The Punning Pundit

Look for a smooth and speedy confirmation. BTW, you're almost certainly looking at the next Chief Justice of the United States. Why?

44% of Hispanics voted for Bush this round, compared with only 35% 4 years ago.

Why? Gay marriage? Abortion? The economy? Iraq? No. Two words:

Miguel Estrada.

(Miguel is from my college class, along with Barack Obama and Peter Bacanovic, btw).

Senate Dems will not-- WILL NOT-- risk alienating this key constituency once again.

This is why we have to play principle, rather than politics. Because they play politics better.

Talking Dog...

While I understand the comment, I have to point out that 1/2 the voting population disagrees with your last line... Alot of the problems in this past election was that Kerry was viewed as someone who played politics to much/well, while Bush was viewed as principled.

As to firing people... Why fire them for doing thier job? It's a lawyer's _job_ to look at the laws, and help thier clients understand what position they are in, and what they are allowed to do. Thier personal ethics are not only not supposed to play into it, they can be dis-barred in some cases for allowing thier personal ethics into thier professional lives.

Now... While I'll grant that torture isn't a good thing, but it is _not_ an open and shut moral/ethical case.

It usually can be boiled down to either of the classic questions, Ends/Means, or Many/Few. Neither question has ever been successfully answered, philosophically. Even if you answer those, you still have a slippery slope to deal with.

Yeah, yeah, I can see the replies now. But answer these first, is inflicting any amount of pain, mental, emotional, religeous, or physical, acceptable in any case? Is it acceptable to keep someone awake for medically dangerous amounts of time? Is it allowable to imprison someone in solitary confinement? How about if that prison were somehow damaging to the prisoner?

Is it acceptable to hurt someone, if that will save another's life? Save many lives? If no to either, then how can self-defense be justified?

Note, I skated around the classic question. Also note, that you may have a knee-jerk answer, and it might even be the one you would be willing to do if it was you personally, and it might even be the one you would do if actually in the situation. But it's _not_ the same answer as someone else out there... A sane, rational someone else.

Rand.