So what? Another "moderate" like O'Connor or Kennedy would be just as bad ESPECIALLY in light of the fact Bush promised to nominated a Scalia-like originalist and the that the Republicans have 55 seats in the Senate. There is no good reason not to appoint someone that has proven track record similar to Scalia or Clarence Thomas.
iing How can you call her a moderate when she's a Southern republican who is Catholic and a member of the Federalist Society a/k/a "The Vast Right Wing Conpiracy."
I don't think folks like you would be happy with anything.
I tend to agree (I know that will make your day, right?) and am waiting to see what the President has to say tonight and if it is Clement, to see what her record tells us about her theory of jurisprudence.
Please refrain from emotionalism. I have no interest in it.
I didn't state she a moderate. I did state she was not a Liberal in my assessment based on what I have read because some people are claiming she is. There is no basis for that characterization.
I stated she appears to be a solid Jurist with a record that does not indicate activism. This points to an originalist. There is nothing to suggest she makes law on the bench.
The question, I'll repeat again, is how she feels about settled law as a proposed member of the Supreme Court. This we do not have answer to.