Of course, I also wonder what the result would be if a nominee had the courage to stand up in confirmation hearingas and say: I am in favor of abortion being legal. But Roe v. Wade was a terrible excuse for a legal decsion — it’s just bad law.

Now, there is nothing wrong, per se, about a judge reflecting the tenor of the president who appoints him–my problem is the caliber of the appointee. We have had some REAL stinkers the past two decades.

It seems that each President picks one stinker.

President’s have worked so hard to find appointees who can sneak under the radar they have ignored quality candidates. I mean, first he was going to nominate Harriet Meiers, an incredibly poor choice and he replaces her with Samuel Alito? Seriously, are you kidding me? Those were such bad choices that it’s amazing he picked John Roberts. who so far seems to be a very good choice.

Then look at Clinton. Ginsberg seems incapable of looking at a case with anything but partisan eyes. Breyer seems to be pretty average.

George HW Bush picked Clarence Thomas–I mean, come on. The guy shouldn’t be a lawyer, let alone a Supreme Court Justice. Souter has actually been pretty good.

Reagan’s appointee Scalia….crap, that just scares me. O’Connor may have been one of the better Justices ever. How does the same guy pick these two?