You couldn't pick two bigger duds for SCOTUS.

[Dees]

IMHO. Legal scholars? Hardly. Well experienced judges? Hardly. This is crony inner circle bullshit. Apples from the same tree. Is this the best MonkeyNuts can find? Conservative or moderate? Packing the court with friends. I wonder why? We all KNOW there will little or no opposition. Christ on the cross.

[LynneSin]

1. No Judicial History to question: DINGDINGDING - we have a winner

For the Bush Regime to pick someone who actually served as a judge means that the Judiciary committee AND especially the democrats would have a history for them to pick through and question.

Blank slates is what the Bush Regime needs to give to the Judiciary Committee. I'm sure this new selection has, in private, promised to the follow the Bush Regime legacy to a "T" if appointed to the Supreme Court. That's all that counts for them.

[RevolutionStartsNow]

2. This was my biggest argument against voting for * in 2004

We all knew he would have at least 1 SCOTUS nomination, and countless lower court appointments. THIS is exactly why we needed to get him out. It's not bad enough that he appointed that incompetent Michael Brown to head FEMA, but he's now putting his cronies on the freakin' SUPREME COURT.

What a joke. But you know what, voters, the joke's on us! Damn.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

3. Replacing two Stanford Law grads with Southern Methodist grad?

Cronyism.

And Thomas was some kind of legal mind that replaced Thurgood Marshall (more or mostly less)?

[butchcjg]

4. Rhenquist never judge....over 1/2 of justices never judge

[Az]

5. Everyone knew from day one that the SCOTUS was the target

Politicians come and go. But the SC is far more lasting. George has always been about controlling the SC. And these two ciphers are what they give us?

They have had 6 years to hand pick who they were going to place. They must have been waiting with baited breath. So why these two? What was the intent in them?

[Mandate My Ass]

6. they may appear to be duds

but something tells me the shitstorms they're going to create are going to be of biblical proportions.

[Sal Minella]

7. One who won't talk about what he believes or show paper trail,

and one who has no paper trail and will believe whatever she's told to believe.

These are not duds. She already mentioned the founders' vision, so we are to be without separation of church and state (not in the Constitution, folks) and without choice and it's back to the days of blacksmiths and flintlocks for SCOTUS.

[librechik]

8. oh yeah? Wait til Shrub's next one.