Yes, I read the opinion piece. And in the spirit of another critical poster, unless I get all of the details in the piece sourced, it is suspect and all quotes and information must be considered to have been taken out of context ;)
Besides, that goes nowhere to supporting your assertion that she was not qualified for the job. The fact that she did not perform well once she was there does not mean she was not "qualified" to be hired or appointed. You can never know how anyone will perform in a job until they actually have it.
And since were talking about attorneys, how about Clinton's firing of ALL 93 U.S. ATTORNEYS just after taking office? No, that wasn't political at all...
----- Original Message ----
From: Booth Martin <booth@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: Open discussion among iSeries Users <cpf0000@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2007 1:04:50 PM
Subject: Re: [CPF0000] Ooops... another inexperienced person appointed...?
Did you actually read the story? Even her Senator sponsor
has
abandoned
her.
Rich Rijnders wrote:
What credentials, indeed? What evidence do you have that she was
NOT
qualified?
