Post A Reply
my profile
|
directory
login
|
register
|
search
|
faq
|
forum home
»
RAILforum
»
General Forums
»
Open Discussion
»
Mr. Justice Scalia
» Post A Reply
Post A Reply
Login Name:
Password:
Message Icon:
Message:
HTML is not enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Gilbert B Norman: [QB] [URL=https://ballotpedia.org/Jane_Kelly]Gentleman's bet[/URL], anyone? A "narrow confirmation" say the tarot cards to me. Lest we forget, she was unanimously confirmed to a Lower Court (CCA8), so that would mean somebody who said she was qualified is now having to say she is not qualified. I believe, and this is solely my thought, that the confirmation process is to determine the qualifications of a designate - and nothing beyond. The system worked well when Nixon appointed a [URL=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G._Harrold_Carswell] political hack[/URL]; not so well when Reagan appointed Robert Bork. Bush 41's appointment of Justice Thomas get derailed with a whole bunch of irrelevant stuff. In short, the President, absent overwhelming evidence to the contrary, should "get his wo/man". It is part of the checks and balances that have served us "pretty well" since 1788. [/QB][/QUOTE]
Instant Graemlins
Instant UBB Code™
What is UBB Code™?
Options
Disable Graemlins in this post.
*** Click here to review this topic. ***
Contact Us
|
Home Page
Powered by
Infopop Corporation
UBB.classic™ 6.7.2
Copyright © 2007-2016
TrainWeb, Inc.
Top of Page
|
TrainWeb
|
About Us
|
Advertise With Us
|
Contact Us