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.
"You are the one who answered at least three different posts in a row - thats headed toward spamming in my opinion."
I did not know it was improper to answer any certain number of posts in a row. I only now became aware of the thread. You call it spamming, I call it engaging in dialogue.
"BTW your style of argument is the same as the folks who gave us Souter - in two words "trust me." "
My "style of argument" has nothing to do with my support for Roberts. My support for Roberts has been expressed many times and I will not repeat it all here. I have disagreed with almost every attack against him, particularly the one that there's no evidence of his judicial philosophy. You folks just ignore it.
"Based on the hearings verification has failed."
I disagree. I and most conservatives believe he was superb and can't wait until he is installed on the bench.
"Roberts has been on the federal bench two years (since June of 2003). That is NOT a long track record."
It's twice as long as Thomas'. Were you as adamant against him?