[Rodney King]

Flawed reasoning, Rodney. You use an assumption, rather than fact, that Miers was/is a fundamentalist moderate, and compound your error by extending that assumption to a preference of your assumption over another of your assumptions. Is it your interest to keep trying to foster a divide ?

So which assumption do you disagree with?

Anyway, do you deny that people are upset that another Catholic was nominated?

[MortMan]

Anyway, do you deny that people are upset that another Catholic was nominated?

Do you deny the fact that "people" were royally pi$$ed off when certain factions worked exceedingly hard to vilify Harriet Miers from the instant of her nomination (before anything at all was known about her)? I don't give a flip whether or not we can "all get along", but you obviously live for the division.

My nickle's worth of free advice? Get over yourself.

[KMAJ2]

[[So which assumption do you disagree with?]]

I contend your assumption/evaluation of Miers is unprovable, and will never be proven, one way or the other. So why the need to create that characterization ?

I also disagree with your assumption of preference. It was not a matter of preferring Miers over Alito. Those that argued against withdrawal were arguing for her to have her hearing before deciding. Your statement is not just an assumption, on your part, it is a pejorative allegation with no basis in fact.

[[Anyway, do you deny that people are upset that another Catholic was nominated?]]

That may turn out to be the case, but I have seen nothing that engenders or supports the argument that his religion will be a major factor in the confirmation process. This will be a battle over ideology, not over qualifications or his personal religious allegiance.

[gogeo]

Anyway, do you deny that people are upset that another Catholic was nominated?

OMG...I assumed you were kidding!