Does This Law Degree Make My Resume Look Fat?

[Brwn_eyes0511]

DOES THIS LAW DEGREE MAKE MY RESUME LOOK FAT?
by Ann Coulter
October 12, 2005

A Supreme Court nomination may not have been the ideal time for Laura Bush to start acting like "Buy One, Get One Free" Hillary Clinton. At least President Clinton only allowed his wife to choose the attorney general. (Remember the good old days when first ladies only got to pick the poet laureate and the White House china pattern?)

Between cooking segments on the "Today" show this week, Laura rolled out the straw-man — sorry, "straw-person" — argument that the criticism of Miers was rooted in "sexism" (which is such a chick thing to say).

I'm a gyno-American, and I strenuously object.

The only sexism involved in the Miers nomination is the administration's claim that once they decided they wanted a woman, Miers was the best they could do. Let me just say, if the top male lawyer in the country is John Roberts and the top female lawyer is Harriet Miers, we may as well stop allowing girls to go to law school.

Ah, but perhaps you were unaware of Miers' many other accomplishments. Apparently she was THE FIRST WOMAN in Dallas to have a swimming pool in her back yard! And she was THE FIRST WOMAN with a safety deposit box at the Dallas National Bank! And she was THE FIRST WOMAN to wear pants at her law firm! It's simply amazing! And did you know she did all this while being a woman?

I don't know when Republicans became the party that condescends to women, but I am not at all happy about this development. This isn't the year 1880. And by the way, even in 1880, Miers would not have been the "most qualified" of all women lawyers in the U.S., of which there were 75.

By 1950, there were more than 6,000 women lawyers, three female partners at major law firms and three female federal judges. She may be a nut who belonged to a subversive organization, but Ruth Bader Ginsburg graduated first in her class from Columbia Law School — and that was before Harriet Miers was applying to law school.

Women have been graduating at the top of their classes at the best law schools for 50 years. Today, women make up about 45 percent of the students at the nation's top law schools (and more than 50 percent at all law schools).

Which brings us to the other enraging argument being made by the Bush administration and its few remaining defenders — the claim of "elitism." I also don't know when the Republican Party stopped being the party of merit and excellence and became the party of quotas and lying about test scores, but I don't like that development either.

The average LSAT score at SMU Law School is 155. The average LSAT at Harvard is 170. That's a difference of approximately 1 1/2 standard deviations, a differential IQ experts routinely refer to as "big-ass" or "humongous." Whatever else you think of them, the average Harvard Law School student is very smart. I gather I have just committed a hate crime by saying so.

Contrary to the Bush administration's disingenuous arguments, it's not simply that Miers did not attend a top law school that makes her unqualified for the Supreme Court. (But that's a good start!) It's that she did not go on to rack up any major accomplishments since then, either.

Despite the astonishing fact that Miers was THE FIRST WOMAN to head the Texas Bar Association — a dumping ground for losers, by the way — Miers has not had the sort of legal career that shouts out "Supreme Court material"! That is, unless you think any female who manages to pass the bar exam has achieved a feat of unparalleled brilliance for her gender.

There are more important things in life than being Supreme Court material, but — oddly enough — not when we're talking about an appointment to the Supreme Court. According to the Associated Press, Sen. Arlen Specter defended Miers on the grounds that "Miers' professional qualifications are excellent, but she lacks experience in constitutional law" — and Specter ought to know. This is like recommending a plumber by saying, "He's a very professional guy, but he lacks experience in plumbing."

The other straw-man argument constantly being hawked by the Bush administration is that Miers' critics object that she's never been a judge. To quote another Bush — Read my lips: No one has said that. So please stop comparing Miers to Justice Byron White (first in his class at Yale Law School) or Justice William Rehnquist (first in his class at Stanford Law School).

It's also not what The New York Times claims, which is that conservatives oppose Miers because they don't know how she will vote. We didn't know how Roberts would vote! As I recall, I was the only conservative complaining about that.

The problem with Miers is something entirely different — and entirely within the meaning of "advice and consent": Miers is no more qualified to sit on the Supreme Court than I am to be a sumo wrestler. The hearings aren't going to change that; they will just make it more obvious.

I genuinely feel sorry for Miers. I'm sure she's a lovely woman, brighter than average, and well-qualified for many important jobs. Just not the job Bush has nominated her for. The terrible thing Bush has done to Miers is to force people who care about the court to say that.

COPYRIGHT 2005 ANN COULTER

DISTRIBUTED BY UNIVERSAL PRESS SYNDICATE

4520 Main Street, Kansas City, MO 64111

www.anncoulter.com

[dissention]

Originally Posted by Brwn_eyes0511

This isn't the year 1880. And by the way, even in 1880, Miers would not have been the "most qualified" of all women lawyers in the U.S., of which there were 75.

[Brwn_eyes0511]

Apparently she was THE FIRST WOMAN in Dallas to have a swimming pool in her back yard! And she was THE FIRST WOMAN with a safety deposit box at the Dallas National Bank! And she was THE FIRST WOMAN to wear pants at her law firm! It's simply amazing! And did you know she did all this while being a woman?

I almost peed on myself when I first read this!

[Brwn_eyes0511]

Originally Posted by dissention

Is that you laughing at one of Ann's jokes, Joshy?

[tynan88]

Hell hath frozen over.

[xxxmx]

in all honesty, this is the first time i have ever shared an opinion with you or your blessed coultergeist. i'm not sure what to do now. i feel lost. how can this be happening to me? me. a bleeding hearted give it all to the poor take away your tax cuts drive a hybrid operation iraqui colonization capital L Liberal.



hey, i'll go with it. she doesn't deserve to sit on the bench. can't argue with that at all

[SuzeQuze]

Originally Posted by Brwn_eyes0511

Is that you laughing at one of Ann's jokes, Joshy?

My world has been turned upside down! I can't believe I agree with Ann on something. The apocalypse is really coming I fear.

[dissention]

Originally Posted by Brwn_eyes0511

Is that you laughing at one of Ann's jokes, Joshy?

No, I'm laughing at the silliness of that particular part. It's so absurd that I can't tell whether she's serious or joking.

[ShangriLaTroubl]

I read that entire article not knowing it was Ann, and it didn't sound at all like Ann the whole way...I got to the end and saw her name and almost fell out of my chair...I must say I have mostly agreed with Coulter on this nomination since the beginning..."ISN'T THAT WEEIRRRD?"

Chris

[ELIUD]

I saw Ann Coulter on Bill Maher last week. She's actually kinda pretty when she's telling the truth.

[Jyqm]

Originally Posted by ELIUD

I saw Ann Coulter on Bill Maher last week. She's actually kinda pretty when she's telling the truth.

At the very least, it's nice to know that folks like Ann are true conservatives willing to stand up for their principles and oppose their president and their party when it's moving in the wrong direction.

[Brwn_eyes0511]

Originally Posted by dissention

No, I'm laughing at the silliness of that particular part. It's so absurd that I can't tell whether she's serious or joking.

I think both.

[Brwn_eyes0511]

Originally Posted by Jyqm

At the very least, it's nice to know that folks like Ann are true conservatives willing to stand up for their principles and oppose their president and their party when it's moving in the wrong direction.

EXACTLY! and guess what....it is moving in the wrong.