I like this Guy

[Perky]

I know I am in the minority on this.


But I like John Roberts. He certainly is not a demagogue. He is intelligent and when he says that he is not a politician,that he is not going to tell someone the way he is going to vote on xyz so that he can get their vote...I like that.


When He says, that it is unfair to criticize current judges because he did not read all the briefs, did not hear the oral arguments and was not in the conference room when the justices debated a cases merits....I think that is fair.

When he says that to share his private views and how that might or might not color his views and how that might be perceived as prejudice against either plaintiff or defendant. I think that is appropriate.


He has already stated that he finds a right of privacy in the COnstitution.

And he sighted the the importance of precedence.

He obviously was writing opinions in the his role as staff attorney in support of previous administrations. But that does not necessarily reflect his personal view. I think we should give hie a bit more grace on this thane others on DU.

One could argue that he should write only what he believes and anything short of that is moral cowardice. but I would submit that such a view is Naive and somewhat self serving. The role of an attorney is far far different then the role of a judge.

I wonder if he was equally "evasive" were he a democratic nominee how we would feel about it.

[Armstead]

1. If he were an equally evasive Democratic nominee...

I wouldn't blame the GOP for challening him.

This guy wants to be the chief justice of the Supreme Court. I thinbk the American people have a right to know more than that he is a good lawyer and wants to "be a responsiblre referee" on the court.

[Perky]

10. Perhaps

But where is the line?


An evenly divided country with a mjority Republican Senate cowtowing to their RW base wants to press the Dem on Roe. The he comes out and says Roe was rightly decided.

It always is appropriate to ask the question.. The issue is is it appropriate to answer?

[pitohui]

2. are a man or a woman

thought so

easy to be gracious when it won't change yr life

[bryant69]

4. I'm not sure about that

For one thing President Roberts is going to be hearing mostly cases that will affect men and women equally. Labor law. the Right of the Government to Regulate businesses. Privacy (as already noted). and so and and so forth.

But then, I'm also not sure about giving Roberts a pass.

Bryant
Check it out --> http://politicalcomment.blogspot.com

[Atman]

3. Perky, Perky, Perky...

Only one thing matters...he is BushCo's waterboy. Bush never appoints ANYONE without it being a quid pro quo for something. Haven't you asked yourself why this man has jumped to the front of the SCOTUS line, above the men and women who have served there for decades? Why is Bush's best buddy -- and legal counsel who got him selected to the presidency via the very court he is about to be appointed to -- more qualified for this position than the life-long jurists already there?

That said, I just had this coversation with my wife about half an hour ago. I told her that I felt the guy sounded good. Very good.

Too good. His answers have been almost too perfect.

that he is not going to tell someone the way he is going to vote on xyz so that he can get their vote...I like that.

Of course you like that. It was written so you'd like that.

I suppose it's all a moot point. The guy is going to get appointed, no matter what we say.

BTW...do you have a wife, and/or female children? Hug them. They're life is about to change.

[hootinholler]

18. Don't forget the Guantanimo ruling he made

Right after he interviewed with *

I didn't know about the 2000 election participation.

At this point I think we'd be better off if the dems could just shut down the government until the PNAC is evicted.

-Hoot

[walldude]

5. While I don't know enough about this guy

to make a well informed opinion I do believe that the administration has been hiding documents that were requested for his confirmation and that alone makes me suspicious.

[babylonsister]

6. Good point; has any Dem demanded those papers, and

if not, why not?

[crispini]

19. They've been trying.

Admin won't cough 'em up. Gotta wonder why.

[crispini]

20. link

Democrats Again Request Roberts Papers
Senators say the files are more crucial now that he's been nominated to lead the high court. The White House maintains they are off-limits.

By Maura Reynolds, Times Staff Writer


WASHINGTON — Senate Democrats renewed their request Wednesday to see 16 files of documents on John G. Roberts Jr., President Bush's nominee for chief justice, arguing that the Reagan administration released similar documents when it nominated William H. Rehnquist to the position in 1986.

Bush administration officials countered that the two situations were dissimilar, that more than 60,000 pages of documents already had been released, and that the Democrats' request was unreasonable.

more....

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-roberts8sep08,0,7132376.story?coll=la-home-headlines

just google "democrats request roberts papers" and you'll get a lot of stories.

[babylonsister]

21. Thanks for the info! nt

[donheld]

7. Well that makes one of us

It's still a free country, at least for a few more days. So you go right ahead.

[calico1]

8. To be fair, I recall Souter was also evasive, at

least with regards to abortion. I remember women's groups were all in a tizzy because he would not answer directly how he felt. I am still undecided by this guy. He seems more likeable than Thomas or Scalia. Doesn't give me the same creepy feeling. Time will tell I guess. He is going to be confirmed for sure.

[Eric J in MN]

9. John Roberts believes the concept of "liberty" in the Consitution doesn't

protect the right to burn the flag, and doesn't protect a 12 year old girl from being arrrested for eating french fries in a train station.

I would oppose any nominee with such a narrow view of "liberty," whether he were a Repbulican or Democrat.

[NewInNewJ.]

11. There is nothing behind those eyes,

he is so evasive, I have watched nearly all of the hearings, and I know nothing more then I did then before the hearing started.

[sandnsea]

17. Vacant shell of a man

His eyes bug me too.

[KT2000]

12. he helped prepare briefs

for Gore v. Bush
what do you think he would do as Chief Justice if such a case came before him?

[Mr_Spock]

13. Don't forget that he was coached by Repuke lawyers for weeks before

these hearings. I'm not saying that I know whether he is sincere or not, but his coaching has to have helped him...

[Cats Against Frist]

14. I go back and forth

He's a slippery fucker -- almost terrifyingly rational and logical, in terms of what he has been forthcoming about. He's also right -- he cannot promise to rule one way, or the other, for confirmation. However, this assumes that we think that Roberts was dropped, from Ork, in a giant egg, and has no clue what the details are, in some of these inflammatory cases, likely to come before the court. I'm a total stoopie, and I can give a run down of many court cases and precedents, and give a brief presentation on the issues involved. Roberts wants us to assume that he's never seen any of it, before, or that, somehow, a specific case would be radically different from what we expect -- which kind of seems like horseshit.

On the OTHER hand, his railroading, repeated insistence that he'll mete justice according to precedent puts him in another camp than the highly feared ultra-conservative ideologue or religious whack-o -- who believe that case law, precedent, stare decisis, whatever should be tied to the nearest carrier pigeon and flown to Kathmandu. This is PROVIDED that he's telling the truth -- which, since he's nominated by Chimp Assmunch, I'm hard-pressed to believe.

And, yes, his eyes are terrifying. You know how they never really show the baby's eyes, at the end of "Rosemary's Baby," -- just Rosemary screaming, "You maniacs! His eyes! What have you done to his eyes?!?!"

I have a feeling Roberts' eyes are close to what she saw. Does this make a difference to me? Nah. I don't believe in that kind of shit. Metaphorically -- maybe.

[melody]

15. anybody George Bush likes for a job is suspect, imho n/t

[sandnsea]

16. There you have it folks

Five years later and there are still Democrats who are willing to give George Bush the benefit of the doubt...

:banghead: