Ann Coulter's fervor for Mitt Romney may be getting the best of her. She recently went after Rick Santorum for voting against e-verify but what she didn't say is why he did it.
Arguing on behalf of former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney in her syndicated column Wednesday, Coulter portrayed Santorum as soft on illegal immigration, citing his vote against the so-called "E-Verify" measure to provide automatic electronic verification of workers' immigration status. But Santorum said that he voted against "E-Verify" in 2006 because it was part of a measure sponsored by John McCain and Ted Kennedy that would have provided amnesty to illegals.
At an Iowa campaign stop, Santorum was asked to respond to Coulter's attack and smacked her down in about 30 seconds:
"Why would Ann Coulter criticize me for voting against the McCain-Kennedy immigration bill? I mean, Ann, should I have voted for amnesty? Should I have voted for comprehensive immigration reform? Because if that's what you're saying, then, doesn't sound like you're the real conservative here. I think when Jim DeMint and every conservative in the United States Senate voted against the McCain-Kennedy bill -- yes, we voted against E-Verify, but we voted against a pretty bad bill that I think, at least you said you were against."
Here is the video of Santorum via the Other McCain, responding to the question about Coulter's charge. You actually have to fast forward to the 4:45 mark to hear it though.
Coulter may have hurt her cause here, not by going after Santorum but by evoking this kind of haymaker from the former Pennsylvania Senator.
As they say in football, after a QB throws a bad pass that is intercepted, I'm sure she'd like to have that one back.
When New Jersey governor, Chris Christie came out last month and slammed anyone who had problems with his appointing Islamist-connected judge, Sohail Mohammed to a Superior court judgeship in Passaic county, Ann Coulter, who has been among the most vocal Chris Christie supporters for some time now, was silent. The appointment of Mohammed is not something to dismiss; Christie's attack on those who have a problem with it only makes it worse. Four of the most prominent experts on the Muslim Brotherhood's attempt to infiltrate America expressed very strong opposition to Christie's actions. Among them are Andrew McCarthy, Daniel Pipes, Steve Emerson, Robert Spencer, Andrew Bostom, and others.
For the record, Sohail Mohammed is not just an attorney. He served as a board member for an Islamist organization, the American Muslim Union, which, as Commentary’s Jonathan S. Tobin and terrorism expert Steve Emerson have shown, has a checkered past of rationalizing jihadist attacks and supporting jihadists.
As general counsel, Mohammed bucked several high-profile terror support prosecutions. After authorities shut down the Holy Land Foundation near Dallas for alleged Hamas support in 2001, Mohammed told the Record of Bergen County, N.J., that the government was unjustly singling out Muslim organizations."People see this as another example of how heavy-handed the administration has been thus far," he said.
Daniel Pipes revealed that CAIR endorsed Christie's decision:
Christie won the hearty endorsement today of the Council on American-Islamic Relations, whose New Jersey branch issued a statement thanking him, applauding him, and urging a note of gratitude be sent him via the "Contact Us" page at the governor's website.
When CAIR is pleased with something, 99.99999% of the time, it's bad for America. On July 26th, Christie attacked anyone who had a problem with his appointment of Sohail Mohammed. Coulter was silent. Now, more than two weeks later, she appeared on Fox News and continued to express her wonton desire to see Christie as the next president. No one brings up the issue in this exchange but it's also interesting that Coulter even expresses how much she likes Herman Cain, who once talked tough about Islamists and sharia law but recently went to a mosque and apologized to the president of the Islamic Society of North America, Mohammed Magid. HERE is Cain's statement.
Something is very wrong. Coulter's silence on this issue is deafening. After Christie's comments, I thought she might just quietly withdraw her support but this clip demonstrates she remains all in.
You can watch the entire Rush interview on Fox news Sunday at the bottom of this post but before doing so, I thought this exchange between Geraldo and Ann Coulter does a good job of providing insight into what's at the heart of the controversy that is almost certain to be front and center for a few days.
Geraldo takes issue with two specific statements from the extremely compelling Rush Limbaugh interview with Chris Wallace. First, he unbelievably implies that Limbaugh's statement that Barack Obama is a "man-child" was racist. Secondly, he feigns indignation over Limbaugh's take that Obama's trip to Dover Airforce base to salute a fallen soldier was nothing more than a photo op.
However, Coulter totally blindsides him with something I'm sure he wasn't expecting. His response was so very indicative of the left's mentality. Coulter actually responds by saying that the White House told New York Times reporter Jeff Zeleny - you know, the guy who asked Obama at a press conference what he found most "enchanting" about being president - that it was an attempt by the administration to "buy time".
The OCTOBER 29TH ARTICLE by Zeleny didn't have the phrase Coulter pointed to but it did have a few interesting excerpts that seem to point in that direction:
The trip was a symbolic one for Mr. Obama, given the gravity of his coming announcement of a new strategy for Afghanistan.
A symbolic trip? How about a trip without symbolism (or photographers)?
The overnight trip was not announced in advance. The president, wearing a dark suit and a long overcoat, left the White House just before midnight. A small contingent of reporters and photographers was quietly called to follow him to Dover, where he met for two hours with members of 14 families. He returned to the White House at 4:45 a.m.
It would seem that Zeleny's article points to exactly what Limbaugh forcefully said; specifically, that Obama's trip to Dover was a "photo-op".
One more thing about Geraldo before you watch the video. Note that after Coulter points to the Zeleny article, Geraldo says, "that's gross". In light of the direction Coulter took the debate, the focus was on Zeleny's article. Was Geraldo calling the article gross or the White House's take on the trip? Decide for yourself.
Face the Nation's Bob Schieffer then lets David Axelrod respond to Rush's assertion that the Obama trip to Dover was a photo-op. Axelrod's refutation of it was beyond pathetic. However, look out for a couple of other things.
1.) Axelrod goes down the road of the Republican party being extremists yet fails to mention that it's the White House that has surrounded itself with radical communists and people who revere the greatest mass murderer of the 20th century, Mao Tse Tung. Not only that but Axelrod himself was mentored by SDS member Don Rose (SDS gave birth to Bill Ayers' Weather Underground) and is a longtime friend of another SDS member Marilyn Katz who, like Ayers, REGRETS NOTHING.
2.) Axelrod contradicts himself in this interview starting at about the 3:15 mark when Schieffer asks him about the White House "war" on Fox. Axelrod says, "We're not at war with anyone. We're at war only with people who represent mis-truths as truths." Uh, so now they're singling out individuals at Fox? The bigger problem here is that Axelrod actually said the White House is at war with people who disagree with them. Troubling indeed.
MUST SEE: LIMBAUGH'S INTERVIEW ON FNS SPEAKS FOR ITSELF.
