Ann Coulter: the Manchurian Columnist

Renew America ^ | July 7, 2014 | Bryan Fischer

[WXRGina]

After reading Ann Coulter's all-out scathing attack on Chris McDaniel and grassroots conservatives yesterday, the question must be asked: what in the world has happened to her? Has her brain been mysteriously rewired by the political elite, like the vice-presidential candidate in Denzel Washington's remake of the Manchurian Candidate?

First she takes a big fat fee to be the keynote speaker at a big pro-gay extravaganza, Homocon, then endorses Mitt Romney early in the 2012 campaign, and now she condescendingly attacks the Tea Party. With friends like this...

Worse, her attack on McDaniel and his camp is wrongheaded and unprincipled in almost every respect.

Coulter begins her column this way:

Chris McDaniel, candidate for the U.S. Senate from Mississippi, lost the Republican runoff to incumbent Sen. Thad Cochran last month, and now he is being led down a primrose path to political oblivion. McDaniel's passionate supporters think that a moment of crisis for the country is a good time to treat control of the Senate as if it's a prom queen election.

This is condescending and patronizing, not only to McDaniel's supporters but to McDaniel himself. This is hardly a "prom queen election." It's a hotly contested election for a seat in the most powerful deliberative body in the world.

And she treats McDaniel as if he is not his own man but some rube who is gullible enough to be led around by the nose by Tea Party hicks. McDaniel in fact is principled, articulate, and strong, things that Coulter would readily recognize if she was basing her view on the facts instead of...well, I don't know what she's basing her views on.

Mississippi politics can be a swamp, and the skulduggery pulled by the establishment GOP in this race is enough to send the base fleeing the so-called Big Tent at warp speed.

There are credible accusations of vote-buying, from no less a personage than Rickey Cole, the chairman of the Democratic Party in Mississippi, who is certainly in a position to know if Democratic votes are being purchased.

And we now know that Amanda Shook, a campaign operative for Cochran, was walking around with almost $53,000 in envelopes stuffed with cash. Even the Cochran camp has admitted that they "screwed up" in properly accounting for this money.

Cole was openly critical of Cochran's effort to induce Democrats into voting in the Republican run-off, calling it a matter of "honor." His view is quite simple: gentlemen do not vote in other gentlemen's primaries, and in particular, gentlemen don't pay people to do it. When it's the Democrat who holds the high moral ground, you know the Republicans behind this stunt are lost in the ethical weeds.

The Cochran campaign report says the $53,000 represented "reimbursement" to Shook, which raises serious ethical questions. Where did she get the $53,000 to begin with? Whom did she give it to? If it wasn't to buy votes but to pay campaign workers, who are these employees, and is anyone withholding their taxes and reporting their income? And what exactly did they do for their cash money?

If anybody is behaving like children "at summer camp," to use Coulter's snide phrase, it's the Cochran campaign. I've talked with seasoned campaign consultants who say they have never seen anything like the reporting sloppiness they have observed in this campaign. Even Cole, the Democrat, knows that in a federal election you just don't deal in cash. The FEC wants a paper trail, and the Cochran campaign can't provide one.

What's worse, these reporting irregularities – which may be an effort to conceal criminal conduct – are just in connection with the June 3 primary. We haven't even seen Cochran's report on expenditures for the June 24 run-off. We can't wait. It's guaranteed to be a real doozy. I'm guessing the Cochran folks are right now spending some long nights trying to figure out how to massage the numbers so that somebody doesn't go to prison.

On top of Cochran campaign irregularity, the National Republican Senatorial Committee (NRSC) has $175,000 unaccounted for, which was supposed to go for ads in its name that have never been produced or aired. Instead, that chunk of change was apparently laundered to produce ads in some other outfit's name (All Conservatives for Mississippi) that ran in African-American communities. These ads accused McDaniel of racism and created the impression he'd wear a KKK hood on the floor of the United States senate if elected.

The All Conservatives for Mississippi group has yet to file its legally required forms showing where it got the money for the ads. Since federal law prohibits any coordination between the NRSC and any outside groups, such as All Conservatives for Mississippi, the missing forms may be missing for a reason. Somebody has a pile of excrement they're trying to shove under the couch.

Coulter falsely argues that Cochran actually won the majority of Republican votes. This is laughable as well as ignorant. Every experienced observer knows that Cochran owes his margin of victory entirely to the black community, which furnished him with 35,000-40,000 votes. Even the guy that took over Nate Silver's FiveThirtyEight political analysis operation says flatly that McDaniel won the Republican vote by 8 points.

Bottom line: McDaniel won the Republican primary and Cochran won the Democratic run-off.

All this is hardly a "color war at summer camp," as Coulter snarks at the end of her column. There are matters of justice and integrity here that by all rights ought to be resolved before the open gaze of the courts and the public.

If Ann Coulter can't see that, it may be because she is looking through glasses she got from Karl Rove and Haley Barbour.

[Nextrush]

Some folks have a loyalty to the GOP like loyalty to a sports team, say the Pittsburgh Steelers.

Rush Limbaugh grew up in a Republican Party home for instance, learning that the GOP team was the “Steelers” and the Democrats were the “Ravens” or some other rival....

I listen to folks like Sowell and El Rushbo, even Coulter if she’s making sense, but at the end of the day they live in the football fan illusion that their team is the one that will win, even if “their team” is helping to move the ball into their own end zone.

[nathanbedford]

Rather than discuss personalities let us search out a formula which guides us toward conservative governance which has a chance of saving the Republic.

I am actually suggesting abandoning the principle which I articulated in my last post and which I operated under in 2012: To support the most conservative candidate who can win.

Below the presidential level (and perhaps even including the presidential level), we should now consider a nuclear option: if a senator or congressman is insufficiently conservative in Washington, we conservatives should turn against him even at the cost of losing the election and enabling a Democrat to take the office.

This option is very dangerous and is liable to go out of control. It certainly cannot be employed across the board because that would mean suicide for conservatism as well as fratricide for Rino-ism. But an isolated examples such as in Mississippi or, perhaps, against Boehner or McConnell, conservatives should consider running a third-party candidate or even voting for the Democrat. But to do so is to understand that if it is done in more than one or two races it would ultimately be self-defeating. It must also be understood that there is no ready means of controlling such a movement and it is therefore liable to run out of control. Finally, if it is not made clear by the media that it is conservatism that has turned the balance in the election (an unlikely scenario), the point will be lost and the seat will be pointlessly lost.

Nevertheless, I think we conservatives should work our way through to a viable doctrine to modify Bill Buckley's doctrine because the times have changed and time is running out. The establishment of the Republican Party by its actions in Mississippi and in the seventh district of Virginia have behaved so egregiously as to make clear beyond doubt that they cannot be reformed. I don't think they can even be intimidated, but it is worth a try. The odds are against either reforming our intimidating the Rino establishment because the establishment has control over big money and uses it to swamp conservatives. The last step is a whole new party or a revolution within the party. If we can make clear in controlled and limited elections that conservatives hold Rinos' electoral future in their hands and are now willing to pull the trigger in other elections, perhaps intimidation will suffice.

The alternative, is a third-party which will either take over the Republican Party or be taken over by the Republican Party and while that occurs Democrats will rule and we will have ruin.

Norm, as you will see I am moving toward what I believe is your position.

[GeronL]

did the Ravens exist back then? wasn’t it the Baltimore Colts?

[Norm Lenhart]

I don’t think there is time. There are maybe 3 people remotely trustworthy in the GOP. That means there are over 500 people determined to stop them and Miss/Cochran shows they are a united front.

That’s just the reality and none of us like it. Not you, not I.

As long as we assist the 500 instead of the 3, we get mauled. No it’s not easy. No we do not fix it overnight. But we must stop going backwards. And supporting the enemy is going backwards. We need a clean break. And we need it yesterday.

[Nextrush]

The Colts were in Baltimore in the old days and I used to be a fan watching them as a kid, then one day they left town.

Another team was given lots of incentives by the Maryland politicians to move in and “Ravens” arrived from Cleveland.

The Colts left Baltimore like the Republican Party has left me.

People in my part of the world have football loyalties ranging from the Ravens to the Steelers to the Eagles.

[fortheDeclaration]

The verse doesn't say anything about the Lord and Satan being brothers!

Angels are called the 'sons of God' because they were created by God.

God wasn't created.

[V K Lee]

I ceased listening to miss priss years ago. She once had something to say worth taking the time for absorption These days it’s nothing more than ‘yada yada yada’ and fiddling with her hair. Ann, dear, shave your head; go into rehab; and begin again as a brand new woman. Good luck, my dear, cause you’ll need lots of it!!!

[BlackElk]

The Ravens were the original Cleveland Browns. Arthur Modell moved them to Baltimore and the owner of the Baltimore Colts (Irsay?) moved his team to Indianapolis. Then today’s Cleveland Browns were create to fill the void in Cleveland. IIRC.

[DisorderOnBorder]

Ann Coulter is a New England Liberal. And Obama Supporter, also...the way she attacked Obama Eligibility folks

[DisorderOnBorder]

Coulter...Tom Petty’s sister...LOL

I laughed so hard my coffee just cleared my sinuses...

They do look alike...

[cloudmountain]

JOB 1 6 Now there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the Lord, and Satan came also among them.

Where does it say there that Jesus and Lucifer were brothers?

Also, if they WERE brothers, that would mean that Jesus was a CREATION, like Lucifer. That would be so very wrong too. It would mean that Jesus was a mere angel and not God.

MY version is: One day the angels came to present themselves before the LORD, and Satan also came with them.
THAT says that Satan was an angel...and he was. It does

Another version: One day the members of the heavenly court came to present themselves before the LORD, and the Accuser, Satan, came with them.

There are a full dozen versions if you look them all up. The Mormons chose the one they like. Of course, Mormons aren't even considered Christians if they put Jesus and Satan as brothers, are they? However, they ARE entitled to their own version.

Since it was the early Catholic Church that compiled the old and new testaments into one book, I guess all the versions can be seen via one version or another.

It doesn't matter to me. But, I wouldn't put Jesus and Lucifer as brothers. I do know that the Mormons have been bleeding members since the Internet came into such popularity. EVERYONE can access it and find out what kind of cocoon they were living in.

[cloudmountain]

I'm not very religious but brothers? That is silly on so many levels.
It's almost some theory by some guys smoking pot in college and getting drunk. How, on one hand, god is all powerful but on the other create the evil itself. OOOOH, dichotomy, ying/yang, the good/evil force...
I get confused! lol And if Lucifer is just a ticked off angel, then how did he get in? Heaven seems to have labor problems. Can you imagine the bureaucracy running the universe? Ask the Q
(I'm not going to sarc tag this...if anyone is offended get a life. It's just chat.)

Lucifer IS just a ticked off angel. Having free will he made his choice, didn't he?
He is also known as the prince of darkness, the evil one...I guess the list is long.

The Mormons ARE entitled to their own beliefs. But I also understand that they are bleeding members since their cocoon of Utah was ripped open by the Internet.

Well, I suppose parents may put the kibosh on SOME sites. MY MONEY is on all those teenage boys who WILL surf the Internet because it is WHAT THEY DO.

[krunkygirl]

Norm, you are tough, but honest...

kg/nancy

[rockinqsranch]

OK. I read it this morning. Thanks again for the link, and yes it was unacceptable as it was IMO “establishment” propaganda.

[ArtDodger]

I am not a student of Mormon theology but I think the reasoning is: Satan is among the angels, who are labeled ‘Sons of God’. Jesus is also labeled Son of God. Mormons, choosing a temporal view of a divine relationship, see two Sons by the same Father as brothers. I have certainly seen whackier leaps of reasoning...
One of the many things that makes this country so great is each person’s or group’s right to interpret the Bible as they see fit. I don’t have to agree with it or disagree or even think about it.

[Impeach98]

Excellent piece. Thank you for sharing.

[cloudmountain]

I am not a student of Mormon theology but I think the reasoning is: Satan is among the angels, who are labeled ‘Sons of God’. Jesus is also labeled Son of God. Mormons, choosing a temporal view of a divine relationship, see two Sons by the same Father as brothers. I have certainly seen whackier leaps of reasoning...
One of the many things that makes this country so great is each person’s or group’s right to interpret the Bible as they see fit. I don’t have to agree with it or disagree or even think about it.

True enough.

The Mormons HAVE changed in that they have only one wife these days. They are also bleeding young people when the kids discovered ANOTHER WORLD out there with the Internet.

My husband and I lived in Saudi Arabia for five years. I asked the Muslim guys I worked with (30 of them) if they had more that one wife. They ALL said: No, ONE wife is enough. Not surprising to find them human. :o)