Skip to comments.Ann Coulter Saw This Coming - Coulter predicted conservative outrage at Roberts a full seven
Posted on 06/28/2012 9:19:39 PM PDT by Nachum
Ann Coulter prophesied the coming split between Chief Justice Roberts and conservatives back in 2005, writing that "Stealth nominees have never turned out to be a pleasant surprise for conservatives."
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 Flynt'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.
Since the announcement, court-watchers have been like the old Kremlinologists from Soviet days looking for clues as to what kind of justice Roberts will be.
(Excerpt) Read more at buzzfeed.com ...
Coulter predicted conservative outrage at Roberts a full seven years ago.
I blame most GOP senators for always leaving their balls in the primaries. Once they get to DC they become eunuchs. If they had balls, they would always go full tilt for conservative judges and beat the hell out of any rat that goes after them.
That’s nice. Nowadays Coulter is talking from the other side of the fence though.
And Drudge is now talking about Roberts’ epilepsy...
Dennis Prager was talking about this on his show today. Anyone have Coulter’s full article?
Ann is sharp as a whip, but has been blinded of late by the Beltway...
Prescience is a gift- as is Liberty.
Do the right thing, dear.
That was fast. Thanks.
The warning signs were all there, and most of us, including me, chose to ignore them.....NEVER AGAIN!
Soon we will see Harriet Miers billboards that say, “Miss me yet?”
Didn’t you get the memo....Ann is a RINO around here. /sarcasm.
If the Senate were in Democrat hands, Roberts would be perfect. But why on earth would Bush waste a nomination on a person who is a complete blank slate when we have a majority in the Senate!
We also have a majority in the House, state legislatures, state governorships, and have won five of the last seven presidential elections seven of the last 10!
We're the Harlem Globetrotters now why do we have to play the Washington Generals every week?
Conservatism is sweeping the nation, we have a fully functioning alternative media, we're ticked off and ready to avenge Robert Bork ... and Bush nominates a Rorschach blot.
Bushie, Rove, and others squandered all that and we got Pelousy and Harry Grim Reaper in 2006 and the foreign, America hating being that inhabits the Whitehouse.
In full disclosure, I used to think Roberts was one of the good things Bushie did. I guess I didn't read this article at the time not that that matters.
Gerald Ford gave us John Paul liberal.
Ronald Reagan gave us SCALIA and two wishy-washy swing voters (Sandra Day O’Connor and Anthony Kennedy).
The first Bush gave us THOMAS and also David Souter (to cancel out Thomas on all the important votes).
The second Bush gave us ALITO and wishy-washy dud John Roberts after trying to give us Harriet from down the hall at the White House.
Romney should start vetting judicial candidates right now. No blank slates. No surprises. Start with Ann Coulter.
Alito was nominated after Miers withdrew.
More Grist for the “John Roberts Is Gay” Mill (2005)
Supreme Court Nominee John Roberts: Gay Rights Champion? (2005)
Justice Roberts and Gay Marriage (2010)
Is Justice Roberts gay? (picture)
Harriet Meiers would have been a better bet.
Question coming to mind: Is there precedent for SCOTUS retiring/replacing during presidential lame-duck timeframes?
Harriet Miers was replaced by Alito.
“But why on earth would Bush waste a nomination on a person who is a complete blank slate when we have a majority in the Senate!”
Remember, at that time, the Democrat minority in the Senate was interminably stalling all judicial nominees in committee, or by preventing cloture. We could have used the “nuclear option” to override that, and gotten our nominees through, but the moderates in the Senate formed the “Gang of 14” to prevent that, and instead set themselves up as the brokers of all judicial nominees. After that, Bush’s nominees had to get past the Gang of 14’s nebulous “extraordinary circumstances” clause, in order to prevent the previous standoff from returning.
That’s the reason we “wasted a nomination” trying to put someone in the court who did not seem too partisan. For this, we can thank the “Republicans”:
Lincoln Chafee (R-RI)
Susan Collins (R-ME)
Mike DeWine (R-OH)
Lindsey Graham (R-SC)
John McCain (R-AZ)
Olympia Snowe (R-ME)
John Warner (R-VA)
Ah yes, forgot about that.
I agree completely with that- but I've always wondered-Who was the idiot, Bush or Rove? I know that Bush was ultimately responsible for those disastrous second term decisions, but where did they originate?
“Harriet Miers billboards”
WWHD (What would Harriet Do)?
And while I am at it, let me rant a little bit. I live in Maryland so for decades my vote has never mattered - for President, Senate, House. Yet I thought yesterday that even if we had the reincarnation of Ronald Reagan, and he was able to win Maryland. And by a miracle of God we got Repub Senators voted in from Maryland, and replaced the leftists with conservatives, it does not matter. One guy in a black robe nullifies all of that. And it seems to be like professional wrestling - all planned and choreographed with just one person swinging the other way to prevent the pendulum swinging back to the Constitution.
What difference does it make?
It’s a joke. You know a joke, but what the hell...?
“Its a joke. You know a joke, but what the hell...?”
Mine wasn’t. Well.. maybe just a little..
It’s ironic that Coulter now strongly supports the liberal socialist Mittens, the architect of Obamacare, for president.
That alone calls into question the credibility of her entire archive.
I remember when he was nominated. I like him but didn't have much info. I read one of her columns and wondered aloud....
“Damn...she was precient”
True. Why is she so in the tank for Romney?
“True. Why is she so in the tank for Romney?”
That’s been my question. I just can’t understand it.
And she’s been in the tank for him for quite a while now.