Posted on 10/03/2005 3:07:23 PM PDT by 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.
You have something against the private sector? Do you think only those who have suckled at the states teat are capable of reading and understanding the constitution? I've spent my entire adult life in the private sector. Met a lot of very smart and capable folks. I'm not buying what you and a bunch of others are selling. Constitutional law is not that hard. When the constitution says the people have a right to keep and bear arms, that's exactly what it means.
This is our guy. We volunteered for him, we funded his campaign, we voted him in. We did the same for the Senate majority. And the House majority. Now, for the first time since Thurgood Marshall left in 1991, we've been given the chance to move the court a little bit back to the right.
Bush passed over dozens of qualified, certain conservatives to give us a 60 year old, long time crony who at the very best "may or may not be conservative". We shouldn't have to settle for that. This is a kick in the teeth.
Demonstrably false, she donated to a pro life, pro gun Gore in the primary, not Dukakis.
and some are sadly....bimbos..lol
I never met a bimbo I didn't like.
Well there was than one time.............
nevermind.
Sure. Makes you wonder why a dumbass like Robert Bork had to spend so much of his career on it.
I remember she was supposed to be on the verge of retiring before the 2000 election.
Becuase all the brilliant ivy league assholes peered into the penumbra to satisy their megalomania.
I agree with you. I used to like her funny quips but she has become too much in love with herself. The more I see her on TV shows the more I think she doesn't really leave an impression of someone who knows what she's talking about.
Could you cite for me the last time any Senator, Democrat or Republican, who asked a nominee who they voted for or gave money to fifteen years earlier?
I agree with you. I used to like her funny quips but she has become too much in love with herself. The more I see her on TV shows the more I think she doesn't really leave an impression of someone who knows what she's talking about.
Were your dad and uncles still democrats in 1988?
I never met a bimbo I didn't like.
Well there was than one time.............
nevermind.
OK
Actually the bimbo turned out to be
and bumbo about midnight but
I'd rather not talk about it.
Well as long as we had the pre-1994 GOP minority that actually had some spine Kerry would not be an issue really. Too many persons have put way too much importance on electing POTUS and the appointments of the Judiciary. They do this while the Legislative Branch specifically the GOP portion has gone to hell in a hand cart after the selling out starting in 1995.
Give me a true conservative GOP minority over a majority of RINO's any day. RINO's only serve one purpose and that is to stand in the blasted way of the GOP uniting enough to even put up a decent fight on key issues. It's a crying shame when the Democratic Governor of Tennessee a self proclaimed liberal is actually more conservative especially on the finical agenda than the current U.S. Senate Majority Leader. Think about it.
Ann "Headline Hunter" Coulter strikes again.
Donated to the DNC, 11/03/1988, five days before the election. Now where do you think that was going?
And as for donating to Gore (or any Dem) as a 'pro-life' candidate...well, I don't believe in piling on.
My Dad died well before that. My Uncles that I kow of who are still alive started voting republican right around then.
No, but apparently you do have a problem with public service.
Do you think only those who have suckled at the states teat are capable of reading and understanding the constitution?
I see, so you think all public servants are parasites. Are you an anarchist?
Anyway, to answer your quesiton, I take the conservative position that people in high positions of authority should have extensive experience related to what they're doing. A CEO should have extensive experience as a high level manager in a company that's in the the same or related industry. Likewise, Supreme Court Justices, being the highest judges in the land, should have experience either as judges or as public servants in other important, high level judicial roles.
I've spent my entire adult life in the private sector. Met a lot of very smart and capable folks.
Being smart and capable is not enough to qualify a person for any high-level position. You have to have related experience. If it's a private sector position, it means private sector experience. If it's a judicial position, it means judicial experience.
I'm not buying what you and a bunch of others are selling. Constitutional law is not that hard. When the constitution says the people have a right to keep and bear arms, that's exactly what it means.
Oh yeah. Constitutional law is just oh so easy. Why bother sending supreme court justices to law school? Just pick any Tom, Dick or Harry off the street.
Thanks for the reply. My point would have been that the dems in the '60s and '70s were way different than the '80s and '90s version.
well...this pick should separate the long knives from the long knives around here
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.