Ann Coulter Is Not Impressed
Ann Coulter today:
I must admit I am also concerned with the idea of a "stealth" candidate and will agree that it has not worked out so great for conservatives in the past. I am, however, willing to give President Bush the benefit of the doubt on this one.
I say this because President Bush has been a straight shooter thus far, and has said he would nominate a strict constructionist. Since Roberts doesn't have a significant track record, the only thing I can do is take Bush at his word and hope Roberts is as advertised.
I do believe that Bush, at the very least, has been assured by Roberts that he will strictly interpret the Constitution. Whether this will be the case or not, remains to be seen. I believe the President is well aware of his legacy and the historical importance this nomination would have in that regard, and I am fairly confident he would not be willing to risk that legacy by making a haphazard appointment.
While past history can be an indicator of future events, as Ann Coulter has suggested, I don't believe it is always the case. Roberts could become another Scalia or Thomas just as easily as he could a Souter or Kennedy. Since I'm not in a position to make my own nomination to the court, I can only take the President at his word and hope for the best.
In the end, Ann may end up being right about this, but I certainly hope she's not. I suspect if she is wrong though, no one will be happier about it than she will.
Tags:Ann Coulter,Politics,Supreme Court,John Roberts,Judicial Nominations
After pretending to consider various women and minorities for the Supreme Court these past few weeks, President Bush decided to disappoint all the groups he had just ginned up and nominate a white male.
So all we know about him for sure is that he can't dance and he probably doesn't know who Jay-Z is. Other than that, he is a blank slate. Tabula rasa. Big zippo. Nada. Oh, yeah...we also know he's argued cases before the supreme court. big deal; so has Larry fFynt's attorney.
But unfortunately, other than that that, we don’t know much about John Roberts. Stealth nominees have never turned out to be a pleasant surprise for conservatives. Never. Not ever.
I must admit I am also concerned with the idea of a "stealth" candidate and will agree that it has not worked out so great for conservatives in the past. I am, however, willing to give President Bush the benefit of the doubt on this one.
I say this because President Bush has been a straight shooter thus far, and has said he would nominate a strict constructionist. Since Roberts doesn't have a significant track record, the only thing I can do is take Bush at his word and hope Roberts is as advertised.
I do believe that Bush, at the very least, has been assured by Roberts that he will strictly interpret the Constitution. Whether this will be the case or not, remains to be seen. I believe the President is well aware of his legacy and the historical importance this nomination would have in that regard, and I am fairly confident he would not be willing to risk that legacy by making a haphazard appointment.
While past history can be an indicator of future events, as Ann Coulter has suggested, I don't believe it is always the case. Roberts could become another Scalia or Thomas just as easily as he could a Souter or Kennedy. Since I'm not in a position to make my own nomination to the court, I can only take the President at his word and hope for the best.
In the end, Ann may end up being right about this, but I certainly hope she's not. I suspect if she is wrong though, no one will be happier about it than she will.
Tags:Ann Coulter,Politics,Supreme Court,John Roberts,Judicial Nominations
posted by Barry at
11:14 PM
<< Home