Throwing McCain Under The Bus

Posted by Greg Laden on November 6, 2008
(22)
More »

Some of you have been asking “What has happened to Ann Coulter lately? We have not seen much of her.” Well, I’ve been seeing a lot of Ann, so I’m not quite sure what you are asking about. Coulter has continued to write for her usual outlets, including her column in Human Events which, which I read. The difference between a year and a half or so ago and now is that mainstream media has stopped picking her up. I think her run in with Elizabeth Edwards that served as the last straw in that regard.

I read Coulter’s column for obvious reasons, but I should point out that I don’t subscribe to Human Events. Ann just sends me her columns (or most of them, anyway). And I thought a brief quote the last one would be of special interest. I have been suggesting (this is mostly off line) that not only will we see nothing more of Sarah Palin (nothing of consequence) but also that the Republicans would now throw McCain under the bus.

This is not so much a Republican thing. Both parties tend to throw the losing candidate under the buss to some extent. It is not always a career ender, and sometimes has no consequence at all. (The Democrats did not throw Al Gore under the bus because he actually won that race, in case you were wondering.)

Anyway, here’s Ann Coulter throwing John McCain under the bus:

How could Republicans go after … Obama … on planning to bankrupt the coal companies when McCain supports the exact same cap and trade policies and earnestly believes in global warming?

How could we go after Obama for his illegal alien aunt and for supporting driver’s licenses for illegal aliens when McCain fanatically pushed amnesty along with his good friend Teddy Kennedy?

How could we go after Obama for Jeremiah Wright when McCain denounced any Republicans who did so?

How could we go after Obama for planning to hike taxes on the “rich,” when McCain was the only Republican to vote against both of Bush’s tax cuts on the grounds that they were tax cuts for the rich?

And why should Republican activists slave away working for McCain when he has personally, viciously attacked: John O’Neill and the Swift Boat Veterans, National Right to Life director Doug Johnson, evangelical pastors Jerry Falwell, Pat Robertson and John Hagee, various conservative talk radio hosts, the Tennessee Republican Party and on and on and on?

Source: Email from Ann Coulter.

(22)
More »

Comments

  1. #1 Dunc
    November 6, 2008

    McCain jumped under the bus in his concession speech: “You didn’t fail, I failed you.” (Or some such – I can’t be arsed looking up a transcript)

    As far as the True Believers are concerned, Conservatism(TM) is infallible. It cannot fail, it can only be failed.

  2. #2 Doyle
    November 6, 2008

    The day after the election, Coulter was on one of the morning “news” programs, being described as a political “expert” and claiming that Republicans will give Obama a chance to succeed because they are more patriot and fundamentally decent than Democrats. (I don’t know what else she said, as I could not bring myself to continue watching)

  3. #3 Dunc
    November 6, 2008

    Oh, and just for laughs, who do you think Newsnight (the serious, in-depth BBC news program) chose to interview last night about Obama’s victory? Francis Fukuyama and John freaking Bolton!

  4. #4 Virgil Samms
    November 6, 2008

    How could we go after Obama for Jeremiah Wright when McCain denounced any Republicans who did so?

    Swift reversals have never been a problem for McCain or the GOP at large. A more relevant problem I see with attacking Wright was the Muthee counter-attack. Can’t pin that one on McCain.

  5. #5 T. Bruce McNeely
    November 6, 2008

    “Well, I’ve been seeing a lot of Ann…”

    You poor bastard.

  6. #6 Badger3k
    November 6, 2008

    I guess Ann is grumpy at being put out to pasture herself. I find it ironic that most of these conservatives would like a morning-after pill for the election (just thought of that one). I guess to the wingnuts, McCain wasn’t rabid enough for her. The next wingnut-choice is going to be a rabid, foaming-at-the-mouth lunatic who actually bites his (or her) opponents. Palin might fit that, if you cut her expense account off.

  7. #7 llewelly
    November 6, 2008

    Coulter/Palin 2012!!!!

  8. #8 Patrick Lingenfelter
    November 6, 2008

    I second llewelly’s nomination. I’d love to see the Far Right take another brutal pounding in the polls.

  9. #9 Virgil Samms
    November 6, 2008

    I disagree, I think Palin will be ready for the top of the ticket next time around.
    Palin/Joe the Plumber 2012!

  10. #10 Greg Laden
    November 6, 2008

    Somehow, Coulter on top, Palin as bottom makes more sense to me.

    Oh wait, did I say that out loud?

  11. #11 Brian X
    November 6, 2008

    I’m glad to see Coulter on the margins. Granted it’s allowed Michelle Malkin unfettered access to the “barking mad conservative quasi-feminist” demographic and enabled people like Pam Geller, but Coulter’s had her day.

    Greg:

    The beauty queen and the modestly hot bone bag? You have weird-ass taste in porn…

    That said, you have to admit that we are talking about two women who have consistently dealt off both sides of the deck when it comes to their sexuality, trading on their looks while getting a free ride off the same feminist empowerment that they claim to fight against. After all, Coulter has dropped hints of unrepentant promiscuity in a few of her interviews, and Palin, if the story in Newsweek this week of her first meeting with Steve Schmidt beginning with her wearing only a towel is true, is at the very least a bit of an exhibitionist; I would consider them fair game for certain some-would-perceive-as-sexist comments that would be beyond the pale for, for example, Michelle Malkin, who, while batshit crazy and female, does not use her own sexuality as a rhetorical tool.

  12. #12 Notagod
    November 6, 2008

    Now that the slop is coulter, get the palin take it down to the hogs.

  13. #13 Brian X
    November 6, 2008

    Incidentally, the answer to Coulter’s criticisms of McCain is as follows:

    Unlike you, Ms. Coulter, and unlike a disturbingly large number of his supporters, at long last McCain truly did have some sense of decency.

    Unrecognizeable until the very end, perhaps, but it was there.

  14. #14 Stephanie Z
    November 6, 2008

    Brian, I have to disagree that Palin would have to be an exhibitionist for that to make sense. Between the beauty pageants and being on-air talent, Palin would have had to work very hard to hang onto any body modesty, assuming she ever had some. All the towel means is that she thought it might be useful to have Schmidt off balance.

  15. #15 Elizabeth
    November 6, 2008

    Trash does as trash is.

  16. #16 386sx
    November 6, 2008

    (I don’t know what else she said, as I could not bring myself to continue watching)

    I get the same feeling from reading her articles. I look at the words, and I know there are fallacies abound everywhere in a million places, but I don’t want to actually waste time figuring out what they are.

    And then I move on to the next sentence and that’s pretty much enough Coulter for me for one sitting. Enough Coulter for one year, actually. Enough for a lifetime…

  17. #17 the real Obamanator
    November 6, 2008

    “Coulter on top, Palin as bottom makes more sense to me.”

    Well, Greg, it depends on whether they were playing the right wing lesbian feminist dominance trip ( in which case Coulter with a strap on makes sense) or the Left wing-nut feminist “mommy and daughter” trip, in which case Palin gets to scrub her sweet baby Annies butt, after reading her select child abuse passages from the Vagina Monologues.

  18. #18 Greg Laden
    November 6, 2008

    Obamanator: Thanks for ruining the rest of my day. My mind was not going into that much detail….

  19. #19 Lurkbot
    November 6, 2008

    All I can say, is bless you and John Cole on Balloon Juice (with his category: “I read these morons so you don’t have to.) I don’t know why your head doesn’t explode!

  20. #20 the real Obamanator
    November 6, 2008

    sorry about that…hope you weren’t eating a late lunch…oops…doesn’t that phrase “late lunch” mean something to Larry Craig?

  21. #21 Brian X
    November 7, 2008

    Stephanie Z:

    You’re probably correct about loss of modesty and keeping Schmidt off balance, but I don’t think that’s mutually exclusive with what I said. After all, don’t you have to be something of an exhibitionist to be in beauty pageants in the first place (at least insofar as someone isn’t forced to by a stage parent)? In any case, Palin still trades heavily on her looks and sexuality. It’s pretty much what defined her campaign for VP.

  22. #22 Peter Mc
    November 7, 2008

    She was on the BBC the day after the election. When the camera lingered on her someone said, ‘What its that?’