You’d think with our health care problems and alternate energy problems, maybe a physician or engineer could bring some value to the table for a change.

Anita Hill was trained in the law and went on to become a law professor, but she seemed to have trouble with the sixth amendment concept of facing one’s accuser. Unfortunately, as seen in the recent Duck case, many will find guilt upon suggestions that conform to their political views. The hearings showed beyond all doubt that Hill’s accusations were actually false. The most persuasive testimony was from a young man who said that Thomas chided him for talking dirty near the womwne in the office. To my recollection “Clarence told me to watch my language. If the women ever get riled up, nothing is going to get done.” But the facts were wasted on those who conclude before considering.

Holding to account is an attractive philosophy. But it’s application is fact dependent and subject to abuse. That John Edwards provided relief from greedy corporations and careless doctors rang true to those who did not, and in most cases can not reason correctly. The same is true for the “no child left behind” act. And what about those WMD’s?

Bottom line, I think Mr. Frank is too harsh on Senator Biden. He is not perfect, but he works hard and has a good heart. If I had my way, Senator Biden would be forced to read Mr. Lester Brickman’s excellent paper on the mass screening manipulations of the Plaintiff bar.