[SmithL]

Are they flying Anita Hill's coke can in?

[Question Liberal Authority]

There are 55 Republicans, 44 Democrats, and independent Sen. Jim Jeffords of Vermont in the Senate

For crying out loud. Why don't they just say 55 Republicans and 45 Democrats? Talk about people who won't admit their ideology.

[msnimje]

Virtually???? The MSM is living in a VIRTUAL WORLD! He may very well be the most qualified person to sit on the Supreme Court EVER.

[Common Tator]

Are they flying Anita Hill's coke can in?

NO.

Here is a clue.. The media will not tell you why Democrats are not trying to destroy Roberts.

Click here for the 'tator take on what is really going on in the Democratic party and the Supreme Court.

[shield]

The dembos from red states will vote for Roberts. Since, Roberts is so perfect...it'll be too hard to justify a NO vote (even though the dembos don't need any type of justification~being the obstructionist they've become)...

No Republican agreed with Ginsberg...they still voted for her...understanding this was the president's pick, he was elected and it was their duty to vote for her.

[goldstategop]

John Roberts is a nice guy with a bright mind. The Democrats are going to vote against him because they don't agree with him on all aspects of the law? Yeah, a NO vote will win over Peoria, alright.

(Denny Crane: "Sometimes you can only look for answers from God and failing that... and Fox News".)

[JohnBDay]

Any Democrats who is running in 2008 (Hillary, Kerry, Biden, Feingold, Bayh) will vote against Roberts. There will probably also be 10-15 "true believers" from safe blue state who will vote against him. Should be a pretty easy confirmation.

[Sivad]

I have a question that perhaps someone can either
answer directly or provide a link. The very nature
of this question will probably cause somebody to
wonder if I might be a DU mole. I assure you I
am not. And, I apolize in advance if this question
would be better placed somewhere else. Anyway, my
question has to do with judicial activism. When
my liberal friends and liberal officials such as
Rep. John Lewis assert that only through judicial
activism were civil rights advances made in the
1950s and 60s, what are some proper conservative
counter arguments? Will somebody help?

Thanks