@CatherineofAragon @Frank Cannon@libertybele
I was playing a bit of devil's advocate about folks and their penchant for placing too much trust into one person's opinion of someone.
I suppose my skepticism of things and especially people got the better of me.
And I apologize for the use of "boi" with regards to Ted Cruz.
He is, after all, why I am here vs. TOS as recent threads and comments over there about him will attest.
It is sometimes better to trust the opinion of someone with more knowledge rather than to form an ill-informed opinion of your own.
Truly understanding a guy like Gorsuch would require reading almost everything he's written, his speeches, etc., as well as having a decent understanding of jurisprudential techniques, schools of thought, etc.. That is basically impossible for most of us. However, there are things like the Federalist Society, which is easily the most respected, pre-eminent association of conservative legal thinkers in the country. There are also outstanding conservative lawyers who have read many of his opinions, heard him speak, etc.. Again, that is not knowledge that most of us are in a position to recreate on our own.
So, relying on the opinions of strong conservatives with much more knowledge than we have is really the best most of us can do. Sure, we can read a few articles, etc., but unless we're reading the actual
opinions, and maybe even getting more educated on the facts or issues raised in the lower court, trusting a few blurbs in a critical article as being a fair or accurate representation of his views is dangerous.
I've had two cases in front of him, and personally heard him speak in April of this year. That's not enough for me to give a guarantee on how he will rule, though it did tell me he is ridiculously intelligent and at least professes to a strong belief in textualism, which is a major positive. But nobody can ever be absolutely sure about how someone will rule on the Court -- sometimes the views of the justices themselves evolve. Generally, though, the people vouching for him are essentially a who's who of conservative legal thought and scholarship. It's not really possible to do much better than that, because someone can find some wart on every single potential nominee.
[/i]
So
