[MarcusTulliusCicero]

Making a statement like that means that you've never read any of their judicial opinions. No one can guarantee that people won't change their opinion over time. But at least we'd know where these 3 are starting from. We don't know that with Judge Roberts other than basically meaningless assurances from people who really are just hoping he's an originalist. There is nothing in his very sparse writings to indicate that he's in the Scalia/Thomas mold. To claim that there is falls under the category of wishful thinking or blind faith, neither one of which should be sufficient to pick someone for a lifetime appointment with the power possessed by a Supreme Court Justice. Perhaps you're content to wait another 30 years to correct another stealth pick that went wrong. I'm saying I'd be more comfortable with someone who actually espouses publicly the originalist doctrine and is willing to defend it, instead of acting like a liberal by trying to change the subject when asked about your core beliefs.

[CWOJackson]

"Making a statement like that means that you've never read any of their judicial opinions."

Hardly. Making a statement like that simply means that no one, even you, can predict how a judge will rule through the course of their life long appointment on the SC.