"And this from a woman who earned her JD from Michigan. Last I checked, that's not exactly Ivy League. So what gives Ann the legal expertise to judge who is and isn't qualified to be on the high court? By her own admission, it isn't her non-Ivy League degree."
A lot of attorneys believe the University of Michigan's law school may be the best in the country. It certainly is in the top 5 in the country. (And I say that as a rival Buckeye.)
I have to say I side with many here who believe Ann Coulter is often shrill, irritating, and condescending. I agree with her more often than not, but generally dislike her demeanor. In this instance, I agree with the substance of her article completely.
Miers may be a excellent attorney, and she may possess loyalty and a good heart, but the Supreme Court is a special place that should be reserved for established jurists who have demonstrated superior legal analysis. It is no coincidence that the current members of the Court attended the best law schools (Yale, Harvard, Columbia, Stanford, Northwestern), and all but O'Connor spent at least some time as appellate judges in the federal court system. (O'Connor was a state court judge, if I recall right.) As former Court of Appeals judges, they had plenty of experience analyzing and writing about complex issues, including constitutional issues. Many had distinguished themselves already as possessing sharp legal minds before ascending to the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court is an intellectual battleground, and a Justice who is not equipped with superior legal acumen will be dwarfed by the more accomplished jurists on that Court.
I understand the point many here have made about appointing someone from "outside" the usual list of suspects. I just don't believe it is wise. It's smart to appoint someone who "shares your views." But that isn't enough. A Supreme Court Justice should be someone who has written judicial opinions, preferably at the appellate level, demonstrating a deep understanding and command of Constitutional legal precedent. The choice of Miers is embarrassing and a sad indication of the poor judgment of this President and his advisors.
Dwarfed schmarfed, the only thing that will matter at the end of the day is how Harriet voted. The Supreme Court doesn't persuade, it rules.