cougarguard.com — unofficial BYU Cougars / LDS sports, football, basketball forum and message board  

Go Back   cougarguard.com — unofficial BYU Cougars / LDS sports, football, basketball forum and message board > non-Sports > Current Events

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 05-10-2010, 05:48 PM   #1
Archaea
Assistant to the Regional Manager
 
Archaea's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: The Orgasmatron
Posts: 24,338
Archaea is an unknown quantity at this point
Default Failed Judicial Nominations

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of..._United_States

Quote:
There was still an appointment to be made for a replacement for Sandra Day O'Connor, and on October 3, 2005 Bush nominated Harriet Miers, a corporate attorney from Texas who had served as Bush's private attorney and as White House Counsel. Miers was widely perceived as unqualified for the position — she had never served as a judge — and lacked a clear record on controversial issues. The nomination was immediately attacked by politicians and commentators from across the political spectrum. At Miers' request, Bush withdrew her nomination on October 27, ostensibly to avoid violating executive privilege by disclosing details of her work at the White House. Four days later, Bush nominated Samuel Alito to the seat. Alito was confirmed by a vote of 58–42 on January 31, 2006.
Actually, Bush for his criticism appears to have nominated qualified justices, sans Miers of course.

Obama gets an easy pass on an unqualified candidate. Go figure.
__________________
Ἓν οἶδα ὅτι οὐδὲν οἶδα
Archaea is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-10-2010, 06:29 PM   #2
MikeWaters
Demiurge
 
MikeWaters's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 36,363
MikeWaters is an unknown quantity at this point
Default

Kagan is a known quantity among the power-elite in Washington.

Miers was not apparently an insider in the same way. She had not spent her life ingratiating herself with those in political power, other than her narrow Texas circle.

Kagan is "brilliant" we are told over and over. Without evidence.
MikeWaters is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-10-2010, 06:49 PM   #3
SeattleUte
 
SeattleUte's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 10,665
SeattleUte has a little shameless behaviour in the past
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeWaters View Post
Kagan is a known quantity among the power-elite in Washington.

Miers was not apparently an insider in the same way. She had not spent her life ingratiating herself with those in political power, other than her narrow Texas circle.

Kagan is "brilliant" we are told over and over. Without evidence.
How do you define "brilliant"? Summa at Princeton and at Harvard law, editor in chief of the Harvard Law Review, Dean of Harvard's law school at a young age (the first woman), professor at Chicago, practiced with the foremost litigation firm in the United States.

Does that meet your prima facie case for brilliant? "Without evidence" seems a stretch in any event.

I know she stands for much that you reject in terms of your personal beliefs. But I don't think attacking her intelligence is a very credible way to critique her nomination or at least keep her honest.
__________________
Interrupt all you like. We're involved in a complicated story here, and not everything is quite what it seems to be.

—Paul Auster
SeattleUte is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-10-2010, 07:32 PM   #4
MikeWaters
Demiurge
 
MikeWaters's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 36,363
MikeWaters is an unknown quantity at this point
Default

Her work product seems to consist mainly of friends in high places. It's a club, once you are in, you are in.

We live in a society full of douchebags who seek power, and in doing so, try and never take any positions on issues that might come to haunt them later.

Take the poster named "Adam" as an example. There is another lawyer who has been on CG who I am told has gone to lengths to erase his record.

What we see is that they have positions, and want to discuss them, but are paranoid about being on the record.

Kagan is obviously that to the nth degree. Lessons in non-courage. We have now entirely turned away from our Borks. We now desire intellectual lightweights with no work product.
MikeWaters is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-10-2010, 07:57 PM   #5
Archaea
Assistant to the Regional Manager
 
Archaea's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: The Orgasmatron
Posts: 24,338
Archaea is an unknown quantity at this point
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SeattleUte View Post
How do you define "brilliant"? Summa at Princeton and at Harvard law, editor in chief of the Harvard Law Review, Dean of Harvard's law school at a young age (the first woman), professor at Chicago, practiced with the foremost litigation firm in the United States.

Does that meet your prima facie case for brilliant? "Without evidence" seems a stretch in any event.

I know she stands for much that you reject in terms of your personal beliefs. But I don't think attacking her intelligence is a very credible way to critique her nomination or at least keep her honest.
She has positions achievable by virtue of her knowing the right people and being the right gender at the time. Note Mike did not say she was stupid, and she obviously did a journeyman's job to get the degrees but none of that is prima facie evidence of brilliance.

She is like our other current nominees, a coward, unwilling to speak out. And that pedigree might be enough to get her a job, but it doesn't sound like she stood out any where.

Mike is right, she simply knew the right people. There must be better people amongst the liberal elite, somebody who's actually articulated a public position on something relevant.
__________________
Ἓν οἶδα ὅτι οὐδὲν οἶδα
Archaea is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-11-2010, 06:27 PM   #6
RedHeadGal
Senior Member
 
RedHeadGal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: DC
Posts: 995
RedHeadGal is on a distinguished road
Default

is that how law review worked at your law school? knowing the right people?

does she come from money? I don't even know. how did she get on the Princeton path in the first place?
RedHeadGal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-11-2010, 07:10 PM   #7
Archaea
Assistant to the Regional Manager
 
Archaea's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: The Orgasmatron
Posts: 24,338
Archaea is an unknown quantity at this point
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RedHeadGal View Post
is that how law review worked at your law school? knowing the right people?

does she come from money? I don't even know. how did she get on the Princeton path in the first place?
Law review was the result of kissing ass with the profs, and being in good graces of those upper classmen who helped make the decision.
__________________
Ἓν οἶδα ὅτι οὐδὲν οἶδα
Archaea is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 09:25 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.