Posted on 09/15/2005 9:40:05 AM PDT by conservatism_IS_compassion
Rush emphasized the fact that the MSM is gleeful about its wish-fulfilment belief that Bush is so politically wounded by his poll numbers that he is a lame duck.
Rush dismisses this idea by referring to the Senate Judiciary Committee hearings, in which the Democrats' "best and brightest" have been unable to lay a glove on Judge Roberts. Rush says that Bush is reshaping the judiciary, which is now the linchpin of the Democrats' influence and remaining power.
And Rush emphasized how tunnel-visioned the media are, and how completely absorbed they are "in the moment." In, that is, their own news cycle - whether it is a day or an hour.
ARIANNA BUSTED -- SHE USES GAS GUZZLING SUV AT SIERRA CLUB SUMMIT
Roberts gives Dick Turban a Civics lesson.
The more I hear of Roberts and his answers (when the 'Rats will let him answer) the more I like this guy.
I listened into NPR a little bit on the way home yesterday. I must say that Roberts was brilliant, not only that, but very, very quick with his answers. Its like he doesn't have to search his memory for what he is looking for, its right THERE. The guy obviously has some kind of special talent.
The Turbin, with a measured and thoughtful answer from Roberts, just got taken to the woodshed. "SMACK" take that you disgusting Turbin.
This is why the President nominated him, because he had spoken with him many times and talked to those who have known him for a long time.
Especially people like Ted Olson who has tried cases with and against John Roberts and has known him personally for 25 years.
"If the Constitution says that the little guy wins, then the little guy wins. If it says that the big guy wins, then the big guy wins. The oath is to the Constitution."
Works for me!
Rush assumes that Bush will choose a well heeled conservative.
The Thomas hearings will be nothing compared to that one. Because the liberals know the court swings right with that selection. They will pile all the hate, crap, junk, hate, not supporting abortion hate, etc. on the candidate. With what they say, you will wonder why the candidate was not in jail instead of being asked to sit on the high court.
The aftermath of those hearings will leave as much destruction as Katrina did. The person Bush nominates will need skin as thick as the Hoover Dam. Those hearings will last forever. The person will be branded anti-EVERYTHING, evil, anti-abortion, a racist, anti-gay, anti-black, anti-immigration, pro-war, pro-God, etc.
Oh yes my friends, it is going to be a MSM and pro-media friendly to the liberals, anti-the candidate en-mass.
One thought I had listening to Roberts and his answers is, "Can this man possibly be a persuasive force with the other justices who vote liberal?" In other words, can this man by more than his single vote on the bench, exert enough influence and persuasiveness that will move the other more liberal justices? Thomas and Scalia I am not worried about.
He's back to Starbucks again. But on a serious note, it sounds like Starbucks is falling into the same healthcare trap that GM got itself into a while back.
I think President Bush already has O'Conner's replacement decided on. He is waiting for the right time to announce it. And I firmly believe it is gonna be such an "in your face" choice that the liberals will fall over passed out.
Excuse me, but you really think Roberts is going to sail through. The dems are asking their questions now and going through the motions, but they have NO intention of giving in on Roberts. Bank on this, they WILL come up with some excuse to fillibuster Roberts, as stupid as it is. Why? First off, if they give in, their far left base will slaughter them. Second, if they force the Republicans to exercise the constitutional option, then they can use it as an excuse to not even give the next nominee a hearing. The Judiciary committee will not meet, no hearings, voila, no Bush Supreme Court nominee.
Unless you can spin it to say Roberts was the O'Connor pick, which it is.
Don't forget the cautions Annie is making regarding Roberts. He may be a wolf in sheep's clothing. Yesterday, a R senator from Kansas tried to tie him down on conservative opinions. Roberts dodged those questions as artfully as he does the Ds.
I am sure he will, especially since he is going to fight tooth and nail against the likes of Justices Kennedy and Breyer who insist on using foreign law to interpret the Constitution.
Roberts has argued in front of the Supreme Court so many times this seems very easy to him. He has no notes!! Roberts is very smooth and his responses are eloquent. This stands in sharp contrast to Senator Biden and the rest of the Libs, asking questions from notes PREPARED for them by Ralph "hairplug" Neas. I often get the impression that many of the Libs either do not understand the "Questions" prepared for them by the special interest groups or they feel the need to prove themselves knowledgable because Roberts's answers make them feel inadequate (by giving them an introductory lesson in Civics/ Con Law).
Yep, the next one will be ugly. It will be time for Conservatives, especially in the beltway to put up or shut up. The next nominee will be treated terribly, and may not be as eloquent as Roberts when performing in front of the committee. Nevertheless, if the nominee is a Judge like Luttig, it will be a great Justice worthy of the Supreme Court.
Then they risk the nuclear option, canceling the fillibuster option for the next nominee. Of course, if they save their fillibuster for judge #2 then the nuke option can start then. If the Senators have the cojones, which they likely don't.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.