Yes, Coulter might be right. He is, however, probably an improvement on O'Connor. That doesn't make Bush truthful on the appointment issue, but it might do as O'Connor's replacement, especially since we have no further choice in the matter.
I guess we'll probably have to wait years to get an idea if this is a good appointment. Which makes me wonder if conservatives had questions about Thomas and Scalia when they were nominated or did they have enough of a paper trail that the overwhelming consesus was that they would be conservative originalists. If it's the later, then why didn't W. nominate a "sure thing"?