I think there is a tendency for republican presidents to throw a crumb to the other side. Meaning that, we got this judge through confirmations, the next time we'll give you one you like.
She want's to keep the heat on the President in this regard.
I think Robert's or Luttig are good choices. I don't think we did our homework on Kennedy, Souter etc. At first these judges gave conservative opinions.
There must be some reason as to why he is well liked by so many. I think he will be a strict conservative on the bench without legislating.
In short, I understand what Ann is doing here...but I think she is wrong.
nick
My take it is that absent the ultimate abolition of judicial review, praise for a judge's philosophy means nothing since the Supreme Court is a difference place from lower courts. Its the next thing to be being God and the temptation to slide Left to please the academy and the media will be enormous. At some point, being human, you begin thinking about your legacy, and you start worrying what the MSM editors think of your opinions and whether you will be invited to the right parties. Washington is a town that makes easy to morph into a liberal so you be well liked. I'm not saying Judge Roberts isn't a good man and he may well be a conservative but you can't judge whether he's going to be a great Justice on the basis of a few lower court opinions. In that regards, Ann's caution is well placed. We were burned before.
(Denny Crane: "Sometimes you can only look for answers from God and failing that... and Fox News".)