You know what I agree with? I agree that if it wasn't those two cases, you'd have found something ELSE to trash him with. Period.
(Denny Crane: "Sometimes you can only look for answers from God and failing that... and Fox News".)
Howlin,
During the confirmation hearings, my Senator Coburn will be asking the right questions that will help us determine if Judge Roberts is a strict constructionist or not.
If his answers to Senator Coburn's questioning make it clear he's not a strict contructionist, will you change your opinion? (President Bush promised that if given the opportunity he would name strict constructionists to the USSC.)
FYI, I'm headed out of town early this morning for a few days, so I won't see any replies for awhile.
Were you an attorney and a "friend" had asked you to do an amicus brief in favor of partial birth abortion, would you do it?
Why not? It is because you have a serious moral objection to partial birth abortion. Why didn't Roberts just bow out because his values system would not allow him to defend sodomites?
Don't know anything about the Romer case, but a conservative can support the result in Lawrence since it dealt with what people do in the privacy of their homes. Regardless of one's position on homosexuality, conservatives should be drawing a bright line where government attempts to regulate consentual, non-harmful conduct ocurring in a private area like a bedroom.
And if Roberts was playing Scalia for a mock hearing, he really didn't help "prepare" the case. Stick with Levin's assessment of Roberts.