Coulter Foes Launch Hate-Filled Attacks

Following my interview with HUMAN EVENTS Legal Affairs Correspondent Ann Coulter and review of her new book, Godless: The Church of Liberalism, I’ve received a slew of e-mails from fans and foes.

Many of those writing the negative e-mails are outraged that a conservative would ask a conservative author questions from a conservative’s perspective for a conservative newspaper. One person writes, “You are so unfair and unbalanced!” Well, there goes my shot as a Fox News anchor. But lest you think he might have any intellectual points to make, the rest of the e-mail refers to me and Coulter in a sexual manner. In fact, several e-mails included this kind of rhetoric. I would quote them, but to make it decent it would look like Morse code.

Another person writes, “So how does it feel to interview Hitler reborn first-hand? I think I would need about 20 showers just to feel normal again after being in the presence of such a pathetic excuse for a human being.” I was actually surprised that it took more than 12 hours since the interview was published to get the first Hitler comparison. The comparison of [insert Republican’s name] to Hitler is as hack as “I just flew in and, boy, are my arms tired.”

Then came the e-mails from those claiming to be conservatives or Republicans who had an instant conversion because “this time she’s gone too far.” As Coulter recently pointed out on Your World with Neil Cavuto, these phonies say that every time she writes a new book. One guy from San Diego stated in an e-mail to me that he “supported Bush after 9/11.” Yeah, so did Rosie O’Donnell. He also wrote that he is a “gun-owning, meat-loving, fishing, entrepreneur” and a “moderate.” Inexplicably, his proof is that he listens to Rush Limbaugh and Bill Bennett and would vote for Rudy Guiliani (moderate Republican), Chuck Hagel (Republican) and Mark Warner (Democrat). One must have a dart and a map of the U.S. to come up with this list. He writes, “I am surprised that you would softball-interview someone who is as blatantly hateful as Ann Coulter. … She gets paid to promote anger, hatred, and division. … The kind of bile Ms. Coulter is spewing is decidely [sic] very mid-90’s. Using loaded words against a political opponent (you know, ‘Godless, traitorous,’ etc.) reads like a page from Gingrich’s 1990 GOPAC memo. Very tiresome.”

Hmm, it seems like anyone who is holding on to a grudge against Newt Gingrich from 1990 might have been drinking the Kool-Aid for a little longer than he’s letting on. Unfortunately, I can’t recall the existence of this phantom memo because I was only 12-years-old at the time.

Another curious claim in this e-mail, as well as several others, is that Coulter makes outrageous statements just to sell books. Then these same people say she doesn’t represent most conservatives. Yet, Godless still becomes No. 1 on and will undoubtedly be a New York Times bestseller. And by the way, those mystery “mass purchases” by Richard Scaife (I received those e-mails, too) don’t count toward the bestseller lists.

It’s a typical ploy by liberals to claim to be Bush voters or moderates or Republicans in order to project a false sense of credibility. It’s like when they use an anti-war veteran or group of pro-Kerry widows from New Jersey to advance their unpopular agenda. Liberals call the War on Terrorism President Bush’s personal vendetta on behalf of his father. How is this any different from making the case against the President based on someone else’s personal tragedy or vendetta? Not to mention giving these people carte blanche to make outrageous claims and condemn anyone for questioning their motives. Someone should really write a book about this phenomenon!

Another “lifelong Republican” says that I have gone too far. He writes, “I have always been a fan of your previous writings. Your latest ‘interview’ with Ann Coulter has left me shocked and dismayed. … You have lost all integrity in my mind. Your inability to question her regarding this outlandish rubbish is disgraceful.” I guess he missed my review of Coulter’s last book, How to Talk to a Liberal (If You Must).

The e-mails I enjoyed the most were those that said I was worse than Coulter herself. One guy wrote, “As a sycophantic piece of s***, your review of Coulter’s latest piece of s*** is exceeded only by it.” Another writes, “[Y]ou revealed yourself to be just as vicious as Ann Coulter — and that’s saying a lot.” I plan on adding this to my résumé.

So, for those of you keeping score, conservatives cannot write about people they agree or disagree with because it makes them “hucksters” or Hitler. Instead, we should be writing about issues we don’t care about and people with no political relevance. Fortunately, HUMAN EVENTS has no need for articles on Brad and Angelina and their new baby, so keep those emails coming!