Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

What Would Reagan Do? (Ann Coulter Laments Bush Not Being More Like The Gipper Alert)
Worldnetdaily.com ^ | 09/21/05 | Ann Coulter

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.


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; Editorial; Government; News/Current Events; Philosophy; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: anncoulter; bush43; coulter; coulterhaslostit; democrats; johnroberts; pornstarclinton; presidentbush; reagan; ronaldreagan; thomasclones; worldnutdaily; wwrd
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 761-779 next last
To: Miss Marple
If you don't want to do so, that is fine. But you can't argue later that the president should have "reached out" to conservatives.

Pardon me, but a Republican should not have to "reach out" to Conservatives.

We got him elected, after all.

41 posted on 09/21/2005 5:53:10 PM PDT by Wormwood (Iä! Iä! Cthulhu fhtagn!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Wormwood

Awhoe lot of "perfect conservatives" think the president hasn't reached out to them. Read FR for a few days, and you will see it.


42 posted on 09/21/2005 5:59:12 PM PDT by Miss Marple (Lord, please look after Mozart Lover's son and keep him strong.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: cyncooper

If memory serves us correctly he also gave us Kennedy didn't he. That should answer her question.


43 posted on 09/21/2005 6:01:41 PM PDT by Kath (Luvya Dubya)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: goldstategop
>>>>Scalia deserved the chief justiceship. He's the best man for the job.

I think Scalia's age may have entered into Bush`s final decision. Scalia was a little too old. The choice was Roberts for 25-30 years, or Scalia for 10-15 years. A no brainer. Personally, if not Scalia, then surely, Justice Thomas.

>>>>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.

LMBO!!!

44 posted on 09/21/2005 6:01:46 PM PDT by Reagan Man (Secure the borders;punish employers who hire illegals;halt all welfare handouts to illegals.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Miss Marple
You guys fail to nderstand the concept of "supporting your party's leader."

Yeah, I seem to remember some president in the 80's had written the 11th commandment, "thou shall not criticize another republican". Who was that, oh yeah it was President Reagan. Reagan was a great man and a great president, but don't forget he gave us O'Connor, Amnesty, pulled the Marines out of Beirut, signed a tax increase in 1986, and so on. Reagan was criticized by many of the so-called pure conservatives of the time, but those conservatives seem to have forgotten those differences.

45 posted on 09/21/2005 6:01:50 PM PDT by sharkhawk (Play me a dirge matey)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: goldstategop
Who did nominate Supreme court justices O'Connor the "moderate" and Kennedy the "moderate"?
46 posted on 09/21/2005 6:04:11 PM PDT by jveritas (The Axis of Defeatism: Left wing liberals, Buchananites, and third party voters.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: gridlock

Dubya ain't perfect, but he's pretty darn good.





Correct on both counts.


47 posted on 09/21/2005 6:04:16 PM PDT by trubluolyguy (Say no to crack! Free overalls for all plumbers.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Cautor
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.

Got that right. Lets hope he nominates another O'Conner. Yeah that was a great appointment there! Yep, the chick who says racism will go away in 25 years! Real brilliant appointment from the Gipper!

48 posted on 09/21/2005 6:08:33 PM PDT by Bommer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: La Enchiladita

I see your point. I'm actually glad, that unlike liberals, the conservative movement has every shade of conservative under the sun! Criticism is OK by me, as long as it is tempered by the acknowledgement of the great things this President has done. I like Ann Coulter, but think she's just silly 25% of the time.


49 posted on 09/21/2005 6:11:46 PM PDT by pissant
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: sharkhawk
>>>>I seem to remember some president in the 80's had written the 11th commandment, "thou shall not criticize another republican".

So Republicans aren't allowed to criticize an elected official? The Founding Fathers are turning over in their graves at such a suggestion. Read on.

Let's start with the phrase, 11th commandment. It came during the 1966 Governor's race in California. That was a slogan Reagan didn't create.

"The personal attacks against me during the primary finally became so heavy that the state Republican chairman, Gaylord Parkinson, postulated what he called the Eleventh Commandment: Thou shalt not speak ill of any fellow Republican. It's a rule I followed during that campaign and have ever since.

Now, I'm not Ronald Reagan and neither are you. I believe Reagan was speaking for himself when he made those remarks. He didn't mean, you and me.

Btw. Have you forgotten? Candidate Reagan had some harsh criticisms for PresFord during the GOP primaries in 1976.

50 posted on 09/21/2005 6:16:29 PM PDT by Reagan Man (Secure the borders;punish employers who hire illegals;halt all welfare handouts to illegals.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: La Enchiladita
The devil is trying all kinds of tricks to divide this nation and it's especially painful to see such petty division among our ranks.

Everyone was saying that in his second term Bush would have the luxury of being himself and no longer need to compromise with the rats for political purposes but Bush has become more of a big government liberal after the election and when the "real Bush" was supposed to appear and after he was given a majority in the senate and house.

You can't expect this development not to demoralize principled conservatives. Any glimmer of conservatism that we see out of Washington will be the result of conservatives putting pressure on the Republicans, not by smiling and head nodding.

51 posted on 09/21/2005 6:16:43 PM PDT by Jim_Curtis (How do we prevent someone from torching his city if he will be rewarded as a lottery winner?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: goldstategop
OK...........this is a little backwards, isn't it?

Seems to me that Bush is doing BETTER than Reagan in the Judicial department.....

What's the evidence again??

O' Connor and Roberts??

52 posted on 09/21/2005 6:17:01 PM PDT by ohioWfan (If my people which are called by my name will humble themselves and pray......)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: goldstategop
Rorschach blot...hot-blooded Italian chief justice..."I still believe in a place called the G-spot"

I sure would like to live long enough to see Ann Coulter become an old woman who blurts out anything on her mind, unedited and unrepressed.

53 posted on 09/21/2005 6:18:47 PM PDT by Graymatter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Wormwood
>No, I mean the First Church of GWB has supplanted the Principles of Conservatism that used to drive this forum.>


As you say. I just don't want to pick on Bush at this point in time while his enemies are heaping scorn on him is such a vicious way. As much as I respect the Principles of Conservatism, I detest the sicko lefties who have been heaping scorn and slanders on my president. I would rather not participate in any criticism of Bush that would give the left wingers any kind of satisfaction. Conservatives being openly critical of Bush helps the morale of Democrats and I don't want to be a part of that. I want Democrats to be miserable 24/7/365.
54 posted on 09/21/2005 6:20:16 PM PDT by Hound of the Baskervilles
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: La Enchiladita
Ann Coulter, in Gen. Honore's words, is "stuck on stupid,"

Deserves to be repeated........only bigger. :)

55 posted on 09/21/2005 6:21:05 PM PDT by ohioWfan (If my people which are called by my name will humble themselves and pray......)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Right_in_Virginia
I wonder where Ms. Coulter places Justice O'Connor on her list of Reagan's greatest accomplishments.

It is OBVIOUS you didn't read her article as posted with this thread

Try doing that and then make a comment
56 posted on 09/21/2005 6:22:41 PM PDT by uncbob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: sharkhawk; Miss Marple
Not only have they forgotten those differences, but the same 'purists' have now deified the man they once reviled.

Complete hypocrisy.

57 posted on 09/21/2005 6:24:38 PM PDT by ohioWfan (If my people which are called by my name will humble themselves and pray......)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: goldstategop
Ann has some strange bias going on here, which is deeper than she's letting on; though she has become an hysteric over the Roberts nomination.

Reagan gave us O'Connor, so thank GOD, that President Bush isn't being Reaganesque, with choosing Roberts first to replace her and now to fill Justice Rehnquist's position; for whom he clerked.

Soooooo, Ann wants an ITALIAN CJ? Has she never gotten over Guchionne (sp.?); perhaps?

58 posted on 09/21/2005 6:32:00 PM PDT by nopardons
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: inkling

Not all of us, but most. Thanks for posting that! Many people here need to be whacked over the head with the facts, every now and again.


59 posted on 09/21/2005 6:34:01 PM PDT by nopardons
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Wormwood
Hell YES, she is wrong about this!
60 posted on 09/21/2005 6:35:18 PM PDT by nopardons
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 761-779 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson