As I said last week, I’m a little mystified as to why President Bush didn’t choose a Supreme Court judicial nominee who was clearly and overtly and provably conservative—and overtly pro-life for example. I would have liked that. And when I formulate thoughts like that and decide what side I fall on issues, I usually then like to prove what a smartypants I am by finding notable commentators who agree. I found nobody. All my usual suspects are against me. Except Ann Coulter, and she’s sticking to her guns. Even the Wall Street Journal’s editorial page came down on her this week saying she was wrong. (Of course they didn’t mention me except in the version that was running through my head in a dream I had….)
In the Wall Street Journal’s OpinionJournal.com, editorialist Manual Miranda said:
[…] Instead, let’s turn, as my cousin-in-law probably did not, to “far-right wacko” Ann Coulter. The day after the nomination the columnist offered criticism of Judge Roberts from the right, calling the next justice, a “Souter in Roberts’ clothing.”
Some conservatives might want to dismiss Ms. Coulter. Not me. She is always provocative (that is a good thing), and a powerful writer. In questioning whether Judge Roberts will be the kind of justice whose rulings will reflect the values of social conservatives, she expressed the worries of everyone who hopes the president we got-out-the-vote-for got it right.
Ms. Coulter describes Judge Roberts as “a blank slate” and she states a fact, “Stealth nominees have never turned out to be a pleasant surprise for conservatives.” She adds: “The fact that Roberts has gone through 50 years on this planet without ever saying anything controversial. That’s just unnatural.”
But she’s wrong on this one. […]
Well that didn’t convince me. This week, Ann Coulter (in our Columnist section) writes “Fool Me Eight Times, Shame On Me”
and points to some notable examples of why she’s right. And no, she doesn’t mention me either, except in the version running through my mind.
Fifty-five seats means every single Democrat in the Senate could vote against a Republican Supreme Court nominee — highly unlikely considering some of those Democrats are up for election next year — along with John McCain, Arlen Specter, Olympia Snowe, Susan Collins and Lincoln Chafee. We would still win.
Of course it’s possible that Roberts will buck history — all known human history when it comes to the Supreme Court — and be another Scalia or Thomas. (And we’ll hear this news while attending a World Series game between the Cubs and, oh, say … the Detroit Tigers.)
PTBC was founded by Mr. Johannesen in 2000.
Contact Mr. Johannesen about this article using this form. Please refer to article's title.
FOLLOW @JoelJohannesen ON X!
- State-Funding of Sports Boondoggles Need To Be Sent To The Penalty Box - Wednesday March 13, 2024 at 4:44 pm
- I’m from the government and I’m here to help you become barely mediocre like us. - Tuesday March 5, 2024 at 11:53 am
- Big-Ass Government makes Big-Ass Blunder - Friday March 1, 2024 at 12:36 pm
