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: Sam who wrote (64112)	5/7/2008 1:38:51 PM
From: Lane3	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 543103

You said: "The point to Rule 4 was to avoid having any president pick someone would be so politically unacceptable to the minority that not even one minority member of the committee would find the nominee palatable." I said: "I do wish, though, that presidents would not try to pick the most politically polarizing guy they think they can get away with." And: "A good example of what I said I preferred" in response to John's "Clinton worked that process about as welll as it could be worked by working with Oren Hatch, the chair of the Judiciary Committee, before sending nominations forward." I don't see a real difference philosophical difference there. (Yours has a written rule and mine is just an understanding, but then your rule was broken so it was effectively no stronger than an understanding.) What difference worth arguing about do you see?