Counter-Coulter

Meet Daniel Borchers, a conservative who says Ann Coulter’s antics are beyond the pale.

Illustration By: Steve Brodner

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.


In America’s pop poli-culture, she’s the Mother of All Partisans, thriving on whatever turn of phrase might most piss off the Democrats and/or “liberals” (and sell as many books as possible). For their part, her targets—although they don’t make as much money at it as she does—are all too happy to sink to her depths of crass depravity in response.

Call it the Coulter Cycle, and call it vicious. In September, I announced on my blog that I’d be debating Ann Coulter on an upcoming radio show, and was immediately showered with e-comments, most of them from lefties tired of being kicked around and publicly humiliated by the right-wing political cabal that has usurped virtually every inch of bandwidth on the American broadcast airscape since the Reagan-led dissolution of the Fairness Doctrine in the mid-’80s. Many were eager to tell me that Coulter, to paraphrase Austin Powers, “is a man, baby,” and pointed to a telltale prominent Adam’s apple (the only part of the anatomy, one emailer, a self-described speech therapist, helpfully pointed out, that can’t be reshaped in a sex-change operation). Others referred to her as simply “mAnn Coulter” or, when eloquence deserted them entirely, just “skanky meth whore.” Such is the exquisite refinement of American political discourse in the early 21st century.

Then, into this spectacle of spittle and disputum came an email from the gentlemanly Daniel Borchers, expressing that he was (and notice the archaic restraint) “highly critical of Ann Coulter.” Borchers is, if you will, the anti-Coulter, a position he arrives at from a decidedly unexpected corner. He loathes the queen of contumely not because he’s a liberal who’s taken the bait, but because he’s a conservative who thinks she and her kin are a disgrace to the conservative movement.

Borchers works for a labor-management organization dealing with health and safety issues, headquartered in Washington, D.C. He fashions himself an old-school conservative, and has been on a singularly lonely fight for true conservative values and policymaking in America for quite a few years. In 1996, he began publishing a newsletter called BrotherWatch, to combat what he describes as the “growing extremism within the Conservative Movement.” It runs stories about and interviews with personalities from across the broad political spectrum, “from Alan Keyes to Alan Colmes,” says Borchers.

His title as editor earned him media credentials at the annual Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC), along with permission to distribute his newsletter to attendees. That is, until he actually did so. In 2002, he showed up carrying a special anti-Ann edition of BrotherWatch, which called Coulter on the carpet for, among other things, the “mass of contradictions which abound in her life” and for the “extremist” positions that, following the 9/11 terrorist attacks, seemed to push the “acid-tongued blonde” toward a descent “into madness.”

BrotherWatch cannot abide her rhetorical excesses and ideological extremes, and the underlying emotional cauldron of hatred which animates so much of what Ann Coulter says and does,” Borchers wrote. “Nor can we tolerate the consequential dysfunctional behavior which is manifested as hypocrisy and mendacity, hate-mongering and abuse of power. These are traits which Coulter exposes in others, traits which no one who calls themselves ‘conservative’ should emulate.”

The issue depicts Coulter on the occasion of the death of her friend Barbara Olson in the plane that crashed into the Pentagon, and decries her disinterest in taking the moment to reflect on Olson’s life of “Christianity, spirituality and graciousness,” preferring instead to “scrounge through the wreckage, find a piece of her…and beat Hillary Clinton over the head with it.”

When the organizers of CPAC caught on to Borchers’ subversive content, they attempted to confiscate BrotherWatch and escorted Borchers out of the hall and back to his Nissan Altima. Coulter has been a perennial star of CPAC, which has wanted nothing to do with Borchers from there on out. In 2003 and 2004, he was denied not only media credentials but even regular admission to the conference. He managed to slip past the gatekeepers in 2005 as a paying member of the public. All this, he says, “merely for expressing my dissent.”

Now Borchers is at work on a documentary film titled The Truth About Ann, due out in June to coincide with the anticipated release of Coulter’s next book. Early press materials promise the film “exposes the extremist nature of Conservatism’s preeminent diva and reigning political icon.” Employing liberal doses of Coulter’s many media appearances and miles-long paper trail, it promises to reveal how her brand of “‘New McCarthyism’ is poisoning millions of minds.”

Borchers is starting to produce some smaller PowerPoint presentations highlighting various examples of Coulter’s opportunism. His first presentation, “The Gospel of Ann,” displays Coulter’s “jaw-dropping expression of faith in God…a faith which otherwise seems so empty in everything Coulter does.” Borchers says Coulter’s “track record of practicing what she preaches is pretty dismal.” He hopes the presentation will “call to the attention of fellow Christians (left and right)” the anti-Christian tendencies and hate-speech practices of those, like Coulter, who declare their fealty to the conservative movement while eroding its tenets.

“Honor requires outing,” Borchers says. “Silence is complicity.”

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We canā€™t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who wonā€™t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its futureā€”you.

And we need readers to show up for us big timeā€”again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We canā€™t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who wonā€™t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its futureā€”you.

And we need readers to show up for us big timeā€”again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate