Next Show: ...loading...

Justice John Roberts?

July 20, 2005

(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.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

  • Dr. Spock July 21, 2005 6:44 pm

    EN–you insist on misspelling etiquette–even after I tried to subtly correct you–that is indicative of an indigenous flaw on your part–that is a weakness–so be it
    I contend that the best part of me didn’t enter my body until well into gestation–since the spirit is incorruptible and the body is mortal
    Perhaps the best part of you died three days ago-and nobody told you–consult a mortician (That might explain the cranial swelling and lack of a soul)
    Then get a second opinion

  • EN July 21, 2005 2:28 pm

    Gordon, I shall return fire:
    I suspect that the best part of _YOU_ dripped down your daddy’s leg.
    EN – the use of the Flag in the banner above appears to violate proper flag etiquitte.

  • Dr. Spock July 21, 2005 9:22 am

    EN–the resident ASSHOLE–the only posts of yours that have disappeared are your childish spam spasms (Of course all your rationales are difficult to distinguish from growth hormone and penile extention ads)
    Flag protocol dictates that the proper way to dispose of a worn and tattered flag–is to burn it
    (Patriots are welcome to wrap themselves in the flag–even wear them as ponchos)–Traitors, posing in the flag, though,–BEWARE!!!
    You are a strange creature, indeed, to make reference to etiquette in any form of spelling
    One tough question for you, ASSHOLE, were there any kids in your family that lived–and any prospective spirit-babies headed for your wife’s womb that didn’t beg their spirit-advisors for reassignment? And my sincere condolences for any children you do have that did survive. And to your wife. And to your mother–if she had to endure vaginal-birth and pass your bulbous head that was described in a footnote on your birth certificate as being basketball-sized, from apparent fetal encephalitis. (perhaps that explains your recurring swelling of the cranium?)