-- Ann Coulter's November 8, 2006 Article

Let's see what Ann Coulter is up to since the election. On her site, her most recent article states:

Democrats support surrender in Iraq, higher taxes and the impeachment of President Bush. They just won an election by pretending to be against all three.
Ann Coulter - November 8, 2006 http://www.anncoulter.com/cgi-local/welcome.cgi

So, how true are Ann's statments? Let's start with her first item, Iraq. She claims Democrats want to surrender, or as she put it later in the same writing, the Democrats' policy is to:

Stay, leave ... stay for a while then leave ... redeploy and then come back ... leave and stay ... cut and run ... win, lose or draw policy.

Is that what the Democrats want? Do we really want to just up and leave Iraq and not clean up the mess we made? Consider what leaders of the Democratic party in both the House and Senate said in a letter to President Bush in July:

We believe that a phased redeployment of U.S. forces from Iraq should begin before the end of 2006. U.S. forces in Iraq should transition to a more limited mission focused on counterterrorism, training and logistical support of Iraqi security forces, and force protection of U.S. personnel.

Additionally, every effort should be made to urge the Iraqis to take the steps necessary to achieve a broad-based and sustainable political settlement, including amending the constitution to achieve a fair sharing of power and resources. It is also essential to disarm the militias and ensure forces loyal to the national government. Finally, an international conference should be convened to persuade other governments to be more involved, and to secure the resources necessary to finance Iraq's reconstruction and rebuild its economy.
Letter to President Bush from Democrats in both the House and Senate, July 31, 2006 http://www.house.gov/pelosi/press/releases/July06/IraqPlan.html

Wow. That doesn't sound like cut and run, Ann, that sounds like the Democrats actually have a plan. Empower the Iraqis to be able to take over their own country again, with all factions being fairly represented and guaranteed such representation in their own constitution. That sounds a lot like what we did here in America when our government was being formed, by the way. Get other countries from around the globe involved in this so it stops being America versus Iraq and shows that we have broad support in our mission. Bring our troops home in stages, so that the progress made in Iraq won't be undone as we leave.

This is a much more sound policy than the "stay the course" alternative that the Republicans have been touting for the past three years, and have recently dropped because of how far from reality it actually is.

How about her second claim of Democrats wanting higher taxes? Are the Democrats really hoping to increase taxes? Consider this from MSNBC:

Pelosi criticized congressional Republicans who have shown support for a new national sales tax, which she said would hurt the middle class ... House Speaker Dennis Hastert, R-Ill., called for a national sales tax or consumption-based tax in a recent book. But Bush’s suggestion this summer that a national sales tax is worth serious consideration drew a backlash from Democrats and many Republicans, and the idea was quickly discarded.
MSNBC September 25, 2004 http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6095868/

Aren't Dennis Hastert and George Bush Republicans? They were the last time I looked, but maybe I missed something. If they are, then it looks like it's the Republicans who are looking to raise taxes, not the Democrats. In fact, every time Democrats start to pull ahead in elections, Republicans start spewing the same old spin, that if they're elected the Democrats will increase taxes. Why, then, are the Republicans the ones who have been trying to do that? Note that this goes back over two years ago, Ann. Nothing new here.

Finally, Ann says that the Democrats are for impeachment. According to an article in the Washington Post:

Seeking to choke off a Republican rallying cry, the House's top Democrat has told colleagues that the party will not seek to impeach President Bush even if it gains control of the House in November's elections, her office said last night.

Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (Calif.) told her caucus members during their weekly closed meeting Wednesday "that impeachment is off the table; she is not interested in pursuing it," spokesman Brendan Daly said.
May 12, 2006 http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/05/11/AR2006051101950.html

Note that this was last May. Has anything changed since Democrats are now coming into control? No. Consider:

Presumptive House Speaker Nancy Pelosi took the podium Wednesday to outline her party’s plans for the future and to reassure voters that she won’t lead a liberal inquisition against President Bush.

“Impeachment is off the table,” said Pelosi, D-Calif. “Democrats are not about getting even. Democrats are about helping people get ahead.”
November 9, 2006 http://www.examiner.com/a-388565~Pelosi__Impeachment__off_the_table_.html

Does that mean that Bush will not be impeached? Not necessarily, and I'll explore that in another post, but for now, it's not being considered by the Democrats, unlike the pathetic attempt that the Republicans made at doing something similar with Bill Clinton, one of the best presidents this country has ever seen. The major difference between the two is that after Clinton's impeachment, he remained as President, while Bush would not. He would be tried for high crimes that would not only remove him from office, but could very well land him in prison.

One thing about Ann's latest writing really surprised me. In a move that will distance her from other right-wing pundits, she admits that the Democrats won the election. Most of the others claim that the Democrats didn't win so much as the Republicans lost. Apparently, they don't think the American voting public had any interest in things like Iraq, torturing of prisoners or illegal wire-tapping, but Ann did.

Imagine Ann getting a fact right!