[rockrr]

“Everyone wants to keep the other side’s best and brightest off the field, so they often use the confirmation process to delay and kneecap them if they are nominated, which can often convince the most qualified people not to even want to be nominated"

ruth bader ginsberg, best & brightest?! The "wise latina" - best and brightest? And that other leftist fool - I can't even recall her name....best & brightest?. Hardly. Being a bitter partisan isn't what I would consider bright.

[richardb72]

The point was that the smartest people aren’t being nominated and they aren’t being confirmed. The point was that the people getting on the courts these days aren’t as smart as judges used to be.

[oldbrowser]

ruth bader ginsberg, best & brightest?! The "wise latina" - best and brightest? And that other leftist fool - I can't even recall her name....best & brightest?. Hardly. Being a bitter partisan isn't what I would consider bright.

Beat me to it.

[Yo-Yo]

ruth bader ginsberg, best & brightest?! The "wise latina" - best and brightest? And that other leftist fool - I can't even recall her name....best & brightest?.

I believe you may not have fully appreciated the spirit of the article. It was Lot's premise that because of the confirmation process, the most qualified people don't even want to be nominated.

What was implied, therefore, is that those who do make it through the confirmation process are less than 'the best and brightest.' Your examples confirm that premise.