The 50 Best Quotes From Ann Coulter’s 2011 Columns


All of these are from Ann Coulter’s 2011 columns. Enjoy!

Just as Americans ought to be able to learn the perils of a welfare state by looking at Greece, we ought to be able to learn the perils of illegal immigration by looking at California.

Employers like hiring non-Americans because they can pay illegal aliens less and ignore state and federal employment laws.

Every few years, heinous Democratic policies — abortion, gay marriage, affirmative action, Hillarycare, Obamacare, to name a few — compel previously uninvolved Americans to leap into politics. This is great, except for two things: (1) We have to get heinous Democratic policies first; and (2) newcomers have short memories, sometimes no memories at all.

Liberals go straight to ugly racist stereotypes when attacking conservative blacks, calling them oversexualized, stupid and/or incompetent.

Trafficking in racist imagery is consequence-free for liberals because they have ruined charges of “racism” with their own overuse of the term. By now, any accusation of racism has the feel of a Big Foot sighting. It’s a neat trick, rather as if the Nazis had called everything “genocide” right before launching the Holocaust, and then admonished resisters not to “play the genocide card.

Liberals step on black conservatives early and often because they can’t have black children thinking, “Hmmm, the Republicans have some good ideas; maybe I’m a Republican.”

The basic setup is:

Step 1: Spend 30 years telling blacks that Republicans are racist and viciously attacking all black Republicans.

Step 2: Laugh maliciously at Republicans for not having more blacks in their party.

Dozens and dozens of prisoners released from death row have gone on to murder again. No one knows exactly how many, but it’s a lot more than the number of innocent men who have been executed in America, which, at least since 1950, is zero.

The worst thing about Occupy Wall Street is that it’s ruining a good cause: hating Wall Street. Just when opposing Wall Street was gaining momentum, these brain-dead zombies are forcing us to choose between thieving bankers and them.

Democrats are firm believers in the welfare state for their own constituents, whether that’s a crack addict mother of five or a Wall Street banker.

Are the protesters aware that the Democrats’ 2010 “financial reform” bill provides for future bailouts of reckless banks? Goldman Sachs and Citibank strongly supported the bill. The protesters don’t care — they have no interest in actual malfeasance by actual Wall Street bankers. They’re too busy denouncing Fox News. (Which did not, incidentally, receive a taxpayer-funded bailout.)

Contrary to all the blather you always hear about how lawless street protests and civil disobedience are part of the American tradition — “what our troops are fighting for!” — they are not. We are an orderly people with democratic channels at our disposal to change our government. The very reason we have a constitutional republic is because of a mob uprising. Soon after the American Revolution, Shays’ Rebellion so terrified and angered Americans that they demanded a federal government capable of crushing such mobs.

Now liberals compare their every riot, every traffic blockage, every Starbucks-window-smashing street protest to the civil rights movement —- which was only necessary because of them.

I am not the first to note the vast differences between the Wall Street protesters and the tea partiers. To name three: The tea partiers have jobs, showers and a point.

Normal people are sick of liberals’ emotional stories that play to soccer moms, but always seem to pave the way for disastrous social policies that benefit only left-wing special-interest groups. Whenever liberals start loftily insisting on our obligation to our fellow man with these tear-jerkers, you know some heinous public policy is coming. As soon as the dust settles, you won’t see any innocent victims being helped, only trial lawyers, government employees and other Democratic constituencies.

Darwin’s theory was that a process of random mutation, sex and death, allowing the “fittest” to survive and reproduce, and the less fit to die without reproducing, would, over the course of billions of years, produce millions of species out of inert, primordial goo.

The vast majority of mutations are deleterious to the organism, so if the mutations were really random, then for every mutation that was desirable, there ought to be a staggering number that are undesirable.

Otherwise, the mutations aren’t random, they are deliberate — and then you get into all the hocus-pocus about “intelligent design” and will probably start speaking in tongues and going to NASCAR races.

We also ought to find a colossal number of transitional organisms in the fossil record — for example, a squirrel on its way to becoming a bat, or a bear becoming a whale. (Those are actual Darwinian claims.)

But that’s not what the fossil record shows. We don’t have fossils for any intermediate creatures in the process of evolving into something better. This is why the late Stephen Jay Gould of Harvard referred to the absence of transitional fossils as the “trade secret” of paleontology. (Lots of real scientific theories have “secrets.”)

If you get your news from the American news media, it will come as a surprise to learn that when Darwin first published “On the Origin of Species” in 1859, his most virulent opponents were not fundamentalist Christians, but paleontologists.

Evolution is the only subject that is discussed exclusively as a “Do you believe?” question with yes-or-no answers. How about conservative journalists start putting mikes in front of liberal candidates and demanding, “Do you believe in the Bible — yes or no?” “Is an unborn baby human — yes or no?” and “Do you believe teenagers should have sex — yes or no?” This is the flash mob method of scientific inquiry. Liberals quickly surround and humiliate anyone who disagrees with them. They are baffled when appeals to status (which would work on them) don’t work on everyone else.

The (extremely generous) test Darwin set for his theory was this: “If it could be demonstrated that any complex organ existed which could not possibly have been formed by numerous, successive, slight modifications, my theory would absolutely break down.”

Thanks to advances in microscopes, thousands of such complex mechanisms have been found since Darwin’s day. He had to explain only simple devices, such as beaks and gills. If Darwin were able to come back today and peer through a modern microscope to see the inner workings of a cell, he would instantly abandon his own theory.

It is a mathematical impossibility, for example, that all 30 to 40 parts of the cell’s flagellum — forget the 200 parts of the cilium! — could all arise at once by random mutation. According to most scientists, such an occurrence is considered even less likely than John Edwards marrying Rielle Hunter, the “ground zero” of the impossible.

The entire Democratic Party is currently promising to “save” Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid in their present form. According to Obama’s own Treasury Secretary, Tim Geithner, in less than 10 years, spending on those three entitlement programs, plus servicing the national debt, will consume 92 cents of every dollar in the federal budget.

But Democrats’ real achievement has been in destroying the family, and thereby creating an endless supply of potential rioters. When blacks were only four generations out of slavery, their illegitimacy rate was about 23 percent (lower than the white illegitimacy rate is now). Then Democrats decided to help them! Barely two generations since LBJ’s Great Society programs began, the black illegitimacy rate has tripled to 72 percent.

The vast and permanent underclass created by the welfare state is a great success story for the Democratic Party, which now has a loyal constituency of deadbeats who automatically vote for the Democrats to keep their Trojan horse “benefits” flowing. It’s the Democrats’ “heroin dealer” model of government.

A few well-placed rifle rounds, and the rioting would end in an instant. A more sustained attack on the rampaging mob might save England from itself, finally removing shaved-head, drunken parasites from the benefits rolls that Britain can’t find the will to abolish on moral or utilitarian grounds. We can be sure there’s no danger of killing off the next Winston Churchill or Edmund Burke in these crowds.

Democrats are at an advantage in the “should the U.S. go bankrupt or not?” debate because, based on their economic policies so far, they obviously favor bankruptcy. This allows them to sit back and demand that Republicans propose all the spending cuts and then turn around and scream that Republicans have declared war on the poor and disadvantaged.

Cops in any town will tell you all the domestic violence calls come from the exact same homes, over and over again.

A 1990 study by the (liberal) Progressive Policy Institute showed that, after controlling for single motherhood, the difference in black and white crime rates disappeared.

A liberal’s idea of being a bad-ass is to say vicious things to a conservative public figure who can’t afford to strike back. Getting in a stranger’s face and hurling insults at him, knowing full well he has too much at risk to deck you, is like baiting a bear chained to a wall. They are not only exploiting our lawsuit-mad culture, they are exploiting other people’s manners. I know I’ll be safe because this person has better manners than I do. These brave-hearts know exactly what they can get away with. They assault a conservative only when it’s a sucker-punch, they outnumber him, or he can’t fight back for reasons of law or decorum. Liberals don’t get that when you’re outnumbering the enemy 100-1, you’re not brave.

That’s why not one person stepped up to aid Beck and his family as they were being catcalled and having wine dumped on them at a nice outdoor gathering. No one ever steps in. Never, not once, not ever. (Except at the University of Arizona, where college Republicans chased my assailant and broke his collarbone, God bless them.)

Liberals despise the rule of law because it interferes with their ability to rule by mob. They love to portray themselves as the weak taking on the powerful. But it is the least powerful who suffer the most once the rule of law is gone.

If state governments stop officially registering marriages, then who gets to adopt? How are child support and child custody issues determined if the government doesn’t recognize marriage? How about a private company’s health care plans — whom will those cover? Who has legal authority to issue “do not resuscitate” orders to doctors? (Of course, under Obamacare we won’t be resuscitating anyone.) Who inherits in the absence of a will? Who is entitled to a person’s Social Security and Medicare benefits? How do you know if you’re divorced and able to remarry? Where would liberals get their phony statistics about most marriages ending in divorce?

It’s exactly like drug legalization: Sure, all good libertarians want to legalize drugs, but the question is whether that is more important than legalizing the ability to locate your widget factory where you want to put it. Even purists can have priorities.

In addition to libeling innocent men in the Tawana Brawley hoax, ginning up angry mobs outside the Central Park jogger’s rapists’ trial, whipping up mobs after a car accident in Brooklyn’s Crown Heights neighborhood killed a black child and a rabbinical student was stabbed to death, Sharpton famously incited an anti-Semitic pogrom against a Jewish-owned clothing store in Harlem, saying, “We will not stand by and allow them to move this brother so that some white interloper can expand his business.” Someone who was listening to Sharpton later decided to storm the store and start shooting, wounding several employees, and setting a fire that killed seven people. Of course, after all this, Sharpton became a pariah — oh wait! In the opposite of being exiled, he became famous, ran for president as a Democrat and Al Gore kissed his ring, after these events.

Although Reagan is always cited as if he broke the divorce barrier in presidential elections the same way Jackie Robinson broke the color barrier in major league baseball, this would be true only if Jackie Robinson: (1) were also the last black person ever to play professional baseball; and (2) no one knew he was black, something like Bryant Gumbel. Many voters didn’t even realize Reagan was divorced. And if they knew, then they also knew that Reagan’s wife left him against his wishes — according to their children, their friends, and newspaper headlines at the time that blared: “JANE WYMAN TO ASK DIVORCE.”

Contradicting the endless New York Times articles celebrating “the new American family,” “blended families” and “quasi marriages,” a recent census report says that only 12 percent of Americans will be married as many as two times in their entire lives. Only 3 percent will be married three or more times. (The “one of every two marriages will end in divorce” canard comes from comparing the number of marriages in a given year to the number of divorces that same year — but the divorces could be from any of the millions of marriages consummated in the prior several decades. Serial divorcers also bring the “average” divorce rate way up.)

Deviants always try to exaggerate their numbers so as to not feel quite so deviant.

As Schlafly says, no wonder liberal women think men are pigs: Their men are pigs.

As Kausfiles observes, maybe financially struggling Democrats believe immigrants “take our jobs” because, in fact, they do. Whose side is Obama on? Forget the grand arguments about whether illegals are hard workers and are a net plus to the beautiful American mosaic. We have skyrocketing unemployment. Our citizens are in distress. Now is not the time to be putting another anvil around the American worker’s neck.

Democrats don’t resent “the rich” on behalf of the poor. They resent the rich on behalf of the government.

But according to Planned Parenthood itself, when it comes to services for pregnant women, abortion constituted 97.6 percent of the services Planned Parenthood provided in 2009. Only 2.4 percent of the organization’s services for pregnant women involved prenatal care or adoption referrals. Again, according to its own reports, Planned Parenthood performed 332,278 abortions in 2009 — or more than a quarter of all abortions in the entire country. It receives about 37 percent of its total revenue from performing abortions.

For years, Democrats have been using taxpayer money so that their buddies in public sector unions never have to know when there’s a recession. People who are already suffering have to suffer more so that those who are doing pretty well don’t have to suffer at all. The high salaries and magnificent benefits paid to government employees are used to fund the public sector unions, which then funnel a portion of that money back to the Democrats, who vote for the pay packages of government workers. The unions function as a pass-through from the taxpayers straight to Democrats running for re-election. As a result, taxpayers are paying people to continually raise their taxes.

Liberals don’t love big government because they think it’s efficient, compassionate, fair or even remotely useful. They support big government because they are guaranteed the support of nearly everyone who works for the government.

Democrats are furious whenever American boys (girls and gays) are put in harm’s way — unless the troops are on a mission that has nothing whatsoever to do with defending the United States.

But Democrats couldn’t care less about the interests of their own country. Indeed, if there were the slightest possibility that our intervention in Libya would somehow benefit the United States, they would hysterically oppose it.

Fine, we like teachers, firemen and police officers. We appreciate them. (And for the record, it is statistically more dangerous to be a farmer, fisherman, steelworker or pilot than a cop or fireman. Soldiers also have pretty dangerous jobs, and they don’t get to strike.) Does that mean we should pay them $1 million dollars a year? How about $10 million? After all, these are the people who educate our kids, run into burning buildings and take dangerous criminals off our streets! Assuming the answer is no, then apparently we’re allowed to discuss government workers’ compensation — even though they do important work. As George Bernard Shaw concluded his famous quip (often attributed to Winston Churchill), “Now, we’re just negotiating over the price.”

Government employees are even worse than welfare layabouts. In a triple-whammy for the taxpayer, they are: (1) hideously expensive, (2) impossible to fire, and (3) doing things you don’t want done at any price.

Government unions have nothing in common with private sector unions because they don’t have hostile management on the other side of the bargaining table. To the contrary, the “bosses” of government employees are co-conspirators with them in bilking the taxpayers. Far from being careful stewards of the taxpayers’ money, politicians are on the same side of the bargaining table as government employees — against the taxpayers, who aren’t allowed to be part of the negotiation.

It used to be widely understood that collective bargaining has no place in government employment. In 1937, the American president beloved by liberals, FDR, warned that collective bargaining “cannot be transplanted into the public service.” George Meany, head of the AFL-CIO for a quarter century, said unions were not appropriate for civil servants. As recently as 1978, the vast majority of states prohibited unionization of government employees.

There’s never a recession if you work for the government.

The fact that liberals support democracy in Egypt, but not in Iraq or Iran, can mean only one thing: Democracy in Egypt will be bad for the United States and its allies. (As long as we’re on the subject, liberals also opposed democracy in Russia, East Germany, Czechoslovakia, Yugoslavia and all the Soviet satellite states, China, Vietnam, North Korea, Cuba, Grenada, Nicaragua and Minnesota.) Democrats are all for meddling in other countries —- but only provided a change of regime will harm U.S. national security interests.

But after every multiple murder, liberals come up with some crackpot idea to “do something” that invariably involves infringing on some aspect of our Second Amendment rights. The ACLU won’t let us put nuts in mental hospitals and Pima County Sheriff Clarence Dupnik wouldn’t lock up Loughner even after he had broken the law several times. In an open society that includes Sheriff Dumbnik and the ACLU, deranged individuals may explode into murder and mayhem now and then. The best we can do is enact policies that will reduce the death toll when these acts of carnage occur.

There’s only one policy of any kind that has ever been shown to deter mass murder: concealed-carry laws. In a comprehensive study of all public, multiple-shooting incidents in America between 1977 and 1999, the highly regarded economists John Lott and Bill Landes found that concealed-carry laws were the only laws that had any beneficial effect. And the effect was not small. States that allowed citizens to carry concealed handguns reduced multiple-shooting attacks by 60 percent and reduced the death and injury from these attacks by nearly 80 percent.

All I kept hearing was, “Ann pays more.” That’s all I ever hear when Democrats start in with all that “investing.” Apparently the government will be “investing” in education, “investing” in technology, “investing” in roads and “investing” in lots and lots of government workers. Ann pays more, Ann pays more, Ann pays more.

As even Obama’s treasury secretary admitted in congressional hearings, “Fannie and Freddie were a core part of what went wrong in our system.” And if it’s something Tim Geithner noticed, it’s probably something that’s fairly obvious. Goo-goo liberals with federal titles pressured banks into making absurd loans to high-risk borrowers — demanding, for example, that the banks accept unemployment benefits as collateral. Then Fannie repackaged the bad loans as “prime mortgages” and sold them to banks, thus poisoning the entire financial market with hidden bad loans.

Believe it or not, the loans went belly up, banks went under, and the Democrats used taxpayer money to bail out their friends on Wall Street. So far, Fannie and Freddie’s default on loans that should never have been made has cost the taxpayer tens of billions of dollars. Some estimates say the final cost to the taxpayer will be more than $1 trillion. To put that number in perspective, for a trillion dollars, President Obama could pass another stupid, useless stimulus package that doesn’t create a single real job.

Related Articles

0

Bickering Over, Not Building, Bay Bridge

In his column Sunday, former San Francisco Mayor Willie Brown wrote that on Labor Day weekend, he’ll be preening at

3

Schoolteacher Cheating

Philadelphia’s public school system has joined several other big-city school systems, such as those in Atlanta, Detroit and Washington, D.C.,

3

Clinton-Appointed Judges Strike Down Illegal Obama Net Neutrality Order

All three judges in Verizon v. FCC agreed that the net neutrality order regulating the Internet was, as I’ve said