Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

This is what 'advice and consent' means (Ann Coulter)
wnd.com ^ | October 5, 2005 | Ann Coulter

Posted on 10/05/2005 4:03:47 PM PDT by perfect stranger

I eagerly await the announcement of President Bush's real nominee to the Supreme Court. If the president meant Harriet Miers seriously, I have to assume Bush wants to go back to Crawford and let Dick Cheney run the country.

Unfortunately for Bush, he could nominate his Scottish terrier Barney, and some conservatives would rush to defend him, claiming to be in possession of secret information convincing them that the pooch is a true conservative and listing Barney's many virtues – loyalty, courage, never jumps on the furniture ...

Harriet Miers went to Southern Methodist University Law School, which is not ranked at all by the serious law school reports and ranked No. 52 by US News and World Report. Her greatest legal accomplishment is being the first woman commissioner of the Texas Lottery.

I know conservatives have been trained to hate people who went to elite universities, and generally that's a good rule of thumb. But not when it comes to the Supreme Court.

First, Bush has no right to say "Trust me." He was elected to represent the American people, not to be dictator for eight years. Among the coalitions that elected Bush are people who have been laboring in the trenches for a quarter-century to change the legal order in America. While Bush was still boozing it up in the early '80s, Ed Meese, Antonin Scalia, Robert Bork and all the founders of the Federalist Society began creating a farm team of massive legal talent on the right.

To casually spurn the people who have been taking slings and arrows all these years and instead reward the former commissioner of the Texas Lottery with a Supreme Court appointment is like pinning a medal of honor on some flunky paper-pusher with a desk job at the Pentagon – or on John Kerry – while ignoring your infantrymen doing the fighting and dying.

Second, even if you take seriously William F. Buckley's line about preferring to be governed by the first 200 names in the Boston telephone book than by the Harvard faculty, the Supreme Court is not supposed to govern us. Being a Supreme Court justice ought to be a mind-numbingly tedious job suitable only for super-nerds trained in legal reasoning like John Roberts. Being on the Supreme Court isn't like winning a "Best Employee of the Month" award. It's a real job.

One website defending Bush's choice of a graduate from an undistinguished law school complains that Miers' critics "are playing the Democrats' game," claiming that the "GOP is not the party which idolizes Ivy League acceptability as the criterion of intellectual and mental fitness." (In the sort of error that results from trying to sound "Ivy League" rather than being clear, that sentence uses the grammatically incorrect "which" instead of "that." Websites defending the academically mediocre would be a lot more convincing without all the grammatical errors.)

Actually, all the intellectual firepower in the law is coming from conservatives right now – and thanks for noticing! Liberals got stuck trying to explain Roe vs. Wade and are still at work 30 years later trying to come up with a good argument.

But the main point is: Au contraire! It is conservatives defending Miers' mediocre resume who are playing the Democrats' game. Contrary to recent practice, the job of being a Supreme Court justice is not to be a philosopher-king. Only someone who buys into the liberals' view of Supreme Court justices as philosopher-kings could hold legal training irrelevant to a job on the Supreme Court.

To be sure, if we were looking for philosopher-kings, an SMU law grad would probably be preferable to a graduate from an elite law school. But if we're looking for lawyers with giant brains to memorize obscure legal cases and to compose clearly reasoned opinions about ERISA pre-emption, the doctrine of equivalents in patent law, limitation of liability in admiralty, and supplemental jurisdiction under Section 1367 – I think we want the nerd from an elite law school. Bush may as well appoint his chauffeur head of NASA as put Miers on the Supreme Court.

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. The devil is an abstraction for normal, decent Americans living in the red states. By contrast, at the top universities, you come face to face with the devil every day, and you learn all his little tropes and tricks.

Conservatives from elite schools have already been subjected to liberal blandishments and haven't blinked. These are right-wingers who have fought off the best and the brightest the blue states have to offer. The New York Times isn't going to mau-mau them – as it does intellectual lightweights like Jim Jeffords and Lincoln Chafee – by dangling fawning profiles before them. They aren't waiting for a pat on the head from Nina Totenberg or Linda Greenhouse. To paraphrase Archie Bunker, when you find a conservative from an elite law school, you've really got something.

However nice, helpful, prompt and tidy she is, Harriet Miers isn't qualified to play a Supreme Court justice on "The West Wing," let alone to be a real one. Both Republicans and Democrats should be alarmed that Bush seems to believe his power to appoint judges is absolute. This is what "advice and consent" means.


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; Government; Philosophy; Political Humor/Cartoons; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: anncoulter; blowingawayinthewind; miers; morecowbell; quislingsgonewild; scotus; whenapologistsattack
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 521-540541-560561-580 ... 1,101-1,117 next last
To: Wormwood

Keep researching....at least until you come to the Texas part.

And, don't curse at me again..ever.


541 posted on 10/05/2005 6:20:35 PM PDT by Right_in_Virginia
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 539 | View Replies]

To: sinkspur

Why is it an insult? Bush raised hell and drank excessively when he was younger, and then he straightened himself out. He never tried to hide it. I don't think any the less of him because of it.


542 posted on 10/05/2005 6:20:56 PM PDT by Cicero (Marcus Tullius)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 394 | View Replies]

To: flashbunny
dang, too late. Personal attacks on ann coulter began with post #2!

Their irrational hatred is palpable, isn't it?

Watch the lib-perv language and jokes appear too. And they actually consider themselves conservatives.

They are an embarrassment. Small people.

543 posted on 10/05/2005 6:21:10 PM PDT by k2blader (Hic sunt dracones..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: MNJohnnie
Just utterly pathetic what the Conservative movement has degerated to. We are SUPPOSE to be the people who think, THIS is the behavior of THEM, NOT US.

Don't forget that LOTS OF CAPS help MAKE YOU RIGHT!

544 posted on 10/05/2005 6:21:14 PM PDT by Wormwood (Iä! Iä! Cthulhu fhtagn!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 538 | View Replies]

To: MNJohnnie
The repetition or amplification of a structurally unsound argument doesn't make it any more solid.

The only thing that her defenders have managed to convince me of thus far is that they're adept at repeating the same exact rationale, ad infinitum.

545 posted on 10/05/2005 6:22:22 PM PDT by Do not dub me shapka broham ("I'm okay with being unimpressive. It helps me sleep better.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 538 | View Replies]

To: Right_in_Virginia
Keep researching....at least until you come to the Texas part.

Ah, Texas. Where he learned to 'talk all folksy-like'.

And, don't curse at me again..ever.

Lighten up, Francis.

546 posted on 10/05/2005 6:22:48 PM PDT by Wormwood (Iä! Iä! Cthulhu fhtagn!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 541 | View Replies]

To: Do not dub me shapka broham

Thanks a bunch for making me remember that woman.. :-P


547 posted on 10/05/2005 6:22:57 PM PDT by k2blader (Hic sunt dracones..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 537 | View Replies]

To: MJY1288
Ann wrote:
"Harriet Miers went to Southern Methodist University Law School, which is not ranked at all by the serious law school reports and ranked No. 52 by US News"
…………….

Do I sense a little elitism with a side dish of snobbery?
548 posted on 10/05/2005 6:23:22 PM PDT by JeffersonRepublic.com (There is no truth in the news, and no news in the truth.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Cautor
I wanted him to fight the fight even if that meant a loss.

What a silly notion. Fight, even if you know you're going to lose.

Bush doesn't do that, he has never done that, and will never do that.

Those of you who just want a pissin' contest don't seem to realize that the rest of the country is sick of that stuff. That's why the Dems have lost ground in every election since 1998.

Bush is supposed to indulge your schoolboy fantasies, even if that means O'Connor sits on the SC for another term.

BTW, the first poll I've seen, on FOXNEWS, says that 58% of the country supports Miers nomination. That number will only go up.

You boys are beat.

549 posted on 10/05/2005 6:23:25 PM PDT by sinkspur (Breed every trace of the American Staffordshire Terrier out of existence!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 516 | View Replies]

To: k2blader
Their irrational hatred is palpable, isn't it?

Irrational hatred?

Irrational hatred?

Ann Coulter takes the lowest of roads by bringing Bush's former drinking problems into her screed - something I'd expect from an unwashed liberal, not a woman of her apparent intellect - and you lecture US about IRRATIONAL HATRED?

Cripes, you would be well suited to be the next Justice Kennedy - words mean what you want them to mean, even if the intended meaning is the opposite of the actual meaning.

550 posted on 10/05/2005 6:23:34 PM PDT by dirtboy (Drool overflowed my buffer...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 543 | View Replies]

To: Miss Marple
I've felt the same way about her comments. It's not that I object to her passionately presenting her opinions about the Miers nomination...it's Coulter's selective representation of Miers legal background...referencing Miers tenure at the Texas Lottery Commission as a career highlight.

Coulter deliberately omits the following: 1972, FIRST woman attorney hired by a prestigious Dallas law firm, eventually attaining the position of the FIRST woman President of that law firm. 1985 (when Coulter was a talented young lass of 24) Miers became the FIRST woman President of the Dallas Bar Association and later the FIRST woman President of the Texas Bar Association.

Ann Coulter (born in what 1961 or so?) has reaped the benefits of the dedicated & hard working women that preceded her...in the 1970's or even into the 1980's...Ms Miers was out there slugging out with the "big boys" who still just didn't quite believe a woman could be as talented or career-minded as the male of the species.

Now Ms Miers has to prove her worth again...this time to a woman whose career path was undoubtedly eased by Ms Mier's years of hard work, dedication & obvious ABILITY !!!!


I have no problem with Ann Coulter NOT approving of Ms Miers' nomination. I have no problem with Ann Coulter using her God given gift of wit to disparage Ms Miers (I usually enjoy it when the focus is say...John Kerry). I do not enjoy Ann Coulter omitting significant details to make her argument "sound better".

It worries me...because of all the times I've agreed with Ann Coulter, vocally supported her to those who find her "shrill", and took her representations as the complete truth... Now, I wonder...what other facts (on a variety of issues that Ann Coulter speaks on) have been selectively omitted...
It's a complaint I've heard Ann make about the MSM and a variety of liberals...I just a bit saddened to see her become the pot calling the kettle black...
551 posted on 10/05/2005 6:23:46 PM PDT by SergeantsLady (I support my soldier by supporting the mission he believes in...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 411 | View Replies]

To: Do not dub me shapka broham

What is unsound about trusting the President's judgement and waiting until we actually see her lay out her positions?


552 posted on 10/05/2005 6:24:35 PM PDT by A.Hun (The supreme irony of life is that no one gets out of it alive. R. Heinlein)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 545 | View Replies]

To: Wormwood
Disgruntled Miers Supporter:

I AM VERY IRATE!!! HENCE THE UTILIZATION OF THE "CAPS LOCK" KEY ON MY KEYBOARD, AND MANY SUPERFLOUS EXCLAMATION POINTS!!!!

553 posted on 10/05/2005 6:25:01 PM PDT by Do not dub me shapka broham ("I'm okay with being unimpressive. It helps me sleep better.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 544 | View Replies]

To: A.Hun
Veto your own party? A waste of time.

EXACTLY the reason why we get more fiscal restraint when the White House and Congress are controlled by opposite parties. Thank you for making the case for voting Constitution Party.

554 posted on 10/05/2005 6:25:03 PM PDT by inquest (FTAA delenda est)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 472 | View Replies]

To: dirtboy
"Is that what you really want to be posting on the premier conservative forum on the internet? A post that could be mistaken for one from DU?"
.....................................

Sometimes even a broken clock is right no? The farce that this appoint is apparent to anyone who is not a blind follower..a conservative uses his God given talents to evaluate all actions of government and his elected representatives..IF BUSH makes what is a terrible blow to conservative jurists who were told in effect..if you are conservative and strict interpreter of the Constitution even a republican president will not nominate you to scotus
anyone accepting ms miers is not willing to ask themselves was this what we voted BUSH in for?
555 posted on 10/05/2005 6:25:24 PM PDT by ConsentofGoverned (A sucker is born every minute..what are the voters?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 535 | View Replies]

To: A.Hun
What is unsound about trusting the President's judgement and waiting until we actually see her lay out her positions?

Because she won;t lay out her positions during her confirmation hearing (a la Ginsberg), and by the time she's on the SCOTUS...well by then it's too late.

556 posted on 10/05/2005 6:25:46 PM PDT by Wormwood (Iä! Iä! Cthulhu fhtagn!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 552 | View Replies]

To: Wormwood

Go away, Worm.


557 posted on 10/05/2005 6:25:56 PM PDT by Right_in_Virginia
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 546 | View Replies]

To: MNJohnnie

I think it is the people that blindly listen and believe everything the president says that are acting more like the left. The Dims are in lockstep for just about every issue and the talking points are usually identical by every Dim that speaks. The debate over this nomination is what sets the right apart from the lockstep left.


558 posted on 10/05/2005 6:26:31 PM PDT by badgerbengal (close the border and open fire.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 538 | View Replies]

To: inquest

Sure, good move. The folks in Waco appreciated your vote for Perot.


559 posted on 10/05/2005 6:26:47 PM PDT by A.Hun (The supreme irony of life is that no one gets out of it alive. R. Heinlein)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 554 | View Replies]

To: p. henry

"I am a partner in a large law firm. A former president of my state bar association is my friend and neighbor. I am not convinced that service as either a manager of a large firm or president of a large state bar association is either indicative of, or likely to impart, the qualities needed in an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States."

Well said. I fully agree.


560 posted on 10/05/2005 6:27:12 PM PDT by B4Ranch (Reality: By the time you get your head together, your body's shot to hell.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 84 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 521-540541-560561-580 ... 1,101-1,117 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson