NYT on Bush judge appointments

[Justin Schwartz]

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.