What Would Reagan Do? (Ann Coulter Laments Bush Not Being More Like The Gipper Alert)

Worldnetdaily.com ^ | 09/21/05 | Ann Coulter

[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.

[ohioWfan]

Keep talking.....

[Pessimist]

"you don't know as much as I do; that's a certainty"

A good general rule in life is that anyone who feels compelled to tell you how smart they are never usually is.

[whizeup]

and your point is....?

[arasina]

Now you're being, as my dear departed mother would say, 'a little sh*t'. If you (that's Y-O-U) keep right on being such a snot then the FR Bouncers (aka Admin Moderators) will escort you to the cyberdoor in a flash.

[arasina]

I believe I need to make it clear that I was referring to whizeup in my previous post.

'Right Wing Kooks', eh, whizeup? We don't use that term here but I know another political forum where they do. You would apparently be much more comfortable there.

[ohioWfan]

Ooooo.......your mother said THAT? :)

Thanks, arasina. The true colors are starting to bleed here....

(Notice, whizeup that I added your name to the "To:" line, so that you would know I was referring to you? That's how it's supposed to work).

[arasina]

RKBA Evaluation requested at 430, please.

[arasina]

LOL Yes, my mother got straight to the point with her 9 kids. She still managed to be one very classy woman. :o)

[whizeup]

I thought being able to defend oneself against being attacked by such blither was what Freedom is all about, I have been attacked non-stop , go back and read everything from early this a.m. when I extended a truce, I did yesterday also. This is Free Republic...correct? This has been going on for about a week now non-stop. this isn't a socialist country yet as far as I know.

[Pessimist]

"If Bush had a (D) next to his name everyone here defending him would be up in arms wanting to impeach him."

You hit the nail on the head. All some of these clowns cared about is political victory, not the kind of gvt that results from it. Its almost like a sport to them.

[ohioWfan]

And she raised very well behaved and classy kids, too. :)

[Darksheare]

"Btw..I am WOMAN...hear me roar?" -post 411.
"U cannot retain what U read I AM WOMAN....HEAR ME ROAR!!!!" -post 430

What, in post 411 you weren't sure you were a woman or roaring?
And what is with this 'U' crap?
If you want to be taken seriously, knock off your attitude and quit with the 'cute' spelling.

[Darksheare]

I see it.
Egads..

[Pessimist]

I voted Libertarian in '04 and I don't regret it either. I'd rather keep my conscience than "have a seat" at the fiscally liberal table.

[rdb3]

Wow! You're actually "outing" yourself?

Not really. I'm being who I always was.

The term "conservative" is radioactive. Purists here are not ones who I desire to be aligned with at all. And on top of that, what the hell does "conservative" mean anyway? I'm more of a radical in that I seek to uproot, not conserve. Also, the Democrats are the real "conservatives" since they want to "conserve" the status quo.

Neo, paleo, fiscal, social, whatever. There is no clear cut definition of the term. What some who want others to think of them as noncomprimising purists, their views are really populist. And if populism is what conservatism really is, LORD knows I surely don't want to be one. That's left-winged in my view.

Know this: I am an English literalist. Words mean things. Since the term "conservative" is like nailing Jell-O against the wall, thanks, but no thanks. That's not me.

If you want a Google GMail account, FReepmail me.
They're going fast!

[Darksheare]

"This is Free Republic...correct?"

Yeah, so?
That doesn't give you free license to go bezerk on people with your tossing of the liberal feminazi buzz words "I am woman, here me roar."
Real women don't need to behave like men to be noticed and appreciated.
Nor do they have to 'roar' to be worth anything, a womans worth is inherent in herself, not in the approval of men.


And you went on teh attack in post 196:
"Posted by whizeup to hoboken109
On News/Activism 09/22/2005 12:05:07 AM EDT · 196 of 455

Listen, nonpardons and Ohio are people who really need to loosen up and join the rest of the world in reality..it will do you no good to try and be civil, nor have civil discourse with them. "


You also should have pinged nopardons when you mentioned her.

[finnigan2]

For reasons that I can't begin to guess at, Ann has always opposed Roberts from the first day his name was announced. Don't worry, she's made too good a career reputation as an attack dog for the right to change her allegiances now. Give her a week to calm down and she'll be back again as the Ann we all know and love, sinking her teeth into Teddy's corpulent butt.

[Pessimist]

"That is why they need to be in a different party than the small government, fiscal conservatives"

I think so too. I suppose that could lead to a european style system in which coalitions would have to be formed in congress, etc.. But then at least you know where you stand. Much better than this bait and switch approach the pubs have been using on us.

[ohioWfan]

Well stated, my friend..........and wonderful to see you!

[JeffAtlanta]

And on top of that, what the hell does "conservative" mean anyway?

You and I certainly don't agree on much, but I wholeheartedly agree with the quoted statement. The terms 'liberal' and 'conservative' are just labels - they have historical meanings but they aren't relevant to the current political environment.