Comments on: The Supreme Court’s Michael Brown? http://sevenels.net/blog/?p=176 Letting the air out Thu, 17 May 2012 22:51:52 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: Oliver http://sevenels.net/blog/?p=176&cpage=1#comment-58 Oliver Tue, 04 Oct 2005 16:58:00 +0000 http://sevenels.net/blog/?p=176#comment-58 Hey, guess what? Rhenquist at least was clerk to Supreme Court justice Robert Jackson, which automatically gives him ten times the Supreme Court experience of Miers. While it's true that there were justices with little to no judicial experience (John Marshall, Earl Warren, and Robert Jackson himself come to mind), that doesn't make it a good idea. Rhenquest was appointed by Nixon, no bastion of honesty, but not generally considered intellectually lacking. Jackson was appointed by Roosevelt, Warren by Eisenhower, and Marshall by John Adams, all Presidents whose judgment and integrity are virtually impeccable. My point in Bush's nomination of Miers is his virtually unbroken track record of questionable judgment. At this time of rife corruption and pratfalls, is this really the time for him to place into power a member of his inner circle who would otherwise have not been given a single consideration? BTW, thank you for taking the time to put up with the word verification. I know it's a pain, but I appreciate the comments. Hey, guess what? Rhenquist at least was clerk to Supreme Court justice Robert Jackson, which automatically gives him ten times the Supreme Court experience of Miers. While it’s true that there were justices with little to no judicial experience (John Marshall, Earl Warren, and Robert Jackson himself come to mind), that doesn’t make it a good idea. Rhenquest was appointed by Nixon, no bastion of honesty, but not generally considered intellectually lacking. Jackson was appointed by Roosevelt, Warren by Eisenhower, and Marshall by John Adams, all Presidents whose judgment and integrity are virtually impeccable.

My point in Bush’s nomination of Miers is his virtually unbroken track record of questionable judgment. At this time of rife corruption and pratfalls, is this really the time for him to place into power a member of his inner circle who would otherwise have not been given a single consideration?

BTW, thank you for taking the time to put up with the word verification. I know it’s a pain, but I appreciate the comments.

]]> By: kevin sandlin http://sevenels.net/blog/?p=176&cpage=1#comment-57 kevin sandlin Tue, 04 Oct 2005 16:30:00 +0000 http://sevenels.net/blog/?p=176#comment-57 Hey, guess what? RHENQUIST had never been a judge when he was nominated to the high court. He was a fairly good Chief Justice, no? There have been 35 - yes THIRTY FIVE - other justices who weren't judges before their tenure on the high court, some of whom weren't even LAWYERS! Hey, guess what? RHENQUIST had never been a judge when he was nominated to the high court. He was a fairly good Chief Justice, no? There have been 35 – yes THIRTY FIVE – other justices who weren’t judges before their tenure on the high court, some of whom weren’t even LAWYERS!

]]>