re: #139 Charles

Again — I disagree with Hinderaker that she was being dishonest. Her first statement in the speech is highly qualified — she’s “not sure she agrees with O’Connor,” she says “more often than not,” etc. And in the very next paragraph of the speech she says very clearly that she is not talking in absolutes, that “many are so capable” of reaching wise decisions despite differing backgrounds.

Well, I agree that it’s a moot point. She will be confirmed, whatever her answers today. But I personally agree with Hinderaker’s take (in fact, I made my comment before even knowing he had written an article on the same topic!).

Like I said at the top of the thread — Let’s just get it over with already! The hearings aren’t going to change anyone’s mind, one way or the other. She’ll be a Supreme Court justice probably for the next 25 years. It’s a bitter pill I’ve already accepted.