Green Room

NO! Ann Coulter, you couldn’t be MORE wrong!!!

posted at 2:33 pm on November 17, 2011 by

“How Do You Solve a Problem Like Ann Coulter?”
Kevin McCullough

Ann Coulter, without question, holds a certain degree of “importance” in the weekly debate over the jot and tittles of the debate between the left and right in America.

She is perhaps one of the most identifiable personalities on the right in America, second only to Rush Limbaugh.

The collective conservative universe bows in homage as the Townhall.com, WorldNetDaily, and HumanEvents websites e-blast her newest missive to their respective distribution lists every Wednesday evening vying for the first set of eyeballs to come to their own landing page for her newest rant.

Radio hosts jump like school boys with a crush when her newest book comes out, always eagerly sacrificing their most valuable asset (their own platforms) entirely for her gain.

She draws large crowds at both conservative and homosexual political conferences. She speaks openly of her own faith (Christianity), while regularly misinterpreting and/or misleading others as to the meanings of Christ, specifically the most important Christian doctrine–Grace.

She’s smart as whip, and can dish out an impromptu tongue lashing while delivering the destructive blow maintaining a bit of a devilish grin.

Often she throws rhetorical temper tantrums over issues she has no relationship to. In the Amanda Knox case she sided against an innocent American girl, who had wrongfully been skillfully framed for the murder of a roommate. In doing so she called Knox’s defenders “liberals and progressives” doing so from a framework of ignorance or negligence–neither an attractive quality. But she was materially and expressly false in those assumptions and refused to apologize to the conservative, Christian, Republican families she slandered in the process.

Ann’s best qualities come in post-election analysis, seldom has she been very good in pre-election prognostication. She backed Duncan Hunter in the 2008 primary, until he dropped out, and then she backed Mitt Romney, the guy who despite spending an enormous fortune could muster no better than third in the 2008 race–behind a very weak McCain candidacy.

In 2011 she had exclusively backed a candidate who wasn’t even in the race (New Jersey Governor Chris Christie), and this week in her syndicated column she claims that none of the candidates in the race other than Mitt Romney have a chance of defeating incumbent Barack Obama in the general election.

In 2008 it was uncovered long after the primaries had been concluded that the Romney campaign staff had in unethical and covert ways infiltrated prominent conservative opinion sources like the National Review with leads and exclusives that were designed to adversely harm all the other candidacies minus Romney. Most specifically National Review repeated false assertions made by these Romney operatives about Governor Mike Huckabee. Coulter parroted them in her syndicated space and was never called to account to it until she appeared on the Huckabee television show–to pimp her book of course–when the Governor politely, but assertively called her inaccuracies into question.

It caused such consternation to Coulter that she walked out after one segment, though she had been booked for two.

Now she is arguing that because former Speaker Newt Gingrich has some legitimate baggage in his past that he is unelectable–despite his notable and steady rise in recent polls. She even goes so far as to imply that the “non-Romneys” in the race are being propped up by the “mainstream media.”

In other words, for all the prattle she has dished out over the last dozen years about conservative ideals and purity, she’s willing to chuck it all for the convenience of not having to actually execute a primary election cycle. So she has decreed it, “Mitt will win.” Therefore it must be.

Wrong!

It is important for Romney’s considerable weaknesses to be exposed so that conservatives can pick the truly best narrative to oppose Obama.

Obama has lost 2 million jobs. The GOP needs a candidate who can help usher in an environment by which jobs will be created. That’s mostly done through small business, and getting out of their way. That is not the record of the man who wrote the very blueprint for Obamacare. That is not the record of the man who cannibalized companies and sold the parts at Bain capital.

Romney’s 25% poll ceiling is bad for a primary race, but his lack of appeal to Evangelicals, Hispanics, Blacks, pro-life, pro-gun, and pro-family constituencies is horrible for the GOP in the general election.

Most importantly if Romney is the nominee, Obama will be re-elected.

This doesn’t make Coulter’s criticism of Gingrich’s dealings with Freddie Mac unimportant, but his association with the agency is no worse than Mitt Romney seeing to it that while most health care procedures now get rationed in Massachusetts, $50 state-subsidized abortions flow freely from Romneycare.

Maybe Ann is lazy. She is certainly disadvantaged. She definitely shrinks when challenged.

Rush Limbaugh talks to callers on a daily basis, this is the advantage of a talk show host–they are actually in touch with what conservatives are thinking. Ann has tried her hand at talk radio on a couple of fill-in stints, each attempt met with a ratings yawn. Perhaps it’s the interaction with people that weren’t waiting for her to sign a book that tripped her up.

Whatever the case Republicans need a candidate who will demonstrate an ability to create jobs in the private sector. They need a candidate that can interact with groups of voters like blue-dog democrats who are demanding a balanced budget. They need a candidate who can appeal across ethnic and racial lines. They need a candidate who has a serious economic plan, a bold tax reduction plan, a plan to attract rapid small business growth, and a plan to revitalize the energy sector. They need a candidate who will downsize Washington DC, and return the power to the people that sent them there. They would even settle for a candidate that would start all foreign-aid at zero and force nations to prove loyalty in exchange for U.S. support.

Several of the non-Romneys have appeal on several of these levels.

Mitt Romney pretty much appeals to establishment Republicans with strong ties to the liberal northeast–almost all of them white.

Republicans a lot like Coulter.

Kevin McCullough is the nationally syndicated host of “The Kevin McCullough Show” weekdays (7-9am EST) & “Baldwin/McCullough Radio” Saturdays (9-11pm EST) now on more than 300+ stations. His newest best-selling hardcover from Thomas Nelson Publishers, “No He Can’t: How Barack Obama is Dismantling Hope and Change” is in stores now.

Recently in the Green Room:

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

Most importantly if Romney is the nominee, Obama will be re-elected.

You don’t know that.

What will you do if Romney is the nominee? You have to put that into consideration. Something that the rise and fall of so many candidates has taught me that we need to stop fighting each other for we are all beating up on someone (be it Cain, Romney, Perry, Gingrich or Paul) that could be the nominee and weaken them for the fight against Obama, a sort of self-inflicted Operation Chaos. You certainly have the right to speak your mind but do look at the larger picture, please.

thebrokenrattle on November 17, 2011 at 2:52 PM

No broken rattle – a good healthy battle in the primary is WHY the primaries exist…

Kevin McCullough on November 17, 2011 at 2:56 PM

Mitt Romney pretty much appeals to establishment Republicans with strong ties to the liberal northeast–almost all of them white.

Republicans a lot like Coulter.

You had me till the end. Then you lost me.

samuelrylander on November 17, 2011 at 3:04 PM

Most importantly if Romney is the nominee, Obama will be re-elected.

You don’t know that.

What will you do if Romney is the nominee? You have to put that into consideration. Something that the rise and fall of so many candidates has taught me that we need to stop fighting each other for we are all beating up on someone (be it Cain, Romney, Perry, Gingrich or Paul) that could be the nominee and weaken them for the fight against Obama, a sort of self-inflicted Operation Chaos. You certainly have the right to speak your mind but do look at the larger picture, please.

thebrokenrattle on November 17, 2011 at 2:52 PM

I know that I will stay home from the general if Mitt is the Republican nominee (unless Palin goes third party). We need to revert our country to when it was great, not advance Progressivism a little slower. I would rather Obama own the destruction caused by a 2nd term than to waste it on a Republican fool.

but do look at the larger picture, please.

I am; perhaps you should do the same.

dominigan on November 17, 2011 at 3:30 PM

I know that I will stay home from the general if Mitt is the Republican nominee (unless Palin goes third party). We need to revert our country to when it was great, not advance Progressivism a little slower. I would rather Obama own the destruction caused by a 2nd term than to waste it on a Republican fool.

Staying home and not voting is the worst mistake you can make; even worse than voting for Romney. Remember, there are House and Senate races too. They are even more important than the Presidential race.
If Romney is the nominee I will vote-but I’ll leave President blank.

single stack on November 17, 2011 at 3:59 PM

Didn’t Coulter say, when she was backing Christie, that if Christie didn’t run, Romney would win the primary…and he would lose to Obama?

Is she backing away from that now? Did she explain her position change?

DrAllecon on November 17, 2011 at 4:16 PM

I know that I will stay home from the general if Mitt is the Republican nominee Republican nominee

And I know that whoever wins the next election gets to appoint the next Supreme Court judge when Kennedy retires. If it’s Obama, well, it’s over for the country.

VBMax on November 17, 2011 at 4:18 PM

And I know that whoever wins the next election gets to appoint the next Supreme Court judge when Kennedy retires. If it’s Obama, well, it’s over for the country.

VBMax on November 17, 2011 at 4:18 PM

What makes you Mittbots so sure that Mitt would appoint a conservative? I mean a real conservative constitutional originalist in the mold of Scalia or Thomas? Cause Mitt says he would? HAH! That’s rich!

gryphon202 on November 17, 2011 at 4:32 PM

Most importantly if Romney is the nominee, Obama will be re-elected.

You don’t know that.
thebrokenrattle on November 17, 2011 at 2:52 PM

Yes he does. So do I. So does anybody with a glancing awareness of the Left and an equal awareness of Romney’s record, rhetoric and past campaign trench-warfare experience. It’s not hard to understand.

rrpjr on November 17, 2011 at 5:02 PM

Im no Mittbot, I’m a Palinista who is on the rickety Cain train but I will gladly cast a vote for Romney in November 2012 if he is the nominee. A blank vote or a refusal to vote for president on that day is a effectively a vote for Barack Hussein Obama.

They are gonna palinize ANYONE who gets the nom. So get ready to defend one of these f***ers unless you want Obama 2.0

thebrokenrattle on November 17, 2011 at 5:30 PM

Ann is wrong if she thinks Romney will work to repeal Obamacare. Romney will work to “fix” Obamacare.

I’m not convinced Gingrich would actually push for repeal of it, but I’d put him closer to the “push for repeal” camp than Romney.

Obamacare is a terrible piece of legislation from multiple perspectives, and it cannot remain on the books. The republic can’t survive its continued existence, even with modifications. The only hope for a constitutional republic is absolute repudiation of it.

I don’t see Romney pushing for that. He thinks there is a government role in and solution for everything; he isn’t sufficiently opposed to the premise of Obamacare to do the work needed to rescue our future from it.

Where does that leave us? I’m working on that. At the moment, if Romney is the GOP nominee, I think our best hope — at least in terms of what government can do — is to send the most conservative Republican Congress we possibly can to Capitol Hill in 2013. A filibuster-proof majority in the Senate is essential. A Congress that could stymie either Obama or Romney, and force a few negative correctives of its own, may be our best bet over the next 5 years.

That said, I haven’t given up on other possibilities. I’m not going to let high school-level grading criteria make my candidate decision for me. Nothing any of Perry, Cain, or Gingrich has done so far constitutes proof that any of them would not be a better president than either Romney or Obama.

J.E. Dyer on November 17, 2011 at 6:41 PM

What makes you Mittbots so sure that Mitt would appoint a conservative? I mean a real conservative constitutional originalist in the mold of Scalia or Thomas? Cause Mitt says he would? HAH! That’s rich!
gryphon202 on November 17, 2011 at 4:32 PM

You know Obama will.

You don’t know if Mitt will. With Mitt you have a chance, with Obama you have none, and we can’t afford 4 more years of Obama.

This isn’t rocket science.

YehuditTX on November 17, 2011 at 7:16 PM

PS I meant of course that Obama will appoint a liberal. You don’t know what Mitt will do.

YehuditTX on November 17, 2011 at 7:16 PM

I think our best hope — at least in terms of what government can do — is to send the most conservative Republican Congress we possibly can to Capitol Hill in 2013. A filibuster-proof majority in the Senate is essential. A Congress that could stymie either Obama or Romney, and force a few negative correctives of its own, may be our best bet over the next 5 years.

We have to do that regardless. And those of you who don’t want to vote for POTUS have to go to the voting booth and at least vote for legislators.

Remember, they get to vote on SCOTUS nominees.

YehuditTX on November 17, 2011 at 7:18 PM

What makes you Mittbots so sure that Mitt would appoint a conservative?
gryphon202 on November 17, 2011 at 4:32 PM

Mitt is #6 on my support list ahead of Paul and Huntsman.
But even if Mitt wins he is not going to appoint a Kagan or
Wise Latina. Remember when Bush tried to appoint whats-her-face? The pressure was brought to bear and he appointed Alito instead.

VBMax on November 17, 2011 at 7:30 PM

Oh for St. Peter’s sake! Buncha pansy, cry-baby, no-load, dorkmeisters! If you all keep stroking out at the thought of Reagan Zombie running for president, I got a couple of words for you: Sandra. Day. O’Connor. Remember her? Not exactly the picture of conservatism, she was.

So, cowboy up and vote for the one that ISN’T going to look at Bill Ayers, Jeremiah Wright and Van Jones for advice and leadership. Or are you all going to get all Peter Arnett and Ben Tre on us an “destroy the country in order to save it”?

MunDane68 on November 17, 2011 at 7:37 PM

Mitt Romney pretty much appeals to establishment Republicans with strong ties to the liberal northeast–almost all of them white.

Republicans a lot like Coulter.

Really? You really went there? Good grief.

MadisonConservative on November 18, 2011 at 8:58 AM

Look Kevin, I realize that a lot of conservatives identify with an “aww shucks” kind of speaking, but how can anyone take your case seriously when you write like a 13 year old girl? Yes, WRITING IN CAPS IS A SIGN OF A SERIOUS THOUGHT PROCESS. Likewise, I love the well reasoned “I’d rather see the republic die than vote for Romney.” Yes, I will enter a suicide pact to kill America rather than vote for Romney. That is cogent debate at it’s finest.

drballard on November 18, 2011 at 1:09 PM

Lets look at actual facts, rather than hysterics- reagan raised taxes (repeatedly), signed the most radical abortion and divorce laws in the country (which he later “flipflopped on), was divorced himself, and abandonded Beirut to terrorists. Those are facts. He nominated some of the most liberal SCOTUS jurists. Yet he was a staunch conservative.
Romney pushed for a much more conservative health law than he got, having his veto overriden 8 times. On every abortion law that came before him, he chose life.
Facts are stubborn things. I believe Romney will be the best consevative since reagan

drballard on November 18, 2011 at 1:47 PM

This is one of the single most idiotic columns I have ever read at Hot Air.

The collective conservative universe bows in homage as the Townhall.com, WorldNetDaily, and HumanEvents websites e-blast her newest missive to their respective distribution lists every Wednesday evening vying for the first set of eyeballs to come to their own landing page for her newest rant.

I get the Anne Coulter columns via Human Events sent to me because….hold on for this….I signed up for them!

In 2011 she had exclusively backed a candidate who wasn’t even in the race (New Jersey Governor Chris Christie..

Ha! I do hope you yourself never pushed the candidacy of the nonexistent candidate Palin.

In 2008 it was uncovered long after the primaries had been concluded that the Romney campaign staff had in unethical and covert ways infiltrated prominent conservative opinion sources like the National Review with leads and exclusives that were designed to adversely harm all the other candidacies minus Romney.

OMG! I have no idea what you’re referring to specifically but you make it sound like the Soviet Union infiltrating FDR’s administration, or something. Worse you make NRO sound like a bunch of incompetent dupes (Useful Idiots for Romney?) who were so gullible they just passed stuff on (received perhaps at drop off points from the covert conspirators?) without then vetting stories on their own.

In other words, for all the prattle she has dished out over the last dozen years about conservative ideals and purity, she’s willing to chuck it all for the convenience of not having to actually execute a primary election cycle. So she has decreed it, “Mitt will win.” Therefore it must be.

Oh please! She’s not suggesting we forgo a primary. She has looked at the field and in her opinion the only candidate who can withstand scrutiny and win a general election is Romney. Meanwhile, your arguments in opposition to his candidacy, particularly the hyperbole about “cannibalizing companies” at Bain Capital are beyond lame.

Mitt Romney pretty much appeals to establishment Republicans with strong ties to the liberal northeast–almost all of them white.

Republicans a lot like Coulter.

Epic Fail. I do agree with one point: She was wrong about Amanda Knox.
*****

I don’t see Romney pushing for that. He thinks there is a government role in and solution for everything; he isn’t sufficiently opposed to the premise of Obamacare to do the work needed to rescue our future from it.
J.E. Dyer on November 17, 2011 at 6:41 PM

It’s most annoying that you keep pushing this opinion without providing evidence to back it up. But if it makes you feel any better, I’m sure Mitt would welcome a super duper super conservative Congress. They can hand him repeal legislation, he can sign it with a flourish, and we can move on to getting the Ship of State back on course.

Buy Danish on November 18, 2011 at 3:01 PM

Buy Danish,

Repealing Obamacare — and making sure it’s not just waived — is the single most important legislation to “getting the Ship of State” back on course…

Lastly… If you DON’T think that Obama’s thugs will bring up every racist bit of history from the Mormon church–not in media, but in the back channels–then you are as naive as the day is long.

You wince when someone merely suggests it – but its true. The GOP can not win on the the white vote alone. So making the principles we fight for articulately defined for anyone, and everyone is sorta paramount.

It is completely unfair, but Mitt’s faith will be tagged with a sinister label, the back channels will propagate it, the media will mysteriously take an as of yet not seen “in depth” to the “history” of Mormonism, just for “public interests” sake, Dr. Cornel West will be sitting there with his half buck-tooth grin, telling the tale, and it will be parroted.

Mitt Romney, who I like and have been with many times, will be powerless to deny the connection to his own practice of faith–to be candid it won’t matter…

Those on the plantation will have been duped and now will be motivated.

It will be ugly, very unAmerican, very nasty… but Obama will gladly “go there” for the sake of preserving power.

If Mitt is the nominee, I will vote for him… But he will lose to Obama, an Coulter is smoking crack to believe otherwise…

Kevin McCullough on November 19, 2011 at 6:50 PM

Apologies for the multitude of typos, prepping for my broadcast at 9pm EST.

Kevin McCullough on November 19, 2011 at 6:52 PM

In 2008 it was uncovered long after the primaries had been concluded that the Romney campaign staff had in unethical and covert ways infiltrated prominent conservative opinion sources like the National Review with leads and exclusives that were designed to adversely harm all the other candidacies minus Romney. Most specifically National Review repeated false assertions made by these Romney operatives about Governor Mike Huckabee. Coulter parroted them in her syndicated space and was never called to account to it until she appeared on the Huckabee television show –to pimp her book of course–when the Governor politely, but assertively called her inaccuracies into question.

Where did you get this information? Do you have links? In particular, the Huckabee show where he discussed these things with Coulter, any related National Review articles, and the article/blog where this Romney 2008 campaign info. was “uncovered.”

Can’t find anything yet, myself. Thanks.

DINORight on November 20, 2011 at 4:54 PM

Lastly… If you DON’T think that Obama’s thugs will bring up every racist bit of history from the Mormon church–not in media, but in the back channels–then you are as naive as the day is long.- Kevin McCullough.
See, here’s what bugs me the most. Evangelicals will cry to high heaven about the racist past of mormons- did anyone call Huckabee out on the racist past of the Southern Baptist Convention? Did they ask “how could you be a pastor for a church that was founded so their pastors could own slaves? How could you be part of a church that justified slavery using the Bible? How do you justify the fact that many Southern Baptist churches are still practicing de facto segregation?” Why didn’t they ask Huckabee that? Because they knew they would catch holy hell if they did. So why do the mormons get a bad rap- because they media know the baptists wont give a damn, just like why they went after mormons in CA for prop 8. They Evangelical silence from folks like you was pathetic and unAmerican. You should be ashamed at your enabling of this bigotry.

drballard on November 21, 2011 at 1:31 PM