Isnt this hilarious? The same people that want to discount EVERYONE else (ie the pundits like Limbaugh, Levin, etc) --because "BUSH KNOWS HER", are the same people who run right over here and cheer on Scalia, who DOESNT. So which is it?
LOL!!
"Isnt this hilarious? The same people that want to discount EVERYONE else (ie the pundits like Limbaugh, Levin, etc) --because "BUSH KNOWS HER", are the same people who run right over here and cheer on Scalia, who DOESNT. So which is it?"
He's responding to the critic's argument. He's suggesting their argument (lack of judicial experience) doesn't hold water.
It should be noted that I stated-before that article was posted-that Scalia wouldn't come out in opposition to this candidate.
In fact, my respect for him would be diminished if he had.
Also, he did not defend Harriet Miers, he defended-in a generic sense-the concept of a non-jurist being elevated to the Supreme Court.
ping to #19
"I think it's a good thing to have people from all sorts of backgrounds [on the Court]," Scalia tells CNBC's Maria Bartiromo, as the debate rages over Miers' lack of judical experience.
Where is the direct quote saying Scalia supports Miers? Judicial is spelled wrong. This is Newsmax's opinion ... not fact.
FYI Limbaugh is remaining neutral.
Also, SCALIA is who all you Bush bashbots point to as a REAL conservative judge. So if he is so smart according to you, why don't you trust him? hmmmmm
Your argument was bogus.
Though it is comforting to know we are in GOOD company, I dare say on the part of most of us, our decision to oppose Miers' nomination has NOTHING to do with the opinions of pundits or politicians.
How do you know he doesn't?
You are one divisive newcomer, aren't you? You'll twist the knife, regardless who placed it ...
Scalia has access to the same information that we have and finds someone like her someone he can live with.