5 thoughts on “Note to Republicans in charge:”

  1. Born-again Christianity is not repeat not a qualification…

    I’ll happily agree to that as long as “born-again Christianity” is also not a disqualifier.

    However, I might argue with your post title. I’m no longer confident that there are any Republicans in charge. 😉

  3. Eric:

    I don’t think a person’s religion has anything to do with one’s qualifications for the Supreme Court, one way or another. I specifically think it shouldn’t be taken into account at all.

    However, with Miers’ nomination, all one (well, me) heard about were her very ordinary record as a judge, and her extraordinarily strong born-again Christian beliefs. So I got the idea that it was her born-again-ness that got her the nomination, not any judicial qualities.

  4. Well, actually, she has no record as a judge. She’s never been a judge.

    And I would think that you, dear Patti, would be the last person to judge another person by what you hear in the media about her.

    I’m not trying to justify her nomination, but I don’t really think she ever got her “day in court” so that any of us could properly assess her qualifications. Nor will she ever, now.

    The politics of SCOTUS nominations is enough to make one want to go blog about nothing but baby squirrels.

  5. Well, that would explain why I’d never heard of her record!

    I’d like to say, of course, that my getting carried away with my judgment of her was due to her getting nominated while I was seven time zones away, or something like that… But sometimes, one just trips and falls. 😐

Comments are closed.