RWN’s Favorite Quotes From Ann Coulter’s ‘How To Talk To A Liberal (If You Must)’

“If you can somehow force a liberal into a point-counterpoint argument, his retorts will bear no relation to what you’ve said — unless you were in fact talking about your looks, your age, your weight, your personal obsessions, or whether you are a fascist. In the famous liberal two-step, they leap from one idiotic point to the next, so you can never nail them. It’s like arguing with someone with Attention Deficit Disorder.” — P. 3

“Torturing randomly chosen people on the off chance that they might be up to something — as was routinely done in liberals’ favorite country, the USSR — clearly doesn’t work. Torturing the guy you know for a fact is withholding information actually works quite well. There may be good and sufficient moral reasons for not torturing people for information, but efficacy is not among them.” — P. 6-7

“On the bright side, you know you’ve arrived when liberals start calling you a [email protected] Curiously, these proponents of tolerance always choose “gay” as their most searing epithet. Joe McCarthy, J. Edgar Hoover, Matt Drudge, Starr’s prosecutors, Linda Tripp’s lawyer, Christopher Hitchens, Mel Gibson — all these have been denounced as homosexuals at some point by liberals…Arguing with liberals instantly becomes a game of gay-baiting musical chairs. We just don’t think they should get married. Liberals actually hate homosexuals.” — P. 15

“I promise you, any Americans captured by al Qaeda will be tortured, disembowelled, and beheaded right before the traditional dancing on the American corpse begins. Indeed, it is difficult to conceive of the United States actually going to war against any country that would honor the Geneva Convention. Despite the enormous groundswell of support for an attack on France, for example, we probably won’t invade France. The only people America ever goes to war against are utter savages.” — P. 31

“The Democrats’ jejune claim that Saddam Hussein is not a threat to our security presupposes they would care if he were. Who are they kidding? Democrats adore threats to the United States. Bush got a raucous standing ovation at the State of the Union address when he announced that “this year for the first time, we are beginning to field a defense to protect this nation against ballistic missiles.” The excitement was noticeably muted on the Democrats’ side of the aisle. The vast majority of Democrats remained firmly planted in their seats, sullen at the thought that America would be protected from incoming ballistic missiles.” — P. 43

“But someday, small children will be reading somber historical accounts about the dark night of fascism under John Ashcroft. Of course, thanks to Ashcroft, they’ll be reading them in English rather than Arabic. If liberals applied half as much energy to some business endeavor as they do to creating the Big Lie, they would all be multimillionaires. What are we to make of people who promote the idea that America is in the grip of a civil-liberties emergency based on a hundred hazy stories of scowls and bumps and one-week detentions? Manifestly, there is no civil-liberties crisis in this country. People who claim there is must have a different goal in mind.” — P. 59

“It was not lost on Osama Bin Laden that it only took eighteen dead in Somalia for the Great Satan to pull out. It should not be lost on Americans that this is what the Democrats are again demanding we do in Iraq.” — P. 61

“Senator Edward Kennedy said, “The administration had a plan to fight the war, but it had no plan to win the peace.” Kennedy’s idea of “a plan” consists of choosing a designated driver before heading out for the evening. The Democrats’ urgent need for an “exit strategy” apparently arose sometime after 1993, when Bill Clinton sent all those U.S. soldiers to Bosnia — who are still there.” P. 62

“The Democrats’ conception of a “plan” is like the liberal fantasy that there’s a room somewhere full of unlimited amounts of “free” money that we could just give to teachers and hospitals and poor people and AIDS sufferers and the homeless if only the bad, greedy Republicans would give us the key to that wonderful room. Republicans should claim the “plan” is in that room, in a lockbox.” — P. 63

“It’s difficult to imagine the American people responding to a new terrorist attack by deciding to placate the terrorists, as the Spanish did. A mollusk wouldn’t react that way to an attack. Only a liberal could be so perverse.” — P. 67

“To refresh everyone’s recollection, before the war began, the Democrats’ argument was that Iraq was not an “imminent” threat to the United States. The Republicans argument was: By the time the threat is imminent, Chicago will be gone.” — P.71

“When was the last time you heard someone say, ‘The help here is way too slow and incompetent. Why don’t they hire some civil service people?'” — P. 79

“Liberals keep loudly proclaiming that they support “the troops” — while simultaneously running sneering articles that portray the troops as coarse, semiliterate cads. So a tax-and-spend Massachusetts liberal like Kerry could finally provide them with one “troop” they really do like. (By contrast, for the first time ever, I find myself in favor of the war but against the troop.)” p. 95-96

“The only beef Enron employees have with top management is that management did not inform employees of the coming collapse in time to allow them to get in on the swindle, too. If Enron executives had shouted “Head for the hills!,” the employees might have been able to sucker other Americans into buying their wildly overinflated Enron stock, as their bosses apparently did. The employees were victims only in the sense that they were not able to get in on the rip-off too.” — P. 129

“George Bush and Dick Cheney’s connection to corporate corruption consists primarily of the media’s capacity to mention their names in the same sentence as “corporate corruption” one million times a day. Liberals think their saying someone’s name in an accusatory tone of voice is sufficient to impute criminality to Republicans. Since Republicans are intrinsically evil, merely mentioning their names suffices to make any point liberals want to make. Bush and Cheney have bought and sold stock! The swine!” — P. 130-131

“Why is it so difficult for people to grasp the advantages of a free market? It’s never going to get any easier than this. Only a little over a decade ago, the centralized planning of the Eastern bloc was exposed as having created a squalid, poverty-stricken abyss. Meanwhile, corrupt running-dog lackeys of the capitalist system here in American managed to produce a society in which the poorest citizens have televisions, refrigerators, telephones, and the opportunity to appear on the: Jerry Springer Show.” — P. 135

“Republicans made Southern Democrats drop the race nonsense when they entered the Republican Party. Democrats supported race discrimination, then for about three years they didn’t, now they do again. They’ve just changed which race they think should be discriminated against.” — P. 145

“Republican presidents need to start sending at least one Potemkin nominee to the Senate for confirmation hearings. If there were just one cabinet nominee willing to sacrifice his appointment for the opportunity to yell back at that adulterous drunk, Senator Teddy Kennedy might not be so cavalier before launching his premeditated vituperations…Heck, I’ll volunteer for this mission myself — if only for the once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to say, on C-SPAN, “We’ll drive off the side of that bridge when we come to it, Senator Kennedy.” — P. 147

“Schumer said eliminating the ABA’s role in judicial nominations showed that “instead of quality, they are looking for ideology.” Schumer then voted against Bush nominee Miguel Estrada — who had graduated from Harvard Law School magna cum laude, where he had been an editor of the law review; had clerked for the Supreme Court; had been a federal prosecutor; had served for almost five years in the solicitor’s general’s office; had argued more than a dozen cases before the Supreme Court; and was then a partner in one of the most prestigious law firms in the country — because Estrada had not given the Democrats a blood oath that he would uphold abortion on demand.” — P. 151

“Last week the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court discovered that the state constitution — written in 1780 — requires the state to allow gay marriages. The court gave the legislature six months to rewrite the law to comply with the heretofore unnoticed gay-marriage provision in a 223-year-old constitution, leaving countless gay couples a scant six months to select a silverware pattern.” — P. 159

“In the United States, more than 30 million babies have been killed by abortion since: Roe v. Wade: versus seven abortion providers killed. Yeah — keep your eye on those Christians!” — P. 165

“In fact and needless to say, it is the Democrats who have turned the Confederate flag into a federal issue, because they relish nothing more than being morally indignant. Not about abortion, adultery, illegitimacy, the divorce rate, or a president molesting an intern and lying to federal investigators. Indeed , not about anything of any practical consequence. Democrats stake out a clear moral position only on the issue of slavery. Of course, when it mattered, they were on the wrong side of that issue, too.” — P. 171

“Demonstrating their famous appreciation of “nuance,” liberals believe the Confederate flag is pure evil and anyone who flies the flag is pure evil — and George Bush is a moron who sees the world in simplistic black-and-white terms of good and evil. I guess that’s what liberals mean by ‘nuance.'” — P. 171

“When the media asserts a convict was “exonerated,” what they mean is: “his conviction was thrown out on a legal technicality.” Up and down the criminal justice system, guilty criminals are constantly being set free. Evidence of guilt is excluded at the drop of a hat. Not so, evidence of innocence. The criminal justice system is a one-way, prodefendent ratchet.” — P. 231

“Well, we got another “first” last week. In the Barbara Walters interview, Monica Lewinsky affirmed — happily, giddily — that Clinton did things “that made [her] feel, as a woman, happy and contented.” Now, I can’t remember back to the Nixon era, but I’m pretty sure Clinton just became the first President to have his capacity to induce orgasm described on national TV. He can add this to his growing list of firsts including ‘first president accused of rape within two weeks after being acquitted in an impeachment trial.'” — P. 233

“Guns are our friends because in a world without guns, I’m what’s known as “prey.” All females are. Any male — the most sickly 98-pound-weakling — could overpower me in a contest of brute force against brute force. For some reason, I’m always asked: Wouldn’t I prefer a world without guns? No. I’d prefer a world in which everyone is armed, even the criminals who mean to cause me harm. Then I’d at least have a fighting chance.” — P. 306

“What the arms-control faithful really want is a world without violence — not a world without weapons. These are the ideological descendants of the authors of the Kellogg-Briand Pact, which purported to outlaw war. But we can’t have a world without violence, because the world is half male and testosterone causes homicide. A world with violence — that is to say, with men — but without weapons is the worst of all possible worlds for women. As the saying goes, God made man and woman; Colonel Colt made them equal.” — P. 306

“Stupid Argument No. 2: Prohibition failed. No it didn’t. Prohibition resulted in startling reductions of alcohol consumption (over 50 percent), cirrhosis of the liver (63 percent), admissions to mental health institutions for alcohol psychosis (60 percent), and arrests for drunk and disorderly conduct (50 percent). That doesn’t mean Prohibition was a good thing. Christ’s first miracle wasn’t turning wine into water. But Prohibition is one of the strongest arguments: againstlegalizing marijuana. The reason Prohibition failed was that alcohol had become a respectable libation, it was part of the social fabric in high society and low. Once the genie is out of the bottle (so to speak), it’s hard to put it back in.” — P. 312

“Whenever politicians say they want to restrict something by taxing it, you know they’re lying: The very fact that they are taxing it means they need people to keep doing it. Otherwise they’d run out of revenue.” — P. 312

“The quintessential Libertarian argument for drug legalization is that people should be allowed to do what they want with their own bodies even if it ruins their lives. But that’s not true. Back on earth, we live in a country that will not allow people to live with their own stupid decisions. Ann has to pay for their stupid decisions.” — P. 313

“The entire dating system runs on implicit understandings. If the hunter male doesn’t like a girl, he doesn’t call. That’s the end of it. If the hunted female doesn’t like the boy, she’s unavailable without a good excuse three times in a row. No explanations, no hurt feelings. When you start fiddling with a centuries-old system like this, you’re just asking for trouble.” — P. 315

“Among the stupidest theories that liberals have about conservatives is the idea that we are a well-oiled political machine. Hillary Clinton somberly warns of a Vast Right Wing Conspiracy. The: New York Times: has actually published a flowchart of the “neoconservative” cabal. Conservatives couldn’t put together a three-car funeral without producing six books denouncing each other. It is doubtful two neoconservatives could agree on where to have lunch — which is going to complicate their secret plans to trick the nation into perpetual war.” — P. 322

Liberals never argue with one another over substance; their only dispute is how to prevent the public from figuring out what they really believe. Meanwhile, it is a source of constant alarm to conservatives that the public will: not: understand what they really believe.” — P. 322-323

“Back in the prelapsarian fifties, women worked if they happened to fall into the .01 percent of the population who are able to have interesting jobs or they retired in their twenties to raise children and, incidentally, do what all serious people would like to do anyway — be a dilettante in many subjects. As far as I’m concerned this was a division of labor nothing short of perfect. Men worked and women didn’t. So when our benefactors come under attack as “patriarchs” and “oppressors,” I realize, someone has to put in a kind word for the oppressors. For cocktails alone, I figure I owe the male population several thousand dollars. So I will be the one to step forward and say: To the extent one gender is oppressing the other, it’s not women who should be complaining.” — P. 327

“(L)et’s say I don’t care about my country, politics, or civil affairs. All I want to do is make porno movies. I could spend a million dollars producing speech of theDebbie Does Dallas: variety. But if I want to engage in speech of the “Vote Against Chris Shays” variety, I can only spend $2000. It is easier to pander obscenity in this country than it is to engage in core First Amendment speech.” — P. 332

“My argument is that the First Amendment doesn’t just apply to working journalists. The First Amendment protects speech that is robust, wide open, etc. etc., and not just speech that is robust, wide open, etc., as between competing newspapers (like the: Post: and the: Times). The First Amendment refers to ‘the people,’ not to ‘the newspaper editors.'” — P. 335

“Perhaps the greatest disservice of Hollywood movies is their cartoonish villains. In real life, I promise you, the devil will look more like Julia Roberts than Snidely Whiplash. Evil does not arrive with a flashing neon sign: MEPHISTOPHELES! LUCIFER! SATAN! FOR ETERNAL DAMNANTION, APPLY HERE! Evil arrives packaged as a winsome movie about a long-legged brunette who manages to marry a rich, handsome bachelor and live happily ever after — all by turning tricks on Hollywood Boulevard! There’s a reason Beelzebub is known as the prince of lies.” — P. 342

Share this!

Enjoy reading? Share it with your friends!