Exactly! This whole argument is based on what a person's philosophy is on a document written over 200 years ago. Since the framers haven't held elected office in 200 years I guess we should disregard them as well?
Having said that, I'm still looking for more confirmation on Harriett. Schaftley's comments are more reasoned than most of the screamers and a little disturbing when she says no woman close to Bush is anti-RvW so we cannot assume Miers is..... anybody know (have any specifics) about that?...I think it may be a valid observation but I don't know...(makes me wonder about Roberts also BTW)
I also think Miers needs to find a way to thread the needle in the hearings and give us some assurance..the typical "the case may come before the court" will not wash. We know the case is already headed to the court.. That's is what the concern with her appointment is largely about. I need to hear more on this and other core issues that is verifyable.