Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: tacticalogic
Simply being competent in the practice of law is unquestionably a requirement, but I think there's a little more to it than that.

I agree. That's where the 60 years comes in. If the Constitution spells out the the President's judgement is prerequisite to selecting nominees, and we elected this President, then it stands to reason that, even if his nominee does not fit everyone's preconceived notion of an SC justice, the nominee deserves the benefit of the doubt at least.

As far as I'm concerned, this nomination is superb because it baffles so many people who are wise in their own eyes. I cannot imagine GWB to be ignorant of the ramifications here. We are mistaken if we think he is, like John Glenn, not aware of the gravity of the situation.

850 posted on 10/05/2005 7:57:04 PM PDT by Fester Chugabrew
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 804 | View Replies ]


To: Fester Chugabrew

Okay, now we have two requirements. The nomination of the President, and competent to practice law. And you submit that this is all we have any right to expect.


871 posted on 10/05/2005 8:07:33 PM PDT by tacticalogic ("Oh bother!" said Pooh, as he chambered his last round.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 850 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson