Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lane3 who wrote (109731)	4/17/2005 12:03:21 AM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793717

The only position I firmly hold is a broad one--that we should not have anyone installed as judge for life who is controversial It would be hard not to be controversial in today's climate of judical nominations. If you believe in a "living constitution" your controversial on one side, if you do not then you are controversial on the other. I suppose if you pretty much accept all of the changes that have in effect been made by the court but oppose any new changes you might not be too controversial but I don't know that this would be a good criteria for judges. If there is to be an evolution to reshare the judiciary it has to start somehwere. The Democrats won't support anyone who doesn't want to continue down the path things have been heading for the last several decades. Tim