Archive for the ‘Ann Coulter’ Category

Ann Coulter at CPAC

February 28, 2009

These two clips cover her speech, and Q&A session at CPAC today.

Ann Coulter is outspoken and intelligent. I recommend the bio pic, “Is it true what they say about Ann?”

Advertisements

Pretty in Mink

November 25, 2008

The Clare Booth Luce Policy Institute is doing something really cool. A calendar of conservative women in glamor shots wearing mink coats.

The line up includes Mary Katharine Ham, Michelle Malkin and Ann Coulter.

A look back at polls

October 18, 2008

Ann Coulter looks at polls in past presidential races.

In 1976, Jimmy Carter narrowly beat Gerald Ford 50.1 percent to 48 percent. And yet, on Sept. 1, Carter led Ford by 15 points. Just weeks before the election, on Oct. 16, 1976, Carter led Ford in the Gallup Poll by 6 percentage points — down from his 33-point Gallup Poll lead in August.

In 1980, Ronald Reagan beat Carter by nearly 10 points, 51 percent to 41 percent. In a Gallup Poll released days before the election on Oct. 27, it was Carter who led Reagan 45 percent to 42 percent.

In 1984, Reagan walloped Walter Mondale 58.8 percent to 40 percent, — the largest electoral landslide in U.S. history. But on Oct. 15, The New York Daily News published a poll showing Mondale with only a 4-point deficit to Reagan, 45 percent to 41 percent. A Harris Poll about the same time showed Reagan with only a 9-point lead. The Oct. 19 New York Times/CBS News Poll had Mr. Reagan ahead of Mondale by 13 points. All these polls underestimated Reagan’s actual margin of victory by 6 to 15 points.

In 1988, George H.W. Bush beat Michael Dukakis by a whopping 53.4 percent to 45.6 percent. A New York Times/CBS News Poll on Oct. 5 had Bush leading the Greek homunculus by a statistically insignificant 2 points — 45 percent to 43 percent.

In 1992, Bill Clinton beat the first President Bush 43 percent to 37.7 percent. (Ross Perot got 18.9 percent of Bush’s voters that year.) On Oct. 18, a Newsweek Poll had Clinton winning 46 percent to 31 percent, and a CBS News Poll showed Clinton winning 47 percent to 35 percent.

So in 1992, the polls had Clinton 12 to 15 points ahead, but he won by only 5.3 points.

In 1996, Bill Clinton beat Bob Dole 49 percent to 40 percent. And yet on Oct. 22, 1996, The New York Times/CBS News Poll showed Clinton leading by a massive 22 points, 55 percent to 33 percent.

Keep this in mind as the election grows near.

Not Gonna Happen…

June 29, 2007

MRC President Brent Bozell makes a damn good point:

But Ann Coulter is owed an apology from those outlets, including NBC’s ‘Nightly News,’ The Washington Post and CNN’s ‘American Morning,’ which have misreported her comments. And conservatives, take note: Today it’s Coulter, tomorrow it may be you. The left has demonstrated that it will stop at nothing, including flat-out dishonesty, to undermine our leaders.”

In the words of Dana Carvey, that apology “ain’t gonna happen.”

Here the detail from the Washington Times:

MRC President Brent Bozell issued the following statement:

“When I first heard the sound-bite of Ann Coulter’s remarks calling for the assassination of John Edwards, I was appalled. Then I read the entire quote, and was doubly appalled — at the media themselves. I have never seen a person’s words so blatantly, and dishonestly distorted. When one reads, or listens to Ann’s entire statement, it is immediately apparent that she was wishing for no such thing.”

Here is the quote being run by some of the top media:

Miss Coulter: “If I’m gonna say anything about John Edwards in the future, I’ll just wish he had been killed in a terrorist assassination plot.” (ABC, Good Morning America, Monday.)

Here is the entire quote:

Miss Coulter: “But about the same time, you know, Bill Maher was not joking and saying he wished Dick Cheney had been killed in a terrorist attack. So, I’ve learned my lesson. If I’m gonna say anything about John Edwards in the future, I’ll just wish he had been killed in a terrorist assassination plot.”

Said Mr. Bozell: “Ann Coulter was making the point that (a) a leftist like Bill Maher made the serious statement that it might be a positive thing to have Vice President Dick Cheney killed by terrorists, and (b) it received no condemnation from the national press; and therefore (c) she would escape negative media scrutiny in the future were she to take that line against John Edwards.

“It is an inescapable truth that Ann Coulter was dripping with sarcasm when she made her remark. It is also an inescapable truth that every TV, radio and print outlet that has run the shortened version of her remarks is distorting her words — deliberately. Some have run the full quote, such as the morning shows on CBS, ABC and NBC. Good for them.”

Update: Tammy Bruce points out who the real slime balls are.

During the past few days it’s amazing how the Edwards’ suddenly decided to go after Ann Coulter. One has to ask, Why? Considering Ann isn’t running for president, why are Edwardses so obsessed with her. The answer, of course, is money. Once an ambulance chaser, always an ambulance chaser.

Here’s the deal: the 2nd quarter fund-raiser date is here. This is the point where candidates have to reveal how much money they’ve raised. This announcement can make or break a campaign. As a matter of fact, days before the Edwards attack on Ann, it was revealed that Edwards’ fundraising for the 2nd quarter has plunged. Other people will draw conclusions, good or bad, on therelevancy of your campaign based on the money you have. Complaining about Coulter has been Edwards best fundraising vehicle, so they needed her again.

As a matter of fact, the night Elizabeth Edwards called into Hardball to sandbag Ann, the Edwards campaign dropped a fundraising email about the confrontation. It included a note from Elizabeth urging donations.

And they accuse Ann of ‘lowering the debate’ and cynicism. The Edwards, IMHO, are the sleaziest people in this campaign. Sleazier than even Hillary. We don’t like Hillary’s ideas, but at least she has some. Edwards is a homophobe who is now apparently using his cancer-striken wife with the hope that people will be less inclined to question her motives or confront her. Remember, cancer doesn’t elevate or transform the moral foundation of a person, especially when they’re as opportunist as the Edwardses.

Update 2: Varmit nails the Elizabeth Edwards lame ass strategy:

Chris Mathews tried to blindside Ann Coulter. didn’t really work out that well. All Mrs. Edwards could do was demand she stop being so mean and talk about real issues. So coulter brought up a few of the real ethical deficiencies of Mr. Edwards. It soon became clear that any fact Elizabeth Edwards would rather not talk about was “mean.”

This is why I don’t often let myself be drawn into arguments with liberals. It’s more productive to just make fun of them.

Liberals against Free Speech

June 21, 2007

Not much of a surprise for anybody who pays attention.
Here is the hard cold proof of the matter, direct from the far left so called “Think Tank” mislabeled “Think Progress”:

The Center for American Progress and Free Press today released the first-of-its-kind statistical analysis of the political make-up of talk radio in the United States. It confirms that talk radio, one of the most widely used media formats in America, is dominated almost exclusively by conservatives.

The new report — entitled “The Structural Imbalance of Political Talk Radio” — raises serious questions about whether the companies licensed to broadcast over the public radio airwaves are serving the listening needs of all Americans.

Hardly surprising, the far hard left “liberal” extremists are calling for a return to the days of strict government regulation of political Free Speech on privately owned radio stations.

A commenter named Noahm sums it up:

there’s no conspiracy at work here. programmers would put on a talking fish if they thought it would get ratings. talk radio listeners want to hear conservative talkers. how do we know this? they get ratings, liberals don’t.


As one pundit put it
, “To be sure, conservative radio talk show hosts have a built-in audience unavailable to liberals: People driving cars to some sort of job.”

The great “experiment” in Liberal (actually far left extremist) talk radio “Err America” failed miserably. It couldn’t even stay on the air in the oh so “Blue” market of Boston.

That is something you don’t see every day…

May 18, 2007

Ann Coulter praising France.

I’m off to Paris! I hereby revoke every churlish remark I’ve ever made about those lovely Gallic people

With Nicolas Sarkozy’s decisive victory as the new president of France, the French have produced their first pro-American ruler since Louis XVI.

In celebration of France’s spectacular return to Western civilization, I bought a Herve Leger dress on Monday, and we’re having croissants for breakfast every day this week. This delicate French pastry, by the way, is in the shape of a crescent to commemorate the Crusaders’ victory over Islam. Aren’t the French just peachy?

“Sarkozy the American,” as he is known in France, called Muslim rioters “scum.” Louis, I think this is the beginning of a beautiful friendship.

He explained his position on Muslim immigrants in France, saying: “Nobody has to, I repeat, live in France. But when you live in France, you respect its rules. That is to say that you are not a polygamist. … One doesn’t practice female genital mutilation on one’s daughters, one doesn’t slit the throat of the sheep, and one respects the republican rules.”

t looks like the Democrats are going to have to drop their talking point about Bush irritating the rest of the world. Evidently not as much as Muslim terrorists irritate the rest of the world. The politicians who hate Bush keep being dumped by their own voters.

At the Democratic presidential debate a few weeks ago, B. Hussein Obama carped that Bush had “alienate(d) the world community” and vowed that he would build “the sort of alliances and trust around the world that has been so lacking over the last six years.”

Democrats are terrific at building alliances. Remember how Jimmy Carter won the love of the world by ditching our ally the Shah of Iran, allowing him be replaced by a string of crazy ayatollahs? Since then, we haven’t heard a peep from that area of the world.

Let us review DNC/MSM Journalism ethics…

May 17, 2005

The following was sent to Michelle Malkin:

Just for the sake of argument let’s say the Newsweek article was true. No one’s pointing out that Newsweek is the same publication that had a non-disclosure agreement with the Kerry campaign last fall. The editors agreed that anything their reporters discovered while “embedded” with Kerry/Edwards would not be published until after the ’04 election. So let me get this straight… Agreeing not to air Kerry’s dirty laundry during a political campaign is fine and dandy. But not airing Gitmo’s dirty laundry during the War on Terror would be a compromise of journalistic ethics. Got it.

As a wise woman said, “They win in the dark; we win in the light.”

The left keeps on hating…

April 14, 2005

Ann Coulter writes in her latest column:

Liberals enjoy claiming that they are intellectuals, thrilled to engage in a battle of wits. This, they believe, distinguishes them from conservatives, who are religious fanatics who react with impotent rage to opposing ideas.

Then she details how this just isn’t the case. Read the whole thing.

To further support her theory that liberals are “still stuck at the intellectual level of 2-year-olds in high chairs throwing food,” let us review the following.

From Brain Terminal:

Some kind, compassionate, tolerant, pacifist New York liberal(s)* have recently taken to posting George W. Bush shooting targets–complete with simulated bullet holes penetrating various parts of the body–around town. This picture was taken on the west side of Second Avenue, between 72nd and 73rd Streets.

Despite the cartoonish look, it is a bit eerie that these posters, which implicitly advocate the assassination of a sitting U.S. president, could remain unmolested in the nation’s largest city for days on end. (No, I won’t be taking it down, since it stands as a graphic monument to the mentality of today’s left.)

One has to wonder whether we’re seeing a modern fascist movement being born before our very eyes.

Lets also note that the folks at Brain Terminal have a better knowledge of mid-20th Century history than most liberals.
I’d also like to point out that there is a big difference between a dartboard and a shooting target.
HT to Ace for finding this.

Michelle Malkin points out that “great myth of liberal tolerance” has been thoroughly exposed by liberals who would rather physically assault those who they disagree with than engage in open and honest debate.

The Washington Times makes the following point:

It is ironic that college campuses — which typically style themselves as bastions of free speech and tolerance — are increasingly the scene of intolerant, thuggish behavior. These days it is being directed at folks who don’t subscribe to the prevailing liberal orthodoxies.

Update: Confederate Yankee joins with his take on the intolerant Left.

Does Ann Coulter Know About This?

December 25, 2004

Leslie Bates asks this question as he points out:

“Unfortunately, on average, everyday 50 Iranian girls and boys convert secretly to Christian denominations in our country.”

— Hasan Mohammadi, Employee of the Ministry of Education, Islamic Republic of Iran.

Read about how Christianity is spreading in Mullahland.

liberals love the race card

December 9, 2004

Ann Coulter points out their latest series of racial attacks.