Ann Coulter, high-speed wail, has reached a new low in her column of April 11, 2012, and I suspect she is nowhere near quitting. Her unsupportable position regarding Romney demands support, and now she must lie and distort in order to make the words come out.
This column is not composed of actual shrieking, which she seems to have gotten out of her system in this Ricochet podcast, but it’s breathtaking nonetheless in its dishonesty and flat-out malice for the Tea Party, which she calls “conservative primary voters”. I’m not going to fisk the whole thing. Let me just outline it and poke a limited number of holes in this seamlessly rotten garment.
- Introduces theme of “fighting the last war”
- Pivots to cutting taxes as fighting the last war
- But establishment Republicans running on tax cuts
- While Insurgent Tea Party types demand drastic spending cuts
- Paul Ryan budget disliked by Establishment as too drastic, by Tea Party as too little, too late.
- Establishes “once a conservative, always a conservative” theme
- Tiresome list of liberal Republican call-outs
- Calls hideous Nazi apologist Buchanan “conservative”
- Calls decorated Navy flyer and Director of CIA Geo. H. W. Bush “betrayer”
- Cites Huntsman’s presence as “the liberal” to prove the Romney is conservative
- Huntsman was Obama’s Ambassador to China, and quit that post in order to run in the Republican primary. It is no defense of Romney’s conservative status to say that the only candidate further to the left was actually working for Obama.
- Accuses Tea Party of calling Romney a moderate just to fight the last war
- Baldly states repeatedly that Tea Party is lying about it
- Considers it “gallant” that Romney packed it in to support McCain in 2008
- Equates Tea Party with progressives
- Blames Tea Party for McCain
- Ends on muddled point
- Praises his flips, denies that he flops
- Issues baffling parting taunt to Tea Party
- Hedges against possible Romney victory, worried about credit or blame
“But the facts are irrelevant to people busy fighting the last war. It’s not about Romney at all, but their own posing. Romney is the Emmanuel Goldstein of GOP primary voters looking for a moderate to hate because they fell down on the job last time.
Liberal Republicans always lose. Because he is not a liberal, Romney stands a good chance of beating Obama this fall. But if the fantasist posers keep turning this presidential race into their personal “Dungeons and Dragons” battle against “moderates,” Romney’s victory will go into the “Liberal Wins” column, when it is anything but.
Good Lord, “Dungeons and Dragons”? That’s almost as good as McCain’s own attack on the Tea Party as “Hobbits” going off to fight the evil in the District of Mordor.
She says you “can tell who the liberal is by whom The New York Times calls a “pragmatic” or “moderate” Republican.” I must admit, I agree:
This time around, Mr. Romney faces similar conservative skepticism. While he has increasingly leaned to the right since his time as governor, his embrace of a health care program in Massachusetts similar to one that Mr. Obama pushed years later continues to dog him. His moderate stances on gay rights and abortion also concern conservatives.
— New York Times Election 2012 guide to the candidates
But don’t take their word for it:
“People recognize that I am not a partisan Republican, that I’m someone who is moderate, and that my views are progressive.” — Mitt Romney, quoted various places, including this New York Times column by Nicholas Kristof
Yeah, I think that about sums that up.