To me the justices SHOULD already be cognizant of the Constitutional issues involved before oral argument. Still waters run deep ;o) I've read many of the decisions by Justices Thomas & Scalia, and I have yet to read one that I would consider wrong, or less than insightful opinion by either. I'd be proud to have either serve as Chief Justice. But if I had my pick, I'd pick Justice Thomas.
Harry Reid will not vote to affirm either, so who cares what the slimeball thinks.
BTW, a little private information - I know one of Justice Thomas's former clerks. He takes a back seat to no-one on sheer intellectual horsepower. He also is a good man, which probably is more important (you can always hire clever law clerks, and the USSC justices can take their pick from the very best in the nation.)
Certainly you're entitled to prefer your paisan. < wink > But how judges behave in oral arguments says very little about their competence.link to other threadAwhile back on public television, I saw an interesting talk Justice Thomas had with a group of high school students. They asked very challenging questions, and he gave remarkably honest answers. One of the kids asked why he does not say much in oral arguments - he responded that it was for a couple of reasons. First, he felt that too many questions in oral argument were "showboating" - he wanted to allow the lawyers to present their case without interrupting (implying that such questions are largely for the purpose of showing off - I happen to agree with him). Second, he mentioned that as a young man he had trouble shaking his "Geechee" accent (from the Ogeechee River, the Savannah equivalent more or less of Gullah) and that made him somewhat diffident about public speaking because of the scorn that rural accent incurred.
So his silence in oral argument has nothing to do with his intellectual ability. Still waters run deep.
Well you are right about that. I probably shouldn't have made the Reid reference because his comments were way out of bounds vis a vis Thomas. I was really only referring to his positive comments about Scalia.
I won't be disappointed if Bush goes for Thomas. I just think Scalia would be the better choice.