Replies

>> I don't know if any conservative said she wasn't entitled to an up or down vote, but conservatives were running ads against her BEFORE they even had hearings. <<

Ann Coulter was vicious and unfair in her treatment of Roberts and Miers. But one thingI do agree with her was this (paraphrased from memory):

We don't need hearings to tell us that Harriet Miers is not a polar bear, and we don't need hearings to tell us she is unqualified.

Miers' public record speaks for itself. Her defenders felt free to accuse her detractors of sexism, extremism, and every other nasty "ism" in the book. President Bush disgraced himself when he had his wife attack conservatives on the air. So if they feel so free in defending her by vicious assault on Republicans and conservatives, what were they possibly going to do during the hearings? They obviously weren't waiting for a dignified, reasoned response. If they were already fragging their own troops, couldn't they have offered a reasonable defense, too?

My response was that she wasn't a proven, hardcore originalist and we could do better. I realize that if someone reads between the lines, I am calling her a lesbian and socialist. But if you actually just read the lines I TYPED, it seems pretty reasoned.

Ann Coulter and the other pundits are in part, entertainers. In that vein, they will go over the top to be...entertaining.

Ann Coulter may be right about that. It was the viciousness, the threats of not voting at all or leaving the party all together, and ads ran by conservatives where we're basically eating our own in public, that I have a huge problem with. I do not see how that helps the party or conservatives at all in the long run.