Your point is moot.
If you want a Google GMail account, FReepmail me.
They're going fast!
Posted on 09/21/2005 4:54:29 PM PDT by goldstategop
Perhaps President Bush has inadvertently nominated a true conservative to the court with this Roberts fellow. I remain skeptical based on the following facts:
Anita Hill has not stepped forward to accuse Roberts of sexual harassment.
The Democrats did not accuse Roberts of having a secret life as a racist.
We have no idea what kind of videos he rents.
Also, I'm still steamed that Bush has now dashed my dreams of an all-black Supreme Court composed of eight more Clarence Thomases. Incidentally, eight more Clarence Thomases is the only form of human cloning I would ever support.
As liberal Hendrik Hertzberg wrote in the New Yorker, Roberts was a scared choice. After Hurricane Katrina, Bush was even more scared. So when he had to pick a chief justice, he renominated the Rorschach blot.
For Christians, it's "What Would Jesus Do?" For Republicans, it's "What Would Reagan Do?" Bush doesn't have to be Reagan; he just has to consult his WWRD bracelet. If Bush had followed the WWRD guidelines, he would have nominated Antonin Scalia for the chief justiceship.
As proof, I refer you to the evidence. When Reagan had an opening for chief justice, he nominated Associate Justice William Rehnquist. While liberals were preoccupied staging die-ins against Rehnquist and accusing him of chasing black people away from the polls with a stick – something they did not accuse Roberts of – Reagan slipped Scalia onto the court.
That's what Reaganesque presidents with a five-vote margin in the Senate typically do. Apart from toppling the Soviet Empire, Scalia remains Reagan's greatest triumph.
Scalia deserved the chief justiceship. He's the best man for the job. He has suffered lo these many years with Justices Souter, Kennedy and O'Connor. He believes in a sedentary judiciary. He's for judicial passivism. Scalia also would have been the first cigar-smoking, hot-blooded Italian chief justice, which I note the diversity crowd never mentions.
But most important, if Bush had nominated Scalia, liberals would have responded with their usual understated screams of genocide, and Bush could have nominated absolutely anyone to fill Justice O'Connor's seat. He also could have cut taxes, invaded Syria, and bombed North Korea and Cuba just for laughs. He could even have done something totally nuts, like enforce the immigration laws.
Even if Roberts turns out to be another Rehnquist (too much to hope for another Scalia!), we don't know that, Bush doesn't know that, and Bush has blown a golden opportunity to make Chuck Schumer the public face of the Democratic Party. A few weeks of Schumer as their spokesman, and normal Democrats would be clamoring for Howard Dean to get back on the stick. Teddy Kennedy would start showing up at hearings actually holding a double scotch.
Inasmuch as Bush must still choose a replacement for O'Connor, it's important to remember the "Sandra Day O'Connor bylaw" to the WWRD guidelines: Never appoint anyone like Sandra Day O'Connor to any court at any level.
Reagan had made a campaign promise to appoint a woman to the Supreme Court. He didn't say anything about appointing a ninny. But back in 1981, it was slim pickings for experienced female judges. O'Connor was a terrible mistake and will forever mar Reagan's record, but at least he did it only once.
Bush has already fulfilled all his campaign promises to liberals – and then some! He said he'd be a "compassionate conservative," which liberals interpreted to mean that he would bend to their will, enact massive spending programs, and be nice to liberals. When Bush won the election, that sealed the deal. It meant the Democrats won.
Consequently, Bush has enacted massive new spending programs, obstinately refused to deal with illegal immigration, opposed all conservative Republicans in their primary races, and invited Teddy Kennedy over for movie night. He's even sent his own father to socialize with aging porn star Bill Clinton.
(Sidebar on the aging porn star: Idiot Republicans fraternizing with the Clintons has not harmed the decadent buffoon's reputation abroad. A Chinese condom manufacturer recently named one of its condoms the "Clinton," a fitting tribute to the man who had Monica Lewinsky perform oral sex on him in the Oval Office on Easter Sunday. Their advertising slogans are: "Always wear a 'Clinton' when you're getting a 'Lewinsky'!"; "I still believe in a place called the G-spot"; "Extra-thin skinned!"; "For when you really, really want to feel her pain." Note to Bush: This isn't Walter Mondale. How about sending Pops on the road with Joey Buttafuoco?)
According to my WWRD wristwatch, it's time for Bush to invade Grenada, bomb Libya, fire the air traffic controllers, and joke about launching a first strike against the Soviet Union. In lieu of that, how about nominating a conservative to O'Connor's seat on the court? It would be a bold gesture.
(Denny Crane: "Sometimes you can only look for answers from God and failing that... and Fox News".)
Who gave us O'Connor??? Wasn't it Pres Reagan???
During the Reagan years, many, many conservatives called the Gipper too soft on the Soviets and too addicted to spending. While the Gipper is rightly lionized now, he certainly was not back then. How soon we forget.
She of the lethal remark turns on our leader.
Shows her colors. Confirms our suspicions. All marginal allies may depart now.
Let's roll.
Your point is moot.
If you want a Google GMail account, FReepmail me.
They're going fast!
Is she wrong to do so?
(Denny Crane: "Sometimes you can only look for answers from God and failing that... and Fox News".)
Is she wrong to do so?
Hello! Tell it like it is.
If you want a Google GMail account, FReepmail me.
They're going fast!
I wonder where Ms. Coulter places Justice O'Connor on her list of Reagan's greatest accomplishments.
This column is beneath Ann Coulter's intellect.
She shouldn't write when she has nothing of substance to say.
While Bush is not RWR, he is a fine president. And a very bold one.
I am in agreement with Ann in some regards. I am concerned about Judge Roberts as a nommiee, and I think he should not have been choosen for the CJOTSC position, but someone from the court.
I am a Bush supporter, however he has his shortcomings, illegal immigration is one, IMHO, and his handling of Iran during the conflict in Iraq.
His using Bill Clinton for any offical work I find sickening.
(Denny Crane: "Sometimes you can only look for answers from God and failing that... and Fox News".)
W W R D ?
Reagan's choice was down to O'Connor and Helen Neis from the CAFC. Neis was not a dem, but was appoited by Carter's "bipartisan committee" arrangement. Reagan had a strict policy against elevating anyone appointed by a Dem, so helen was sunk. She would have been a much better choice.
"During the Reagan years, many, many conservatives called the Gipper too soft on the Soviets and too addicted to spending. While the Gipper is rightly lionized now, he certainly was not back then. How soon we forget."
I won't, inkling! Reagan was the first President I had the honor, duty and privledge of voting for. It was so exciting! And it turned out well, I think. :)
I do remember my Dad, a staunch Republican, getting as mad at President Reagan as I do some days at President Bush. ;)
No, I mean the First Church of GWB has supplanted the Principles of Conservatism that used to drive this forum.
But you probably knew that already.
Ann tells it like it is once more. Dubya and his Bush family have become a major, major disappointment to this conservative. With 6 years down and just 2 more to go, one can only count the missed opportunities squandered by Bush. Like Frist, he just doesn't have it in him to be a Reagan. Too bad.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.