Position on what, Michael? Just what particular point is Buyer trying to address here? Seems to be all over the map, with a lot of totally unnecessary hot air.
I listened to part of the debate over the radio. Much of the talk was repetitious, self-congratulatory or obfuscatory, etc. etc. Yet some of the discussions of specific points, some of the back and forth, I found quite absorbing.
Now that I have the full transcripts, I will review the remarks of the Congressmen, on both sides, who best address some of the points at issue. That is more interesting to me than fixating on the remarks of some Congressman with whom I know in advance I will "agree."
jbe
P.S. Tom Shales, the Washington Post's TV critic, gives a wicked review of the Judiciary Committee's hearings on Dec. 9. Shales is very harsh on Buyer, but does grant that by comparison with Bob Inglis, Buyer "looks like Oliver Wendell Holmes."
search.washingtonpost.com
I mention this only in illustration of the general truth that one man's prophet, or pet politician, is another man's poison.
|
