I don't mean to harp on anti-Semitism, but...

This time, it's Ann Coulter, the right-wing's take-no-prisoners trash-talker, who has, among other "highlights" of her career, praised Sen. Joseph McCarthy and accused basically everybody who isn't a conservative Republican of treason.

Her most recent column mocks the Democratic presidential candidates for (a) relating stories of personal tragedies (death or near death of siblings, children, etc.) while running for President and (b) having some connection to Judaism, whether by having Jewish ancestry like Gen. Clark and Sen. Clinton (who is not a presidential candidate except in the minds of the right wing), being married to a Jew like Gov. Dean, or actually being Jewish, like Sen. Lieberman. [link] Now, maybe she's not exactly stooping to calling Jews "Shylocks" and the like, but the insinuation is pretty gross:

In addition to having a number of family deaths among them, the Democrats' other big idea – too nuanced for a bumper sticker – is that many of them have Jewish ancestry. There's Joe Lieberman: Always Jewish. Wesley Clark: Found Out His Father Was Jewish in College. John Kerry: Jewish Since He Began Presidential Fund-Raising. Howard Dean: Married to a Jew. Al Sharpton: Circumcised. Even Hillary Clinton claimed to have unearthed some evidence that she was a Jew – along with the long lost evidence that she was a Yankees fan. And that, boys and girls, is how the Jews survived thousands of years of persecution: by being susceptible to pandering.

What exactly does Coulter mean when she says that Jews are "susceptible to pandering"? And what about saying Sen. Kerry is "Jewish since he began presidential fund-raising"? Is she implying that our support can be bought? Or that we once we get our pound of flesh, then we'll support a candidate?

On second thought, maybe it's not so far from calling us "Shylocks" after all.