Replies

You really are just as bad as a liberal. You just want Roberts to be a "judicial activist" for your position. Again, it's not his job to "defend babies." It's his job to apply the law, not to decide what he thinks the law should be. Of course, he may ultimately vote to overturn R v. W. So why would you criticize him for not voicing an opinion on future cases, when voicing that opinion would most likely lead to his non-confirmation?

voicing that opinion would most likely lead to his non-confirmation?

That seems to be the spineless strategy used today. Think about that. A Supreme Court Judge nominee of the United States, afraid to voice his opinion. We have the votes anyway, how could he not be confirmed? If we didn't have the votes this strategy would have a little merit, not much, but from a political point of view. But we control the House, the Senate, and 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.

Yet our nominee has to have his mouth duck taped on the issue of 2000 babies being murdered every single day?

You can be articulate as Socrates but if you have no courage to speak out... well don't be surprised if this strategy continues - after he is nominated and we see no courage to speak out then either.