At CPAC last year, Ann Coulter made the comment that if Governor Chris Christie did not run for president, then Mitt Romney would get the GOP nomination and would lose to Obama. (Video proving so at the end of the blog post)
Lately though, Ann has become Mitt's biggest cheerleader, and the biggest attack dog against Newt Gingrich. Her columns which used to amuse and entertain me. I agreed with her 99.99% of the time. I loved to pull up clips of her up against liberals and see her get the best of them.
What happened Ann? How did you do a complete 180 on Mitt? And furthermore, why are you hellbent on trashing Newt, as in the same video mentioned, you said you don't like to attack Republicans, but you have done a 180 on that also.
Mitt Romney did to Massachusetts with his healthcare plan what Obama has done to the whole country, but in your most recent column titled Three Cheers for Romneycare, you defend it and Romney, and blame the Democrats for the bad effects of it. What on earth are you smoking?!
Mitt Romney is Obama-lite. It is obvious to anyone with a brain that the left and the media want Mitt to be the nomination. Why? To quote someone - oh yeah, that would be you "Romney would lose to Obama."
I used to love you and your column, Ann, but I am not too happy with you. I wish you'd provide a good explanation of why you have become so pro-Mitt and become so willing to attack Newt. May I quote someone else on that.... oh wait, that was you also "I don't like to attack Republicans". Your column has become nothing but a cheer leading platform for the very man you said would lose to Obama, and a attack platform for Newt Gingrich.
A friend of mine suggested Mitt is either paying you off, or you are having an affair with him. Either is possible, and I have yet to come up with a better explanation for your complete 180. Maybe you can give one? I await your reply, but not too hopeful I will get one.
Ann in her own words: