Ann Coulter: Miers a 'Complete Mediocrity'

Newsmax ^ | Monday, Oct. 3, 2005

[nickcarraway]

Count Ann Coulter among the conservatives who are unhappy with President Bush’s nomination of Harriet Miers to the Supreme Court.

Asked by NewsMax.com if she considers Miers to be what she had called John Roberts after his nomination - a "tabula rasa” - Coulter, who’s now out with the paperback edition of her best-seller "How to Talk to a Liberal (If You Must),” said:

"No. She’s something new: a complete mediocrity.”

Ouch.

[jwalsh07]

All your ranting is based on the conclusion that Miers is not the candidate most likely to adhere to originalism once placed on the bench. Yet Bush has made excellent choices at the apellate level with the advice of Miers. Why do you suppose he changed his mind not to seek the candidate most confluent with his judicial philosophy?

[newzjunkey]

Brown was a crony. Miers is a crony. They are comparable.

Other crony examples lurk in this administration beyond those two.

Rehnquist hadn't been a judge but it was clear where he had been politically. While in private practice between 1953 to 1969, he was active in the GOP. He served as a legal advisor to Goldwater's campaign. He also had some controversial writings while a law clerk.

Miers doesn't have this sort track record. We have no indication what her judicial temperment will be.

She's no Rehnquist. She's more apt to be an Ike-style mistake like Earl Warren.

[saminfl]

The place would be a whole lot better without the negativity.

I completely agree with you. I don't think I have ever been so disappointed in FR.

[Dane]

She's no Rehnquist. She's more apt to be an Ike-style mistake like Earl Warren.

You better hope your words are sweet, IMO, you'll be eating them later on.

[rcocean]

Gotta disagree with you TT.

Clinton knew how Ginsburg would vote, she was former general counsel of the ACLU. Same for Breyer.

And Reagan knew how Bork & Scalia would vote.

There are plenty of judges with a paper trail and an established JUDICIAL PHILOSOPHY. They believe it, they talk and write about it. And they want to get on the SCOTUS to put it into action. The problem is with the "moderates" and the O'Connor's. You never know what they will do. But somehow, always, over time, they drift left.

[newzjunkey]

YOUR comparison is the candard.

When Reagan ran for the White House, we knew where he stood. What do we know about Miers?

A president is not a lifetime appointment.

She's not Reagan. She's not Rehnquist. She's not David Horowitz. She's not Bill Krystal.

She does not belong on SCOTUS just for being W's gal pal.

[Do not dub me shapka broham]

All of those choices were vetted beforehand.

Who vetted Miers?

Oh yes, she did.

(Prolonged eye roll.)

BTW, even though the balance of his choices have been sterling there have been some clunkers.

He did reappoint Mr. Gregory, a holdover from the Clinton administration.

[finnigan2]

"Aw, she's just ticked because the President didn't pick her."

- Ann is PO'd about something or other as the tone of her columns over the past month or so seem to indicate. She doesn't seem to want to consider any appointment but the one(s) that she has preselected in her own mind as being the "right" pick.
She is shedding her moderately conservative fan base faster than a snake sheds it's skin and if she's not careful her only loyal fans will be of the barking moonbat marginalized variety.
Too bad. Her columns, while entertaining, were never thoughtful, informative or skilfully written in the Mark Steyn mold, but she had an attack dog fierceness which was very endearing.

[Brimack34]

We were ready for the fight and the other team never showed up. That is what I feel like. It is like Pres. Bush saying we are putting up a wall on the border and it turns out to be a 3 foot plastic fence.

[uncbob]

If Miers did not work for Bush, would she ever have been considered for this (or any judicial) position? Would any other Republican President put her on the list of potential Supreme Court nominees?

How dare you ask a sensible question

[jwalsh07]

(Prolonged eye roll.)

Here, roll your eyes at this one yoyo.

President Bush vetted her. Remember him? The POTUS is assigned the power by the constitution to nominate federal judges and justices.

[veronica]

I think Bush will have at least one more chance to fill a seat on the SC. Ruth Bader Ginsberg isn't a well woman I am told.

[ottersnot]

[Pharmboy]

Ann is right; this pick is awful. Miers will go right back to being the dummocrat she was in '88 as soon as she gets to the court. Dreadful.

[decal]

"Ruth Bader Ginsberg isn't a well woman I am told."

She's not in the best of health, either.

[curiosity]

I think there were better candidates out there, but I do think she'll be quite good and a lot better than the liberal riff-raff who have dominated the court for 40+ years

And it doesn't bother you that she has exactly zero experience as a judge?

Putting someone with her experience on SCOTUS is about on par with McDonalds promoting a store manager to CEO.

[sinkspur]

When Reagan ran for the White House, we knew where he stood.

And yet he nominated and got confirmed two squishy judges.

He didn't know O'Connor or Kennedy.

Bush knows Meiers, and where she stands.

[Lester Moore]

an ability to work 3000 hours in a year.

That's no special ability. Most U.S. citizens are doing at least that.

[uncbob]

I remember the betting here on how "skillful" (read: principle-free) he was being when he signed off on the assault on the First Amendment, because everyone just knew the Supreme Court would toss it out.

And how many of us here were trashed as Bush Haters because we expected him to keep his campaign promises
And how were assured it was a brillant polical move

[Jim_Curtis]

Enough with that canard! Ronald Reagan, as a governor, signed a liberal abortion bill, and changed from the Democrat to the Republican party five years before he ran for governor of California. So what?

What a pathetic argument you make. It would apply to anyone Bush selected for SCOTUS from Dershowitz to Tribe.

Beware when they tell you that the most qualified nominee for the SCOTUS contributed cash to the DNC five days before the Reagan legacy candidate vs Michael Dukakis election.