Fred Barnes: The Safe Pick

The Weekly Standard ^ | July 20, 2005 | Fred Barnes

[RightFighter]

I think that's because she smokes - she's probably always fidgety because she doesn't have a cigarette in hand.

[RoyalsFan]

Ginsberg is 85 and sick.

John Paul Stevens is 85. Ruth Bader Ginsburg is 71.

[Lexinom]

You are absolutely right.

Listen carefully to the arguments of the opponents of the Iraq war. Every argument can be appropriated with far greater effect to the war against the innocent.

As a perfect example, Rep. Lynn Woolsey (D-CA) recently asked the rhetorical question, "How many more American servicemen and women have to die before we bring them home?" Her point, which she took pains to establish, was that we have ALREADY been in Iraq too long. These people are utterly blind to the war going on in our own nation against the weak and innocent, executed by the thousands in the most brutal manner imaginable, for the capital crime of mere existance.

[agincourt1415]

I could have lived with Mark Levin, LOL, but that was the THERMO NUCLEAR OPTION.

[savedbygrace]

Sounding a bit like Democratic Sen. Chuck Schumer of New York, who is sure to spearhead the opposition to Roberts, Coburn said senators have the right to ask "any appropriate question."

There's zero possibility of consfusing Senator Coburn with Schumer, and this is a slimy little tag by Barnes. Way beneath him, but he took the shot anyway.

I agree with my senator that we need to discover if Judge Roberts is really going to strictly interpret the Constitution as written.

[A CA Guy]

You would have had a slight problem with the Judiciary committee saying he has made his mind up on a few issues.

[deport]

Fred was in a snit tonight; he must have crossed and uncrossed his arms 100 times.

---

Probably upset like that coulter gal because they problably didn't have Roberts on their radar screen.

[montag813]

Clinton chose the far-left radical ACLU Chief counsel Ruth Bader Ginsberg and the Republicans did not even ask her any tough questions! She was pushed right through by Orrin Hatch.

Why is it only Republicans need to make "safe" picks and wince at the thought of a hard battle to win a confirmation? Americans have made their preference clear at the polls for a long time now---they support Conservative values. So why are we so hesitant to put an uber-Conservative out there for confirmation?

[alnick]

Skinny is OK, but it's the nervous energy that unnerves me

The nervous energy is the reason she's so skinny. That's the result of a very high metabolism.

[kittymyrib]

The defenders of this nomination sound distressingly like the posters who thought it was just swell that the President campaigned for Arlen Specter, thus beating the conservative Toomey in the PA primary last year. And we all know how WRONG those posters were. I'm expecting a milque-toast conservative, a middle-Westerner, God love them, who think that it's a virture to be "middle of the road." Texans tend to think that the only thing in the middle of the road are dead skunks. If his nomination is confirmed, we will see by this time next year how he has ruled. I hope most of us don't have to tell the cheerleaders, "We told you so" again.

[sitetest]

"Is Roberts likely to join a anti-Roe bloc on the court? Probably not."

If not, may he go down to defeat in flames.

[sitetest]

Dear Aquinasfan,

"I'm not going to dismiss Fred's opinion here because the left is eerily silent."

That the likes of Messrs. Reid, Leahy, and Schumer seem to be giving up almost without a fight is disturbing.

The question is, what do we do if a Republican president who wins with a majority of the popular vote, with a 55-seat majority in the Senate, refuses to nominate folks who will overturn the greatest judicial injustice and unconstituional decision of the 20th century?


sitetest

[nickcarraway]

The thing is, that issue is a pretty good indicator of the judge. If they aren't afraid of that issue, chances are they aren't the type to go wobbly. There are a lot of important issues, but that tends to be an S&P500 of the overall judge.

[GoodWithBarbarians JustForKaos]

Thanks for the correction! I mixed up something I read on here. Freeped for most of 18 hours yesterday and I also misspelled her name! Ginsburg has only been on the USSC for 12 years and Stevens for almost 30. So, I believe you must be right in stating that Stevens is 85 and Ginsburg is 71. But I'm sure she's sick and am hoping for an early retirement from her. Have you taken a good look at her decisions and opinions? The woman is nuts! And a total man-hater it seems. I'll also be rooting for a quick exit from Stevens. But, he and Ginsburg won't want to quit before Bush's term is up.

I'm increasing my political education level after years of apathy. Apathy amongst many voters has been a big reason for the power the liberals attained, but it's nice to see it waning now. Thanks again!