Roberts hearing is one big joke!!

[dajoki]

i don't know about you, but i've never seen anyone so adept at not answering direct questions in my life. i will not watch another minute of these so called hearings; i'm totally disgusted, he's as good as in.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
WPhttp://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/09/14/AR2005091402477.html

'Advise and Consent,' Anyone?

By Dana Milbank

Thursday, September 15, 2005

Efforts to get an answer out of John G. Roberts were going nowhere at yesterday's Senate Judiciary Committee meeting, so Sen. Charles E. Schumer went Hollywood.

"Your failure to answer questions is confounding me," the New York Democrat fumed at the nominee for chief justice. "It's as if I asked you: 'What kind of movies do you like? Tell me two or three good movies.' And you say, 'I like movies with good acting.' Then I ask you if you like 'Casablanca,' and you respond by saying, 'Lots of people like "Casablanca." ' You tell me, 'It's widely settled that "Casablanca" is one of the great movies.' "

As the laughter at his expense subsided, the judge's smile shifted toward a smirk. Chairman Arlen Specter (R-Pa.) moved to call a recess, but Roberts asked if he could reply to Schumer.

" 'Dr. Zhivago' and 'North by Northwest,' " the nominee deadpanned. The crowd scored it another point for Roberts. Jane Roberts gave her husband a kiss. Schumer went outside to the cameras, where he observed, a bit wistfully, that Roberts "is a very, very smart man."

<<snip>>

...While Roberts spoke, Biden shook his head, put his face in his hand, pouted and glared disgustedly. "We are rolling the dice with you, Judge," Biden said. "It's kind of interesting, this Kabuki dance we have in these hearings here, as if the public doesn't have a right to know what you think about fundamental issues facing them."

Biden kept talking. Graham rolled his eyes. Roberts explained that a fuller answer would be "inconsistent with the independence and integrity of the Supreme Court." The Kabuki continued.

[Bumblebee]

1. Brooks thinks so too -- and he is evolving...

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/09/15/opinion/15brooks.html?hp=&pagewanted=print

September 15, 2005
Ready? Cue the Sun...
By DAVID BROOKS

Arlen Specter Welcome to Day 3 of the confirmation hearings of John Roberts. I'd like to take this opportunity to remind the nation of what a wonderful job I'm doing chairing this committee, and I'd like to let the ranking member tell me so.

Patrick Leahy Absolutely, Mr. Chairman! And let me kick off this morning's platitudes about the grandeur of our Constitution by quoting its first three words, "We the People." That means that here in America the people rule - except on issues like abortion, where their opinions don't mean spit.

Specter Very well put, Senator Leahy! And welcome Judge Roberts back before our committee.

John Roberts Jr. Aw, shucks. This has been a humbling experience, Mr. Chairman. To think that a boy from an exclusive prep school and Harvard Law could grow up and be nominated for the Supreme Court - it shows how in America it's possible to rise from privilege to power! That's the hallmark of our great nation.

EDITED BY ADMIN: COPYRIGHT

[LittleClarkie]

2. Brooks is probably just worried Roberts middle name is Souter

The other side isn't completely sure about him either.

[Tsiyu]

16. Now THAT was funny as hell

thanks for sharing

[Moderator]

17. Bumblebee

Per DU copyright rules
please post only four
paragraphs from the
copyrighted news source.


Thank you.


DU Moderator

[firefox]

3. It is like contempt of Congress

Plus, they keep his writings secret. What a goddamned fucked-up mess this country is in when they do not refuse to even let him in the building and reject him outright for his attitude and smugness.

[Disturbed]

5. Everybody knows that he will be..

confirmed. They are duty bound to go through the Kibuki Theatre.

[jmatthan]

6. Brownie points for Bush?

[dajoki]

7. i agree...

that's why i can't watch anymore, i've seen enough. i don't care how much of a show these senators put on, they are not doing their fucking job if they continue to let him get away with his smugness and end up confirming him.

[jmatthan]

4. Robert thinks he is already in the Supreme Court

The answers thart Roberts has given assumes that he is already IN the Supreme Court.

Once he is there he may be entitled to give such answers, not while being interviewed for such a post.

I wish the Democrats had more spine to call his bluff!!

They should state that unless they get answers they cannot accept his nomination and he will be fillibustered.

[dajoki]

8. i can go for that...

but they lost their balls a long time ago.

[Dr Fate]

25. Democrats should say what you just said to the cameras.

Oh, but then Sean Hannity & Wolf Blitzer would say mean things about us- oh, the horror.

[KT2000]

9. Why don't they ask about

his earlier cases - ask him to explain his thinking on the cases and briefs.
This would be most interesting.

[dajoki]

10. "it might come before SCOTUS"

:sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm:

[oldtime dfl_er]

12. He has a canned answer for that

"I was writing on behalf of such and such a client. It wouldn't be prudent to give my personal opinion on such a matter at this time." Since when, I mean, really -when did this happen???? that we don't want to know what a judge stands for? What he thinks? What his ideology is? We want a friggin blank slate with a blank stare to assume the highest judicial post in the land?
I feel sometimes like Aaron Broussard -- I want to break down weeping and say "I'm sick of the press conferences" -- I'm sick of the grandstanding, the vapid senators like Biden making tired little speeches that have no substance behind them, the smug repukes running roughshod over anyone who tries to question this fake tabula rasa who is going to be our chief justice. I kissed this democracy goodbye after the last stolen election and I see no reason to change my opinion now.

http://www.cafepress.com/scarebaby/837226

[KT2000]

13. Yes - it is likely a goner

but at least all the democrats could force Roberts to refuse to discuss his briefs for Gore v Bush.

(Yeah on the jerkoff button - that guy has to go)

[PATRICK]

11. Metaphors and musings

No, few of our proud senators are capable of getting the point about OPPOSING a judicial disaster. They went in smugly senatorial, naively broadcasting their wise tactics to pin down the other side, not committed to the concerns of alrmed issue groups. They fell back on the old issues and process thing, steamrolled into irrelevance long ago. And they expected what? Another easy gift like Kerik?

The lesson from Kerik. If these guys are all crooks- dig and dig hard. IF you ARE going to engage in rhetoric and process you can't possibly control, don't give the other side what they won't give- all the questions in advance.

I've heard Schumer at a commencement speech. it was not of a high level to put it kindly and very innocently revealing of a nice guy who worked his way up the political chain in the honest democratic way- which really won't exist much longer. Biden we know too. But in any event this is not about STOPPING the evil consuming America, but the ludicrous way Dems are observing a process voided of respect and meaning.

The still give the crook in charge the respect that is killing us. Killing us all. None of his appointments have done anything but HARM. Hello, anyone noticing the cemeteries lately? Now that they are reduced to clever analogies such as I use in online rants maybe the can see the game is up? Will a question force an answer? Will a point bring down a candidate? Not by the Dems.

[dajoki]

19. great post!! n/t

[FreedomAngel82]

14. Of course it is

Last night I turned it onto CSPAN around 9pm est and saw that the second hearing was on and it was just Specter and someone else. Specter had this smile and "holier then thou" attitude about Biden's reaction to Roberts and some question's he answered. It's of course a joke. The democrats can't do anything even if they wanted to.

[CityDem]

15. Roberts is done deal

I have been watching the hearings pretty closely and I will say that Roberts is extremely smart, disciplined and quick on his feet. He listenes to the questions, doesn't take notes and gives much better than he gets. He is extremely well coached / prepared and knows constitutional law much more thoroughly than the senators asking questions. I read somewhere where Biden approached Roberts after the hearing and told him he is the best he has ever seen in a confirmation hearing. While I am opposed to Roberts because he is a conservative and we know too little about him, I can see where the average american would like the guy. There is no way we are going to Bork this guy -- we need to save our powder for the next nominee.

[Nederland]

18. Unfortunately

Dems did the same thing with Ginsberg. She refused to answer questions too.

[PATRICK]

20. That is why the Dems approach is weak

and token. They are grappling for some pretext not to vote for Roberts except the honest ones.

The approach is totally wrong. The candidate is appointed with great power for LIFE. There should be a lot of experience and reasons for why he should be appointed, not why not. Hiding the negatives within the bigger negative- open resume proving his qualities for the job has become a stupidly destructive game to make the whole court a partisan reflection of a political contest.

For the same reason no one young, no one without a demanding amount of experience and records should be even qualified for the post no matter how nice or agreeable everything else appears. Not being elected but having to perform slyly like a dressed up turkey for battling pols is ruining the high court anyway.

These are more fruits of "it's an imperfect system but somehow it works" ideology meeting a ruthless abuser.

There should be a mandatory retirement age at least since competency bars are impossible to fix fairly. In fact there should be single terms non-renewable, not lifetime appointments at the very top. SCOTUS evolved away from the original structure when Marshall asserted himself against Jefferson. As participatory democracy and real power grew so the chasm between the judicial check and the term elected government. Times change too rapidly to leave the relics of past appointing legislative bodies to judge a new generation.

There are simple logical issues that plainly are missing under the game, the myth, the accretion of uncritical traditions. The latest is HOW the confirmation game is to be played, a deceptive silliness definitely not in the Constitution and guaranteed to create eventually the things the confirmation hearings were meant to avoid.

[dajoki]

21. very good!! n/t

[jillan]

22. I can't wait to see the exchange between Kerry and Roberts.

From watching Kerry interrogate Condi, Gonzales, and Bolton, to his comments last nite.

Bring your popcorn, there's going to be a boxing match on the senate floor this week!

[dajoki]

23. yeah, but...

will it matter?

[tritsofme]

24. Roberts doesn't testify before the whole Senate.

They debate between themselves once he is sent to the floor by the Judiciary Committee.