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 : View from the Center and Left -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Bridge Player who wrote (64013)	5/7/2008 10:34:26 AM
From: Lane3	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 543024

I'm not sure how much of that was just politics. Same with Thomas. The objection to the most recent nominees was IMO all politics. I do wish, though, that presidents would not try to pick the most politically polarizing guy they think they can get away with.

To: Bridge Player who wrote (64013)	5/7/2008 10:59:15 AM
From: JohnM	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 543024

I remember all too well the disgusting process with Robert Bork, an eminently qualified jurist. Edit added: not to mention Clarence Thomas. We could debate Bork, though it's well past the point of doing so. But Thomas was massively unqualified for the court. As I'm typing this, I'm trying to think back over the last twenty years or so of SC nominees. I can't think of a one that gets even close in terms of lack of qualification. Debates about Bork, Roberts and Alito go to, in my view, the function of the SC.