4 hours of searching
Four hours of searching? Where were you searching, the back of your 'fridge? I admit I had to really search to dig up that bit I posted. I put his name in Google, and I think it was actually the third link. The first two were boiler-plate recycled "news" stories.
For one thing, he has all the right enemies, which has got to count for something. MoveOn.Org sez he's a "right wing corporate lawyer who would join the right wing activist block of Scalia and Thomas."
He's written a number of opinions that read seriously pro-life, pro-freedom, etc. Rehnquist likes him, most conservative sites are gushing over him, he's Catholic, so Gregg's probably high-fiving his cats over this.
We'll have to see how the confirmation process goes. I'm guessing that the guy will get through. Bush, contra conventional wisdom, is a seriously smart guy. Given the perceived stakes for the Supreme Court, and given it's one of the reasons the Repubs gave for NEEDING people to vote for Bush, I can't imagine they'd have floated this guy if they weren't sure he'd get in.
But, you're right, you just never know how they're gonna turn out. The problem is the sibilant siren whispering of the left "...Trusssst Ussss, We Can Fix It... We're Sssssmarter Than Everyone Elsssse... We Know What We're Doing... We've eaten from The Tree of Knowledge.." and that can corrupt just about anyone.
The proofs in the pudding. So, for good or ill, we wont know until it's to late.
I miss Bad Joke Wednesday
We are going to find out real soon. Ayotte V. Planned Parenthood will be heard this upcoming term and in 2006, the Congressional Partial birth abortion legislation will hit SCOTUS. So, we should know sooner rather than later.
Of course, these justices tend to get more liberal (not more conservative) the longer they sit on high. Look at Kennedy. So that is something to worry about.
The only thing that gives me some hope is that many conservatives didn't care much for Thomas during his confirmation either because he didn't have a "paper trail" and no "on the record" statements about anything other than his opposition to affirmative action.
All I can hope is that Roberts is more like Thomas than O'Connor.
Prophet, it last night. The President got us started.
Sounds like Nate's been boneing up on his Ann Coulter.
http://anncoulter.com/cgi-local/....cgi?
article=66
If a smart and accomplished person goes this long without expressing an opinion, they'd better be pursuing the Miss America title.
Actually Ann's been bonin' up on her Nate. I've not read her article yet. Great minds think alike though... either that or she wants to be a Harem Girl.
As for my 4 hours... they were spent with google and yahoo... searching for actual opinions or quotes from opinions.
What I found was nothing. I know absolutely nothing about this man, what he thinks, or what his judicial outlook is.
I don't care about what people say about him, or what he said while representing some client or another. I want to know what HE has said himself.
That ain't out there.
No kidding. The guy has, like, no paper trail anywhere. I remarked earlier, on another blog, that I wonder if he's been leading his life for this sole purpose, making decisions based on how they'd reflect on him at this point. Sort of John Kerry-esque.
Hey, I'm in a big hurry right now, don't have time to say much but Nate you might find the Wednesday Mickelsen show on http://www.whoradio.com/main.html
interesting. He quotes Roberts as saying that Roe is the settled law of the land.
You may have to download the whole show to get to the stuff in the second hour but it was very interesting. I'll comment later.
"He quotes Roberts as saying that Roe is the settled law of the land."
He said this as an appellate court nominee. EVERY appellate court nominee says the same thing, because for the purposes of the appellate court, what the Supreme court has ruled as constitutional/unconstitutional IS the settled law of the land. An appellate judge is not to interpret the constitution, he is to apply legla precendent. Roe is precedent.
Once he is in the position to interpret the constitution, it is a different story.
Unlike Souter, he did clerk for Rehnquist, he did work for both Reagan and Bush I. His wife has worked as VP for a rabidly pro-life group. Couples often share the same beliefs, positions, etc.
I am willing to keep an open mind until I know for sure.
Is it just me, or does this remind some of the older ones of y'all of David (the Enigma) Souter. I remember many of the same things being said about this guy that were said about Souter, and we all know how that turned out. This guy is out of nowhere, much like Souter. Bork I could understand and agree with.... he had a track record that was second to none, and the backbone to match. This guy?? Who is he?? If he doesn't have the balls to speak up before this on who he is and where he stands, what makes anyone think he will speak up now?? This is the ultimate stealth candidate to appease the right... much like Souter was 13-14-15 years ago. Wake up people!!
Is it just me, or does this remind some of the older ones of y'all of David (the Enigma) Souter.
Two things.
First. Yes, he does faintly resemble Souter, but Souter was REALLY an unknown. Roberts actually has some pretty firm quotes down on paper, and he's worked with some really good groups. So, I'm a bit more comfortable with him. Given his history, he's been a lawyer, not a judge, there's not gonna be many opinions written by him.
Second. I really like the idea that Bush is pushing this guy as the nominee for two reasons. First reason; he's not a novelty candidate (i.e, he didn't fill a "women's seat", Bush seems to have tried to pick a legit justice regardless of special interest groups). Second reason, as far as it's possible to get a solid conservative past Congress, this guy has a great shot of getting in. This guy is not an "appeaser" kind of nominee. I really think this guy is as solid a conservative as Bush can get past Congress. In other words, Bush appears to be honestly trying to deliver on his promise to get conservatives on the court.
"Second reason, as far as it's possible to get a solid conservative past Congress, this guy has a great shot of getting in. "
This is what I hate about republicans. Democrats never wonder if their nominee is to liberal to get appointed.
Also, regarding Souter, he came about because of the ambush on Bork. So, the homework done on him was sketchy. Apparently, this Roberts guy has been pretty well vetted. His name has been thrown around for a few months, and people acted pleasantly surprised to hear he got the nod. So, I'm not quite as worried about him as some. The Bork stunt was something that you get to do once, so I'm thinking Bush is pretty sure this guy is gonna go through.
BTW, remember the deal with Snarlin Arlen, this guy is gonna get a floor vote. And remember the deal with the RINO repubs, we'll see if and how this all holds together.
Democrats never wonder if their nominee is to liberal to get appointed.
Yeah, but fortunately they haven't had a chance to test that recently. Let's keep it that way.
I, and my two boys, miss Bad Joke Wednesday. Maybe we need a revolution, take over the site. Any hackers out there?
{/}BTW, remember the deal with Snarlin Arlen, this guy is gonna get a floor vote. And remember the deal with the RINO repubs, we'll see if and how this all holds together{/}
WTF!!?? When should you have to "make a deal" for the asshole senator from penisvania to DO HIS DAMN JOB!!!
Ok Ok Ok...
I've blown it... I hearby promise that Badjoke Wednesday will return to this space next week and will continue to be an on-going blog feature. I sincerely apologize to those who've missed it.
"Bush, contra conventional wisdom, is a seriously smart guy. Given the perceived stakes for the Supreme Court, and given it's one of the reasons the Repubs gave for NEEDING people to vote for Bush, I can't imagine they'd have floated this guy if they weren't sure he'd get in.
ROFLMAO. He's smart alright. He's a Bush, and they learn at birth how to fool people into thinking they're Repubs while continuing building the state. Roberts will get in, and Repubs will look on in consternation as they get hosed again. Meanwhile at the RNC, they'll be planning on explaining to the base that things would really be bad if a Dem got elected. ROFLMAO. The wheel turns, and the Republicans are always looking for that pony after seeing what they got under the Christmas tree. Are Republicans naive morons? Well, probably not legally morons, just a little dim.
I tuned into Rush this morning just to see what the Republican party take on things was and (very) low and behold, there's Dick Cheney, lying through his teeth. I've heard some facid and meaningless bullshit in my time but Dick was the master this morning.
"Fool me once... fool me 4 times?"
My numbers are much higher. Everytime I wake up after drinking red wine.
Actually Bill I could care less if he is Catholic. That does not effect my judgement of a Judge. Let's see Thomas, Scalia are Catholics. Hrmmm Where is that Cat?
The libs don't seem to be nearly disappointed enough and all this stuff about "Washington Society" absolutely scares me to death.
ARRGH!
Let's just hope that the Roberts nomination doesn't turn out to be the bad joke.
" The libs don't seem to be nearly disappointed"
No they don't. I listened to three Republican talk radio shows today (four if you count Hannity, but since he has an RNC hand up his puppet ass on any given day, I throw him out as not to skew the average). They were all running on and on about thow the Dems knew this was a solid conservative choice... but that's not what I saw. They had Schumer and Kennedy going through the motions but totally lacking any fire. This is another set up.
Astrosmith, when you're reduced to hoping a Bush will do anything conservative, it's best to abandon all hope for your mortal life and move on over to prayer for your immortal soul.
" Ok Ok Ok..."
Thanks Nate.
EN: Heh.
The libs don't seem to be nearly disappointed enough and all this stuff about "Washington Society" absolutely scares me to death.
ARRGH!
JACIII
AMEN
Commenting by HaloScan
