Comments on: Beer, Cronyism and the Supreme Court http://realitycafe.blogsome.com/2005/10/04/beer-and-cronyism/ Your daily dose of (un)reality Thu, 10 Dec 2009 11:04:12 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=1.5.1-alpha by: raven http://realitycafe.blogsome.com/2005/10/04/beer-and-cronyism/#comment-148 Wed, 05 Oct 2005 10:17:02 +0100 http://realitycafe.blogsome.com/2005/10/04/beer-and-cronyism/#comment-148 Good points, guys! I'd just be a lot more comfortable if a nominee had spent a few years in an actual court. Good points, guys! I’d just be a lot more comfortable if a nominee had spent a few years in an actual court.

]]> by: gawker http://realitycafe.blogsome.com/2005/10/04/beer-and-cronyism/#comment-147 Wed, 05 Oct 2005 09:28:05 +0100 http://realitycafe.blogsome.com/2005/10/04/beer-and-cronyism/#comment-147 I think that along with cronyism it's also to do with the fact that Bush is not a very trusting person, and his circle of trust is quite limited. If you look at his appointments, he keeps appointing the same people to different positions. eg : Condi, Wolfovitz and now this woman. But look at the bright side : At least when asked to make a choice between cronyism and torture (Alberto), he chose cronyism. I think that along with cronyism it’s also to do with the fact that Bush is not a very trusting person, and his circle of trust is quite limited. If you look at his appointments, he keeps appointing the same people to different positions. eg : Condi, Wolfovitz and now this woman.

But look at the bright side : At least when asked to make a choice between cronyism and torture (Alberto), he chose cronyism.

]]> by: apu http://realitycafe.blogsome.com/2005/10/04/beer-and-cronyism/#comment-145 Tue, 04 Oct 2005 23:49:46 +0100 http://realitycafe.blogsome.com/2005/10/04/beer-and-cronyism/#comment-145 Raven, there could be two possibilities. 1. Ms. Miers doesnt have judicial experience, but her calibre in the matter is clearly perceived by all. As in, she is an extremely superior and excellent lawyer, and some of those qualities will move to the new job. The problem with this argument is that both jobs may not need the same skill sets at all. 2. Option 2 is ofcourse that she licks ass very well, and you know who's, thus giving her the best qualifications for the job. You've pointed this out under a more polite term cronyism. What can be done about it? I dont know. America seems to give the president sweeping powers to do just about anything. Veto legislation, put an end to the kind of scientific work he doesnt like (or atleast make it very hard to do), appoint whomever he likes. There needs to be sufficient debate on amending a constitution that gives him such sweeping powers. Raven, there could be two possibilities.

1. Ms. Miers doesnt have judicial experience, but her calibre in the matter is clearly perceived by all. As in, she is an extremely superior and excellent lawyer, and some of those qualities will move to the new job. The problem with this argument is that both jobs may not need the same skill sets at all.

2. Option 2 is ofcourse that she licks ass very well, and you know who’s, thus giving her the best qualifications for the job. You’ve pointed this out under a more polite term cronyism.

What can be done about it? I dont know. America seems to give the president sweeping powers to do just about anything. Veto legislation, put an end to the kind of scientific work he doesnt like (or atleast make it very hard to do), appoint whomever he likes.

There needs to be sufficient debate on amending a constitution that gives him such sweeping powers.

]]>