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

To: Miss Marple

"That's fine. I, however, do not make my desicions based on who is on TV."

Well, as much as I frequently agree with your opinions, it appears this time you are making YOUR decision based on trusting Bush, which is about as bad as basing it on whose on TV. Bush Sr. appointed Souter. Reagan appointed O'Connor (against the advice of many of his conservative advisors). Anyone can make a mistake, especially when there is no constitutional law track record anywhere to be seen. Just hope you are guessing right here, as it truly is just a guess, isn't it. Even Bush Jr. is just guessing, as there is no record to look at, just his "gut" instinct.


43 posted on 10/07/2005 9:54:00 PM PDT by flaglady47
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies ]


To: flaglady47
No, I am not supporting her because I have faith in the President. I am supporting her right to be heard as a nominee before making a decision. The President is the one who has the right to make the selection; whether this is a good selection remains to be seen, although I fail to see how she could be worse than some now sitting on the court. Well-known Constitutional expert Kennedy doesn't seem to have turned out the way his resume and record indicated.

So, should the nominee have been Luttig, for example, could you guarantee he wouldn't have gone native once ensconced on the court, like Kennedy or O'Connor? No.

I want to hear her testimony. If she is incompetent or appears to be liberal, I will withdraw my support.

56 posted on 10/08/2005 4:21:40 AM PDT by Miss Marple (Lord, please look after Mozart Lover's son and keep him strong.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | 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