"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.
Without mentioning the Bush nominee by name, the conservative legal icon said that the High Court needed someone who had never served as a judge to take the place of the late Chief Justice William Rehnquist.
"There is now nobody with that [non judicial] background after the death of the previous chief," Scalia laments to Bartiromo.
"And the reason that's happened, I think, is that the nomination and confirmation process has become so controversial, so politicized that I think a president does not want to give the opposition an easy excuse [to say] 'Well, this person has no judicial experience.'" Scalia concludes: "I don't think that's a good thing. I think the Byron Whites, the Lewis Powells and the Bill Rehnquists have contributed to the court even though they didn't sit on a lower federal court."
Of course he couldn't mention Miers by name, but if you believe that's not who he's talking about then you have a problem.
Yep, you're ever so FRiendly too!! Love ya
The problem I have is it was the reporter who injected Miers name not Scalia and makes the judgement that it appeard to be an endorsement (her opinion, CNBC BTW). He is quoted elsewhere (I'll try to find it) that it would not be appropriate for him to endorse her. The quote in your post does not endorse Miers but does approve of one of her characteristics, no judicial experience. My grandmother when on the pulpit committee of her church was asked by a church member what she thought of a particular candidate for pastor. Her response? Well, he wore a nice tie..