"You spam this thread then don't answer and then have the gall to tell me I am the one who is arrogant. Get real."
What are you talking about? In what way did I "spam" the thread? By replying to posts? I thought that what we did? What did I not answer? You must live in Bizarro World. Every question you've posed I've made an effort to offer a response. It is you who has been non-responsive, ordering me to read a prior post that said nothing. What is it with you? Your style of argument seems to be common among Roberts' detractors.
You are the one who answered at least three different posts in a row - thats headed toward spamming in my opinion. BTW your style of argument is the same as the folks who gave us Souter - in two words "trust me." We have seen how poorly that turned out. Personally I like Ronald Reagan's formulation much better - "trust, but verify." Based on the hearings verification has failed. Roberts has been on the federal bench two years (since June of 2003). That is NOT a long track record.