Howie, are you saying you were impressed with Thomas’ intelligence, thoughtfulness, integrity, temperament and depth of knowledge of the law?
I recall him saying over and over again he wasn’t familiar with past cases and legal concepts which is FAR different than not commenting on legal concepts that may come before the Court in the future.
and I won’t even go into how Specter treated Anita Hill and as Chairman allowed two male “acquaintances” to testify about their perception of Hill at a party, something to the effect of they thought she looked like she “wanted” it.
One of the most disgusting scenes to ever occur in a Senate chamber, even if you don’t believe Hill’s charges. No court would hear “testimony” from two men who were apparently chomping at the bit for their 15 min. of fame and eager to share their “feelings” about how they perceived the aura of a woman they don’t even know. Despicable in the extreme. Do you remember those two clowns?
So Howie, if that didn’t bother you …. i’ll let it go at that
Howie, are you saying you were impressed with Thomas’ intelligence, thoughtfulness, integrity, temperament and depth of knowledge of the law?
I recall him saying over and over again he wasn’t familiar with past cases and legal concepts which is FAR different than not commenting on legal concepts that may come before the Court in the future.
and I won’t even go into how Specter treated Anita Hill and as Chairman allowed two male “acquaintances” to testify about their perception of Hill at a party, something to the effect of they thought she looked like she “wanted” it.
One of the most disgusting scenes to ever occur in a Senate chamber, even if you don’t believe Hill’s charges. No court would hear “testimony” from two men who were apparently chomping at the bit for their 15 min. of fame and eager to share their “feelings” about how they perceived the aura of a woman they don’t even know. Despicable in the extreme. Do you remember those two clowns?
So Howie, if that didn’t bother you …. i’ll let it go at that