Let us consider the press releases by Sen. Coleman over the three individuals nominated by President Bush for the U.S. Supreme Court. See if you can guess in which of these he is talking about the female nominee, Harriet Miers.

#1

July 19th, 2005 - Washington, D.C. - I am pleased that after extensive and unprecedented consultation with the United States Senate, President Bush announced Judge John G. Roberts, Jr. as his nominee to be the next Associate Justice of the Supreme Court, filling the vacancy left by Justice O'Connor. Judge Roberts has a distinguished record, having served as associate counsel to President Ronald Reagan in the White House Counsel's Office and as Principal Deputy Solicitor General in the Department of Justice, before being confirmed unanimously to the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia in 2003.

All along, the President has said that that he had wanted to nominate a distinguished and highly qualified American, committed to equal justice under the law. I cannot think of a better qualified person than Judge Roberts to fill this vacancy. His extensive experience and sound legal judgment, along with an exemplary record of 39 cases argued before the Supreme Court, shows that the President has chosen a nominee of high integrity essential for the High Court.

I look forward to a thorough and thoughtful floor debate in which all are heard. Above all, Judge Robert's nomination should be treated with the fairness, dignity and respect, which are the hallmarks of the nominee himself. The American people fully anticipate an up or down vote on the Senate floor before the Supreme Court begins its next term October 3rd. A full Court is in the best interests of the nominee, our work in the Senate, and the American people.

#2

October 3rd, 2005 - ST. PAUL, MN - "I am pleased that President Bush has moved quickly to nominate White House Counsel Harriet Miers to replace Justice Sandra Day O'Connor as an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court. The President's decision to nominate a woman to the court is praiseworthy and sends a very important message to all of America. It is my intention to withhold judgment on this nominee as we continue to get a better sense of her qualifications as the confirmation process moves forward."

#3

October 31st, 2005 - Wasington, D.C. - Judge Samuel Alito, Jr. today was nominated by President Bush to serve as Associate Justice on the U.S. Supreme Court. I am encouraged by the wealth of judicial experience and dedicated public service Judge Alito brings to the table. During his nearly 30 years of public service, Judge Alito has served with distinction on the third Circuit Court of Appeals for 15 years, and worked as Assistant to the Solicitor General and U.S. Attorney for the District of New Jersey, earning a reputation as a litigator who has worked for justice and equality, as well as a fair-minded judge who is committed to the rule of law. Judge Alito's outstanding qualifications appear to meet the standard of excellence for Supreme Court nominees, and I look forward to a careful review of the nominee's credentials so that we may have a full, working bench as soon as possible. Now is the time to focus on Judge Alito's qualifications and set aside partisan politics so that we may have a fair and dignified confirmation process, ending in a timely up-or-down vote.

So Mr. Coleman, it is all well and good to have the court filled ASAP, as long as the nominee is a man? I'm not calling you sexist, the numbers speak for themselves. I have a theory, I think that as soon as you hear that the nominee is a man, it's "well qualified this" and "well qualified that", but when the third woman to ever be nominated to the highest court in the country comes up, you have to withhold judgement. So it is praiseworthy to nominate women to the court but then you object to 100% of the women that Mr. Bush has tried to put on the Supreme Court. I don't want excuses Mr. Coleman, the numbers speak for themselves.

Why is it full speed ahead "up or down vote" confirmation when it's a man being considered, but a "slow the hell down" attitude when it is a woman? I'm just asking.

Do you have a problem with women, Mr. Coleman? Do you have a problem trusting them when they say they are qualified to sit on the Supreme Court? Does this stem from your wife moving to Los Angeles to become an "actor" while you were stuck as mayor of St. Paul and raising your kids? Marriage counseling is the place to work out these problems, not the Supreme Court.

NOTE: I wrote and tried to post this at like 9 AM but I'm having hosting problems I think. Please stand by as I may have more difficulties.