The president has always said that he's a "uniter, not a divider." And by God, it turns out that he was right. If it weren't for George W. Bush, we would never, ever find ourselves saying these words: We agree with Ann Coulter.
OK, not on everything. We don't agree that Democrats should be blamed for 9/11. We don't agree that the citizens of Muslim countries should be forced to convert to Christianity. And we don't agree that it would have been better if Timothy McVeigh had blown up the New York Times building. But when Coulter starts talking about Harriet Miers -- well, we have to say that Ann speaks for us.
In her latest column, Coulter says Miers is so unqualified for a spot on the Supreme Court that Bush may as well have appointed his chauffeur as the next head of NASA. Coulter says that Bush "could nominate his Scottish terrier Barney, and some conservatives would rush to defend him, claiming to be in possession of secret information convincing them that the pooch is a true conservative and listing Barney's many virtues -- loyalty, courage, never jumps on the furniture."
But there comes a time to draw the line, Coulter says, and that time is now: Whatever Republicans may think of "elites" generally, they ought to understand that the Supreme Court requires a certain level of expertise in matters that might come before the court -- the kind of expertise that Miers' career just doesn't demonstrate.
"However nice, helpful, prompt and tidy she is, Harriet Miers isn't qualified to play a Supreme Court justice on 'The West Wing,' let alone to be a real one," Coulter says. "Both Republicans and Democrats should be alarmed that Bush seems to believe his power to appoint judges is absolute. This is what 'advice and consent' means."
Shares