Ann Coulter

Address at CPAC 2013 – March 16, 2013

Ann Coulter
March 16, 2013— Washington, D.C.
Print friendly

Thank you. As some of you know, due to the turmoil in North Korea, our regularly scheduled speaker, Ambassador Dennis Rodman, will not be here, so I'm filling in. I'm Ann Coulter, the author of nine massive New York Times bestsellers.

Boy, the sequester has really ruined everything, hasn't it? Little kids can't go on White House tours, Muslim Brotherhood has been deprived of 250 million – oh no, that's safe, that's fine. Even CPAC had to cut back on its speakers this year by about 300 pounds.

After all of Obama's hard work and wrangling over the budget, he's managed to cut the growth of federal spending by two percent – two percent. Congratulations, Mr. President. And even that was imposed on him by the sequester. And Roger Ailes calls Obama lazy.

Did you see that – a new biography of Roger Ailes quotes him as saying that Obama is lazy. Van Jones said that was racist but Obama himself said he was lazy. You know why Van Jones didn't know that? Because he's lazy. I'm just kidding. I love Van Jones. I do.

Liberals say the word lazy is a racist code word, as is Chicago, the word apartment, mentioning that Obama golfs. No, these are all, according to liberals, racist dog whistles – which may be why only Debbie Wasserman Schultz, Rachel Maddow and Chris Matthews can hear them.

But you know, Obama has his own code words. He says investment, he means government spending. He says revenue, he means taxes. He says Dr. Livingstone is in the library, he means distract Michelle I'm going out for a smoke.

Even after Republicans gave Obama his tax hike, he still won't cut spending. This is becoming what's known as a pattern. Remember – Republicans agreed to raise taxes and in exchange we're supposed to be, you know, taking an axe to the budget. No, he wants to raise taxes again. Remember this the next time some journalist asks a Republican, "Are you saying you would not take one dollar in tax hikes in exchange for ten dollars in budget cuts?"

No, see the problem is we're the Indians and the Democrats are Andrew Jackson. We've been through this before.

Back in the 80s Ronald Reagan made that deal with Tip O'Neill. He said he'd raise taxes. Tip O'Neill: "Yeah, we will slash the budget." The Democrats tripled the budget. So it is not true that it was Reagan's tax cuts that led to the deficit. The problem was for every additional dollar that came into the Internal Revenue Service, the Democrats were spending another $3.

Then Reagan's knucklehead of a vice president, the first George Bush, unable to learn from the first kick of a mule, made the exact same deal with Democrats, breaking his "no new taxes" pledge. He raised taxes in exchange for promised cuts in spending. "I'll gladly take a tax hike today for a cut in spending on Tuesday." And once again Democrats raised spending.

So it would be like journalists going to tribal chiefs circa 1890 and saying sarcastically, "Are you telling me you would not give up one acre of land for a guaranteed promise of 10 acres of land?" And then 10 years later: "Oh yeah, we're gonna be needing Nebraska and South Dakota, too.

Obama claims he wants to keep taxes low for the middle class, and let me tell you, for the 400 people still left in the middle class, he could not be happier.

But Obama also said he had to shut down White House tours because of the sequester. Do not worry though – the 250 million for the Muslim Brotherhood – that's safe. The federal grant to study the sex habits of gophers – that's safe.

We also apparently have enough money for the government to spy on Americans' personal finances. Did you see that? Reuters reported yesterday, I think, that Obama is drawing up a plan to allow our spy agencies to scour the personal finances of Americans.

But most Americans don't care – after four years of Obama they don't really have any personal finances to scour. Most of them told Obama, "Hey, let me know if you find anything."

I don't know why Republicans keep saying we have to cut spending to save these entitlement programs for our grandchildren. We have to cut spending to save the entitlements for today's 45-year-olds. On our current spending rate, 45-year-olds will not receive any Medicare. And liberals' response is to say that, "Well, but Medicare is the most popular program in US history" – which by the way, isn't saying much. "The most popular government program."

They determined what the most popular program was by asking the recipients of Medicare, "Do you like Medicare?" It's like asking six-year-olds, "Are birthdays a good idea?" Can we include the neighbors and the friends who are forced to buy gifts?

Despite the non-Fox media's claim that we've become a center-left nation, in fact, you know, Republicans still hold the House of Representatives. There's a reason that's called the people's house – it's most representative of the feelings of Americans. They're up for election every two years.

And the reason we don't have the Senate is because Republicans keep screwing up. I can think of about ten Senate seats in the last three election cycles that we just pissed away through narcissism, greed or stupidity. Show me one example in the last ten years of the Democrats giving up a winnable seat. No, that hasn't happened.

Passion is great, but in politics, remember, scoring is all that counts.

We can't anticipate every candidate's mistake, but we can stop encouraging our candidates to show off for the base by taking positions that aren't even our positions. It's not the position of the National Right to Life Committee that a woman should be forced to carry the baby of her rapist. I think our position is: no, absolutely exceptions for rape and incest. And now let's talk about the other 99% of abortions. Hey, where did all the Democrats go?

And I think our position is also, let's talk about locking up the rapist and not giving him the right to vote the way the Democrats want to. But on the basis of this one boneheaded statement by Todd Akin out in Missouri, Democrats finally had their talking point that Republicans were waging a war on women.

If we agreed to wage a war on women I wasn't at that meeting, because if I had been I would have told Republicans, "You're too late. The Democrats have already won that war."

The keynote speaker at the Democratic National Convention this year was forcible rapist Bill Clinton. The convention also featured a loving tribute to Teddy Kennedy, who I believe has the only confirmed kill in the war on women. I half expected Charles Manson to show up night three.

No, the only evidence they have for the Republican war on women is apparently that some taxpayers don't feel obliged to pay for Sandra Fluke's birth control. I think that haircut is birth control enough.

Your average Democrat actually believes things much crazier than Todd Akin, but the Democrats don't let their candidates open their mouths and say stupid stuff. Otherwise you'd have Democrats saying, "Oh, I think abortions should be funded federally. We should confiscate all guns. Trees have feelings." Democrats tell their candidates, "Open your mouth and we'll kill you."

In addition to being much better at stealing elections, Democrats are much crueler to those who hurt the Democratic Party. They don't get book contracts or radio gigs or TV gigs for harming the Democratic Party.

Where's Howard Dean's TV show? The only place that would employ Dennis Kucinich is Fox News, and that's after Keebler let him out of his contract.

If Republicans don't focus on what is really causing problems, they're going to fall for the canard that the problem with the Republican Party is its conservative principles. Oh contraire. Conservatism is about the only thing the Republicans have going for them.

In Gallup polls over the last twenty years, about twice as many Americans have called themselves conservative as call themselves either liberal or Republican. No, conservatism is our winning feature.

Which brings me to the final point before I get to your questions, and that is this scapegoating of a fake Republican establishment, which is allowing the real Republican establishment to plot and scheme undetected.

And my example of this is what public policy will harm average Americans, drive up unemployment, change America permanently in negative ways, and on the other hand is supported by businessmen who will never vote for a Republican anyway? Amnesty for illegal aliens.

And half of elected Republicans support it. As far as I can tell most conservative talk radio and TV hosts support it. You want the Republican establishment – that's the Republican establishment.

There are many negative consequences to amnesty, but the one that I think ought to concern this crowd is, if amnesty goes through, America becomes California and no Republican will ever win another national election. As it is, the state that gave us Richard Nixon and Ronald Reagan will never elect another Republican.

I can see why Democrats would want amnesty, but why on earth are Marco Rubio and these endless Bushes supporting it? Even Shemp and Zeppo Bush are supporting amnesty for illegals.

Republicans are grasping at these suicidal policies because they're panicked, they're demoralized after the last election. Stop panicking, Republicans. Obama was an incumbent. He did worse than any other incumbent to win reelection in more than a hundred years.

Liberals writing the obituary of the Republican Party right now remind me of nothing so much as new homeowners at the height of the housing bubble. People always announce their complete triumph a moment before their crushing defeat.

Our job, Republicans, is to ensure Democrats have that crushing defeat.

Thank you and I'll take some questions.

AUDIENCE MEMBER: Do you believe Chris Christie should have been invited to CPAC this year?

COULTER: Should he have been what?


COULTER: The nominee?

AUDIENCE MEMBER: Chris Christie?

COULTER: Should he have what?

AUDIENCE MEMBER: Had been invited to speak at CPAC this year.

COULTER: Oh, invited to speak. Um…did you see his convention speech?


COULTER: It was really bad. And I must say, though, I, as you know, have loved Chris Christie. I'm now a single-issue voter against amnesty, so Christie's off my list. Our next speaker, Ted Cruz, is still on my list.

AUDIENCE MEMBER: Good evening. I'm Kenneth Harbin. I'm from Ohio. Is there any advice that you can give us young, vocal, black conservatives with dealing with attacks from the liberal mob, and will you go on a date with me?

COULTER: Yes, absolutely, young man – I'm just going to need a note from your mother. Um…what was this advice for? I'm just, I'm already imagining our date. I'm sorry, I forgot what the question was. Advice for, wait, young black conservatives?


COULTER: Well, I have good news, also relating back to the amnesty issue. I've been saying this in nearly every radio interview and trying to slip it into every column I write. Mitt Romney won 20% of black males under the age of 30. That is a stunning number. I mean…. The traditional home of blacks is in the Republican Party, as described in my latest smash bestseller, "Mugged." Blacks and Republicans go together like chocolate and peanut butter. And I think the reason…. But you know, the Democrats stole them away by lying about the history of civil rights and the history of Republicans – all set straight in "Mugged." And I think the reason Romney did so astronomically well among young black males is they want jobs and they don't want to be competing with illegal aliens for jobs. You know, blacks have been in this country longer than…their roots in America go back longer than most whites. I think we owe them something more than someone who has just run across the border.

AUDIENCE MEMBER: Hi, this is Daniel Rivera. I have a two-pronged question for you. First, I have my mother's signed consent statement – we can absolutely go on a date, so I mean, I'll meet you right outside. Point two, much has been made recently of the Republicans Party need for a facelift by the liberal media. You know, they're running around crazy saying we've been defeated, as you said, and it's a little bit annoying. But on a more specific level, we have been doing horribly with minorities and women. And I was wondering what your thoughts on that were on the first end of the question. And on the second, much has also been made of the GOP divided, but in the conference I've noticed you have speakers like Marco Rubio on one hand and then you've got Ron Paul on the other – vastly different but both test well with independents, minorities and women. So I was wondering your thoughts on that, too.

COULTER: First of all, I mean this idea that the Republican Party is a party of old white men…. The average age at our convention of both the speakers and the attendees was about 15 years younger than at the Democratic convention. I may be exaggerating slightly, but not by much. I mean, I kept hearing, "Oh, Republicans – they want to take us back, they want to take us back." I look at the Democratic National Convention, and it's Jimmy Carter, Michael Dukakis, Teddy Kennedy. Wait, who's trying to bring you back here? And as for the groups Republicans don't do well with, I think…. Well, for one thing, we're actually doing pretty well with white women, with married women, with single women. Mitt Romney did better than John McCain with every single possible demographic, including the evangelicals. We were told, "Oh, evangelicals won't vote for the Mormon." Every single religious group – Jews, evangelicals, Catholics – more of them voted for Mitt Romney than voted for McCain. The only two groups that voted more for McCain than for Romney were Asians and Hispanics, the two largest immigrant groups this country has been taking in for the last 30 years. I've said this before – Teddy Kennedy specifically designed his immigration act of 1965 to change America demographically without checking with the American people. It's virtually impossible to immigrate here from Europe now. About 80% of our immigrants for the last thirty years have come from the Third World, about 60% of them go on welfare – much higher percentage than native-born Americans. This is so Democrats get themselves more voters. We have a more dependent society. We have people who want welfare. And we cannot get the votes of a dependent society without changing our principles. I mean it's awful… they are awful people, Democrats. Every time a woman has a child out of wedlock, Democrats think, "Oh great – another Democratic voter." Every time a family gets divorced – fantastic, another Democratic voter. Every time someone loses his job and goes on welfare – fantastic, another Democratic voter. Now, we offer hope, opportunity and jobs, and I hope that we offer a change to our absolutely suicidal immigration policies.

AUDIENCE MEMBER: Ann, could you agree that even here at CPAC there seems to be some confusion. It was not a conservative defeat in 2012, it was a Boston liberal Republican defeat, I believe, with Mr. Romney. And I just want to ask you if you can help clarify why it's important that Mr. Bush not be our nominee and Mr. Christie not be our nominee and Mr. Cruz and some of the other great conservatives – real conservatives, in great part thanks to Jim DeMint – that are out there for us today. Thank you.

COULTER: Well, I'd like to give you some rules for choosing our next presidential nominee. I don't have a candidate yet, but I do have some rules for who shouldn't be running. And I've made this mistake, so I'm not blaming any of you. Among the candidates I've supported for president have included Pete DuPont, Pat Buchanan, Steve Forbes, Duncan Hunter. No, you can't run a congressman – I have learned that. You cannot run a governor from a state that's only as big as a congressional district. That's the equivalent of running a congressman. We can't run businessmen, pundits, people who have not run and won elections in at least a mid-sized state. So we're looking at governors and senators. Once you throw in the governors and senators, let's see how they debate. Let's look at their positions then. And we have…. I was telling him I couldn't get to sleep last night, so instead of counting sheep I was counting Republican candidates. And we have a pretty a pretty good list of them. Going with the governors, we have Sandoval of Nevada – yeah, he's pro-choice but maybe we can change him and again, I'm a single-issue voter against amnesty. There's Martinez of New Mexico. There is Rick Snyder of Michigan. There is Paul DuPage, the governor of Maine. There is – I'm sorry, he's got to be in the running – Chris Christie of New Jersey. I, of course, will now be against him unless he changes on amnesty. There is Rick Scott of Florida. There's Mike Pence of Ohio. There's John… or Indiana. There's John Kasich of Ohio. And in the Senate, you got Ron Johnson, Ted Cruz and I say we just…. [audience calls out "Scott Walker"] Scott Walker. I also have – okay, you have your favorites out there, I say throw 'em in a debate and let's see 'em –but I should also tell you at this moment that I also have height requirements. So if you didn't hear your favorite senator or governor, put him next to the clown at the moat, at the roller coaster – see if he hits the height requirement. And I wouldn't get, you know, too wed into any one candidate now. Let's see how they do in a debate. Let's see what their records are and most importantly let's see what their position is on amnesty.

Thank you. Drive safely.