Judge Roberts is pro affirmative action

[MNJohnnie]

"I can't point to one thing that gives me any assurance about this guy."

Which means you aren't really paying attention which is another indication you pretending to be something you are not. Some sources to back up your accusations please?

[umgud]

I'll bet Bush has a better handle on him than we do. I'll give Bush the benefit of doubt on this.

[CyberAnt]

Your total lack of understanding of how the courts and lawyers work - well .. it's stunning.

If you hire a lawyer to defend you in court - you want him to defend YOUR POINT OF VIEW. It doesn't matter if it's the lawyer's point of view or not.

So Roberts defended somebody who supports affirmative action - that does not mean that ROBERTS SUPPORTS ARFFIRMATIVE ACTION.

Your entire reply is a beautiful museum of ignorance.

[johnmecainrino]

Ben Ginsberg said he did this in his private time.

I think Bill Kristol said it best that he is an incremental conservative.

We will see very soon in the parental notification case next year what type of judge he will be.

I disagree with the Fox panel saying that they wished he was a true movement conservative but is more like Renquist.

I don't see a huge gap between scalia and renquist. The real gap is Renquist and O'Connor. If he were to turn out like Renquist I we would be very happy.

[johnmecainrino]

I heard on Fox that Brownback was quoted in the K.C city star the big paper from K.C.

I didn't read it just heard it sorry about not linking a source.

[glegakis]

Bush had the "warm and fuzzies" for Putin too. Hmm...?

[msnimje]

What are your creditidentials to make such accusations and assumptions? Why do you look at the issues only on the surface rather than take into consideration the fact that he was working for clients therefore arguing THEIR STANCE, not his own.
Are you a reporter for CBS? CNN? NYT?

[CWOJackson]

LOL! I hope if you ever need and hire a lawyer, he just does whatever he wants to and doesn't represent you. Then you'll be happy.

[johnmecainrino]

I admit I don't know a lot about the legal profession.

But he didn't have to take that case. I'm sure many republican judicial hopefuls in that situation wouldn't have taken that case. I know very little about law firms. Did the state of Hawaii ask for him specifically to represent him in that case or did they ask the law firm. Why when there were other law partners in his firm did he have to take the case.

I couldn't see Ted Olsen taking a case like that.

[umgud]

I don't blindly support of agree with Bush, but I think he knows the stakes on the SCOTUS appointments.

[glegakis]

Does the guy need the money so much that he's willing to "supposedly" argue a case that he's personally opposed too.

Let's face it boys and girls this is about whether we're gonna keep killing innocent unborn humans for the next 30 years.

You bet we want this guy vetted. If he's not pro-actively pro-life(or anti-abortion) you can send him back to wherever he came from.

[johnmecainrino]

I have no credentials just a concerned conservative hoping for the court to move to the right. We will see soon enough how he turns out.

I could very well be wrong and he could turn out as a Renquist conservative. If he does I will be very happy.

[F16Fighter]

"Roberts' record looks like a guy who will uphold the constitution, regardless of whether it will tick off the left or the right. I like that."

Then welcome to the pandering moral relativist world of Kennedy, Souter and O'Connor.

Don't bother to wipe the mud off your shoes.

[Cincinna]

"Mark Levin (Author of "Men in Black") endorses John Roberts"

Dr Levin's OK is good enough for me.
BTW Judge Roberts was then a lawyer,representing a client.
Instead of seeing pink elephants, some wackos see RINOs everywhere.

[Natural Law]

You have completely missed the mark in several areas. Roberts was selected by the President because he is an originalist, NOT a judicial activist. He will interpret the constitution regardless of what his personal feelings are on any case. Second, he advocated in the Rice vs Cayetano on behalf of his client, the US Government. It was not a personally motivated amicus brief.

[Artemis Webb]

"you can send him back to wherever he came from."

I don't think Judge Roberts is going to be sent anywhere except the Supreme Court. Frankly I'm enthusiastic about him. If you want a reduction (end) in abortions in this country another strong supporter of states rights is exactly what we need on the court.

It is at the state level that the abortion issue will now be fought.

[johnmecainrino]

Where in his record is he an originalist.

I want some assurances after some of the past court picks.

I don't want an activist that will make gay marraige legal.

But I want someone that will overturn bad precedent made by this court in the recent and past future.

If it isn't in the constitution that is grounds for overturning bad precedent.

[msnimje]

Does the guy need the money so much that he's willing to "supposedly" argue a case that he's personally opposed too.

The very best lawyers take on all sorts of clients. What better way to learn how to defeat a foe than to learn how to protect them? He is too smart to be a "Souter"

[glegakis]

I hope you are right. I pray you are right.

[Terpfen]

That's not relativist pandering, that's originalism at its finest.