Pat just started off all wrong
The Court has seen its share of conservatives, but religious conservatives have been underrepresented. This could well be changing:
Ok two things already hammered that down.
#1) NO RELIGOUS LITMUS TEST
it says so in the constitution, and your use of a religous litmus test to -specifically- site her worth does tend to cast poor light on your cause
#2) So did O'Conner
People already found her religous and moral comments from back whent he President put her on the court. So I'm not going to dig them up. Not only does this not prove the underlying question ( is she a strict constructionist) it seems to be a distraction to avoid the conversation.
n terms of pure bio, Miers seems to be more in tune with the rank-and-file conservatives than a legal elitist with a Cambridge or New Haven address who's never written a contract.
*) it is kind of telling you have to insult people who disagree with you. When democrats do that we laugh at them and say they are bankrupt of ideas.
*) MANY of the names mentioned by those who weren't happy didn't go to Yale or Harvard Patrick and you know it
Not only is he wrong more then Pat Hynes... he goes around starting off with insults
you usually have to work with H-Bomb to get the insults
No comments:
Post a Comment