Posted on 10/04/2005 10:39:32 AM PDT by ajolympian2004
I think Roberts WAS a dream candiate all by himself.
I agree about Ann, but maybe she is not in on the strategy.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1496414/posts
This post puts things in a different light
Unfortunately, this criticism is mostly warranted...and the President, who could have chosen anyone he wanted and had so many potential nominees with well-established track records as strong constitutional conservatives, has no one but himself to blame
I wonder if Bush is thinking more of the courts overall makeup, than the intellectual firepower of the nominee. For example, he gets Roberts in there, a sure fire, first rate thinker, and now, he nominates someone whom he knows and trusts, and he knows that she will be flexible towards Roberts' opinion, much like the Scalia-Thomas relationship. Maybe Bush is thinking more in terms of the GROUP, than the individuals.. hmmmm..
the rules, guys! :-)
Yeah, she's praising Roberts now, after putting him through the meat grinder. Every so often Ann hits a foul ball, like her column supporting the WoD. Her Roberts' columns, as well as her complaints against Meiers, is another example.
You forgot "third party voter."
I LOVE Ann! But she may be wrong here. It is hard to remember 90% of what the media says about Bush is slanted. I would rather go with a personal selection than a Souter type pick.
All this talk about Black seats and female seats has me wondering when it comes time to nominate a Hispanic or Asian, etc., does the quota come from the existing White seats or will they take away a female or Black seat?
Ann darlin', we luv ya, but YOU couldn't get 50 Senate votes on a resolution praising sunshine...
I'd just as soon see someone without a law background get on the court, so I have to disagree with Ann here about not having a good enough law school education. I think that's the "Esquire" in Ann talking. I guess there really is something to titles of nobility.
Well, I've been saying it all day too. Looks like the editors at National Reivew agree with me. Yeah, looks like you're right, challenging Miers qualifications is definitely a lefty thing. /sacrasm
I wish I could get paid to be spun up. But the photo rule would be a deal stopper for me.
DO you not think President Bush knows he has pussies backing him up in the Senate?
Ann Coulter should be able to see this, with Chuck Hagel, Arlen Spector, Olympia Snowe, and at least three others side with the RATS over half of the time, we are not going to get a controversial nominee confirmed by these wimps, Janice Rogers Brown would not be where she is if it wasn't for 7 of our spineless worms backing away from the Nuclear Option. I wish Ann would think before she opens her mouth and makes a fool of herself
The prob is the weakness in the Republican bench. Bush has a majority on paper, but in political reality, he can't count on all the R's to stand with him in a big fight.
It's not the Rats he's running from. It's that he knows he the quarterback of a team that only puts 8 men on the field. The plays have to adjust when there's only half an offensive line and half a defense.
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.