DesScorp's Journal: Is Ann Coulter right? Did Bush blink?

She has a point that stealth candidates always turn out badly for Republicans...hello, David Souter. They always heave left once in office.

So why is it ok for Democrats to pick doctranaire liberals, like Ruth Ginsberg (who never made any secret of her views on expanding Federal power and authority over a wide range of issues), but it's unnacceptable for Republicans to nominate a doctrinaire conservative?

Is this the same old same old, or has Bush/Rove once again foiled the Dems by pulling out a secret weapon that the Senate can't oppose. Do they know something about Roberts that Dems don't? The stakes are so high, because you can't fire these guys, and they'll be on the bench for decades. Coulter hates him, Andrew Sullivan likes him. That should give conservatives pause...

Discuss.

P.S. - Memorable Coulter quote....

The only way a supreme court nominee could win the approval of NARAL and Planned Parenthood would be to actually perform an abortion during his confirmation hearing, live, on camera, and preferably a partial birth one.

The bright side

[Henry V .009]

At least it wasn't Gonzales.

With the way all the usual suspects...

[ncc74656]

...are going stark raving mad over Roberts' nomination (yeah, as if they weren't stark raving mad already), I have a hard time believing that this is a Bad Thing. If he pisses off PFAW, NARAL, the Chappaquiddick Swimmer, Chuckie Schumer, and the rest of 'em, he must be doing something right.

Re:With the way all the usual suspects...

[DesScorp]

Yeah, but keep in mind, PFAW, NARAL, et al protested O'Connor and Souter as well....they protest ANY GOP nominee. It's standard policy.