with a flair for color. They can’t keep up.

Population expert Nick Eberstadt recently speculated in The Washington Post that a principal reason for America’s high fertility rate compared to Europe’s is its religiosity. Well, that leaves liberals out.

The Democratic Party is in the fight of its life against a conservative demographic trend. Its only hope is to gerrymander America to make the poorest half of Mexico a state. Only a massive influx of criminals, wards of the state and rioters can save them. This is why Democrats are obsessed with giving two groups the right to vote: illegal aliens and felons...

To liberals, building a wall across the Mexican border is a violation of the Voting Rights Act. Democrats are counting on illegal immigrants to be the future of their party, their border guards for the new socialist state.

At least liberals have a clear mission and know what they’re fighting for. Their plan is to destroy America.” —Ann Coulter