With the publication of her latest book, Demonic : How the Liberal Mob is Endangering America, the liberal establishment just got another good reason to pile the hate on Ann Coulter’s tall, thin body.
For the uninformed or those living in Lost Nation, Iowa, Ann is the antithesis of the dumb blonde.
She is an incisive writer with an undergraduate degree from Cornell and a law degree from Michigan.
The best of Democratic women would be no match for her in a debate.
But what Ann does is write books and she writes them well with cogent arguments and a rapier wit that can send any liberal into the throes of death from a thousand cuts.
I had the pleasure of interviewing her five times on my old program at WGNU and once for Phyllis Schafly, the woman who inspired her to become the potent force that she is.
More importantly I had the honor of meeting her at a pro-life Vitae dinner a few years ago in St. Louis.
The first thing you notice about her is that she is very tall.
After shaking her blonde locks a few times because of a failure to immediately recognize my name until I mention radio, I told her she was much taller than her doll.
While most people problem probably think Sarah Palin is the most hated woman in American, the contest is not even close.
Palin is cute, bouncy, a live-wire exponent of conservative virtues but she fights back in feminine niceties and memorable metaphors and images.
She is more of a symbol for the kind of woman the liberals hate.
She is a pro-life mother of five children with a supportive husband, while she found time to run the state of Alaska and secure the vice presidential nomination in 2008.
And to make matters worse, Palin delivered a Downs Syndrome baby late in life when according to the liberal creed, the baby would have been better off being aborted so not as to have reminded liberals of the imperfectability of the human condition.
And down the road her child might have needed special care at the state’s expense. This money would have been better spent buying votes in future elections.
If my prose seems a bit cutting for me, I just finished reading Ann’s book last night. Her style wears off on you sometimes.
Palin’s grasp of hard-core intellectual attacks, laced with hyperbole, and sarcasm pales by comparison with that of Coulter.
Should there ever be such a contest it would be reminiscent of the boxing match years ago between Paula Jones and Tanya Harding.
Before two minutes had elapsed Harding had broken Jones’ already prominent nose into a million pieces.
As for her aforementioned book, I have read virtually every one of her books and I can say that by far this is her best and one that I will keeping coming back to for reference.
I advise every one and even liberals to read it and read it slowly because she will test your liberal faith to its very core and if you honestly and openly answer her objections about your credo you will understand better what it is you believe.
If you simply go into denial, that will only affirm her accusations.
When I had my own show I loved the challenges that my most astute liberal callers made to me–all three of them–Jim from Ferguson, the Roosevelt Man and Dave the cab driver.
A priest friend once told me that within the first two weeks after ordination, he had heard every sin in the book, except suicide in the confessional.
The same was true for me concerning my own beliefs.
Every thing I ever believed had been challenged and assaulted. I either learned to counter their arguments or risked the disgrace of being in the wrong.
The caveat is that you have to be serious about finding the absolute truth of things and not just in winning political power by any means necessary, which I believe is the marching orders of most liberals.
If denial is your defense strategy then there should be no surprise why you never win any arguments without resorting to shouting, violence, innuendo and character assassination, which I think is Rule #11 from the Saul Alinsky playbook, Rules for Radicals.
The first thing Coulter suggests is that you check you history–the French Revolution in particular.
Of course as she points out if you attend an elite university like her Cornell or Michigan, you will not be able to take a course on that part of the liberal heritage.
It would be as if one could not find any suitable biography of our founding fathers.
As Ann recounts in bloody detail, during the Reign of Terror that followed the French Revolution 600,000 French citizens were butchered and mutilated while an other 145,000 fled the country in fear of their lives.
It also equals the number of military fatalities during the American Civil War, some 70 years later. And this was in a country of under 26 million people.
As Coulter points out it is hard to establish an accurate chronology of the revolution itself because it revolved around the mob.
This is the precise reason most of America’s founding fathers were frightened by the turmoil in France on the heels of their own rebellion against Great Britain.
They feared the lack of order and the mindless violence that characterized the mobocracy, as they called the Paris throngs.
In his Little Richard’s Almanac, Benjamin Franklin opined that a mob is a monster with many heads and no brain.
To understand this, just think back to 2008 when the Obama campaign mobilized its own brand of the sansculotte with their purple-shirted SIEU and the orange clad ACORN mobs to terrorize Tea Party goers and other Obama opponents.
The French Revolution gave liberals a legacy of death while its counterpart in America gave us a Republic of freedom.
The former gave liberals a heritage of the show trial, regicide, and the guillotine.
It gave them a Satanic orgy of pornographic violence and disfigurement that deaden the French soul.
Thousands of priests and nuns were slaughtered and the Catholic Church nationalized.
The French Revolution was the forerunner of the concentration camp, the crematoria, the gulag and the abortion clinic.
It wrote the playbook that gave us Stalin, Hitler, Pot Pol, Mao and Fidel.
The French Revolution helped us establish a the culture of death that Pope John Paul II warned against.
If you don’t believe me or Coulter, I suggest you read up on the liberal heritage or study it in school if you can find anyone who will teach it.
Like so many unfavorable things liberal colleges and professors have assigned that segment in history to the Orwellian memory hole.
But my faith in the future was reenforced last night when my eight-year old granddaughter was able to tell me who the Grant of our local attraction, Grant’s Farm was.
I quickly asked her then if Grant was the 18th president, who the 19th?
She knew it instantaneously and my jaw dropped. She just finished the 2nd grade.
Many years ago when the family started going to the Gulf side of Florida, I spent many (too many) an hour basking in the sun, while reading the novels of Robert Ludlum.
After digesting about six to eight of the formulated plots, I can to the conclusion that the hero–usually Jason Bourne, who has become the frequent property of actor, Matt Damon, had kind of nihilistic personal code that took Hemingway’s code hero down a peg or two.
While Hemingway’s heroes usually lived by their self-centered code of masculine honor that mirrored that of its creator, Ludlum’s protagonist seemed completely devoid of any plausible inner guide for his behavior.
Critics tell us that life is stranger than fiction.
What could be more bizarre than the twisted story of, now former New York Congressman,* Anthony Weiner?
His recent life reads like a very bad Ludlum novel, where the protagonist not only has no code but like the amnesic Jason Bourne, was searching for his true sexual identity.
Here was a man who once had the political world at his doorstep.
Here was a man who has exerted his influence within the Halls of Congress and what did he do—he squandered it–all because of some inner urge to prove himself on the social network.
His friends and enemies alike have been shaking their heads in relative disgust, embarrassment and disappointment.
His act of self-destruction raises the eternal question of Why?
Was this some kind of twisted fantasy that prompted the behavior of an adolescent that has had some resounding adult consequences and sanctions?
The National Enquirer reported that some conservative sites reported that he was frustrated because his wife, Huma Abedin and her boss, Hillary Clinton were carrying on an affair.
Even if there were a scintilla of truth in that accusation, I am certain he could have found some more traditional ways to satisfy his cravings than the Internet.
The Enquirer also offered its own interpretation by publishing a number of weird photos of Weiner from his college days.
The photos included posed shots of him in something resembling a Speedo swim suit and a rather odd photo of him in a woman’s two piece swim costume.
The Enquirer seemed to think that it was all part of a three-day college skit during the Christmas season, something akin to a scavenger hunt for weird costumes.
The best explanation I heard came from Rush Limbaugh.
Rush discussed Weiner in a social/political context that put him in such a psychological box that this was the way his inner needs came to the surface.
During his entire social and political life Weiner has been smothered by a politically correct environment that emphasized the idea of the powerful woman.
In American culture, women who aspired to be, not like their moms but their dads, had literally shed their aprons, turned their collective backs on the cradle as a form of feminine satisfaction and gone off to graduate schools in medicine, law, business, and even mathematics as much an iconoclastic statement as for economic necessity.
In their Marxist drive to rebirth traditional American life they have tried to neutralize the language to the extent that person has to replace any use of the word man even when a congressman is really a man.
In a word they fomented a virtual genocide against the cultural importance of man.
History now has been reformed to read Herstory.
Technology even made it possible to eliminate men in reproduction.
The petite actress with the irritating voice, Kristen Chenoweth has recently revealed that she wants a baby without a man’s help because so many of them are unkind to people.
They now have babies, when they want them, even without a man’s personal involvement.
When they do get married, many assume the breadwinning role in the marriage, which is probably doomed from the start.
This is a shot to the man’s ego.
With the decline in organized religion few men grow up with the traditional idea that a man should rule his own body spiritually and physically.
Now young boys are taught in their schools to give in to all their bodily urges.
Weiner has been surrounded by these powerful women in his private life, his professional life and of course his political life. He has needed them to get nominated and ultimately elected.
These powerful women have help to feminize or as Rush calls, work for the chickification of the American male.
Millions of men have taken on the Metrosexual attractiveness of a Ryan Seacrest, or a Brad Pitt.
Now muscles are back in.
The whole thing is very confusing for men in today’s cultural morass.
Young men are so confused by all this that many become better identified with members of their own sex and turn to other men for their satisfaction.
Gone is the Neanderthal look that at least had no trouble with sexual identification.
Huma, who is rumored to be pregnant, is busy traveling with Hillary in their attempt to save the world.
This has given Weiner too much free time to express his needs.
I think Weiner is the atavistic opposite of the Helen Reddy song I Am Woman, hear me roar.
Deafened by that primitive yell of the 1970s, Weiner felt compelled to express his manhood in the most available way and that was to beef up at the gym and then start exposing the fact that he was indeed a real man on the social network where he reasoned had women who were not hell-bent on power, careers and being on top.
The exposure of his manhood was a primitive cry, not just for help but for women to see his atavistic roar that he was A REAL MAN and like Howard Beale was sick and tired and was not going to hide the fact of his manhood any more.
In his own perverted way, Anthony Weiner speaks for millions of men who do not know how to be honorable any more. They feel trapped and confined in a culture that has men in all walks of life quaking in their collective boots, afraid of the feminine hordes of castrati.
* On personal note, had I still lived in Forest Hills, Weiner wold have been my congressman!
Please check out my recent posting on Renew/America.