Judge John Roberts

Posted by Moonage on 19 Jul 2005 | Tagged as: National Politics, The Legal Process, The Media

Bush has nominated John Roberts to replace Sandra Day O’Conner.  I don’t know anything about John Roberts.  I didn’t speculate on the process because Bush IMO is about the hardest person to predict I have ever dealt with.  What I did expect is already happening:

Here’s Reuters’ take on it:

President Bush chose conservative appeals court judge John Roberts on Tuesday as his first nominee to the Supreme Court, igniting what could be a fierce partisan clash over his bid to shift the closely divided panel to the right.

  1. Igniting?  All he’s done is nominate a candidate.  What did Reuters’ expect him to do?  That’s a careless and poorly researched description of what is happening.
  2. "a fierce partisan clash".  Reuters’ has done absolutely no research on this issue apparently.  According to The Hartford Courant: Lieberman offered reporters Wednesday three names he said could be considered without sparking a talkathon. He would not say whether he brought them up to Rove.  He said federal appellate Judges Michael McConnell and John G. Roberts were "in the ballpark," and that "people tell me" appeals court Judge J. Harvie Wilkinson is "very similar."  Lieberman emphasized that should they be nominated, they would be carefully scrutinized.   Sounds like an endorsement to me.  The Democrats were shouting Bush needed to reach out to them.  Nominating someone one of their own had already endorsed is reaching out about as far as Bush could.
  3. "shift the closely divided panel to the right".  Sandra Day O’Conner was nominated by Reagan and was considered part of the right.  If a right is replacing a right, how is that shifting anything?

As usual, main stream media is already doing everything in their power to screw this up.  Hopefully enough Senators see above that garbage and take their job seriously.  The last thing the Democrats need right now is yet another issue that will polarize their party to the left.  Lieberman has an opportunity to take some reins on the party with Bush’s nod to his nomination.  He needs to take that role and run with it.  More than that, the Kennedy’s and Feinsteins need to step aside and let Lieberman lead for a while.

They won’t thought.  Look for inflammatory remarks from the most immature and radical elements of the Democrat leadership before this evening over.

!!! UPDATE !!!

About 1 minute after I made this post complaining about how poorly the Reuters’ story was written, it has been retracted.  I’m leaving my criticism as it was.

Here’s the NEW Reuters’ story.  I guess the first one was so bad even they couldn’t stomach it.

Technorati Tags: , ,

Trackback This Post | Subscribe to the comments through RSS Feed

Leave a Reply

Related Posts

  • Judge John Roberts
  • Confirming John Roberts
  • Sandra Day O’Connor on Judge John Roberts
  • Roberts for Chief Justice
  • Senator Kennedy’s Questions?
  • NARAL, Judge Roberts, and Facts
  • Ted Kennedy on Judge John Roberts
  • Breaking up the CIA
  • Roberts gets Kaused
  • My position on Harriet Miers
  • Supreme Court Judge hearings serve no purpose?
  • Miers Withdraws
  • Roberts Confirmation
  • Judge Perkins and Moveon
  • Judge Perkins and Moveon, updated
  • The John Bolton Appointment
  • Janice Rogers Brown
  • Karen Pearl, POTUS?
  • Why we’re losing the war on drugs
  • Wisconsin’s the place to screw dead people
  • « The Plame Time affair

    Judge John Roberts »