Comments on: Poll: Americans Overwhelmingly Support Sotomayor http://donklephant.com/2009/05/30/poll-americans-overwhelmingly-support-sotomayor/ Big Teeth. Huge Ass. Surprisingly Reasonable. Sat, 20 Mar 2010 23:56:52 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9 hourly 1 By: Mark-NC http://donklephant.com/2009/05/30/poll-americans-overwhelmingly-support-sotomayor/comment-page-1/#comment-472527 Mark-NC Sun, 31 May 2009 23:21:48 +0000 http://donklephant.com/?p=14977#comment-472527 "Gabe Says: I’m a Republican, but I think some of the stuff people like Rush and Newt have been saying is ridiculous" Gabe: This is no more ridiculous than the "palling around with terrorists" crap, or Obama might be a closet terrorist, or he's a Socialist/Marxist/Fascist/Communist, or he's the Anti-Christ, or he wants the country to fail, or he wants the troops to die. Why is this any different? “Gabe Says:

I’m a Republican, but I think some of the stuff people like Rush and Newt have been saying is ridiculous”

Gabe:

This is no more ridiculous than the “palling around with terrorists” crap, or Obama might be a closet terrorist, or he’s a Socialist/Marxist/Fascist/Communist, or he’s the Anti-Christ, or he wants the country to fail, or he wants the troops to die.

Why is this any different?

]]> By: Gabe http://donklephant.com/2009/05/30/poll-americans-overwhelmingly-support-sotomayor/comment-page-1/#comment-472351 Gabe Sun, 31 May 2009 21:03:40 +0000 http://donklephant.com/?p=14977#comment-472351 I'm a Republican, but I think some of the stuff people like Rush and Newt have been saying is ridiculous. I’m a Republican, but I think some of the stuff people like Rush and Newt have been saying is ridiculous.

]]> By: the Word http://donklephant.com/2009/05/30/poll-americans-overwhelmingly-support-sotomayor/comment-page-1/#comment-472127 the Word Sun, 31 May 2009 03:37:01 +0000 http://donklephant.com/?p=14977#comment-472127 I'll have to agree with Simon here. I think term limits sound appealing because of the long term problems a court skewed in one direction can lead us but any change should be deliberate based on the facts as best they can be ascertained. I am not one who believes that no good thought can come past the framers though. They were a mess too. Lots of imperfection tolerated to get the votes needed. Same as it ever was. I’ll have to agree with Simon here. I think term limits sound appealing because of the long term problems a court skewed in one direction can lead us but any change should be deliberate based on the facts as best they can be ascertained. I am not one who believes that no good thought can come past the framers though. They were a mess too. Lots of imperfection tolerated to get the votes needed. Same as it ever was.

]]> By: Simon http://donklephant.com/2009/05/30/poll-americans-overwhelmingly-support-sotomayor/comment-page-1/#comment-471678 Simon Sat, 30 May 2009 19:56:13 +0000 http://donklephant.com/?p=14977#comment-471678 I don't think it would really make much difference whether the public were for her or against her (and for most of those surveyed, the opinions of those who are for her are likely to be as founded on ignorance of her views as those who are against her). Obama has sixty votes, and she isn't conspicuously unqualified, as Miers was, so she'll be confirmed. There are various ingenious arguments for and against judicial term limits, but I am opposed simply because it would require a Constitutional amendment and I am opposed to wanton amendments of the Constitution based not on necessity or experience, but on vague a priori theories of what might be a good idea. If one compares the quality of the courts in states with appointed judiciaries and retirement ages with those of states with appointed judiciaries but no retirement ages, what do we find? I don’t think it would really make much difference whether the public were for her or against her (and for most of those surveyed, the opinions of those who are for her are likely to be as founded on ignorance of her views as those who are against her). Obama has sixty votes, and she isn’t conspicuously unqualified, as Miers was, so she’ll be confirmed.

There are various ingenious arguments for and against judicial term limits, but I am opposed simply because it would require a Constitutional amendment and I am opposed to wanton amendments of the Constitution based not on necessity or experience, but on vague a priori theories of what might be a good idea. If one compares the quality of the courts in states with appointed judiciaries and retirement ages with those of states with appointed judiciaries but no retirement ages, what do we find?

]]>