[Mister Baredog]

uh, yes it does. Because there's still a role for the people: If they are sufficiently upset, they can contact their senators, who in their 'advise and consent' role, can keep her from getting on the bench.

Get it??

Yea I get it, do you think we're at that point now?

I heard the same crapola about Roberts, who really knows anyway.

Even the judges are not supposed to know how they'll vote on an issue until in comes to the court in the form of a specific case, GET IT.

Even Scalia and Thomas have been on opposite sides on some issues.

[flashbunny]

"Even the judges are not supposed to know how they'll vote on an issue until in comes to the court in the form of a specific case, GET IT."

Yes.

And if a judge is supposed to receive the consent of the senate, and by extension, the extent of the people, they should have something more to go on than "trust me".