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

To: xzins
The argument about her credentials is disingenuous....real quick -- name another another NON-JUDGE (cause Bush said he wanted that diversity) female lawyer who headed a 400 lawyer firm, was president of a state bar, made review, was listed in the top 100, led a state agency, and worked as personal staff for the president.

That's great. But she's not nominated for "Who's Who," she's nominated for the Supreme Court. An associate justice on the Supreme Court has a very specific job to do, one that has nothing to do with heading a large law firm, being president of the state bar, making review ... and so on. What could the Texas Lottery Commission possibly have to do with debating the interstate commerce clause?

Hillary Clinton doesn't even have those credentials. We need an article comparing Hillary's legal credentials with those of Miers. After all, isn't a presidential candidate and a Scotus candidate at somewhat similar levels?

No! No they're not. The jobs are entirely different and overlap only insofar as they're at the top of their respective branches of government. And even that's a flawed analogy because the aftereffects of a bad presidency are either subtle or reversible, while the penumbra of a bad Supreme Court justice is dark indeed.

39 posted on 10/07/2005 9:48:50 PM PDT by Generic_Login_1787
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies ]


To: Generic_Login_1787

In my view is an honest expression (as is IMO or IMHO). All of these things are our opinions, and there is no universal truth that jumps out at us.

That being the case, I see nothing in the record of this candidate that disqualifies her, a lot that qualifies her, a lot that puts her above a vast majority of other female lawyers, and a lot that has her above many other lawyers in federal service. (Jaime Gorelick for example.)

I've run across no one who has yet supplied the name of a female, conservative lawyer with her credentials. And her credentials top those of a Hillary Clinton, a Jaime Gorelick, and a Ruth Bader Ginsberg who was simply an aclu lawyer.


57 posted on 10/08/2005 4:27:07 AM PDT by xzins (Retired Army Chaplain and Proud of It!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies ]

To: Generic_Login_1787; P-Marlowe

In my view is an honest expression (as is IMO or IMHO). All of these things are our opinions, and there is no universal truth that jumps out at us.

That being the case, I see nothing in the record of this candidate that disqualifies her, a lot that qualifies her, a lot that puts her above a vast majority of other female lawyers, and a lot that has her above many other lawyers in federal service. (Jaime Gorelick for example.)

I've run across no one who has yet supplied the name of a female, conservative lawyer with her credentials. And her credentials top those of a Hillary Clinton, a Jaime Gorelick, and a Ruth Bader Ginsberg who was simply an aclu lawyer. (And who was Clinton's Attorney General....Waco Reno...)


58 posted on 10/08/2005 4:27:48 AM PDT by xzins (Retired Army Chaplain and Proud of It!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | 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