I don't apologise to fools and trolls who get their rocks off by bad-mouthing their President and his "decision-making" in a public forum. Your back-biting infantile comments are a disgrace and contribute nothing to conservatism. We have a good solid conservative nominee to the supreme court and none of your baseless drivel will change that one iota.
So you now admit it, anyone who "bad-mouths" their Presidents decision-making 'in public' must be 'fools and trolls'.
This kind of dogmatic loyality is common on the left, where every leftist who every questioned leaders were labeled as 'traitors' and, even if the criticism was warranted, was unacceptable because 'the evil rightists' would use it against them.
This kind of suppression for 'party discipline' belongs in the dark ages. And many dissenting leftists became conservatives precisely because we allowed diverse thought and were more loyal to a cause than to a man.
Fine, carry on your 'cult of personality' of uberleader. My loyality is to conservative/libertarian ideals. And to the extent Bush fights like a junk yard dog for those ideals I will support him (e.g. in his appointing Bolton, we hope). When he gives in because of personal weakeness or misguided emotions I will express my displeasure.
If you really believe in something other than toadyism, it is your duty to let leadership know...even when the news is not good.
PS I noticed you still havn't checked out FREE CONSERVATIVES... want to prove you're honest and do so?
"We have a good solid conservative nominee to the supreme court and none of your baseless drivel will change that one iota."
Please feel free to produce a shred of evidence of his 'good solid conservative' personal opinion. I have been asking for anything more than what has been produced re: Souter, just a single writing that would demonstrate where Roberts personally stands on the construction of the Constitution, it could be on the commerce clause, or the necessary and proper clause, or just federalism in general. The only thing he's got out there is a couple of law review articles against environmental takings law. And that's pretty darn thin for someone who's gonna be on the SCOTUS for 30 years.
I've put my money where my mouth is--I got $50 with Always Right that Roberts WON'T vote with Scalia and Thomas 90% of the time. So how about you play nice and put up or shut up, instead of calling people names?