Replies

Yes, I forgot how simple constitutional law was. Lord knows why all those silly people spend all the money and time attending law school.

I'm astounded that you're unable to understand the US Constitution. People do not attend law school in order to understand the US Constitution. If you think they do, then there's no surprise that we're not able to discuss this issue on the same level.

Let me ask you this: using your rationale above why not nominate me. I guess I'm just as qualified as anyone. Better yet, let's nominate Laura Bush. I mean she's a woman - which seems to have been the main criterion here, and we think she'd vote the right way.

Why not nominate you? Because you think only a subset of lawyers, ordained by their law schools are capable of understanding the US Constitution, and applying it to laws that are challenged. You clearly are not worthy of the court; it would be asinine to nominate you. You can take that "nominate a woman" BS elsewhere.

I cannot believe that you think I need a lawyer to tell me what the Constitution means. I guarantee you that a plumber understands the phrase "Congress shall make no law" a lot better than your liberal friends of the bar, who discover emanations and penumbras.

"Oh, mighty black robed thugs! Please tell us what our rights are!!"

100% agree. If the president asked joe blow to read the consitution the second admentment and joe blow says this means the government can not take our guns. He should nominate Joe Blow. The Consitution is not rocket science folks. It means what it says and says what it means. It limits government. Period.

No, I (nor I presume you)do not need a judge to tell me what the words of the Constitution say. I can read. It's applying what is written to the specifics of a given case that causes difficulty. The "Congress shall make no law..." bit you quote is an excellent example. Do you think porn shops should be allowed to operate next to schools and churches? I doubt it. Well, that kind of goes against the clear words "Congress shall make no law..." now doesn't it? And most cases before the court are FAR more complicated than the example I just gave.

So, what are your qualifications for a SC justice? Anyone who can read at an 11th or 12th grade level (the approximate level at which the Constitution is written)? BTW, you do know that Scalia, Thomas, and Rhenquist sometimes disagreed with each other don't you? How do you explain this? I think that proves there is a little more to it (being a SC justice) than simply being able to read and understand the constitution.