Justice John Roberts?
(broadcast stream) (.mp3 download Right-click,”Save Target as”,”Save”)
First impressions on Bush’s choice — neither unqualifed (Thomas), nor wacko (Bork), nor racist (Rehnquist), nor flame-throwing hypocrite (Scalia). Faint praise, to be sure, but praise nonetheless. And yes, he’s a Harvard man…I have to respect that. But is he a corporate shill? A Presidential apologist? Is he at heart someone who respects the rule of law and the checks and balances of the American system or someone who wants to recreate the Constitution in his image? He clerked for Rehnquist. Is he like the Chief Justice, someone whose rulings can almost entirely be predicted based on knowing who the parties are (corporations and government always win against individuals) rather than on what the facts and law might be?
I do not believe Roberts’ conservative views alone necessitate voting against him and certainly not filibuster. But it is far too soon to endorse or condemn a man with such a scant, barely two-year judicial record. If Roberts cooperates in the nomination process, it should give us the answers we need to decide.
PLUS the politics and process. Why Bush chose Roberts early to change the subject of Bush’s flip-flop on agreeing to fire the CIA leaker in Traitor-Gate. (I don’t plan to leave the subject alone…) And why the White House spread false rumors to the press and their Republican allies about two judges named Edith.