Ann Coulter: “Three cheers for RomneyCare”

posted at 8:55 pm on February 1, 2012 by Allahpundit

Remember what I said in the minimum-wage thread about conservatives gradually being forced to play ideological Twister to defend Romney if he’s the nominee? Here’s Exhibit AAA1.

I don’t understand. I don’t understand why, if you support one of these candidates, it can’t simply be because they’re the best of a bad lot. This happens endlessly in the comments here as Romney fans and Gingrich fans insult each other into digging in ever deeper behind their guy, but I can’t fathom why that mindset would affect Coulter. She has a million arguments for Romney over Gingrich or Santorum if she wants them: He’s a better fundraiser and organizer, he polls better against Obama head to head, he’s good enough at debates to have thwarted Newt twice in Florida, he’s got private sector experience, etc. There’s simply no need to cheer him on for the least conservative thing he ever did in public life. Either she’s so sick of people dumping on her for backing Mitt that she decided to write this as a rhetorical middle finger to her critics or she’s curious to see just how strong her persuasive powers over the right are. If she can turn them around on RomneyCare, she can turn them around on anything.

Read it all, but here’s the worst part. Turns out government coercion isn’t so bad as long as it’s not coming from the feds:

As Rick Santorum has pointed out, states can enact all sorts of laws — including laws banning contraception — without violating the Constitution. That document places strict limits on what Congress can do, not what the states can do. Romney, incidentally, has always said his plan would be a bad idea nationally…

No one is claiming that the Constitution gives each person an unalienable right not to buy insurance.

States have been forcing people to do things from the beginning of the republic: drilling for the militia, taking blood tests before marriage, paying for public schools, registering property titles and waiting in line for six hours at the Department of Motor Vehicles in order to drive.

There’s no obvious constitutional difference between a state forcing militia-age males to equip themselves with guns and a state forcing adults in today’s world to equip themselves with health insurance.

The hyperventilating over government-mandated health insurance confuses a legal argument with a policy objection.

Once you accept that State Mandate Y should be tolerated because people already tolerate State Mandate X, you’ve built yourself a self-perpetuating government expansion machine. Why not let the state mandate people’s diets while we’re at it? After all, we let them force militia-age males to carry guns. And the punchline, of course, is that the federal/state distinction she’s drawing isn’t nearly as bright as we wish. Fully half of RomneyCare was paid for with federal tax dollars through Medicaid, i.e. by you and me. Romney’s ostensible big solution to Massachusetts’s free-rider health-care problem actually required Massachusetts to be something of a free rider.

A lot of people are going to end up writing about this, so rather than me blathering on, let me point you to two of them for further reading. One: Inveterate RomneyCare critic Philip Klein has a lengthy rebuttal to Coulter, part of which is devoted to reminding her that RomneyCare actually wasn’t designed as a solution to the free-rider problem. It was designed to grow the pool of premiums in order to offset the costs of expanding coverage to people with pre-existing conditions. Go see how the math turned out on that. And two: Mark Levin spent half an hour of his radio show tonight rebutting Coulter point by point. I’ve only been able to listen to the first 10 minutes so far but the time was well spent. Carve out 30 minutes and settle in. Exit question: Her CPAC speech next week should really be something, huh? Click the image to listen.

Update: Actually, as a counterweight to Coulter’s piece, go read Laura Ingraham’s lament about tea-party impotence in the presidential race. The great expectation on the right is that we’ll elect a conservative Senate this year that’ll hold Romney in check even if he reverts to his RINO-ier ways as president. I’m not as sure of that as other people are. The pressure to fall in line behind a first-term president will be enormous lest he be undercut publicly before the following election, and it’s not clear how bold Romney would be in stumping for conservative measures that originate in the Senate.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3 8

HOLY SHI’ITE

blatantblue on February 1, 2012 at 8:56 PM

This is gonna get ugly fast.

squint on February 1, 2012 at 8:57 PM

Good Lord.

I support Romney over the execrable Gingrich, but Ann is simply insane here.

Did you catch that from Maher, Ann? Yikes.

rightwingyahooo on February 1, 2012 at 8:57 PM

Shut up and brush back your hair!

KOOLAID2 on February 1, 2012 at 8:57 PM

Ann Coulter acted stupidly.

Electrongod on February 1, 2012 at 8:57 PM

She’ll say literally anything for a headline. And Levin fell for the trolling – not because he’s a noob, but because he has NPD pushing Obummer levels.

CorporatePiggy on February 1, 2012 at 8:58 PM

ED HARRIS / JULIANNE MOORE ’12

its the only way

e-pirate on February 1, 2012 at 8:58 PM

Ann Coulter thinks she’s going to take Willard away from his wife after the election, and convert him to Catholicism. Such is the hypnotic attraction of a tycoon’s wallet on women, especially one with a billion dollars in it.

Emperor Norton on February 1, 2012 at 8:59 PM

Don’t you love farce?
My fault I fear.
I thought that you’d want what I want.
Sorry, my dear.
But where are the clowns?
Quick, send in the clowns.
Don’t bother, they’re here.

Isn’t it rich?
Isn’t it queer,
Losing my timing this late
In my career?
And where are the clowns?
There ought to be clowns.
Well, maybe next year.

Fallon on February 1, 2012 at 8:59 PM

At the rate we are going, coming November NRO is going to be running editorials claiming Obamacare didn’t go far enough

e-pirate on February 1, 2012 at 8:59 PM

Ann Coulter has always been about performance art. I doubt she’s uttered a dozen sincere phrases in her public lifetime. Once again, she goes for whatever gets her in the paper or on the Internet.

urban elitist on February 1, 2012 at 9:00 PM

wow. A Coulter thread. This is rare.

ted c on February 1, 2012 at 9:00 PM

As it turns out mandates = Conservatism. How did I miss that?

Bmore on February 1, 2012 at 9:00 PM

Either she’s so sick of people dumping on her for backing Mitt that she decided to write this as a rhetorical middle finger to her critics or she’s curious to see just how strong her persuasive powers over the right are. If she can turn them around on RomneyCare, she can turn them around on anything.

Ann Coulter, a legend in her own mind.

GrannyDee on February 1, 2012 at 9:00 PM

it’s rare to even get a Coulter link in the headlines.

I’m not a big fan of Coulter, but this is a rarity.

ted c on February 1, 2012 at 9:00 PM

Yeah… I just commented on the other thread. I just got that email.

I guess the pie tosses have gotten to her. She’s gone over to the dark side.

JellyToast on February 1, 2012 at 9:00 PM

Eat a cheeseburger, girlfriend. Your sugar’s waaaaay low and you’re hallucinating again.

tree hugging sister on February 1, 2012 at 9:00 PM

I’m actually speechless.

gophergirl on February 1, 2012 at 9:01 PM

Mark Levin spent fully half an hour of his radio show tonight rebutting Coulter point by point. I’ve only been able to listen to the first 10 minutes so far but the time was well spent. Carve out 30 minutes and settle in

To hell with that. I’m not stopping listening to fine music for a half hour of nails on a chalkboard.

Transcript, or Levin goes ignored.

JohnGalt23 on February 1, 2012 at 9:01 PM

Establishment mob.

SouthernGent on February 1, 2012 at 9:01 PM

May the Scare-Ho stick her shitty books up her boney ass! She has been “bought and paid for” by the Rommeny elite. I hope she got a room with a great view in hell! If she’s lucky she’ll have an adjoining room with Fat Boy Christie, whose bunking with John “I Wanna Be President Whaaaaa” McCain.

Tbone McGraw on February 1, 2012 at 9:02 PM

Either she’s

Bill Maher’s Girl Friend.

Or she’s

Bill Maher’s FWB.

batterup on February 1, 2012 at 9:02 PM

Time for another dressing down of Coulter by TV’s Andy Levy

moonbatattack on February 1, 2012 at 9:02 PM

The bed called, she needs to clean the poop up.

Sekhmet on February 1, 2012 at 9:02 PM

And they said Michele Bachmann was batsh!t crazy!

Emperor Norton on February 1, 2012 at 9:02 PM

You know, I just can’t figure Ann Coulter out. Coming off the release of her powerfully poignant reminder of mass mob psychology, Demonic, she has oddly endorsed Mitt Romney and vociferously denounced Newt Gingrich.

I can think of three reasons for this. One is that she is making penance for denouncing the milquetoast anti-conservative John McCain in the last election – and requiring the American people to sacrifice our freedom on her behalf; two, she realizes that she made a tremendous mistake with McCain and that Obama really was far worse than she imagined and she is altering her commentary to correct that mistake this time; and three, that she is on the take, knowing (as John Ziegler writes; who also incidentally hates Gingrich) that having Obama, or any Democrat President, to rail against is the source of the vast majority of the income for conservative pundits, writers and newsmen.

My wife has another theory or two, which I won’t address: that Coulter is a Mormon, or wants to be Romney’s third wife, or wants to be Romney’s press secretary.

But why would a conservative writer so strongly and brutally endorse a candidate whose political opportunism and political spinelessness is so obvious to the electorate. Why does she rail against all cheering crowds; as if cheering in itself is a demonic act? Why does she think that Romney has a better chance than Gingrich? Why does she think any Republican in office, particularly Romney, will ensure that ObamaCare will be revoked? Her recent argument with Bill O’Reilly on the subject consisted only of emotionally bullying, name-calling, brow-beating, circular logic, opinions offered as statements of fact, and evasion when pinned down.

To say that Gingrich can’t win, is to say that the election is that much less necessary, that much less appropriate. She mocks the voters who are raised out of their seats by Gingrich’s antipathy for the liberal press. She says that debates are for sober consumption by quiet people of reason, and not for the voters who are sick and tired of MSM maligning Republican candidates with trumped up charges and slanderous innuendo.

She sees no reason for Gingrich to address the issue that old news, obviously culled up and offered for public consumption by a biased press, and tailored by the press to do him the most political damage, was not the issue in this election but was a clearly deliberate slur. She has become so inured to Washington ways that she honestly thinks that if CNN can get an ex-wife to say in an interview something along the lines of: “It hurts. It hurts to this day. I feel traumatized by his infidelity. I feel brutalized. I feel beaten up inside” then the legitimate lead question in the debate, just coincidentally scheduled for later that night, should rightly be: “Sir, a lead story in the news today is about how your wife has come forward to say she feels beaten up. Sir, in light of these recent allegations, we all have to ask you the question: ‘Sir, do you still beat your wife?’”

If this were Obama being asked, or Jesse Jackson, or Bill Clinton, the question would be: “Sir, how do you deal so well with your ex-wife’s – and I must point out, sir, your now long-divorced ex-wife’s – lingering resentment? Do you find it the least bit distressing to deal with at the same time that you have the weight on your shoulders of leading the most powerful country on earth?”

Coulter knows this is going on. And she knows not only the conservative voters but the independents as well, hate it. And so when one of these questions, phrased and injected into the news cycle and the debates with greater or lesser degrees of subtlety, is raised the people object. And when it is so soundly rebuffed by the targeted candidate, and the media are rightly chastised, the people cheer. It has never happened before, and now they are cheering. And Coulter calls this Democrat-minded and mob responses.

And she says only Milquetoast Mitt, man too introverted and controlled to cry out what he thinks and too ambitious to take a position based on conviction, can deflect the media’s arrows and bring the fight to Obama and beat him fairly in an unfair fight. Right.

Me personally, I would rather have a man challenge the question and refuse to answer it than hear a man accept the question and then bluff his way through it. Romney refuses to answer questions, too. The difference is that he pretends to answer it; replaying tape number 247 and burbling it out of his mouth; pre-scripted, poll-tested and polished to confuse, delay and defer until a later date – a date some time after the election.

Question: And this man can beat an Obama who employs bombast to make a point, unchecked and unchallenged by the press, and repeated prolifically as the perfect answer, as genius, by a press in his pocket? Demagoguery is bad, but the battle will be won by the people, people who hear the reasoned well-thought out response, sharpened and delivered with a heart-felt conviction. This will convince the public. This will, if anything will, change opinion. This alone will win the battle. Whether Gingrich will win, I can’t portend. But this is certainly not Romney’s game. This is the game Romney cannot win. This is Obama’s game, and his only game.

No one can beat a demagogue, but another equally powerful speaker. Ann Coulter knows this. So how can she argue so vehemently against Gingrich? And what does she ever expect Romney to be able to do?

One thing is certain. With Obama in his second term, her next book will be her best seller yet.

flicker on February 1, 2012 at 9:02 PM

Allah, I already feel like I’m living in a Bizarro Superman world. Now this?

cynccook on February 1, 2012 at 9:02 PM

Romneycare, automatic increases to minimum wage…Romney is a Republican? We are doomed. It is time for a third party, an actual conservative party with NO squishy RINOs!

Doomsday on February 1, 2012 at 9:03 PM

T have followed ever primary since 96′ I would have to say this is the strangest.

I never thought I would read something like that from Ann, but whatever time heals all wounds.

boogaleesnots on February 1, 2012 at 9:03 PM

Don’t quite understand the logic of “it’s OK for the state government to take away my rights and freedoms, but it’s bad for the federal government to do the same thing”. How about all levels of government concentrate on what they are suppose to do (fix roads, defend the country) and not worry about everything else?

Frank Drebin on February 1, 2012 at 9:03 PM

Jump. Shark.

conservative pilgrim on February 1, 2012 at 9:03 PM

One thing is certain. With Obama in his second term, her next book will be her best seller yet.

flicker on February 1, 2012 at 9:02 PM

Wow. You really think (and type) fast.

cynccook on February 1, 2012 at 9:03 PM

Ann Coulter: Romney White House spokesperson

Roy Rogers on February 1, 2012 at 9:04 PM

“Crazy…. that’s how it gooooesss…”

Pasalubong on February 1, 2012 at 9:04 PM

Ann Coulter, channeling Megan McCain…

Scary.

idesign on February 1, 2012 at 9:04 PM

We call this jumping the shark, folks. Coulter has been on the edge of irrelevancy for a while, now. She just went over the cliff.

Warner Todd Huston on February 1, 2012 at 9:04 PM

Last stop on the road to irrelevance for the crazy hag.

Southernblogger on February 1, 2012 at 9:04 PM

No one is claiming that the Constitution gives each person an unalienable right not to buy insurance.

How much did she get for her soul..?

d1carter on February 1, 2012 at 9:04 PM

I don’t understand

Allah, that is the most correct thing that you have said during this election cycle.

Jailbreak on February 1, 2012 at 9:04 PM

She has officially jumped the shark.

John the Libertarian on February 1, 2012 at 9:05 PM

AP.

I don’t like mandates, but Coulter is right in that mandates have already been accepted on the state level. She correctly points out several previous kinds of mandates, all on the state level, that have never really been challenged.

I’m not saying we shouldn’t undo mandates on a state level, but your assertion that if we accept it in Y situation we’ll have to accept it in X situation is faulty. We accepted mandates for Y situations decades ago, X, healthcare, is just an outgrowth of that.

WolvenOne on February 1, 2012 at 9:05 PM

Never found her arguments for or against anything very compelling. Someone said earlier that she’s all “performance art.” Perfect description.

DrStock on February 1, 2012 at 9:05 PM

it’s rare to even get a Coulter link in the headlines.

I’m not a big fan of Coulter, but this is a rarity.

ted c on February 1, 2012 at 9:00 PM

Yeah, it’s that bad. Let’s hope her article is hyperbole. Otherwise, she toast. As in, she just got the nuclear code numbers to blow up her Conservative following and went full-on crazy. She done blew it up.

conservative pilgrim on February 1, 2012 at 9:05 PM

Ann Coulter wishes that Chis Christie had ChristieCare…
It would be like Vi@gra to her.

Electrongod on February 1, 2012 at 9:06 PM

flicker on February 1, 2012 at 9:02 PM

BRAVO!!!

GrannyDee on February 1, 2012 at 9:06 PM

Jump. Shark.

conservative pilgrim on February 1, 2012 at 9:03 PM

She’s past that with this column. She’s in Joannie Loves ChaChi rerun land with this one

Pasalubong on February 1, 2012 at 9:06 PM

s/b she’s toast.

conservative pilgrim on February 1, 2012 at 9:06 PM

She’s past that with this column. She’s in Joannie Loves ChaChi rerun land with this one

Pasalubong on February 1, 2012 at 9:06 PM

Groan. I was young enough to watch those. Ew.

conservative pilgrim on February 1, 2012 at 9:06 PM

“This happens endlessly in the comments here as Romney fans and Gingrich fans insult each other into digging in ever deeper behind their guy,…”

Now that’s just crazy talk…

/

Seven Percent Solution on February 1, 2012 at 9:06 PM

I don’t want X, Y or Z. Like I have said before and will to do is I’m voting for Santorum. I can’t seem to be able to trust Gingrich or Romney.

multiuseless on February 1, 2012 at 9:07 PM

I wonder if she realizes she has damaged if not killed her book sales.

She has totally insulted the very people who buy her books. I know I’ll never buy another one.

gophergirl on February 1, 2012 at 9:07 PM

It is time for a third party, an actual conservative party

All right, let’s get this party started.

Emperor Norton on February 1, 2012 at 9:07 PM

What a day for Mitt. His girlfriend validates his mandates and he creates a whole new entitlement, ever increasing unemployment benefits.

And Mitt beats Obama? Who cares? Mitt = Obama!

ConcealedKerry on February 1, 2012 at 9:07 PM

Her CPAC speech next week should really be something, huh?

It will awesome as always. Lets see some Gingrich supporters debate her face to face. I could always use a good laugh. Bloggers and fat talk show hosts are great behind the keyboard and with their pre-screened talk shows. They dont do jack newt in a real debate situation where their stupidity can be called out live.

Jailbreak on February 1, 2012 at 9:07 PM

Is Ann Coulter dating Charles Johnson these days?

Rational Thought on February 1, 2012 at 9:07 PM

One thing is certain. With Obama in his second term, her next book will be her best seller yet.flicker on February 1, 2012 at 9:02 PM

‘We’re all now wallowing in a puddle of poisonous refuse’ makes for a bad book title.

The Nerve on February 1, 2012 at 9:07 PM

Now that’s just crazy talk…

/

Seven Percent Solution on February 1, 2012 at 9:06 PM

haha. Yeah, what is he talking about?

conservative pilgrim on February 1, 2012 at 9:07 PM

How much did she get for her soul..?

d1carter on February 1, 2012 at 9:04 PM

Bingo!

44Magnum on February 1, 2012 at 9:08 PM

I don’t understand why, if you support one of these candidates, it can’t simply be because they’re the best of a bad lot. This happens endlessly in the comments here as Romney fans and Gingrich fans insult each other into digging in ever deeper behind their guy-

Couldn’t be because people on both sides genuinely feel that the very things you said Ann Coulter could argue for Romney (and a handful I’m sure people could pick out for Gingrich) actually makes their candidates good, and that the negatives are just the bad you get with the good (hey, it’s the facts of life), and that the constant back and forth insults cause these people to genuinely dig in for their candidates.

Admittedly, I’m not one to talk considering I throw sarcasm and dry humor into the faces of Newt fans, and Ann’s a bit off here trying to throw support for Romney. But hey, when you have Palin ignoring Newt’s own Alinsky behavior and his establishment lifestyle in trying to cast him as the ‘tea party outsider’, Rush Limbaugh and Mark Levin doing everything in their power to ignore everything bad about Gingrich’s performance except for his whining and the Newtrons both on the boards and in the media doing their hardest to square the facts about Newt with the notion that he’s someone some great Conservative Outsider, then Romney supporters can only act in kind.

Personally, I’m under no illusions that Romneycare was a pretty bad idea, or that Romney isn’t the Great Conservative hope. But then I’m not looking for that, I want a technocrat who understands the Private Sector, which I get in Romney.

I’m also not under the illusion that Newt Gingrich would be anything less than a massive weight around the party’s neck that’d drag down not only our ambitions on the Presidential level, but on the Federal, State and Local level as well.

WealthofNations on February 1, 2012 at 9:09 PM

What is the hell is wrong with that chick? Is she fracking nuts? Doubling down on crazy? I’m done with her. She’s getting a bad case of liberalis kissassus. I’m sticking with my guy, Mark ‘thank me’ Levin. He’s da man!

I hope Andy Levy tears her a new one next time she’s on Redeye. Andy, do your thang!

Conservchik on February 1, 2012 at 9:09 PM

Life’s a heck of a thing, I’ll say that. It’s like you could be walking in the park and BAM! Simultaneously you step in dog poop and some kid’s Frisbee hits you in the groin.

radjah shelduck on February 1, 2012 at 9:10 PM

Bmore on February 1, 2012 at 9:00 PM

Well, Gingrich is for a mandate as noted in a 2007 interview and prior to that in the 90′s on the Federal Level. He is consistently conservative. At least that is what he keeps telling me.

uhangtight on February 1, 2012 at 9:10 PM

Either she’s so sick of people dumping on her for backing Mitt that she decided to write this as a rhetorical middle finger to her critics or she’s curious to see just how strong her persuasive powers over the right are. If she can turn them around on RomneyCare, she can turn them around on anything.

What some people don’t understand is that… it’s about the principles. It’s not about the person. Ann Coulter made a name for herself because she stood for conservative principles. It wasn’t because she was Ann Coulter.

I suppose like anyone, you can get worn down by the constant attacks and pie throwing and so one. but you know, some of us who are standing up for our principles don’t have walled mansions and body guards to hide behind. We’re out working, living and breathing it all right here on the street, only nobody is around sending us thousands or millions of dollars, or throwing publicity at us or heaping praise on us as conservative icons every time we take a stand or just live our values. No, we pretty much go noticed, except maybe by our families. And sometimes the best we can hope for is not to get kicked in the face.

JellyToast on February 1, 2012 at 9:10 PM

As much as I agree with Ann’s constitutional reasoning, there’s a big hole…

There’s no obvious constitutional difference between a state forcing militia-age males to equip themselves with guns and a state forcing adults in today’s world to equip themselves with health insurance.

But there is an obvious difference, Ann. The US Constitution gives Congress the authority (and I read the responsibility) “To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia”. No individual, under this clause is to be responsible for arming themselves as a member of the militia. That is the responsibility of Congress. In this case, the citizenry is expected to provide the means for fulfilling this legislative mandate.

JohnGalt23 on February 1, 2012 at 9:11 PM

Maybe while writing Demonic she was possessed. I have no other explanation.

FLconservative on February 1, 2012 at 9:11 PM

This is what happens to your brain when you sleep with Bill Maher.

JPeterman on February 1, 2012 at 9:11 PM

Why not let the state mandate people’s diets while we’re at it?

How far away from this do you think we actually are?

Axe on February 1, 2012 at 9:12 PM

I’m throwing all of her books away and never reading another. She is now dead to me.

daddysgirl on February 1, 2012 at 9:12 PM

Maybe while writing Demonic she was possessed. I have no other explanation.

FLconservative on February 1, 2012 at 9:11 PM

That was such a good book. I can’t believe she’s gone from that to this.

gophergirl on February 1, 2012 at 9:12 PM

Ann Coulter…and she gets more TV time than the “Boss Emeritus”? Shows you where Fox etc. really are at. Never could understand how this low-class political skank could get where she is…I wonder how it feels to sell your political soul. Maybe she doesn’t have one. Maybe she’s just been following opportunity and doesn’t know she’s done.

I guess you just have to rant and rave a lot and then write a book. Once you’ve done that you can say anything and everyone is supposed to pay attention.

oldroy on February 1, 2012 at 9:13 PM

No one is claiming that the Constitution gives each person an unalienable right not to buy insurance.

How much did she get for her soul..?

d1carter on February 1, 2012 at 9:04 PM

Where in the US Constitution do you find the US Government has the authority to prevent a sovereign State from requiring you, as a resident of that State, to carry health insurance?

JohnGalt23 on February 1, 2012 at 9:14 PM

I’ve been losing my patience with her. Now she’s just jumping the shark.

tyketto on February 1, 2012 at 9:14 PM

Clueless… *unt.

… I said runt.

GuitarMark on February 1, 2012 at 9:15 PM

oldroy on February 1, 2012 at 9:13 PM

It’s the hair color. Fox likes blondes. Sad, but true.

conservative pilgrim on February 1, 2012 at 9:15 PM

She doesn’t get it. RomneyCare doesn’t suck because it’s Government Making Us Do X, it sucks because it’s Government Smothering the Free Market to detrimental effect (which is redundant, I know). Premiums are sky-high in Massachusetts now, and wait times for care are longer. A super-genius businessman like Mitt should know there’s a cost to everything, and that cost might now be measured solely in dollars (eg, wait times, quality of care). How can someone manipulate the lines of supply and demand so violently and call it “conservative”? Bizarro.

Pasalubong on February 1, 2012 at 9:15 PM

Maybe while writing Demonic she was possessed. I have no other explanation.

FLconservative on February 1, 2012 at 9:11 PM

There it is. Simple and to the point. Ms. Coulter is possessed.

Fallon on February 1, 2012 at 9:15 PM

(With a capital “C”)

GuitarMark on February 1, 2012 at 9:15 PM

In this case, the citizenry is expected to provide the means for fulfilling this legislative mandate.

JohnGalt23 on February 1, 2012 at 9:11 PM

This was my immediate thought, too. I was just too lazy to look it up. There is absolutely no Constitutional case to be made for mandating the purchase of a product for non-activity. Not even the general welfare cause can be stretched that far. If they want to call it a tax, then call it a tax.

John the Libertarian on February 1, 2012 at 9:15 PM

This is what happens when you focus on the person, rather than the principals….

idesign on February 1, 2012 at 9:15 PM

JohnGalt23 on February 1, 2012 at 9:14 PM

I guess we will just have to let the SCOTUS resolve this for us, now won’t we…

d1carter on February 1, 2012 at 9:15 PM

(For “clueless”.)

GuitarMark on February 1, 2012 at 9:16 PM

She has been gilted by her hero!
She relentlessly pursued Christy Creme and when he would not throw his fat hat in the ring she went to the next bestest Progressive, the NE liberal RINO Romney.

ConcealedKerry on February 1, 2012 at 9:16 PM

Diane Sawyer is proud of her.
Then chokes down a drink…

Electrongod on February 1, 2012 at 9:16 PM

(That’s obvious, right? No other alternative would come to mind, would it?)

GuitarMark on February 1, 2012 at 9:16 PM

I heard somewhere she is dating someone from the Romney campaign.

ctmom on February 1, 2012 at 9:16 PM

She relentlessly pursued Christy Creme and when he would not throw his fat hat in the ring she went to the next bestest Progressive, the NE liberal RINO Romney.

ConcealedKerry on February 1, 2012 at 9:16 PM

RINO digger.
BBD.

Electrongod on February 1, 2012 at 9:18 PM

If I were a CPAC attendee, I would walk out when she starts speaking. Empty room.

journeyintothewhirlwind on February 1, 2012 at 9:18 PM

As soon as Ann Coulter endorsed Romney and started shilling for him, I threw all her books in the garbage!

Sane people are losing their marbles over Romney and are going any length to make a case for Romney being a Conservative and the ONLY electable candidate!

Ann has lost the last vestige of any credibility she may have had.

Hope the staff at Hot Air is learning a lesson here!

Sparky5253 on February 1, 2012 at 9:18 PM

I wonder if she realizes she has damaged if not killed her book sales.

She has totally insulted the very people who buy her books. I know I’ll never buy another one.

gophergirl on February 1, 2012 at 9:07 PM

to paraphrase Mitt, I don’t worry about Coulter’s book sales..what are you people going to say next, that Drudge is going to go out of business :-)…btw, even that dolt from alaska sells books, so it can’t be that difficult :-)…

jimver on February 1, 2012 at 9:18 PM

“Once you accept that State Mandate Y should be tolerated because people already tolerate State Mandate X, you’ve built yourself a self-perpetuating government expansion machine. Why not let the state mandate people’s diets while we’re at it? After all, we let them force militia-age males to carry guns.

“Is Coulter arguing that RomneyCare is good policy, or is she merely saying that RomneyCare adopted by a state is not unconstitutional with respect to the U.S. Constitution?

Ira on February 1, 2012 at 9:19 PM

How about all levels of government concentrate on what they are suppose to do (fix roads, defend the country) and not worry about everything else?

Frank Drebin

Pfff. How do you expect politicians to trade favors for campaign funds? Well?

chimney sweep on February 1, 2012 at 9:19 PM

or she’s curious to see just how strong her persuasive powers over the right are. If she can turn them around on RomneyCare, she can turn them around on anything.

She fails. Miserably.
She can’t turns us around on Obamneycare.

burrata on February 1, 2012 at 9:19 PM

I don’t understand why, if you support one of these candidates, it can’t simply be because they’re the best of a bad lot.

It also doesn’t help that a number of bloggers, politicians and talking heads keep talking up end of the world-esque language as it concerns this field and this election, some going so far as to talk up their preference for a meteor rather than any of the actual candidates and going for the super unrealistic and bound to backfire option of the backroom deal based brokered convention.

If people tend to think that their candidate is good, then the constant pounding of the supposedly poor state of the field can create the impression that ‘Oh God, my guy’s the only good guy, the rest suck’, and cause inspire even further trench digging.

WealthofNations on February 1, 2012 at 9:20 PM

This is what happens to your brain when you sleep with Bill Maher.

JPeterman on February 1, 2012 at 9:11 PM

Syphilis? Yes I think you may be onto something there.

cynccook on February 1, 2012 at 9:20 PM

And they said Michele Bachmann was batsh!t crazy!

Emperor Norton on February 1, 2012 at 9:02 PM

OOOHHHHH ! How DARE THEY !!!!

/

cableguy615 on February 1, 2012 at 9:21 PM

This is absolutely ridiculous. She was just on Red Eye not two weeks ago saying we absolutely positively have to get someone in the White House to kill Obamacare.

John the Libertarian on February 1, 2012 at 9:21 PM

Honestly, I think the term “knee-jerk” applies to your hyperbolic and hysterical blog post Allahpundit.

These days, so-called “CONSERVATIVES” wouldn’t know a conservative principle if it slapped ‘em up side the head.

It’s SAD, it’s truly SAD to see the reactionary response to something that you SHOULD comprehend without having to even try.

Here it is: A conservative principle. The concept of states’ rights.

http://www.whyromney.com/truth-about-mandates.php

mountainaires on February 1, 2012 at 9:21 PM

Whatever has happened to her is soooooooooooo bizzzarrrre I can think only that they got to her with the Obama fairy dust, she’s been turned to the Dark Side, and is now an unwitting prop in a new David A$$h0l#rod campaign gimmick.

stukinIL4now on February 1, 2012 at 9:21 PM

I guess we will just have to let the SCOTUS resolve this for us, now won’t we…

d1carter on February 1, 2012 at 9:15 PM

Not really.

There is no doubt (in my mind, at least), that the US Government has overstepped its bounds with Obamacare, not because of any express right to not carry insurance, but because there is nothing in the Constitution giving the USG the authority to require that of citizens. If the Constitution doesn’t say they have it, then under Amendment X, they don’t have it.

But the authorities that States have to impose requirements on people is assumed to be vast, unless those requirements come in conflict with provisions of the US Constitution. I can’t find anything in the US Constitution that empowers the USG to take action against a State for placing that requirement on its residents.

Can you?

JohnGalt23 on February 1, 2012 at 9:22 PM

Once you accept that State Mandate Y should be tolerated because people already tolerate State Mandate X, you’ve built yourself a self-perpetuating government expansion machine.

You fought for it. You own it.

Kent18 on February 1, 2012 at 9:22 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 8