I guess I read a different column from the one others seem to have read.
In the column I read, Coulter just pointed out that nothing much was known about Roberts. That he had no clear track record, or any record of public utterances or writings to indicate that he was a conservative (constuctionsist, etc.)
She noted that many (actually every) time a Republican I has picked someone they thought would be conservative--but who had no clear record, they had turned out more liberal than had been hoped. (Warren, Souter, for starters.)
I don't see where she is wrong about that. Maybe Bush will be lucky and break the pattern. But what was wrong with pointing it out? What was wrong with suggesting that maybe he should have picked a surefire conservative?
That's what he promised when he was campaigning--both times.
but it isn't quite like that in this case.
Besides Souter lied his @$$ off when he was being interviewed for the job.
if he is SLIGHTLY more conservative than O'Connor was, then it is an improvement. But I think he will be better than that.
No one seems to give this President enough credit for his judicial picks. All have been excellent so far. People need to quit being so nervous. I think that is really what it is. When it comes to the courts, Conservatives are a bit snake bitten...