Posted on 10/03/2005 3:07:23 PM PDT by nickcarraway
Rehnquist clerked for a Supreme Court Justice. Miers clerked in a District Court. Rehnquist went to Stanford and Harvard and was valedictorian at Stanford. Miers went to SMU. Rehnquist served as Assistant Attorney General. Miers is Bush's personal lawyer, and White House counsel; neither post requires confirmation.
No I have not noticed Ann Coulter running for President or starting any third parties, further she hasn't started sounding anti-semitic, and Pat Buchanan never was funny.
While there are many exceptional partners at BIGTEX law firms, there are many I wouldn't trust arguing my speeding ticket. Sometimes all you need to rise to partner is a big client or two and/or an ability to work 3000 hours in a year. That is not a qualification for the highest court in the land.
Also, don't insult Rehnquist by comparing him to Miers. THAT is a "travesty". Rehnquist was top of his class at Stanford and was a distinguished lawyer in the mold of Roberts. Miers went to SMU, didn't even make law review there, did not clerk in the federal appellate system, and is not considered even near as good of an attorney as Rehnquist was. She is a mediocrity.
A moron then? Or a closet liberal?
God save us.
Judicial tyrrany began--at the absolute latest--with Wickard vs. Filburn!
"Also, exactly why are all these so called conservatives opposing nomination of a devout Christian?"
Because they haven't heard the magic words emanating from her mouth yet: "I am against Roe V Wade"
Why don't you all admit it. It is your fault. You are all pro-choice and you are afraid to say it. So let me be the first Conservastive on this board to say it.
I AM PRO CHOICE.... And I choose life. Which means you either choose life or you choose death.
There, I took the pro-choice agenda away from the RATS. Gee, you would think that all these brilliant politicians would have figured this out by now.
Now, let me take it one step further. The Republicans should put forth a Constitutional amendmant for abortion and gay marriage. Call it the Alternative Lifestyle Amendmant. Now have the citizens of this country vote on it. After they vote it down, the RATS will bring it to the courts.
There, you just killed ACT, NARAL, MOVEON and every other pro-abortion money laundering machine of the DNC as well as exposed the liberals on the court as activists.
Congratulations, you just exposed the RAT party and all the corruption in it to the entire country and at the same time expose the media as the DNC water carrier.
I'm a Coulter fan but this assertion is garbage. Miers has competed and won in the private sector rising to the level of the head of a 400 member law firm and to White House Counselor. Ann's resume comes nowhere close to that. Of course the private sector is anathema to lefties but to me it is where I have spen my adult life and thus I have a preference for those who have done likewise.
(Denny Crane: "Sometimes you can only look for answers from God and failing that... and Fox News".)
Really? She was Governor of California?
Miss Coulter agrees with Mark Levin, Michael Savage and other Conservatives who, unlike the President, are asking, "Is this the very, very best candidate for the Supreme Court?" Not "a decent candidate." Not, "an acceptable candidate." But the "very, very best candidate."
Clearly, Bush is playing poker, believing he has a semi-stealth candidate who will be as true to Conservative ideology as a Brown, an Owen, or an Estrada. And, to him, there is the added benefit of a reduced battle to get her approved. We've already heard the likes of Schumer and Reid being very non-inflammatory in their analysis of the nominee. For them, that is tantamount to high praise.
I, for one, don't want a mediocre candidate who is likely to be approved rather easily (after the dems do their usual "appeal to their base" dance, which is unavoidable unless Bush chooses Hillary Clinton for the Court.) I want a solid Conservative who will challenge the left's assertion that being a solid conservative is somehow "out of the mainstream."
If not wanting to murder a baby ten seconds before it is delivered puts us out of the mainstream, then I don't want to be in the mainstream.
If my 12-year old daughter can get an abortion without my permission (but can't get an aspirin from the school nurse) then I am out of the mainstream.
If I can't keep a gun in my home to protect my family from robbers, looters, rapists, and murderers, then I am out of the mainstream.
If I believe that The Constitution, as written by our Founding Fathers, is a binding document whose canons should and must be the basis for all legal rulings, then I am out of the mainstream.
As Mark Levin says, "We shouldn't shrink from having this argument with the libs, for once and for all. We are right and they are wrong." And the majority of Americans agree with us. A majority can't be "out of the mainstream." That's an oxymoron.
I disagreed with the Lady Ann on Roberts, but I think she is dead on with this. Here is the undeniable truth - there is a great deal of talent out there that was more qualified to sit in this position. Given this, and Meiers' lack of experience, this pick is almost inexplicable - the sole virtue she has is that it's unlikely that she will face many hurdles in being confirmed.
I have read the Lady Ann's work - if you think she's some bimbo, you're sadly mistaken. Just because she refuses to support Bush in everything he does, does not make her worthy of your scorn. I do not support President Bush in everything he does - the expansion of government pork being a leading example - and refuse to prostitute my intellect or my principles to his cause. One wonders if the same can be said about who stick to the mantra, "My president right or wrong". ..which is eerily similar to how the Clinton defenders acted in 1998.
Ivan
I am more upset about the trolls that keep popping up on this website. I believe she will make everyone eat their words. As I said to my husband -- I'm 66 yo and honestly believe I and many other so-called nobodies would be great Justices. All you have to do is read and learn the constitution and follow the law.
First of all, I LOVE your tagline. :)
"Maybe now all the guys around here (and they are ALL guys) who think AC is such a great pundit will finally realize she's just a bimbo with some snappy patter."
I think the correct term is, "Bimbette." ;)
I used to think she was really one to speak her own mind, but now I see her as every other "pundit." Depending upon which side of the isle they're on, they hold up a wet finger to the wind and write what they think their core audience WANTS to hear and will PAY to hear in one form or another. You know...just like a politician? LOL!
What's next? She and Combs agreeing and kissing up to each other on FOX? *Shiver*
Did the DUmmies put something in the water over the weekend? What's with all the defeatism around here today?
Good Point. Two stealth candidates is beyond betrayal. Its proof the president's conservative act was fraud from day one.
Yes we understand the requirements, Owen. But if you appoint a non lawyer, the question has to be asked -- can they write opinion? Can they write at all? Is someone else going to have to read the case law to them in terms they can understand? There are certain aspects to the law that mitigate toward having a lawyer in that role.
What I DON'T like is when attorneys try to pretend that "laymen" can't understand the law. That's bull. Or bad law. Usually both.
What obscure point are you trying to make? Do you even know?
Many, many, many freepers are Bush haters!
It is generally the people on this site that treat her like a bimbo. Though she doesn't seem to mind it that much. I think it is her schtick to get people to misunderestimate her.
Yeah. Sure.
Your tongue would be hanging out if Coulter looked like Janet Reno.
Give me a break!!
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.