From: grendel@camelot.bradley.edu (Alyosha Bourgea)
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: God Help Us All! (mutter, mutter,) Amen!
Date: 12 Nov 92 16:04:39 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Bradley University

In <1992Nov10.153758.2985@galileo.physics.arizona.edu> krueger@galileo.physics.arizona.edu (Ted Krueger) writes:

>In article <grendel.721285610@camelot> grendel@camelot.bradley.edu (Alyosha Bourgea) writes:
>>In <6815@news.duke.edu> eyc@acpub.duke.edu (EMIL CHUCK) writes:
>>
>>>marcr@studsys.mscs.mu.edu (Marc Rassbach) writes:
>>>$In article <1992Nov6.184705.198@hsh.com> paul@hsh.com writes:
>>>$
>>>$George Bush said "Clarence Thomas was BEST qualified for the job."
>>
>>>$No one in political power either had the guts to say 'bullshit' or
>>>$COULD say such.  ("Best qualified" is very subjective.  The best possible
>>>$person in the land?  I highly doubt it.  The best minority who wasn't
>>>$very contriversal and was most likely to hold an anti-roe viewpoint? 
>>>$Probably.)  So instead of calling an ace an ace and a spade a spade,
>>>$the committee attacked whatever they could to try to manufacture
>>>$whatever they could get to say no.  Anitia Hill, well if they had
>>>$brought it up right away, I'd bet it would have been handled alot
>>>$less 'messy'.  The committee failed to take what Anitia said
>>>$seriously.
>>>$
>>>$Either way, the post (in a political utopia) should be filled by the
>>>$best person, reguardless of political stripe.  
>>>$
>>>$>Can we assume that "character doesn't matter" now, regardless of ideology?
>>>$
>>>$No, tis better to assume a political appointment was made to what
>>>$(in utopia) should be a politically neutral office.  And (what could
>>>$politition would want to stop that?) the opposing side used any tool
>>>$they could get their hands on.
>>>$
>>>$Expect the Democratic choice to fair just as well.
>>
>>>Okay. Mario Cuomo "would be an excellent choice [for the Supreme
>>>Court]." (MTV special) He sure seems to be the BEST qualified for the
>>>job too. Right?
>>
>>He'd be a hell of a lot better choice than Thomas was.  The Court is supposed
>>to be balanced.  Cuomo, a liberal, would do better than Thomas to balance out
>>the ideology of the Court.

>Crap.  I didn't hear any of you liberals whinning about balance when you 
>had the court in your hip pocket.  After listening to you folks cry about 
>the supreme court for the last several years I just have to smile when 
>you accuse us of whinning about the presidential election.  We have got 
>nothing on you.

I don't know who or when you're referring to, but the court hasn't been in the
hip pocket of the liberals since Warren Burger, and that was quite a bit before
I was born.  You're right, I might not have whined back then.  But neither, I
suspect, would you--unless you want to whine about desegregation, etc.  Of
course, desegregation is not considered a liberal ideal today, but just
remember who initiated it.  If it hadn't been for those crazy liberals...

Nevertheless, this is moot.  I haven't had a chance to be smug about government
for any of the eighteen years of my life, because government has consistently
been controlled by either conservatives or ineffectual liberals like Carter.
From: patm@hpfcso.FC.HP.COM (Pat Murphy)
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 20:35:32 GMT
Subject: Re: INDEPENDENT HOUSE SPEAKER
Organization: Hewlett-Packard, Fort Collins, CO, USA