Coulter flips flops, sells out “right wing” Republicans
In an interview with Sean Hannity yesterday, Ann Coulter reversed her former position on the necessity of selecting strong right-wing candidates during the primaries. She now calls for a moderate like Romney mainly because she thinks he can out-talk Obama in the debates and thus win.
She argues that the qualification for choosing “is not just, can you check off this issue, this issue, this issue, but who can you send in in the debates against Obama.”
Breitbart reports Ann adding, “The idea that you pick the most right-wing candidate without any concern over who can win is suicidal.”
Rather, she says the next Republican candidate should be someone “who has run in . . . a diverse enough state that he has had to appeal to get votes from independents, from Democrats, from women. . . .”
This is a sea change in Coulter: a Romneyesque flip-flop in comparison to her former strong “right-wing”-conservatives-only pitch given just after Obama’s victory over McCain. Here’s the Ann Coulter of November 5, 2008:
How many times do we have to run this experiment before Republican primary voters learn that “moderate,” “independent,” “maverick” Republicans never win, and right-wing Republicans never lose?
She then tiraded (rightly) against those who voted for moderate and independent political transvestites in the primaries:
After showing nearly superhuman restraint throughout this campaign, which was lost the night McCain won the California primary, I am now liberated to announce that all I care about is hunting down and punishing every Republican who voted for McCain in the primaries.
Primaries. Primaries, Ann. We need to elect only strong right-wing conservatives in the primaries. So she said, and she was right.
But now she’s desperate to call all Republican primary voters to the very thing she formerly loathed—someone who has diverse appeal to independents, Democrats, and moderates. Now, that’s flip flop if there every was any.
And who’s she want now? Romney? How fitting.
Other famous conservative female commentators have started down this path too, and never came back. Next thing we’ll see Ann writing for HuffPost.
Continue Reading on www.breitbart.tv
Ann is ALL about Ann…her only objective is to publicize Ann. If she doesn't say outrageous and incendiary and controversial statements the media will simply ignore her and she then gets no pay. She's found her niche…making Republicans seem as foolish and unthinking as her statements are. Perhaps she's on to something there, judging by the recent actions of the modern GOP.
I watched the interview and Ann Coulter did not make any incendiary comments. And when she started to point out gingrich's serious flaws, Hannity cut her off because he just about drools over gingrich. Romney is called a RINO and we all know from gingrich's fluctuating political stances that he is a RINO- frankly I'd rather have a RINO with character-Romney- than a RINO without character-Newt. Newt is not and has never been a true conservative. He stands more often with Dems like Pelosi and Gore and Rockefeller than he does with conservative Repubs. like Ryan. Newt is for Newt…period.
I heard her on Hannity and on Ingrams show as well. She lost me as a fan a LONG time ago. Romney is another McCain and is a SURE loss against obama…WHY do you think the media keeps pushing Romney??? Let me remind people about something that FITS this like a hand in glove…remember when the democraps picked Howard Dean as the one to beat Bush before his meltdown? Well, then the one to beat Bush was the lurch like kerry…he was touted as the one who could beat Bush…no contest! I know this is the democraps BUT it is what is happening right now with the republicans and the first red flag is that the media supports the gop picking romney. STOP PEOPLE and THINK! Romney is a SURE LOSS for us and they know it! Romney as well as newt are RINO'S…neither are true conservatives…BOTH of them bought in to the global warming issue…newt even made a commercial with nancy pelosi about it! FOR GOD'S sake, don't fall for this crap. Herman Cain and Michelle Bachmann are the ONLY TRUE conservatives…and either one could win against obama! Herman Cain is MY choice and always has been…I am NOT changing my mind about him, HE is the one AMERICA NEEDS right now. If you want obama again despite him NOT being eligible in the first place, for four more years, go ahead and nominate romney or newt! Then kiss America GOODBYE!
I begin to think that only brain damaged conservatives or Republicans post on these subjects. Newt is NOT a RINO – he explained why he made the commercial with Nancy Pelosi (he was trying to show that conservative Republicans are concerned about the environment too) and admitted it to be the biggest mistake he made in his political life. He testified before the Senate AGAINST cap and trade the same day that Al Gore testified for it. His daughter wrote a book debunking the lie that he served divorce papers to his wife in the hospital on her death bed – she says he was very attentive and supportive of her mother. He acted as a consultant for Freddie Mac, not a lobbyist. He admits his mistakes and takes full responsibility.
I have become very tired of the pundits and talking heads telling us who is going to win. I ignore them. Ann Coulter, who wants to think of herself as a "King Maker" is behaving much like a spoiled liberal who didn't get her way with Chris Christie so she latched on to the person he decided to support. These are the facts. It is important that each of us support our candidate with passion during the primaries without trashing the others. If your candidate can't win without casting aspersions on others then they don't have much to offer. If your candidate is out of the race for any reason, campaign and support your next choice. However, in the end we must vigorously support the Republican nominee – no matter WHOM it is. I do not support Ron Paul and his notion that we can be friends with Iran frightens me, but if he is the nominee – I WILL SUPPORT HIM 100%. We must defeat Obama and anyone of our candidates will be a 100% improvement.
By the way – the idea that if we pick a very conservative candidate who goes after Obama the independents will all flock back to the democrats is, as Bart Simpson would say – a crock of crappy crap crap. I agree with Rush Limbaugh. TRUE CONSERVATISM WORKS EVERY TIME IT'S TRIED.
Why do we continue to allow the MARXIST media to choose our candidates? Are people REALLY this STUPID? I guess so, ObaMAO sits in the White House, courtesy of the media & "white" guilt. All they are is a left wing PROPAGANDA machine, churning out LIE after LIE after LIE but people worship them as gods. Look up LightSquared, it will make your blood boil & you won't hear a WORD of it in the media.
Oh, but LightSquared is one of Obama's pet projects/goals with broadband for every one. It's just coincidence one of it's main investors is a major contributor to Obama and the Left. It's also just coincidence that they purchased satellite down link frequency spectrum because it was cheap. Of course they plan on filling this spectrum with over 40,000 ground based transmitters running as much as 45KW. I guess I forgot to mention this is between the GPS down lings and ground augmentation transmitters to create precision approaches over highly populated areas, or that the FCC violated their own rules giving LightSquared permission to start the implementation before the approval process was completed, or that the military, commercial and general aviation have come out against it for safety reasons. (LightSquared signals are billions of times stronger than the satellites (GPS) and cause interferrence up to 30 miles. That's OK though as LightSquared says it's all the fault of the GPS systems. (Yes I'm a pilot)
Ann Coulter was obsessed with Chris Christie and wanted him to run for POTUS. Christie is now backing Romney so naturally Ann is going for the RINO.
I have to agree with Ann. If we do not bring a candidate that liberals and dems can relate to, then we are going to have another 4 years of Obama. McCain was weak and it showed often during his campaign. A candidate who can embrace constitutional programs that aid citizens and show a path to fiscal balance without removing SSI medicare ect and a humane closure to our borders (remove anchor baby law, a law that was put in place to guarantee that the freed slaves children were automatically citizens when born). This is the person that will bring voters over and someone I would support.
You are dead on. I was appalled when I read Coulter's last column trashing Newt and endorsing Romney. I thought for a minute that it was a parody, that she was mocking Romney or something for his flip flops. Then, as I realized she was serious, the only thing I could figure was that she has an axe to grind against Newt for some reason. Her weak argument in favor of Romney was so un-Coulteresque, and her criticisms of Newt even weaker. She excoriated Newt for taking money from Freddie Mac. Is that really more egregious that writing the blueprint for socialized medicine, now adapted for whole country, which Romney did? Are you kidding me? Sure, Newt isn't perfect, and he "refilled his coffers" gratis of Freddie Mac while he still had some cache in DC. But he's a heck of a lot closer to perfection from a Conservative's standpoint than Romney. Remind me again – is Romney pro-abortion or pro-choice? I can't remember which day it is. Oh yeah, and is Romney pro-Global Warming Hoax or against? Is it Friday or Saturday? At least after Newt made that idiotic commercial with Princess Pelosi backing the Global Warming Scam, he had the decency and good sense last week to call it the dumbest thing he ever did. That at least shows some humility and contrition. I don't recall Romney ever doing the equivalent. Newt would crush Obama in a debate. Yeah, Romney has his talking points down really smooth now, but can he compare with Newt's ability to make profound philosophical points and historical parallels? Does Coulter really want RINO Romney instead of a real rightwinger (with occasional lapses), like Newt? Ann, you sold us all out. I don't know if you are on Mitt's payroll now or what, but you really stepped in it. I've read all your books and, until now, was a big fan. You're seemingly smart and funny. But I think you took a Stupid Pill recently.
I can't believe how stupid most are. If you want to argue with me about this, look at who we have for president. The people of this nation put him there. Now tell me the people are not stupid. Most knew what Obama was all about. Most knew who were his friends and what his views were. Most weren't even sure of where he was born. We're not even sure now if this man is a US citizen. Yet, the brilliant people of this country elected him president.
Now, we know we've got to get rid of Obama and it comes down to, in my opinion, Mitt Romney or Gingrich. Let's not make the same mistake we made in electing Barack. New Gingrich, though intelligent, has just too much baggage. In addition to his extra marrital affairs, we have learned that he was the recipient of better than $1.6 million dollars from Fannie Mae. And, there is much more to be said about Newt most of you know about. If you don't, you'll learn soon enough. Don't be misguided by "Motor Mouth" Sean Hannity and Rush Limbaugh; it has been evident from the start that their man was Newt Gingrich.
Mitt Romney is a winner! He is smart and has the resources needed to run an effective campaign. He knows how to win over independents and democrats and has proven it by being elected in Mass., probably the most liberal state in America. And, when you look at Mr. Romney, he looks like a president. Newt looks like he's getting ready to push another one of his fresh off the press monthly books.
I like how Newt talks and he, of course, is very intelligent and worldly. However, I strongly believe that he is not going to be able to overcome the scrutinny he'll have to if he is to win over the women vote and those who are very religious. In my opinion, Ann Coulter makes a great deal of sense. I choose Mitt Romney over all the candidates.
Charles Guerra, you would be better to keep your mouth shut and appear stupid, because by opening it you have removed all doubt. Neither Rush nor Sean have endorsed ANY candidate – they remain neutral and defend all candidates against left wing attacks. Newt DID NOT take any money from Fannie Mae – he had a consultants contract with Freddie Mac over a period of years and has stated that they DID NOT follow the advice they hired him to give. His daughters from his previous marriage support him 100% and have written books stating that he was very considerate and supportive of their mother in the bad times. If you've never given your wife jewelry, shame on you.
Newt gave us control of the House of Representatives for the first time in 40 years and passed almost all the items in his "Contract for America". He worked hard to pass term limits even though it did not go through, and he did give us welfare reform.
None of this matters. The primaries will determine the nominee. We all need to support our favorite with passion (I don't have one yet – I'm split between 3) and if our favorite is knocked out of the running, support our 2nd favorite until there is one left standing. Then we all need to support that candidate whole heartedly because a 2nd term of the Chicago thug liberal democrat socialist communist muslim currently occupying the White House and traveling on Air Force 1 is unacceptable.
Anne Coulter is right, and I couldn't have said it better. The one more important thing we need than the most conservative republican serve as president is to first get the most conservative candidate to run for President that can actually beat Obama. No one wants the most conservative qualified republican in the presidency than me. But I know that Newt is not electable due to both his baggage and the fact he isn't even likable, and would stand no chance against Obama. Cain is a flash in the pan but might make a good Veep. Bachmann has no chance. Perry is too clumsy, and none of the others are even marginally serious contenders. The only thing that needs to be done with Romney is that he must be made to apologize for his gaffe in Massachusetts through pressure from the tea party and that he must promise to get Obamacare repealed. If those two things are achieved during the primaries, he will be absolutely the best Republican that stands any kind of chance of beating Obama.
Anne, Karl Rove, and Fox News are all for the establishment!
They're not for Michele Bachmann or Herman Cain because they're part of that group of people who want to keep business as usual in Washington.
There's too much at stake to elect someone who's the closest in comparison to Reagan, of which Michele Bachmann is!!!
They're afraid that if she is elected it will change the entire dynamics of Washington. This is why Fox news is continuously pedaling (Romney), Perry, and Gingrich.
Can they be anymore obvious?
They talk about Reagan all the time, but fail to make the connection with
the most conservative candidate out there, you would think that they would be mentioning her name more often!
There's some really bad acting going on at Fox, and I'm not buying what they're trying to sell. This election is too important to be pushing for a moderate again, not this time around! We need a right winger to counter balance what the left has done to our great country, and we're not going to get there with a moderate/liberal. Not even close!!!
Why settle for crumbs when we can have the entire cake!
God bless!
Ha, She picked a loser with Christie now this is her second choice. Maybe she really prefers McCain to run again. She should team up with Carl Rove to defeat more conservatives.
I don't want Obama to win another term, Ann is not only beautifull, she is smart as a whip. I ocasionally wonder if she's married.
Not legally. Gay marraige is generally not allowed…yet.
Romney cannot be president his father was born in Mexico. According to the constitution both parents must be born on American soil. We cannot let this pass as was done with Obama his father was born in Kenya. This would only legitamize the fraudulent Obama presidency.
Do you want a moderate who can win with the Independent voter, or a true 100% conservative who doesn't stand a chance. I'm pretty much a Libertarian, but I realize most of America isn't ready for a Libertarian, nor are they ready for a far right conservative. This has to be "any one but Obama" first, then work on getting the conservative line. It took the Liberals and Progressives over a century to get where we are now. We are not going to be able to undo a century's worth of subversion in one election. It will take a thoughtful and careful approach presented in a way that is palatable to the American public. Remember too that a large percentage of parents were indoctrinated by the left in school to accept the entitlement state.
I like Ann but she ain`t always right. She famously declared last election cycle that she would support that baby-killing "Christian" ( yeah right ) witch Hilary. George the Atheist Will famously scolded her on Sunday Stephanopolous as being "like Achilles sulking in a tent". She is right about a lot of things , this just ain`t one of them. If Romney is the nominee I will vote for him as an improvement over the ineffectual, incompetent sissy 0. I would do so gritting my teeth and holding my nose. ABO anyone but Obama.
I can't stand the bitch
I am sick and tired of this author and some commenters insisting that Romney is a RINO. In 2008 Tom Tancredo endorsed Romney over McCain. Yes, I think McCain is a shameless RINO, rubbing elbows with Kennedy and Feingold, etc. Romney is NOT McCain. A vote for Romney is actually a fairly conservative vote. Romney doesn't pass the "purity test" of some evangelicals simply because her is Mormon, but as Franklin Graham said, "we're not electing a pastor-in-chief". So lighten up with the angst about Romney's religion. Also, can you REALLY call Romney a luke-warm candidate simply because, in his words, he is "not willing to light his hair on fire" just to prove to you die-hards that he has passion?
Ann Coulter! You must have had too much koolaid or you have your head in the sand! Romney is the man in the "empty suit who parades as a Republican but walks and talks the Democrat Ideology". You may want to review his very liberal record also.
NEWT and PERRY are the ONLY qualified candidates for the Republican Presidency 2012.
Get a Grip lady…you are blinded by ????
Yeah, and Ron Paul…..romney sucks! He's a RINO, and is almost a leftist in ways-he is no friend of gun owners and gun rights, for one. He's the worst candidate the republicans could put up!
But Romney is the GOP candidate and we better get over it and support him.
ABO.
These statements should appear on ESPN's "Come on Man".
The WIlliam F. Buckley rule will liver forever, Ann's rule will fade just as she will. Has she not heard of the most popular candidate in the GOP field? Anybody but Romney.
Anybody but Romney is so stupid…gingrich has no chance of beating Obama – none. He is a RINO more thoroughly than Romney is but he has no character…women will not vote for him because of his shameless treatment of women – having sex with other women for years while married to his first and second wives; having sex with interns while going after Clinton for the same thing…using women for his personal pleasure and purpose and then dumping the women he has sex with for newer and younger models..urging conservatives to vote for radical left wing pro abortion, pro gay marriage Repubs like Scozzafava and lashing out in fury over those who would not do this…he is deceitful – why would we want this elderly has been RINO when we can choose real conservatives like Ryan or Rubio or Walker…perhaps now they will get in the race …we can only hope.
to answer your question Florin, as to why should we vote for Gingrich? the answer is, that he is the only one of the candidates who has the experience and balls to beat Obama thats why. Nothing against Romney But Gingrich has been there and done that , and I think he is the only one in the pak that can stand toe to toe with Obama and correct all the lies he will be throwing out at the public during a debate. Gingrich has the answers in his head already. and don't believe all the crap the mainstream media is going to throw out there about him, He is the front runner now so time for a media feeding frenzy to start on him, It's like he says all his pros and cons are a matter of public record. He can't be any worse than what we have in the white house right now. Newt has matured a lot in the last 30 years as we all have . don't codemn him until you prove out the facts, and who is saying it…. actually thats a good rule with any of the candidates , .
Actually,it is ABO.
Period.
Get with it or four more years of Obama's junk.
I fully concur with Jackson's statement. Not only is she all about herself she will prostitute herself for $$$. She claims to be for marriage between one man and one women, but she had no problem being the keynote speaker for a major gay rights movement. coincidence that it just happened to be a POLITICALLY CORRECT GROUP AT THE TIME?
And Jesus went about among prostitutes and sinners in order to win them over…
JUST AS I ALWAYS SUSPECTED. SHE'S JUST ANOTHER PHONY!
Ann was one of my heros in her past life. Now, however, she has taken the fast road to has been status ever since she started her Chris Christie tour of America. Christie didn't take her advice but he fell into the Romney trap and took Ann along for the ride.
I think Ann has sold her last book to me and I will turn her off if I were to ever see her face on my television again. I have no need of fence riding republicans nor do I need left wingers pretending to be conservatives such as Mitt Romney.
What do you think about left winger gingrich then…at least Romney has a good character after having been thoroughly vetted by the press for years-and they found nothing. There is still more to come out about gingrich's shameful past…both personally and politically.
You need to pray to God for guidance if you want to truly find the right candidate, my prayer is that Israel might be saved, for I bear them record that they have a zeal for God but not according to knowledge. Romney doesn't even hold the Bible as the most important in his "christian" life but as a MOrmon the book of mormon is the most influential and Mormonism was started by a man named Joseph Smith who claims to have received golden plates with inspiration for the Mormon religion from an angel named moroni , who by the way has no mention in the Bible. I will take the word of god which says if any man or even an angel from heaven come preaching any other gospel than that which you have learned of us let him be accursed. The apostle Paul as inspired by the Holy Ghost penned those words and I choose the Bible over any man. We must be rid of Barrack Obama but lets choose right or we will surely be wrong. If my people who are called by my name will humble themselves and pray and turn from their wicked ways , then will I hear from heaven then will I heal their lands. Praise and Glory and Honor unto God the Father and God the Son and God the Holy Ghost forever and ever AMEN
a shame……more of the same…………the US hasn't a chance in Haitis to get out of the pit we are in
Jeff, it's "Hades".
The most important thing is to have a candidate that can beat Obama, and
Romney is that Candidate. He is tied, with Obama in Polls and all the others are 10 points and more behind him. Independants WILL NOT vote for an extreme right
candidate. When people blast Romney, they are actually helping reelect Obama.
Ann Coulter is extremely intelligent and more people need to listen to her.
Apparently Joy is not old enough to remember Ronald Reagan and the campaigns of 1980 & 1984.
Joy also doesn't know what she's talking about. All the top four candidates in the primaries are within the margin of error against Obama.
romney is into the gay lifestyle–he supports it—sick!!!!
Ann, you are wrong on this one. I will not vote for Obama Lite, Romney. It is likely a conservative third party candidate would then run. Romney is the liberal's only hope to get the communist re-elected, and you fell for it.
No – gingrich is the only hope for the liberals to get Obama re-elected!
Like Ann Coulter said, "We don't have a Ronald Reagan running." so with a more Conservative Congress and most likely control of the Senate as well as the House, Romney would make am excellend choice, he is very knowledgeable on the economy, has been vettet thouroughly, is a fine decent man, a leader that loves this country and understands capitolism, and he is Center Right, like most of the country. He has only been in Government a short while and spent most of his time in sucessful business, so he understand both.
I appreciate the "right wing" enthusiasm and share many of those opinions, especially when it comes to economics. Unfortunately, we have real world politics and opinions out there. Those radical who sit in at New York, Washington, Boston, Seattle, and San Francisco, are not going to be satisfied by an election. Local politicians can operate from a narrow point of view. World leaders have to be pragmatic and understand the world from a broader perspective. Mr. Romney may not be my first choice but he certainly is a huge step above Obama. Please keep an open mind. Romney was governor in a one party state. Can you imagine what he will be able to do when he has congress on his side? Keep listening and don't become close minded. Winning one election will not solve the problems generated over seventy-five years.
We do have a Ronald Reagan running Newt. He will amnesty illegals. He will let Wall Street and the bankers crap all over you. He will continue as war monger in chief. He will flood the country with "guest workers" to drive wages down. He will enter into trade agreements that kill American jobs. He will suck corporate c**k, He will continue Reagan's policies of destroying the middle class.
What is the use to get a party elected by focusing on men who do not get right with the issues, so they can be celebrity statused citizens screwing the public out of more of our money, Liberties, and when anyone asserts a little bit more realistically in his resistence to that tyranny, our LIVES? The purpose of government is to be a remedy to settling difference by the mouth of the sword. In such, the difference ought to be the same as that obtained by the sword, total, NON compormise, in reference to the issue. The RIGHT state of affairs is SMALL government majoring on what it takes to protect the INNOCENT LIVES, LIBERTIES, AND POSSESSIONS of the people for their good, not to provide opportunity of another social organization exalting some national home coming king or queen. Winning ought to be on who is doing that which is RIGHT, and if anyone tramples the true inalienable rights of the people, then government is in rebellion and if the people desire to return our MEANS of insuring these rights, BACK to the aims of our original protections, by means of force, the people are NOT in rebellion. So until governments go about preserving LIberty, the freedom to do that which is RIGHT, and for the Christian, that may mean that which is right in the sight of God, then governments have wasted their ordained mandate given by GOD HIMSELF. And speaking of God, has anyone even desired GOD's opinion as to how much government is allowed to take from the people? God has a definite opinion as to what the threshold of slavery is, and 1 Samuel 8:15-17 has TEN PERCENT as that threshold of how much can be taken from the people, thus making the people government slaves. The mantra of the people ought to be, "IF YOU THINK THAT YOU MUST TAX, NINE POINT NINTY NINE IS MAX." You see, the people must be free, and since America is saddled by three taxing authorities, Federal, State, and Local, then these three must share in up to 9.99% of the increase of the individual, these taxing entities fighting it out among them as to what their share of that up to 9.99% they deserve. 1 Corinthians 7:20-25 insists that the persons made free never again becomes the servants of men.
Something must have happened in Miss Coulter's life that makes her recent behavior baffling. This Republican primary campaign is getting to be an embarrassment to long-time Republican voters. The problem started when Karl Rove and Barbara Bush initiated their verbal assassination of Sarah Palin during and after the last national election. Now they have been joined by Ann Coulter and Linda Ingraham. And we see the result of this cannibalism by the eastern Republican establishment cabal.
Ann Coulter is all about selling her books. That's it. Nothing more!
Ann is absolutely correct! Certain cicumstances call for certain changes in strategy. YES I would like a Marco Rubio, who is a no negative conservative who could destroy Obama but he's not running is he?? Romney will demolish Obama in debates and easily beat him in my opinion as his negatives are easily overcome. Good job Ann.
Sensible words from Ann. Mitt Romney is the best thing to happen to America since sliced bread. He will work for the America he loves, and her people. Be thankful he cares enough to become involved, there are few easy solutions now and will be less in another year. Already Obama has done untold damage, why is he allowed to continue doing so? Impeachment proceedings should have already removed him from office.
Voters who care for the welfare of the US and her people will be grateful to have a man of Mitt's calibre, expertise and character whom they can choose to vote for.
WHAT have YOU been smokin??? Romney is NOT who this countrey needs to dig us OUT of this hole obama has dug us in. He will NOT repeal obamacare, HE was instrumental in WRITING this debalce of a bill with HIS romenycare!!! WAKE up and stop drinking the koolaide!
Ann, Pres. Obama will not debate, only take questions he approves in advance. He will not subject himself to any open debate!!! Please check out his TRANSPARENCY MEETING!!!!! Please get your head out of the sand.
LOL
Ann is right in this situation, because it's essential that Obama be defeated. Sometimes you have to swallow hard and just look at the big picture.
ann is just going forward with her sexual desire for chris shristie. if she wanted to tear obama apart at the debates newt is best qualified and he can use obamacare against obama. newt is a strong conservative that is my choice for president. ann take a cold shower and rethink your position.
Putting newt and the words 'sexual desire' in the same sentence fits just right…newt has no moral character supplemented by an enormous ego and a capacity for deception and manipulation that fits his ego…if you say Romney is a RINO, well if he is then he's a RINO with character while newt is a RINO without character…be careful what you wish for. Romney may not be the ideal candidate but he's the best chance to beat Obama.
Hey Florin…And Newt can't win why??? Becasue the meia says so??? Guess so in light of the recent polls. I am not electing a preacher, a priest, or someone who is morally perfect. No, in case you haven't noticed, the US (and the world for that matter) is on fire and I am electing someone who will put America's interest first, doesn't give a damn about what liberals think, and will quit taking the crap that we've been subject to since the Oduma regime took office. I don;t need a role model…I NEED AN AMERICA PRESIDENT WITH A SET OF 'NADS. Gingrich / Ryan 2012..
look here is every thing nice and tidy. newt is the smartest, newt has said exactly what he will do and how he will doit. newy will make obama look stupid in a head to head debate. cain knows nothing of forieng policy.michele bachmann is a true consevative but we cant afford another experiment in the presidency at this time. romney loses a big weapon cause of romneycare.ronpaul scares me with his outlook on the military. newt is only viable candidate. so what if he left his wife cause he fell in love,happens all the time. newt saved us from clintons left wing agenda bu making clinton go rt and be a good president. forget about monica,he was a decent pres.
Florin,
I was under the impression that only an almighty GOD could tell what was in one's heart. Can you walk on water??
I've actually gone back and read all your attacks against Newt, and if I were making a psychological analysis of your comments, I might be inclined to think that somewhere you must have been infatuated with Newt, been rebuffed, and now your only pleasure is to hurl accusations against his character.
Newt may not have Romneycare to defend or explain, but he has a much larger problem…hillarycare which HE DID support. Regardless, I'll support whoever the nominee is. They all have strong as well as weak points. They each have their successes as well as failings. I'm not going to trash any repub candidate though. Even the ones I strongly don't like. Bottom line, one of them will be our nominee. The MSM will be ripping them apart soon enough. I'm not helping the left or the MSM. And I'm not helping Obama by picking up my marbles and going home because my guy didn't get the nod.
Obama won in '08 for several reasons. One being because of an ignorant, socialist youth. Another because many purist conservatives had a temper tantrum and refused to vote for McCain and stayed home, voted 3rd party, and more than a few cast votes FOR Obama to punish America for not supporting their horse. Noone disliked McCain more than me. I DESPISE him to this day! Yet I voted for him in the general election to avoid the horror that is Obama and what I knew he'd do to America.
The way you feel about Romney is the way I feel about Newt AND Romney. Yet I will support whoever is left standing. And even not liking Newt, I am fair minded and practical enough to find Newts strengths and weaknesses and recognize, despite my disfavor toward him, he'd be excellent in any debate situation against Obama. Romney would too, but Newt is a stronger debater. Romney has less scandal and that is a plus. But neither Newt or Romney can really come after Obama too hard on healthcare because they both supported socialized medicine in one form or another. Romney w/romneycare and Newt w/hillarycare. It is what it is. Both men showed belief in global warming and support for combating it.
No candidate is perfect. And hopefully we don't agree with any of them 100%, making us political groupies. But any of the repubs running will be a serious improvement over BO. Any of them! Don't get mad when someone likes a different candidate than you. Support the last man standing just as you want ppl to support your guy if he wins. Stop behaving like psycho, spoiled children. Or you will have four more years of Obama. And if these last few years with him wasn't enough to scare you, think of an Obama admin with nothing to lose, without having to worry about re-election. A 2nd Obama term will be a 1st Obama term on steroids. America could not recover from such a thing. I suggest repubs get their crap together and do whatever it takes to get BO OUT of the WH.
You couldn't have said it better!!! Thank you for your willingness to consider, and encourage others to consider, that we are choosing from a set of humans here and there will be pros and cons to every choice. I hope people will reconsider their approach to these elections after reading your comment.
Well said.
I think she has been listenning to Chris Chistie too much. I agree with Rush Limbaugh, is not the best debater, (the man without a telepromter is nothing), is the candidate with more character and proved leadership (government or business) who demonstrate he/she has the best intentions and understanding of the solutions for the country. A real leader, not a puppet.
ann, next you will be living with the occupy wall streeters . maybe u and christie can tent together. ann i liked your stattements in the past now i will put them on level with the dem propoganda. you have lost all respect as a conservative.
Another article to divide and confuse moderates and conservatives. She is right about suicidal. Ann is usually succinct and practical and is here too. Newt was speaker of the house with his contract with America, Clinton was president, and the republican congress gave us a balanced budget but they were reaping many elements that came with the demise of the soviet union. The ows are a very small radical minority with very little redeeming social or moral value. One of their spokes persons was an immigrant with no real understanding of the USA or our culture. He spoke very poor english with nothing but cliches. Immigrants only want to implement the culture they escaped from that was a failure in their home country. Lawyers and politicians and other groups exploit this for their own interests. We in the middle and right need to stick together like those on the left ie unions and all the other sacred cows of the radical secular left.
The media does not represent me in anyway. They stir the pot and never protect our traditional American values. They muddle the waters, never offer a moral practical solution and shout down any opposing idea or belief. In fact they have no values or beliefs that work for America but they do collect a fat paycheck. NO one has any balls anymore especially the Republican party. We who are against obummer and the democrats must stick together.
I'm afraid Romney will be another McCain. Too nice, too courteous PLUS too liberal.
and easy to beat! NO ONE is passionate about Mitt Romney,
Ann Coulter knows nothing about MItt Romney's "career" here in Massachusetts. He won one (1) election after swinging as left as he could against an ultra-:Leftist who in the last week said she would allow abortions to juveniles without parental involvement. Up until then, she was leading in the polls. Mitt was "pro-choice", but opposed to her permissive view. Even at that, he governed by compromise to the Left and gave us "Same-sex marriage" and Romneycare. BUT all the pundits still agreed that he still could not be re-elected. Mitt, himself, knew it. The Harvard/Boston Globe/Planned Parenthood axis had started their search and had come up with the present governor, an Afro-American reared in Chicago. Mitt would be gone after a term, and he announced he would not run again for the office. She needs to do some homework, as any foolish voter should who would even consider the man.
I'm so disappointed about Ann that she'll back a RINO like Romney just to win an election. What purpose would that serve? Okay, so Obama may lose the election, but to be replaced by another tax and spend politician? Those three books written by Ann are probably the last three books of hers I'll ever buy.
Ann is indeed selling out constitutionalists. She overlooks the plain and simple fact that "moderate" Republicans–who have little respect for the Constitution–is one of the reasons that Obama is in the White House to begin with. I am not interested in the quick death of the Republic at the hands of Obama–neither the "slow death" at the hands of neocons who tread the same pathway, albeit much more slowly. If Americans don't learn to get off of this "let's select someone ELECTABLE" kick to appease the liberals, we will lose it all anyway.
Ann is absolutely right. We need candidate with execuitive experience – and they all have had to compromise on some issues to solve problems and run a state. The "pure" Republicans are all legislators, and Gingrich is the only legislator who has shown the ability to solve real problems. Obama is a perfect example on someone totally lacking in management experience.
You are absolutely correct. Newt is the only one that both has the experience and has had success in doing the right thing for this country. And he knows how upset the American people are; I doubt he will back step on our toes. He's well aware that the door swings both ways.
it's not about "management", if that's the case, then go ahead and elect Newt. It's about LEADERSHIP; boldness and vision. The ONLY two I see with that is Bachmann and Paul. The rest belong on the trash heap of liberal garbage.
Obama in the White House, Romney in the White House, Newt in the White House, it doesn't matter.
Ron Paul is the only opposition against both Party's establishment elite candidates.
Coulter, Levine, Limbaugh, O'Reilly, Hannity, Graham, and Medved are all shills for the establishment.
America has two political parties fighting for power. They are:
The Demopublican/Republicrat establishment oligarchy
against
Ron Paul and his supporters, freedom's last hope.
No he's not. He's weak and left of the liberals. He's lawless, and incapable of keeping our country safe. The first time Iran's leader says boo, he be asking Secret Service to bunker him. He's clueless. He's is definitely not presidential material.
If Dr. Ron Paul wins the nomination, I will support him 100%. If he does not win the nomination, will you and the rest of the Paulbots make the same pledge???
It's interesting to see all these comments as to which candidate is the best and the one who can beat Obama. It's like watching people debate on which poison is the one they should take, which one will kill them "better." I also wonder how many of these posts are "cointelpro" to keep people distracted from the reality of the situation.
WAKE UP! Every single candidate, save one, is owned by the globalists. In every election our "choice" is between two people cut from the same cloth, EXCEPT FOR THIS TIME. We have a true Conservative candidate, and you can tell that by the way 1) the media are attempting to ignore him, 2) his own party is attempting to derail his campaign, and 3) you see countless misinformation posted about him in blog replies, such as this venue.
Yes, I'm talking about Ron Paul.
Do you really think he's "weak and left of the liberals"? Do you really think he's "clueless"? The only man who predicted (correctly) what would happen after the bailouts; what would happen if we kept on with our disastrous monetary policy; what would happen if we continued to allow the Federal Reserve to loot the wealth of the American people?
The reality is, if you think Ron Paul is wrong on any given particular policy, you either have received your information second-hand (or third or fourth). and haven't investigated for yourself what he REALLY stands for, OR you are a shill for the globalists, planting as much disinformation as you can about him, in order to keep your agenda on track.
For example, there are those who constantly say that Ron Paul is for "legalizing" drugs. No, he's for taking the issue out of federal control, where it doesn't belong, and putting it back to the states, where it does. If a STATE decides it wants to legalize something, it's the STATE'S decision. Do you really think that's likely? Even if it IS (e.g., California and medical marijuana), it's a STATE decision, and not a federal decision.
Read the Constitution. Get informed. Pay attention to geo-politics. What is happening is as plain as the nose on your face, if you will pay attention. Look at what is happening in Europe. A "central banker" has just taken over as the head of Italy. They are on the verge of destroying the individual sovereignty of the European nations and putting them under the political control of the central banks (economic control wasn't enough). They are so sure of their plans that they aren't even trying to hide them any more.
Do you wonder why the Federal Reserve keeps making the "wrong" choices, and the economy keeps getting worse. It's because it's not wrong from THEIR standpoint. The plan is not to "fix" or "heal" America. The plan is to DESTROY America. Obama is doing a bang-up job of just that. However, even if he loses, if they can put a Cain, or Romney, or Gingrich, or (God forbid) even Perry in the White House, they will be able to keep their agenda on track, and it will be business as usual.
If you've never heard of "Agenda 21," go to the U.N.'s own web site, and start reading. If you don't know what the "Wildlands Project" is, do a google search. If you don't understand what the Federal Reserve is all about, read the writings of G. Edward Griffin, Murray Rothbard, Lew Rockwell, or even Ron Paul, who has a better understanding of monetary policy than any other candidate.
In fact, watch the debates. When any other candidate is asked a question, they'll fall back on their canned "talking points," especially if they don't have a clue as to the answer. Then, they'll shift the question on to something they are prepared to say, and just start the typical blather you're so familiar with because you've seen it so many times from so many politicians. Then, notice when Ron Paul gives an answer (if he's allowed to actually do so). He gives it to you straight, and succinctly, and you'll see all the other candidates watching him, intently. That's because he knows what he's talking about, because he LIVES it, while they are just "prepared" and spewing what they hope will get them through the debate.
We The People created our government. The created cannot be above the creator. Government is subservient to US, not the other way around. We are NOT a "democracy." We are a Constitutional Republic. The difference is between a "collective sovereignty" (democracy) and "individual sovereignty" (Republic). I'm amazed at the people who not only call themselves Republicans, but Conservatives, who do not understand this difference, do not understand our Constitution, and do not understand our form of government.
Quit being concerned with who's on "Dancing With The Stars," or who just got booted off of "Survivor," or who's playing whom on "Monday Night Football," and start learning what is really going on. Pull the curtain back and look at who is really controlling the wizard (I hope that analogy isn't too obscure for you younger readers).
I you do the research, really want the greatest amount of liberty (not always a given, what with the state of our public "education"), and the least amount of government, and have even a modicum of intelligence, you will come to one conclusion as to who our choice for president should be.
There is still enough time to save this country, through peaceful means. Otherwise, it's going to get very ugly, very quickly, and we'll be forced to use the method of last resort that the Founding Fathers provided for us. When they are rounding us up to take us off to the FEMA camps (for our own "protection," mind you), it will be too late. So, it's up to us (you and me). Do we sit on our butts discussing who the best candidate is, or do we get informed and take action? The ball is in our court. It's time to serve (a little tennis analogy).
I like Ann Coulter. But she is a gadfly. She makes outrageous statements to sell books – stay in the spotlight. Supporting Gov. Christie as the best Conservative hope as GOP candidate is just an example. If one takes Ann too seriously as a righteous Conservative, disappointment will follow. She's like the beautiful blonde at the cocktail party, fun to flirt with, but you don't take her home to Mama.
She sold us out some time ago with her support of the homosexual agenda. And that is ALL this is about. Anyone who knows of Romney's illegal activity in the matter of same sex marriage in MA will connect the dots. He is a closet supporter, and so is she. When will conservatives see this crucial issue for what it is and just dump this guy once and for all?
The fact that she supports Chris Christie should send everyone running for cover. The only thing he did well was control Union over lording. Everything else is liberal. She has never had my respect or support. She's antagonistic and elitist. She's obnoxious, loud-mouthed, and disrespectful of authority except herself; as she perceives herself above the rest of us.
Ann has always been and is for Romney and I do not know WHY. She has roots or some connection some where. She should very well know Romney is a career politician and will say whatever it takes to win. He is part of the problem like most in congress execpt for a few new true conservative ones. Ron Paul is the only one running for president that can stand on his record and keeps his word. AMERICA FIRST ……………. Charles of Waveland,MS.
Dr. Ron Paul's foreign policy stance frightens me because I do not think you can be "friendly" with radical muslim nations. We live today in a global world and protectionism is not possible. However, if Dr. Ron Paul wins the Republican nomination, I will fervently support him for the Presidency.
If Dr. Ron Paul does not win the nomination, will you and the other Paulbots support the nominee, or will you give your vote to the liberal democrat socialist communist muslim thug politician from Chicago who currently lives in the White House and travels on Air Force 1 – Barack Hussein Obama.
There are two great fallacies in politics. They go something like this:
1. We have to support OUR guy, because he's not as bad as THEIR guy.
2. OUR party (or guy, or cause, etc.), right or wrong.
The choice of the "lesser evil" is ALWAYS evil. That is the choice that we are constantly presented with in politics, and as long as we keep falling for it, we keep losing ground with our freedom. Typically, we get a president who furthers the global agenda, and we get so disgusted with him that we vote for the other "party" in the next election. Then, THAT, president keeps advancing the same agenda, we again get disgusted, and we boot HIM out and again go back to the original "party" (whether you approach this as a Democrat or a Republican, the result is the same). This is repeated, ad nauseam, while the agenda keeps advancing, unchecked.
As long as you keep voting for the "endorsed" candidate, no matter who he (or she) is, and no matter the circumstances, you will keep getting the same outcome (remember the famous quote, often incorrectly attributed to Albert Einstein: "Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again, but expecting different results").
I got into a lot of trouble in 2008 because I refused to support John McCain. However, I had been against McCain for years, and considered him unsuitable for president on several levels. I made this fully known before he was even the nominee, but it didn't matter. I took a lot of flack, even though I (correctly) predicted that if McCain was the Republican nominee, we would have either our first woman president or our first black president. I didn't have a problem with a woman or black president; just not THAT woman or THAT black.
I have a "new" method of picking my candidate, and the only one that I will use, going forward. I vote for the candidate who I think will best defend, protect, and uphold the Constitution, which should be a simple matter, because the president takes an Oath to do just that. It SHOULD be simple, but most candidates perjure themselves in the very act of swearing the Oath.
Learning about what the Founding Fathers were attempting to bequeath to us (and there were many, not just a few), will provide a better understanding of how our government is supposed to operate, and what the Constitution means. You would be surprised at how many of our so-called "problems" would miraculously "fix" themselves, if we got back to the Constitution. It IS the "level playing field."
So, understand, that as it is, now, the two "parties" are merely opposite sides of the same coin. They are BOTH taking us down the wrong path. However, every once in a while, a candidate comes along who is not already "owned" by special interests; a candidate who cares more about doing what is right, than in getting re-elected, or maintaining political power; a candidate who loves America and loves liberty. When that candidate comes along, it is not only an honor, it should be our duty, to support him.
I have already chosen my candidate. That is who I will be voting for, because, in the end, any other choice is no choice at all, and I will not be responsible for losing America. If you keep voting the status quo, you might be.
P.S. As for Ann Coulter, I used to like her. She talked a good game. However, she has revealed her true neo-con colors, and is no longer credible.
Herman Cain is the right choice here, clearly. Would destroy Obama in any debate. Has the executive experience to be chief executive. Get on the Cain Train! http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/8053175/…
There are two words that should immediately disqualify Cain from being the nominee, and I'm not talking about "sexual harassment."
They are: Federal Reserve.
Cain was the Chair of the Kansas City FED. That SHOULD be all you need to know about him (assuming you know anything about the Federal Reserve, such that it isn't "federal," but is a private consortium of banks). The Federal Reserve agenda is NOT in the best interests of the United States, but rather, just the opposite. Do the research and you will discover the truth.
Ditto! Ann is contradicting herself. Or, is she really showing her true colors? The Republican Party has no real anchor in the east. Those days are long gone! New Hampshire, the home of the "R.I.,N.O. Republican" has been given far too much focus. If anything, those Republicans need a seat at the very back of the room, with minimal input in the nominee selection process! The party is now a party of the south, prairies and mountains. Ann comes from "a land of high taxes, unions and secular humanism." On eastern standards, she is a conservative. But in comparison to one of the "red state areas" she is a "moderate to the right." It is highly understandable and fitting that she would endorse Romney's candidacy.
ann is in left field now. newt was speaker and he changed the clinton presidency and moved clinton to balance budget and abandon hillary care. he basically made clinton a good president. he can straighten our country out.
Newt Gingrich is (or was) a member of the CFR (Council on Foreign Relations). The CFR agenda is treason. That should dispel any notions on a Gingrich presidency.
The majority of these comments remind me of those in the church who are so willing to kick or throw that stone against the bro or sis who had lost a battle with satan.
I believe we try to find someone close to our views as possible for President. Right WING gave us Clinton twice and President in Training BO. Newt has always been my choice even taking jabs from close GOP friends saying I endorse sex with other women while married. Even with 48 yrs of marriage to same woman (my college lover).
The Dems don't beat us; they just tell us why we can not support this or that candiate. we don't even listen to our own Liberal Media Warnings when it comes to whom we should support FOR NOMINEE=MCCAIN.
In local elections including U. S. House hold more strict to the conservertive issues. Senate and especially President we must give on the more extreme right wing positions. If not we will end up with playboi BC; bigspenders W; and changers BO.
Mitt or Newt better would be Mitt&Newt team in that order. As VP Newt would be strong enough to create a NEED TO LISTEN MR PRESIDENT. like a CHANEY(sp) TO BUSH. BIG spender would have been a lot more progressive if MR Chany had not stood up to him as a strong VP.
Newt has and is running a great campaign; stand tall: against News Media EGOS; lack of wisdom of other contenders; keep to HIS agenda regardless of the question; and finally having the experience to say I KNOW HOW TO DO THIS JOB. THANKS.
Quick get her out of the battle she's shell shocked. Poor thing.
Unbelievable. She sure fooled me. I have now lost all respect for her.
Coulter has gone stupid on us. Usually she is spot on w/ most issues. Lately,this has not been the case. She now is confused even on the homosexul issue? Wow. Poor thing…. Is there something in the water in the NE States?……Seems anyone who lives in the NE, eventually, is sucked in by the mental disorder that liberalism is. Coulter needs to move to Texas and get re-educated. Maybe something in the water there may rub off on her…..
I'm shocked that the party that has a focus on values is openly advocating winning at all costs. Let me be the first to make this call: Nominate the candidate that represents the majority of Republicans' values. The rest will take care of itself. Romney's biggest problem is that he is Obama lite. Newt's biggest problem is that he has a lifetime of DC politics to haunt him. Cain has women problems in addition to the pizza guy parallels. Perry has immigration and croneyism issues from Texas. Bauchmann can't get history right to save her life. Ron Paul takes a love of peace to national security threatening and just downright scary places. All the candidates have flaws but the bottom line is we need a REAL ELECTION. Let's get the nomination process over with then help the nominee win the campaign!
PS Campaign or not I'd pay to see Newt and Obama in a debate. Obama thinks he's an intellectual, Gingrich would educate him!!!
yes newt would educate him
Wait a second – you just named all the candidates EXCEPT Rick Santorum. Why aren't any of you giving him a chance??? He's a strong fiscal AND social conservative with solid foreign policy experience and a decent economic plan – and NO BAGGAGE! Just because he lost in 2006 in a Democrat-leaning district to a faux-conservative Democrat (and by the way, here in Ohio, almost EVERY Republican lost in 2006), it seems many people don't want to give him a chance. I suggest you all take a second look at him, and stop letting the media pick our candidate for us!
Ann's been spending too much time in bed with Bill Maher.
Wonder how much soros paid Coulter to back Mittens?
I wonder how much soros paid Coulter to back Mittens?
Newt, Romney and probably Perry are all "bought and paid for". None of them will be any better than the "current" man in the oval office. Michelle Bachman, as I type, is the only "real" conserveative running, but don't believe she'll get the nod.
Ann Coulter has changed over the years, don't know what has happened to her, but she is no longer a true patriot-conserveative and isn't operating her political standing as the "Christian" she claims to be. A true believer CAN NOT leave their faith at home while entering the voting booth. It is no different than Obummer claiming to be a Christian, which his actions, words, decisions and people he surrounds himself with contradict.
If it looks like a duck…
I have always liked Newt, and I would certainly back just about any other candidate that we nominate. That being said, the only candidate that can beat Obama is Mitt Romney. We can nominate someone with idealogical purity (Newt, Bachman, etc.) and the democratic machine will use Obama's billion dollar campaign war chest to bury them. This business about not nominating more moderate candidates because they will lose is idiocy. The reason that those candidates have lost in the past is because they were weak candidates to begin with. As superficial as it sounds, we must nominate a candidate who can stand up to Obama through the eyes of the TV camara. Anyone who thinks that "the american people are too smart" to vote for Obama again must be living in an alternate universe. The typical non-conservative voter is not smart, and on top of that they are for the most part totally ignorant of facts regarding the economy, foreign policy, or anything else that is pertinant to governing the country.
Obama appeals to Independents, Democrats and moderates. A epublican who appeals to that grouping is called a RINO.
This nation cannot afford to elect the same
I was standing in line at a Ron Paul rally, last week, and a guy and his wife got in line behind me, and as they did so, I heard him saying that if Romney gets the nomination, he would vote for Obama, because he would rather have only FOUR more years of Obama, than EIGHT more years of Obama. I thought that was pretty accurate.
And another one throws themselves under the bus! Ann must have morphed into a leftist lemming. Someone needs to check the water supply, it has to be tainted with something that turns conservatives into moderating Zombies. Off all the candidates we do not need, Romney is pretty near the top of the list!
Ann you have lost your mind and are no longer relevant, Go away Ann
I have 40 year voting conservative you are now a has been
If Romney wins over Obama, what will we have???
go Alice!