As noted previously in this space, Ann Coulter’s next book is called “Treason: Liberal Treachery from the Cold War to the War on Terrorism.” Which means that you can expect to see a certain, er, recurrent motif in her work for awhile, I suspect:
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 his 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 in their seats, sullen at the thought that America would be protected from incoming ballistic missiles. To paraphrase George Bush: If this is not treason, then treason has no meaning.
Democrats don’t support a boondoggle missile defense system? Then they’re traitors, by god, traitors! They’re guilty of, ahem, treason!
Ann just wants to sell books. But the slippery slopes of history are always greased at first by opportunistic slimeballs.