[zarf]

Here come the FR wackos.

[zarf]

Roberts took the side of U.S solicitor general waxman in the clinton administration arguing for the racial preferences.

Robert's is a lawyer. His gig is represent his client.

[JLS]

He was hired. I agree with Coulter that he is more of a blank slate than I would like. I am not foolish enough to not understand that lawyers for hire argue cases they are hired to agrue.

[Terpfen]

And he also argued against Roe v. Wade.

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.

[Andy from Beaverton]

When Roberts was representing the government in these cases, he is not expressing his views, but defending the views of those he represents.

Don't go psycho on us!

[Echo Talon]

Welcome to FR... :\

[minus_273]

he also argued for Playboy TV

[Dan Evans]

Ann Coulter had reservations about this guy. Maybe she is right:

Souter in Roberts' clothing

[denydenydeny]

In that case, Judge Roberts was hired as an attorney to represent the native Hawaiians.

Do you understand the concept of working for someone?

[MJY1288]

If you're gonna post a vanity making such claims, don't you think you should provide some links to back up your claims?

It's no wonder you've been called a wacko, this vanity is nothing but inadvertent flatulence

[zarf]

Welcome to FR. Don't be a wingnut.

[CWOJackson]

"Roberts took the side of pro racial preferences and quotas in the rice vs cayatano case giving racial preferences to native hawaii islanders. He argued this before the supreme court."

Yes, that's what lawyers do, argue for their clients.

[MNJohnnie]

"Since May 16, 2005"

I will cut you some slack cause you are new. You are expected to post a link to back your accusations. So please provide a source to back up your claims

[A CA Guy]

We will have to see.

He was a lawyer for money, so I don't think his personal preferences are that involved in every case.
He's paid to be an advocate.

[Keyes2000mt]

Looking at the way the thread started, I was hoping for a good zotting, but see you've been here more than 2 months. *sigh*. Oh well, we'll get one soon.

[CWOJackson]

I'm waiting for the real damning information...how does he take his coffee?

[OmegaMan]

I don;t know what to make of this guy. If I had to bet it would be on him being pretty conservative. But Im not sure. The hearings should be very interesting.

Chuckie Schumer has actually come up with some pretty good questions. Theyre listed in an article at NRO:

http://bench.nationalreview.com/archives/070387.asp

[digger48]

Scalia himself has said that he has had to rule in ways that he personally abhorred, but felt bound by the original intent.

Just like that idiot Wexler claiming he should be denied simply because he advised a client in Bush v Gore, like about 2000 other lawyers.

[skr]

Roberts also has as a caused tried to help minority students get into law schools. He is very pro affirmative action.

How did he do this? By using law or by personal recommendations?

[COEXERJ145]

Go back to DU and stop trying to sow trouble on FR. You're fooling no one.