Bush could be saving the real conservative for when Rehnquist retires.
Why would Bush be so stupid or naive to "save for a real conservative" by appointing a nominee like John Roberts (at best an Anthony Kennedy swing vote clone or at worst a David Souter-type liberal) when he could have nominated a real true conservative that we don't have to guess at his judicial philosophy? Since John Roberts has been nominated he has ...
1) Confirmed with Chuckie Schumer that he will not be a judicial activist - But using liberal left-wing Dems definition of judicial activism to imply Scalia or Thomas type of justice
2) Has reiterated his support for "settled law" re. Roe vs Wade? Apparently conservative findings can be overturned at any time, but liberal activist rulings are considered sacrosanct, never to be re-examined.
3) Has tried to dissasociate from any formal ties or connection with the Federalist Society, an open forum for ANY lawyers to discuss issues or opinions free from the shrill screams of the lunatic lefties.
4) Has been a major factor in putting together a case to overturn a Colorado law to allow CO employers and landlords to exclude gays??? If Roberts had any qualms or moral dilemmas about advancing the gay rights agenda, he did not need to have taken this case PRO BONO as a matter of fact.
Bottom line is, only Coulter and Pat Buchanan, maybe 1 or 2 others are raising legitimate concerns about Roberts and his (lack) of commitment to cultural & pro-American issues. Methinks that Bush has nominated a stealth moderate-liberal for the SCOTUS appointee. What a tragic betrayal!