CB
>>> jkschw at hotmail.com 10/31/00 12:34PM >>>
I didn't say what confirmation votes should be about. In fact I think they
should be political. However, there is an element of competence that is in
play, and those who voted for Thomas voted on pure politics without taking
competence into account, which is disgracefrul. If you think, as many do,
that politics should not play a role in whether to vote to confirm a judge,
it is not a disgrace to vote for such an awesimely competent judge as
Scalia. --jks
>Justin Schwartz wrote:
>
>>Scalia, however, is clearly more than qualified, unlike Thomas,w ho
>>is rather less than qualified. It's not a disgrace to have voted for
>>him. --jks
>
>But Scalia's a raving reactionary and theocrat. Surely you don't take
>the position that confirmation votes should be about "competence" and
>not "politics," do you?
>
>Doug
_________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.
Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at http://profiles.msn.com.