[advance_copy]

IMO, I think what we have here isn't a Liberal Justice. Her record doesn't indicate that. It indicates a solid Judge without any whiff of activism. The real question, imo, is whether she believes all precious precedents set by the Supreme Court are settled law or if she is amenable to overturning bad law from the High Court. That is the question we need an answer to.

I can agree with you, despite Clement's "settled law" quote. That is, after all, the only indication we have of her position on abortion, so you can understand the concern from pro-life supporters of President Bush. We need to make sure that Republican Senators on the Judiciary Committee get to the bottom of this during hearings. If she is the nominee and flunks this test, she needs to get rejected and let the President understand he cannot get a nominee through who does not stand for life.

[topher]

Amen to that. I am not happy with George W and the prospect of another Pro-Abort Justice.

If George W. Bush wants to add to his enemies list, this is a good way for him to do it.

[Soul Seeker]

Certainly I understand why that quote triggers conservative fear, but fear is an emotion.

Only the facts are relevant here and we're in solid agreement if Clement is the nominee, our Senators need to question this Judge anew on precedent. Not as a prospective appeals nominee, but as a prospective Supreme.