Coulter on a Tear -- for Coulter

Thursday, February 16, 2006

It's Ann Coulter, so don't expect much more than a bunch of funny one-liners, but I did enjoy this one.

Over lunch, I found this hilarious Coulter column up over at Jewish World Review . I haven't enjoyed one of these this much in a long time: This earlier one was inexcusable, for example. But I do have to say I fully agree with her -- except for the matter of which country should be next on the Uncle Sam Tour -- when she says the following:

Perhaps we could put aside our national, ongoing, post-9/11 Muslim butt-kissing contest and get on with the business at hand: Bombing Syria back to the stone age and then permanently disarming Iran.
I also enjoyed the following:
So it's not exactly a scoop that Muslims are engaging in violence. A front-page story would be "Offended Muslims Remain Calm."

What is stunning about this spectacle is that their violence is working. With a few exceptions, the media won't show the cartoons that incited mass violence around the globe (cartoons available at And yet, week after week, American patriots endure "The Boondocks" without complaint. Where's the justice here?
and this:
If you don't want to get shot by the police, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, then don't point a toy gun at them. Or, as I believe our motto should be after 9/11: Jihad monkey talks tough; jihad monkey takes the consequences. Sorry, I realize that's offensive. How about "camel jockey"? What? Now what'd I say? Boy, you tent merchants sure are touchy. Grow up, would you?
While this kind of language is usually out of bounds, I think Coulter makes an excellent point here. There is absolutely no reason whatsoever to worry about the opinion or "feelings" of someone who is uncivilized and will only take courtesy as a sign of weakness.

Coulter is on the money about Iran, but on Syria, she claims we should go to war based on the NATO charter. I don't recall exactly where, but I have seen some arguments that that is not the case. Besides, Syria gave us ample reason to invade long ago. How would a mere treaty convince our sluggish leaders to act now?

If we want to keep on laughing occasionally at Coulter's antics, we need to get serious about confronting Islam and we need to demand much more from our leaders in the way of spine than we have seen so far.

-- CAV


Nicholas Provenzo said...

The trouble with Ann Coulter is for every time she says something good, there at least fifty other times she comes off as a total moonbat. The acid tongue that helps bring her clarity on the need to fight the war ruthlessly also helps her say things like “I think our motto should be post-9-11, ‘raghead talks tough, raghead faces consequences’” at the last CPAC.

Raghead? You mean a nationally syndicated columnist can’t come up with a legitimate descriptive term for Islamic jihadists? WTF?

My view of Coulter: her shtick is little more than conservatism with a dose of Tourette's

Gus Van Horn said...


Amen, to borrow a word from her lexicon....

Something else that bugs me about this column is that it's a sad commentary on the state of our public discourse when we are so close to having to talk about war only by joking about it.