I believe the confirmation of Roberts will show the hand of those who have more politics on their mind than justice. "Man is a political animal."---Aristotle.
Robert Novak's , (Chuck Schumer's Defeat) "Schumer was good; Roberts was better" - we could say Schumer is a POLITICAL lawyer, while Roberts is a LEGAL lawyer. Schumer brought his politics to the hearing, while Roberts brought the CONSTITUTION to the hearing.
Robert Novak makes two very good points.FIRST: Because the President chose a nominee that is near perfect for the Chief Justice position; and in light of the committee Dems. voice against Judge Roberts, the President is free to choose anyone, because the Dems. are going to vote against ANY nominee. Second: The Court may be back on its way to judging each case based on merit, and how it stacks up against the Constitution.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
Roberts was brilliant, and Novak summed it up correctly, and you knew enough the importance of this issue. Can't wait til the next appointee.........better be very conservative.....it's time for some fun! That one was way too easy.
Right you are Maddie. This vote will or should convince the Admistration that a CONSERVATIVE to replace the MODERATE O'Connor is the right move to balance the Court.
Judge John Roberts was the MODERATE nominee to replace the MODERATE O'Connor. Now we need a CONSERVATIVE to replace the CONSERVATIVE Rhenquist.
Since W. is a lame duck he should put a right-leaning, reasonble indiv. up for nomination. Nothing to lose....Hillary to Gain.
Post a Comment