Archive for the ‘Ann Coulter’ Category

Ann Coulter rants about ‘Jews’ and Israel during GOP debate

Political commentator and author Ann Coulter arrives at the premiere of "Sharknado 3: Oh Hell No!" at iPic Theaters on July 22.(Photo: Gregg DeGuire, WireImage)

The GOP debate on CNN was full of zingers,but some of the comments that caused the most controversy were from the sidelines.

Conservative syndicated columnist Ann Coulter posted a series of tweets during the GOP debate that many are calling 'anti-semitic." After several candidates addressed the need to strengthen the relationship between the U.S. and Israel, Coulter tweeted, 'How many (expletive) Jews do these people think there are in the United States?"

Coulter, who has over 600,000 followers on Twitter, said she was the responding to the plethora of GOP support for Israeli relations, during the second GOP debate held at the Ronald Reagan Library in California.

Her Twitter tirade began early in the debate and a string of tweets called out the candidates for what she later called "pandering" to Israel.

Coulter received a mixed response, with some offering support and others slamming the columnist as an "anti-semitic." Coulter tweeted in defense of the comments throughout the night.

USA TODAY

Republican candidates reveal dream Secret Service code names

On Twitter Coulter responded to a tweet that said "shame on you," by explaining that she was calling out Republicans for their worn-out rhetoric. She tweeted, "All GOPs = prolife, pro-Reagan, pro-Israel. Pandering on all 3 tonight was EPIC."

On Twitter, the hashtag #IStandWithAnn was used by people voicing support for the columnist.

Others noted that the majority of those using the hashtag were voicing "anti-semitic" opinions.

Follow @Marybowerman on Twitter.

Read or Share this story: http://usat.ly/1iRtuht

Read more:
Ann Coulter rants about 'Jews' and Israel during GOP debate

Ann Coulter sparks outrage over anti-Semitic tweet – NY …

NEW YORK DAILY NEWS

Updated: Thursday, September 17, 2015, 11:46 AM

Ann Coulter is being blasted as a bigoted "idiot" after she shocked social media users late Wednesday with a tweet that many are calling anti-Semitic.

The rightwing pundit went on a Twitter tirade during the Republican presidential candidate debate, accusing participants of kowtowing to special interests when she wrote: "How many f---ing Jews do these people think there are in the United States?"

WARREN: GOP DEBATE TURNS INTO PRIZE FIGHT

The tweet, which was shared nearly 2,000 times, prompted criticism from hundreds of people, including actor and comedian Seth Rogen.

"You're a horrible f-----g idiot," Rogen wrote to the Coulter.

Coulter, 53, said her comment was "not about Jewish people."

The sharp-tongued commentator told her nearly 660,000 followers on Twitter that she was instead calling out the GOP "panderers" for repeatedly reiterating their support for Israel during the debate.

"I like the Jews, I like fetuses, I like Reagan. Didn't need to hear applause lines about them all night," she tweeted. "Cruz, Huckabee Rubio all mentioned ISRAEL in their response to: 'What will AMERICA look like after you are president.'"

FIORINA TAKES VICTORY LAP AFTER SOLID GOP DEBATE PERFORMANCE

The candidates had just addressed the need to strengthen the relationship between the U.S. and Israel.

"Ugly & reprehensible anti-Semitic Tweet. @AnnCoulter, have you lost your mind?" author Joel Rosenberg wrote. "Such behavior is not conservative."

Coulter responded, saying she was a "huge Israel fan."

"I was attacking GOP for pandering on Israel (AND Reagan AND abortion)," she said.

Others didn't accept the explanation and called for her to apologize.

It's not the first time Coulter has drawn heat for her remarks.

In May, she said Americans should fear immigrants more than ISIS terrorists.

Coulter was unfazed by the onslaught of criticism she received in 2012 for calling President Obama a "retard."

ON A MOBILE DEVICE? WATCH THE VIDEO HERE.

mchan@nydailynews.com

Continue reading here:
Ann Coulter sparks outrage over anti-Semitic tweet - NY ...

Ann Coulter & Tavis Smiley Have Heated Debate Over …

Donald Trump isn't aloneconservative commentator and author Ann Coulteris also speaking out against immigration, although she appeared to reach an impasse while arguing her case with PBS hostTavis Smiley.

After makingcontroversial comments about Mexican immigrants when he announced his presidential campaign earlier this year,Trumpvowed that if elected, he would installstricter limits on legal immigration andoverturn a law that grants citizenship toanyoneborn in the U.S. Coulter, a conservative commentator and New York Times best-selling author, is promoting hernew book titledAdios, America: The Left's Plan to Turn Our Country into a Third World Hellhole. So you can imagine her stance.

In her book and in an interview on Smiley's show this week,Coulterrepeated a known conservative argument that claims immigrants take low-level jobs away from non-immigrants, which Smiley called "absurd." Shetalked about how government resources are being spent on immigrants, who she says don't deserve it, and cited the hardships of the black community. Smiley, who is black, wasn't impressed.

READ:Ann Coulter says she has the "black perspective" on race relations

"Your argument suggests that if these other persons weren't here, that somehow we would be fairer and better by those who are already here," replied Smiley. "The evidence doesn't support that."

"I wish all of the resources that have been going to immigration had been going to the group we actually owe in this country," Coulter said. "The reason Americans are sensitive torace, the reason we have civil rights laws, the reason we have a 14th amendment is because of the black experience in America, it is because of slavery, it is because ofJim Crow and the idea that someone who arrived yesterday can just piggy-back onto that and claim the same rights...we're sensitive to this for one reason. But meanwhile, you know what, affirmative action, it goes to immigrants. Why is that? We don't owe you anything!"

READ: Kelly Osbourne to Donald Trump: If you kick all Latinos out of America, who is going to clean your toilets?

"I think a lot more effort would be spent on the black community and we'd be a lot farther along because we would only have this one thing to deal with," sheadded.

Smiley said the "problem of disrespecting black fellow citizens already existed" "long before we had a basic immigration problem" and cited how black Americans "are still getting shot in the streets by white cops all the time."

"And by Mexicans," Coulter added, citing Mexicanandblack gang violence in parts of Los Angeles.

"The black and brown issue is real, no doubt about that," Smiley said. "But when you consider...how closely black and brown live in certain parts of this city and in this state and for that matter, New York City, those incidents pale in comparison again the peace thatexists every day among neighbors who live in those tight environments."

PHOTOS: Red-hot Republicans

RELATED VIDEOS:

See original here:
Ann Coulter & Tavis Smiley Have Heated Debate Over ...

Author Ann Coulter | Interviews | Tavis Smiley | PBS

Tavis Smiley: Good evening from Los Angeles. Im Tavis Smiley.

Tonight, a conversation with conservative commentator and bestselling author, Ann Coulter. The unapologetically incendiary polemicist has written 10 New York Times bestsellers, including most recently her anti-immigration tome, !Adios, America!

She joins us tonight to discuss why she and, for that matter, GOP frontrunner, Donald Trump, and all the others have decided to focus their efforts on attacking Mexican immigrants even at the expense of alienating over 55 million Latino-Americans as a result.

Were glad youve joined us. A conversation with bestselling author, Ann Coulter, coming up right now.

[Walmart Sponsor Ad]

Announcer: And by contributions to your PBS station from viewers like you. Thank you.

Tavis: Ann Coulter is, of course, a well-known conservative commentator and the author of 10 New York Times bestsellers, including her latest titled !Adios, America!

In the text, Ann outlines why she believes immigration is one of Americas greatest threats, an idea that has apparently been embraced by some leaders on the right, including current GOP frontrunner, Donald Trump, and every day it seems somebody else lines up behind him. Ann, good to have you on this program.

Ann Coulter: So good to be here.

Tavis: Let me jump right in because I want to make the most of the time we have. Let me just say up front. I hope that this conversation can be as much about humanity and dignity as it is about politics and polling. Because I want to try to better understand to the extent that I can.

I suspect viewers might want to better understand the motivation behind your rhetoric and, for that matter, Donald Trump and others. Let me just start, though, with the titles of some of your books. This one, !Adios, America!: The Lefts Plan to Turn Our Country Into a Third World Hellhole. You really believe that?

Coulter: Yes. Now part of what Im doing, obviously, is to have it be titled.

Tavis: I got it.

Coulter: So well leave that aside. You do need interesting rhetoric. Winston Churchill had interesting rhetoric. In fact, Im always asking Thomas Sowell if I could write the titles to his books because they have things like Basic Economics. Mr. Sowell, please let me do your titles.

But as I explain in the book, what happened is, it was the change with the 1965 Immigration Act. People get weepy over, you know, there are immigrants arriving at Ellis Island. Were getting a very different kind of immigrant now and it began as a specific plan to bring in lots of more Democratic voters and it worked.

But now, unfortunately, the Republicans are going along with it and I wish more people were joining Donald Trump, who, by the way, asked for and received an advance copy of this book. But they wont, they cant, because of their donors.

Just recently, Scott Walker tried to follow Trump by saying we have to do something about the anchor baby policy. One of his billionaire Republican donors said, nope, Im against that, and suddenly Scott Walker changes his mind.

So part of what Trump is doing is exposing how the Republican Party is so beholding to their donors and the donors want the cheap labor. They have Spanish language TV. Theyre making money off of this and they dont care what happens to America.

And, look, this isnt good just for Americans whove been here for hundreds of years. How about the immigrants who came last year and the year before? For some reason, they decided to immigrate to America, not to immigrate to Bangladesh, to Honduras, to Mexico. That country is disappearing.

The country they struggled to come to wont exist if we continue this mass dump of people from extremely different cultures and at a time when we not only have a welfare state, but its, you know, a hate crime to try to assimilate people to what is a very successful culture.

Tavis: Let me jump in. You said 10 things already. I could take any one of them and spend a whole show talking about it. So Im going to do the best I can to try to pick some of these things apart and give you a chance to respond.

So first of all, we agreeagain, I want to talk about humanity and dignity. We agree that there are too many immigrants, undocumented workers, who are being exploited by Republicans and Democrats. We agree on that. All right, what I dont think I agree with you on is that the country is getting a different kind of immigrant now than we were getting in 1965.

As I read your bookand I went through thiswhat I see in the book is much more anecdotal, respectfully, much more anecdotal than statistical. Thats my issue with Donald Trump and others who are taking anecdotes, incidents, where people do things that cannot be condoned or supported like the undocumented worker in San Francisco.

Those are anecdotal. I mean, all life is valuable, all life is precious, but those are anecdotes. Its not statistical. So when you say were getting a different kind of immigrant now than we had in 1965, explain that. What do you mean by that?

Coulter: Well, heres statistical and factual. 65 immigration acts went through right at the time of the Great Society program. So pre-1970 immigrantsand thats basically when it kicked inpre-1970 immigrants, 30% went home. They couldnt make it.

Well, now nobody goes home. You go on welfare and thats welfare meant for Americans. We have our own poor. We have our own criminals. We dont need more. Right now, 71% of illegal immigrants with children, i.e., anchor babies, are collecting government assistance. 71%.

Tavis: When you say government assistance, you mean by that, well, what are they getting?

Coulter: All kinds of things, food stamps. If you can claim a disability, social security disability insurance, housing aid, of course, schooling and second language

Tavis: But these are for children who were born in this country.

Coulter: Well, yes.

Tavis: Okay. So how is that some illegal, some foreigner, getting U.S. assistance if in fact they were born here? Now we can debate whether or not you think they ought to get assistance, but you cant advance the argument on this show that theyre somehow foreigners getting assistance if they were born here on this soil unless and until

Coulter: No. I am debating that.

Tavis: Well, unless and until we change the 14th Amendment, that arguments got a big hole in it.

Coulter: No, and I dont want to completely bore your audience, but I will say quickly I write about this in the book and I expanded it more in recent columns because even allegedly people on my side, but speaking for cheap labor, the interest of cheap labor are claiming that was what the 14th Amendment was about. No, it wasnt.

It was about freed slaves. 13th, 14th, 15th Amendment came after the Civil War to get an amendment attached to the Constitution. You need a mass feeling about a major subject. And Supreme Court case after Supreme Court case said this is about freed slaves. Indians didnt get citizenship.

It took another, I dont know, 50 years before even the children of legal immigrantsand I think that is incorrectthe illegal immigrants, i.e., anchor babies, it has been argued, briefed or decided by the Supreme Court. That was dictus slipped into a 1982 opinion by Justice Brennan in a closely-divided five to four decision, but that is not constitutional.

Tavis: But it is the law of the land. It is the edict

Coulter: It isnt, though. Its a policy that has been followed

Tavis: Its the policy and the edict, exactly. Its the edict thats been followed.

Coulter: And I dontlets put it to a vote because I am confident that 80% of Americans would say, no, citizenship in our country should not be a game of Red Rover with the border patrol.

Tavis: So my point to you is that, if we want to talk about changing the policy, then lets talk about changing the policy.

Coulter: Yes.

Tavis: But demeaning those babies who were born here through no fault of their own

Coulter: But its not demeaning.

Tavis: It is. Its demeaning, Ann

Coulter: You asked for statistics on how they were different.

Tavis: No, no. Its demeaning

Coulter: I just gave you how they were different.

Tavis: Its demeaning, and Ive responded by saying that, if that is the way the policy is written and that policy is the edict that we have followed and these babies are born here are considered Americans, then how do we call them anchor babies, and in that phraseology, disrespect and deny the dignity and the humanity of the child who had nothing to do with where he or she was born?

Coulter: Well, two things. First of all, I was responding to your question how are pre-1970 immigrants different from post-1970 immigrants.

Tavis: Right.

Coulter: 30% of them used to go home. Now they go on welfare and I was citing an actual straightforward statistic to respond to the anecdotal points. And I do want to respond specifically to that too. I dont think it demeans anyone. There is nothing about anchor baby and Im so glad Donald Trump didnt back down on this.

The normal Republican response when somebody yells and says you cant use that phrase or that word is, Oh, Im sorry. Well preemptively surrender. There is nothing sexual, racial, offensive. Anchor baby is a voting metaphor.

What happens is, illegal immigrants can run across the border, drop a baby, and say, Ha-ha, theres nothing you can do now. My kids an American citizen. Well, that wasnt the intent of the 14th Amendment. Americans would not agree with that. It creates a horrible incentive.

These babies, I agree, and the mothers that youre concerned about, theyre putting themselves in enormous danger. Theyre dying in the desert. We have put a magnet on our side of the border to create all these problems.

And if I can just get back to the anecdotes point, the reason this book became this book, it wasnt going to be about immigration. That was going to be one chapter in a much larger theme. And Id written a couple of the chapters already and then I get to the immigration chapter and I start looking for, you know, basic crime statistics.

I know that weve had a lot of immigration. How many immigrants are in prison? And what I found wasand Im a fanatical researcherwhat I found was a massive cover-up by both the government and the media in not telling us how many immigrants are in prison.

I describe it a little bit in Chapter 7, what you can find. So I say, look, Id love to have the absolute numbers. How many anchor babies are in prison? How many legal immigrants? How many illegal immigrants? For what kinds of crimes? And from what countries?

They wont tell us that, and this is why its become kind of a big thing now, how the headlines are always, you know, Man rapes child or Houston man rapes child. Id have to wait for the court transcripts to find out there was a court translator.

Tavis: Wheres the evidence that these undocumented workers who are having babies are doing it specifically for the reason of having anchor babies? How do we know that they arent in love? How do we know that they arent procreating like all the rest of us do?

Wheres the evidence that they are specifically laying with someone to have a baby so they can anchor themselves? Wheres the evidence that suggests that?

Coulter: Well, there is some evidence, but before answering the evidence, Id say who cares? Were a country. We ought to be able to consent to anyone who becomes a citizen. It shouldnt be a game with the border patrol. I mean, thats kind of crazy, but as for the evidence

Tavis: But my point is calling them an anchor baby when you dont know thats what the intent of that pregnancy was.

Coulter: But I dont care. It works that way.

Tavis: You should care, though.

Coulter: No, no, no. Youre asking about motive, but Ill get to the

Tavis: Im talking about language. Im talking about

Coulter: Ill get to the proof.

Tavis: Okay, go ahead, okay.

Coulter: But it still works as an anchor, whether or not that was in their minds, but, yes, there is evidence. For one thing, why would you choose when youre eight months pregnant to come across the border? Number two, there are birthing centers.

We have the pamphlets. We have the pamphlets saying, especially the pamphlets written in Chinese out here in California, of all these birthing centers saying, If your child becomes a citizen, you get in-state tuition, youll be able to come back any time you want. You can get an American passport. They have the lists of the advantages of coming to America and giving birth here.

Tavis: So let me advance. Let me advance. Even if Iwhich I obviously have not and will not concede to you that argument. I think Ive made my case and youve made yours. Well move on.

But even if that were the case, how does that number, the number of whatever government assistance is going to these babies born here, whatever that number is, that number, you must admit, pales and I mean pales in comparison to the billions of dollars that are generated in this economy by those undocumented workers. So one cancels the other out massively.

Coulter: Oh, I totally contest that.

Tavis: Hold on. Let me turn the record here. You think that the number of government assistance that goes to these babies outstrips the billions of dollars generated in this income by the work done by undocumented workers? You believe that?

Coulter: Yeah. The issue is where does the money go to? Yes, the capitalists, the employ

Tavis: It goes to those Republicans who you said earlier dont want to tell the truth

Coulter: Thats right.

Tavis: Because they believe that they make money off of it. Democrats too.

Coulter: It goes to the very rich, but the middle class and the lower class and the working class trying to get those jobs, theyre taking it up the shorts over and over again.

Tavis: That is the most

Coulter: No. It has been proved eight times on Sundays.

Tavis: Hold on. That is the mostrespectfully, I cant put these two words in the same sentence. But its the most absurd argument, and youre brilliant

Coulter: Well, let me explain

Tavis: Hold on. Ill let you explain. Let me tell you why its absurd. How many BlackI dont know any Black folk. Im so tired of hearing this argument.

I dont know any Black folk, I certainly dont know any white folk or anybody else whos standing in line because they want to pick grapes, because they want to pick strawberries, because they want to sell oranges, because they want to manicure lawns or work in kitchens or nanny babies. Where are the lines of all these Americans who theyre taking these jobs from?

Coulter: Well, the grape-picking, this is just lazy farmers refusing to mechanize. There are machines. We have robots. I mean, whens the last time youve seen a bank teller?

Tavis: Thats not my point, though. My question is, though

Coulter: As for the other jobs, working at McDonalds, working retail, these used to beI mean, for 200 years Americans did them. So a lot of teenagers used to do them and the Black unemployment in particular for teenaged Blacks, absolutely through the roof.

Tavis: Is off the charts, exactly.

Coulter: A lot of these were entry level jobs for teenagers that were talking about. But the idea that, you know, whos going to clean our homes and do our gardening or whatever? We used to do it. Somehow Americans used to get it done. Theres still a few states out in America, you know, Ill call my friends and say, Hey, guess what I saw in Iowa? I saw Americans doing jobs Americans just wont do.

Tavis: But to your point, though, Ann, if we keep being the magnetthats the word you used earlierif we keep being the magnet to pull people here from across the border for a better life because theyre willing to do that work, how then do we magnetize them, pull them over, and then blame them for coming when they were pulled by the magnet?

Coulter: You know, from my book, I mostly blame our elites. I mean, it is the elites against the middle in this case. I dont have to blame them to say that the policy has to change. No, I blame first of all the Democrats who wanted the voters and now the Republicans who want the donations from businessmen who want the cheap labor or the extra customers.

But you cant dump millions of poor people on the country and say that is good for Americans generally. It is good for people who hire those laborers.

They get the cheap labor, but Americans are out of jobs, their taxes are going to pay forinstead of, you know, What happened to our school pageant this year? Oh, sorry. We needed English as a second language. There are so many services, so many taxes, going to immigrants coming in. Again, we have our own poor people. We have our own criminals.

And as for the anecdotal evidence, if I could jump back to that, my motto is there are way too many immigrants who are criminals and there shouldnt be any. We have our own criminals. Not one immigrant should be a criminal. Not one immigrant should be on welfare. We cant do anything about our native poor. We cant do anything about our native criminals. We dont need more.

Tavis: There are two things. One, your argument suggests that, if these other persons werent here, that somehow we would be fairer and better by those who are already here.

Coulter: I think we would.

Tavis: Well, the evidence doesnt support that. The evidence doesnt support that. And thats why Black folk have been toiling for as long as they have been. Before somebody came across the border, Black folks still werent being respected. They were still the last hired and the first fired. The unemployment rate is still triple, quadruple, the national average.

I can do this all day. The health disparity still exists. Before anybody came across the border, Negroes were still being treated, maltreated, in the way they are right now.

Here is the original post:
Author Ann Coulter | Interviews | Tavis Smiley | PBS

Ann Coulter – SourceWatch

Ann Coulter is "a lawyer and author, famous for despising anyone politically left of Ronald Reagan" [1], and one of the most vitriolic right-wing ideologues currently appearing on national television. [2]

"Political positions Coulter disagrees with are briefly, brusquely, and often inaccurately described, then dismissed, often with an insult. The same steps are repeated several times per column. The technique is enthralling for readers already in agreement with Coulter. For anyone else, it is uninteresting.

"Coulter was fired from MSNBC when she told a disabled Vietnam veteran, 'people like you caused us to lose that war.' She was fired from the conservative National Review when she turned in a column offering a final solution to the Muslim problem: 'We should invade their countries, kill their leaders and convert them to Christianity'." [3]

In July 2004, USA TODAY "dropped plans" to have Coulter "write a daily column" from the Democratic National Convention "in a dispute over the first column she had written about the Democrats." [4]

In college, she was an editor of the Cornell Review - a part of the conservative campus news network supported by Collegiate Network - and a founder of a local chapter of the Federalist Society for Law and Public Policy Studies at the University of Michigan. She did an internship at the National Journalism Center. After then-Senator Spencer Abraham - who was active in the Federalist Society for Law and Public Policy Studies - was elected in 1994, she served a stint as his aide.

Coulter also worked for the Scaife-funded Center for Individual Rights and played a role in helping Paula Jones find lawyers and, according to Chip Berlet, "suggesting that Jim Moody help Linda Tripp with her legal problems".[5]

Michael Schere and Sarah Secules from Columbia Journalism Review examined a sample of forty of Coulter's claims that were disputed by her critics from her book Slander: Liberal Lies about the American Right. Nineteen they classed as either accurate or that could "generously" be classed as fair comment or criticism (including one that "Liberals have been wrong about everything in the last half-century"). The remaining twenty-one, they wrote, "would not pass without major debate". Included in this list was:

According to Schere and Secules, "she cites an October 27, 2001 column in which Rich makes no such demands. He does chastise Ashcroft for not meeting with Planned Parenthood, which sought to offer tips on combating anthrax scares, based on its own experience with them." [6]

Coulter's book Treason fulfilled the formerly satirical prophecy that Coulter would eventually get around to defending McCarthyism.

Coulter is also listed with the Premiere Speakers Bureau as being available for conference programs with an indicative speaking fee of $25,000. [7]

According to a brief biographical profile supplied to the National Journalism Center, Coulter attended a course in spring 1985 and has subsequently been "legal affairs correspondent, Human Events; columnist, George; contributing editor, National Review Online; columnist, FrontPage; syndicated columnist, Universal Press Syndicate; columnist, Jewish World Review; columnist, Capital Hill Blue; columnist, Townhall.com; columnist, InsideVC.com; columnist, UExpress.com; author, Slander: Liberal Lies about the American Right; author, High Crimes and Misdemeanors; published in The Defender; has appeared on This Week, Good Morning America, and Politically Incorrect (ABC), Today (NBC), Larry King Live (CNN), Riviera Live (CNBC), and Hannity & Colmes (Fox News Channel)". [8]

In 2005, she had an argument with a Canadian journalist when she falsely claimed that Canada sent troops to Vietnam during the Vietnam War. [9]

In an article for the New York Times, David Carr examines Coulter's simple PR formula for marketing her best-selling books: vile hate speech echoed in the mainstream media. In her five books Ann Coulter has "suggested wistfully that Timothy McVeigh should have parked his truck in front of the New York Times, joked that a Supreme Court justice should be poisoned, and said that America should invade Muslim countries and kill their leaders." [10]

Bob Wietrak of Barnes & Noble observes Ann Coulter's "fan base is phenomenal and she is in the media constantly. When she is in the media, it creates more media coverage. And every single day, the book sells more." TV loves Ann Coulter, Carr concludes, because "seeing hate-speech pop out of a blonde who knows her way around a black cocktail dress makes for compelling viewing. ... You can accuse her of cynicism all you want, but the fact that she is one of the leading political writers of our age says something about the rest of us." [11]

According to Jack O'Dwyer's Newsletter (Vol. 38, No. 18, May 4, 2005) Shirley & Banister Public Affairs, a Republican PR firm, promoted Coulter's three books published since 2003.

Website: http://www.anncoulter.com

Read more:
Ann Coulter - SourceWatch