It is hilarious that after Buscheney and the right's barrage of attacks on John Edwards's past as a trial lawyer during the campaign, that Bush has now nominated a trial lawyer to be Supreme Court justice.
She definitely seems underqualified and this looks like cronyism, but I'll try to keep an open mind until I hear the confirmation hearings. My first instincts on Roberts were negative but ended up sorta liking him despite myself.
What Was I Thinking?
-
I finally saw Shawn Levy‘s The Internship last night at a Paris press
screening, and I have to agree with most of the criticisms levelled by
Stateside crit...
1 hour ago
5 comments:
My brother, whose work is in political science & analysis, pointed out to me tonight that there have been several very good supreme court justices with no judicial experience in the past. My reservations come from the fact that it's Bush who nominated her, and I don't trust him. But we'll see.
I’m going to keep a reserved open mind on her as well. There do seem to be some positives. Sen. Reid recommended her for the job (this’ll piss off the wing nuts in both the democratic and republican parties). She has contributed to both democratic and republican campaigns in the not too distant past. She does not appear to be a Scalia or a Thomas. I don’t think her close ties to Bush will make any difference if or when she takes a Supreme Court seat (such ties don’t seem to make a difference when one makes it to the bench, as ambition no longer becomes a motivator). We’ll see, I suppose.
eebmore
so the tigers have leyland? what do you think?
I'm pretty happy with Leyland. I honestly don't know a great deal about him because I'm always focusing on the AL. But they needed someone tough and that's him.
I'm sort of curious to see if he's still smoking in the dugout during games. The Tigers will probably drive him to start again even if he's quit.
Whoops. She's born again. I take it back. Run for the hills!
Post a Comment