Ann Coulter Becomes Unhinged

Coulter with foot in mouth
Has Ann Coulter become unhinged? It looks as if she may have.

Coulter throws verbal bombs for a living. It was only a matter of time before one of her verbal bombs blew up in her face. That time has arrived.

In a commentary published by, Coulter aims one of her bombs at Dr. Kent Brantly, a Christian physician who performs medical missionary work in Africa under the leadership of Samaritan’s Purse, an international Christian charity. Dr. Brantly is the American physician who acquired the Ebola virus and was returned to the USA for specialized medical treatment.

In her commentary, Coulter accuses Dr. Brantly of “Christian narcissism” because he performs his missionary work in Africa instead of the USA. Coulter writes the following:

But serving the needy in some deadbeat town in Texas wouldn’t have been “heroic.” We wouldn’t hear all the superlatives about Dr. Brantly’s “unusual drive to help the less fortunate” or his membership in the “Gold Humanism Honor Society.” Leaving his family behind in Texas to help the poor 6,000 miles away — that’s the ticket.

Pardon me for taking a moment to vomit.

Apparently, Coulter has read neither the New Testament parable about the sheep and the goats nor the parable about the Good Samaritan, both parables having been told by Jesus himself. Had she read and understood them, the Coulter would know that Dr. Brantly was doing exactly what living out the Gospel message requires, which requires taking personal risks when necessary.

The idiocy of Coulter’s rant against Dr. Brantly has resulted in plenty of scorn. In a commentary published by the American Thinker, Dr. Janice Shaw Crouse writes the following:

One of the essential lessons of clear thinking is to avoid specious “either/or” dichotomies. Ann Coulter violated this basic standard in her intentionally sensational article, “Ebola Doc’s Condition Downgraded to ‘Idiotic.’” She wondered why missionary doctor Kent Brantly didn’t stay in the U.S. to “serve Christ” instead of going to Liberia, where he “risked making his wife a widow and his children fatherless.” In other words, in Ann’s opinion, Christian service is limited to one of two options: serve in the U.S., or abandon wife and children to “slink off” to do “heroic” “good works” in “Third World countries” that are “disease-ridden cesspools.” Obviously to folks with Ann’s infantile perspective, such “idiocy” is merely to “impress” people like the NY Times columnist Nicholas Kristof.

It is ironic that someone as so publicity-obsessed as Coulter would have the gall to assert that if missionaries weren’t so “narcissistic” and had courage or weren’t burned out over all the social problems in the U.S., they’d stay in “some deadbeat town” in the U.S. and forego all the “superlatives” they get for serving as foreign missionaries.

It probably is a waste of time to ask the question: did you really mean to reveal how shallow your thinking can be?

Regarding Coulter’s rant, Dr. R. Albert Mohler, Jr. writes the following:

Coulter has written a very sad and infuriating article – an article that should lead to outrage in Christian circles. It reveals a radical nationalistic and libertarian worldview that is fundamentally incompatible with evangelical Christianity, with the Scripture, and with the command of Christ.

Peter Rosenberger is president of an organization that provides prosthetic limbs to people in Africa. In an opinion piece published by, he writes the following:

There are plenty of things for Ann Coulter to harp about when it comes to American politics. When it comes to this issue of why American Christians go to the mission field, she, like many of the patients we treat, doesn’t appear to have to have a leg to stand upon.

Only time will tell if Coulter feels enough shame to apologize for what she wrote, or if she will be too narcissistic to make such an apology.

Atheists Threaten to Sue Restaurant for Giving Discounts to Patrons Who Pray Before Meals
Voter ID Laws Winning, Obama and Holder Losing
  • Commander_Chico

    She’s a barren old hag who is vying for the Wicked Witch of the West job.

    • High praise indeed, considering the source.

    • warnertoddhuston

      I think she is just an attention seeker and doesn’t believe a word she says.

    • Retired military

      Coulter is trying to wrestle the title from Pelosi??

  • JPeron

    This just shows that Coulter and Mohler are both clueless. If Mohler thinks Coulter reflects a “libertarian” view—she had attacked libertarians publicly several times—then’s he not very bright, but then, he is a Southern Baptist.

    • Actually, Coulter does display a libertarian-type mentality in her hit piece against Dr. Brantly. Thirteen years ago, I was briefly a member of the Libertarian Party, and I heard plenty of Libertarians advocate a policy of non-involvement with other nations.

      • jim_m

        Libertarianism has a long tradition of isolationism, but to confuse isolationism, which can be found in all political strains, with libertarianism would be a mistake.

      • JPeron

        Next time stay around long enough to figure it out. Libertarians don’t advocate “non-involvement with other nations,” at all, they advocate non-intervention, which means don’t invade them, don’t bomb them, don’t try to overthrow their governments, just trade peacefully with them, visit them and have friendly relations.

        You have almost perfectly misstated the position of the LP and libertarians NOT in the LP (most are not in the LP).

  • Brucehenry

    Hilarious that, for all the many times Coulter has insulted every group of people under the sun — liberals, gays, blacks, Latinos, Arabs, widows of 9/11 victims, etc — she only gets denounced by conservatives when she insults white Christian church people.

    • jim_m

      Hilarious that for all the times that leftists make outrageous racist and other bigoted comments, Bruce chooses only to be upset when a conservative makes one.

      • Brucehenry

        Who’s upset? Par for the course. Amused, really.

        • jim_m

          Par for the course, pointing out things you dislike in your ideological opponents and excusing the same in your allies. Hypocrisy thy name is Bruce.

          • Brucehenry

            Ha ha why don’t you link to some comment I made where I expose my hypocrisy? My own comment, not some LSD-inspired “interpretation” of yours of what my comment “boils down to.”

            EDIT: And your hypocrisy here, where you seem to me to be defending Coulter’s rant as no worse than what some imaginary liberal strawman said?

          • jim_m

            I am not defending her at all. I point out that even hypocrisy in your complaining about conservatives criticizing her when it is difficult to find any examples of you leveling criticism toward th we left without someone first pointing out what an outrageous hypocrite you are.

          • jim_m

            And no, I don’t defend her. She is as conservative as Bill O’Reilly, which is to say that she is more about self promotion than about conservative ideas .

          • Brucehenry

            Well we agree on that, they are both grifters.

          • jim_m

            Yeah, but then you believe that everyone who disagrees with you is a grifter because you discount the possibility that anyone could actually have sincerely held beliefs that are different than yours. You are so used to left wing politicians making claims that they don’t believe and promises they never intend to keep (you can keep your doctor if you like him…), that you assume that everyone is lying.

            On the other hand I think that these two are just narcissists and that people are frequently sincerely wrong.

          • Brucehenry

            You seem to be attacking me for doing the same thing you are doing. You don’t criticize Coulter but you would, I assume, viciously attack any liberal who dared to speak negatively about “Christian narcissism” or to suggest, as Coulter has, that Jews are “incomplete Christians.” Not to mention the blatant dogwhistle of calling for the conversion of “Hollywood power brokers” — meaning Jews.

          • jim_m

            In order to criticize Coulter I would have to listen to or read her self promoting bs. I don’t do either. It would be a waste of my time.

          • Brucehenry

            No you spend your valuable time at Gateway Pundit instead lol.

          • jim_m

            I actually got banned from GP for criticizing Jim Hoft for being a dishonest hack. When he did it I told him that if he wanted to be the next Charles Johnson and ban everyone who disagreed with him that I wished him good luck with that.

          • Brucehenry

            OK correction: You USED to spend your valuable time at Gateway Pundit but got banned for trolling. Then you spent a little more of your valuable time telling Jim Hoft, the Stupidest Man On The Internet, why he was wrong and you were right.

            But Coulter? Now THAT would be a waste.

            And it’s “peals” of laughter not “peels.” But you’re right.

          • jim_m

            I actually posted links demonstrating that things he said were factually incorrect. GP used to be a pretty good source of info. There was at least some accuracy to be found there, but Hoft has let the site slide into fabulism and pays little attention to accuracy and truth. I happen to think those things are important.

            Watching TV political commentary largely is a waste of time. I agree with that last line of yours.

          • jim_m

            I take exception to your description of Hoft as “The stupidest man on the internet”. Chico certainly outdoes him daily.

          • Brucehenry

            If Hoft isn’t The Stupidest, I can think of another candidate, but it isn’t Chico.

          • jim_m

            I can think …

            That’s debatable.

    • Bruce, in case you missed it, NYT columnist Nicholas Kristof has defended the work of Dr. Brantly. So, is Kristof supporting Dr. Brantly because of Dr. Brantly’s race. No, of course not. Neither are the defenders of Dr. Brantly whom I quote in my post. Your attempt to play the race card in this case goes beyond the pale.

      By the way, Coulter has been previously denounced by conservatives when she has gone too far, such as the time she ranted against widows of 9/11 victims.

      • Brucehenry

        But not when she attacks Muslims, Arabs, gays, blacks, Palestinians, or even “incomplete Christians.”

  • Par4Course

    Ann is on better footing when she attacks Muslim extremists who hate and want to kill us than when she attacks her fellow Christians. She apparently believes charity should both begin and end at home (in the US) but most Christians and non-Christians in America don’t take quite such a narrow view, believing that there is a place for both national and international charity.

    • Brucehenry

      Her “fellow” Christians? I don’t know any definition of “Christian” that fits that harpy. Except maybe the one that includes “Christians” like Limbaugh and Hannity — xenophobic nativist assholes. But I’m pretty sure that’s not what you meant.

      • I somewhat agree with Bruce in regards to Coulter’s display of “Christianity”.
        For an explanation, read my quote of Dr. Mohler in my above post.

      • Par4Course

        By calling her a Christian, I was not judging the sincerity or depth of Ms. Coulter’s religious beliefs. I’ll leave that call to you. Like President Obama, Ms. Coulter self-identifies as a Christian. You obviously disagree that Ann fits within that description, just like 17% of registered voters believe Obama is really a Muslim (according to the Pew Poll).

  • IngeC

    Her misfire regarding this issue is that of a person too narcissistic herself to see the irony – her muddled Christian view.

  • ljcarolyne

    I agree with her on that mater. . .America needs to tend to it’s own damn business.
    Plenty here to tend to plus the same goes for our corrupt government. Obama and his evil Regime needs to refund the American tax payers back some of their money instead of giving it all to other countries, thank you.

  • Retired military

    I am not defending Coulter.
    I am just looking forward to Chico and Bruce denounce someone on the left who says something equally stupid but I wont hold my breath.
    You like like Pelosi and Reid saying people on the right are against Obama’s policies because of racism or people are terrorists because they support the repeal of Obamacare . Or Obama standing up and lying out his ass like he does so much.

    • jim_m

      As he has done so in many instances in the past, Bruce will tell you that his criticism of these people is unnecessary because there are other making these criticisms.

  • PatrioticUSGlory

    The story appears to take Coulter’s comments out of context. As if it was written with the conclusion in mind before her column was read.