Ah, so that justifies you taking the MSM bait hook, line and sinker.
A known originalists should have been appointed whose record on these issues was clear.
You mean someone like Robert Bork? Someone who believes something like this:
The same liberties that ensure a free society make the innocent vulnerable to those who prevent rights and privileges and commit senseless and cruel acts. Those precious liberties include free speech, freedom to assemble, freedom of liberties, access to public places, the right to bear arms and freedom from constant surveillance. We are not willing to sacrifice these rights because of the acts of maniacs.
Oh, wait a minute, I got mixed up. Bork didn't write that. Miers did. This is what Bork wrote about the 2nd Amendment:
"The Second Amendment was designed to allow states to defend themselves against a possibly tyrannical national government. Now that the federal government has stealth bombers and nuclear weapons, it is hard to imagine what people would need to keep in the garage to serve that purpose.''
So, now, who would YOU rather have on the Supreme Court for a 2nd Amendment case - a noted scholar like Bork? Or a simpler person like Miers.
But I'm the one dumber than dirt. Go figure.
There are some on this site that are currently "Borking" Miers all based on the MSM/Democraps spin machines!
This leaves me to once again believe that like the Ultra Left, the Ultra Right are ill informed and should form there own party -- but they would not have enough votes to win anything!