Talk:George H. W. Bush Supreme Court candidates

Politics Section
"As a Yankee aristocrat and a non-lawyer, Bush showed less interest in issues relating to the Supreme Court than other presidents before and after him." This statement under the politics section is odd. It seems more like conjecture then actual fact. The source also is a CNN analyst which might lend more credence to why I think it is not proven factual and more opinionated. I think it should be removed and re-written, specifically the "Yankee aristocrat" statement and the claim that he showed less interest in the court, as that would be difficult to ascertain since we may never know with certainty President G.H.W. Bush’s motivations. Hunnydaisy (talk) 04:31, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Souter was on the First Circuit not the Second —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.27.111.121 (talk) 18:28, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Indeed - fixed. Cheers! bd2412  T 19:03, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

The Great Copy 'n Paste scandal at the Wikipedia
First, let's boot the following link, paying particularly close attention, to your first sentence:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_W._Bush_Supreme_Court_candidates

Then, let's boot the next link for a look-see at the very first sentence, on daddy's page:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_H._W._Bush_Supreme_Court_candidates

Such a wonderful, gripping, stylish opening sentence, don't you think? I vote let's copy and paste the whole kit 'n kaboodle at the Wikipedia, beginning each page: "... Speculation abounded, over potential nominations to the..." [SNIP] - asj. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 100.39.22.117 (talk) 16:42, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

Overall
This page is dumb and no longer notable. And the "Overview" secion is not an overview, and is statements of opinions that are irrelevant, unsourced, and arguably incorrect. 169.252.4.22 (talk) 14:52, 22 August 2018 (UTC)