Ann Coulter was recently interviewed by author, journalist and talk radio host Howie Carr on his program; her commentary was pure establishment balderdash. Ann may plead hyperbole, but her sentiment is readily apparent. Among the pearls of wisdom:
Carr: "Who are you for, for president right now, Ann?"
Coulter: "Um...well, don't tell'em, but I'm planning on giving Mitt Romney a little more time to rest; flying out, kidnapping him, and depriving him of sleep, food and water until he agrees to run again."
Carr: "You're kidding."
Coulter: "No"
Carr: "You really want him to run again?"
Coulter: "Look it, Yeah...I think he was a fantastic candidate. As I've told you before, he would have won by a larger landslide, uh, than Ronald Reagan did in 1980 with, with the, without Teddy Kennedy's immigration bill, and [it's] basically impossible to beat an incumbent. Um, but he is head and shoulders better than the other candidates we have; they all -- and I don't want to name them, but...but, I mean, you go through the list, and for one thing, as you I have discussed, and this is the most important point, and, that...that all of your listeners have to tell all of their friends: knock it off with the congressmen or inspirational figures. Gotta' be a governor or a senator, preferably a governor. Um, and you know, there's a limited world list of who those people are. And they all have problems; none of them are as articulate, um, and...and...and reasonable...and, as good on immigration as Mitt Romney is."
Carr: "What about Ted Cruz?"
Coulter: [Pause] "Um...well, he's a lot worse on immigration."
Confusion or Opportunism?
Is Ann Coulter under the influence? How does one explain such intellectual confusion?
Or perhaps it's not confusion at all? Perhaps it's as simple as one deciding which side has the best chance of winning based on conventional equations of how establishment power has traditionally determined the outcomes of political contests, as compared with doing the right things for the right reasons consistently over time, regardless of how one's personal popularity may be affected in media, by peer pressure from the beltway king-makers, or lost opportunities from exclusion as a preferred guest for the lavishly elegant parties thrown with regularity in and around our nation's capitol?
That's the ticket with the Progressive RINO Establishment; on a personal level, they win even when they lose: a comfy win/win situation to be in if you're aligned with the inside-beltway players as an establishment cheerleader and big government groupie.
Sir Winston Churchill once said:
"If you will not fight for right when you can easily win without blood shed; if you will not fight when your victory is sure and not too costly; you may come to the moment when you will have to fight with all the odds against you and only a precarious chance of survival. There may even be a worse case. You may have to fight when there is no hope of victory, because it is better to perish than to live as slaves."
Ann crawled into bed with the Progressive RINO Establishment, embracing the status quo; elites with long histories of attacking constitutional conservatives to suppress their ideals, values, and principles, and thus remove such important cultural and historical influences from Republican party politics.
Sandy Stringfellow is a writer and musician with an interest in history, economics, and politics. A fifth generation Floridian, he was born and raised in Gainesville, Florida. From an early age he developed a fascination with music, eventually playing in a variety of local bands.
Sandy continued to write as he made his living in the fields of commercial carpentry and retail sales. In 2001 one he established a home studio, where he records his songs.
He is currently employed driving tractor/semi-trailer combinations around Florida. Sandy can be reached on Facebook.