Roberts is the latest in a long, long line of republi8can SCOTUS appointees who seem to lose their brains or ethics as soon as the take then oath....
Why is it always the republican appointees who seem to change allegiances after they are appointed?
I don’t recall liberal democrat appointees making such swift and dramatic philosophical flip-flops to the conservative side.
Maybe there really is something to the suspicion that the republican/conservative appointees are being blackmailed into traitorous behavior.
“Why is it always the republican appointees who seem to change allegiances after they are appointed?
I don’t recall liberal democrat appointees making such swift and dramatic philosophical flip-flops to the conservative side.
Maybe there really is something to the suspicion that the republican/conservative appointees are being blackmailed into traitorous behavior.”
This is most likely due to a cultural influence thing, just like most of our congressmen and legislators. Liberals tend to congregate in capital cities so that they may become friends of friends and influence the social circle and thus values & views of those in power.
Who your friends are likely defines who you become, this is even more true of politicians than it is of regular men but it is true of most all men including ‘judges’. So when John moved to Washington and became an important judge one of the first things leftist will do is try to infiltrate his circles of friends. To make them all thing more like them and thus john himself.
Only a minority of men are generally unaffected by this, and almost no man can claim to be immune to this kind of influence. Liberals are particularly adept at this kind of influence which is why they tend to congregate into cities, and go into carriers where they might have the best chance to influence the most people. (Media, schools, ect...)
for a simpel reason, like Moth’s they are drawn to a flame
In those days, the Democratic Party was moving left and many Democrats were left behind. More recently, the Republicans shifted to the right and some of the Eisenhower, Nixon, and Ford appointees didn't keep up. They were essentially part of the Establishment, the legal elite, and two decades down the road they were closer to the Clinton-era Democratic Party than to the post-Reagan GOP.
In those days, too, Supreme Court appointments weren't as carefully vetted and scrutinized. Eisenhower picked William Brennan because he thought appointing an Irish Catholic Democrat would help him win reelection. Ike's people were impressed by a speech Brennan gave, but Brennan was reading a speech written for his state's Chief Justice, who couldn't give it himself (that's the story, anyway, though it may not be true).
Even more recently, Bush I went with the unknown David Souter because Reagan had such a hard time in Congress with appointees like Robert Bork. Bush may just have wanted to get the position filled quickly and without trouble. That was just about the only positive thing to be said for Souter.
What would have happened if Borg had made it?