Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Roberts's testimony alarms conservatives (FR Mentioned)
Boston Globe ^ | 9/15/05 | Charlie Savage

Posted on 09/15/2005 4:11:01 AM PDT by nj26

Supreme Court nominee John G. Roberts Jr.'s testimony about the existence of a right to privacy, the importance of respecting precedent, and the need for the Constitution to adapt to changing conditions has alarmed some rank-and-file conservatives, who are filling up Internet message boards with predictions that Roberts may turn out to be a moderate justice.

Many say they believe that Roberts's answers have shown him to be to the left of Justices Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas, whom President Bush promised to use as models in selecting new justices. Some compare Roberts to David Souter and Anthony Kennedy -- Republican appointees who proved to be moderates who supported abortion rights.

One writer on the conservative FreeRepublic.org site wrote that yesterday's questioning by Senator Joseph R. Biden Jr., Democrat of Delaware, had ''exposed Roberts" as a moderate.

''Biden gave Roberts every opportunity to even minimally associate himself with Scalia and Thomas, and he ran away from them like he was running from a burning building -- not a good sign," the post said.

Bush chose Roberts, a highly respected lawyer with a short judicial tenure, over conservative judges with longer track records on issues of importance to conservatives. Still, almost all conservative judicial groups endorsed Roberts, recognizing that his lack of a long judicial record made him less susceptible to liberal attacks.

But the first three days of Roberts's confirmation hearings, during which the nominee has taken pains to portray himself as a cautious moderate, sparked concerns among grass-roots conservatives that Roberts may join a long line of Republican Supreme Court appointees who proved to be more liberal on the bench than the presidents who chose them.

(Excerpt) Read more at boston.com ...


TOPICS: Government
KEYWORDS: conservatives; johnroberts; roberts; robertshearings; supremecourt
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100101-116 next last
To: MindBender26
Nice post and some good points. My concern is an old one starting with the Bork debacle. A man honestly stated his position on many issues, and was therefore doomed to lose the senate vote. What is wrong with this picture? Now I have to rely on a conversation with the nominee by the President. Let's look at what that strategy has wrought upon our land:

1. Souter
2. Kennedy
3. O'Connor

These are certainly not shining examples of conservative Justices, and they were all picked by Republicans.
81 posted on 09/15/2005 6:05:26 AM PDT by conservativecorner
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

To: Lizarde
I am only sorry we get only one more day to watch him - it has been wonderful

I feel the same way and I'm so pleased that Roberts will be Chief Justice. I think his very presence on the court will have a huge (and good) influence over the liberal justices.

82 posted on 09/15/2005 6:05:36 AM PDT by right wing
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 80 | View Replies]

To: All

OK, I'm certainly not they only one? Who else has been looking for this quote? Has anybody found it? I just checked the entire 3rd-day live thread and couldn't find the phrase "burning building".


83 posted on 09/15/2005 6:21:29 AM PDT by CharlesWayneCT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LRS

And you're suprised?....I thought not.


84 posted on 09/15/2005 7:12:37 AM PDT by Valin (The right to do something does not mean that doing it is right.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: maryz

"Shumer (if it was him) was trying to get Roberts to say whether he agreed or disagreed with a statement from Thomas, but his use of terms sounded slippery to me, and it got tedious."


Yeah...I can't decide if he is supremely reasonably and brillianty prepared or both of those plus much less conservative than President Bush's base.


But we are bound to find out as there is no reasonable basis for filibustering him and he will surely survive an up or down vote.


85 posted on 09/15/2005 8:45:55 AM PDT by gondramB ("Leadership is getting someone to do what they don't want to do to achieve what they want to achieve)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies]

To: Blogger
They're reading us.

No, they're reading FreeRepublic.org, which I've never heard of.

86 posted on 09/15/2005 8:48:08 AM PDT by humblegunner (If you're gonna die, die with your boots on.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Tempestuous

The argument of viability before the third trimester defining personhood is ludicrous. Does an old man with no brain damage lose all his rights because he needs support to live?

Not to mention the age of viability is different now than when Roe was decided. Why doesn't NARAL want the point at which abortion is allowed to be changed in order to be consistent with their argument?


87 posted on 09/15/2005 8:49:40 AM PDT by gondramB ("Leadership is getting someone to do what they don't want to do to achieve what they want to achieve)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: Blogger
They're reading us.

Also notice that the reporter notes that FR is a "site and nota Blog!

Consideing the times that Roberts has been able to interject anything through Biden's and Kennedy's mindless drivel. How can his "testimony" alarm anyone?

Jack.

88 posted on 09/15/2005 8:52:11 AM PDT by Jack Deth (Knight Errant and Disemboweler of the WFTD Thread)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Fenris6

This entire situation continues to confuse and befuddle me.

It seems from what I heard that Roberts is very bright and quite cagy in parcing his responses, which may not be bad, in light of the demons he is conversing with.

There IS a right to privacy in the Constitution - its in the protection against illegal searches and seizures, but that doesn't necessaarily extend to what some Conservatives dread. Like ALL constitutionla rights, it is subject to interpretation.

While he did say Roe versus Wade is the law of the land and changing prior decisions was not wise, he also said something else about that subject which indicated that prior court decisions were not necessarily written on stone.

I would have preferred a more obvious conservative. But Roberts appears to be able to deal quite well with the collection of losers who are cross-examing him. I think he will turn out all right.

What conservatives should be doing NOW is pressuring the President and their representatives to pressure him, to select a candidate with solidly conservative credentials to succeed O'Connor, and be willing to go to the mats to fight for that candidate, even if it means invoking the "nuclear" option against filibusters.

We deserve a candidate like that on the Supreme Court. That's why Bush was re-elected and why he was given a majority in Congress and we shouldn't settle for anything else next time - ESPECIALLY Bush's amigo Gonzales - a SUPER loser.


89 posted on 09/15/2005 8:55:20 AM PDT by ZULU (Fear the government which fears your guns. God, guts, and guns made America great.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: humblegunner

FreeRepublic.org is registered to ROBINSON-DEFEHR but it is not setup... probably to keep someone from taking advantage of the name.


90 posted on 09/15/2005 8:56:40 AM PDT by gondramB ("Leadership is getting someone to do what they don't want to do to achieve what they want to achieve)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 86 | View Replies]

To: ZULU

"This entire situation continues to confuse and befuddle me."

http://www.hughhewitt.com/

scroll down to "Dems in Destruction"


91 posted on 09/15/2005 9:00:00 AM PDT by Fenris6 (3 Purple Hearts in 4 months w/o missing a day of work? He's either John Rambo or a Fraud)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 89 | View Replies]

To: IncPen
The difference is that we're no longer an anonymous 'internet chat room' that they can spin.

We are now a bunch of fanatics in pajamas who had the nerve to expose Dan Ratherbiased for the pathetic fraud he is. They are no longer attempting to "spin" us, they are doing everything they can to destroy us.

92 posted on 09/15/2005 9:35:03 AM PDT by wagglebee ("We are ready for the greatest achievements in the history of freedom." -- President Bush, 1/20/05)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Fenris6

Encouraging.

"The rpesident knows this, and the president will surely follow with just such a nominee from this list: Judges Garza, Jones, Luttig, McConnell or Owens. "

We can only hope and pray. The specter of Gonzales continues to haunt me.


93 posted on 09/15/2005 9:42:49 AM PDT by ZULU (Fear the government which fears your guns. God, guts, and guns made America great.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 91 | View Replies]

To: Fawn
Never mind---looks like Jim Robinson owns all Freerepublic.(domains)---LOL!
Too bad we can't link them all to here....

Why can't we? Redirecting should be fairly simple if Jim already owns the domains. What am I missing?

94 posted on 09/15/2005 10:13:21 AM PDT by highball ("I find that the harder I work, the more luck I seem to have." -- Thomas Jefferson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 78 | View Replies]

To: Blogger
They're reading us.

Based on some of the concepts I see posted here, that's not necessarily a good thing.

95 posted on 09/15/2005 10:16:18 AM PDT by Protagoras (My liberal neighbor is more dangerous to my freedom than Osama Bin Laden.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Fenris6
I'm voting YES.

You don't get a vote.

96 posted on 09/15/2005 10:17:29 AM PDT by Protagoras (My liberal neighbor is more dangerous to my freedom than Osama Bin Laden.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: cynicom

FR is more Republican than it is conservative. JMO.


97 posted on 09/15/2005 10:22:44 AM PDT by k2blader (Hic sunt dracones..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Protagoras

"You don't get a vote."

Actually I do. Sucks for you, eh?


98 posted on 09/15/2005 10:29:58 AM PDT by Fenris6 (3 Purple Hearts in 4 months w/o missing a day of work? He's either John Rambo or a Fraud)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 96 | View Replies]

To: Fenris6
Actually I do. Sucks for you, eh?

Actually, unless you are one of the useless Senators, you don't.

And no, it doesn't suck for me if you are a Senator. You couldn't be worse than most, I suppose. Unless you are one of the imbeciles who is a Senator from my state, in which case, it does suck.

I live in a state where all the political parties are equally criminal or incompetent.

99 posted on 09/15/2005 10:55:07 AM PDT by Protagoras (My liberal neighbor is more dangerous to my freedom than Osama Bin Laden.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 98 | View Replies]

To: nj26
FreeRepublic.org

Is that a similar site to us, which is FreeRepublic.com.

100 posted on 09/15/2005 10:58:06 AM PDT by scouse
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100101-116 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson