This is what 'advice and consent' means (Ann Coulter)

wnd.com ^ | October 5, 2005 | Ann Coulter

[deadhead]

"After reading this bs and the crap I've read the past three days, I wish Bush would have appointed an engineer and a hardhat."

I share your sentiments :-)

[gpapa]

http://www.anncoulter.com/cgi-local/content.cgi?name=bio

Coulter clerked for the Honorable Pasco Bowman II of the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit and was an attorney in the Department of Justice Honors Program for outstanding law school graduates.

After practicing law in private practice in New York City, Coulter worked for the Senate Judiciary Committee, where she handled crime and immigration issues for Senator Spencer Abraham of Michigan. From there, she became a litigator with the Center For Individual Rights in Washington, DC, a public interest law firm dedicated to the defense of individual rights with particular emphasis on freedom of speech, civil rights, and the free exercise of religion.

A Connecticut native, Coulter graduated with honors from Cornell University School of Arts & Sciences, and received her J.D. from University of Michigan Law School, where she was an editor of The Michigan Law Review.

[Texas Songwriter]

I love Anns' cynicism and insipid tongue. But I think she is wrong here and does the conservative movement a disservice by unmasking her elitist predilections toward Harvard/Yale types. Denegrating SMU does not further the debate, it only show her snobbishness, which only works for me when applied toward liberal.

Bill Gates was a college dropout, but I would not put him under the column of dumbass. Some of the smartest people I have ever know never went to college. They were busy running buisnesses and raising families, but they were very , very smart.

I think Bush knows this woman and feels he can predictably rely on her conservatism and being an originalist. Smart, core belief, and strict constructionist view of the constitution is what is desired, and she has all three. She is not the best he could find. That person does not exist except as an ideal. This woman has qualities which will do exactly what the conservatives have been hoping for a justice to do, and that is, make rulings faithful to the original meaning of the constitution.

In the end, I suspect Bush put forth 2 stealth candidates to flummox the democrats and to avoid a fight. I suspect the man is exhausted. Who would want to put up with all of the sh*t he has put up with, and for eight years. When Stevens dies, I suspect he will put up Luddig and the guns will blaze. Perhaps we should cut him some slack.

[Neets]

This is what happens when folks engage Punditry Adulation.

All one has to do is throw a claim out there and it's the Gospel According to __________(fill in the pundit/activist/radio-talkshow host name).

[jwalsh07]

Good on ya Deadhead!

All we are sayyyying,

Is give Harriet a chance....

[Owen]

All this talk about qualifications. I just scanned through the Constitution of the United States.

There does not seem to be a minimum age requirement for a nominee. There does not seem to be a requirement that the individual be a lawyer. There does not seem to be a requirement that the individual be a US citizen.

Weird.

But . . . let me toss this out. I'd rather he nominated a non lawyer. Toss the law clerks. There are too many lawyers in the US and lawyers have too much influence on American society. Making 5 Justices of the USSC non lawyers could have merit.

[Lurking Libertarian]

I wonder how many lawyers or judges helped create the Consitution.

I don't have the exact figures at my fingertips, but many, many of the members of the Constitutional Convention were lawyers. Madison, Hamilton and Jay (the authors of the Federalist Papers) were all lawyers.

[MNJohnnie]

After she sees how little we the people value her and her elitist friends she will go native on us

Actually I think some of the good little moveon.org "conservatives" are hoping she will go medieval on them. They all have visions of Ann, the stern Governess, bearing whips and chains dancing in their little heads.

[traderrob6]

"This lady isn't qualified to serve coffee and donuts to Scalia."

Just how in hell do you know? Are you privy to information that no one else in the free world has, did the voices tell you? Pomposity combined with ignorance is an extremely dangerous combination

[rbmillerjr]

"I see, so even in the subgroup, you Moonbats garner only 23.3%."

Don't be so cocky, if a small percentage of that number decides to stay home in the midterms,,,,out go the lights.

[Attention Surplus Disorder]

"Third and finally, some jobs are so dirty, you can only send in someone who has the finely honed hatred of liberals acquired at elite universities to do them...."

Does this statement make sense...? To me, no.

[jwalsh07]

The smartest people I have known were not lawyers.

[inquest]

Lots of people criticize the president. It's the fact that she can't do it without sounding exactly like a liberal DUer that irritates me.

Funny, I was just thinking that a lot of the criticisms of Ann on this thread bear more than a passing resemblance to the, uh, eloquent dissertations coming from those types.

[aft_lizard]

Of 55 writers of the Consitution, only 35 of them were lawyers, and even a lesser amount of them became Judges. 13 were Businessmen.9 were also Civil Servants.

So I guess the 13 who were businessmen, and those lawyers who werent educated at a tier 1 school, were not qualified in creating the Consitution according to Coulter and her Coulter-bots.

[Miss Marple]

Oh, I don't consider it hyperbole. It was a deliberate insult to Coulter based on her language in this article.

Dean usually does the following:

Uses insults and mockery toward the President
Hints at his prior drinking in a derogatory way
Insinuates that he is stupid and lazy
Talks about his "cronies" (such as Cheney) in an insulting manner
Makes fun of his Texas upbringing

All of these elements are here in Ann's column. Sounds pretty Deanish to me.

[Cautor]

"And the 30% act like they're in the majority and anyone who doesn't automatically approve of miers is some fringe wacko. "

That is what I find so interesting. The vocal MINORITY here is trying to assign labels to the MAJORITY (those who are not prepared to accept Bush's unverified pronouncement that Miers is what Bush proclaims her to be: the best choice in the U.S.).

The real issue that's being missed here (and I blame this in part on the pieces by Coulter and Will because they allow the Miers' supporters to shift the debate to the spurious issue about Ivy League schools) is not whether only judges from elitist law schools should serve on the SCOTUS, but whether conservatives who voted Bush into office are entitled to nominees with proven records and intellectual acumen--nominees that take precedence over Bush cronies with no such record.

When Bush needed his base, he promised them judges in the mold of Scalia and Thomas--the judges he told us he most admired SCOTUS judges. Instead, he gave us two unknowns--Roberts and Miers.

Personally, I really Bush to confront the Dems and to confront the gangsta of 14 including the RINOs. I wanted him to fight the fight even if that meant a loss. It seems he preferred to tuck tail and run. I guess facing off such foes as McCain (RINO-AZ), Dewine (RINO-OH), Graham (RINO-SC), Specter (RINO-PA) and so on was too much for this Texan.

In Washington, power goes to those who take it. The Dems and the RINOs have taken it away from Bush. He's now perceived as weak, wounded, and a lame duck. Personally, I can't imagine how he will ever regain power.

[ElPatriota]

I LOVE this woman!... She and Rush have 'gotten' it, in different ways. I don't dislike Mrs Miers.. I have nothing against her. Is the president I have a beef with. This, nominee, was, IS, more important perhaps than Robert's nomination, we all know why. Rush said well, this is more than just getting some in there that votes our of way, IF WE ARE LUCKY (nothing guarantees that). It was about the "changing of the culture," It was about taking the supreme court by the front entrance, stating proudly what republicans principles are. Winning the battle of ideas. And yes it was about rattling the cage of the RINOs in the "the club," The Fritz'es, and the others in the gang of 16... they are the ones who won... I can almost hear it "pleas Mr. president, don't makes look bad, please.... give us something mediocre, something we don't have fight about, and expose the cowards/hypocrits we really are.... please, please, please... listen to Senator a Reed.." - Goshhhh... I better stop here... I am still mad... there is something still stinks to sensitive sense of smell (LOL). Hey, if you don't agree me, ignore me... I don't' give a S***, we, the ones who disagree with this decision, also have the right to express it :) until they 'suspend' me :)

[A.Hun]

I disagree vehemently. No attacks by nutcase Muslims since 9/11 seems valuable to me.

That and a few other minor things he has accomplished like democracy in the Middle East.

[aft_lizard]

But did they attend tier 1 law schools?

[dirtboy]

She's no Thomas either..

How the heck do you know? She has said she will literally interpret the Constitution. That's what Thomas does. And intellect has little to do with it. Instead, it takes a core commitment to the words of the Constitution, instead of being like Scalia and succumbing to activism when it suits his intellect.

and no one can expect to agree with every decision made by any judge or even President BUSH..I don't, but come on, miers is the best he got??

Once again - do you think JRB could survive the Gang of 14? I don't. Miers, however, shows a practical legal skill set and a tremendous personal determination - coupled with Christian values and a commitment to the law as written.

So she damn well could be another Thomas (who has been decried as an idiot his entire career).

if you believe that then you are not aware of the other jurists available (which i doubt). Running for 5 YEARS the texas lotto speaks volumes to me about her christian conversion (FAKE IMO)..she is a classic ride the coat tails pol. and you see her on SCOTUS please.

You can barely present a coherent argument yourself, yet you are casting judgement on a very bright woman on the scantest of information.