He's contrarian and likes to take shocking positions. I think he's usually a very good judge, and he's the leading legal theorist in America. It's hard for me to see how anyone could defend Bush v. Gore, which I regard as worse, legally speaking, than Dred Scott v. Sanford, but if anyone can make it sedem less than disgraceful, it would be Posner. He is definitely worth reading. he is cultivated, literate, interesting, a fine stylist with a lively mind, and always provocative. I don't think he's dishonest, but he _is_ a Republican. --jks
>
>
>>At 03:37 AM 7/22/01 +0000, you wrote:
>>
>>>That's why Posner's right that philosophical arguments don't trump strong
>>>intuitions. --jks
>
>i've never read posner except for one article. i must say, though, that i
>heard him in an interview this a.m. it was about his book on the court and
>the election. now, this guy is dishonest, plain and simple.
>
_________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp